Nov 28th 2009 1:51PM I already quit. For me I left when the game became more about 'numbers' than about having fun. Sure I can appreciate that people want to squeeze out as much as possible from the game, but it has got to the point where people only care about 'numbers'. Be it DPS numbers from recount, your last WWS report, or some other mod that tries to put a 'number' on gameplay. The best fun I had in WoW was in the level 60 game when that kind of thing wasn't prevalent. People still raided, but they had fun doing it.
Another aspect that drove me away was that because of the min/maxing and changes to the game, there is no margin for error anymore. In the 'old game' you could make an error and survive. In the 'new' game you make the smallest error and it is a wipe. The game demands perfection, and frankly I don't find that fun.
However the nail in the coffin was how they forced people to play arena (which I hate) to get PvP gear. On top of that the Battlegrounds became a shell of what they once were, especially AV which used to be great fun. (I made it to rank 10 in the old system - and while I wasn't a fan of it, the BGs were more fun then.)
While I missed the game a bit initially after I left, I have kept following things on here and other sites - and it reminds me of why I made the right decision. I've moved on to other games that don't require me to keep a spreadsheet of my gear handy to play.
Nov 23rd 2009 11:52AM Why does the kitten have a saddle anyway?
Sep 12th 2009 12:21AM What I don't understand is why Blizzard started changing things to begin with. GC openly admitted that the warrior was designed to be the best tank for the first 4 years. They never attempted to make other tankable classes comparable. We were also told that warrior was/is the most popular choice in the game. So why not leave it the way it is with warriors tanking everything? If a person wants to tank, they roll a warrior. The other tanking classes would still OT, and 5-man, but the big stuff would be warriors. People were used to it, and everyone managed just fine.
The problem with mutiple tanks is that since tanks are such a key component, if a tank is even a FRACTION better than another, people will go for it since that fraction can mean you don't wipe.
This is not an issue with DPS. If they are 10% off on DPS compared to another class, then you won't wipe because of it.
This is not an issue with healers. If a healer is 10% off compared to another healer, you can word through it.
With a tank, if one tank is inherently 10% worse than another, you are going to wipe. Boom, you are done. That's the difference here, and that is why people will always choose the best tank. GC may think people will choose the best PERSON for the role, but in reality the best person usually will pick the tank class that is the 'best' at that time. rying to screw around with tank balance has caused a number of guilds to lose great tanks.
In the end, there was no pressing reason to mess around with the tanks. They said that adding tank classes would make finding tanks easier, but that never happened.
Tanks were fine. It's unfortunate that they had to screw with them.
Aug 18th 2009 2:27AM I think that's also part of the problem. (Re: threat) For whatever reason, most (but not all) tanks that were 'serious' tanks were warriors. These were the guys there since beta, that would be there every week, always knew the fights, you could set your watch to them as far as depending on them for threat and such. As they started to back away from the role, other tanks stepped up to the plate - some warriors, but many in other classes that were new (DK) or had been better tweaked to tank (pally and to a lesser extent druids). The problem is that these people who coveted the tank role on a non-warrior class, were fast coming to realize that it was not everything they expected it to be. It's a pretty thankless job, requires a lot of skill and if you screw up - EVERYONE dies. Being on the receiving end of that responsibility is not fun, and so many of these 'wannabe' tanks soon decided that it was not all it was cracked up to be. Unfortunately, the solid dependable 'warrior tanks' were no longer around, and so now people are trying scrounge tanks from anywhere and everywhere.
Frankly, looking back from a hindsight 20/20 kind of view, I think Blizzard shouldn't have screwed with the tank to begin with. (as a role, not a class) Since it is such a critical role, raids are going to crunch the numbers and choose the best class, even if the difference is 1%. That 1% might make or break a fight, and that is why the warrior was the top tank for so long. The problem is that to make people use other tanks, you need to make other classes BETTER than warrior, and that means people will choose others over the warrior. (As was with the DK until the nerf.) I think they would have been better to leave the game with one class as tank. I know it may seem odd, but the game would have been way easier to balance, and none of the other classes would have been left out. (you can't be left out from what you never had) Either that, or you have to make all tanks identical as far as skills, which defeats the purpose of having other classes as tanks.
While the goal of Blizzard in introducing more tank classes was to increase the number of tanks in the game, they have actually caused a paradoxical reaction. We now have four tank classes and face tank shortages greater than ever before. The more they screw with tanks, the worse it gets.
Aug 18th 2009 1:18AM I think a lot of warrior tanks have seen Bliz doing everything they can to get more NON-warrior tanks in the game. The situation with DKs (before the nerf) obviously was a factor for many. Burnout is a factor too, but in the end the warrior tank (as a person - not the 'class') is moreso bred to tank. Many of these people got sidelined from tanking, and have basically turned their back on it. Aside from burnout, they may have come to realize that they can have MORE fun playing other classes. I know a number of people who parked their tanks.
Aug 17th 2009 4:28PM The biggest problem with standby and such is that you end up with competing objectives that are almost impossible to balance.
First off, the issue with the NEED for stand-bys to begin with. This, in of itself, is the biggest problem. With no way to know who might 'drop' or otherwise vanish, there is no way to know who you will need to have available. Overall, the best way to determine this is to keep a detailed attendance sheet, and then make notes on how often a person who signs up actually shows, and if they ever have 'dropped'. A player with a 100% attendance rating who never drops is not going to need someone sitting on standby. The 1 in 100 chance that something might happen is not worth the trouble of having someone on standby.
Of course if you have a quality guild, with lots of people who have stellar attendance ratings and never drop, then you run into the problem that your people on standby will almost never be needed. In that case you are faced with the unenviable task or sitting someone out repeatedly. Even if you rotate people, you still have the people on stand-by who feel like they are wasting their time.
In these cases I think it is better for the officers to organize something for them. If you have 5 on standby, organize them into a group so they can hit some instances for badges. That way even if you need to yank one out, the 5-man group can usually find a fifth somewhere. (It's a lot easier to find someone to fill a slot in a 5-man than it is to fill a slot in a raid.) I think it is VERY important that people on stand-by get some DKP or other credit (based on whatever system the guild uses). It can a percentage of what the raiders got, but if your people on stand-by are all well geared and know the fights just as well as anyone in the raid, then they should be getting 75% of what people in the raid are getting. Those who are less geared or knowledgeable can be 50%, and newcomers 25%.
Do NOT use the excuse of the person having poor gear as a reason to sit someone out repeatedly. This is a situation where the person can't get the gear because they don't get to go on the raids, but they don't get to go on the raids since they don't have the gear. If the person is that poorly geared, then they shouldn't be allowed to sign-up to raid, and you should tell them so they can move on to another guild. Or if you think they can improve outside of raids, help them out by giving them advice and help get them groups to get the gear they need. Guilds are supposed to help one another. You don't have to hold their hands, but at least try and help.
The worst thing officers can do is cop an attitude of "It's not my fault that we have too many raiders and we have to have people on stand-by." The reality is that it *IS* your fault, because it is your responsibility to be able to fill slots if people drop. So don't try and make people think this is something beyond officer control, since it is not. As an officer you COULD just sign up 25 and hope for the best, which would mean no stand-bys. You didn't, so take responsibility for that fact.
Stand-by is *not* for the benefit of the person sitting out in that they may get a chance to come, it's for the benefit of the *officer* so that they can quickly fill an open raid spot. So don't pretend differently. You aren't doing anyone a favor by 'allowing' them to go on standby. A person on stand-by is doing YOU a favor by hanging around, so you need to treat them as such.
-do NOT sit the same person out every week
-DO make sure you organize a run to keep stand-bys busy
-DO make sure you compensate stand-bys with some partial credits
-do NOT use the excuse of the person having poor gear as a reason to sit someone out repeatedly
-DO suggest a person may be better suited to another guild if their gear/skill gap is large
Jul 29th 2009 7:57PM Arenas are one of the main reasons I quit. (But I still like to read WoW insider!) When they started putting arena ratings on all the PvP gear it was basically the final straw. I hate the arena concept in WoW. Yeah I know I don't have to play them, but when you tie PvP gear to arena points, then I *do* have to play them to get better gear. I could rant about all the flaws in the arenas, but there are plenty of people who have posted volumes about it.
Sufficient to say if they dumped arenas entirely I wouldn't miss it if I was still playing. The best times I had in WoW were in the 'old days' where there were no cross-realm battlegrounds, and an AV game lasted for a couple DAYS. Great rivalries, shredders, and games where it was more than just 'who can rush to the finish line faster'. I'm still hoping to return to WoW one day, but that day is yet to come.
Feb 11th 2009 10:34PM Just remove the need to have your flag in base *and* make it so that the team that caps FIRST (when both flags are out) will get the point, and then the other flag disappears. So both teams would only be able to get the point if they somehow capped at exactly the same moment. (Or in the rare case when both teams cap at the exact same time for the 3rd point, it could nullify both caps and force the teams to try again.)
This is where slowing the flag carrier would really pay off, and hiding the flag would never happen again.