Jul 2nd 2009 7:04PM To all those bashing the article, I think you missed the main point. The issue is not "waah, I want to change my race", it's "why is it that I can change race and faction, but can't change just race?" This is a very strange move on Blizzard's part to allow one but not the other. By criticizing the author for his question but not criticizing Blizzard's choice of re-customization options, you are saying that it's okay to want to change your appearance, gender, or faction, but wanting to change your race is whining.
Is it really so wrong to ask for clarification on a policy that just plain doesn't make sense by conventional logic? Prohibiting race changes can't be due to lore or plausibility (since we can change gender and race + faction), and now we know it definately isn't due to code complexity (since we'll be able to change race + faction). If the issue is racials, then Blizzard is openly acknowledging that some races are overpowered, which seems surprising. I personally have no interest in changing my character's race or gender, but that doesn't make the question cease to exist: WHY?!
Jul 1st 2009 4:55PM One more thing: If there's a large gap between your healers' capabilities, but all of them can avoid /facepalm methods of dying, you'll probably always want to ss the 'better' healer. Not only are they more crucial to the raid, but since they're doing more healing, they're more likely to be the one to pull aggro if something goes wrong.
Jul 1st 2009 4:41PM There is one very serious point to consider when deciding priority on ss'ing, one that has been ignored by many of the comments. There are (arguably) TWO reasons for ss'ing, and the choice of who to ss depends heavily on which one you're going for:
1) Preventing wipes
In this case, the intention is that the ss be used DURING the fight, to resurrect an important player in the hopes of saving the battle. Druids are always the best choice here due to the battle rez, but baring that, you want to ss the most important person to the fight that is most likely to die. Fortunately, these are often the same person: a squishy healer. If you've got a choice between a non-squishy healer (i.e. paladin) and a priest, go with the priest, because the latter is more likely to die.
2) Wipe recovery
In this case, the intention is that the ss be used only if everyone dies (or everyone who can rez dies). If this is what you want it for, and you've got multiple rezzers, you do NOT want to ss the one most likely to die. If your ss'd target dies during a bad pull while another rezzer survives, your ss is wasted, because the surviving rezzer can just rez them. If you instead ss the last rezzer likely to die, then your ss target likely won't die unless it's a real wipe--therefore, a pally is generally a better choice than a priest. (Also, a druid is neither here nor there in this case since after a wipe, you won't be in combat, so battle rez isn't necessary.)
In raids you should always go for #1, as the time required to run back after a wipe is negligible compared with the time saved by a ss-funded victory on a tough boss (and if your raid is wiping on trash, you probably don't want to be there at all). In 5-mans...it depends on the caliber of the team.
Of course, it should always be remembered that the player is more important than the class. Ss'ing the druid will do no good if the druid refuses to do battle-rezzes or has perpetually poor judgment on who to battle rez. A well-geared, experienced priest may have more survivability than some paladins. In some cases, you may also have to make a choice between "more crucial" and "more likely to die": do you ss the uber-awesome healer that the raid depends on but only rarely gets killed, or do you ss the learning healer that provides only a moderate contribution but tends to stand in the lava?
I have always had bad luck with ss'ing the tank, but not due to aggro issues--the problem is that the tank has so little health after an ss that they die almost instantly, and the ss was wasted.
At low levels, most of this is probably not much of a concern. Just ss the healer, and you're good. More important is making sure that your healer KNOWS he (or she) is ss'd and knows what that means...I've encountered healers as high as upper-70 dungeons that seem to have never encountered a soulstone before >.< Rather than make a fuss, I just have my ss macro'd to say "Soulstoning %t..." in party or raid chat whenever I cast it. The macro isn't such a bad idea even in groups that know what they're doing, as it lets everyone else know not to throw up their hands and go afk if the healer dies.
Jun 19th 2009 9:51PM I haven't laughed that hard at a WoW insider article in a long time XD Awesome piece.
Jun 12th 2009 3:39PM I thought it apparent that the author meant "you can attach any color gem without compromising any socket bonuses". Perhaps the wording could have been clearer, but perhaps it is also not necessary to spell out every obvious detail to an audience that already understands most of the game.
Jun 12th 2009 3:34PM No, rogues do not get 2 AP per 1 Agil. Due to the other bonuses of agility (like crit), 1 Agil is often considered equivalent to 2 AP, but that's only a very rough rule of thumb.
Of course there are more enchants. The point of the article is enchants/enhancements that require a profession to use. Anyone can get Armsman, so there's no point in being an enchanter if that's all you want.
Jun 12th 2009 12:26PM ROFL
Love the visuals for the klingons on the starboard bow, and it's a little spooky just how appropriate the male human dance is for that song.
Jun 7th 2009 1:35PM Well, I'm glad you're "pretty sure", because evidently you didn't even need to read the entries to draw this conclusion. Given the size of WoW's audience, is it that hard to believe that there are actually some talented writers in there? Even, dare I say it, professional writers? There's a big difference between criticizing the classic mistakes of fanfic writers, and assuming that the winners made those same mistakes.
Here we have some extremely talented people that Blizzard has seen fit to recognize. WoW.com couldn't be bothered to report on this when the winners were first announced in a blue post, or even when they were announced on the main WoW page several days later. Then, they apparently couldn't be bothered to pay enough attention to the announcement to accurately find the winner's name. Is it too much to ask that, at the very least, the winners simply be congratulated without a backhanded slight?
Jun 4th 2009 2:41PM I rather like the new night elf cat models, but it seems to me that there's a flaw in Blizzard's approach to the cat models of both races: instead of making the models gender-neutral, the Tauren cats look vary masculine, while the Night Elf cats look very feminine. (Note that I did NOT say "male" and "female"; an animal can be male and yet have a feminine appearance by human standards.)
The tauren cats are heavily built, with strongly-lined faces. The night elf cats are a little pink-intensive, and much more modestly built (in fact, there's only one model that doesn't have any pink at all). The pink seems really strange to me given that pink has never been a color the night elves are associated--purple or silver seems more appropriate. I love the new models for my female NE, but I'd feel pretty fru-fru for a male. (Seriously, picture your stoic white-haired male turning into a white cat with a cotton-candy pink ruff.) By the same token, if I were a female tauren, I'd feel like I was cross-dressing whenever I transformed.
I'm not saying we need different models for male and female characters; we just need models that are a little more gender-neutral. Some cats do have heavy ruffs in both genders, so a mane of sorts wouldn't be out of place on the tauren model, and a face that more closely resembles in-game lions would fit both genders. The old night elf cat model also looked pretty neutral, with a deep, silvery shade of purple that's common in night elf design, and an almost scruffy yet graceful lynx look that fits both genders.
May 14th 2009 12:43PM Er...
"the speaker's intentions are still quite clear even WITH the filter on"