Sep 10th 2009 8:24PM I run Snow Leopard, Windows 7RC and Ubuntu Jaunty(Linux) on my (non-mac) laptop.
Incidentally, I was previously running XP instead of 7. I run Warcraft on all 3 OS's, and it runs more or less equally on each.
The microsoft training thing the original blog post is about was Microsoft "training" best buy employees with specifically anti-linux training material that was vague at best and definitely questionable to outright false at worse. Ultimately, each OS is different, has their pros and cons. I use each for a variety of reasons, but I game on all three (whichever I'm currently running, generally).
There's definitely a lot of fanboy angst in this thread - it's inevitable when OS's are discussed, but it annoys me. OSX, for example? It's a great OS. Well designed and stable, but you're basically forced to live within Apples guidelines. It's fantastic for people who want a computer that "Just Works", though. Windows 7RC is amazing, and in my opinion is Microsofts best OS offering, ever. I hated Vista and reverted to XP, but 7 is much faster than XP was while being slicker and much more "Usable" than Vista. Linux, on the other hand, offers orders of magnitude more customizability and raw power; but to really get the best out of it you need a higher skill level and interest in learning things. I should note, though, that the newer Ubuntu releases are improving very rapidly in terms of "Just Working" and being far more user friendly. It's definitely not just for servers anymore.
Viruses? Malware? First, if you get a virus, 99% of the time *it's your own damn fault*. OSX and linux are far safer than Windows 7, but not because they are much more secure (though they ARE more secure, the gap has closed a lot with 7) Really, though, the real reason is that Windows has such a huge market share that virus designers are basically targeting the most common platforms. As OSX and Linux variants continue to gain market share, just wait: There will be more viruses and malware targeted at them too. It's simple cost/benefit analysis.
Finally, one point to consider for the Apple fanboys. A Mac runs the *same hardware* a windows or linux based system runs. The only difference in terms of hardware is that mac's don't have inexpensive low-end components, only mid to high end. The OSX operating system can be - and often is - installed on non-mac hardware, where it runs just fine. Also, OSX is ultimately just Unix - the same roots that Linux has. Under the hood, they are VERY similar.
Aug 22nd 2009 5:36PM Wow. That's really, really awesome.
Really awesome. Extended to raids too, eventually, will be *fantastic* though I REALLY hope you can have a better selection system.
For example, a "select all" button; the ability to effectively LFG all heroics EXCEPT ones you're saved for. In fact, one that automatically disables entering LFG for instances you're saved for.
It's annoying when you've done one or two heroics, and just want to get into some other random one but don't care which.
This, though... really, it's outstanding. If they do go ahead and allow cross-server chat/friends lists too? zomg. I have so many friends on so many servers, being able to chat and instance with them? It would be fantastic, we'd get the benefits of a huge single-shard server like Eve without the horrible disadvantages (crushing, mindblowing lag if too many people are in the same place at the same time).
Imagine, if they extended it to Wintergrasp? Brought in cross-server folks to get everyone who queued on *any* server into the battle? Excess people who couldn't get in on their server, able to bounce to another to fill empty space?
Aug 22nd 2009 4:41PM I've got a huntard and a feral druid, and I'm REALLY happy for this change.
Mana is annoying.
Energy/Focus, however, is much more tactical instead of just button-mashing. You're not limited by GCD's, you're limited by energy. It regenerates fast enough that you're not left bored, but you need to think more about what you do and when.
With a mana based system, you just fire off your shots whenever they are available, so you're just a cooldown monkey. Run out of mana? Nerf your dps to get some back. Yay. Exciting.
Instead, energy allows you to do other things (missing a GCD isn't terrible) so in fights where you need to run around, get out of the fire, etc you don't nerf the hell out of your dps. It's just a noticeably *better* system.
Aug 22nd 2009 4:22PM
Sir, as a hunter/druid/others-but-no-mages, I'd like to say that your column is made of awesomesticks and win. It's the only class column that I ALWAYS read, and I'm largely uninterested in mages!
That is all.
Aug 15th 2009 11:02PM Well, you could try mousing over the links in the original blog post, that shows the stats on a lot of the loot.
Maybe not the helms in particular, but you can get a good idea.
232+ish; the helms will be around the highest that drop.
Aug 15th 2009 12:31AM Tex, while technically correct, you miss my point.
Rarely is the choice between 1% hit or 1% crit. I see LOTS of players using, say, crappy heroic drops instead of much higher ilevel drops, so you're not comparing otherwise equal items.
So, while mathematically speaking it's better point for point, rarely is it that simple.
To be more clear: Be within 1% of your hit cap from gear. Then look to gem the rest, but don't go over the cap at all. This provides more flexibility in your gear choices, so you can take better pieces overall. It's easier to get small bits of +hit off your gems than gear.
Also, to reiterate: If you're NOT doing serious raiding, remember, your hit cap is lower against Heroic mobs. If that's what you do most, you can easily waste a lot of itemization by prioritizing hit too much.
Aug 14th 2009 8:50PM Bah, gimmie a break about the lore thing. People killed her over and over before, how's it any different to kill her again now? The only difference with 3.2.2 over the current patch is that she'll drop better loot. The story is the same as it was.
Don't want to kill a boss twice for RP reasons? Then don't.
There's not really any way they could have brought her back with new lore without changing the encounter. We killed her and hung her head from SW after all.
Much better to preserve the original raid when retuning it rather than redesigning (and thus just removing an old raid and adding a new, different one).
Aug 14th 2009 8:47PM If I had my way, they'd redo ALL the old content this way.
It's FAR faster and cheaper from a development standpoint to redo the old raids. The single largest expense and time consumption factor in raid development by several orders of magnitude is the graphic design and modelling, of the instance itself and the mobs within.
Thus, their artists can continue, for the most part, building new content along side the encounter designers (as old content is already designed), while a skeleton crew re-tunes the old encounters.
It's not one or the other, it's much more like the whole "Feature A being added has no bearing on how quickly Feature B gets done" thing.
Not to say I don't want new stuff, but what I *DO* want is more game content available at level cap. Old raids are simply not practical to run at all while levelling - you don't jump into MC while levelling generally outside of MAYBE 80-run milk runs.
Also, there are literally MILLIONS of players who have never run the old raids. MILLIONS. This *IS* new content for them.
I for one am ecstatic at the notion of multiple raids at a given tier level, instead of one raid per tier. A new raid, plus a couple retuned ones would be AWESOME.
Aug 14th 2009 8:36PM I've played primarily a Night Elf Druid since Vanilla WoW.
If there are Worgen druids, I'll reroll Worgen Druid in a *heartbeat* - the only thing I'd even consider dropping my Ulduar-geared 8k achi point druid for.
Without a second thought. Not even one.
Aug 13th 2009 10:42PM There's so much misinformation and sillyness. People shouldn't get all bent out of shape about hit; you don' tneed to keep multiple peices of gear around etc, etc.
First: You want to get hit as close to your cap as possible, WITHOUT EVER GOING OVER.
However! It's NOT THAT BAD if you're not capped.
DPS loss to a percent or two of missing is negligible at best, and often more than made up by getting significant power enchancement from other stats.
Furthermore, consider buffs. Are you likely to be grouped with a Draenie? Your hit cap just dropped to 7% instead of 8% (melee). You're better off gearing for 7% and having a 1% miss rate on the odd chance you don't have a draenie handy than gearing for 8% and wasting all that itemization when you are grouped with one.
So, to be as simple as possible:
Hit is a good stat for you if you're below cap; but it becomes WORTHLESS as soon as you cap. Thus, you're best off staying a little below the cap to give yourself "breathing room".
I play a hunter, and a feral druid in 80 raiding. In both cases, I consider my Ideal Hit Percentage to be "Greater than 6%". If I'm under 6%, I'll gem for hit until I can find gear to push me back over 6%, then I'll regem to Armor Penetration again.
I aim for >6% to give me room for draenie hit bonus (we have LOTS of them in our guild) and to provide lots of flex room, while leaving a heft itemization bonus for lovely crit and armor pen and such. I maintain top notch dps doing this, in hardmode-ulduar/Tourney raids and below.
Also, remember, if you're primarily running Heroics? Hit cap is lower - the bulk of enemies you fight will only be level 80, and bosses are typically 82 (iirc); so you need less overall. In a heroic, you're not gearing for "Vs. Boss" performance so much as "Overall Performance".
So, if I were a heroic running player, I'd probably lower my hit target from 6% to 5%.