This is why shamans are angry. p2.
by Tharfor | 08/02/2008 15:31:44![]() So you've posted a thread which compiles all the negative changes from all the patch notes, but conveniently omits all other changes (either neutral or good) - I've seen this in other class forums already so I'm not particularly impressed by it. You then go on to talk about the CMs and how when they get ill it's clearly a conspiracy just to avoid shaman concerns, and how a little bit of mis-communication during a very busy period is a blatant attempt to nerf or deride the shaman class. You post no links to threads of any the comments you are referring to, most likely because they are blown way out or proportion or taken out of context, and you put a negative spin on any blue presence that you have been given (I personally remember participating in a very constructive thread on this forum). Your dissection of each talent tree is fair enough, though again it's completely negatively written and only picks up on what is wrong with each build. I'd like to see a bit more about why you think these abilities are a problem and not so much about "QQ, this is a problem for us." Although this kind of micro-level discussion is what these forums are for, it has been said that we are not aiming for game balance at specific talent spec levels. As long as each class is able to be reasonably involved in every aspect of the game then things are going pretty well. I understand that you are upset and have valid concerns over the class that you like or want to play, but this post is showing one side of one part of a very long story about a much bigger picture. ...and as for the sticky requests: when have we ever made a sticky out of a post which basically says "You fail, Blizzard."? There is a potential here in this thread, I can see that. I can't say I'm surprised that it's the ones who are left after me banning so many in the dot spam this week who can formulate potentially decent threads, but I think you need to take a breath and get some perspective. I know, I'm asking for patience and constructive input. This is where you tell me that you've been doing that for years and you're sick of being patient. I hear that, I understand. However, saying something more than once does not make it any less true or relevant. [ Post edited by Tharfor ] "Those days are passed now And in the past they must remain But we can still rise now And be the nation again" |
by Tharfor | 08/02/2008 16:50:00![]() I'm not going to respond to every point raised in this thread, because I'm going on vacation in about 10 minutes and at the moment it feels like everyone is talking at me at once. :) So let's see: The forums exist for our game subscribers to discuss various aspects of the game. I don't believe that they were ever designed to only be a place for players to give feedback to developers via the community managers, but that seems to be what people expect. They should be used for people to discuss their class and if feedback can be taken from those discussion and used by the developers then fine; it's not really the same thing. I mentioned that all classes should be able to participate in all aspects of the game and I was not surprised to see the link to sk-gaming appear shortly afterwards. From that list of statistics I can see that shaman are probably the closest to being at the balancing point that the devs have talked about because you are represented in 5v5 and not so much in 2v2. The stats don't show a lack of popularity for shaman, they just show a ridiculous popularity for other classes. It takes a negative mind to assume that other peoples popularity is a reflection of your own unpopularity, if that makes sense. The rest of the posts are either praising my bravery for posting here, or trying to burn me down for not posting what people want to hear so I'll just stop here and wish you all a great weekend. "Those days are passed now And in the past they must remain But we can still rise now And be the nation again" |
by Thundgot | 13/02/2008 12:21:10![]() Guys, please don't get too stuck on a single line of text now. (Well, too late for that, but I can make an effort, right? :-p) You are way more interesting points discussed between Shamans than harping on that one. I'm not gonna call up Tharfor during his vacation, but may - just maybe - try to read it like "The stats don't show a lack of popularity for shaman, they just show a ridiculous popularity for certain other classes." (e.g. Warriors and Druids when looking at the "all players" SK list). Infinite Loop; see Loop, Infinite Loop, Infinite; see Infinite Loop |
by Thundgot | 13/02/2008 12:53:40![]()
Just wanted to point out the full wording of that particular point (only directly relevant part of the post quoted):
From Ret Paladins to WoW Developers ver. 6.0 Infinite Loop; see Loop, Infinite Loop, Infinite; see Infinite Loop |
by Thundgot | 13/02/2008 14:27:03![]()
Can't say I disagree. ;-) And Morkatog, thanks for re-posting your input here. As I posted in the other thread, it's a good read. :) Infinite Loop; see Loop, Infinite Loop, Infinite; see Infinite Loop |
by Thundgot | 13/02/2008 17:13:13![]()
Must have been a strange mind twitch when deciding between "There are" and "You are forgetting" or something like that. Consider it "There are..." :-) Good point on the more differing play-style of the specs, compared to Warrior and I guess other more specialised classes like Mage and Rogue. It's something I figure is natural when it comes to classes with a more complex role combination (i.e. hybrids). Druids and Paladins can probably make the same point. [ Post edited by Thundgot ] Infinite Loop; see Loop, Infinite Loop, Infinite; see Infinite Loop |
by Thundgot | 14/02/2008 08:25:18![]()
I think you're jumping to conclusions here. I was merely pointing out that it was good (key) point of the Shaman concerns, and adding that it was something I figured was a distinction between hybrids and specialist classes in general. I'm sorry if my present tense of "figure" led you to believe that this was a new revelation to me. ;-) Infinite Loop; see Loop, Infinite Loop, Infinite; see Infinite Loop |
by Thundgot | 14/02/2008 09:31:52![]()
Another quick morning reply before I have to work on other things... 1. i) Yes (for clarity, that is "we do", not just "I do") ii) Yes (see clarification above) iii Yes, and I can assure you that's not a new thing brought on by e.g. this thread ;-) 2. Not sure what information you're thinking of. All changes should be announced - if not earlier, then in the patch notes (and pre-PTR "leaks") at least. However, I doubt we will be throwing out ideas and speculation getting people worked up over ideas things that might not happen for reasons we wouldn't be able to share all details on (e.g. code limitations). That'd just be asking for trouble. Infinite Loop; see Loop, Infinite Loop, Infinite; see Infinite Loop |
Hot: View Nethaera's Comments on Class Balancing in Patch 2.4



Recent Blizzard Announcements

