Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it,
follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given
their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!
[WoW] PvP: Fuck you. POKEMON.
Posts
But it was still a gibfest for some because 2.0 has wacky talent changes and stuff. I faced a few triple felguard teams in that span of time. It didn't end well.
Although they did turn Arcane into literally a one-hit wonder. Arcane Power + Trinket + Presence of Mind + Pyroblast = lolololol
that was a fun few weeks for me
Hmm ok a 5 boomkin team spamming moonfire called "may cause seizures".
One time it was exciting because I got randomly paired for twos with a warrior with full FM and Sulfuras three straight matches.
We won those matches.
Random arenas had some charm despite being completely pointless.
Because it required greater improvisation instead of building your team around imbalance gimmick #7824 and hoping you got a good draw on your opponent.
nah in season 2 BC pretty much every class had a viable 2v2 arena spec/team composition, except for maybe hunters, though I do recall some kick ass hunter/priest drain teams that worked fairly well
Also I was second ranked in my battlegroup season 2 for 2v2, so I do know what I am talking about, I was very hardcore into 2v2 arena back then.
I know warrior/any healer worked well, warlock/any healer usually worked well too. Then of course you had rogue/mage which worked well, and a lot of the rogue/healer combos worked well also.
So while arena was terrible for most specs, there was always a spec that worked well and arena 2v2 was never too terribly imbalanced.
edit: And most importantly there were never almost never any fucking 45 minute games, except maybe on blades edge with lock/druid mirror matches
edit2: my combo was druid/lock
also i don't believe you for a minute if you say you had the #2 team on your BG but only 1500 now
Resto druid and Sl/Sl warlock by any chance?
Yeah lets not complain about balance now, and at the same time time say how great it was back in TBC, when combo's such as the above existed.
It's only balanced if you're winning.
It's enough to make me think it's time to go back to TF2.
Defiance: Nermals/Jotok
s8 was decently balanced outside of certain maps (FUCK YOU RING OF VALOR)
but it was balanced around every class being able to two shot everyone else
I wish I could have played more on this WSG weekend. It was 2 minute queues and 3-0 games all the time, every time. WSG weekend is like christmas and easter combined for the horde.
I am only 1500 because I just recently started arena and have yet to find a decent partner with a mic, that is to say I have only done arena for a few weeks and every week I have done it has been just for points.
1 tanky FC type, 3(4?) healers, then just work out some good buff/debuffs for dps types?
SW:Tor - Tao - Kryatt Dragon Server
most exciting thing I read
Sure, right when I decide I'm done with my mage.
Trying to play a healer in a battleground with competent opponents around is an extremely infuriating experience. Between interrupts, silences, stuns, and general CC all being on separate DR, you often can't do much more than throw out whatever instants you have. Trying to throw out a cast time heal and chancing a CS, kick, WS, etc. is a pretty risky use of your non-locked down time.
Also, will they use the opportunity from this realization to finally get rid of the damage increasing cast time mechanic?
Don't worry. It'll probably be months before we see the effects.
The second most important thing I read was how they were talking about Arena coming down to "layering control spells" that were on exclusive diminishing returns categories.
Maybe a Rogue *shouldn't* be able to hold a caster in one place for 10 seconds.
"We have the best programmers in the industry, but we can't make a single spell work properly."
Maybe I'm missing something, but is there some reason why a stealthed rogue shouldn't be hit by a trap?
Pokemon Black code - 3009 7390 5907 Send PM if you add me
I was just thinking that myself. But... I hit traps all the time as a rogue while stealthed and they do hit me. That's why I have a disarm trap spell that I can only use while stealthed. Otherwise, what's the point?
So maybe the guy who answered his has no fracking clue?
I mean, I swear I've been hit by plenty of traps in the WSG tunnel on accident while stealthed. Or maybe I'm just unlucky.
Because traps do elemental damage, there is a chance they can be resisted. This resistance would (i.e. should) be overcome by the Hunter's spell penetration, but the way the game is programmed, traps cannot inherit that value from the caster. This leaves the devs with 3 options:
1. Leave the traps as is, where they sometimes get resisted when they shouldn't.
2. Increase trap hit percentage by an arbitrary number, up to possibly 100%. This makes it so that hunter traps would always hit, always revealing stealthed rogues, with no recourse to the rogue and no requirement for spell pen from the hunter.
3. Try to rewrite the code to fix the problem, which is the answer they gave.
Feel free to correct me if I've got this wrong.
Edit: Also, the reference to stealthed rogue was just an example. All classes are affected by traps in this same way.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
If it's 100% then hey, we will have disarm trap.
If you're a resto shaman or druid you only need instants to stay alive.
Pokemon Black code - 3009 7390 5907 Send PM if you add me
Yeah, I think it was meant to be conversational but just missed the mark. The point is that they'd like for EVERYONE to care about resist chance and spell pen, rather than just pretend that those two values don't exist for traps.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
It's kind of a chicken and egg situation, the only reason they have such great instants is because of CC/Interrupts.
If cc/interrupts were toned down the devs could shift the classes away from instants.
Well they said in the QA that instants would be reduced in potency.
To the extent that their resistances are mitigated by it, yes. They don't care about their own spell pen value, but they are aware that other classes have it.
Like Jasconius alluded to above, these are such small percentages that no one actively thinks about it, but it's more elegant from a game perspective for these numbers to matter than to simply say "100%! Done!"
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
I do not understand this garbage about "CC being too powerful" this season. CC was significantly more powerful last season when you could kill someone in a blanket silence, the cast time was almost half as long as it is now, there was dispel protection, and only two classes could dispel to begin with.
If anything Blizzard needs to rebuff CC to S8 levels, of the last 10 matches I've played in 3s, 8 of them were mindless melee cleave. It seriously feels like S6 all over again.
Also, if warriors don't get spell pen in PvP, the answer to that question is "no."
I don't care how impossibly improbable that would be.
Pokemon Black code - 3009 7390 5907 Send PM if you add me
This is becoming two separate issues:
1. Are traps fixable? Yes, and easily so, simply by setting traps to hit 100% of the time. However, the design team has stated, not just on this issue but on many PvP issues (esp. Colossus Smash) that they see going outside of the core game programming to fix a single problem is something they hate to do, and something they see as a last result. I don't care what they do to hunter traps, I'm just trying to provide a little perspective on the devs post, since it seemed confusing to some people. To reiterate, the question was "Why should cloaked rogues not have to worry about traps?" and the answer is "cloaked rogues should care exactly as much about traps as anyone else, it was dumb for the devs to use that example."
2. The confusion regarding warriors has to do with the way you interpreted my use of the phrase "care about". Saying a warrior doesn't care about his opponent's spell pen is like saying a warrior doesn't care about how much critical hit his opponents have. Does he GEAR for it? No. Does he CARE what it is? Yes. Can he change it directly? No, but it's still a game mechanic that affects his play. If he thought it was important enough, he could change his own gearing for more resists to compensate for his opponents spell pen, or in the case of crits, by getting more resilience. He doesn't gear for it, he gears around it. Make sense?
I was answering care = "think about", you seem to be answering care = "wants it on his gear". In that sense we're both right =)
Edit: I changed my example to one that was a little more PvP centric.
Pre-emptive double edit: Yes, I know that warriors do want crit on their own gear. I'm saying that, during combat, they should also think about what stats are on their opponents' gear.
3clipse: The key to any successful marriage is a good mid-game transition.
Re: 1.
I haven't seen the Q&A yet since no one has C-P'd it here, so that was the first time I'd seen the dev clarification about making ability-specific changes like with Colossus Smash. The position is understandable; however, it's still kind of a lazy stance to take when you have ability-specific "bugs" (using that as a general word for software defects, design oversight, whatever) in the first place. The CS change was a ruleset separation specifically to address warriors exploding people without hindering PvE. Traps are another matter entirely, since they're essentially bugged.
Inner edit: Anyway, they've shown they're open to doing this sort of thing more and more in Cata, with Taunts (granted, they're essentially PvE-only abilities) and soon Interrupts being made always-hit. It's like there is a slow dawning upon the devs of the realization that utility doesn't make a lot of sense being tied to the "hit rating" stat, which makes more sense to be segmented as a DPS stat, not an omnistat. Just like crit and mastery are "throughput" stats. It would be a weird game indeed where a "crit" Cyclone lasted 3 seconds longer.
Not really. You literally change nothing about your gear based on individual opponents. You just gear around 4/5% hit cap, get X amount of spell pen if you care about spell pen, etc. Resilience doesn't even affect crits anymore, so I don't see why your opponent's crit chance would even affect that "decision," which isn't even really a decision you make. If you feel you're dying too fast in general for your own preference or your pocket healer to keep up, then you try to get more resilience at the cost of some DPS, but that's the sort of thing that will vary from game to game to game. Sure, you care if your opponent is a dribbling retard or a Gladiator, but there's nothing you do in response to it, so using "care" in that sense becomes essentially meaningless.
I'm honestly curious how you expect this scenario to work in practice. It reads like a hand wave over the two massive issues of 1) actually identifying a gear differential beyond "he geared good" and "he geared not so good" and 2) what strategic or tactical change one would make based on somehow getting through (1).
"Does he have a big glowing sword?"
Yes? Dismantle
No? Kill kill kill