Options

[WoW]Patch 2.2 notes from PTR

1246

Posts

  • Options
    terminal stupidityterminal stupidity Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I quit my rogue around the time Naxx came out, does blind/vanish powder still only stack to 20?

    It was really annoying when it only stacked to ten, but 20 is barely any better. If blind/vanish powders stacked to 100 or 200 it wouldn't be nearly as bad.

    As it stands now, it's a pain in the ass.

    terminal stupidity on
  • Options
    BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I quit my rogue around the time Naxx came out, does blind/vanish powder still only stack to 20?

    Yes.

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • Options
    terminal stupidityterminal stupidity Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Not sure why people are saying getting rid of it is a bad thing, then.

    Yeah, I really like having to play inventory tetris if I'm going to PVP for a few hours.

    terminal stupidity on
  • Options
    BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I really like having to play inventory tetris if I'm going to PVP for a few hours.

    Roll a warlock :P

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • Options
    terminal stupidityterminal stupidity Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I have one.

    Shard Bags plus a Necrosis UI mod means you don't have to manage jack.

    terminal stupidity on
  • Options
    BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I have one.

    Shard Bags plus a Necrosis UI mod means you don't have to manage jack.

    Then I don't see how having to keep reagents on your rogue that don't stack that well is any worse.

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • Options
    terminal stupidityterminal stupidity Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    There's no special bag for powders or poisons.

    You also don't need to use more than one type of soul shard.

    You don't need to buy or farm reagents for your shards, either.

    terminal stupidity on
  • Options
    GoatmonGoatmon Companion of Kess Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Wavechaser wrote: »
    Goatmon wrote: »
    Wavechaser wrote: »
    Sorry, blind is not "practically a pally bubble"

    It was until the recent (and delightful) change to the PVP trinket. =P

    Even then, no. No it wasn't.

    Edit,

    Refer to Frylocks post.

    Yes, which pointed that that 1-1 fights aren't worth talking about. I disagree strongly on this, but since everyone here agrees with him I'm not bothering to continue my side since there's no point in it.

    Goatmon on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6680-6709-4204


  • Options
    FrylockHolmesFrylockHolmes Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    It's not worth talking about because WoW designers themselves have said that the game isn't balanced around one on one encounters between players.

    FrylockHolmes on
  • Options
    BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    There's no special bag for powders or poisons.

    Yours stack in lots of 20 and last 30 minutes. It doesn't really need a special bag. If I'm not mistaken they don't disappear from your weapon when you die, either.

    If you carry two stacks of each (to make things simple it's so you can use the same on each weapon) that's 10 inventory slots, which will last you ten hours. Add in however much blinding and flash powder you need. You'll have to restock the powders more often if you use them each and every time the cooldown is up, but if you have three stacks of each (to fill up a 16 slot back, since everyone and their grandmother should have them) that is still 60 uses of each. If you have Elusiveness that's...what, three and a half hours worth?

    EDIT: Forgot about Anesthetic Poison. Bleh, who cares if we're talking about PvP use.
    You don't need to buy or farm reagents for your shards, either.

    Most of your reagents are readily available from an NPC. 9 out of 10 warlocks agree, they would love to be able to buy shards from a vendor. Instead they have to fly off to some zone with NPCs in their level range to kill. It sucks, bad.

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • Options
    Racist JokeRacist Joke Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Yes it does suck. If I could buy shards, I'd fucking do it.

    Racist Joke on
    Steam
    Xbox Live: Kunohara
  • Options
    GoatmonGoatmon Companion of Kess Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    It's not worth talking about because WoW designers themselves have said that the game isn't balanced around one on one encounters between players.

    To anyone who's played the game since release, it's hard to believe that Blizzard themselves know how to balance anything. Every patch is like yanking something off one part of the scale, and then stacking it on another, throwing things out of whack.

    They're notoriously bad about making minor changes that have a tremendous effect and cause tons of problems. I recall when they enabled warrior stance-specific skills to carry over into other stances once they've been activated. This single handedly made arms warriors absolute monsters in group PVP, even moreso than they already were.

    Goatmon on
    Switch Friend Code: SW-6680-6709-4204


  • Options
    BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Goatmon wrote: »
    They're notoriously bad about making minor changes that have a tremendous effect and cause tons of problems. I recall when they enabled warrior stance-specific skills to carry over into other stances once they've been activated. This single handedly made arms warriors absolute monsters in group PVP, even moreso than they already were.

    Can you think of any examples? Because the only thing even remotely similar to that was when you could cancel a buff (Enrage) which would instantly remove you from combat, allowing a warrior to use charge as another Intercept.

    There was also a bug where warriors could get an extra talent point, so you had MS Arms warriors with Deathwish.

    I've played since January of '05, and I can't think of the instance you're describing.

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • Options
    The_ScarabThe_Scarab Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Blind changes make sense as none of the ingredients are found in outland so stacks of 3 or 4 are now 20g on my server. I couldnt afford to use blind.

    The_Scarab on
  • Options
    DehumanizedDehumanized Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Except y'know, that you can pickpocket any humanoid for junkboxes, which contain 5-6 blinding powder around 50% of the time.

    http://www.wowhead.com/?item=29569#z0Rzc

    Dehumanized on
  • Options
    korodullinkorodullin What. SCRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    The_Scarab wrote: »
    Blind changes make sense as none of the ingredients are found in outland so stacks of 3 or 4 are now 20g on my server. I couldnt afford to use blind.

    Ingredients aren't found in Outland? How about the SIX HUNDRED Blinding Powder my Rogue got from junkboxes while leveling from 60-70?

    It's not my fault none of you are willing to pickpocket things while you level.

    korodullin on
    ZvOMJnu.png
    - The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
  • Options
    Liquid GhostLiquid Ghost DO YOU HEAR THE VOICES, TOO?! Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Barrakketh wrote: »
    I've played since January of '05, and I can't think of the instance you're describing.
    They're probably talking about stuff like Recklessness, Retaliation, and Shield Wall. Not sure if Blizzard rescinded these changes or not, though.

    Liquid Ghost on
  • Options
    ArikadoArikado Southern CaliforniaRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    As a resto Shaman, I think I might as well just use Bloodlust and bend over as soon as I walk into Arena matches once this patch hits.

    Arikado on
    BNet: Arikado#1153 | Steam | LoL: Anzen
  • Options
    khainkhain Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Goatmon wrote: »
    It's not worth talking about because WoW designers themselves have said that the game isn't balanced around one on one encounters between players.

    To anyone who's played the game since release, it's hard to believe that Blizzard themselves know how to balance anything. Every patch is like yanking something off one part of the scale, and then stacking it on another, throwing things out of whack.

    They're notoriously bad about making minor changes that have a tremendous effect and cause tons of problems. I recall when they enabled warrior stance-specific skills to carry over into other stances once they've been activated. This single handedly made arms warriors absolute monsters in group PVP, even moreso than they already were.

    This is pretty much every MMO ever though, except most seem to just give up a lot quicker.

    Wait, what changed with Shamans, I reread the notes and I don't see anything earth breaking.

    khain on
  • Options
    StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited July 2007
    With the rogue changes being...not so...this patch is 2.1.4. Nothing I have read can convince me this is worthy of being a major patch.

    Sterica on
    YL9WnCY.png
  • Options
    SabreMauSabreMau ネトゲしよう 판다리아Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Yeah, it really needs at least Zul'Aman to show up to be worthy of a 0.1 increment. Everything about this looks like it's a patch that was rushed into the PTR pipeline because male orcs complained.

    SabreMau on
  • Options
    autono-wally, erotibot300autono-wally, erotibot300 love machine Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Barrakketh wrote: »
    I really like having to play inventory tetris if I'm going to PVP for a few hours.

    Roll a warlock :P

    I carry at least 30 Soul shards at all times, 40+ for raiding

    autono-wally, erotibot300 on
    kFJhXwE.jpgkFJhXwE.jpg
  • Options
    OptyOpty Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Rorus Raz wrote: »
    With the rogue changes being...not so...this patch is 2.1.4. Nothing I have read can convince me this is worthy of being a major patch.
    It's a major patch due to Mac Video Recording and Voice Chat (which will be put in at some point for testing).

    Opty on
  • Options
    KartanKartan Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I really hope they add something similiar for PC users sometime. inbuild videocapture is just to awesome to leave it to the Macs.

    Kartan on
  • Options
    SeptusSeptus Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Opty wrote: »
    Rorus Raz wrote: »
    With the rogue changes being...not so...this patch is 2.1.4. Nothing I have read can convince me this is worthy of being a major patch.
    It's a major patch due to Mac Video Recording and Voice Chat (which will be put in at some point for testing).

    Right, so not content. I think people expect content patches to be the major .x ones.

    Septus on
    PSN: Kurahoshi1
  • Options
    Bok ChoiBok Choi Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Kartan wrote: »
    I really hope they add something similiar for PC users sometime. inbuild videocapture is just to awesome to leave it to the Macs.

    Still haven't figured this out yet.
    Am I misreading the notes, should this be functioning already?

    Bok Choi on
    [SIGPIC][/SIGPIC]
    <ProfMoriarty> oh yeah. one time I PMed a picture of my penis to a forumer, and then I got a PM from Thanatos saying "nice girth"
  • Options
    SabreMauSabreMau ネトゲしよう 판다리아Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Septus wrote: »
    Opty wrote: »
    Rorus Raz wrote: »
    With the rogue changes being...not so...this patch is 2.1.4. Nothing I have read can convince me this is worthy of being a major patch.
    It's a major patch due to Mac Video Recording and Voice Chat (which will be put in at some point for testing).

    Right, so not content. I think people expect content patches to be the major .x ones.


    1.1 - Initial Release
    1.2 - Maraudon
    1.3 - Dire Maul, Azuregos, Kazzak
    1.4 - PvP Honor System
    1.5 - Battlegrounds
    1.6 - Blackwing Lair, Darkmoon Faire
    1.7 - Zul'Gurub, Arathi Basin
    1.8 - Green Dragons, Silithus remade
    1.9 - Ahn'Qiraj
    1.10- Dungeon 2 Armor Sets
    1.11- Naxxramas
    1.12- Cross-Realm Battlegrounds
    2.0 - The Burning Crusade
    2.1 - Black Temple, Outdoor 5-man Content, Netherdrakes
    2.2 - Voice Chat! (?)


    Releasing Zul'Aman would be perfect to showcase a content patch with, but we're apparently getting a patch now instead of waiting until that's ready. Hmm.

    SabreMau on
  • Options
    StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited July 2007
    Yeah, 2.2 is the lamest patch since 1.12, and even it had some cool UI changes and things. 1.10 was also kinda lame, but priest review and DRUID FOR DANCING were saving graces. And they revamped five-mans, which made for alt-tastic times.

    2.2 is giving us a feature many of us won't use. And...that's it.

    Sterica on
    YL9WnCY.png
  • Options
    korodullinkorodullin What. SCRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I could have sworn cross-realm BGs/Battlegroups were introduced pre-Naxx.

    Like, pre-1.10 even.

    korodullin on
    ZvOMJnu.png
    - The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
  • Options
    SegSeg Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    korodullin wrote: »
    I could have sworn cross-realm BGs/Battlegroups were introduced pre-Naxx.

    Like, pre-1.10 even.

    Well according to http://www.wowwiki.com/Patches/1.x it was when SabreMau has in his post.

    Seg on
  • Options
    korodullinkorodullin What. SCRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Seg wrote: »
    korodullin wrote: »
    I could have sworn cross-realm BGs/Battlegroups were introduced pre-Naxx.

    Like, pre-1.10 even.

    Well according to http://www.wowwiki.com/Patches/1.x it was when SabreMau has in his post.

    I'm not doubting him or anything, I'm just wondering why I thought cross-server BGs came out much sooner.

    korodullin on
    ZvOMJnu.png
    - The Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse (2017, colorized)
  • Options
    SabreMauSabreMau ネトゲしよう 판다리아Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    korodullin wrote: »
    I could have sworn cross-realm BGs/Battlegroups were introduced pre-Naxx.

    Like, pre-1.10 even.

    http://worldofwarcraft.com/info/underdev/implemented/

    Oh, and they come up with epic-sounding names for the theme of each major content patch, too. The Call to War. Rise of the Blood God. Shadow of the Necropolis. Listen to PUGs Speak.

    ...I would be very unsurprised if this patch languished on the PTRs until Zul'Aman was ready. I mean, seriously, every 0.1 patch gets a big picture and all the major features bolded, including one to three paragraphs of lore. What's the paragraph-writer going to do? "Mystical forces have adjusted the amount of damage Azeroth and Outland's fierce fighters take from critical strikes!"

    SabreMau on
  • Options
    SaerisSaeris Borb Enthusiast flapflapflapflapRegistered User regular
    edited July 2007
    It's really quite astounding how poorly their patch release paradigm is designed. Practice shows that small, frequent patches are always superior to large, infrequent ones. Always. They even acknowledged this at one point, if memory serves. Yet they continue to go months between patches, and delay important, small fixes unnecessarily long just so they can say "Look here, this is the patch where we released Big Feature X".

    Come to think of it, the only MMO developer that I've seen release patches in a reasonable timeframe is Mythic with DAoC. There were usually weekly patches, and sometimes multiple hotfixes per day.

    Saeris on
    borb_sig.png
  • Options
    SeptusSeptus Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    My worry with weekly patches, would be screwing up mods, weekly.

    I think monthly is a pretty good rate, and both EnB(for a while) and Asheron's Call did that. I can't remember what AO's schedule was.

    Septus on
    PSN: Kurahoshi1
  • Options
    BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Septus wrote: »
    My worry with weekly patches, would be screwing up mods, weekly.

    I think monthly is a pretty good rate, and both EnB(for a while) and Asheron's Call did that. I can't remember what AO's schedule was.

    Content and bug fix updates shouldn't have much of an effect on breaking UIs unless it involves API changes.

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • Options
    focused7focused7 Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Barrakketh wrote: »
    Content and bug fix updates shouldn't have much of an effect on breaking UIs unless it involves API changes.

    One would think that but past history with patches has taught us otherwise.

    focused7 on
  • Options
    BarrakkethBarrakketh Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    focused7 wrote: »
    Barrakketh wrote: »
    Content and bug fix updates shouldn't have much of an effect on breaking UIs unless it involves API changes.

    One would think that but past history with patches has taught us otherwise.

    If you paid attention to the UI & Macros forums, you would know that many patches have had API changes.

    For 2.2 changes, see here.

    Barrakketh on
    Rollers are red, chargers are blue....omae wa mou shindeiru
  • Options
    jonxpjonxp [E] PC Security Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    I don't know how many (if any) of you are developers, but adding voice chat to WoW, as well as the requisite sound backend changes, and server additions/upgrades/changes, is a HUGE thing. This reminds me of people calling Vista nothing but a "visual upgrade" of XP. Just because you can't *see* anything majorly different from the two million lines of code, doesn't mean that it took any less time to do, or is a minor feature that could have been added in a day. In fact with some things (like an audio or visual subsystem overhaul) if it looks and works exactly the same to the end user, then that's perfect.


    It's things like that that make my job really hard to do.

    jonxp on
    Every time you write parallel fifths, Bach kills a kitten.
    3DS Friend Code: 2707-1614-5576
    PAX Prime 2014 Buttoneering!
  • Options
    StericaSterica Yes Registered User, Moderator mod
    edited July 2007
    Saeris wrote: »
    It's really quite astounding how poorly their patch release paradigm is designed. Practice shows that small, frequent patches are always superior to large, infrequent ones. Always. They even acknowledged this at one point, if memory serves. Yet they continue to go months between patches, and delay important, small fixes unnecessarily long just so they can say "Look here, this is the patch where we released Big Feature X".

    Come to think of it, the only MMO developer that I've seen release patches in a reasonable timeframe is Mythic with DAoC. There were usually weekly patches, and sometimes multiple hotfixes per day.
    After 1.3, which was the longest wait between patches before 2.0.1 raised the bar (followed by 2.1), Blizzard promised to speed up the development cycle.

    Which they did. 1.4 Was out within two monts of 1.3. 1.5 was out the month after 1.4, and 1.6 was out the month after that. 1.7 was a bit longer...two months after 1.6, but 1.8 was the fastest patch ever at under a month since the last one.

    Then things slowed down again, as 1.9 took until January and 1.10 was another three or so months and 1.11 another three months still. Things just started getting slower, even record-breaking as the TBC delay meant not content patch for four plus months. 2.1 started a new era in slow patches, taking nearly half a year to come out.

    2.2 isn't even the fastest content patch, and it still has less content than 1.8.

    Sterica on
    YL9WnCY.png
  • Options
    kaleeditykaleedity Sometimes science is more art than science Registered User regular
    edited July 2007
    Barrakketh wrote: »
    Goatmon wrote: »
    They're notoriously bad about making minor changes that have a tremendous effect and cause tons of problems. I recall when they enabled warrior stance-specific skills to carry over into other stances once they've been activated. This single handedly made arms warriors absolute monsters in group PVP, even moreso than they already were.

    Can you think of any examples? Because the only thing even remotely similar to that was when you could cancel a buff (Enrage) which would instantly remove you from combat, allowing a warrior to use charge as another Intercept.

    There was also a bug where warriors could get an extra talent point, so you had MS Arms warriors with Deathwish.

    I've played since January of '05, and I can't think of the instance you're describing.

    Sweeping strikes was completely broken. It was difficult to use due to the prior stance limitations.

    Sure, it was a big deal, but that was the only real problem caused by that change. Sweeping strikes and whirlwind when it was first possible was overwhelmingly overpowered.

    It has always seemed that Blizzard's playtesting has been a little off with the warrior. The whole server-client issue that translated all dodges, blocks, and parries on attacks from players against npcs into misses was ridiculous and only considered a problem several months after the issue was reported en masse. "Buffing" the pvp trinket to remove polymorph instead of snares was ridiculously stupid. Allowing the pvp trinket to remove all sorts of effects invalidates the presence of many classes in many situations while they're fighting against a warrior (whether as an individual or as part of a group).

    Heh, virtually all of these problems could have easily been fixed with quick patches. Instead, the problems stuck around for quite a while.

    kaleedity on
Sign In or Register to comment.