This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Help me with this suggestion
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Arberian021
Please suggest this to blizzard:
I think that the talent specialisations must be divided into other 3 under specialisations for ex: Restoration druid of the Wild , that will give other bonusses at lv 80 and a spell at lv 95 for the next WoW. For example: Resto druid of the Wild, lv 70 Passive: Increases movement speed by 10% healing done by rejuvenation by 10% and healing done by lifebloom by 5%.
Lv 95: Spread Rejuvenation: Applies rejuvenation to all allies within 60 yard range. Cd:25 sec
Please suggest this to blizzard with this example but there must be 3 underspecialisations , i just gave 1 example, i think this must be added to WoW, The underspecialisations must not affect specialisation's passives.
Tell me what do u think!
Post by
Sephrain
I think you're kind of adding complexity for comlexity's sake. They had those with the old talent trees, and it ends up being hard to balance and make every choice equal; so everyone uses the same cookie-cutter build that icyveins or noxxic says is best.
Post by
Arberian021
I think you're kind of adding complexity for comlexity's sake. They had those with the old talent trees, and it ends up being hard to balance and make every choice equal; so everyone uses the same cookie-cutter build that icyveins or noxxic says is best.
I dont think so , this is to make the game more beautiful not the same resto druids for example but with 3 ways of healing , in this way he can choose which spells to empower, blizzard can make the underspecialisations to give equal healing and to balance the game too. This can make the game more competitive with changes between players !
Post by
581897
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Arberian021
Yep, and if you look at LK Death Knights, where there were 4 or 5 tank 'builds' at any given point, it was ridic.
There will always be some things that are better than others (or easier to use) and get more attention than other styles.
All the underspecialisations must be balanced , this is the reason that the developers work. They must balance everything. In cata there were to much decisions, but i think of bringing just 3 other decisions not so much. Not always something should me easier to use than someone else so blizzard must work for this too !
Under Specialisations have 2 empowerments , as i said . Is blizzard's job to balance them !
Post by
581897
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Eccentrica
If the trees are going to be made complex again I would be in favour of returning to the old old talent trees where people could do anything they wanted with their points even to the point of ridiculously gimping themselves because I don't believe in protecting people from themselves.
As it is, I have gotten accustomed to the new 'trees' and don't see the point in having 9 specs per class.
Post by
Arberian021
I know what do u mean , and i dont want many complications too , i didnt suggest a tree with multiple decisions , just three balanced underspecialisations!
Post by
Sephrain
I know what do u mean , and i dont want many complications too , i didnt suggest a tree with multiple decisions , just three balanced underspecialisations!
In an ideal world, yes you could customize your class endlessly.
That said, it's a LOT harder to actually balance a class than to just say poof theyre balanced. Death Knights (my main since wrath day 1) have been hilariously overpowered and depressingly underwhelming at some points. More complexity = harder to balance = more cookie cutter builds, which actually reduces the amount of customization you have.
For your druid example, lets say there are 3 sub trees. Someone is going to do the math and figure out HPS or mana conservation for every tree, figure out which is best, and everyone will use it.
Post by
Arberian021
I know what do u mean , and i dont want many complications too , i didnt suggest a tree with multiple decisions , just three balanced underspecialisations!
In an ideal world, yes you could customize your class endlessly.
That said, it's a LOT harder to actually balance a class than to just say poof theyre balanced. Death Knights (my main since wrath day 1) have been hilariously overpowered and depressingly underwhelming at some points. More complexity = harder to balance = more cookie cutter builds, which actually reduces the amount of customization you have.
For your druid example, lets say there are 3 sub trees. Someone is going to do the math and figure out HPS or mana conservation for every tree, figure out which is best, and everyone will use it.
I understand you to but if the blizzard balances them and when someone figures out which is the best from each other sub specialisations there will be a little change because i know blizzard cant balance 100% them and that a little difference from the sub specialisations must be , i agree , but not to much!
Post by
Sephrain
Now here's the disconnect, you're arguing when blizzard balances them, when the fact is they can't. They can't even balance the classes and specializations we have now.
Post by
lonewolfe31705
Please suggest this to blizzard:
I think that the talent specialisations must be divided into other 3 under specialisations for ex: Restoration druid of the Wild , that will give other bonusses at lv 80 and a spell at lv 95 for the next WoW. For example: Resto druid of the Wild, lv 70 Passive: Increases movement speed by 10% healing done by rejuvenation by 10% and healing done by lifebloom by 5%.
Lv 95: Spread Rejuvenation: Applies rejuvenation to all allies within 60 yard range. Cd:25 sec
Please suggest this to blizzard with this example but there must be 3 underspecialisations , i just gave 1 example, i think this must be added to WoW, The underspecialisations must not affect specialisation's passives.
Tell me what do u think!
No...
Bad ideas are bad. This is a bad idea.
Post by
1069282
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Arberian021
I need some answers please , and if u will find the game playing style as i suggest cool or good please suggest !
I accept every opinion to improve something in this !
Post by
Nathanyal
It seems you only want opinions that agree with you.
As for my opinion, I agree with the others. This seems to be more complicating than it already is.
Post by
Adamsm
There isn't much to improve as it's not a good idea.
There would be one specialization that does the best healing/tanking/dps and that will be the one that all choose.
Post by
581897
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
331902
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I think that the three spec system is fine as is. At maximum, I could see Blizzard MAYBE adding a fourth spec to the classes at some point, but it's unlikely. To suddenly triple the numbers of class-specs, to try and come up with three times as many mechanical or resource differences so that the sub-specs would feel markedly different, and then balance them to all be viable, sounds like a tremendous amount of work for something that there is really no demand for. I don't think that the amount of effort would be worth the result, and while you will probably find people who would like a tank spec for shamans, or a melee hunter spec, I don't think that you are going to find anyone who wants SIX new specs per class.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.