Random (M)MORPG thoughts

[Xenich]

Yet none of that negates the original point I made about the game play design and focus.

You assume that original game play design and focus were god.

And that a good thing. My party played faction, races and classed that party member wanted to play, not the super optimized top tier last patch meta race for half percentage of stats masturbation that no lifers did and we were having good time, ee were having fun.

No, I said I preferred them and there are others who do as well.

You seem to think this is a contest and I was pretty clear these are different styles of play.

Which is good or bad certainly is somewhat subjective depending on the goals in play an individual seeks.

I could explain in detail why the elements of play you like are bad for the style of I seek, but it won't matter as you dislike them, so again... here we are back to... "I don't care for that style, you do".

Claiming I am wrong is just as stupid as telling me that cake is better than pie.

[rusty_shackleford]

Wotlk was "bring the player not the class" design which sucked, I wanted to play an rpg not Farmville

Not sure why people rated this "disagree", it's not disputable. This was the core design principle of WotLK.
https://www.engadget.com/2009-02-27-gho ... class.html

You have heard Blizzard's motto for raiding in Wrath of the Lich King, "bring the player not the class."

This is completely counter to what an RPG is, it led to widespread homogenization, removal of any role that didn't fit neatly into the trinity, and arguably destruction of the MMO genre itself due to every MMO thereafter copying it.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Claiming I am wrong is just as stupid as telling me that cake is better than pie.

Would it be too much of an ignorance to say that I don't see the difference between cake and pie, since they both are cringe desert for women and not a grilled juicy steak?

[Stack of Turtles]

Wotlk was "bring the player not the class" design which sucked, I wanted to play an rpg not Farmville

Not sure why people rated this "disagree", it's not disputable. This was the core design principle of WotLK.
https://www.engadget.com/2009-02-27-gho ... class.html

You have heard Blizzard's motto for raiding in Wrath of the Lich King, "bring the player not the class."

This is completely counter to what an RPG is, it led to widespread homogenization, removal of any role that didn't fit neatly into the trinity, and arguably destruction of the MMO genre itself due to every MMO thereafter copying it.

They're disagreeing because they wanted to play Farmville.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Wotlk was "bring the player not the class" design which sucked, I wanted to play an rpg not Farmville

Not sure why people rated this "disagree", it's not disputable. This was the core design principle of WotLK.
https://www.engadget.com/2009-02-27-gho ... class.html

You have heard Blizzard's motto for raiding in Wrath of the Lich King, "bring the player not the class."

This is completely counter to what an RPG is, it led to widespread homogenization, removal of any role that didn't fit neatly into the trinity, and arguably destruction of the MMO genre itself due to every MMO thereafter copying it.

Classes are being designed so that many necessary buffs, such as Replenishment, can be acquired through a variety of classes, rather than just one.

Thank, *******, God people have choice among different classes, that plays differently and keep necessary buffs!

[Xenich]

Wotlk was "bring the player not the class" design which sucked, I wanted to play an rpg not Farmville

Not sure why people rated this "disagree", it's not disputable. This was the core design principle of WotLK.
https://www.engadget.com/2009-02-27-gho ... class.html

You have heard Blizzard's motto for raiding in Wrath of the Lich King, "bring the player not the class."

This is completely counter to what an RPG is, it led to widespread homogenization, removal of any role that didn't fit neatly into the trinity, and arguably destruction of the MMO genre itself due to every MMO thereafter copying it.

Classes are being designed so that many necessary buffs, such as Replenishment, can be acquired through a variety of classes, rather than just one.

Thank, *******, God people have choice among different classes, that plays differently and keep necessary buffs!

Is that the point when they basically rubber stamped every class to be the same allowing all to tank, dps, and heal, etc... and then acted like there was any real point in choice?

[rusty_shackleford]

Wotlk was "bring the player not the class" design which sucked, I wanted to play an rpg not Farmville

Not sure why people rated this "disagree", it's not disputable. This was the core design principle of WotLK.
https://www.engadget.com/2009-02-27-gho ... class.html

You have heard Blizzard's motto for raiding in Wrath of the Lich King, "bring the player not the class."

This is completely counter to what an RPG is, it led to widespread homogenization, removal of any role that didn't fit neatly into the trinity, and arguably destruction of the MMO genre itself due to every MMO thereafter copying it.

Classes are being designed so that many necessary buffs, such as Replenishment, can be acquired through a variety of classes, rather than just one.

Thank, *******, God people have choice among different classes, that plays differently and keep necessary buffs!

So why even have classes instead of just "generic guy" who does everything and brings everything?

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Not sure why people rated this "disagree", it's not disputable. This was the core design principle of WotLK.
https://www.engadget.com/2009-02-27-gho ... class.html


This is completely counter to what an RPG is, it led to widespread homogenization, removal of any role that didn't fit neatly into the trinity, and arguably destruction of the MMO genre itself due to every MMO thereafter copying it.

Classes are being designed so that many necessary buffs, such as Replenishment, can be acquired through a variety of classes, rather than just one.

Thank, *******, God people have choice among different classes, that plays differently and keep necessary buffs!

Is that the point when they basically rubber stamped every class to be the same allowing all to tank, dps, and heal, etc... and then acted like there was any real point in choice?

It is that the point that every heal can do battle resurrection, but every heal class heals differently.

[rusty_shackleford]

, but every heal class heals differently.

it's the same exact thing with different colors and animations

the only time this isn't true is when one class/spec is just better — and since the others no longer have their niches, they become objectively worse

[Xenich]

Thank, *******, God people have choice among different classes, that plays differently and keep necessary buffs!

Is that the point when they basically rubber stamped every class to be the same allowing all to tank, dps, and heal, etc... and then acted like there was any real point in choice?

It is that the point that every heal can do battle resurrection, but every heal class heals differently.

So do some classes that heal differently not heal certain encounters and situations as well then? Or can all heal as well, but just in different ways?

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Not sure why people rated this "disagree", it's not disputable. This was the core design principle of WotLK.
https://www.engadget.com/2009-02-27-gho ... class.html


This is completely counter to what an RPG is, it led to widespread homogenization, removal of any role that didn't fit neatly into the trinity, and arguably destruction of the MMO genre itself due to every MMO thereafter copying it.

Classes are being designed so that many necessary buffs, such as Replenishment, can be acquired through a variety of classes, rather than just one.

Thank, *******, God people have choice among different classes, that plays differently and keep necessary buffs!

So why even have classes instead of just "generic guy" who does everything and brings everything?

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Is that the point when they basically rubber stamped every class to be the same allowing all to tank, dps, and heal, etc... and then acted like there was any real point in choice?

It is that the point that every heal can do battle resurrection, but every heal class heals differently.

So do some classes that heal differently not heal certain encounters and situations as well then? Or can all heal as well, but just in different ways?

Yes, heal in different ways. A little reminder: discipline priest amount of healing was dependent on his DPS. Holy pallasin have to deal damage while his debuff from blue hammer is on enemy otherwise he run out of mana.

[rusty_shackleford]

So do some classes that heal differently not heal certain encounters and situations as well then? Or can all heal as well, but just in different ways?

(with regards to pve only)
It just means some classes were all-around better and none of the weaker specs had niches to make up for being worse at their role.
Holy paladins were overall the best healer in wotlk and it wasn't close, they had no weakness.

Ironically, wotlk was far more imbalanced than TBC or classic because of this. Just compare any spec tier list for classic WoW e.g.,
WotLK:
https://www.icy-veins.com/wotlk-classic ... ng-classic

Holy Paladin (S-Tier)
Discipline Priest (A-Tier)
Restoration Shaman (B-Tier)
Restoration Druid (B-Tier)
Holy Priest (B-Tier)

TBC:
https://www.icy-veins.com/tbc-classic/h ... bc-classic

Shaman (S-Tier)
Paladin (A-Tier)
Priest (A-Tier)
Druid (A-Tier)

[Faceless_Sentinel]

, but every heal class heals differently.

it's the same exact thing with different colors and animations

the only time this isn't true is when one class/spec is just better — and since the others no longer have their niches, they become objectively worse

Just try to heal on priest and then switch on druid, if you can't see difference than I am not shure that the game that fulfill your demand on difference even exists.

[Xenich]

So do some classes that heal differently not heal certain encounters and situations as well then? Or can all heal as well, but just in different ways?

(with regards to pve only)
It just means some classes were all-around better and none of the weaker specs had niches to make up for being worse at their role.
Holy paladins were overall the best healer in wotlk and it wasn't close, they had no weakness.

Ironically, wotlk was far more imbalanced than TBC or classic because of this. Just compare any spec tier list for classic WoW e.g.,
WotLK:
https://www.icy-veins.com/wotlk-classic ... ng-classic

Holy Paladin (S-Tier)
Discipline Priest (A-Tier)
Restoration Shaman (B-Tier)
Restoration Druid (B-Tier)
Holy Priest (B-Tier)

TBC:
https://www.icy-veins.com/tbc-classic/h ... bc-classic

Shaman (S-Tier)
Paladin (A-Tier)
Priest (A-Tier)
Druid (A-Tier)

I liked paladins in original, I can't remember them all that well, but it was pre-healing focus change. I also liked the way the class was in beta right before release, but for the life of me I can't remember what it was that they changed.

[Xenich]

It is that the point that every heal can do battle resurrection, but every heal class heals differently.

So do some classes that heal differently not heal certain encounters and situations as well then? Or can all heal as well, but just in different ways?

Yes, heal in different ways. A little reminder: discipline priest amount of healing was dependent on his DPS. Holy pallasin have to deal damage while his debuff from blue hammer is on enemy otherwise he run out of mana.

I prefer a system where healers have strengths and weaknesses based on the types of classes they heal and the situations they are in.

EQ Druids did well healing avoidance tanking of monks, but were not so good on mitigation tanks. Same with clerics, they were better suited for mitigation tanks and had a hard time with monks spiky damage from avoidance tanking. (this was earlier EQ btw)

[Faceless_Sentinel]

So do some classes that heal differently not heal certain encounters and situations as well then? Or can all heal as well, but just in different ways?

(with regards to pve only)
It just means some classes were all-around better and none of the weaker specs had niches to make up for being worse at their role.
Holy paladins were overall the best healer in wotlk and it wasn't close, they had no weakness.

Ironically, wotlk was far more imbalanced than TBC or classic because of this. Just compare any spec tier list for classic WoW e.g.,
WotLK:
https://www.icy-veins.com/wotlk-classic ... ng-classic

Holy Paladin (S-Tier)
Discipline Priest (A-Tier)
Restoration Shaman (B-Tier)
Restoration Druid (B-Tier)
Holy Priest (B-Tier)

TBC:
https://www.icy-veins.com/tbc-classic/h ... bc-classic

Shaman (S-Tier)
Paladin (A-Tier)
Priest (A-Tier)
Druid (A-Tier)

Also paladins were single target healers, difference in mechanics:

Holy Paladins are also the only healer that is mostly focused on single-target healing, with all other healers having a raid healing profile, especially Discipline Priests and Restoration Druids who specialize in blanketing the whole raid with efficient healing from Power Word: Shield and Rejuvenation.

[rusty_shackleford]

As an example, consider playing a shadow priest.
TBC?
Doesn't matter if your damage isn't the greatest, you get taken because your class has a niche: you're a mana battery, and put in the caster or healer group.
WotLK?
Your damage sucks, plenty of classes provide the same mana regen buff(raidwide too) while doing more DPS, you get skipped over for a better DPS class, go reroll noob.

[Xenich]

As an example, consider playing a shadow priest.
TBC?
Doesn't matter if your damage isn't the greatest, you get taken because your class has a niche: you're a mana battery, and put in the caster or healer group.
WotLK?
Your damage sucks, plenty of classes provide the same mana regen buff(raidwide too) while doing more DPS, you get skipped over for a better DPS class, go reroll noob.

Played a mage in TBC, got ****** at the ice lance change. It was wonderful for PVE and allowed us to do great damage in groups keeping up with warlocks in the damage and provide a good balance for controlling mobs. PVPers threw tantrums, nerf came... and then came the "sorry, we don't need you, got a lock... thanks for coming!" because every single hit from any player broke our ice and our damage sunk because of it.

I don't miss the constant BS of WoW's nerfs.

[rusty_shackleford]

Also paladins were single target healers, difference in mechanics:

Holy light has an aoe heal with the glyph, they don't even have to focus on healing the tank because of beacon of light. Holy paladins are tank healers that effectively double as raid healers at the same time.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

So do some classes that heal differently not heal certain encounters and situations as well then? Or can all heal as well, but just in different ways?

Yes, heal in different ways. A little reminder: discipline priest amount of healing was dependent on his DPS. Holy pallasin have to deal damage while his debuff from blue hammer is on enemy otherwise he run out of mana.

I prefer a system where healers have strengths and weaknesses based on the types of classes they heal and the situations they are in.

EQ Druids did well healing avoidance tanking of monks, but were not so good on mitigation tanks. Same with clerics, they were better suited for mitigation tanks and had a hard time with monks spiky damage from avoidance tanking. (this was earlier EQ btw)

For me, it's going into territory of forced min-maxing, I don't like that kind of things.

[rusty_shackleford]

The only way to prevent min-maxing at this level is to give each everyone a niche, without niches you have a bunch of classes competing for the exact same spot. This resulted in years of homogenization which turned every class into the same class with different color spell effects.

[Xenich]

Yes, heal in different ways. A little reminder: discipline priest amount of healing was dependent on his DPS. Holy pallasin have to deal damage while his debuff from blue hammer is on enemy otherwise he run out of mana.

I prefer a system where healers have strengths and weaknesses based on the types of classes they heal and the situations they are in.

EQ Druids did well healing avoidance tanking of monks, but were not so good on mitigation tanks. Same with clerics, they were better suited for mitigation tanks and had a hard time with monks spiky damage from avoidance tanking. (this was earlier EQ btw)

For me, it's going into territory of forced min-maxing, I don't like that kind of things.

I don't like forced, but I loved to really work the numbers on things. I remember out damaging the locks in MC in full green eagle gear as an ice mage and all the locks were confused because they had on all these fancy blue items thinking some how because it was blue gear, it was better.

[Xenich]

The only way to prevent min-maxing at this level is to give each everyone a niche, without niches you have a bunch of classes competing for the exact same spot. This resulted in years of homogenization which turned every class into the same class with different color spell effects.

Can't have niche though, it promotes someone being better at something and that's bad... could hurt some feelings.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

Also paladins were single target healers, difference in mechanics:

Holy light has an aoe heal with the glyph, they don't even have to focus on healing the tank because of beacon of light. Holy paladins are tank healers that effectively double as raid healers at the same time.

Your Holy Light grants 10% of its heal amount to up to 5 friendly targets within 8 yards of the initial target.

10% is nothing, especially in that small radius.

[Xenich]

A kid is sitting by a pile of toys they gathered and after seeing another kid walk in with a toy they didn't have, they immediately began screaming that they wanted it as well.

Pretty much my picture of a lot of people I played with in WoW when it concerned classes and having a specific niche. It was rather unfortunate.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

WotLK?
Your damage sucks, plenty of classes provide the same mana regen buff(raidwide too) while doing more DPS, you get skipped over for a better DPS class, go reroll noob.

I never had that experience, my DPS was always enough to get in the groups.

[Faceless_Sentinel]

A kid is sitting by a pile of toys they gathered and after seeing another kid walk in with a toy they didn't have, they immediately began screaming that they wanted it as well.

Pretty much my picture of a lot of people I played with in WoW when it concerned classes and having a specific niche. It was rather unfortunate.

Guys, choose your ******* lies: either the wotlk classes are homogenized to the state of non-existence of differences or each class had something so unique and useful that all other classes immediately wanted to have. You can't have both they contradict each other.

[Ranselknulf]

Maybe min-max player means differently these days, but I always understood it to mean maximizing the choices within your characters development to optimize its efficiency. Which really just pertained to basic things like gear/skill selection in development, race selection in class evaluation, and I guess approach to play in terms of technicality (monk pulling really was a technical based skill as you had to understand the mechanics of mob behavior and the engine to really maximize its use).

That said, I never saw that as a conflict with game play features. Circumventing game play features as I mentioned above were never a question of min-maxing, they were essentially cheating the design of play, defeating the point of exploration game play. Min/maxing play as it concerns exploration would be learning all the tricks, ins/outs of travel, world/mob behavior, etc... to more skillfully traverse the world, though this may be a consideration for a min/maxer when selecting a race/class at startup (ie does the race/class have benefits to travel related game play and what are the trade offs in other areas of play).

It's a problem of scale. Make the exploration so massive, that its impossible to do everything.

In these situations, the min / maxers typically focus on other types of "achievement" such as territory control or ownership over specific parts of the world.

This leaves room for the explorers to do their thing.

Ok, I guess that is why I get confused, my understanding of the term is different as I explained.

I wasn't disagreeing with your take on min/maxing, I was suggesting an alternative approach to addressing the issue.

Instead of restricting players or adjusting mechanics, which I find the lowest brow approach to emergent gameplay, I suggested expanding the world to make it where the min/maxers will not have the opportunity to "max" the entire world.

In these situations, Min/Maxers typically develop strategies to focus on the most relevant quests that provide the highest rewards, and focus on completing those tasks quickly, and then controlling access to the quests/rewards so that other players can not gain them.

My suggestion is to make the world even more massive to the point that its nigh impossible for min/maxers to use such a strategy. It's ok to have great rewards for the exploration enjoyer crowd, but if the world isn't large enough, then it just becomes another sector of game play for the min/maxers to control. Making the world so massive that min/maxers would need to do that type of gameplay to excess would deter them from attempting to exert control.

The issue then becomes, how do you make the rarest of rare items come from exploration (needed for best in game items), while also making it engaging and fun for the exploration enjoyer crowd. Traveling around a massive world for hours looking for a rare node is about as fun as watching paint dry, so there needs to be something enjoyable along the way that is more than "just throw enemies in the way", because killing waves of trash mobs is boring too.

I'm not saying I have the answers to this, but its just my thoughts on the subject.

[Kalarion]

A kid is sitting by a pile of toys they gathered and after seeing another kid walk in with a toy they didn't have, they immediately began screaming that they wanted it as well.

Pretty much my picture of a lot of people I played with in WoW when it concerned classes and having a specific niche. It was rather unfortunate.

Guys, choose your ******* lies: either the wotlk classes are homogenized to the state of non-existence of differences or each class had something so unique and useful that all other classes immediately wanted to have. You can't have both they contradict each other.

You misunderstood his point. He was saying, players demanded that they get access to the same toys that everyone else had, and niches went away.

You also misunderstood the other points being made. Briefly: the tier lists that Rusty was talking about were for raids, not groups. And that very much mattered until each raid was a solved problem (usually about two tiers later). Holy Light was absolutely massive healing. I think it could also crit? 10% of a massive heal was still massive. They also had absolutely fantastic spot healing with insta-cast Flash Heal on Judgement, and the Flash Heal left a hot behind. They were exactly what Rusty said. Your point about Holy Paladins having to "deal damage" is silly. Holydins didn't "do damage", they sat in melee range casting a completely ineffectual auto-attack in order to enable their healing mechanics.

I think at the end of the day it's what Stack and Rusty said: you don't want a ROLE-PLAYING game with a wide variety of ROLES to fill, you want multiplayer Farmville. Where you can have different appearances and press different buttons in different orders, to see different graphics that achieve exactly the same result as everyone else that generally does what you do. You don't really want a Paladin, or a Shaman, or a Rogue, or a Warrior. You want a Healer, a DPS and a Tank with different costume sets.

You got what you wanted from WoW. We lost what we wanted.