11/08/2011 19:34Posted by Vesik1) Gearing up is an entertaining part of the game at first. Players can and often will spend hours searching for one piece of gear. Although at first this is an enjoyable pursuit, after levelling a few characters it becomes tedious and boring. Thus heirlooms were created. I personally use heirlooms in PvP because I'm sick of grinding dungeons for that nice agility hat only to lose it to some idiot mage when it finally drops after the umpteenth run. If heirlooms are to be adressed, I'd prefer a scaling down of their stats rather than removal or replacement with exp increasing enchants.
I'm not against gearing up, it can be entertaining. I know that back in the day I spent the best part of half a day trying to acquire a red shirt to pimp my level 22 hunters image ^^ (it clashed terribly with my hair in the end, FML). That said I do not feel that requiring it to engage in levelling PvP is a good system. If a player wants to gear up then twinking is the ideal environment for that. The player gets to get extended playtime with that gear and gets to fight equal geared players. I don't approve of gearing up solely for the reason of "rolling noobs" so I don't factor that in. Imo pvp is better with out gear differences.
Its worth pointing out that blues are not only acquired through the potential RNG fest of dungeons. Both honour and quests reward blues. I would thoroughly support a move to introduce more blue quality gear in quests and pvp. There is a noticable lack of them in certain places and increasing the number would buff the pvp underdogs without significantly buffing heirloomers or the top end of gear. This coupled with scaled back heirlooms would be a very favourable outcome in my opinion and from what you've said would it be safe to hope that you would agree?
2) Regardless of whether a player has heirlooms or not, certain classes/specs are more suited to PvP. These FOTM classes/specs are not neccessarily overpowered or broken (though they often are) but their strength may lie in PvP whereas they perform poorly in PvE. Finding a middle ground is the challenge, and Blizzard have never quite managed to get it right. If balancing is to be addressed, damage and healing needs to be scaled down and some classes need to have more in depth overhauls, e.g. MM hunters and disc priests.
There is little differentiation between PvP and PvE for OP classes and specs. One that is OP in PvP will be OP in the other in general. Hunters, disc, paladins (holy and ret) and rogues all perform spectacularly well in both PvE and PvP while classes like warlocks and spriests struggle in both. There is the odd class like the warrior that better than average in PvE but underpowered in pvP, but they are the exception rather than the rule.
My point is that this problem hasn't stemmed from Blizzard not managing to get things right, it in fact stems from a complete lack of any balancing thought by Blizzard. There are a multitude of very good reasons for me saying this, but crucially since the only balances provided by Blizzard for low levels were the nourish and swipe changes. These were done with a complete disregard for low level pvp (I have a blue post confirming as much) and they only served to make every healer and tank capable in dungeons. Further than this (other than the hunter pet bug fix) there have been no balances what so ever in either PvE or PvP. There are other reasons for me to say that close to zero thought has gone into low level balance, but these are the main ones.
Personally, I feel that the issues of heirlooms and class imbalance are not the major problem. Surely, the biggest issue is utility. All classes need to get all of their abilities much earlier. Something like two new abilities every level starting with the most important ones. Some classes really suffer not having some of their vital tools available for most of the game. My level 70 warlock twink for example simply cannot beat rogues because they have so much more utility. It really sucks at a level I wouldn't consider "low" we still have the same classes steamrolling through battlegrounds because they are designed to do so well in a PvP environment.
They're not so much overpowered as poorly designed.
Yes and no. utility is a major issue for low levels, but damage and healing values and efficiencies vary hugely between classes too. There are also problems with resistance being overpowered and trinket length being poorly considered. These all lead to overpoweredness. So yes, it is poor (or rather non existant) design but that in turn leads to overpowering. The main point I would like to make is that there is not one single root to the problem with low level balance. There are several prominent problems and fixing one will not work as a general solution because another one will take its place.