just a thought plz be gentle

Classic Discussion
30/04/2018 17:10Posted by Trelonicus
However, I look at it this way:Everyone contributes something to the group.Good classes/specs contribute more: mage contributes more than balance druid (even if we count buffs), prot warrior contributes more than prot paladin and so on.

you are right.

however this was never the argument, whatever something is viable or not is not measured this way, hence the name : sub-optimal, because they can never be optimal when measured vs others, example : balance is sub-optimal, because mage is always more optimal ( even buff's included ), again, this has nothing to do with viability.
30/04/2018 17:10Posted by Trelonicus
Why is it considered fair that several people contribute less because they want to play a bad spec, but they get the same loot? Perhaps it even could be fine if you do everything from first try, but if you wipe? Having a lower output due to your decision to play a bad spec and having your group struggle as a result is a selfish move.

why is it fair that you can be 100% optimal with 15 different consumables, but only contribute 50% with 5 consumables ?

100% optimal is only true in very, very hardcore raids, and again you are right, having sub-optimal spec requires far more extra work with consumables than avarage optimal DPS to be even viable, and when you start to get gear you can take those extra consumables off in easier raids.

however, if sub-optimal spec in non-hardcore raid is able to pull nearly the same dps as other dps(taking also inconcideration the buffs and utility he provides), isn't he entitled for the loot same as that mage who has no consumables at all ?

again, let me use the 200dps marker example, if that mage, without any / or few consumables is able to deal 200dps(including boomkin aura), and that boomkin is able to deal roughly 100-150dps with some / many consumables, considering he brings extra utility to raid(let's say boomkin aura increases 4 people's damage By 20), how is he exacly holding the raid back or not being viable ?

other good example from Private servers is HYBRID healer specs, what are these ? they are 50% dps 50% healing specs, so they get farming ability outside the raids, and still is able to perform VIABLE in raids, they are not 100% optimal, but since they are very viable, they are popular because leveling that farming alt is for some people way too big hazzle and you don't need to constantly respec and save a ton of money.
30/04/2018 17:23Posted by Cai
however, if sub-optimal spec in non-hardcore raid is able to pull nearly the same dps as other dps(taking also inconcideration the buffs and utility he provides), isn't he entitled for the loot same as that mage who has no consumables at all ?

In this case, sure. That's pretty much my point.

If your moonkin has the same output as a mage because you try harder with consumables, it is fine. Hell, you could go with a smite priest if you will end up dpsing on par with other classes. If both players are equally dedicated to the spec, optimal specs will thrive and this is the case where I consider suboptimal specs a burden.

Anyways, Vanilla, even though it "brought the class, not the player" was all about good people. You would not want a drama queen or a tank with 50% attendance. In that case, good players were valued above specs they've played.
30/04/2018 19:09Posted by Trelonicus
optimal specs will thrive and this is the case where I consider suboptimal specs a burden.


true, when searching raid / guild it doesn't really give good first impression regards to your dedication of your role, having sub-optimal spec.

this is only one of the reasons why finding your part in community is difficult, you also have to deal with :

- only 1 raid spot per 40man raid, usually even more casual guilds will take MAX 1 boomkin per raid, feral, retribution etc, not anymore.

- proving your worth, getting on par with other DPS in casual guild requires extra effort from your part, farming constantly heavy ammount of consumables.

- old stigma, people genuinly belive that sub-optimal specs are not viable, even on more casual and easier content such as moltencore.

i however, never claimed that being sub-optimal spec's life is easy and everyone will want you, i only took part of "viability" part, and yes, they are viable.
Every spec is viable in Classic... since most of the game has nothing to do with raiding.
30/04/2018 20:37Posted by Shogath
Every spec is viable in Classic... since most of the game has nothing to do with raiding.


ofc they are viable.

we however we're talking about raiding part of the game, that is still part of the game, no matter how much you don't want it to be part of the game.
The highest DPS mage spec pre AQ has more points in arcane than any other tree. Priests putting more points in disc than in any other tree to give mages PI is not that uncommon. Just saying.

Pretty much every spec of every class is viable in raids, it's just not optimal, so the best guilds won't take you, but the rest probably will.
30/04/2018 21:03Posted by Narcind
Pretty much every spec of every class is viable in raids, it's just not optimal, so the best guilds won't take you, but the rest probably will.

Affliction warlock is completely unviable. Playing an affliction lock in raids reduces your raid's DPS.
01/05/2018 00:54Posted by Trelonicus
Affliction warlock is completely unviable. Playing an affliction lock in raids reduces your raid's DPS.


you'll be playing it the sameway you are playing destruction, in that sense yes, it's not really viable.

however in reality it boils down are you able to pull dps required, if you are then it is "viable", if not, then it's not.

same goes for all debuff based specs, all point put into somekind of debuff dot goes to waste, in raids only ofcourse.
My friend, I truly respect your opinion, but we just want to play the old game exactly how it was, nothing more.

We're waiting for it for a very long time (more than 10 years) to be able to play the old game again we once bought (not everyone tried private servers, I didn't!).

That's all, we just wanna play the old game again, we've no hate against anyone but don't try to change it because then we will not like it, even play it! This "project" should just give us the oppertunity to play the old game again we once loved so much, but no longer are able to play (legally)!

Please try to understand, it has nothing to do with being toxic or unreasable, we just want the old game EXACTLY how it was because now we have nothing!

Even just "optional" stuff like new character models does have an impact on the game, I (we) do not like it, I (we) just want everyone to see us as we see ourself on the screen, just like it was back then in Vanilla. It's just very important it stays exactly how it was.

Please try to understand, we have still nothing, but we just want to play the old game again without any changes and/or improvements, just how it was, nothing more. :)
01/05/2018 08:45Posted by Cai
you'll be playing it the sameway you are playing destruction, in that sense yes, it's not really viable.

Then I would not call it affliction lock, the same way noone claims that frost mages speccing deep into arcane are arcane mages.
01/05/2018 16:47Posted by Trelonicus
01/05/2018 08:45Posted by Cai
you'll be playing it the sameway you are playing destruction, in that sense yes, it's not really viable.

Then I would not call it affliction lock, the same way noone claims that frost mages speccing deep into arcane are arcane mages.


What you dont want to call it is irrelevant. Warlocks have 2 very good talent builds. And you going around saying affliction warlocks are not viable is just silly.

Just because your prefered playstyle of a spec is not viable, doesnt make the spec bad. Its like complaining about fire mages because pyroblast spam isnt viable.

Dots in general are bad, not because of the debuff limit, but because they just dont deal enough damage to justify their global cooldown compared to just spamming shadowbolts.

They are bad because the way warlocks scale with hit and crit, something that doesnt affect dots at all, but scale like crazy for shadowbolts. Corruption is the only dot worth using because it can proc instant shadowbolts for SM/ruin locks, and a optimal debuff raid has space for 2 corruptions.
01/05/2018 20:14Posted by Roxyfoxy
01/05/2018 16:47Posted by Trelonicus
...
Then I would not call it affliction lock, the same way noone claims that frost mages speccing deep into arcane are arcane mages.


What you dont want to call it is irrelevant. Warlocks have 2 very good talent builds. And you going around saying affliction warlocks are not viable is just silly.

Just because your prefered playstyle of a spec is not viable, doesnt make the spec bad. Its like complaining about fire mages because pyroblast spam isnt viable.

Dots in general are bad, not because of the debuff limit, but because they just dont deal enough damage to justify their global cooldown compared to just spamming shadowbolts.

They are bad because the way warlocks scale with hit and crit, something that doesnt affect dots at all, but scale like crazy for shadowbolts. Corruption is the only dot worth using because it can proc instant shadowbolts for SM/ruin locks, and a optimal debuff raid has space for 2 corruptions.

You make no sense whatsoever.

Go ahead and call pve frost mages arcane then.

All this "all specs are perfectly viable" bs is going to ruin gaming for many newer players that will believe these sweet lies.
01/05/2018 20:42Posted by Trelonicus
All this "all specs are perfectly viable" bs is going to ruin gaming for many newer players that will believe these sweet lies.
If they are bent on raiding they will learn the cookie cutter builds fast enough... in time long before they get to lvl 60. Because in Vanilla you learned from other players during leveling.

Not from shtposts on a backwater forum.
01/05/2018 20:42Posted by Trelonicus
All this "all specs are perfectly viable" bs is going to ruin gaming for many newer players that will believe these sweet lies.


mayby people needs to learn difference between optimal, sub-optimal, viable and not viable.

all i have ever claimed is that sub-optimal specs are most of the time viable, that doesn't mean they are most optimal.

sheesh.... mayby you should stop spreading your lies and tell them how hardtime they will have with sub-optimal spec instead of just spreading 10year old stigma that's not true.
01/05/2018 22:57Posted by Cai
all i have ever claimed is that sub-optimal specs are most of the time viable, that doesn't mean they are most optimal.

I get your point. By trying hard a moonkin can sneak into a casual raid. That's true.

But my latest post was adressed to a guy that unironically claimed that Affliction warlock is a viable raid spec.

Imagine a new player coming, excited that he can play affliction, all those sweet curses and dots affliction was always associated with...

Well turns out he won't be playing affliction, but will put some talents into affiction and that somehow makes it affliction.

I'd be sad. I personally love affliction, even in Legion it was my favorite even though since Cata warlocks were absolutely destroyed. I like dots, I hate shadowbolt spam. That post would literally ruin my 200 hours of levelling as I'd end up with a character I won't be able to do all these raids I want to. I'd have to stick to shadowbolt spam. If only I did not knew that affliction is not a viable spec before. Luckily, I do.
01/05/2018 20:42Posted by Trelonicus
01/05/2018 20:14Posted by Roxyfoxy
...

What you dont want to call it is irrelevant. Warlocks have 2 very good talent builds. And you going around saying affliction warlocks are not viable is just silly.

Just because your prefered playstyle of a spec is not viable, doesnt make the spec bad. Its like complaining about fire mages because pyroblast spam isnt viable.

Dots in general are bad, not because of the debuff limit, but because they just dont deal enough damage to justify their global cooldown compared to just spamming shadowbolts.

They are bad because the way warlocks scale with hit and crit, something that doesnt affect dots at all, but scale like crazy for shadowbolts. Corruption is the only dot worth using because it can proc instant shadowbolts for SM/ruin locks, and a optimal debuff raid has space for 2 corruptions.

You make no sense whatsoever.

Go ahead and call pve frost mages arcane then.

All this "all specs are perfectly viable" bs is going to ruin gaming for many newer players that will believe these sweet lies.


What you call it is irrelevant.

The fact is that all classes are viable, and have a raidspot in a 100% optimal raid setup. And there is space for some of the hybrid dps specs as well.

But not all speccs are meant for being top dps in a raid envoirment. Some speccs are good for pvp, some for solo farming, some are taken only because of their buffs.

Even on retail, you have sub optimal speccs. And the difference is no smaller from the top dps specc to the bottom than what it is in vanilla. I remember early legion where my warlock was declined on over 50% of the mythic+ groups i applied to, just because i played a warlock.
02/05/2018 00:20Posted by Roxyfoxy
The fact is that all classes are viable, and have a raidspot in a 100% optimal raid setup. And there is space for some of the hybrid dps specs as well.

Cool story, go advertise Vanilla as the place for Arcane Mages and Affliction Warlocks more.
Stop measuring every spec by raiding effectiveness ffs. The game was not only about raids.
02/05/2018 08:40Posted by Агграэль
Stop measuring every spec by raiding effectiveness ffs. The game was not only about raids.

Raids are the most challenging PvE content. Vanilla is much more than raids, but average Vanilla player that never played Vanilla before most likely will want to experience them.
02/05/2018 09:16Posted by Trelonicus
02/05/2018 08:40Posted by Агграэль
Stop measuring every spec by raiding effectiveness ffs. The game was not only about raids.

Raids are the most challenging PvE content. Vanilla is much more than raids, but average Vanilla player that never played Vanilla before most likely will want to experience them.
Yes, probably because of the same lie they told everyone back then.... that the game 'begins at 60'.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum