This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
Why Deforestation isn't a nerf
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
curlymon
And until Cata is released none of us know exactly what will be in the end product so why winge about it if you don't know for sure?
Because honest debate is encouraged. Because ideas that come out of debates like this can and have been placed within the game.
And, here is the big point, There is nothing genuinely new to discuss in the druiding world that relates to the here and now that has not already been beaten to death. So we look to the future and talk about it like normal people or like crazed rabbits on E (you decide :P )
Post by
Drakaina
Because honest debate is encouraged. Because ideas that come out of debates like this can and have been placed within the game.
And, here is the big point, There is nothing genuinely new to discuss in the druiding world that relates to the here and now that has not already been beaten to death. So we look to the future and talk about it like normal people or like crazed rabbits on E (you decide :P )
This is true... *looks down... feels kinda sheepish*
Just don't understnad some of the more extreme ppl I guess someone I know IRL said they would abandon his Resto spec if they dropped Tree :S seems a little much to me
Post by
skribs
Heres the thing though, pvp is whats driving the change. Not pve and certainly not asthetics.
Actually it's the combination of both. If the game were only PvP, blizzard could have balanced tree to be the strongest healer as a result of the loss of DPS/CC in form. Weakest healer in caster form, strongest healer in tree form - makes you fairly powerful.
Barring LDW (on 10-man if you have 2 druids and 1 gets MC'd, the other is the best option to CC it via cyclone) or maybe a few specific other fights, they could have balanced PvE for trees to heal as well as the other classes. If 99% of what you do is just spam heals, then it doesn't matter what other assets you bring to the table.
The problem is that they have both, which means you're balancing one based on full effectiveness and the other on min/max heals. You can't have them missing signficant portions of what others can do and balance them along both spectrums.
Is still a valid argument. I'm not talking about heals vs dps, dps vs heals, tank vs heals or any other permutation you can think about... I'm talking about Primary vs Secondary roles. It is a simple way to compare the flexibility of the class in a PvP situation.
You're not talking about primary vs. secondary roles, though. You're talking about primary rolls vs. added utility. Blizzard has pretty much homogonized the roles and nerfed hybridity. DPS are primarily DPS, with the secondary rolls in PvP of CC and tanking. Any DPS that can heal are adding utility over what the DPS role does, and (once again, excepting the ele shaman) will be significantly weaker at either healing or DPS while in a healing capable form.
The druid is the only one of the healers who has to give up his ability to DPS or CC. Which, for the healer slot on a team, gives him a significant disadvantage unless his heals are OP (keep in mind, they're nerfing druid mobility in other ways as well).
What you're trying to do is an apples-to-apples comparison of DPS to healers. They function differently (in PvP, you can do only damage and kill someone, but you cannot do only heals and kill someone; but in PvE you are generally expected to do your role), and they fill a different slot on the team. Like I pointed out above - you have several things that they give each player, depending on role. So in determining what a druid should have in a given form, it only makes sense to compare it to what ALL of the other specs fulfilling that role can do.
Think about it: what if they told warriors that they were removing thunder clap because warriors are supposed to tank single target. But then if you go to this new stance all you can cast is thunder clap. Now warriors would have to switch back and forth to hold a boss and adds, but switching back and forth kills rage that you've generated. In the meantime, all three of the other tanks work AoE threat into their rotation enough to keep aggro on the adds without any real effort (just remove single target filler with high damage AoE). Is this fair to warriors? No. That's basically what it's like to play a resto druid when something is called for.
Another good analogy is what they did to ret seals. Seals used to last 2 minutes, and judgement would consume your current seal. So every time you used your damage attack, you had to spend another GCD to get your self buff up. That's what it's like for druids any time we cast tree form just to get back from caster after having cycloned that druid in LDW or casting a wrath to finish off that player in PvP. It's an extra GCD and mana burned just to do what the other healers could have done anyway.
Post by
109094
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
404185
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
132589
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
109094
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
404185
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
132589
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
109094
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
404185
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
109094
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
132589
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
404185
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
razzem
Heres the thing though, pvp is whats driving the change. Not pve and certainly not asthetics.
As curlymon pointed out half the game is pve, half pvp.
The Tree does not suffer in any way shape or form in pve. Its 'balancing issues' i.e. its in-ability to do any meaningful damage is a purely pvp orientated problem. Sure any pvp adjustments has implications to the pve side of the game but its the pvp side where the Tree is lacking in competativness.
TODAY, this is true that in pve we don't need CC now.
BUT...
The first part is definitely a goal. The second part has been taken out of context a bit. I was saying that I was sure we would still have *some* fights with raid-wide AoE damage because that mechanic is one way to make healing feel different from encounter to encounter. But it is not a design to have persistent damage auras as part of every encounter. It's also not a design goal to have crowd control part of every encounter, but overall we expect you'll be doing more CC (and therefore less group tanking) than in Wrath.
We'll see much more CC in cataclysm, imo. It will be important. And 10% healing loss to do it will be a big deal when tackling new content.
Source
Post by
109094
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
razzem
They said the same at the start of TBC, by the end it was non existant. It was said again at the start of WotLK but it was non-existant from the start.
I wouldnt hold my breath for it lasting too long come Cata either
Except this time they've talked about mechanics and how they will change things to make this happen. More of a reality than before, imo. You're right though, we will see.
Post by
curlymon
Is still a valid argument. I'm not talking about heals vs dps, dps vs heals, tank vs heals or any other permutation you can think about... I'm talking about Primary vs Secondary roles. It is a simple way to compare the flexibility of the class in a PvP situation.
You're not talking about primary vs. secondary roles, though. You're talking about primary rolls vs. added utility.
Added utility
is
a secondary role. You don't take a mage just for the burst he can provide and you don't take a resto sham just for his healing.
Blizz keeps odd distinctions in the game to keep classes feeling "unique and fun to play" within this homogenized world.
Am I bitter about it? No.
Would I like to see consideration given to this? Yes.
It's not a demand and honestly just musings.
As far as this is going, the debate has degenerated into debating about debating... see something wrong here?
Post by
404185
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
curlymon
Moonkin form locks you out of healing (quite intentionally). These things are all working as intended.
Tree form didn't do any of that, except lock you out of utility/damage, which they've decided is a bad thing.
Moonkin being locked out intentionally is what was being brought up... Ideally, in a similar change to Tree form, Boomkin gains the ability to heal in form (or some other mechanic).
Tree form being locked out of something :: Boomkin being locked out of something :: SPriest being locked out of something
Regardless of role
they are locked out or limited by something that other classes/specs are not. With Tree form this is changing... why not continue it to the last two specs stuck in a similar boat? (Feral kitty got a bandaid fix that turned out to balance things quite well with instant spells, Bear does not need something similar but why not include it for the sake of consistancy?, lol)
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.