New Mists of Pandaria Quests and News Round Up
29/05/2012 a las 13:21
As part of last week's beta patch, we datamined some more quests and NPCs! Be sure to add your comments and screenshots if you're in the beta :)
Click here for the latest additions!
Some points of interest:
Jewelcrafting dailies are up, such as
Las cosas buenas
. Quests reward 1
Marca de joyero zen
Several Halfhill dailies are added, such as
Llenando la despensa
, which reward
Marca Zarpa Férrea
A few quests are tied to pet battles, such as
We also have a news round up: the most interesting part is that the daily quest cap
will be removed
in Mists, but there's also class feedback for Paladins, Shamans, and Warlocks, as well as thoughts on different generations of gamers enjoying WoW.
Daily Quest Cap
Current plan is to remove the daily quest cap completely for ship. Just like what you see in the beta now. We literally have 100's of daily quests at level 90 and we want to make sure that players can pick and choose what they want to do.Not really. We honestly think it would be worse to actually raise the cap and make people think that now they need to do 50 or 100 or whatever higher number we chose. All of the daily's are limited to a random amount per day so its not like you can do every single quest every day.
Daily quests are included as one of the new ways to earn valor in MoP. We don't expect many people will choose to cap their valor just by doing daily quests, but that is an option if you really like them. We expect to have around 50 dailys available from all the factions every day.
Like I mentioned before, those 50 would be randomly chosen from a much larger total pool of quests. This helps keep things feeling fresh for a long time.
We have not spawned in the vendors for the Dragon Turtles yet. These will hopefully be in the next build. The vendors will be at the Pandaren camps in Stormwind and Orgrimmar.
Releasing and Naming Pets
We have added restrictions on releasing pets in the latest build. The only pets you can release are ones that you have caught though the pet battle system. We have also made a change to the tooltips for pets so that it will always show the pets original name below the custom one.
TCG Account-Wide Mounts
As far as I'm aware, they should still have it. It's set on the account end and not the individual character end. If (however) I find out differently, I'll let you know. I don't have reason to believe that this isn't how it should work though.
It should be the individual World of Warcraft account itself no matter what realm the other characters are on. There are still details to work out however, so I don't want to give any incorrect information if I can help it.
We'll have more information about pets specifically as soon as we can. That too has some things being ironed out still but we'll share a bit more "soonish".
No need to kiss up. ;)
The Tillers and the farming gameplay are still planned for ship. We are in the process of reviewing and iterating on it still. We just want to make sure its ready for feedback when it goes live on the beta.
The decay of embers (or any resource really) is only intended so that you don't feel like the right way to play is to finish a fight, then go nuke a squirrel or something so that you're at full embers before the next fight. Thematically, embers are something you build up, not something that you start with at full and burn down. However, it's not our intent to punish everyone who doesn't end a fight with exactly 0 embers.
In the beta build you should have now, the decay is much slower. If you are going from creature to creature while questing, you shouldn't see them decay. It should feel about like Holy Power or similar resources. If you're trying to game the resource so that you can start every boss fight or PvP duel will full embers, then you're going to have more trouble.
Multi-dotting is one of those mechanics that provides a benefit to dot specs (especially Affliction, Shadow and Balance) and we're not trying to kill it. We do need to keep it under control however. When there are 2-3 targets then players have some decisions about whether to spend their GCDs focused on one target or trying to keep dots up on multiple targets. Doing so can mess with the rotation, in a good way, and as I said, it's one of those mechanics that makes dots feel different from cast time spells.
The benefit of multi-dotting depends a lot on the situation -- the dot classes can out-perform the melee cleave guys when targets aren't clumped and the melee tend to do a lot better when they are. The value of multi-dotting in PvP depends a lot on the power of dispels, and I don't think anyone has a good feel yet for how that is going to play out. (Our intent, once again, is to make dispelling in PvP more strategic and less spammy so that you can remove things when you need to, but anything dispellable isn't immediately regarded as worthless.)
When multi-dotting becomes broken, in our minds, is when a dot class would rather try to maintain dots on many targets at once rather than focus on single targets at all because they end up doing more damage from just dotting. (Let's assume for the sake of argument that such damage is useful and isn't just trying to win meters at the expense of beating the encounter.) When multi-dotting large numbers of targets becomes too good, we have several problems. For one, we have to choose how to balance the dot specs. Do we just let them be overpowered when there are many targets? Do we make them weak against single-targets to compensate? Casting too many dots also comes at the expense of cast time spells, which means that stats and mechanics that benefit cast time are less attractive and the casters themselves are too good at moving and too hard to interrupt.
It's too early to worry about whether Affliction, Balance or Shadow will be the best multi-dotter, or whether such a title is even worth much. In an ideal world there will be situations that benefit each so that the classes don't play too similarly but don't convey such an advantage that players feel like they need to stack the right class for the right encounter.
Sure, that's fine. But it can't be "I win the meters, but you have high burst." For better or worse players focus a lot on who does the highest damage, not whose damage was most useful to beat the encounter. If the situation is "I win the meters when I can multi-dot but you win the meters when you burst," then that would work better, but it's harder for us to frequently engineer encounters with those situations. Even better would be "I benefit the group because I can multi-dot but you benefit the group because you can burst." :)
Judgements of the Pure
To loop back to my previous comments, we feel that all of the healers are relatively balanced in their longevity now, and that longevity is in a reasonable place when fully geared in epics. However, we also think longevity is too short in greens and blues. To address this, we are going to increase base mana regeneration. This should let healers in dungeons feel like they can heal a boss fight, without causing Spirit to become even more valuable. In essence, we're increasing the intercept of the curve without increasing the slope. Let us know how it feels.
You'll see the mana regen bonus for mages and warlocks decrease as a result of this change, but the end result will be that their mana income stays about the same. Nobody panic. :)
Shaman: General Class Feedback
Just to touch on a few points here:
"Resto shaman glyphs have too much of a penalty."
This is a fair concern. We don't want glyphs to be no-brainers. Often this means giving a powerful bonus a penalty that offsets that bonus, hopefully in interesting ways. "Increases duration and cooldown," is a common one. Glyph of Lightning Bolt would be a no-brainer without some kind of offset. However, because there are only 3 glyph slots, choosing a glyph for a more situational spell can itself be a sufficient cost. We've taken a look at the Resto glyphs recently to make sure they feel more equitable.
We definitely don't want that to be the case. To be fair, it wasn't mandatory early on in Cataclysm, but as Intellect-based mana regen increased, it became better and better. By having Intellect no longer interact with mana pools, we'll improve this situation somewhat, but we'll take a look at it above and beyond that.
"Enhance doesn't value haste enough."
Yes, this is something we want to address. Ultimately, we'd like to deliver on the goal of "more haste lets you do more stuff," but that's challenging giving how many buttons Enhance is already using. It's better than it used to be with the addition of
, but it's not quite good enough yet.
"Why the long cooldown on
We debated this for awhile, but ultimately decided that having every shaman in a raid being able to stand up every fight would be really powerful and an actual encounter balance problem for us. We could make the ankh count against the battle rez counter, but that would be pretty mean. We think the best design is to leave it at a long-cooldown. Sometimes you may not want to blow it if you think the fight is going to be a wipe.
"Thou shalt not use AE abilities on a single-target fight."
I'm going to address this because it's of potential interest to more than just shaman (and frankly, issues with broad appeal are the ones I prefer to address). I think the "law" here has gotten oversold a bit, and maybe that's my fault.
There are two essential problems here we wanted to fix. One is that it's fun when you hit different buttons on AE fights. That just keeps combat more interesting. The second, more balance-related issue, is that when say warriors used
so much on single-target fights and multi-target fights, then warrior damage just skyrocketed whenever there was an opportunity to AE. Meanwhile the mage just had to channel
or something. The game is in a very different place these days and every spec has some variety in how they AE. Frost DKs use
and Protection warriors use
even on single targets.
It's fine for
Latigazo de lava
to get used for both single target and AE. There are some situations where breaking CC or hitting the wrong target is a really bad idea. In those situations, you can try to move out of the way or just not
Latigazo de lava
(or not use
). The risk of hitting the wrong target has always existed in WoW and it's one of those points of skill differentiation between average players and experts. We don't want a world where there is never any risk of breaking CC or hitting the wrong target. That's dull. In those very rare situations (say Spine of Deathwing) where maximum DPS and hitting the right target are both extremely critical, you can use the glyph.
"Why so few shaman changes?"
I know players eagerly tear into the latest beta changes like opening birthday presents. What goodies did the designers leave for us today? And to be fair, it's really rewarding for designers to make a change that they know players will get excited about. There is a lot of positive reinforcement there.
But remember, change is not the goal. Fun is the goal. It is not our intention to introduce crazy new things every beta build. We are overwhelmingly focused on the end result. All of the developers are well accustomed with the phenomenon where we make changes early in an expansion and those classes get excited, but then what was shiny and new starts to be less shiny and new as time goes on and they see other classes get changes. If you are like most players, newness wears off quickly -- that's not what is going to keep you playing two months after Mists ships. It's more likely to be a very slippery, very subjective "I am having fun playing my character" sentiment that can keep you engaged.
If there are things you still don't find fun about your class (whatever class it is) please feel free to keep bringing them up. But don't evaluate beta notes as some kind of thermometer about how much we love or hate your class. We love them all. :)
"OMG, GC didn't address the most important issue!"
I don't have the bandwidth to answer everything, but rest assured we read it all. If there is something particularly important to you for us to address, feel free to keep bringing it up (without just "bumps" please).
Gamer Generation Gap
Guys, it doesn't matter what we do, does it...
The money in the industry lies with the new blood, not the old gamer like us. For every 1 of us there's 100 new kids just getting into gaming. We won't be listened to...not ever. We're the elders of the society, shunned off into our own little corner of the world and largely ignored. Sure, we got this industry moving and supported it through all the rough times, but now we've been disposed of. The younger generations hold all of the power now, they determine what direction gaming goes, not us, not the people who were there from the beginning.
Logically, do developers try to appease the 1 old gamer, or the 1,000 new gamers that want new things and are willing to push the industry forward? Old gamers want what made them happy before in gaming, and it's been done before. Old style games generally don't do well, and only carry a small fanbase of old gamers. They aren't smart investments for any company, and we're going to see less and less of them.
What can we do besides watch as our beloved industry crumbles around us, all what we held dear is destroyed and changed into something new, shiny, and ultimately shallow and disgusting? Our cries are not heard, they are swatted away like annoying flies while developers drop a knee and beg for direction from their new gamer generation.
We're destined for sadness, gentlemen. There's nothing we can do, nothing we can say that will change this inevitable cascade. We're done, used up, old news. This is our life.
What are you considering "older"? I hate to burst your bubble here, but, we have a pretty diverse population of gamers that we try to accommodate as much as we can. I assure you that no one is "swatted away like annoying flies" nor are we dropping a knee and begging for direction. This is opinion and conjecture and while your post is somewhat poetic, I'd prefer we didn't make this into a discussion based on age. We believe that every voice matters here both within the company and beyond. Age doesn't even factor into it. The ideas are what matters.
A gamer is a gamer is a gamer no matter their age. I'm not exactly in the "younger crowd" anymore (nor a gentleman despite being around for the "beginning" of home gaming), and I certainly don't see the golden age of gaming being behind us. The future continues to become brighter as we gain more people to our beloved hobby from all walks of life. I assure you, no one has been "disposed of" either. We recognize and value all of the individuals in the community. We also have to recognize though that there are limitations to how much we can do or how happy we can make all of the people we'd like to make happy.
Everyone has different opinions and experiences that shape their perceptions and there's only so much we can do. But to say that we don't recognize or appreciate them is false.
I find that' I'm being pushed out of gaming against my will. It's like the industry is an entity that is slowly purging anything old. I don't think it's age, but I do think most of the industry is no longer directed at me, I'm no longer the target demographic. Just makes me sad is all, the golden age of gaming for me is over.
Perhaps it's not gaming that has changed, it may just be that you've changed or your expectations have changed, which is perfectly alright. I enjoy things differently now than I did when I was "younger". It's OK to let go if you're just not getting the joy out of something you used to, and it's OK to mourn that loss if it makes you feel better.
I'm starting to feel like we just need a group hug here. Maybe it's just me. ;)
I think the responses here show that people do care and do want to listen even if perhaps they aren't the people you were hoping to reach. It may be simply a matter of burnout or you need a fresh perspective, or you need to reevaluate what it is you enjoy most, then do it. Everyone goes through these moments of, "Is it for me?" The answer is completely up to you in the end.
We're with you in that the game is just more fun when you have friends and guildmates to run with. The issue we run into is, "what happens when they're not available but you want to do things?" So the most we can do is facilitate the means to get with others easily. We can connect you to other players, but we can't force people to talk or be social. It's going to take effort from the community itself to make it a more social experience by being social. I don't think what you're referring to is a design issue. And if you think it is, I'd love to hear your thoughts on how it could be improved. Just keep in mind, if you share some thoughts, they should keep in mind the current structure of the game. Without taking anything away or putting new restrictions out there, how would you go about doing it? Because as it is right now, it's easier than ever to be put into contact with other people. It's just a matter of then getting those people interested in interacting socially.
Why is it required to have dead times between xpacs, and then wholesale change with yet more leveling up in a new xpac, over and over without end, the same formula every time?
It takes a lot of time and dedicated effort and resources to create an expansion pack. While we can develop both current and future content at the same time to an extent, there has to be a spot in which we put focus on future content so that we don't get in our own way. As I've said in the past, World of Warcraft has many layers of complexity. Changes that seem innocuous may end up impacting larger systems causing further issues if they aren't segregated in some way during development.
Why not have more content patches, leave off new leveling up, and focus on having a steady stream of content without so much change?
I'm not sure I get where you're coming from here other than if you're asking why we choose to make larger changes during expansions than in patches. For the answer, we go back to the first answer. It's far easier for us to make larger system changes and additions in an expansion. Some of this is due to technological limitations and some is about being cautious about breaking that which was not broken before.
Not saying no changes, I am saying fewer changes.
Not saying no new content, I am saying do it via patches.
We do patches when we can, but those patches generally occur after we've put in the framework for them. Without that framework, it's more difficult and more can go wrong. Expansions give us the opportunity to make those larger changes that we want to make and we keep the "smaller" ones to patches when we can. It's understandable that some may feel the changes are "too much" and we try to maintain a balance where we can, but we like taking opportunities to make those larger changes where we can so long as we think it will benefit the overall health of the game and community.
Right now raiding is dead unless you are one of the chosen 10, and even a die hard raider like myself is now tired of no new content for a long time, and none to come until the xpac, however long that may yet be.
A valid concern, but I have seen people setting up PUG raids or still spending time in the Raid Finder. It may not be ideal, but the best thing you can do is use the realm forums or the in game chat to see if you can locate others interested in running the content you are. It's understandable though that there are lulls when a lot of people have seen or experienced the content already. We're doing what we can to keep the "downtime" limited, but we aren't making any specific guarantees on timing for the expansion.
Seems like Blizzard is married to a formula that is outdated.
We're not "married" to it, but it does work. We have adapted how we do things over the years and I'm sure we'll continue to adapt as technology and need allows.
Just to correct the OP really quickly, he is actually she. ;)
Socializing in Azeroth
We're working toward making sure we get people out in the world a bit more than we did previously in a variety of ways. There will be world bosses to kill, pets to collect, and daily quests you'll want to go back for.
The Dungeon Finder and Raid Finder aren't going away nor are the conveniences that come with them. Players are able to get together and do these things far more easily than they ever have in the past.
We also are implementing cross-realm zones which should help with getting people into lower-population areas (such as lower-level/level-up zones).
As many will most likely comment here, when your time is limited, spending it sitting in town asking for a group isn't always the best use of your time. In some cases, it would take people hours to find a group they could go with into a dungeon.
We can connect people all day and all night, but that doesn't mean we can force anyone to be social. That's completely up to each individual.
I don't want to get into a RealID debate here, but that too is optional. You don't have to use it if you don't want to, but it does make it easier to hook up with your real life friends and family.
I just wanted to pop back in and thank everyone for taking the time to post and keep this thread constructive. As always, it's appreciated.
I don't claim to have every answer you may want at this moment. I can say that as always, your concerns and discussions are important to us and we will continue to convey your thoughts and ideas to the best of our ability to the rest of the teams here.
This is just not a black and white topic and as much as we may try to make it one, it never really can be. There is always a cost for things involved and sometimes, it's about deciding how we pay for it and making sure it's not painful.
Obtén Wowhead Premium
para apoyar la web, ocultar los anuncios y disfrutar de funcionalidades Premium!
Mostrar 0 comentarios
Ocultar 0 comentarios
Inicia sesión para publicar un comentario
Escribir un Comentario
No has iniciado sesión. Por favor
entra a tu cuenta
registra una cuenta
para añadir tu comentario.