This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Classic Theme
Thottbot Theme
Why Deforestation isn't a nerf
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
404185
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
579986
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
curlymon
Tree form being locked out of something :: Boomkin being locked out of something :: SPriest being locked out of something
Those things are absolutely
NOT
equivalent to each other in any way, shape or form. Because Healers and DPS
are not the same
.
They ARE the same when you look at primary and secondary roles... How is this a hard concept?
Regardless of role
they are locked out or limited by something that other classes/specs are not.
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.
Other classes have zero loss to effectiveness in their primary role while doing a separate role.
^ This is the core of his argument. Why do we have this loss? What significant gains to we have that offset this loss?
Resto is in the exact same boat, even though it has a different main role it still falls under the "can't do a secondary role with out a significant loss to their primary role's effectiveness"
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.
Last time I checked PvP was half of the game so it's a perfectly valid point to bring up. The core of the debate falls on the PvP side of the changes not the PvE which is why my posts have been directed in that manner(i.e. PvE is an aesthetics change, while PvP is a large mechanics change).
The changes proposed and looked at by my argument actually say that the changes are a good thing. The tree form should be adjusted... assuming they keep their standard "can't cast x type of spells in form" mechanic. The other side of the argument is "why keep the spell restrictions mechanic"
The next logical step is to normalise that ideal across the other classes/specs.
With the argument being:
Why does the Resto Druid, Ele/Resto/Enh Shammy, Ret/holy Paladin, Holy/Disp Priest get to heal & dps while the Balance Druid and Shadow Priest dont get to do that?
It does leave those 2 specs at a disadvantage when compared to its peers does it not?
With the solution to give them the same treatment as the Resto druid. Good by Moonkin, good by Shadow Form.
Seriously guys...
your missing the point entirely.
Post by
404185
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
579986
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
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
579986
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
curlymon
Also amazingly enough, Resto spec druids
can
dps/cc, they just suffer a bit for it.
Yes, but while Blizzard thinks DPS shouldn't be able to heal (or at least should be penalized for it) they don't feel the same way about healers.
You can't say "But if they do it to healers, they're obviously going to do it to DPS."
The question here is "WHY is that restriction in place and would it be possible to change the nature of it?"
Why not have heals allowed in form but have a penalty to the power of those heals in some manner? The ability to heal does not cause an imbalance in so far that the penalty is shifted away from our primary role.
we get the concept, we just disagree with it
So you
want
them to make it so Moonkin can heal without penalties? Good luck with that.
Not heal with out penalties so much as heal without reduction in our ability to perform our dps (primary) based role. The penalty, if it is really needed, can easily be shifted somewhere else.
The questions I am posing are:
Why is there a restriction in the first place? (a pure mechanics answer would be preferable but some speculation as to the thought process of the devs is acceptable)
Why is the restriction so immutable to you?
Post by
579986
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
384751
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
579986
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
curlymon
I repeat:
The questions I am posing are:
Why is there a restriction in the first place? (
a pure mechanics answer would be preferable but some speculation as to the thought process of the devs is acceptable
)
Why is the restriction so immutable to
you
?
Please answer the questions I asked.
Tree needing to change doesn't mean others need to change, or that there's a danger of such an event. We're talking about what's in the interest of each class, not dominoes. Just because one form's about to fall back doesn't mean the others stacked behind are going to fall.
I'm not saying they NEED to change... I am asking "why not?" It is not a case of dominoes it is wondering if those changes could be expanded beyond just the tree form.
P.S. - Tree form is not going to lose effectiveness... does everyone agree on that? Nothing is going to "fall"
Post by
579986
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 Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.