Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

5.0.4 PTRFollow

#1 Jul 21 2012 at 12:25 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
So, 5.0.4 PTR is up.

Mists is getting closer (thank God!).

I wonder what is meant by "Currency Conversion". I'm thinking they're talking about what happens to your JP/HP/VP/CP when this patch goes live, but that's just my assumption.

Not going to C&P the whole thing, but, some highlights include:

1). The whole Theramore thing.
2). AoE looting.
3). The new Talent system.
4). Relics/Ranged Slots have been removed, Wands change to MH weapons, Guns/Bows/Xbows are now 2H weapons and there's no minimum range for ranged weapons anymore.
5). Glyph changes.
6). Account-Wide Mounts/Pets/Achievements.
7). Character creation screen changes.

Are the big things I saw.


Edited, Jul 21st 2012 2:25pm by Lyrailis
#2 Jul 21 2012 at 4:54 PM Rating: Excellent
**
760 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
I wonder what is meant by "Currency Conversion". I'm thinking they're talking about what happens to your JP/HP/VP/CP when this patch goes live, but that's just my assumption.


I'm pretty sure that's exactly what is meant.
Have fun testing. Smiley: smile
____________________________
Osseric
#3 Jul 21 2012 at 5:16 PM Rating: Excellent
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,629 posts
Figure a month(ish) till it goes live, 1 month after that MoP. So mid Sept at the earliest for MoP.

Anyone have historical links for tbc, wotlk and cata, or am I gonna have to google!

Edited, Jul 21st 2012 7:16pm by bodhisattva
____________________________
Bode - 90 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#4 Jul 21 2012 at 7:13 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
bodhisattva wrote:
Figure a month(ish) till it goes live, 1 month after that MoP. So mid Sept at the earliest for MoP.

Anyone have historical links for tbc, wotlk and cata, or am I gonna have to google!

Edited, Jul 21st 2012 7:16pm by bodhisattva


Follow the link in my OP, then click on "Comments".

First comment has a historical dates thingie.

Every single expansion thusfar has worked like this:

"Prep" patch arrives on PTR.
~1 month later, Prep patch goes Live.
4-6 weeks later, Expansion goes live.

So, by this estimate, looks like 5.0.4 will hit Live about Aug 14, 21, or 28th and the Expansion will go Live either Sept 11th, 18th, or if we're really unlucky, 25th.

Something like that.

Edited, Jul 21st 2012 9:15pm by Lyrailis
#5 Jul 21 2012 at 7:37 PM Rating: Good
Drama Nerdvana
******
20,629 posts
Pffft clicking on links! (thank you for pointing it out though)

That was a hell of a lot of dead time between DS & MoP though. I think it would be safe to say 6 weeks from August 16 when they the debut the Cinematic for MoP. If we were doing a pool for the release date. I've stayed away from any beta whining but looking at blue posts it seems like there has been a lot of back and forth on balance and people are saying good things about the pokemon feature.
____________________________
Bode - 90 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
#6 Jul 21 2012 at 9:23 PM Rating: Good
***
2,419 posts
bodhisattva wrote:
Pffft clicking on links! (thank you for pointing it out though)
Quote:


np at all, I coulda copied and pasted, but meh. lol.

[quote]That was a hell of a lot of dead time between DS & MoP though.


Doesn't help that LFR DS is a bit simplistic mechanics-wise. I've cleared LFR DS and, well. The first boss is cakewalk, the bosses inside the maws are fairly easy, the huge dragon boss is cakewalk (seriously, you click the big fat invincibility button just before he finishes casting the spell!? OMG!). The first battle in the 2nd half is the only real part that you'd have to think about... not eating shockwaves, soaking the dragon's fireballs to prevent the ship from going down, and not bringing down too many riders at once... the part on his back, meh, KILL FREAKING ADDS, how hard is that? And the last part is just a Patchwerk-style DPS race.

Hence, a lot of people get bored quickly and easily with LFR DS. And once they "see the content", they're not left with much desire to try N-DS unless they're already in a raiding guild.

And yes, the amount of Time between 4.3 and 5.0.4 is... quite a large gap, true.

[quote]I think it would be safe to say 6 weeks from August 16 when they the debut the Cinematic for MoP. If we were doing a pool for the release date. I've stayed away from any beta whining but looking at blue posts it seems like there has been a lot of back and forth on balance and people are saying good things about the pokemon feature.


I've been hearing lots of good things overall about the Beta... though I'm still worried about Spirits of Harmony. I think it is a horrible idea, and I pray to God someone at Blizz has the brains to make them BoA instead of BoP.
#7 Jul 22 2012 at 12:02 AM Rating: Excellent
**
809 posts
As much as I dislike the "pokemon" crap... i'm gonna get sucked in thru the acheivments. Dammit.

Cooking specializations I'm dreading entirely.

Rest is the usual "changes are changes" shiz.
____________________________
"...for he suffers the worst fate he can know, and that is to know that he dies."
#8 Jul 22 2012 at 3:25 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
471 posts
Don't think I like #4: Relics/Ranged Slots have been removed, Wands change to MH weapons, Guns/Bows/Xbows are now 2H weapons and there's no minimum range for ranged weapons anymore.
____________________________
[wowsig]2609911[/wowsig]
WoW
90 Orc shaman
90 Orc Hunter
90 Troll Hunter
90 Dwarf Hunter
90 Undead Warrior

EQ2-EQ1
Scrappy 92 Ratonga Bruiser
Mazum 91 Kerra Ranger
Daktari 65 Iksar Beastlord
DragonFists 71 Iksar Monk

#9 Jul 22 2012 at 3:30 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
ChiefsClassik wrote:
Don't think I like #4: Relics/Ranged Slots have been removed, Wands change to MH weapons, Guns/Bows/Xbows are now 2H weapons and there's no minimum range for ranged weapons anymore.



I LOVE LOVE LOVE LOVE that.

That's 1-2 less pieces of equipment I have to collect for my character.

It was always a pain in the butt trying to find a Strength gun for a warrior, or Relics for Paladins/Druids/Shamans/DKs. I'm not gonna miss that slot, one bit.

Since Hunters can shoot at Point-Blank range now, they won't need melee weapons or Raptor Strike anymore and they won't be rolling on Rogue/Shaman/Druid/Monk stuff, either.

Protip: If you have any Mages, Priests, or Warlocks who have a <378 weapon in their Main Hand, get 700JP and buy the 378 wand and make sure you hold onto it.

When 5.0.4 goes Live, the Wand will become a Main Hand weapon and its stats will be buffed to about the same as the 378 1H caster weapons. You can easily do this with a couple runs of N-HoO if it comes up as your Random Normal.

Edited, Jul 22nd 2012 5:31pm by Lyrailis
#10 Jul 22 2012 at 3:31 PM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
35,691 posts
ChiefsClassik wrote:
Don't think I like #4: Relics/Ranged Slots have been removed, Wands change to MH weapons, Guns/Bows/Xbows are now 2H weapons and there's no minimum range for ranged weapons anymore.


If it means my Hunter can run around with his bow visibly sheathed and perhaps a quiver (like in the old days), I'd happily give up a melee weapon.

Not sure about the wands, though. My Mage, Warlock and Priest will be slightly unhappy if they can't equip a staff.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#11 Jul 22 2012 at 3:32 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
Mazra wrote:
ChiefsClassik wrote:
Don't think I like #4: Relics/Ranged Slots have been removed, Wands change to MH weapons, Guns/Bows/Xbows are now 2H weapons and there's no minimum range for ranged weapons anymore.


If it means my Hunter can run around with his bow visibly sheathed and perhaps a quiver (like in the old days), I'd happily give up a melee weapon.

Not sure about the wands, though. My Mage, Warlock and Priest will be slightly unhappy if they can't equip a staff.


You can equip a staff, but you can't use a staff and a wand at the same time.

At least now, you should be able to SEE your wand hanging off your belt.
#12 Jul 22 2012 at 3:48 PM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
Question, can you use a wand and offhand then to compensate for lack of stats on a wand? Because that would be pretty cool.
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#13 Jul 22 2012 at 3:51 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
Criminy wrote:
Question, can you use a wand and offhand then to compensate for lack of stats on a wand? Because that would be pretty cool.


Wands are Main Hand and have been buffed to be about the same as daggers/caster maces. You'd use them paired up with a Held-In-Off Hand item, such as those books, orbs, crystals, etc.


Compare these two:

http://www.wowhead.com/item=71151
http://mop.wowhead.com/item=71151

Notice how the stats have been buffed to be about the same as this item:

http://www.wowhead.com/item=71359

Now, Wands still say "Ranged" but I'm pretty sure they're meant to be Main Hand.

Edited, Jul 22nd 2012 5:54pm by Lyrailis
#14 Jul 22 2012 at 4:23 PM Rating: Good
**
760 posts
I don't like them scratching equipment slots. If the Relicslot (for example) was a hurdle for some classes to equip properly they should work on loottables or such. Removing stuff is just lame game design.
____________________________
Osseric
#15 Jul 22 2012 at 4:53 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
TherealLogros wrote:
I don't like them scratching equipment slots. If the Relicslot (for example) was a hurdle for some classes to equip properly they should work on loottables or such. Removing stuff is just lame game design.


It fixes a lot of problems, and I agree with the decision.

It fixes...

1). Relic Slots seemed a bit of a "Why is this even here?" The only reason: Shamans, Paladins, Druids, and Death Knights cannot use ranged weapons. This means they're at a statistical disadvantage, as they cannot equip anything in this slot.

2). Hunters keep taking weapons meant for Rogues, Druids, and Enhancement Shaman. Hunters almost never melee if they can possibly help it, so these weapons are nothing but extra stat sticks. Meanwhile, Rogues, Druids, and Enhancement Shamans were going "WTF huntard!? I needed that!" as they would have actually USED said weapon to melee with, instead of just carrying it around as a stat stick.

3). Warriors needed Strength Guns -- they are the one and only class that does. Rather than wasting database room on a weapon that only one class would ever use, they decided "Warriors don't really need a ranged weapon -- they have Taunt, Heroic Throw, and Shattering Throw now".

4). Rogues never used ranged weapons for anything other than Fan of Knives, so why not get rid of their ranged weapons too?

What does that leave, Spellcasters. Spellcasters almost never wand anyways, and same thing with Warriors, Rogues, Relic-users: They had to have them to compete with everyone else, stat budget-wise.

Thus, the logical decision then becomes to remove the Ranged Slot entirely. Make Guns, Bows, and Crossbows 2H weapons (so hunters no longer want Melee weapons and won't be taking them off of people who REALLY need them), Wands become MH so casters can still use them as a ranged weapon if they wished, and Warriors and Rogues won't need ranged weapons. Fan of Knives, I assume, becomes an attack all Rogues can do, without the Thrown Weapon requirement.

This negatively impacts no one, and everyone is kept equal in terms of stat budgets, and everyone has 1-2 less items they have to collect to gear up.

I can see nothing wrong with this design decision whatsoever.
#16 Jul 23 2012 at 2:12 AM Rating: Decent
**
760 posts
For all I know the problems you've listed are valid points, so I won't even try to dispute these. However in my book having less item slots to equip is not a good thing but a very very bad one. I like collecting and upgrading gear. It's one of the main reasons I'm playing WoW.
So for me personally it would have been a better approach if they had looked at any problems at hand and found other solutions. Yes that would've been way harder and not this clean by far. But that's exactly why I call this removal lazy. "Oh we don't have any easy solution? Well let's kick this slot entirely. Problem solved lol."
____________________________
Osseric
#17 Jul 23 2012 at 8:17 AM Rating: Good
***
1,877 posts
Any suggestions to how they can improve on a range weapon only one class can use, melee weapons that will never be used in melee, and relics that serve absolutely no purpose?

I understand that loosing a gear slot sucks but we are just loosing slots that serve no logic at all.
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#18 Jul 23 2012 at 8:37 AM Rating: Excellent
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
35,691 posts
I'd happily give up my relic slot if it meant that Hunters wouldn't roll on my "turn into a fire kitty" polearms/staffs in the future.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#19 Jul 23 2012 at 8:57 AM Rating: Decent
**
760 posts
Criminy wrote:
Any suggestions to how they can improve on a range weapon only one class can use, melee weapons that will never be used in melee, and relics that serve absolutely no purpose?

I understand that loosing a gear slot sucks but we are just loosing slots that serve no logic at all.


Then Blizz should alter the slots so they make sense. I'm sure the developers could come up with something if they really wanted to. But it seems that is too much to ask for.
The removal of headenchants is another trip right down the same alley which I personally strongly dislike. I have seen many threads suggesting to put headenchants in with Engineering, but no. Instead they get just removed alltogether.

I know and understand the reasoning behind both decisions and I don't say that there wasn't need for a change. But just taking them out of the game? Come on now...
____________________________
Osseric
#20 Jul 23 2012 at 10:06 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
1,079 posts
Personally, I'd like to see ONE trinket slot. Or, even NO trinkets. They're a pita if you don't have the BOAs.
____________________________
A reader lives a thousand lives, the man who never reads lives only one. - George R.R. Martin
#21 Jul 23 2012 at 10:20 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
1,900 posts
Quote:
So for me personally it would have been a better approach


Smiley: lol You are committing a logical fallacy -- I'm the center of the universe and it revolves around me. That invalidates your whole argument.

____________________________
In Chinese: glasses are yanjing; eyes are yanjing, and the beer of Beijing is Yanjing. When speaking, the difference is in the tones. Did I just order a glass of beer or a glass of eyes?
#22 Jul 23 2012 at 11:37 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
Quote:
The removal of headenchants is another trip right down the same alley which I personally strongly dislike. I have seen many threads suggesting to put headenchants in with Engineering, but no. Instead they get just removed alltogether.


TBH, I don't understand why they didn't give head enchants to scribes just like shoulder enchants.

But I'm not going to complain about it (the removal of the enchants itself), though I wish they'd stop with the double standards -- their explanation behind the removal of head enchants is "nobody likes having to grind up a reputation on every character just to do endgame with".

.......duuuuuuurrrrrrrrrrrp.

Then make the stupid things truly BoA without rep requirement, then!

Sheesh, how hard does that have to be?

1). Grind Rep on ONE character per server.
2). Buy Head Enchant.
3). Mail it to your alt.
4). Use it.
5). ???
6). PROFIT!

No, the ones in Therazane (that many complained about) were BoA, but required Therazane rep to buy and use which was just absolutely retarded.

And Then.....then they make epics buyable with Valor Points and stick reputation requirements on them.

Not only did they go back on their "we don't think buying gear from a vendor is very interesting", but they also did a complete 180 on their "nobody likes to grind reps on every character". Now, instead of grinding one rep for a head enchant, you're grinding at least three for all of your Valor gear.

Niiiiiice.

Love the double-standards and 180 turns there, Blizz.

Edited, Jul 23rd 2012 1:37pm by Lyrailis
#23 Jul 23 2012 at 11:47 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
Vorkosigan wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see ONE trinket slot. Or, even NO trinkets. They're a pita if you don't have the BOAs.


I hate trying to find trinkets sometimes.

Hopefully this time around, they stick at least a couple weak ones on a vendor that's easily gotten.

While trying to level the last couple characters up, I had Level 83 characters that couldn't get into any dungeons because the only dungeons the RDF will let you Random at 83 require 305 avg. Even while carrying around a cape to offset my BoA Cape, I still couldn't get in because I had Outland (or worse) trinkets, because trinkets are so few and hard to find, that I easily leveled without finding any at all.

All Cataclysm Trinkets are at least 50% of the way into the zone (except for Deepholm, which gives Strength or Agility users 1 trinket 30% of the way in), and if you're leveling to get to 85 quickly, you're not going to do a whole zone to find the trinkets. And trinkets dropping in dungeons? lololololol, I've done 10+ dungeons in a row and didn't see a single one. So there I was at 83.. I pressed the "Find Dungeon" button and it goes "You don't meet the requirements for any dungeons".

If they're going to do this again in MoP (having I-level requirements for pre-90 dungeons), then they need to stick trinkets on a vendor, or have a couple that you can find in the first few quests, not the quests way near the end of the zone.
#24 Jul 23 2012 at 10:04 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
395 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
Vorkosigan wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see ONE trinket slot. Or, even NO trinkets. They're a pita if you don't have the BOAs.


I hate trying to find trinkets sometimes.

Hopefully this time around, they stick at least a couple weak ones on a vendor that's easily gotten.


So far in beta there's seven trinkets as quest rewards, starting in the first zone and they're all fairly decent (unless you're a healer, most seem to proc on damage).

http://mop.wowhead.com/items=4.-4?filter=cr=18:166;crs=1:5;crv=0:0

On a related note, the Darkmoon trinkets look pretty awesome again.
#25 Jul 24 2012 at 12:33 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
******
27,063 posts
TherealLogros wrote:
I know and understand the reasoning behind both decisions and I don't say that there wasn't need for a change. But just taking them out of the game? Come on now...
They're removing head enchants now too? /sigh

What's next?
Future Patch 6.0 Notes wrote:
-We've replaced the current gear system with one that has three slots: Armor, Weapon and Shield

____________________________
Someone on another forum wrote:
Wow, you've got an awesome writing style.! I really dig the narrator's back story, humor, sarcasm, and the plethora of pop culture references. Altogether a refreshingly different RotR journal (not that I don't like the more traditional ones, mind you).

#26 Jul 24 2012 at 2:24 AM Rating: Good
**
760 posts
Rhodekylle wrote:
Quote:
So for me personally it would have been a better approach


Smiley: lol You are committing a logical fallacy -- I'm the center of the universe and it revolves around me. That invalidates your whole argument.



What the hell? I never claimed to have the superior opinion. I just said that I would have liked Blizzard to take another approach on this issue. That's called having a discussion. If you can't accept me having another opinion than you that's your problem, not mine.

I specifically worded my posts this way to prevent someone storming in and accusing me of trying to speak for the whole community or some bullcrap like that. I thought this way it would be clear that this is my personal opinion and nothing more. But hey, it seems no matter how you construct your posts someone will always find something to fret over.

Also I never said the points Lyrailis made were wrong...

So yeah Smiley: lol x100.
____________________________
Osseric
#27 Jul 24 2012 at 2:32 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,900 posts
From a blue post announcing the change:

Quote:
We decided that putting head enchants on the various faction vendors wasn't working well with our design intent for the factions. There is a lot of max-level quest content in MoP, much of it focused around the reputation with the new factions. I think it's really cool stuff -- worlds away from the old Argent Dawn scourge stone days.

In previous expansions, the head enchants on the faction vendors served to force players into that content. You couldn't even choose which reputation to pursue -- you had to pursue the one with your specific head enchant. Our design intent for MoP is to give players options in how to play, and the head enchant design wasn't compatible with that.

Once we decided to no longer offer new head enchants, we made the older ones non-functional or else players would feel like they had to go back to older content or be missing out on power. This way, helmets are just no longer enchantable and you'll have one less required step to get a piece of loot ready to wear.


I have to agree with them, I never did like the "you have to grind rep with X because you need Y enchant" system. A common complaint about Cata was that it seemed to cut down on players' choices and the developers seem to be trying to change that. I haven't been following the various faction changes closely, but it seems like it could be interesting.

Now, about this whole wand as a main hand slot ... when can we get dual wield? Smiley: eek

____________________________
In Chinese: glasses are yanjing; eyes are yanjing, and the beer of Beijing is Yanjing. When speaking, the difference is in the tones. Did I just order a glass of beer or a glass of eyes?
#28 Jul 24 2012 at 3:13 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,900 posts
Quote:
I never claimed to have the superior opinion. I just said that I would have liked Blizzard to take another approach on this issue. That's called having a discussion.


The problem with writing is that one only has the written word as evidence of the writers intent. You may have believed you were having a discussion, but you dismissed any point that didn't agree with your view out of hand. That isn't a discussion.

In a discussion, you might have actually responded to the points Lyr raised. You didn't, nor did you just say that you would have liked Blizzard to take another approach. What you actually said was that they were lazy and that it was lame game design; by extension asserting that anyone who doesn't agree with you is equally lazy or lame. That wasn't intended to come across as if you feel you have a superior opinion, particularly when you explicitly state that you don't intend to address anything that conflicts with your view? As a further example, Criminy asked:

Quote:
Any suggestions to how they can improve on a range weapon only one class can use, melee weapons that will never be used in melee, and relics that serve absolutely no purpose?


You blew it off with:

Quote:
I'm sure the developers could come up with something if they really wanted to. But it seems that is too much to ask for.


Yet you wonder why it seems to me that your whole argument is that you should be accommodated?

Discussions are fine, but how about making an attempt at reasoned discourse, possibly even supported by facts or at least suggestions? Did universities stop teaching debate and writing? Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
In Chinese: glasses are yanjing; eyes are yanjing, and the beer of Beijing is Yanjing. When speaking, the difference is in the tones. Did I just order a glass of beer or a glass of eyes?
#29 Jul 24 2012 at 4:01 AM Rating: Decent
**
760 posts
Rhodekylle wrote:
The problem with writing is that one only has the written word as evidence of the writers intent. You may have believed you were having a discussion, but you dismissed any point that didn't agree with your view out of hand. That isn't a discussion.


I didn't dismiss anything. I actually said that I think the issues that were raised are valid. I just don't like the solution Blizzard presents to us.

Rhodekylle wrote:
In a discussion, you might have actually responded to the points Lyr raised. You didn't, nor did you just say that you would have liked Blizzard to take another approach. What you actually said was that they were lazy and that it was lame game design; by extension asserting that anyone who doesn't agree with you is equally lazy or lame. That wasn't intended to come across as if you feel you have a superior opinion, particularly when you explicitly state that you don't intend to address anything that conflicts with your view? As a further example, Criminy asked:

Quote:
Any suggestions to how they can improve on a range weapon only one class can use, melee weapons that will never be used in melee, and relics that serve absolutely no purpose?


You blew it off with:

Quote:
I'm sure the developers could come up with something if they really wanted to. But it seems that is too much to ask for.


Yet you wonder why it seems to me that your whole argument is that you should be accommodated?


Is it my job to solve this problem now? I don't know exactly how to solve this and never stated otherwise. Rename the items for this slot so they make more sense for each class. Something with an on-use ability maybe (like some Trinkets)? I read in several articles on WoWInsider that people want more of these. As stated I have no perfect formula for this.
Blizzard developers have proven time and again that they can be pretty crafty when it comes to elegant game design. Why shouldn't I expect better than this removal? Also, when they announced headenchants would be removed MANY people suggested valid alternative solutions but Blizzard didn't listen to any of them. And yes, that's lazy design in my opinion.
In case of the Relicslot I think they could do better but chose not to. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe they spent alot of time trying other things and none worked. But I don't really think so.

And no, I didn't insinuate that anyone who disagrees with me is lazy and lame. That's you putting words in my mouth (again).

And please stop with this whole entitlement-argument. Everyone who wants anything changed or not changed in this game wants this because it would improve his/her playing experience. When the Relic/Wand/etc slot goes, yes, I will be sad to see it gone but I can live with it. I won't throw a tantrum. But saying that I would have liked another solution is entitlement? By trying to devaluate my opinion with this stuff you are not setting the bar for discussion high.

Rhodekylle wrote:
Discussions are fine, but how about making an attempt at reasoned discourse, possibly even supported by facts or at least suggestions? Did universities stop teaching debate and writing? Smiley: oyvey


I agreed with many things Lyr and Criminy said. I disagreed with other things that were said. I didn't misinterpret anything, at least not intentionally. Plus I don't think that in any of my posts I have been near as condescending as you managed to be in each post you adressed to me in this topic.

I have no intention of answering to anything on this subject in the future. If you insist on misinterpreting my posts this way, fine, that's your prerogative. After a bit it gets tiresome to repeat that I don't value myself/my opinion higher than others in this matter.
____________________________
Osseric
#30 Jul 24 2012 at 8:28 AM Rating: Excellent
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
35,691 posts
Lyrailis wrote:
Vorkosigan wrote:
Personally, I'd like to see ONE trinket slot. Or, even NO trinkets. They're a pita if you don't have the BOAs.


I hate trying to find trinkets sometimes.


This. A million times this.

Wrath of the Lich King was horrible when it came to trinkets. One trinket in the ICC 5-mans from a pain-in-the-ass dungeon boss. One trinket from the ICC raid. And everyone would roll on them, despite role and need. I've raged so hard because some @#%^wit ninja'd the trinket from Saurfang. Brings back fuzzy, alcoholic memories of me strangling kittens and twisting necks on puppies.

They need to put more trinkets in the game, or copy loot tables to more bosses. Having to run one dungeon over and over again because you need a trinket from the last boss is painful. Even worse when the trinket drops from the first boss as you know the tank/healer will leave after the fight. Anyone remember the ICC 5-man farm? How many of you have been in a Pit of Saron run where the tank or the healer left after whatshisface because the loot he or she wanted didn't drop?

I have. Many times. Many, many times. So many times.

The pain.

The anger.

/twitch
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#31 Jul 24 2012 at 9:04 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
10,403 posts
Mazra wrote:
Wrath of the Lich King was horrible when it came to trinkets.


For completeness sake lets add in using the mongoose enchant and farming lvl 70 marks for the relic.
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#32 Jul 24 2012 at 9:24 AM Rating: Excellent
***
2,419 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
Mazra wrote:
Wrath of the Lich King was horrible when it came to trinkets.


For completeness sake lets add in using the mongoose enchant and farming lvl 70 marks for the relic.


Or having to go to H-MgT for the Tank Trinket because entry-level trinkets for Wrath endgame had pretty much nothing for a tank that I could find, 'cept for that one Hadranox drops (and I could count on one hand how many people were willing to do H-AK), and... I think there was another tank trinket in there somewhere, but I never saw the stupid thing.

And then there was a tank trinket that dropped from the black knight in the 5man ToC, but lol.

I ran that thing like 30+ times and never saw the stupid thing.

But then Blizzard seems to do the same damn thing with tank shields.

Yet again, using the crafted shield for the entire expansion because they only put 1-and-only-1 non-raid Tank Shield in the entire game that I saw (the one from the troll dungeons is 353, worse than the crafted shield) and it is a rare rare rare drop, killed that stupid blood elf assassin I don't know how many times and only saw it drop once... while NOT playing my tank.

They put a 378 BoE.........caster...... shield in Firelands raid. Caster? Seriously? They can use the plethora of easy to get "Held in Off-Hand" items instead of a shield if they so wanted. That SHOULD have been a Tank Shield.

Edited, Jul 24th 2012 11:25am by Lyrailis
#33 Jul 24 2012 at 10:47 AM Rating: Good
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
35,691 posts
They could have kept the caster shield there, but added a shield for tanks as well. I hate using off-hand items on my Paladin and Shaman. It's just an aesthetic thing since a shield won't matter much in PvE, but I just don't like looking at my Shaman without a shield on.

The problem with loot tables and RNG is that the latter is a cruel mistress. If the chance of looting an item isn't 100% then there's always the risk that it won't drop for you. It can have a 99.9% drop chance and some poor sod still won't see it drop. And when it does finally drop, it'll be on another character.

That poor sod is me.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#34 Jul 26 2012 at 8:43 AM Rating: Decent
*
161 posts
"no minimum range for ranged weapons anymore"


So much for hunter being challenging/interesting in PvP..
#35 Jul 26 2012 at 11:52 AM Rating: Good
***
2,419 posts
Labiarinth wrote:
"no minimum range for ranged weapons anymore"


So much for hunter being challenging/interesting in PvP..


Hunters are still the only class that has no self-heals (save a very small one that Marksmen get, and Beast Mastery's weak HoT.. what is that, 2% every 5 seconds?), little to no mitigation whatsoever (play dead doesn't work very well from what I've seen) and their pets have no way of keeping you off of them. [Edit: Note, this is based upon Pre-MoP knowledge of the class; I've not studied their MoP talent trees yet.]

Meanwhile, the minimum range was a pretty crippling handicap, that made hunters fairly weak in PvP unless they had plenty of friends to keep people distracted. Anytime I got up in a hunter's face, he was blowing everything he had to deal with me and his DPS went into the dirt, boom, just like that.

This is something hunters have been needing now, for a long time.

Also, there are solo PvE quests that plain got annoying because you're on a small ledge, in a small cave/tunnel/whatever and there's no room for you to get your pet to tank the thing AND get far enough away from it to shoot. There were some quests I remember having to melee mobs because I didn't have enough room to properly fight them with ranged.

Edited, Jul 26th 2012 1:52pm by Lyrailis
#36 Jul 26 2012 at 12:26 PM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
Avatar
*****
10,403 posts
In my mind at least hunters were one of those classes that sucked in Arenas with no self-heals, but did nicely in battlegrounds. They were quite easy to top the damage charts with, and get a good number of HKs. They were a nice anti-magic user class, and could deal impressive damage from a distance. BM hunters were a shiznit 1v1 with their CDs.

I'll be nostalgic about it I'm sure, but losing the minimum range thing isn't a big deal to me. After all shotgun blast to the face at close range should do more damage right? right? Smiley: rolleyes
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#37 Jul 26 2012 at 12:44 PM Rating: Good
***
2,419 posts
someproteinguy wrote:
In my mind at least hunters were one of those classes that sucked in Arenas with no self-heals, but did nicely in battlegrounds. They were quite easy to top the damage charts with, and get a good number of HKs. They were a nice anti-magic user class, and could deal impressive damage from a distance. BM hunters were a shiznit 1v1 with their CDs.


Hunters do best when they've got friends to keep everyone else distracted. Afterall when you've got paladins and death knights and healers running around nearby, you're not likely to notice that one guy standing 30+ feet away turning you into swiss cheese, are you?

In Arena, though, there's a lot less people and hunters are a lot more noticeable.

Now, with Cooldowns they can do OK, but what happens when those cooldowns are done? They go down fast.

Quote:
I'll be nostalgic about it I'm sure, but losing the minimum range thing isn't a big deal to me. After all shotgun blast to the face at close range should do more damage right? right? Smiley: rolleyes


Indeed, one of the reasons I'm not all too broken up over it.

And besides, it is necessary -- if we remove Raptor Strike and melee weapons from hunters, then they can't melee unless they punch with their bare hands.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 48 All times are in CDT
Xandurson, Anonymous Guests (47)