While PvP in World of Warcrft has always involved the use of consumables, such as potions, bandages, and drinks, the Wrath of the Lich King expansion added a brand new type of inventory item for PvPers: objective-specific explosives. Explosives were actually fairly frequently used items in classic WoW PvP, and items such as Ez-Thro Dynamite and Ez-Thro Dynamite II were common sights on the faction auction houses because they were effectively cheap bonus damage, but those were more general use items than what I'm referring to. I'm speaking of items such as The RP-GG in Lake Wintergrasp, Massive Seaforium Charge in the Strand of the Ancients battleground, and both Seaforium Bombs and Huge Seaforium Bombs in the Isle of Conquest battleground, all of which were designed to help players demolish specific obstacles.
However, one question comes to mind again and again when I encounter these items in their respective PvP zones: why do these items still exist?
By that question, I don't mean to imply that these items have outlived their usefulness and should be removed from the game - quite the opposite, in fact - but I ask because the fundamental mechanics of such explosives seems downright antiquated in the Mists of Pandaria age. These days, when Blizzard wants to give players access to a zone or encounter-specific ability, it often does so through a User Interface element named "ExtraActionButton1", commonly just called the Extra Action Button because there has yet to be an "ExtraActionButton2". The Extra Action Button debuted in Cataclysm's Dragon Soul raid instance during the Ultraxion encounter, where it served as a way for players to activate the encounter-specific Heroic Will ability to negate powerful attacks, and is now a frequently-used element in many of Pandaria's dungeons and scenarios.
So here we have this user interface element that has dedicated screen real estate, can be activated by picking up specific objects (as evidenced by the Smash! ability granted by picking up Big Ol' Hammers dropped by slain Virmen Boppers during and prior to the Hoptallus encounter in Stormstout Brewery), and is entirely unused in PvP - why not use it for RP-GGs and the various Seaforum explosives? Unlike raids, which tend to become less frequented over time, battlegrounds stay in use for years, and thus I think it makes sense to expend some resources to ensure that they stay up to date and modern.
Also, we need a tabard wardrobe and a toy chest, because I no longer have spare inventory space for PvP bombs. <.<
Showing posts with label Cataclysm. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cataclysm. Show all posts
Monday, June 17, 2013
Tuesday, November 15, 2011
On the Rivalry of Mastery and Beacon
Holy Paladins have traditionally been known through World of Warcraft's history for being the healing class with the smallest healing toolkit. Over time and expansions, our tools have grown more numerous and eventually Blizzard standardized healing abilities to some degree in Cataclysm, but generally speaking our toolkit has rarely had an excess of abilities that performed the same basic task. The current Holy Paladin mastery—Illuminated Healing—and one of the tree's defining activated abilities—Beacon of Light—seem to me to be the new exception.
As things currently stand, both Illuminated Healing and Beacon of Light are two tools that essentially share the same primary function: to act as a health buffer for tank healing. However, the two act in such conflicting ways that they feel like rivals competing for a single job rather than two distinct utility abilities that each have their place in our toolbox. The way Beacon of Light is designed makes it less appealing, even with Tower of Radiance, to cast directly on the buffed tank unless absolutely necessary, but the Illuminated Healing mastery makes it more appealing to cast directly on the tank and thereby bypass Beacon of Light's whole purpose. Since both Beacon of Light and Illuminated Healing are wasted on targets that are not consistently taking damage, the only time the two effectively work together are when multiple tanks are taking damage simultaneously and for prolonged periods of time, which only happens in raids, and even then not on every fight.
The problem is made worse by the rules governing the Holy Radiance ability in patch 4.3. Even though the ability is being redesigned as an active heal rather than a passive one, it still won't be allowed to transfer through Beacon of Light, unlike our other AoE healing ability, Light of Dawn, and our other primary Holy Power generator, Holy Shock. However, it will be allowed to benefit from the Illuminated Healing mastery, which makes it feel like it should be used on or near tanks in order to not risk making the tank's health less stable.
I hope Blizzard doesn't leave the situation as-is, especially as design moves forward for the upcoming Mists of Pandaria expansion. To some degree, it feels to me that if the two abilities can't (or won't) be made to play nicely with each other, then either one should be altered to fit a more distinct role or the two should be rolled into a single ability.
As things currently stand, both Illuminated Healing and Beacon of Light are two tools that essentially share the same primary function: to act as a health buffer for tank healing. However, the two act in such conflicting ways that they feel like rivals competing for a single job rather than two distinct utility abilities that each have their place in our toolbox. The way Beacon of Light is designed makes it less appealing, even with Tower of Radiance, to cast directly on the buffed tank unless absolutely necessary, but the Illuminated Healing mastery makes it more appealing to cast directly on the tank and thereby bypass Beacon of Light's whole purpose. Since both Beacon of Light and Illuminated Healing are wasted on targets that are not consistently taking damage, the only time the two effectively work together are when multiple tanks are taking damage simultaneously and for prolonged periods of time, which only happens in raids, and even then not on every fight.
The problem is made worse by the rules governing the Holy Radiance ability in patch 4.3. Even though the ability is being redesigned as an active heal rather than a passive one, it still won't be allowed to transfer through Beacon of Light, unlike our other AoE healing ability, Light of Dawn, and our other primary Holy Power generator, Holy Shock. However, it will be allowed to benefit from the Illuminated Healing mastery, which makes it feel like it should be used on or near tanks in order to not risk making the tank's health less stable.
I hope Blizzard doesn't leave the situation as-is, especially as design moves forward for the upcoming Mists of Pandaria expansion. To some degree, it feels to me that if the two abilities can't (or won't) be made to play nicely with each other, then either one should be altered to fit a more distinct role or the two should be rolled into a single ability.
Thursday, November 3, 2011
Why I Stopped Blogging
Sometimes, when I think about this blog, I feel like I owe the 3 people who may actually check it on occasion an explanation as to why I simply haven't been around here, even though I've been as active as ever on Twitter and PlusHeal. Part of the answer is personal and has to do with real life, and I'm not going to get into it here, because, quite frankly, I don' wanna *stomp stomp* *pout pout* so there! =P
The other part of it about how World of Warcraft has changed these past few years. There are, at the very core, two reasons why I play World of Warcraft—the story and the raiding. The storytelling in Cataclysm has been leaps and bounds better than its predecessors, and I have to give major kudos to Dave Kosak for that. Having major lore characters actually going out into the world and doing things is fun to watch, and getting to help them do those things is a joy to experience. Getting to see the plot unfold first-hand is amazing, and my only real problem with it is that the factional divide locks me out of experiencing some very key moments in Alliance lore unless I play a Horde character (such as the full story of Gilneas). Unfortunately, the storytelling does not make for a particularly blog-worthy experience unless I decide to take things in a more RP-centric direction, such as Flinthammer Hall or Travels through Azeroth and Outland, because everyone who is interested in the story can simply log into the game and experience it for themselves.
As such, most of my blogging desire is a result of the raiding aspect of the game—an aspect which I've been equal parts frustrated and content with for since Cataclysm launched. It's not so much with how Blizzard is handling raids (although I'm saddened that Blizzard's 10/25 raid lockout changes have essentially wrecked my old raid group), but rather the inescapable feeling that I'll eventually have to move on from my raiding group of the past 6-7 years if I'm ever to find the style of raiding I'm looking for. The fact of the matter it that, among other things, 10-mans are just not my thing. The days of Upper Blackrock Spire and running Karazhan weekly alongside the 25-man raids during the Burning Crusade have firmly implanted into my head the idea that 10-mans are supplemental large dungeon groups rather than raids proper, and it's an idea I just can't shake no matter how hard I try. Hopefully, though, the introduction of the Raid Finder feature in patch 4.3 will allow me to experience the best of both worlds—raiding with people I know and have a vested interest in seeing succeed, without feeling locked out of running larger, more epic raids.
All in all, between the upcoming storylines and upgraded game systems, I'm becoming more and more excited about the next big patch by the day, and that excitement is the reason why I'm trying to get back into blogging—I finally feel like I have something to say again.
The other part of it about how World of Warcraft has changed these past few years. There are, at the very core, two reasons why I play World of Warcraft—the story and the raiding. The storytelling in Cataclysm has been leaps and bounds better than its predecessors, and I have to give major kudos to Dave Kosak for that. Having major lore characters actually going out into the world and doing things is fun to watch, and getting to help them do those things is a joy to experience. Getting to see the plot unfold first-hand is amazing, and my only real problem with it is that the factional divide locks me out of experiencing some very key moments in Alliance lore unless I play a Horde character (such as the full story of Gilneas). Unfortunately, the storytelling does not make for a particularly blog-worthy experience unless I decide to take things in a more RP-centric direction, such as Flinthammer Hall or Travels through Azeroth and Outland, because everyone who is interested in the story can simply log into the game and experience it for themselves.
As such, most of my blogging desire is a result of the raiding aspect of the game—an aspect which I've been equal parts frustrated and content with for since Cataclysm launched. It's not so much with how Blizzard is handling raids (although I'm saddened that Blizzard's 10/25 raid lockout changes have essentially wrecked my old raid group), but rather the inescapable feeling that I'll eventually have to move on from my raiding group of the past 6-7 years if I'm ever to find the style of raiding I'm looking for. The fact of the matter it that, among other things, 10-mans are just not my thing. The days of Upper Blackrock Spire and running Karazhan weekly alongside the 25-man raids during the Burning Crusade have firmly implanted into my head the idea that 10-mans are supplemental large dungeon groups rather than raids proper, and it's an idea I just can't shake no matter how hard I try. Hopefully, though, the introduction of the Raid Finder feature in patch 4.3 will allow me to experience the best of both worlds—raiding with people I know and have a vested interest in seeing succeed, without feeling locked out of running larger, more epic raids.
All in all, between the upcoming storylines and upgraded game systems, I'm becoming more and more excited about the next big patch by the day, and that excitement is the reason why I'm trying to get back into blogging—I finally feel like I have something to say again.
Wednesday, November 2, 2011
Horde Favoritism in Theramore's Future?
Warning: This posts contains spoilers for the upcoming Mists of Pandaria pre-launch in-game event. Normally, I wouldn't even talk about this since it comes from datamined/unreleased sources, but I'm going to take the fact that Blizzard has taken the time to respond to the posts (including explicitly stating what happens in the events I'm referring to) publicly on their official forums as a sign that they don't mind public discussion about this. If you would like to read the threads and the official responses, you can find the first thread here and the second one here. Click the little Blizz icons to be taken to the first (or next) Blizzard post.
The posts linked above reveal an interesting plot point for the upcoming Mists of Pandaria pre-launch in-game event: the Horde under Garrosh Hellscream's leadership attacks and destroys the port city of Theramore. After the many losses suffered by the Alliance in Cataclysm (relatively speaking, compared to losses suffered by the Horde), some Alliance players are taking the razing of Theramore to be a sign that Blizzard is outright favoring the Horde to be the ultimate victor of World of Warcraft.
I disagree. The fact of the matter is that the Horde instigating an escalated conflict with the Alliance is the only way forward that makes sense. Both the Alliance and the Horde have suffered huge losses over the course of recent WarCraft history, especially in Cataclysm, and as such, both factions are trying to consolidate their power and rejuvenate their resources. It just so happens that the way these two factions go about this is in diametrically opposing manners that cut to the very heart of what it means to be Alliance or Horde.
The Alliance would most likely undertake this consolidation by renewing and reinforcing the ties between its varying races, as well as seeking someone to champion the cause of the faction as a whole, such as happened during the Second War with Anduin Lothar (and later Turalyon). During BlizzCon, Blizzard revealed that a major quest plot point for Alliance players in the future will be to act as a squire for King Varian Wrynn as he undertakes herculean tasks for the other Alliance leaders in order to be worthy of becoming said champion. Indeed, in addition to this quest chain, steps towards closer diplomatic ties between the Alliance leaders are already being taken as Prince Anduin Wrynn has been sent to study the ways of the Holy Light under the tutelage of the Draenei, who had until then been about as far from the center of Alliance political power as possible.
The Horde, on the other hand, is in the worst shape it has ever been in. The new WarChief, Garrosh Hellscream, is despised by most of the other Horde racial leaders. Cairne is dead by Garrosh's hand and Magatha Grimtotem's treachery, Sylvannas misses no opportunity to show her contempt for Garrosh, Vol'jin has been exiled and trusts Garrosh so little that he even sent emissaries to Stormwind City to ask for aid in the wake of the Zandalari resurgence, Trade Master Gallywix is certainly using the Horde for his own ends, and who knows what Lor'themar Theron is up to. The most obvious and orcish solution? Pick a fight with the Alliance to force Horde leaders to unite under the WarChief's banner.
Additionally, some posters in the above-linked threads are complaining that the next step they fear Blizzard may take after Theramore's destruction would be another Alliance loss with no consequence for the Horde. Personally, I don't think that's very likely because the lore itself does not bear that out. When we look at why the Alliance hasn't retaliated against Horde aggression thus far, two primary reasons come immediately to mind: 1)there were urgent matters at hand with significantly higher stakes; and 2)two powerfully influential proponents of peace were in perfect position to mitigate an Alliance military response.
The Theramore incident takes place after Deathwing's death, in the lead-up to the Mists of Pandaria expansion—an expansion in which Blizzard emphasized that there were not going to be any overarching doomsday plots that would suppress the conflict between the Alliance and the Horde. Even if we were to completely ignore Blizzard's emphasis on factional conflict, the fact that there is no imminent threat from the Burning Legion or Lich King or Old God-controlled dragon aspect putting all of Azeroth in jeopardy means that point number 1 above ceases to be. In other words, the Alliance can stop focusing on whether or not there will even be a tomorrow and start focusing on what kind of tomorrow they wish to live in—and chances are said tomorrow will not include a unified Horde threatening their stability at every turn.
As for the second point, the two characters preventing the military might of the Alliance from turning to face the Horde were Prince Anduin Wrynn and Lady Jaina Proudmore. As mentioned earlier, Prince Anduin is off studying in the Exodar, conveniently out of the way and unable to talk his father out of war. Lady Jaina Proudmore, on the other hand, is caught right at the epicenter of the conflict. Something tells me that this time she's not going to advocate for peace after the Horde levels her city.
All in all, I'm excited, because if WarCraft past is any predictor of the WarCraft future, the Alliance is about to show the Horde exactly why you don't rouse a sleeping lion from its slumber. I can't wait. >=)
The posts linked above reveal an interesting plot point for the upcoming Mists of Pandaria pre-launch in-game event: the Horde under Garrosh Hellscream's leadership attacks and destroys the port city of Theramore. After the many losses suffered by the Alliance in Cataclysm (relatively speaking, compared to losses suffered by the Horde), some Alliance players are taking the razing of Theramore to be a sign that Blizzard is outright favoring the Horde to be the ultimate victor of World of Warcraft.
I disagree. The fact of the matter is that the Horde instigating an escalated conflict with the Alliance is the only way forward that makes sense. Both the Alliance and the Horde have suffered huge losses over the course of recent WarCraft history, especially in Cataclysm, and as such, both factions are trying to consolidate their power and rejuvenate their resources. It just so happens that the way these two factions go about this is in diametrically opposing manners that cut to the very heart of what it means to be Alliance or Horde.
The Alliance would most likely undertake this consolidation by renewing and reinforcing the ties between its varying races, as well as seeking someone to champion the cause of the faction as a whole, such as happened during the Second War with Anduin Lothar (and later Turalyon). During BlizzCon, Blizzard revealed that a major quest plot point for Alliance players in the future will be to act as a squire for King Varian Wrynn as he undertakes herculean tasks for the other Alliance leaders in order to be worthy of becoming said champion. Indeed, in addition to this quest chain, steps towards closer diplomatic ties between the Alliance leaders are already being taken as Prince Anduin Wrynn has been sent to study the ways of the Holy Light under the tutelage of the Draenei, who had until then been about as far from the center of Alliance political power as possible.
The Horde, on the other hand, is in the worst shape it has ever been in. The new WarChief, Garrosh Hellscream, is despised by most of the other Horde racial leaders. Cairne is dead by Garrosh's hand and Magatha Grimtotem's treachery, Sylvannas misses no opportunity to show her contempt for Garrosh, Vol'jin has been exiled and trusts Garrosh so little that he even sent emissaries to Stormwind City to ask for aid in the wake of the Zandalari resurgence, Trade Master Gallywix is certainly using the Horde for his own ends, and who knows what Lor'themar Theron is up to. The most obvious and orcish solution? Pick a fight with the Alliance to force Horde leaders to unite under the WarChief's banner.
Additionally, some posters in the above-linked threads are complaining that the next step they fear Blizzard may take after Theramore's destruction would be another Alliance loss with no consequence for the Horde. Personally, I don't think that's very likely because the lore itself does not bear that out. When we look at why the Alliance hasn't retaliated against Horde aggression thus far, two primary reasons come immediately to mind: 1)there were urgent matters at hand with significantly higher stakes; and 2)two powerfully influential proponents of peace were in perfect position to mitigate an Alliance military response.
The Theramore incident takes place after Deathwing's death, in the lead-up to the Mists of Pandaria expansion—an expansion in which Blizzard emphasized that there were not going to be any overarching doomsday plots that would suppress the conflict between the Alliance and the Horde. Even if we were to completely ignore Blizzard's emphasis on factional conflict, the fact that there is no imminent threat from the Burning Legion or Lich King or Old God-controlled dragon aspect putting all of Azeroth in jeopardy means that point number 1 above ceases to be. In other words, the Alliance can stop focusing on whether or not there will even be a tomorrow and start focusing on what kind of tomorrow they wish to live in—and chances are said tomorrow will not include a unified Horde threatening their stability at every turn.
As for the second point, the two characters preventing the military might of the Alliance from turning to face the Horde were Prince Anduin Wrynn and Lady Jaina Proudmore. As mentioned earlier, Prince Anduin is off studying in the Exodar, conveniently out of the way and unable to talk his father out of war. Lady Jaina Proudmore, on the other hand, is caught right at the epicenter of the conflict. Something tells me that this time she's not going to advocate for peace after the Horde levels her city.
All in all, I'm excited, because if WarCraft past is any predictor of the WarCraft future, the Alliance is about to show the Horde exactly why you don't rouse a sleeping lion from its slumber. I can't wait. >=)
Tuesday, May 4, 2010
Cataclysm's Shared 10/25 Raid Lockouts
This is a copy/paste of a post I made in the World of WarCraft Cataclysm forums. It's my argument against the shared raid lockout system Blizzard is planning on implementing in Cataclysm. Feel free to head on over and post in that thread, or post your thoughts here as comments.
I realize that in Wrath, raiding became a bit too much and caused people to feel forced to run both formats of current tier content (10 and 25) in order to feel competetive. However, while I can certainly appreciate the other changes made to promote more balanced play habits, I don't think that shared lockouts for 10s and 25s is the proper solution. Here are some of the reasons why I think shared lockouts are unfair, and why I think alternative proposals should be considered:
Equalizing loot across both formats, capping point gain, and instituting a "no double-dipping on boss drops" mechanic more than adequately fixes the problem of players feeling forced to run both raid formats without unfairly punishing players who enjoy raiding both formats on a single character. Please reconsider the shared lockout decision.
I realize that in Wrath, raiding became a bit too much and caused people to feel forced to run both formats of current tier content (10 and 25) in order to feel competetive. However, while I can certainly appreciate the other changes made to promote more balanced play habits, I don't think that shared lockouts for 10s and 25s is the proper solution. Here are some of the reasons why I think shared lockouts are unfair, and why I think alternative proposals should be considered:
- The conversion of the badge/emblem system into a points system that caps the higher tier of points means that players will no longer be so compelled to run every current-tier raid possible to maximize emblem gain. Since there's no guarantee that any given raid will cause players to reach the maximum weekly point cap, the shared lockout system unfairly prevents people who would rather raid for their points by forcing them to run random heroics. Why not allow people to cap their points via 10s + 25s in addition to the 10s + random heroics, 25s + random heroics, and 100% random heroics methods that Cataclysm will offer?
- PvPers are not locked out of one version of content because they participate in another, so why should PvEers be forced to choose only one avenue of progression? Since regular BGs and rated BGs are the same content that players might get sick of, shouldn't doing one lock players out of the other so they don't burn out? Or since arenas and rated BGs both offer the same rewards, shouldn't players be forced to pick their poison and only be allowed to progress via one format in any given week? No, of course not. So why should raiders be unfairly limited so? There are alternative options, such as preventing raiders from double-dipping on drops by limiting them to only be able to receive loot from the first incarnation of any given boss they see that week, whether it be the 10-man version or the 25-man version. Reputation can be similarly limited, and point gain is already capped as mentioned above.
- Shared lockouts unfairly punish players who like raiding both formats but dislike playing alts. How is the argument of "if you want to run both formats, run one with an alt" acceptable to Blizzard when changes have been consistantly made to make other similar arguments invalid? Arguments such as:
- "if you want to tank, roll a Warrior tank alt"; or
- "if you want to DPS, roll a pure DPS class alt because hybrids are only for healing"; or
- "if you don't like your character, reroll a new character"; or
- "if you don't like your server, reroll on a different server"; or
- "if you don't like your faction, reroll on the opposite faction"; or
- "your complaints about your class are all irrelevant because you have the option to roll a new character of a different class", etc.
Alts have not been arbitrarily used to deny characters access to the content their players enjoy before, nor have they been used as an excuse to dismiss players' complaints before (at least not by Blizzard), so why is "just roll an alt" an acceptable response now? Dual specs, character recustomization, server transfer, and faction change are all geared at breathing new life into players' characters so that no one feels forced to reroll or create an alt if they don't want to, so why should raiding formats be an exception?
Equalizing loot across both formats, capping point gain, and instituting a "no double-dipping on boss drops" mechanic more than adequately fixes the problem of players feeling forced to run both raid formats without unfairly punishing players who enjoy raiding both formats on a single character. Please reconsider the shared lockout decision.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
