The Daily Quest: Patch 3.2 Madness
by Adam Holisky 
Jun 25th 2009 at 9:00PM
- Runeforge Gossip isn't very happy with the recent Death Knight Q&A.
- I am a Paladin... has an initial reaction to Paladins on the Patch 3.2 PTR.
- Banana Shoulders takes a great look at Epic Gems and Jewelcrafting in Patch 3.2.
- Matticus thinks the emblem changes in Patch 3.2 are great.
- Mystic Chicanery talks about the add-on Power Auras.
Filed under: Items, Jewelcrafting, Raiding, Death Knight, The Daily Quest
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Worcester Jun 25th 2009 9:57PM
Should have added...
The Rogues remain silent... which is somewhat troubling.
Worcester Jun 25th 2009 9:58PM
And aren't you glad I didn't say... well... you know!
talkingmike Jun 25th 2009 10:44PM
That Death Knight is just complaining to complain. He's twisting around the responses so that they align with his own Jump To Conclusions mat ("We don't really care about 2h Frost anymore"). He carps about already knowing everything there from the recently released patch notes and bitches about the questions people posed. And still, he doesn't mention what he wants to see answered...
Khon Jun 26th 2009 12:10AM
I agree with talkingmike. Don't waste your time at Runeforge Gossip. Nothing but QQ there.
And please, wow.com - don't link every crap blogpost that drops into your lap.
Bregor Jun 26th 2009 1:21AM
Um, did you read until the end?
"Questions didn’t address any of the important issues in any detail (ArPen, itemization, tanking, 2h Frost…)"
Sounds like he said what he wanted addressed after all.
RG has this Q&A dead to rights. It says nothing useful to a PvE DK, especially a tank. It would have been really interesting to hear some logic why WotN was nerfed, then the un-nerfed version was combined with Cheat Death and given to Paladins. No, instead, we get this junk.
Luanai Jun 26th 2009 2:48AM
Indeed, Runeforge Gossip needs to QQ less.
Not like any other class got huge, revealing "answers" in the Q&As.
Olicon Jun 26th 2009 3:12AM
No one other than Shaman (and possibly Hunters and Warlocks) will be happy with their Q&A, since they won't be told they're receiving a big buff.
From an outsider (not playing WoW currently), I think the Q&As answer the biggest questions being thrown around the forums very well. The problem comes from the fact that a lot of these answers aren't "we'll buff you to kingdom come".
shopshopshop Jun 25th 2009 11:30PM
"It also carries the risk that all Frost death knights feel like they have to go dual-wield. This latter part isn’t necessarily a goal, but could be the outcome. We think in this case our only option is to remove some player choice in order to provide a real choice in other areas." -GC
This implies to me that they aren't interested in maintaining 2h Frost if the changes they are making to allow DW to be viable somehow end up making 2h terrible. Also, I said I'd like to see more detailed (i.e. less vague) answers about things like ArPen, itemization, 2h Frost, tanking, etc. I understand they are not obligated to provide me with answers, but if they put out something called a class Q&A I really don't need to know that Death Knights use runes and not mana or energy or rage.
Luanai Jun 26th 2009 3:12AM
I take it you are the author of the DK blog in question.
If you looked at the other Q&As, you would have seen the lack of in-depth discussion coming, and furthermore, they did touch some upon the points you mentioned.
Also, QQ. Mages were told Blizzard would be changing Fire up to be a lot more pvp-viable in 3.1, and Frost would be a lot more pve-viable.
We didn't get this. In fact, we got a changed Improved Scorch, Replenishment for Frost and Mirror Images that didn't ruin our polymorphs. Compare that to the HUGE changes practically any class got for 3.1.
But I understand when blizzard have to make compromises, and these Q&As while maybe not very in-depth is still a nice dialog with the developers, and people like you who just QQ MORE when we get information is the reason why stuff like this is so rare.
I commend developers like Ghostcrawler for being able to put up with the incredible whine the community manage to spew out.
tw34k Jun 26th 2009 3:08AM
Sure some of his comments were a bit snarky but realistically its not too far off base, who ever proposed some of those Q&A questions really doesnt have a clue, half the information we knew, and there is still no true justification.
The real issue alot of us face is poor community communication. The class changes, spell changes and direction of the DK class have always had very little if any explanation or justification, Most serious plays take the changes deal with it and move on, and end of the day theres nothing any one can do about it.
But it would be nice if the development team took on some of the serious issues and suggestions players have, and actually tried working towards bettering the class, but this of course would be no easy task. I guess all we can do is deal with the changes work with what we have and hopefully in a year the class might be close to where it should be.
Luanai Jun 26th 2009 3:15AM
"But it would be nice if the development team took on some of the serious issues and suggestions players have, and actually tried working towards bettering the class"
This is what Blizzard does on a daily basis. They don't have their development team reading the forums because of the great community.
talkingmike Jun 26th 2009 11:19AM
"But it would be nice if the development team took on some of the serious issues and suggestions players have"
Do I want to hear the development team respond to players' perceptions of serious issues? Yes, by all means. But please accept the answer you get.
Do I want to hear the development team respond to player suggestions? HELL NO. Player suggestions are lightly-veiled wishlists that would make that particular class the God-Mode of WoW.
Call me a Blizzard Fanboi, but I believe they want the game to be the best it can be for ALL classes. Not just yours. Or mine either.
tborel2008 Jun 30th 2009 6:46AM
haha cant w8 so rdy for the new patch..lol there puttin it on as i type..lmfao