Posts with tag class-q-and-a

Every Wednesday, Chase Christian of Encrypted Text invites you to enter the world of shadows, as we explore the secrets and mechanics of the Rogue class. This week, we talk about the Rogue Q & A recently released by Blizzard.

Last week, Blizzard released the long-awaited (at least by me) Rogue Q&A series. Ghostcrawler and the rest of the community team answered many of our long-standing questions, and gave us some insight into where Rogues are headed as a class. You can read the full details of the Q&A that Eliah posted for us.

After reading the questions and answers, I breathed a sigh of relief. No hints or indications of any nerfs coming our way, and Blizzard actually acknowledged several longstanding flaws with the class. Not only that, but they actually provided possible solutions; I'll be taking them with a grain of salt. New Rogues are excited about our class' complexity and diversity, while experienced Rogues are proud that we are now respected as damage dealers instead of being seen as second-class DPS.

The highlights are after the cut.

The priest Q&A has just been released. This is the final Q&A in the entire class Q&A series, and has some answers that many in the Priest community have been looking for. The Rogue Q&A was also released this afternoon.

Some of the highlights of the Priest Q&A include:

• The Shadow tree needs to have more talents which affect overall damage, and less on DoT only damage. This is so the Shadow Priest isn't penalized during encounters in which DoTs are not usable.
• Dispelling DoTs is not too easy right now.
• Regarding the Glyph of Mind Flay: "...at this point we don't think it would be a problem if the glyph just bumped the range without the penalty. It's probably too conservative a glyph."
• Blizzard is considering removing the backlash from Shadow Word: Death if the target is within Execute range.
• Blizzard recognizes the disparity between Greater Heal and Flash Heal, but doesn't really offer any solid solution.
• There are no concrete plans to change Lightwell into something useful.
• Blizzard is not happy that Dispels can miss, but they don't have an easy fix for it.

The full Q&A after the break.

The class Q&A series continues with Rogue, the stabbiest class. Look for a more complete analysis later; for now, here's a quick summary, with the full Q&A after the cut. Priest is now the only class left, but don't despair, my clerical friends – I'm sure they saved the best for last. I hope.

• Rogues are for DPS. Historically, they have been "selfish" - little group utility. Right now they have better utility and synergy.
• They've always been strong in PvP, because of stealth, stun, and burst.
• The devs are happy with the way the combo point/finisher system is working right now.
• A proposed solution for Vanish! "...Vanish puts you in stealth for 1 second minimum no matter what else happens."
• Hunger for Blood is meant to boost PvE damage without doing much for PvP, and as such it works, but is boring. Changes are in store for the long run. They want it to be more reactive, and also put it back into PvP.
• They would like to make Subtlety competitive in PvE, but if they make it too good players will all switch to it because of the utility. Long-term, some Sub utility might become core, or some damage from other trees might become core so the choice is utility vs utility (not utility vs damage).
• Rogues underperform in dungeons, as a consequence of scaling so well in raids. If you're not doing good DPS in raids, "the problem exists between the chair and the keyboard."
• Rogues are too survivable when they can use all their tricks on one target, and too squishy when they can't. Long-term, they want to move some survivability to passive abilities.
• Combat Daggers is dead because Blizzard thinks that it was clunky and unfun.
• Don't expect more class-specific content any time soon - they would like to do it, but it's low on the priority list.

The full Q&A from Ghostcrawler and friends is below.

Good day folks and welcome to Scattered Shots. The column that takes a good look at what it takes to be a Hunter in the World of Warcraft. I am Eddie "Brigwyn" Carrington from the Hunting Lodge. This week we'll be reviewing the recently released Hunter Q&A.

The Hunter Q&A was like the other Class Q&As, a mixed bag of frustration, tease, and interesting concepts. It shouldn't be a surprise that we didn't get the details we wanted. Nor should it be a complete shock to you that some Hunters would feel disconnected between what players want versus what the Developers are concentrating on. Given all that, I still felt that this Q&A was overall pretty decent.

There is so much to review and discuss I've decided to break the Q&A out into 2 parts. Here's a quick highlight of the main things discussed in Part 1:

• Developers feel Survival Hunter spec is currently performing within normal operating parameters.
  
• Crowd Control still needs work.
• PvP has a big influence on PvE Class Balance
• Ammo remains a consumable because of technical difficulties.
  
• Ammo is a focus point on Hunter damage progression.
• Blizzard is hoping to cut the cost of Ammo to address the cost burden for Hunters.
• The Hunter "No Fire" zone will remain in effect.
• Development considers enhancing Hunter melee attacks.

All that is just in Part 1! So let's see what Ghostcrawler had to say.

As promised, there's a new version of the Hunter class Q&A up on the official forums. Very little has changed from the previous version, actually, but they did add the following question:

Q: Do we have plans to increase the number of stable slots available to hunters?

A:Obviously we increased it a lot in Wrath of the Lich King. We want to try and keep the pet as some kind of decision - they aren't supposed to be like mounts or titles where you just collect as many as you want. We expanded the size so that players could have say a Tenacity pet for soloing and a Ferocity pet for raiding, but we don't want every hunter to have every family available here. Now one potential problem are the Spirit Beasts, which are collected by hunters and not trivial to replace. We have also discussed expanding the Spirit Beast concept to have rare skins of other pet families (that otherwise don't convey a combat bonus). If we do that, we'd probably have to expand the stable slots.

We've also considered a model where the hunter doesn't even need a stable and can work more like a warlock where they can just summon their pets whenever they want - with the remote stable ability from the dual-spec feature, we're pretty close to that already. If we went this route then maybe the stable could just become pet storage in the same way your bank has all those Invader's Scourgestones and Zul'Gurub bijous that you don't use often but can't bear to part with.

That's all we can see that's changed with the Q&A.

In a somewhat surprising turn of events, the devs have decided to do a followup to the recent Druid Q&A, tackling certain things with more specifics rather than the general approach they took originally. The followup seems mostly aimed at Druid PvP, perhaps an omen of the future. It reminds me much more of the unofficial Shadow Priest Q&A that Ghostcrawler tackled, addressing very specific issues.

For convenience, the full followup can be read below.

Q: Players feel that the effect of Feral Cat Charge isn't as good as the Feral Bear Charge yet the cat charge has double the cooldown. What is the reasoning behind the cooldown difference of these two abilities?
A: Feral Charge Bear mirrors warrior Charge (15 sec), while Feral Charge Cat mirrors Shadowstep (30 sec). They are really different abilities. We just had to put them on a shared cooldown to keep the druid from using them back to back.

Q: Are we satisfied with the damage that Shred does without a bleed/mangle effect on the target compared to how much it does with the bleed effect?

Just days after the Druid Class Q&A, the blues have seen fit to post the Warrior edition. Look for in-depth analysis from our very own Warrior expert, Matt Rossi, soon. This purpose of this post is to get the news out there to you, dear readers, as fast as possible. Here's my very brief summary:

• Historically, Warriors have been dominant in tanking and competitive in DPS and PvP. Balance is in a "fairer place" now.
• Arms and Fury need a "hard look." They are happier with the Prot tree.
• "Arms is supposed to be about weapons and martial training and feel 'soldierly.' Fury is supposed to be about screaming barbarians in woad."
• They still want to get rid of stance penalties (like increased incoming damage in Berserker) eventually.
• In the future, Prot warriors will generate more rage through doing damage. Long-term, they need "a better solution to rage generation."
• "Block needs to be a percentage of damage blocked in order for the stat to do what we want" (though the frequency of block, and avoidance in general, would probably have to come down to compensate).
• They want tanks to not ignore DPS stats quite so much.
• Warriors have too much downtime when leveling.

Read on for the full Q&A with Ghostcrawler and friends.

Blizzard's class Q&A is back again, this time with a class that's near to my heart: Druid. I play my Druid more than my Priest these days (who says there's a healer shortage?), and I've grown pretty enamored with the class. But you didn't come hear to hear me talk about me. What did Ghostcrawler have to say on behalf of the dev team?

Every class Q&A so far has started with a section on the class's past and present.

• In original WoW, end-game Druids were basically healing-only.
• BC: Bears were pretty good; cats and (b)oomkin were probably still underpowered. This was the era of the hybrid tax.
• Wrath: all four specs are viable.

Of course, PvP is a bit different, with Resto's dominance in the BC era.

After the break we'll take a look a closer look at a few areas, and present to you the complete Q&A.

Once again, it's time for a Class Q&A with Ghostcrawler! Today Paladins get their chance to shine (previously: Shaman, Mage, Death Knight, Warlock).

As with the other Q&As, this one starts with a bit on what the idea is behind paladins, with a glance at their history and at their present.

• In the beginning: paladins were a "defensive buffing class...buffs were pretty much the entire reason you'd want to group with a paladin."
• End-game classic WoW: paladins were healers only.
• BC: paladins could tank, but were still mostly OTs.
• Wrath: "finally embraced all three specs."

Paladins still have several unique facets: bubbles, strong dispels, plate armor as a healer, and the Seal and Judgment system.

Itemization: so far in Wrath, MP5 wasn't particularly valuable, and they claim it wasn't inteded to be. They still think MP5 is undervalued right now, though, hence the buffs coming to it in patch 3.2. They also think Int/Crit based mana regen is a bit out of control, and furthermore than in patch 3.2, some Holy pallies might look into taking Haste.

Third in the class Q&A series is Death Knight. I thought it was going to be Warlocks, but I guess plans change. So far Shaman and Mage have been covered, and in each post the Ghostcrawler has been talking about the developer vision for the class past and future, as well as answering popular questions from the forums. What do they have to say about WoW's first hero class? Read on.

Introducing a new class to a game that didn't really have an empty niche was tricky, but they think they have succeeded - "perhaps too well." They like that there's a lot of room for variation in player skill.

In patch 3.2, they wanted to reduce DK AoE and defensive cooldowns, which they definitely did.

The resource system (runes and runic power) is a large part of what makes Death Knights unique. They also have a lot of medium-length cooldown (able to be used a few times per fight), and there's a lot of skill involved in knowing when to use them. DKs are also especially well-rounded, with a lot of versatility and a lot of tricks, which makes them at risk for being over-powered in PvP.

Second up in the class Q&A (Shamans were first) are Mages, those lovable glass cannons. Or are they? The Q&A opens with Ghostcrawler discussing public perception of the class, with a prompt of "a lot has changed since the days when the 'glass cannon' description was applied."

General

GC describes the mage as "the iconic caster:" deals magic damage from range. They should be versatile enough to do single-target damage, AoE damage, and crowd control, and every group should want one. (I'm noticing a trend here -- GC also described Shamans as a class every group should want. I guess every group should want all classes.)

They like the different feel between the three trees is in a good place, with Frostfire possibly providing a fourth aesthetic. They have decided that "king of AoE" is no longer a good niche to put any class in, so now they're trying to give both AoE and single-target to all DPS specs (with "extra effort" to make sure mages do good AoE).

The first answer post from the class Q&A series is up! 6:30 PM on a Tuesday night is not exactly when I expected this to drop, but I'm not complaining, and neither are most shamans, I expect. 4,400 words from the devs answering the community's questions is always nice. I've summarized the major points below; my summary may seem long, but it is only 20% of the original post.

As of Wrath, the goal is for all three Shaman trees to be viable in end-game raiding, and for Shaman DPS to be not necessarily quite as high as pure classes, but close; the goal is that "no raid worth its salt would turn down" any shaman out of concerns that the class is underpowered.

They do think Shamans are a bit underpowered in PvP, especially smaller Arenas, and view that as a problem. They mention particularly wanting to improve Shaman performance on 2v2s.