255: A Simpler Cataclysm

BeeRye

New member
Mar 4, 2009
327
0
0
You can simplify the game, but that won't stop the dependence on theorycrafting whatsoever. People go to sites like elitist jerks not only because the have no reasonable idea how to play their class, but because they are too lazy to make any attempt to do so. So all that would happen is that the articles about what specs to take will change to articles about what spec to take when X class is in your party (which has already been done if you ever played a raid stacking rogues with HaT). People won't ever think for themselves, they will still just copy the few players who actually work out the most efficient method of playing. The strategies will change, but most people won't notice because they will be too busy waiting for someone else to figure it out for them.
 

ZephrC

Free Cascadia!
Mar 9, 2010
750
0
0
Hopeless Bastard said:
ZephrC said:
Hopeless Bastard said:
"simplicity = more strategy" is the same as "ignorance is strength." Its doublespeak.

Simplicity just reduces options. Fewer options means less strategy. Less strategy means less gameplay. Less gameplay means wow is just a work simulator.
Yes, because chess is clearly for people less intelligent than WoW players.

I'm pretty sure there's an ideal amount of complexity. It's just slightly more than an intelligent person can easily understand. Video games generally have billions of times that much complexity. That means instead of actually thinking and trying things out and getting a feel for how things work, you simply stumble around blindly until something kinda works without having any idea why or how, or you get a computer to figure the answer out for you. There is absolutely zero strategy involved in that.

Frankly, I think Blizzard is trying to take WoW away from the people in this thread and give it back to people that speak English. And I applaud them for it.
A: I'd love to know the games you're playing with "billions of times the complexity an intelligent person can easily understand." If you're doing the stupid thing, and trying to argue every single line of code equals more complexity, sure. But in reality, where I live, the code of a game is equal to the individual atoms that make up the board and each piece of a chess set. They are what allows the game to exist but have little affect on how the game is played.

B: Chess has sixteen pieces spread across six piece types that at the highest levels need to function in perfect tandem to achieve anything other than crushing defeat. This is good balance.

If you boil everything down to what it actually affects, then wow has fifteen total "stats." To each individual class, only five really matter. Three of which will be at sufficient levels simply as a side-effect of wearing the best gear. This is terrible balance.

The problem isn't that there are too many stats, the problem is powercreep hasn't been balanced properly, rendering 2/3rds of wow's stats irrelevant to each individual class. Instead of taking the proper approach to fixing their game, they're simply cutting away all the sharp corners to make the game more accessible.

[random last line, that I think is really, really profound, but just makes me look like a retard]
Hey, that last line is exactly what it claims to be! :p

Anyway, you just claimed that every single character in WoW has ten useless stats and five useful ones. Even if I bought your idea of complexity=strategy you still lose nothing from them changing it so everyone just has five useful stats. Do you honestly think the game would be more fun if you had fifteen stats and every one of them was useful? How many different things can a stat even do in WoW? How would new people ever figure out which of those stats were better? The best strategic games are the ones where new players can figure out the basic idea and play. They can make their strategies themselves, instead of having to get them from other players that got them from a computer.
 

incoherent

New member
May 7, 2007
38
0
0
People have overly high expectations for the gear simplification in Cataclysm. At present, unless some other major change is announced, each player will have maybe one fewer stat to balance on gear than they do in WotLK, and in several cases they will have the same number of stats to balance.

There are some good things, of course. The removal of armor penetration is wonderful. (If you're a non-WoW player and still reading this, armor penetration is a stat so complicated that the math nerds mentioned several times in this article/thread thought it was bugged until one of the developers came in and posted in excruciating detail how it worked [http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=16473618356&sid=1&pageNo=4#77].) Making the "white" stats (stamina/strength/agility/intellect/spirit) actually useful to people besides healers and tanks is a good change, but it doesn't reduce the complexity of the game all that much.

And then they announced the mastery stat, which does something different for every spec of every class and will inevitably cause a giant headache for everyone, much like armor penetration currently does for physical DPS.

The continual simplification of the raiding game is another matter entirely, but I won't wade into that flamewar.
 

ZephrC

Free Cascadia!
Mar 9, 2010
750
0
0
Hopeless Bastard said:
People aren't going to start suddenly thinking for themselves. The people currently hanging on EJ's every word, are simply going to continue hanging on EJ's every word. If the dumbing down of the game alienates people who actually liked putting a modicum of thought into the game, those currently hanging on EJ's every word are going to find someone else to tell them how to play. These people aren't going to stop being thick if blizzard applies spell haste to agility or armor penetration to intelligence. They aren't going to start thinking for themselves if theres less to think about. They're just going to continue demanding someone think for them.

But... yea, how does complexity not equal strategic thinking? If, during the years in which chess was still in a state of change, someone came to the conclusion that "pawns are weak, lets remove them," would that have made chess more strategic? I played chess with some black kid in 7th grade, and he was taught you could move into check. Meaning the next move ends the game. Does that make chess more strategic?
If somebody decided to make a version of chess where every pawn had a different way of moving and there were twice as many pieces and the whole thing happened on a 16x16 grid would that make it more strategic? I would say no. No human mind is capable of processing that level of complexity, so the game would simply be more random from a human point of view, and no human would ever be able to compete with a computer. But that's how video games try to implement strategy.
 

Jaded Scribe

New member
Mar 29, 2010
711
0
0
I'm all for simplifying the stat system. It was crazy-bogged down and complicated. As a BM hunter, I wanted to stack Attack Power because my pet benefited from straight AP rather than my agility. If I wanted to try Survival, it practically required a whole new set of gear, gems and enchants.

I'm excited about talent tree changes too. I love the idea of bring the class, not the spec. I get tired of being pigeon-holed into one specific spec. I miss playing as BM. I would love to see it get buffed to the point of being competitive again.
 

Prophetic Heresy

New member
Dec 26, 2009
131
0
0
I enjoyed the article very much, especially the nod at D&D 4th edition. It's a refreshing change of pace to hear somebody besides me or my best friend say that it's a well made game.

Personally, complex group synergy would be a massive selling point for me in any game. I know that in most JRPGs party synergy is a main component of the gameplay, but I hate everything else in JRPGs with a passion. I mean, I told anyone who would listen that FF sucked before I even owned a computer. But that's neither here nor there.

Bottom Line: If it makes the MMO's in general about more than Tank/Healer/DPS, I'll be glad.
 

kementari

New member
Mar 18, 2008
159
0
0
Jeff Groves said:
The one variable that a strategy guide can't predict is your personal group composition. With 10 classes, each of whom can choose between 3 talent specializations, there are more potential combinations for a 10-man raid than there are current WoW subscribers. What if your talent spec not only affected yourself, but everyone in the raid as well?
This was a great, insightful article until you brought this up as a "solution". You must realize that if raid makeup and how certain specs' abilities affect the raid were a pivotal core mechanic EJ would eventually figure out which precise grouping of classes would contribute the most DPS, the most HPS, the most survivability, etc., just like any other variable. (In fact, this already happens - "You need a (spec) (class) to take down (boss)" - and it's a travesty.)

In this, like in everything else, simplicity is the key to allowing players to have the most freedom. E.g., for a 10-man, you need two tanks, three healers, and five DPS - the rest is up to you.

Does this lead to the overwhelming ultra-simplification we've been seeing in World of Homogenizationcraft since mid-TBC? For better or for worse, yeah. But the devs have to choose simplicity OR complexity - trying to straddle the gap between them just leads to disaster.
 

^=ash=^

New member
Sep 23, 2009
588
0
0
Plinglebob said:
Is it sad that I could identify the UI overlay on the title picture as being a Dwarf Priest's?
haha yea i see it, Shadow Word: Pain and Stone Skin (at least i think its stone skin):p

OT: i really enjoyed reading this article and i have to agree, while reading i was picturing the possible talent trees, and tag-team dynamics.

The game has become complicated, with talents, glyphs, gems, the optimum gear, buffs etc.
 

solidstatemind

Digital Oracle
Nov 9, 2008
1,077
0
0
Late to the party, but there are a couple of things I think it needs to be pointed out:
Somebody said that everyone could see all the content in tBC. This is factually incorrect. The Vials of Eternity attunement questline allowed only 'teh hardcorez' (of which I was one) into Hyjal (and thus BT as well) until they lifted that requirement. Of course, if you had completed the attunement, you got a title: Hand of A'dal, but then everybody got to run BT and MH. And it worked.

Does that sound familiar?

Honestly, there are arguments on both sides of the fence, but you really need to consider that Blizzard isn't in the business of making games that only appeal to a small percentage of the fanbase- if they want to keep the subscriber numbers up, they must appeal to the widest range (and skill levels) of players possible.

Now I understand the disappointment that some of the more competitive types might feel, not being able to flash their '1337 G34rZ in Dalaran, but isn't that void filled by the server-first titles (if the regular ones aren't cool enough)? I actually think titles are better, because eventually everyone can get gear-- heck, they don't even have to be that good, they can just pay to be carried through a raid (I saw some real terribad rogues with Warglaives), but there are only TWENTY FIVE people who have Death's Demise, Celestial Defender, etc. per realm.

Oh, and to the person who pointed out the paradox of 'Need Gear to Raid; Need to Raid to get Gear', the whole point of the Frost Emblem system is to allow players who can't regularly get raids to gear up. Yes, it's very very slowly (which prevents oversaturation), and yes, the best stuff is still going to be gotten out of Raids, but you can eventually meet the gear requirements.

Which actually brings me to the OT: I am also looking forward to Cataclysm because I've long despised the Min/max attitude where if you play a certain class, you "have" to play a certain spec, and "have" to have certain gear, gems, and enchants, or else your 'a N00blet!' Narrowing the stats will possibly (not for sure) allow for more flexibility. At least, I hope it does.

Plus, it really looks like they're doing just as fantastic a job with the art and the design as they did with Wrath. It should be fun.
 

mptothedc

New member
Jul 23, 2009
192
0
0
Seems like people are just mad the game is changing.... but really the game has come to just copying the person with better gear than you. I think making everybody differ, and utilize their abilities, over their max dps spec will make the game much more interesting. Personally, I feel that WoW has become fairly boring and is in need of a dire change.
 

Three Dawg

New member
May 31, 2010
2
0
0
I for one am glad the game is taking this uncomplicated direction, if only because it'll cut back on the whole "WoW subscription = No life" stereotype. However, sadly nothing Blizzard does can make the actual people who play the game improve. What I mean by that is, the reason I dropped my subscription in the first place is because of the horrible community that's even worse then Xbox lives.

Hopefully Cataclysm is good enough to bring me back in, I do sort of miss my Orc Hunter.
 

Nohra

New member
Aug 9, 2008
143
0
0
Some of the problems with the level of synergy characters have in DnD being brought to WoW:

1.) People play classes they enjoy. Each of the ten classes behave very differently, and in a game like WoW, where certain composition is expected in 10 or 25 man raids (2 tanks, 2 healers, 6 DPS on average for 10s, 2-3 tanks, 5-7 healers, and 15-18 DPS for 25s), the only rule for 4e is that you want a minimum of one striker, one controller, one leader, and one defender. Any of the classes in DnD can double up effectively, but in say, five man instances, going with a pair of tanks or healers can be hindering. The same is true of going with four healers or four tanks in a ten. Enrage timers have made fights in WoW exceedingly precise in what they require to be completed. Not only that, but there are only four healing classes and four tanking classes (two classes are also capable of being tanks or healers).

2.) Arena. This is the constant thorn in the side of many PvErs and PvPers alike (especially BG enthusiasts). Arena has greatly modified PvE tactics over time because of certain abilities or talents that were causing immense problems in PvP, but were just fine in PvE. The Fan of Knives nerf for Combat (removing the interrupt effect from Throwing Specialization) was one example of this, FoK interrupt was required for a few fights in Ulduar, which was the highest raid at the time, but the ability for a single rogue to interrupt five people all at once was just too much.

3.) Fight balancing. Fight balancing WILL be modified over time to favor certain combinations of synergistic characters, because their potential for DPS or what have you would otherwise completely trivialize an encounter. This in turn would make it difficult for any other group to succeed, because their maximum potential is very limited. But what do I know, I run with four elemental shaman (currently one of the lowest max potential DPS, if not the lowest) and no rogues. :u

Anyways. I look forward to the Cata changes myself, it'll be nice not having ArPen as a stat anymore. But then, it was a stat that played favorites, and frost/UH DKs, ret paladins, enh shaman, and 2/3rds of hunters were not on that list.
 

Rack

New member
Jan 18, 2008
1,379
0
0
I certainly agree with the sentiment here, complexity is not strategy, making knights move 17 spaces forwards, 3 to the right, then 4 to the left followed by 15 backwards adds nothing to the game. But WoW is not a strategy game and I'm unsure the removal of stats here are the ones you would remove to promote strategy.

Spellcasters for example will retain Spirit, Intellect and Haste as offensive options. Decisions between Spirit and Haste make total sense they affect the speed at which you deal damage or heal versus your longevity. That's a simple tactical choice which adds richness next to decisions to increase your defense. Throw in defensive spells and you've got a nice pattern. But with Intellect affecting total mana AND spell damage you're almost certainly introducing EJ syle formulae bashing. Which is better, 10 intellect or 5 spirit and 5 haste? Their functional effects are nigh identical but one will increase your total effectiveness compared to the other. If they were balanced at all levels then you could play the effects of haste vs spellpower but the coupling of mana to intellect rather than spirit muddies the issue unnecessarily. Ironically the old system was probably less complex, if they had just streamlined the formulae they could have increased clarity without pissing off half the player base.
 

anaximanes_1978

Big Bad Beast
Mar 20, 2004
6
0
0
I wish they would add a thing you could click to make ANY instance in the whole game from Ragefire Chasm all the way to Northrend Heroic, or at least match a level, like lvl 80. Playing old school dungeons that would be hard again like in the old days and yet now drop lvl 80 loot would be fun and bring back memories too. It would also give players a HUGE choice when they want to do dungeons.
 

Idocreating

New member
Apr 16, 2009
333
0
0
anaximanes_1978 said:
I wish they would add a thing you could click to make ANY instance in the whole game from Ragefire Chasm all the way to Northrend Heroic, or at least match a level, like lvl 80. Playing old school dungeons that would be hard again like in the old days and yet now drop lvl 80 loot would be fun and bring back memories too. It would also give players a HUGE choice when they want to do dungeons.
The older dungeons were not hard because of dungeon/monster design. It was all about how they were tuned and how player characters worked. Go into the dungeon finder now and your more than likely to blitz through whatever dungeon you get into from vanilla content because player characters have been tweaked and improved at low levels to make the game less of a pain in the butt to play.

The actual encounters themselves are mostly tank and spanks (All the boss does is whack one target repeatedly) which are boring as hell and have been removed in TBC and Wrath content. The difficulty lied in low player character power and the fact that the trash was bunched together and would run to other packs at low health.
 

olicon

New member
May 8, 2008
601
0
0
Third page, and this discussion is still strictly about WoW PvE?
I was thinking the moment the word strategy comes in, someone would mention PvP-oriented aspect of the game, or other games.
I guess I'm just playing League of Legends a lot these days, and it makes me really bad how people fall into the trapping of cookie cutter builds.

While it is possible to math out some spreadsheet for the best healing or damage you can do, it becomes impossible in other type of games--like say, one where you cannot outheal all the incoming damage. Suddenly, the paradigm is shifted. Having a tank and a healer doesn't mean you got it made in moba games. It just mean that the tank will live a few seconds longer than normal, which is a few seconds longer than the squishies. I find the prospect that varying your spell timing by 1 sec can be the difference between life and death of the whole team to be very exciting. When the variable becomes so pronounce, more strategy and play style should arise..
and yet if you visit the LoL forums, you have a few "facts" that people live by. "X and Y items are bad", they proclaim. Anyone who think otherwise must be wrong, because there should only be 1 ultimate solution.
Then they come crying every time someone breaks the rule of the system, tried a new build, a new team composition, which destroy the old paradigm.

It's surprising that with all the advancements in the game, and all the new things that you could do, very few actually learned that there is more than 1 way to play a game.
 

marurder

New member
Jul 26, 2009
586
0
0
WOW engineered it's downfall by making the game revolve around GEAR more than player SKILL.

IF you want simple stats, look at an older game, for example CS. Sure there's math involved, but you don't need to think about it to play well.