@GC, What's happening to resto druids?

#0 - Feb. 27, 2009, 5:20 p.m.

I hate to make an @GC post, but I get the feeling that very significant resto druid changes are being made without any forewarning.

First we have the spirit nerf which greatly effects our most important stat and innervate.

Then we get a huge regrowth change.

Now I'm reading that lifebloom is being changed in a way that entices us to let it bloom instead of roll.

Do the devs not like how resto druid healing is being done right now? Should we expect the way we play this spec to be radically changed in 3.1?

If you don't want us rolling lifeblooms or spamming regrowth I wish you'd just say so. It would go a long ways towards heading off the knee-jerk reactions and form QQ that's going on.

Ghostcrawler

#79 - Feb. 27, 2009, 6:33 p.m.

You addressed a thread to me and then players proceeded to QQ all over it.

I will discuss the issue, but I don't want to reward threads like this. :(

Ghostcrawler

#173 - Feb. 27, 2009, 9:10 p.m.

Q u o t e:
This is a good thread though. I just read through it again and there's hardly any complaining. I don't see any profanity, account cancelling threats, or insults. What I do see is constuctive discussion and the exchange of ideas from both live and the PTR. This seems to be the type of thread blizzard would want to see on these forums.
GC's reply really confuses me. All I can guess is that he skimmed through the thread or condemned it because I put @GC in the title.
I suppose we're not getting an explanation for the huge resto druid changes here, but thanks for the feedback guys.

We delete a lot of objectionable posts. But that takes time we could better spend elsewhere. Depending on when you read the thread, it might look a lot better than it did when I initially saw it.

I shouldn't need to remind anyone that saying "But other people do it," is not a reasonable argument.

Every time I feel the need to make a post like this probably replaces a post I could be making about the actual game design. Is this really the discussion you want to have?

Ghostcrawler

#180 - Feb. 27, 2009, 9:55 p.m.

Q u o t e:
why didn't you just lock/delete this thread? you just leave it here with blue posts so people can continue to comment on what shouldn't have even existed?

Because the OP's question was totally valid and I wanted to address it, so I hoped someone would start a better thread, which happened.

I have also learned that locking threads like this leads to "They aren't going to answer" and "They lock threads that challenge their decisions." Neither is true, and I can shrug it off, but it can confuse the community.

Ultimately, we think these forums can be a lot better than they are. It's going to take some carrot and stick to get them there. A lot of players get that and try and call out someone who is dragging a good thread through muck with pointless posts. Maybe seeing my blue post will remind some players that they aren't supposed to use threads that way. If I hadn't posted, they might have just felt ignored or wondered if I had seen the post yet. In some ways, a post that says "I'm not going to address this topic because this is a bad post," is more useful, even though I agree it certainly doesn't stop people from posting in the thread. :)