Did you see this?

#0 - March 16, 2009, 8:16 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Quoted from the "[Mage] Spirit "more useful" - still planned?" topic

Q u o t e:
Check back as many of GC posts as you can find (the wotlk beta forums would be good if they still existed):

1) He has played a warrior/tanker probably more than any other class.
2) He has no real understanding of mage mechanics and only makes very general statements regarding mages (easily shown to be misinformed).
3) He doesn't understand mana vs energy/runic power, doesn't understand hard oom as a DPSer, and doesn't understand caster dps class concerns (warlock, balance, elemental, mage) very much.

Simply, he misses the point because he's never played this role extensively and empathizes more with melee and tanker concerns.

This thread is full of people blue in the face of trying to explain to him how:

* energy/runic regen rate is equal to cast time.
* mages/boomkin have no benefit using mana over energy, runic power, and only a minor one over rage at the very beginning of the fight.
* downsides to mana are way more than downsides to any other resource.
* mages do not do significantly more damage while they have their resource that balances out the low dps they do when their resource runs out. this is a requisite mechanic to balance out mana vs other resources but has never been implemented.
* fights where rage and energy and mana are endless, mana dps does not change. rage and energy classes dps go through the roof.
* energy and rage and runic have no hard oom and have no drains.
* spirit will still be pointless to get for pve (and of course pvp) as long as it doesn't give BETTER dps than another stat. comparable is still pointless.

These and many other points have been made repeatedly, page_after_page, and you can hear the *whoosh* sound as they go right over his head each time.

Likewise it's pointless to try to engage him in an informed discussion about it, as his posts in this thread and others regarding mage and mana-dps mechanics should show.


This seems to be a very accurate psychoanalyst of your ideas and knowledge on the situation with mages and other mana-based casters. I'd just like to ask, is this true? If it is, we could work something out with you in order for you to understand what our problem is, would that be alright with you? For one thing, if we could get this all sorted out, you would fix about 2 classes and 3 other sub specs of other classes, which would go a long way to obtaining perfection, don't you agree?


EDIT: something I posted later in the topic as to what I'm asking with a little data (Example data, not true data) and what we actually want as Mages.

Q u o t e:
GC, You still don't understand why we ask for "infinite mana" as a DPS based class. This is because Melee has infinite resources themselves, they can never bottom out over a fight if it lasts forever, while a mana based class, can. (And I say you don't understand, as you were getting defensive instead of being truthful, what am I lead to believe other then this?)


For example, A rogue can do Mutilate every 6 seconds (Not counting his procs and everything.) Lets say this does 12K. Now he also has his Poisons and Melee attacks, which might be another 12K, so 24K every 6 seconds (Which is low, but I'm just making an example.)

Now, A Caster, does a 3 second cast for 12K. Then another 3 second cast for 12K. The Caster has done 24K in 6 seconds, same as the rogue.

THIS is where we get to our issue. We do the same DPS as a rogue, yes? The rogue could keep his DPS up forever until the boss dies or he dies, while a Mage will EVENTUALLY run out of mana, and will be unable to DPS. Now lets see what would happen if we gave the rogue infinite Energy compared to the mage with infinite mana.


6 mutilates every 6 seconds for 12K damage each, which is 72K damage over 6 seconds. Pllus poisons and white attacks for 12K, A total of 84K damage in 6 seconds (rogue GCD is 1 second I've heard, if it is not, I'll adjust numbers accordingly.)

Now, a mage does a 3 second cast for 12K, then another 3 second cast for 12K, which is 24K over 6 seconds.

The only difference, is that the Mage will now NEVER run OOM and be unable to DPS, just like the rogue could WITHOUT infinite energy, but giving the rogue the same benefit made his DPS jump up by 3.5/4x its amount. I'm saying this, as you say infinite resources isn't good (You said mana, but you really meant resources, as I've shown, unlimited mana just makes a caster able to DPS for as long as a rogue, while a rogue gains DPS off of it, which is what you were worried about.)


Now that the Melee/Caster discrepancy is done, I'd like to say what mages have been asking for. Mages have been asking for Lifetap, something to actively manage mana. All DPS mana classes should have this, then they could reliably manage mana, like Melee can manage rage/energy. Note, if a mage's Evo is interrupted in anyway, a mage will bottom out and be UNABLE to DPS.


#18 - March 16, 2009, 8:59 p.m.
Blizzard Post
During the beta, I told the active posters that I got 1 gold every time people dragged out certain tired catchphrases or arguments.

Among them were "broken promises" and "slap to the face" of course. But a big one is "It's clear nobody at Blizzard plays or understands my class." That one is making a comeback in recent days.

Aside from being both untrue and irrelevant, it is a logical fallacy. You subvert the process of trying to disprove the argument when you attack the person making the argument instead of the argument itself.

If your thesis is that mana needs to be unlimited in order for the game to be balanced, positing that Blizzard doesn't understand the issue is not a particularly strong way to prove your point.
#75 - March 16, 2009, 9:31 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
However you realize this is like tactic 101 in law school :-D, it may not be a legitimate tactic, but it succeeds never the less in soliciting feelings from a jury or a response from a dev :-D lol


The weird thing is, they are trying to use the tactic to solict feelings from the same people they are attacking.

And it got a response, but not at all on the topic they wanted.

I'm just saying, if there is a Blizzard class role forums drinking game (and who is to say there isn't?), you can imagine us all polishing one off when we read "Nobody there plays my class."
#80 - March 16, 2009, 9:32 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Stop feeding the trolls, GC. They never stop.


If I can make one other person stop and think, then I have done my job. :)
#85 - March 16, 2009, 9:33 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
why are you complaining, you are swimming in money at this point.


My mage needs mana pots for Ulduar.

Sorry, couldn't resist. :)
#92 - March 16, 2009, 9:37 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
Saying "Logical Fallacy" is a redundancy.


I actually have a philosophy degree (and a mage). I took logic courses.
#97 - March 16, 2009, 9:38 p.m.
Blizzard Post
I used "posit" intentionally. But I don't blame you for thinking I misspelled. I don't use a spellchecker because I think it makes me lazy.
#148 - March 16, 2009, 10:33 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
But, I personally would hope Blizzard's game designers would take a step back and realize that tired catchphrases or arguments are relevant.

The question i hope designers ask is, why are players constantly using this argument? Why do they feel let down? Why do they feel like we just made them irrelevant? Why do they feel the developers are out of touch with the player?

Just because a player isn't able to express (to your standards) why they feel betrayed, or why they feel something is going horribly wrong, doesn't deny the fact that they are actually feeling that. I find that very relevant.


This is a fair point, and we shouldn't be overly harsh on players who struggle to express themselves. That is particularly true for players for whom English is not their first language.

However, I do often find that the "slaps to the face" are brought out not because the players can't express themselves, but because they feel it makes their arguments stronger if they act upset, as if they are personally injured by the game design. Emotion certainly has its place in discussing a game that we (most of us anyway) all love. But I will still encourage players to try to frame their arguments better than accusing of us of being lazy, mean or ill-informed, which I can assure you are just not true.

Q u o t e:
GC, after reading the original post I really don't see why you got so upset. He sounded pretty reasonable to me.


Forum posts don't make me upset (though they do drive me to drink). I was poking gentle (I hope) fun at the the tactic of saying we don't understand class mechanics as an explanation for why we wouldn't make a particular change they wanted.

I do not have a level 80 of every class and spec in full T7 gear while also having a 2000 Arena rating. Nobody does. And that is not a prerequisite for being able to do game design on WoW. We do have all of the classes covered internally, and we gather a lot of data, run a lot of tests, and talk to a lot of players.