When blizzard launch legacy servers would you want to see monks, death knights and demon hunters on it?
>>332963281
>When blizzard launch legacy servers
not gonna happen
no
and btw you dont want to that to do that that either. You think you do but you dont.
>>332964217
>you don't want to that to do that that
What
>>332964345
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuOYmqSF6OQ
>>332963281
yeah
monks are a cool class so why not
Well, obviously not in the form they were in later expansions. The transition from vanilla to TBC was a pretty smooth one (a bunch of new roles were created from spriest mana battery to protadin AoE tank) while such roles didn't previously exist or they were outright unviable but ultimately the average character power didn't increase too much (particularly after the new guardian/battle elixir was introduced soon after TBC launch, which largely evened out the extra power you got from the new (de)buffs by removing the power you could get from stacking all the consumables).
But then look at WotLK: Suddenly tank damage quadrupled, all tank specs got short cooldowns out the ass, flat mitigation improved, AoE-tanking and ability to catch mobs reached a whole new level, gearing got a lot easier etc. Healers and damage-dealers got similar buffs but not quite at the same magnitude. And now think what this does to the balance. Consider Brutallus, for example: Even if there hadn't been -30% buff to everything, the DPS requirements would suddenly have become trivial with Karazhan gear and the damage he dealt even during Stomp would have similarly become non-threatening because you could throw a cooldown at every Stomp. And this effect isn't the most pronounced on "gear check" bosses but the bosses with involved mechanics where improved damage while moving, DPS survivability cooldowns and such like make them disproportionally easier compared to how much the numbers you can put out changed.
You can't simply add death knights, cap them at 60/70 (with whatever abilities and talent tiers they'd have at that expansion, like Unholy DKs in TBC having 41pt talent Scourge Strike but no 51pt talent Summon Gargoyle) and maybe adjusting their damage to a level where it's "balanced". No, the entire DK toolkit is too powerful for the context it's in. Plus, DKs in vanilla/TBC simply don't fit thematically.
>>332963281
>When blizzard launch legacy servers
lol
>>332963281
no, are you retarded?
>>332965284
This. CC was much more important in BC, and in Wotlk, every instance was basically AOE EVERYTHING GG. No one gave a shit about cc.
This mentality also had an inverse effect on player attitude. If you can't nuke everything in one go, leave group and re queue. Instead of working together and overcoming the obstacle.
>>332965284
I ran into character count cap and kinda missed my point: In order to make the new classes even remotely balanced within the context they're put into, their abilities would have to be reworked to such an enormous degree it would be the same class in name only. Abilities like Icebound Fortitude, Death Grip, absurd self-healing ability and such like simply have no place in vanilla/TBC, and monks and demon hunters probably would probably face similar problems in WotLK.
In addition, if allowed to make any changes at all, neo-Blizzard would certainly ruin the games. And even if they weren't allowed to make changes per se, I have a hunch they'd manage to ruin them through fuckery like having buffed 5-man loots/ZA/AQ20/whatever available at vanilla launch, never mind releasing WotLK in 3.3.5a patch (which effectively renders all raids but ICC 99% obsolete). Or alternatively, putting the players through patching hell (have fun constantly patching your client with all the exploits and bugs still there and all the addons made for the final patch of the expansion).
Any of you play this?
Friend recommended it to me and its pretty fucking good
>>332966240
>Death Grip
Very vanilla like spell
Unfair and broken
Monk charge before it was removed would fit vanilla well too
>>332966129
Well, besides more powerful classes, it's also related to WotLK "heroics" (and T7/T9) tuning being just laughable. For example, WotLK "heroics" barely had any mobs as hard-hitting as a Ravenguard and Naxx literally had vanilla values or even removed mechanics for a lot of bosses.
>>332966938
I mean look at this shit.
>>332967661
wotlk naxx was the baby entry raid tho, classic naxx was the hardcore 1% only raid
>>332968041
>classic naxx was the hardcore 1% only raid
Maybe fully cleared, but even my casual guild killed few bosses there back then
But yeah, wotlk naxx just insult
>>332967661
And let's not forget about Anub'Rekhan's health being so low that you could skip the kite phase entirely after the first few raids (and ignore the nerubian adds for that matter and just let their inconsequential debuff stack on the tank who also only needs to press one (1) button and have the adds glued to him forever with no positioning or targeting required, just being in the general vicinity of the adds).
>>332968041
That's almost inconsequential when character power difference is 5-20x depending on what factor (DPS, survivability or whatever) you're looking at while only minute differences (about 30-50%) in numbers are enough to turn an encounter at the edge of mathematical possibility to one that's realistically impossible to fail at (unless there's some mechanic almost completely independent of gear, like Heigan dance or Mimiron Shock Blast/Rockets/Laser barrage). If Anub'Rekhan was nerfed by 50%, he'd have been PuGed by fresh 60s. Relative to the character power, WotLK Naxx version is equivalent to him having 20% of his original stats ("PuGable by naked level level 50s" level).
>>332966129
Not only that, but at the beginning of Cata CC was pretty important before everyone was geared in heroics. But Wrath babies complained and it was nerfed to shit.
