Help
Regional FlagColossus Smash: The 50% Band-aid is OldSource
avatar
Aark
Target Source
#1 - 2012/08/12 06:37:00 AM
Patch 4.1

Colossus Smash now ignores 50% of a hostile player's armor (PvP), but continues to ignore 100% of a non-player character's armor (PvE).


WARRIORS: 3v3 US
4% Representation > 2200
1% Representation > 2400
0% Representation > 2600

You still haven't nerfed Rogue PvP damage. You could easily nerf FW to 50% but you have instead allowed them to completely dominate competitive play.

You still haven't nerfed DoT damage in PvP even though DoT cleaves have ruined RBGs and cheesed 3v3/5v5.

I mean, with MoP coming out soon, is 50% CS really necessary?
And why have you not nerfed other classes in PvP as you have done to Warriors?

avatar
Game Designer
Target Source
#24 - 2012/08/12 08:57:00 PM
So when abilities work the same in PvE and PvP that's lazy design, and when abilities work differently in PvE and PvP that's lazy design? Got it.

avatar
Game Designer
Target Source
#257 - 2012/08/14 01:52:00 AM
I think GC's point is that the accusation of "lazy game design" is often just a hoity-toity way of saying "you're not doing something I want."

I mean, the point might be valid, I don't know anything about PVP and less about warriors, but the rhetorical jab of "lazy game design" is the new "slap in the face."


Yeah, this was really my point. I legitimately wasn't trying to troll anyone. As any long time readers know, I have a very sarcastic sense of humor, but it's not intended to convey disrespect for any of our players. At the same time, I'd recommend a pretty thick skin from anyone attempting to wade into our forums.

We get requests literally every day to have different sets of numbers in PvP and PvE so I found it slightly amusing that the argument here was that it was bad design to do so (which ironically is often an argument I use for why we don't do it more often).

I suspect the OP and other early posters really wanted to say "I want warriors to be more of a force in PvP and having a brutally hard-hitting Colossus Smash is one way to do that." I would have found that a much more solid argument than trying to argue that we had no choice but to buff Colossus Smash because it was somehow aesthetically offensive to have it work differently in PvP. Now, I still would have disagreed with that argument because higher burst damage is almost never a good way to make a spec desirable in PvP. It's usually just less fun for everyone.

Interesting thought experiment, if you're so inclined: compare the armor of a boss to the armor of a player.

You, of all people, should know that each player represents their own opinions, regardless of what other players have said.


I do appreciate that of course, but it's helpful when players recognize that too.

Ninety-nine percent of the time you post something on our forums, you're going to be engaging with other players, not us. We read everything of course, but we can't directly respond to it all. If I were a player, one of the first questions I would ask myself before posting is "How will other players respond to my post?" If you think other players will disagree with you or if you think your point will be controversial, then it's probably worth shoring it up even more carefully. That is often the distinction between a well-crafted argument and something that comes across as just venting.