#1 - 2013/06/13 09:01:00 PMNOTE: I would like to remind every poster here to be civil. We've done an excellent job on keeping the peace in this thread and have gotten SimC posters, popular Lock poster, many Twitter responses, and apparently lots of Blue attention. I would like to emphasize to, while not putting the rage away, not let yourself get carried away and post in a way that pushes the hope of reversal farther away. We can still show the devs that they're desperately, horrifyingly wrong about trying to implement this change, but we can do that with class.
"Drastic and unexpected changes that impact negatively on parts of the player base is something we should try to avoid as much as possible."
A continuation of the old thread.
Original post here: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/9280508340?page=1
Second thread here: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/9280358645?page=1
Fourth thread here: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/9280998834
(Third thread was locked, then re-opened and the fourth thread locked)
Currently Blizzard's position is to support the nerf on Warlocks with very little fundamental backing besides that "it seems too good".
Currently Holinka has been quoted for supporting the very same mechanics for Hunters for no other reason as it being a "niche", disregarding the fact that we are in an extremely similar situation.
As of now the class has very little mechanics to deal with the problems removing passive KJC will cause, and the revamped version will not change this situation as it will not be chosen most of the time. It leaves Warlocks with less mobility than Spriests or Boomkins, and leaves our 90 tier worse than Mages to the point where we can actually not select a talent and feel nearly no difference.
General — Does granting range players the ability to retain more and more damage on the move (as illustrated by the upcoming Lightning Bolt changes in 5.3) make it harder and harder to design encounters where melee DPS are not trailing behind?
Traditionally, the melee advantage was being able to do damage while moving, but now a lot of ranged are also good at movement. We could certainly go back in and prune a lot of cast-on-the-move and instant spells from casters, but on the other hand we know players think those abilities are fun and you can even argue that having to stand and “turret” as a combat mechanic feels a little dated. There is also a continuum here: casting Lightning Bolt while moving isn’t a big balance problem, but something like passive Kil’jaeden’s Cunning might be.
Rather than making casters terrible at moving, we’d rather develop a niche that melee are really good at. For example, we could emphasize that melee are really good at cleaving multiple targets, or they could be more survivable, or both. We are going to explore these ideas more.
Ghostcrawler has been actively defending the change on his Twitter, so I advise you to look there for more follow ups to his/Blizzards position. Generally, no factual reason has been presented as to why the team considers it a different situation for Hunters. Their reasoning being that they want to find Hunter's a niche, and expect allowing us to have mobility is homogenization (ironically, changing us to have mobility like every other caster seems more like homogenization).