Shield Wall & Last Stand: frustrations

We're still working on the Inscription design for Cataclysm and it may end up changing a lot.

If it doesn't change, then I am going to predict we do something like remove the Glyph of Last Stand (and lower the cooldown base or through a talent) and keep the Glyph of Shield Wall. The Shield Wall glyph is mildly interesting in that sometimes you want it and sometimes you might not. We don't think it's unreasonable to have to spend some glyphs on survivability, since presumably that's what is most important to you. But maybe you're spending too many glyphs on cooldowns today.

We're not going to give all tanking classes the same abilities or cooldowns. That's just not a game design we're interested in pursuing.

We just want the total package to be close enough in survival, threat generation and other aspects of doing your job. No doubt different people will have different perceptions for how close different abilities need to be in order to do your jobs.

In this particular case, we don't want every tank to have or need an identical Last Stand equivalent or Shield Wall equivalent. We do think, as I said above, that warriors might be spending too many glyph spots on cooldowns today. That's a pretty subjective call though, so I wouldn't necessary expect a majority of players to agree with it.

Q u o t e:
Any thought to changing the baseline Shield Wall ability and leaving the Last Stand glyph instead? Even with Last Stand gone, two talent points and a glyph seems like a pretty hefty pricetag.

Edit: As I've mentioned previously, I refuse to invest that heavily into Shield Wall. Not because it's not useful, or even a desired end result, but because I shouldn't have to. It seems like an unfair investment into a single tanking ability that the other tanks don't have to make.

We're stuck in this trap sometimes where players want glyphs and talents to be meaningful but optional. That's a pretty narrow design space.

If we make a talent that affects Shield Wall, then it feels mandatory. If we make no talent that affects Shield Wall, then it feels like the talents aren't affecting things you actually care about and can become this potentially marginalized aspect of the game.

The argument seems to be that if you didn't have to get Improved Disciplines, that you could get some other potentially juicy talent. True. The same would be true if you didn't have to get Shockwave or if paladins didn't have to get Ardent Defender. You need Improved Disciplines, but they need Vindication. My point is that classes are balanced as part of their entire package. You aren't balanced at the core level with talents and glyphs thrown on as gravy on top of that.

Now we are making an attempt with Cataclysm to give players more options in how they talent. But still if you imagine a talent tree in which every single talent is optional, it's also hard to imagine how every single talent is interesting or powerful enough.

Q u o t e:
There you go again, thinking all tanks want to be homogenized to death. We do not want the same abilities or cooldowns, we want to be equal.

I was responding to posts such as the following. I should have quoted those, though I know the blue trackers like to not include the post that I was addressing. :( For what it's worth, I agree with you. The classes are more interesting when they have similar threat and survivability but achieve it in different ways. Some players are going to look at any differences and cry foul though. Their feedback is valid too. Quotes:

Q u o t e:
Survivability cooldowns are not something that should vary wildly in effect and duration and requirements.

Q u o t e:
Can you consider when doing this, making all 4 tanking classes have to devote the same amount of talent points or glyph slots to get the same cooldowns.

Q u o t e:
As a DK tank, I simply get a 2 minute CD damage reduction ability because I'm a DK. If a warrior wants that same 2 minute CD damage reduction ability, they have to spend 2 talent points and a major glyph slot. The end result is the same, but it makes the warrior angry that his class doesn't get that ability as easily as a DK. It just doesn't seem fair.

Q u o t e:
I suppose what I'm trying to say is that the perception isn't super fun- the perception that you are glyphing so you can do your job and not so you do your job better, even though it is essentially the same thing.

Right, that is what I was trying to say. It would be all well and good if you functioned at 100% capacity and glyphs could boost you up to 104%. But then what do we target the other tank classes at? 100%?

I think part of the problem here is that many warriors are viewing themselves at functioning at 90% of capacity compared to a paladin's 100% so they feel they need the glyphs just to keep even. If you feel that way though, the problem isn't the glyphs necessarily....

As with many threads in this forum, it's tricky for us to extricate whether a specific piece of feedback is that the glyphs aren't fun or whether the feedback is that the glyphs aren't fun because you think they still leave you weaker than a paladin. Asked another way, would you have the same feedback on warrior glyphs if you were the only tank in the game? The answer to that is very important, so I would invite you not to dismiss it. :)

Q u o t e:
Yet another example of binary thinking limiting possibilities. There are lots of other things we care about that doesn't require you to put in a modification to SW. Threat in both Single target and AE varieties, passive survivability, active survivability through abilities we currently can't use on raid bosses and other things are all possibilities. Point being you don't have to put in SW talents in order to do something useful for our class.

There are several posters in this very thread though saying it's not fair that they can't always get Deep Wounds in their tanking build for threat. Threat talents like Defiance were something we cut awhile ago because players thought they were mandatory and uninteresting. If threat was relatively easy to maintain today, then all of those talents might be considered junk and warriors would be asking for more talents that actually made a difference when they invested in them.

I'm not trying to dismiss your feedback, but I am saying it's not as easy as you make it sound. In a perfect world, players would like for their class to be fully functional and completely balanced. Only then do they get to choose talents and glyphs. We have to factor all of that power and utility in though. The alternative is a talent tree that looks a lot like minor glyphs where the choices are all cosmetic and the effects pretty trivial. This is why I'm trying to steer the topic away from warrior vs. paladin and get players to focus more on what fun talents and fun glyphs look like. Warbringer... Sword and Board... awesome. I get that. I'm not sure how realistic it is to have a tree with 51 talent point like that and with no Improved Disciplines or Toughness (which someone else brought up earlier). A few players opined that the existing Glyph of Shield Wall would feel awesome if it was reversed with the base Shield Wall. Feedback like that is really useful.