Really hopeful shadow gets some much needed buffs in p4.
You're literally making them choose between dispersion and void plague though. You are literally going directly against what you are claiming.Not to mention no meaningful new talent options from 50 to 60 bracket, and the T1 set bonus is "you can cast heals in shadow" when its literally more healing to keep DPSing.Fix the tier set, and take void plague back off of boots. There is basically no new exciting runes for spriest this phase, and you are removing dps and utility from them. Almost all of my spriests across 2 raid teams are quitting or rerolling next phase.
PLEASE. MAKE. MINDFLAY. A. 30YARD. BASE RANGE. SPELL.
this whole tweets about are blizzard just dont want to think out of circle.. its easier for them to keep in the circle (safe zone) and just recycle .. but why is called discovery at the end ... people spending weeks on tracking and giving feedbacks to just end up in trash.
Don’t bring parses into this as an excuse lol, 90% of casual players don’t care about that.
controversial
The funny thing is that they still think the utility beyond the healing is useful. Mage is getting a dispel which decreases our utility having others with same abilities. im sry but the mana regen from VT is terrible compared to shamanistic rage even after the nerf. the fact is they dont know how/want to fix the class and there isnt enough people playing the class for them to care about changing it. it is my favorite class of all time but if it was played as much as a warrior you all know we would see some changes. sad to see they ask for our input about how to bring the class up to speed and not take any of our recommendation. also as someone else said bring parses into it was a TERRIBLE excuse. people will parse no matter what and do you think someone that has a low parse even looks at that stuff. so sad to see this happen. i dont wanna reroll but dang this stuff makes me want to.
design philosophy doesn't matter for shadow priest it'll be reworked next patch like it has been since WotLK. How about we solidify retail shadow priest for more than 2 patches before we get high and mighty for a seasonal silly game mode
Are people seriously surprised? If you want to be a pure damage caster, mage and warlock are right there.
The issue is there are already 2 other specs that are utility and help the raid "for dad gamers", in many other iterations of WoW disc is considered the "utility spec" for priest, holy was pure healing and shadow was dps. Why do priests need 3 specs dedicated to supporting the raid when they already have 2 that already do that. Other classes have other specs that they can spec out of to play pure dps, why doesn't a priest? Why is only shadow considered a "utility" spec, but elemental for shaman isn't when they have a healing spec and 2 dps specs? Or pali that has all three, or druid has 4? It's nonsense to not give a pure dps option to priests like every other class out there. This utility argument is silly when priests already have 2 other specs dedicated to "helping the raid"!
Easy way to solve this, give us the Smite priest finally, how is it possible that a class called PRIEST, doesn't have a dps spec where you do HOLY damage? Stupid af, retail has this same problem. Don't give me the Disc is that crap, disc is a healer/support spec.
Wish I never read this, no valuable information. Just adult males crying like babies.
why pve hunters have duel spec in next phase since we have only 1 spec to play after removed Melee hunter from the game ?
Exorcism vs Rebuke wasn't just tanking their damage, it was completely breaking the entire build design. Everything about Ret is to fish for art of war procs, if you remove that, the entire build falls apart. I'm all for having choices, but asking for an interrupt to cost you the entire build synergy is going a little far.I'm a little unsure why they didn't use x rune slots as a combination of mechanical play styles and y rune slots for utility/qol, such that if you need to rebuke, you do so without breaking the class mechanically.