Please introduce dual spec ASAP

[Nicain]

For one very important reason, it would solve the looking for healer problem.

 

1. Specing heals isn't enough of a boost to healing to justify it as your only spec.

 

2. You tend to spend 90% of the game soloing missions, and having only a heal spec slows the game down quite a bit.

 

3. Constantly respecing isn't really a viable option long term for many reasons.

 

This game really could benefit from dual spec.

 

This game probably isn't for you if this is a huge problem. Find a group. I don't have this problem with the healers in my guild regardless if they're grouped or solo.

 

BTW, as a secret, healers are usually the first person to get grouped so finding one shouldn't be a problem for you.

[Sendrel]

That you don't like the analogy doesn't make it "flawed".

 

Sometime allowing something a little is ok and allowing it a lot is not.

 

Me liking or not liking the analogy doesn't make it bad. Its complete irrelevance to the topic does.

 

So define 'too much' in the specific circumstances of respecing and explain how then allowing it too much isn't desirable.

[Xzulld]

If you make some available, but make it "tedious" you allow it to be used but not overused.

 

Ok so where is the logic? Where are the examples? Where can I see your premises? How can I check the validity of those premises?

 

I don't think logic means what you think it means.

[Seyyal]

powertech , shieldtech, leveling as tank, pvping as tank etc. loving it. i have several different companions to aid in leveling speed/downtime. and pvp tanking is proving to be fun.

 

 

i do plan on rolling another character for DPS. which is the way I believe MMO's should work.

 

Dual spec was a dumb idea in wow and its still dumb now.

 

Respec fees should be kept fairly high so that one can tweak there spec, but not constantly switch.

[Saber_Six]

Your analogy fails becuase the speed at which we drive is directly related to the safety of travel.

 

Which does not apply to talents specs . . .

 

Yet crashing at 45 is better than ones at 55 and 35 is better than 45.... and so and so on.

 

It's just an arbitrary line drawn where something is deemed acceptable.

[Xzulld]

Respec fees should be kept fairly high so that one can tweak there spec, but not constantly switch.

Why? Explain your reasoning.

[SlickDevlan]

Getting somewhere.

 

So define 'overused' in the context of respecs and then explain why its not desirable. How often is too often and why shouldn't we just leave it up to the individual player to determine on their own how often they'd like to respec.

 

While I personally think dual specs are idiotic and contrary to the entire purpose of RPGs, or MMORPGs, my posts were all made on the basis of BW having a reason for high respec costs and a lack of a dual spec system. If so, that reasoning must be to dissuade people from changing specs every 10 seconds. As such, I wouldn't be able to tell you what the limits are or aren't.

 

I could very well be wrong, but until there is evidence to the contrary I am simply working with what we have.

[Xzulld]

Yet crashing at 45 is better than ones at 55 and 35 is better than 45.... and so and so on.

 

It's just an arbitrary line drawn where something is deemed acceptable.

 

Not true, every 10MPH increases the force of impact by X2.

 

Physics my friend, physics. Its not arbitrary. The speed we drive has an effect on our safety, how often you respect has no impact on anything. It does not take away from the game in any objective way.

 

If its not demonstrably true, its not worth arguing.

Edited December 29, 2011 by Xzulld

[Sendrel]

Yet crashing at 45 is better than ones at 55 and 35 is better than 45.... and so and so on.

 

It's just an arbitrary line drawn where something is deemed acceptable.

 

There's actually quite a bit more thought that goes into determining safe driving speeds than that. There's nothing arbitrary about it, which is why your analogy is horrifyingly bad. Please just stick to discussing the topic without the use of analogies.

[SlickDevlan]

Ok so where is the logic? Where are the examples? Where can I see your premises? How can I check the validity of those premises?

 

I don't think logic means what you think it means.

 

Says the guy who has yet to provide any example or premise other than not having dual specs is inherently "illogical".

 

The mere fact that you are here complaining about lack of dual specs and/or respec "tedium" only makes my point stronger. Please, keep posting...

[MaximillianKnei]

Dual-spec is such BS, if you ask me.

 

The whole point of a (MMO)RPG is that you choose a role, and you stick with it!

 

Don't like the path you chose? Level up another character. That's how we did back in the old days, and it has worked pretty damn good thus far!

 

If you want to be truly epic, you'll even play both your characters at once!

[Sendrel]

While I personally think dual specs are idiotic and contrary to the entire purpose of RPGs, or MMORPGs, my posts were all made on the basis of BW having a reason for high respec costs and a lack of a dual spec system. If so, that reasoning must be to dissuade people from changing specs every 10 seconds. As such, I wouldn't be able to tell you what the limits are or aren't.

 

I could very well be wrong, but until there is evidence to the contrary I am simply working with what we have.

 

I can disagree with your personal opinion, but I can't really find any fault with your reasoning. I just don't really see the need to limit respecs.

[Nicain]

Its not an opinion that talent trees increase a given roles ability to perform that role.

Its not an opinion that tightly tuned encounters require players to eek out every last ounce of performance from their characters.

Its not an opinion that some encounters require 2 tanks, and some do not, some encounters require more or less healers, and some encounters have strict dps requirements.

If you think these are opinions you have not explored the facts.

 

Let me help you out:

 

1. Trees are there to create variation, otherwise there should be static character classes.

 

2. Tightly tuned encounters benefit more from educated players than which spec's you have. You act like there is a 'right' way or a 'wrong' way to spec your guys.

 

3. If you have two tanks and you're encounter doesn't need two, then use your second tank as DPS. It's been done, don't worry. You can be flexible without having to respec between events.

 

You act like event X requires this group to win, when there are probably a number of different group configurations you can use in each event. That's not how this game works, just because it's not as familar as WoW doesn't mean it should be changed.

[corjoad]

-1 for dual spec. Pick a role and fill it.

[Blackweb]

I'm on board with this. And a group finder while we're at it.

 

I havent had problems finding a group to anything even once, why introduce this communtiy destructive tool?

 

Don't ever implement this, plz. tyvm

[Saber_Six]

What you are claiming here is that the content allows you to have a person, 1 or more people at that, with specs that under-perform by a wide margin.

 

No, that is not what I've claimed. Try reading. Less logic, more reading

 

This is just not true. If it were all content for every game would be completed in the first week by everyone, not just the top groups who happen to sub out less than ideal specs.

 

Of course it isn't. It wasn't said.

 

Its just a fact, one you are trying to SO hard to not deal with.

 

Not a fact, not even a discussion point. Something in your mind that you've won an argument with. Congrats.

 

The game is one that when you are dealing with the hardest content each player MUST have the ideal set of advantages. You cannot argue against that rationally.

 

Who is? You seem to be arguing that they need to have two sets.

 

However duel spec goes farther than even that, it allows players full access to there talent trees which transcends raiding, and it is a Quality of Life issue.

 

Quality of life issue? ***? Is progressiveness permeating our gaming culture too?

 

I find it a strange cognitive dissonance that seeks to remove quality of life changes in games.

 

Some people like playing on easy, some don't. What "cognitive dissonance" makes this hard for you to understand?

 

I do like how you try to argue from a hard-core raiding POV and then slip right into the hello-kitty POV. Talk about having your cake and eating it too!

[Nicain]

Dual-spec is such BS, if you ask me.

 

The whole point of a (MMO)RPG is that you choose a role, and you stick with it!

 

Don't like the path you chose? Level up another character. That's how we did back in the old days, and it has worked pretty damn good thus far!

 

If you want to be truly epic, you'll even play both your characters at once!

 

You are correct sir, thats why each server has 8 slots so you can make a bunch of characters.

[Xzulld]

Says the guy who has yet to provide any example or premise other than not having dual specs is inherently "illogical".

 

The mere fact that you are here complaining about lack of dual specs and/or respec "tedium" only makes my point stronger. Please, keep posting...

 

Here was my post with my logical anlaysis. Feel free to try to refute it line for line. A common way to refute a logical argument is to prove a premise is flawed or not true, or that the conclusion does not follow from the premises.

 

Good luck.

 

 

Its not an opinion that talent trees increase a given roles ability to perform that role.

Its not an opinion that tightly tuned encounters require players to eek out every last ounce of performance from their characters.

Its not an opinion that some encounters require 2 tanks, and some do not, some encounters require more or less healers, and some encounters have strict dps requirements.

If you think these are opinions you have not explored the facts.

 

 

These are my premises ^, which are demonstrably true. My conclusion is that allowing easy respecs, or duel specs contribute to better Quality of life for people attempting the tightly tuned encounters. Confirmation of the accuracy of this conclusion has been seen in prior MMO's. The conclusion is demonstrably true.

 

This is sound logic with supporting evidence. Your post has done nothing to refute this. I would love for someone to line by line try to address this logical conclusion and provide detailed reasons why they disagree.

Edited December 29, 2011 by Xzulld

[Zironic]

3. If you have two tanks and you're encounter doesn't need two, then use your second tank as DPS. It's been done, don't worry. You can be flexible without having to respec between events.

 

You can't clear a well tuned encounter with your DPS in tanking spec.

[Airinya]

Here was my post with my logical anlaysis. Feel free to try to refute it line for line. A common way to refute a logical argument is to prove a premise is flawed or not true, or that the conclusion does not follow from the premises.

 

Good luck.

 

Someone did - very well. I feel bad they wasted time refuting dumb arguments though. =/

[Xzulld]

Someone did - very well. I feel bad they wasted time refuting dumb arguments though. =/

 

Not true, if it was I am sure you could demonstrate that by doing what I did and going back and copying the refutation and showing me line for line how it disassembles my argument.

 

My wager is that you cannot.

[Airinya]

Not true, if it was I am sure you could demonstrate that by doing what I did and going back and copying the refutation and showing me line for line how it disassembles my argument.

 

My wager is that you cannot.

 

You're so funny. You think what you say is the be all end all because other people don't discredit it to your satisfaction? Get off your high horse. What a narcissist.

[Xzulld]

You're so funny. You think what you say is the be all end all because other people don't discredit it to your satisfaction? Get off your high horse. What a narcissist.

 

Name calling really? I have not acted like anything other than a person engaging in a conversation who is arguing in favor of my position. A logical argument stands on its own. Pointing to the person behind the argument is one of a few different kind of fallacies.

 

Either

 

1) poisoning the well

2) ad hominum.

3) Argument from authority.

 

The validity of an argument does not hinge on any kind of authority, which you claim I am referencing for myself. I actually run a casual raid guild, and go out of my way to include people. We are an extremely friendly group, and I often sit out to give people a chance to engage in the content they have worked so hard to explore. (I do this so I do not have to ask anyone else to sit out)

 

From my perspective the kinds of tactics being used against my argument here are quite shallow and without merit. If a person wants to exclude duel spec for an actual logical reason, I have offered to engage in exploring those reasons from a completely honest perspective, if they just want it for personal reasons, well each to there own.

 

However I have a vested interests in having such a feature, for the EXACT reason of getting more people into the end game content, and enjoying the challenges of that content. So I dont know about you, but my own motivations are honest and pure, and without any real self interest as I am the GM and if I wanted to Id raid every night and never be sit out, that I do not engage in that behavior says something about my own intentions.

Edited December 29, 2011 by Xzulld

[ArmchairMagpie]

In the end my opinion is worthless because I am one of those who does not have any problems doing every quest, everything with a healer spec. Been doing so since ages, but more-so in WoW. It also does not kill my fun because I don't feel married to big numbers and neither I am in a hurry. In my opinion patience and survivability outweighs the need for speed.

 

On the other hand not anyone is like me, I don't mind having a dual spec option, it also does not hurt the game. In the end it - whether you re-spec in the field or at your trainer - doesn't matter, the fact that you can actually re-spec negates the need for an absolute choice and permanency. Money is also by experience no natural limiter either, the only hard limiter would be time or a maximum over a given period. But both would be contra-productive and hamper flexibility of your gameplay choices.

 

But there should be drawn a line, either you allow infinite number of specs or just two. In either case if it's indeed just keep in mind that nobody is ever satisfied. People will come and ask for triple spec and more, and an option for switching class without having to reroll. This is where the line has to be drawn. No middle grounds.

[Airinya]

The validity of an argument does not hinge on any kind of authority, which you claim I am referencing for myself.

 

Yes you seem to be the final say on whether someone's argument against yours is valid. You contradict yourself more and more each post. If you can't see the valid arguments made by Niacin (or whatever his name is on the previous page) then it shows you're just blind to your own side. It's fine that you feel the way you do, but don't say that everyone's argument is valid and then continue to berrate everyone else who has an opinion that differs from yours.

 

Dual (not duel by the way) spec:

 

Reduces in game immersion. It's a ROLE playing game. Whether you choose to actual RP or not (I don't) isn't the point. When you are creating and developing a character you are choosing to fulfill a certain ROLE.

 

You have eight character slots, use them.

 

If you're a guild leader and you're having a hard time filling out the proper roles in your raid then you're obviously not doing an adequate job of recruiting the right classes.

Edited December 29, 2011 by Airinya