Remove Advertisements

GC comments on itemization

Ret, Holy, PVP, etc

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Baelor

Re: GC comments on itemization

Postby Isetnefret » Fri May 22, 2009 2:09 pm

Yeah, of the Tiger was good stuff. To some extent I really appreciated the of the Beast which I think was a BC thing.

I do think Ghostcrawler is being disingenuous when he says the problem is the class, not itemization. That's garbage. The spec works the way it works. Blizzard knew how it worked when they designed the gear. If they put gear in aimed at some idealized version of the spec that didn't exist, rather than gear that works with the spec being played, then that IS INDEED poor itemization! Suggesting nerfs that might make the gear correctly itemized is just backwards design and really makes it seem like he's bending over backwards not to admit a mistake.
Isetnefret . . - . . Gavoryn

Those of you on the port side of the plane can look out and see the Grand Canyon. Those of you on the starboard can look out and see a cloud shaped like a horsey.
User avatar
Posts: 1083
Joined: Wed Dec 24, 2008 3:48 pm
Location: Columbia, MO

Re: GC comments on itemization

Postby semp » Wed May 27, 2009 7:26 am

The problem is that leather is so well itemized it becomes BiS for ALL melee DPS classes. That just isnt right in my opinion. Plate pieces need to start coming with larger amounts of strength, or give us some stam--> AP talents to take advantage of the 120 stam on some plate DPS peices..
Posts: 361
Joined: Thu Oct 09, 2008 9:13 am


Return to Off-specs & Other Classes

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest


Remove Advertisements

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 1 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest
?php } else { ?