Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Of Teeth and Claws, a WoW druid blog, takes up my analysis of hybrids and dismisses it as hybrid envy. As I said before, you can't really very well separate emotions from rational analysis when discussing class balance. Of course the specialized classes are more likely to be for nerfing hybrids, and the players of such hybrids are against it. Nobody believes his own class is overpowered.
Nevertheless I would like to respond to Teeth and Claws' argument that flexibility is a fallacity, quote: "99.999% of the WoW population decides upon a spec before a raid/instance run, and does not change it until well after that run has completed."
My comment to that one was: I think you underestimate the value of flexibility. If you enter lets say Naxxramas with a typical 10-man raid groups with 2 tanks, 3 healers, and 5 dps, there will be *some* encounters where this is exactly the perfect mix. But there will be other encounters in the same raid dungeon where lets say 1 tank was enough, or 2 healers were enough, and the surplus tank or healer would be better used doing damage. A druid tank, switching just gear, not talents, deals a lot more damage than a warrior tank. A druid healer deals a lot more damage than a holy priest. That flexibility has a value for the raid, and increases the chances for such a flexible class to be invited over a specialized class.
So what do you think? Is flexibility completely worthless (and I'm not just talking druids here, also for example the added flexibility of a death knight off tank), or does flexibility have to be considered when looking at class balance?