News Roundup: Blizzard Posts on Druid Lifebloom Nerf, Upcoming 4.1 Changes
News Roundup: Blizzard Posts on Druid Lifebloom Nerf, Upcoming 4.1 Changes
By Miyari on 03/02/2011 at 4:22 PM PacificBlizzard posters have been pretty quiet lately, but that's okay - we've bet getting tons of awesome 4.1 information via updates to the official patch notes, info from the 4.1 PTR, and even some recent Cataclysm hotfixes!
Latest topics include:
Check out the full Blizzard posts after the break!
- Upcoming Druid Lifebloom Nerf
- Upcoming Battle of Gilneas Graveyard Changes
- Upcoming Change to 'Ambassador' Title Achievement
- Winterspring Frostsaber Quest Changes in 4.1
- Archaeology Item Cooldowns
Upcoming Druid Lifebloom NerfBashiok said: We're a bit worried about Resto being too powerful in PvP. We wanted to try out the Lifebloom changes to see if it fixed the problem. We don’t think it's quite the right change though, so we're going to revert the Lifebloom mana nerf, but keep the reduced bloom effect. We'll have to keep watching this.
The change to Efflorescence becoming a smart heal was actually originally just a bug. Since so many of you responded so favorably to it though, we're actually going to redesign Efflorescence to work similarly. We expect the redesign to help the talent be more useful in 5 and 10 player content as well. We'll have more details at a later time.
Upcoming Battle of Gilneas Graveyard ChangesSlorkuz said: We are changing the way respawns work in Battle of Gilneas. The following is an excerpt from the PTR Patch Notes: http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/blog/1959705#blog
- Players who die at a control point that they own will now be teleported to the next closest graveyard, instead of the one at which they died.
- If a player's team owns the Mine and Waterworks, and dies at Waterworks, they will be teleported to the Mine.
- If an Alliance player's team only owns Lighthouse, and dies at Lighthouse, they will respawn at their base.
- If a Horde player's team owns Waterworks and Mine, and dies at Lighthouse, they will respawn at Waterworks.it's impossible to kill everyone before 1 or 2 come back.Although we do feel that it was a little hard to completely control the defence for long enough to effectively pull of a cap (hence the GY changes), a some positioning and planned CC can be pretty powerful in dealing with this sort of situation. One tip could be that as you're killing players off from around the flag area, that you move parts of your group towards the opposing teams GY, or at least position them between the GY and the flag in order to slow down respawns.
While this is not as much of an issue or concern after the GY changes however, the same tactic can be applied to intercepting enemy groups before they even get to the flag, effectively causing a staggering effect on the enemies assault, thus breaking a lot of the initial pressure.
Upcoming Change to 'Ambassador' Title AchievementBashiok said:I know ptr etc.... I'm just wondering if people who are currently neutral with Bilgewater Cartel will be losing their titles until they grind out the rep with that faction, Or will we get to keep our titles because we already earned it ?.
Just asking in advance, since there were some issues with a previous change in achievements/titles.
If you have the achievement you'll keep the title. The Exalted worked differently because we wanted to move the title to a different achievement altogether (50 exalted).
In this case, if you have the achievement you'll keep the title. If you're close to getting the achievement, you might want to hurry and get it before 4.1 because after 4.1 you'd need to also gain the additional rep to meet the requirements, earn the achievement, and get the title.
Same as it was for Loremaster or Explorer, if you had the achievement you still have the achievement, even though the requirements changed.
Winterspring Frostsaber Quest Changes in 4.1Vaneras said: In patch 4.1 we will add a new quest chain to Winterspring for the Alliance, which will be similar to the Horde quest chain found in Un'Goro Crater. This means that obtaining the Reins of the Winterspring Frostsaber for Alliance players should be somewhat similar to the way that Horde players get the Whistle of the Venomhide Ravasaur... or atleast that is the idea :-)
Archaeology Item CooldownsLylirra said: Sometimes it can be difficult to find a good "sweet spot" when choosing cooldowns for items such as those obtained through Archaeology. We don't want all the cooldowns to be exactly the same, but we also don't want it to feel like the numbers were chosen totally at random. We may not always get the values right initially, so knowing what feels good to you and what doesn't -- and why-- is really helpful.
So, thanks for postin'. If you've any additional feedback about Archaeology item cooldowns, please feel free to share it (constructively, of course). :)Hm. There wasn't any fabrication. As noted, we didn't want every single Archaeology item to have the same cooldown. Some of the items are pretty unique and provide interesting on-use abilities, so it made sense to us to vary things up a little. This is perhaps a bit different than our approach to other cosmetic or novelty item cooldowns, but Archaeology itself is new and has its own reward structure.
I can't decide whether fabricating your own reality is suiting for a Blizzard employee or not...it's what you guys do for a living by creating video games, afterall.
If you don't agree with the intent behind that design or its implementation, that's okay. Just say so, you know? We're not lying to you or trying to dupe you into agreeing with us. In fact, we enjoy it when players are able to post constructively on topics they feel passionately about it. We want the game to be as fun as possible, and if you're not having fun, we like knowing why.
(Now, with that said, I can see how you may have interpreted what I posted to refer to our design philosophy towards all vanity items, rather than specifically to items granted through Archaeology. If that's the case, then I apologize for the confusion. That certainly wasn't the intention behind message. Instead, the message was simply "We're listening, and we want to hear more from you about this particular topic.")The current cooldown was chosen deliberately, but I can see why you might think otherwise (100 minutes is kind of strange for a cooldown time).
Are you certain the Pendant cooldown is intended, Lylirra? It's 100 minutes as opposed to the other items' 10 minutes - are you sure someone didn't fat-finger an extra 0 on there?
Anyway, summoning a harem of scarabs can be pretty taxing on some systems, so there were some initial concerns about putting the pendant on a short cooldown. Based on the feedback we've received, though, we're looking into reducing it. We agree that the effect is pretty cool and would be nice to use it more frequently.Dozens of pages of constructive feedback, deeply disturbed that this bit of archaeology about cooldowns is what gets Blizzard's attention.So, the reason I posted in this thread is actually pretty straightforward. Comparatively, the topic of Archaeology item cooldowns is pretty uncommon. It's a valid discussion, but it's not really talked about a lot, so we're interested in hearing more about what players have to say. By posting, I just wanted to thank those who had broached the topic, as well as encourage more players to weigh in with their thoughts and ideas.
Now, there may be other threads or discussions related to Archaeology out there that we haven't jump into, but that doesn't mean we're intentionally ignoring them. There are very legitimate reasons why we tend to stay out of certain discussions -- for example, we may not have any new information to communicate at the time, or the discussion itself may be really constructive and the last thing we want to do is make post and risk changing the tone or direction of the conversation (which tends to happen a lot whenever we do post).We just want some acknowledgment that, "Hey, we see that you guys are not having fun with the way it was implemented, so we are looking into it."To sort of continue with Setanta's post, we know you have more overarching concerns about Archaeology. We like the current model for Archaeology, so we may not agree with all the posts we see, but we definitely feel that improvements can be made. We don't have any plans for change that we can share right now, but iterating on the profession is something we want to do.
I wish I could give you more than that after such a good post, but I hope you can at least take some comfort in knowing that we're very open to your feedback (and reading it), and that we're not opposed to meaningful changes to Archaeology in the future.