14 Nov Classic WoW alternate timeline Hi, I'd love to hear some players opinion on the following: WoW Classic to be an alternate timeline. Players stay at level 60 and further content will be developed. Like different Raids, Dragon Isles, that weird Snail-Like-Building for possible old god content, Mount Hyjal, Dead Wind pass. Devs could implement all the old stuff that was planned for Vanilla wow. Deathwing... Azshara Battleground. Or staggering release of Expansions until Wrath of the Lich King? (Personally I wouldn't like that.. I'd rather stay in Vanilla forever... like until I'm a old man in my 80s dying while goldfarming or something.) Or just straight staying on the Naxx Patch forever? My favourite would be having a long time for the Naxx patch so more ppl can kill Kel'thuzad and then developing this unplanned content sounds like a very very awesome Idea for me. Having a level 60 alternate timeline to current wow would make it even better. Greetings Dandin (name of my first char ever :) )Payneprime34 14 Nov
I think that the token is a nice solution for the problem. Back in the days, blizzard tryed to ban gold sellers, but it was a lost cause. Instead, the token seems to have resolved the problem, letting workers that want to raid with consumables and stuffs to have the golds to do it. Personally, I don't find the gold buying really fair, but I understand that for many people is a necessity and I prefer to leave the economy and the farming spots to the player instead to the gold sellers.
In terms of what the World of Warcraft Classic Best Classes are, Warrior and Priest stand out almost instantly. This is partly due to the fact that Protection Warrior is the only viable Tank Class in WoW Vanilla Patch 1.12. Both the Proc Warrior and Priest are required for Raids and when combined in a PVP setting can be a fierce combo on the battlegrounds.
Kaivax, a WoW forum community manager, revealed that WoW Classic's class design, battleground mechanics and stats on existing items will be set to their 1.12 state, despite the game releasing content that expands beyond that. This removes "progressive itemization," so if the stats on a specific piece of equipment was changed during the original updates, that won't take effect in this version.
15 Nov Please reconsider 2-in-1 subscription. Please note this is not a thread about hating on BfA players or tourists. I am happy they have their own game or might experience how vanilla was like (at very least rather similiar to what it was). However, the bundled subscription comes with extreme drawbacks to both Classic and BfA players: It gives Blizzard a reason to cut corners on both games Since their monetary gains will be lower, as you only need one sub to play either BfA or Classic. Remembering how Blizzard has operated for the past few years gives you a clear reason why Classic supposedly needs to have Sharding, Right Click Reporting, Loot Trading and many other "conviniences". Blizzard is not expecting to bank on Classic in the long term and so, will have it operate on a shoestring budget. BfA is in danger too. Always having Classic as a fallback lets Blizzard go WoD 2.0 on BfA (and possibly future expansions), seeing as there is always some content in the retro game to do. It makes Blizzard assume extremely low retention rate And that's not neccesarily incorrect either. Assuming most of the tourist crowd will log on launch, the absolute lack of convinience and lots of running compared to 'fun' activities will put them off, possibly before leaving the first zone. The problem begins if some tourists stay, since all mechanics put in place to stabilize overestimated populations will have to remain until people leave, which might become more and more unlikely as time goes on (especially since people flock to high pop servers). It makes Blizzard prioritize a controlled launch experience Let's not kid ourselves, this is to make that launch look GOOD. The problem arises when we realize we need lots to quit the game that 'flows perfectly for everyone' before they hit a wall. The absolute uncontained chaos of launch day is something epic to see, epic to be part of and I've seen quite a lot of people express the opinion that while Blizzard is trying to resolve a perceived problem, they are in fact erasing the experience that would be paid for. It negates the obvious gameplay possibility One subscription means you can be logged in on one character at any given point in time. Makes sense. However, bundling the subs would imply you wanted players to have fun in both games. Say, go onto a really long flight path in Classic and do your emmisary in BfA. Or the reverse - 2 hours until raid night in BfA with nothing to do? Jump onto your Classic character and run a dungeon. To actually be able to use a flight path in Classic and play BfA simultaneously, you need a second sub. Why bundle them if you need 2 subs anyway to enjoy both games in ways you are certain you would with a single sub, but would be DC'd off one character? It targets the wrong crowd Now this is purely anecdotal, and thus worthless from a statistical POV but I'm sure someone can relate. My tight-knit group of 10 friends in total was rather eager to play Classic (some of us playing Retail, some playing on vanilla emulators). Well, almost all of us. Only two of them weren't happy about it, one person being neutral as he doesn't care, and another being hostile and 'happy to have Vanilla players put into their own asylum'. With all the changes that Classic 'needs' implemented, we're not going to return as private servers are closer to the actual vanilla experience. Doubly so once Classic releases - Blizzard is putting all the numbers, spawn points and mechanics into private server devs' hands. The anti-Classic player is happy, since he gets to 'screw around and troll a bit' without paying a single extra dime. 5 potential resubs are gone. It may encourage trading Modern and Classic gold ... The solution There were many solutions given and all of them have drawbacks. I propose separating subs, and to enable a free 10-day trial a few weeks after launch. Tourists/nostalgia runs get their dose of Classic without impacting server populations since these should be stable already. Without paying extra, just like they would be with a shared sub. Meanwhile, Classic players might get the neccessary staff that we need to not have the retail systems pushed into Classic as means to reduce recurring costs.Yathri43 15 Nov
Affliction: Endless Affliction - Your Unstable Affliction deals the same damage as normal, but its duration is increased by 6 sec. Demonology: Nether Ward - Surrounds the caster with a shield that lasts 3 sec, reflecting all harmful spells cast on you. Destruction: Demon Armor - Protects the caster, increasing maximum health by 10% and increases armor by 150%. Warrior
Nov 15 Article Explains Why No Communication So this is why we aren't getting updates, communication, customer service, etc, that Blizzard has provided in the past: https://www.influencerupdate.biz/news/67499/blizzards-saralyn-smith-the-power-is-with-the-influencers-we-all-know-that-its-the-age-of-influencers/ A youtuber actually breaks it down here for analysis: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NEaIAPoCDPc What an absurd joke. If this is going to be a successful game in ~8 months, we need the communication to be open, flowing back and forth, as it was in 2004-2006. Telling yourself otherwise is a lie. There's absolutely no reason third parties should be filters between Blizzard and the Players/Customers.Bynisarron31 Nov 15
“We talked about it [making Classic] for a number of years and we couldn’t figure out what the right way to do it would be,” Brack explained. "The problem was, the codebase that shipped with WoW and encompassed the WoW Classic timeline was a codebase that we had really moved on from in subsequent years. Software is a very iterative process, and its development was more than 10 years in the past at this point. So thinking about the hardware that didn’t exist anymore that we would need to run on it, running two MMOs simultaneously with two different toolsets, two different toolchains, it was not something we could really get our head around.”