I have, many, many times.
Also, women can fight. sometimes better then a man. Training can be a factor.
From my understanding it is only for melee or campaign generic heroes, basically anyone who is as good as anonymous as far as lore goes.
The reason for it is because in World of Warcraft there is no real gender restrictions on classes. As long as a race supports a class, both genders can use it.
That said I am unsure how it makes sense in some cases… For example a male Priestess of the Moon just does not sound right. I hope they at least try to rename the hero to be more generic. They better include a male version of it or they are being sexist against males!
Maybe female versions get 1 less armor, 5% less HP, 5% more health/mana regen, and 2% more mana? (or whatever’s balanced) (and vice-versa for male variants) ![:slight_smile:](https://dou48tnq0ocoa.cloudfront.net/en/warcraft3/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=6" ":slight_smile:")
I do agree with the concern over workload, though. How many gender-swapped models can you make for the same effort as a brand new model (on average)? I’d guess around 2.5:1.
1 Like
i would not mind if it was random or if we got to pick (which i think its this option) but yeah if its a permanent female change (this coming from a female) it would be really weird since it would be a very unnecessary change only to please those type of people. but i think they will give us the best of both and allow us to pick and chose whether we want a male or female hero.
1 Like
you are still talking about this ? wow talk about community support when a useless gender swap topic is more important and on trend then any other concerning issues.
at the bottom of the line is that they’re doing it and we can’t change their minds, and i don’t think blizzard is that out of touch to transform a hero like the pitlord to have a female version.
they’ll do it when it’s possible and that’s that.
WarII elven archers and rangers werent female. They werent neutral either.
There were knights and there were footmen. Not foowomen. I like variety, but unless females ar ebiologically stronger in certain species, putting them to war unless being more special, is a waste. Historically, for heavy physical work and battles that include wearing heavy armor, this does not fit the frontline fighter. Being fantasy doesnt mean that footmen and footwomen will be 50/50. 19:1 ratio would be still fancy but if you make a female footman/footwoman … dont let it rot in the editor.
WC II had sorcerers too, it had undead DKs.
You have specialized jobs where the ycan work. WCIII apart from the heroes, all female cadres. Female priestesses or paladins are basically heresy.
This is why elves have their sun and moon worshipppings. Strange that the worcraft world has an orbiting moon too … strange. Why not more than one or none ? Anyway, nelves have their cults that are tied to gender stratification. Change that and you destroy nelves as a structured orderly society.
And while youre at it, reform the egyptian ankh from lordaeron flag, because it doesnt really fit and the cinematic - Warning - from WCIII shows the L with up and downward arrows, 4 stars and something like a crown. Cinematics seem to be the canon of WIII. Ankh is about the doctrine of reincarnation and as such, I see no word of such a belief in Lordaeron. As such, it is completely out of place. And it is not a cross - that is about death and ressurection. And you have ressurection paladin skill, so if you want to keep real-life stuff like people worshipping moons, earth, trees, stars, weather, then the cross is consistent with this as is the Light against Darkness. Arthas return wording is also nwo-like. He speaks of a kingdom to fall and from its ashes to arise a ‘new order’ which seeks to shake the very foundations of the world. The world, not of the ‘ashte-roth’ or anything like it. Lordaeron seems to symbolize the U.S:, so Arthas basically says, down with the US, and from its ashes the conspiracy wants its NWO to arise. (satanic ‘new’ world ‘order’, or translated, ancient world regime - very backward)
3 Likes
If you can choose I can accept that. If it’s randomly assigned I cannot. If you play as night elves basically your entire army is female anyways, so this notion that the original game didn’t incorporate women in a positive light is ludicrous.
5 Likes
Random and weighted would be even worse. Though I can’t wait to get my Priest of the Moon. /s
Just have a second row where you can choose the female counterpart. Random is just going to piss everyone off.
4 Likes
If it’s optional - I’m 100% fine with that.
And I’m pretty sure it will be.
We already had situation like that in Starcraft 2 when we were able to customize a skin for a number of units in our game profile - including choosing between male or female ghost.
If Blizzard gives us an option to customize a hero - great. Love that. I would like to see female Blood Mages (YES!), Demon Hunters or Achmages. Or pick a different skin for a Blade Master - I was always miffed about vaguely Asian-themed Kensai orc amongst the savage Horde. It never fit for me. So, swapping him out for let’s say Grom Hellscream in melee - count me in.
Although, I would leave the Priestess of the Moon and the Warden be - there is a critical lore reason why they are female-specific. Give them different skins to your heart’s content, but leave them female.
Also I don’t see Heroes like Lich or Crypt Lord getting gender-swapped.
How would that work - you slap a lipstick and a hair bow on a Lich and call it a day?
On the other hand. there is also the matter of “hero distinction” in high-tier plays - the thing that Grubby pointed out in his Reforged Impressions.
Player choosing a different unit skin then default in a skirmish that requires making quick field assessment can be problematic. But I can assume that there will be an option to restrict custom hero skins in “serious” online play.
3 Likes
And this is where you stop reading the post, folks.
Probably something like Lady Deathwhisper, the first time we’ve seen a female Lich in Warcraft lore.
xhttps://i.imgur.com/ONNwMdV.jpg
Differences wouldn’t even have to be that huge. If there’s a female Mountain King (Mountain Queen?) and she doesn’t have a big blonde beard, that’s fine. She’d still have the big hammer, axe, horned helm, skulls on her back, and gold poleyns on the knees.
2 Likes
You haven’t learned to respect others’ opinions yet, have you?
5 Likes
Oh my god, are people still threatened by the idea of female versions of some hero units? Who cares? It’s not changing the in game lore, and it might get more women to play. Or, does the idea women playing games scare you?
4 Likes
Plenty of folks here do.
No, it won’t. It never does.
Stop with your blind hate, and try to listen to the other side. Because it is numerous. And it should be relied upon because they form the backbone of the community. Piss them off, and all will be lost.
I think, we should have an option to decide the gender of our units - if there is no chance of the devs turning back. And even then, don’t make lore-breaking skins. I don’t want a female Paladin just as much as I don’t want a Paladin swinging a candy bar. And of course, I wouldn’t want to be forced to use anything of the sort.
8 Likes
OMG give me those female Pitlords and mountain kings. Also male priestessess’ of the moon ![:smiley:](https://dou48tnq0ocoa.cloudfront.net/en/warcraft3/images/emoji/twitter/smiley.png?v=6" ":smiley:")
I’m not saying its smart. Just hillarious if they roll with it. Anyways. I don’t really care as long as there will be no skin changes in campaign, and the animations will be consistent in melee. Cheers
2 Likes
Who is saying anything about a Paladin swinging a candy bar? And what blind hate?
1 Like
And about candy bars, female skins are just that, skins. In no game am I forced to use silly skins. Why should this case be different?
1 Like
I don’t recall anyone talking about making skins of anyone using candy bars as a weapon. And who says a female skin will look silly? I saw the concept art for the female demon hunter and i thought it looked awesome.
1 Like
I didn’t, but I can say. And thereby I will stand by my word like a stoic.
3 Likes
Yeah, this art of Female DH looked pretty great. And if I’m given a choice I’m locking her in as my “default” DH in skirmish. I would also kill to have a female Blood Mage skin - who wouldn’t want a pretty elf wizardress running around in their army?
But to an extent I understand the concerns of the “other side” - I wouldn’t appreciate to be forced to play as only a female DH in skirmish - I don’t think anybody would.
I legitimately don’t think this is going to be the case though. Blizzard will most likely give us an option to customize the look of our heroes in our game profile and that’s it. They’ve already confirmed that you’ll have an option to change default Archmage to Jaina in skirmish. I literally don’t see why that wouldn’t be the case with different skins.
And seriously - idea to personalize the look of your army is a great one in my book.
After topics like this, I’m really upset what I preorder Reforge, because I’m afraid for future of legendary game. Developers, can you, please, DON’T BREAK classic Wacraft 3 experience, and just do better technical components, but not change and break “spirit” of the game. Thanks you a lot and good work!
1 Like