It’s your lucky day!
With your paid subscription to Classic, Blizzard have included a free subscription to BfA, where you can experience all the lack of tedium you want! Congratulations!
8 Likes
“Make AV great again, give all those npcs their jobs back!”
6 Likes
Wait – if that’s your stance, what are you doing over there?
My preference, as stated previously, is based on preservation, but if you’re looking for better community, how is 1.12’s version of AV the ‘better community’ version of AV? For the most part teams ran straight past each other, communication was minimally down to ‘ALL IN!’ yells with a few ‘No defense!’ calls… versus people hammered up in bunkers / towers, calling for aid, people calling out who was going back to help them, asking how upgrades were coming, and how close we were to a summon – getting to know your server-mates and learning to hate that rogue who keeps sapping you and trying to re-cap while you /s ‘Rogue on flag’ hoping someone’s close enough to help…
Versions prior to the NPC removal had a lot more community spirit because of a lack of CRBGs and because communication meant better chances of victory.
All respect to your opinions and choices, but I just don’t understand what you’re doing on that side of the fence if you’re trying to ensure a better community. Communities thrive on forging bonds – friendships and rivalries.
Like, I know you, and we’re kinda rivals because we think different things, but we’re still friendly, and we wouldn’t be involved in a debate about something we each care about if we didn’t keep talking. We are meeting here on the Field of Strife. ![:slight_smile:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/slight_smile.png?v=6" ":slight_smile:")
Shank. ![:smiley:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/smiley.png?v=6" ":smiley:")
6 Likes
Well if av is 1.12 gotta organize massive turtles on the horde side.
Maybe even make a premade thats incapable of killing van but capable of camping alliance, all mage group all warlock group something funny like that maybe all warriors or rogues.
Be the firsts to summon the giants and send them at them, a premade AV of nothing but stealthies. That would be my version of boycotting.
Yep nothing but 40 shadow priest dotting alliance as they rush past to horde base.
Personally I didn’t like the honor grind in tbc, I liked the arena rating points per week system though. Conquest points were abominable when they started coming out, you shouldn’t get arena gear if you don’t arena.
Out sourcing npcs is bad for what made AV great, a bg of npcs for the npcs and by the npcs.
1 Like
Literally all your examples in the text that follow are about the community on one faction. AV 1.5 doesn’t really do that in any more significant way than AV 1.12. My specific statement was about cross-faction recognition generating a better PVP community across the whole server. CRBGs inject outsiders into the environment who become ‘faceless NPCs’. Whether its 1.5 or 1.12, as long as its intra-server, not inter-server, that element is preserved. The biggest destroyer of “revenge/rivalry based PVP” is the faceless men of CRBGs.
And again, if you keep reading you’ll see that I highlighted that even removing CRBGs would be “a change” that would open the floodgates for demanding every different pet project from no DHKs, to Guild Banks (“a guild bank alt is the same thing”) , to Captain Placeholder, to disconnected Flight Paths and disconnected banks, to C’thun pre-nerf, to yes, AV 1.5.
If I had the choice between a clean consistent 1.12 game, including CRBGs, and the franken-patch of ‘loudest voice wins’, I’ll accept the CRBGs as the price of “what it was at the time”.
I did read your whole post – I’m just pointing out that your preference for a healthier community is better served under a previous version of AV. That’s not me trying to slant things – it’s just the design of the BG and the way it naturally works talking.
Incidentally, I did specifically reference both factions – I did, after all, mention learning to hate the rogue who kept sapping you, and there’s a thousand other readily available examples for every which direction you could ask for that I didn’t get into. If you need another, alright – there used to always be that group of roaming bandits taking back towers in a group that you got to recognize, but I’m really not looking to get lost in the minutiae of how it encouraged rivalries – the fact that a non-1.11 AV is so strongly fought for seems to speak for itself in that regard.
Any other version of AV encourages rivalries across factions more than 1.11, for the simple reason that in 1.11, PvP was less encouraged by virtue of the design of the BG at that point than it was in previous iterations.
You do not generate rivalries with people you do not engage with. If the design of the BG favors riding past each other and never looking back, there is less incentive to get in situations that cause / encourage those rivalries.
Incidentally, if you consider any possible change a ‘floodgate,’ 1.12 itemization is already eligible to be that floodgate, as WoW did not start with 1.12 itemization and stats. We are not getting a perfect Vanilla experience, which I’m okay with, but let’s not act like there’s no changes, or that Blizz hasn’t specifically responded to feedback with changes. Those changes haven’t really ‘opened’ the floodgates. People will always ask for more. The question isn’t if those requests for more exist (they should, it shows engagement and desire for a good product), but if they’re reasonable within the design and intent without causing damage to the experience, which is not up to the community alone to weigh – only for them to weigh in.
4 Likes
Yet again, another person claiming that Blizzard forcing changes that none of us want onto us, is an opening for players to force changes that only some want. Blizzard is the 1000-pound gorilla in the room. If they force changes on us, we can argue for adjustments or changes to make it “more like vanilla” but in the end they can just overrule us.
Using that as a justification for why players get to drive a change away from what Blizzard’s stated goals are, isn’t the same thing. One is the dam owner diverting the water in the dam for agriculture. The other is the dam breaking. The flood gates aren’t open, because Blizzard knows how to hold a line to what they need, as opposed to what we want.
You, ahh, understand that’s all what I just said, right?
People are weighing in, and it may not mean anything. But whether Blizzard listens to the feedback or not has, in the end, no real factor on whether or not there will be requests for more changes or not. People will always ask for changes. It’s human nature.
In the end, the only thing that matters is if the request makes sense to Blizzard. By which standard – we should not be afraid to give feedback for fear of a ‘floodgate’ being opened.
To be clear – I did not claim any of this. I stated that we should give feedback without fear of a ‘floodgate’, as you termed it, because feedback is a natural thing to give, and if people want to justify a change they already have whatever ammo they need to make it up.
Rather than concern ourselves with some floodgate that, honestly, assumes no one would be manning the dam, we should simply present our arguments (in the sense of a debate), let them stand on their own merits and flaws, and see what happens. But to keep saying no because you’re afraid one change will make people ask for more – if that were the case, none of the other changes Blizz has already announced should have happened.
5 Likes
You specifically did use the argument “Blizzard already started it, why can’t we”. That argument is not valid for the reason I stated here, and in dozens of other threads on all those other things people have specifically asked for.
If that were likely to happen, this thread would have ended about 30 posts in.
Except that Blizzard gets to overrule us. We show not allow people to use them making bad changes that no-one wants, as an excuse to make our own changes. That is what the floodgates hold back. Nothing holds back Blizzard ignoring us completely and releasing 1.12 as 1.12 without any progression or variation. They’re making content cycles as a concession to us. They’re listening to us when they make a non-Vanilla change and we want them to dial it back. Using that as an excuse for why you should get 1.5 is an invalid argument.
No its not. Its a valid argument since blizzard has stated that they want feedback on what parts of vanilla to put in classic brach said so. The different versions of AV fall i to that category and as such its reasonable to think that if ebough people push for an earlier version its possible they might budge or at least compromise.
6 Likes
And the feedback they’ve actually reacted to has only ever been about non-Vanilla features. Loot Trading, Sharding, RCR etc.
No, what I was saying was that if people want a justification for why they’re making a suggestion, they’ll find it. I was not saying that was my reasoning. At all. My statement of ‘if you’re afraid of a floodgate’ was in reference to the idea that if someone wants to make a suggestion, they don’t need any other justification than what’s already happened – and it doesn’t matter because we are not the ones making the decision.
Blizzard is.
And we are all communicating with Blizzard. I am saying I would like to see an earlier version of AV restored because if Blizz eventually opts to make TBC and Wrath servers, two of the Legacy-type servers will share the same mechanical AV, instead of three unique versions.
You are communicating that you want a strict 1.12 version of AV unless they stagger the earlier versions out and -end- at 1.12.
Others are arguing the merits of the 1.5 version of AV over the 1.12 version of AV.
We are not here to make the decisions. Blizzard is. We can only present our debate, make our case, and see what happens, based on any of the feedback. Maybe when AV is released, they’ll have wholly agreed with you, and we’ll get progressive AV. Maybe they’ll think restoring a painting still leaves it inaccurate, and it will be 1.11. Maybe they’ll think 1.5 is a perfect picture because it’s where it all started or 1.8 because it was tied for longest running AV with 1.11 but its mechanics were -only- available in Vanilla.
We don’t know. We offer up our thoughts, and Blizz will sift through it what Blizz will sift through.
You are the one who stated you were concerned about a floodgate. I will talk to the Keeper of the Water about how I feel about the distribution of the water.
6 Likes
Then explain what brach meant at blizzcon? He specifically states changes wholly within the vanilla timeline are up for debate and give some examples implying there are more things to consider what version to use and asked for our feedback on said issues.
3 Likes
And not only did he give examples like UBRS being 5 man which never occurred in Vanilla, nothing of what J Allen “But you don’t” Brack has said really ever happens.
Give an example where it has.
1 Like
“the compass heading should be to try to re-create the original 2004, 2005 experience. That’s the compass heading we should be following.”
- Brack in 2018
https://www.forbes.com/sites/hnewman/2018/01/30/classic-servers-cats-and-cute-things-the-world-of-warcraft-interview/#406eaa965134
2 Likes
Yeah so I should assume he was lying and risk missing out on something to make you feel better? Ill take the other approach and assume he was telling the truth and risk being wrong but still having a shot at getting what I want. We can only go on what weve been told going on anything else is pure speculation.
5 Likes
I’m not even going on what we’ve been told. I’m going off “actions speak louder than words” and going off what Blizzard has done so far.
You can assume Brack is saying what Brack says. Whatever it takes to keep the players happy.
If you’ve accepted that 1.12 is the truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth, why exactly are you a permanent resident of this thread?
What role do you believe you have to play here? You are not the keeper of the water, nor are you someone interested in speaking with the keeper of the water.
4 Likes
Brack was speaking as the President of Blizzard Entertainment. The President of the company doesn’t always get his way with how the game is actively developed and implemented. He’s there to make big decisions. Not go in and develop games.
Echo chambers tend to create more toxic encounters when they leave the echo chamber and suddenly realise that not everyone agrees with them.
Example: American politics.