***EVERYTHING We Definitively Know about Classic***


#269

No - the person that asked about itemization.


#270

Oh, Blizzard hasn’t said definitively “No you won’t get progressive itemisation”. And like Cubic said, if you don’t stop asking maybe you’ll get what you want.


#271

We never got a non-vague statement on how exactly they plan to deal with the 1.10 gear (i.e. which 1.10 items will be gated and which won’t be - they just said they identified powerful items, again vague), what they plan to do with gear that already existed but was updated in 1.10 to be extremely good (better than MC/BWL gear) and will be available in Phase 1, etc.

You can read my post here where I summarized it Progressive itemization is crucial or character/raid progression is destroyed


#272

This is likely false. Read what they said about 1.10 items: ...We’ve gone back and reconstructed many of the most heavily affected drop tables as they existed prior to the 1.10 patch... They mosty certainly have pre-1.10 data otherwise they wouldn’t have been able to do what they did, and pre-1.10 data (even just 1.9) is enough to eliminate 99% of the itemization anomalies that I describe in my post.


#273

You don’t like it because they didn’t come straight out and say “Progressive itemization is X” but when they’ve gone as far as to specifically comment on progressive item RELEASE - and not mentioned itemization, it’s a fairly safe conclusion that the other side of the coin (itemization) will not be in.


#274

I accept that they have 1.9 or earlier drop tables. And in their progressive item release method, they can slot that in because they have a complete copy. And I don’t think they have them for all patches, or even a large number of patches. 1.10 was a major change to those tables, so likely they have a 1.9 set of the drop data, and decided they could use partial information with the progressive item release because it wasn’t significantly changed in prior patches.

I don’t think they have the spell effects tables for all the items, and especially not the many different iterations that happened all the way through Vanilla. Drop tables changed (significantly) I think twice. Proc rates, ICDs etc were being tweaked constantly through the Vanilla era. I don’t think they have enough data to accurately provide the consistent across-the-board itemisation that people want them to do.

They can reconstruct the visible parts from Thottbott and Alakhazam etc, but its the internals that have vast effects on the game, which they can’t accurately recreate. Ironfoe’s proc rate being 10% vs 2% dramatically changes its benefit. An ICD of 30s vs an ICD of 3 minutes also dramatically changes it.

I don’t think they have a consistent image of the itemisation from an earlier point than 1.12, and for that reason they can’t do progressive itemisation (vs progressive item release).


#275

It’s enough for them to have the item database for 1.9 to cover almost all the itemization anomalies; they all happened in 1.10 (dungeon catch-up gear) and 1.11 (PvP gear). They don’t even have to change any proc rates or spells effects or change every single item in the game; just the stats on the most heavily affected pre-raid items. Nobody will care if low-level quest gear that was updated in 1.10 will stay with its 1.10 stats, or if some items that had little tweaks will stay the same. It’s the big ticket items like Ban’thok Sash and Savage Gladiator Chain that completely change the power curve at Phase 1 & 2. These items and several more like them were updated as catch-up mechanisms and they’re better than MC/BWL loot in their 1.10 state.


#276

Having the drop tables, and having the entire database are completely separate statements though. They’ve given no indication they have more than the drop tables.

How low level? Some BiS pieces in Classic can come from the 40s.


#277

You can see a list of all weapons & armor that were updated in 1.10 here https://itemization.info/?search=updated%3A1.10

Edit: out of that list, many of the changes are not significant, but some of them stand out like the examples I’ve given (Ban’thok, Savage Glad, etc.)


#278

None of those cover the ICD and Proc rate, which is the entire problem with Private Server simulacrum, and the major reason why progressive itemisation is hard. The stats on the item that you see are not the only part of it.


#279

What proc rate and ICD do the items I’ve given as examples have? you keep repeating that but these are just simple items with simple stats.

Edit: read my original thread here Progressive itemization is crucial or character/raid progression is destroyed to see more examples, and again none of them have procs or hidden effects that need restoration, it’s just simple stat changes.


#280

It doesn’t matter if you tailor your examples to only cover things without a proc. Ironfoe is the significant counter-example you keep ignoring.

Released in 1.1, changed in 1.3, and 1.7 according to your logic. Except that according to commentary from back then it could:

  • Both proc off windfury (2005) and not proc off windfury (2006).
  • Had a proc rate of 2.5% and 5% in mid 2006 (they guess).

You want certain items fixed because you can see stat changes. I’m pointing out that Blizzard won’t do part of the items and leave the rest. They’ll only do it if they can do consistent changes across the board, which they can’t do without the data.

If they have the total item data at 1.9 (which they haven’t said they do) and the data for 1.12 (which we know they do), then yes, totally, do progressive itemisation with all stats for weaponry at 1.9 values in CP1-5, then change it to 1.12 values in CP6.

But if they don’t, they won’t. They’re not going to play with balancing issues if they only have some or none of the hidden, DB only, itemisation data.


#281

That’s not true either. Read what they said about 1.10 again: Prior to the Ahn’Qiraj unlock, most of the drop rates and locations will look as they did in the patches prior to 1.10, with exceptions—there are lots of little changes made in earlier patches that don’t have a big effect on player power, and in those cases, we’re planning to use the 1.12 drop rates and locations. They have no problem doing partial changes if that’s what makes sense - and this is exactly what’s needed here. To curve these pre-raid items to their intended strength in Phase 1 & 2.


#282

Which is probably a greater indication that they don’t have total itemisation data. You raise a valid argument on the partial elements, but for the reasons I pointed out above, and the effort of itemisation vs item release, I doubt they’re going to do it.


#283

As a software engineer for the past 20 years I can tell you it’s not that much effort to write a script that changes some rows in a database and another script to later change them to something else, or just have multiple versions of the database and restore the one you want, it’s probably exactly what they’re doing with the drop tables anyway :slight_smile:

But anyway, it boils down to you willing to give Blizzard a pass to not implement these crucial stat changes, while I’m not ready to give them such a pass. I want Classic to be the best it can be and I think these pre-raid items being this strong this early is not good for the long-term health of the game for all the reasons I listed in my post.


#284

As a software engineer from before WoW was released, I also know that reconstructing the data to make sure its suitable and not tainted by external data like Private Server changes, will take far longer than the initial data pull. You’re assuming they have that itemisation data still, and don’t have to reconstruct it from outside sources, or their own data sources. Itemization.info didn’t come from Blizzard’s internal database, and if they are reconstructing data that they simply don’t have, the only sources are those external sites.


#285

itemization.info is derived from a database that is the result of 100s of hours of volunteers like the Nostalrius team scouring over the archive.org versions of thottbot and allahkazam, it’s not just stats that people made up, and it is constantly being updated and refined for accuracy as new information comes to light. And if they have pre-1.10 data to rebuild drop tables the chances are very high they also have the item data as well, as a software guy I don’t have to tell you that.

Also, in the worst case scenario they can rebuild all the old stats themselves from archive.org versions of all the old wow sites (thottbot/allakazam/tentonhammer/various blogs and guild sites/etc.), old Youtube videos and the client-side DBCs in the various versions of vanilla clients. There’s enough data there to get multiple verifications from different sources on the most important items


#286

And that effort of checking is a large effort that will be required for Blizzard to trust the data.


#287

You are 100% correct, and I expect Blizzard to undertake that effort in the name of authenticity, a term they so fondly like to throw around. If a bunch of private server volunteers can do it in their free time I’m sure a large corporation like Blizzard can do it.


#288

I always accept that an unpaid volunteer army will do far more work than a paid corporation though. And the Classic team isn’t big.