Guild Banks Pt. 14

[Cyberfour-aegwynn]

Based on what’s been said recently, I don’t think they’re going to be in and I’m good with that. However, as we’ve talked about before (I think we’ve talk about everything before), at some point down the road I wouldn’t be opposed to them being used as a gold sink.

Yes, I’m necroing this thread. Do I care about guild banks? Not really and I highly doubt they’ll be in there. However, having seen all of the AV debate, I have decided that this is a far less contentious topic.

Why would you do this?

[Katerina-mannoroth]

Bag space is meant to be a resource in and of itself. If you give peoples bank-alts a bunch of low cost bag space in comparison to buying normal bags and what not then you will be influencing the market cost for bags. Which in vanilla high slot bags(the highest of which I believe was 18 slots) were fairly expensive, so reducing the cost to get high amounts of storage on a character would affect the overall economy.

I always considered the bagspace management “minigame” to be about what I could take with me. Not about what I could squirrel away somewhere that wasn’t immediately available to me.

It isn’t like you can store soulbound gear in a guild bank, or on an alt. THAT was “the bag space management mini-game.” How much soul-bound stuff were you willing to keep linked to a particular character, and what trade offs were you willing to accept in exchange for it?

This was particularly relevant for crafters going for high mat requirement crafting. Needing to be able to carry everything they needed to where they needed to be to craft the item, and have somewhere for the finished product to go. Being able to carry all of the consumables you need for a raid, so on and so forth.

A guild bank existing or not has Zero impact on that part of the game play, either the non-critical trade-able items would be shuffled off to an alt(possibly on a second account), or a guild bank, and that’s the end of it.

The only thing it possibly changes, and only slightly, is the “social interaction” aspect of it, as now Joe Blow can just walk into a capital city, visit the bank, and withdraw what he needs. Or see if there’s something he might have use for and ask for it. Where previously he would have needed to possibly ASK somebody if ___ was in the “guild bank” and then possibly talk to somebody else in order to obtain the item. So it does slightly reduce some social interactions.

On the flip side though, for many of the guild officers, it removes a lot of drudgery as it related to the “officer only” stuff. Where the only person who would have been involved was that “quartermaster” for the guild, who’d either have to two-box, or log in and log out multiple times as they switch between alts in order to go about collecting everything that was needed.

[Shimy-khadgar]

No guild banks.

[Katerina-mannoroth]

Given the opposition to guild banks in every one of the previous threads, I would suspect that those who desire a truer classic experience would.

I think you’d find most of the opposition isn’t really, truly opposition to Guild Banks. What they’re afraid of is “the slippery slope” and because they’re opposed to the Slippery Slope, they’re opposed to Guild Banks.

[Katerina-mannoroth]

On top of that the only thing complained about for vanilla mail system isn’t the time it takes, it’s the one item at a time issue that virtually requires add-ons to make it effective.

As I recall, they said they might allow batching of mail in the base client this time. Making you mail things 1 item at a time doesn’t add to the gameplay, and it is even more pointless when an addon can do it for you.

The thing they did away with was instant mail.

[Katerina-mannoroth]

Major cities? Do you mean cities like Gadgetzan, Booty Bay, Ratchet and Everlook, as well as the Capitol cities. Sure, if Johnny wants to create 7 bank alts so that he can park on in every capitol city, as well as the Goblin towns, then maybe he can bypass that one hour mail wait without a guild bank.

Nobody said the guild bank implementation in Classic has to mirror what happened in TBC and Later. I’d actually be fine if they locked down the guild banks to faction-specific banking locations only. So the goblin towns wouldn’t have guild banking services in this scenario. There is more than one way to go about doing things.

[Fesz-cenarius]

Major cities? Do you mean cities like Gadgetzan, Booty Bay, Ratchet and Everlook, as well as the Capitol cities. Sure, if Johnny wants to create 7 bank alts so that he can park on in every capitol city, as well as the Goblin towns, then maybe he can bypass that one hour mail wait without a guild bank.

Nobody said the guild bank implementation in Classic has to mirror what happened in TBC and Later. I’d actually be fine if they locked down the guild banks to faction-specific banking locations only. So the goblin towns wouldn’t have guild banking services in this scenario. There is more than one way to go about doing things.

Are you another one those that advocates not only adding the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks, but also redesigning the guild bank system so that it functions in manner in which it never did previously?

[Gorwarth-khazgoroth (Gorwarth)]

if they arent changing the code from 1.12 why would they add more code to it?

Who said they are not changing 1.12?
They are doing it for mail, most likely for the new BNET social functions and I am sure they will be doing it for ALOT of bugs/exploits as well.

[Cleavis-magtheridon]

You’re replying to a post from November

[Fesz-cenarius]

Given the opposition to guild banks in every one of the previous threads, I would suspect that those who desire a truer classic experience would.

I think you’d find most of the opposition isn’t really, truly opposition to Guild Banks. What they’re afraid of is “the slippery slope” and because they’re opposed to the Slippery Slope, they’re opposed to Guild Banks.

“Those that oppose guild banks don’t really oppose guild banks, they just oppose guild banks”?

Many, including myself, have noted the convenience that guild banks provide.

They were never present in vanilla, though, and therefore should not be part of Classic. IMO.

IMO, the best course of action is to keep all those non vanilla QOL convenience feet firmly on the other side of the door.

[Galdor-maelstrom (Galdor)]

Are you going to be joining a Guild?

[Fesz-cenarius]

Are you going to be joining a Guild?

I may join a guild or form one myself.

What relevance does that have to guild banks never being present in vanilla?

[Galdor-maelstrom (Galdor)]

You seem more invested in this topic than any other, just trying to understand why.

[Katerina-mannoroth]

Are you another one those that advocates not only adding the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks, but also redesigning the guild bank system so that it functions in manner in which it never did previously?

As someone who ran a second WoW account for the purpose of operating a “Guild Bank Alt” and also shared the account with other officers, and also had that account get hacked and subsequently locked by Blizzard(but recoverable, except the stolen materials; that was “fun”) I perhaps have a slightly different skew on it. It is a account security issue from my perspective.

I can see both sides of it, slippery slope is a valid concern. However, I think Blizz-GM overhead and “other factors” are going to skew it towards allowing them. I don’t really see it as a hill to die on, but I do think it’d be a (very) slight net-positive all things considered.

I also do agree that Guild-Bank access in 6 locations across the Classic Game world is a little too convenient for Classic. As to the implementation being different from what even happened in retail? Meh.

As has previously been mentioned, that’s a few lines of code and 3 tweaks to the game world. (Making it so players can’t interact with the guild bank widgets in the Goblin Cities; which the Classic Devs probably have figured out how to do anyway, without regard to what implementation they ultimately do)

People keep confusing themselves as to what’s going on with Classic WoW. It is the Classic WoW data/game mechanics on the modern client. Deference is made to the 1.12 reference client in nearly all cases(unless they decide to differ, and they have on a few points already). But while it may be the 1.12 mechanics, it is very unlikely to be the 1.12 code making those mechanics happen. But rather a mix of “reformatted data” paired with “(slightly altered) code”(“wrappers”) to make it work inside the modern client.

The Modern Client Features that won’t be available for players in Classic? They’re probably still there, or least “the hooks” for them will be there. They’ll just have “wrappers” of their own to allow the client to operate normally without anything happening client side to make things not work.

From a long-term maintainability standpoint, they’re very likely to be coding this to use as much of the active “retail” code as is possible. Which means making Classic Work with the fewest changes to the retail code base as possible.

The final “Classic Client” will be running on the same exact “engine” version as the retail client is on. The only things that will be different is the datasets they’re using, and the state of those “wrappers.”

As such the hooks for the guild bank code will be in the client at a minimum, so will most of the despised “Slippery slope” stuff. They’ll just be dormant, or not, as the case may be.

I’d be surprised if Guild Banks aren’t implemented in the game, or don’t otherwise end up in the game within the first few months(after they start having “enough” GM ticket issues that the Guild Banks would resolve/prevent to justify doing so). But they’re not going to make or break my choice to play or continue playing.

[Fesz-cenarius]

Are you another one those that advocates not only adding the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks, but also redesigning the guild bank system so that it functions in manner in which it never did previously?

As someone who ran a second WoW account for the purpose of operating a “Guild Bank Alt” and also shared the account with other officers, and also had that account get hacked and subsequently locked by Blizzard(but recoverable, except the stolen materials; that was “fun”) I perhaps have a slightly different skew on it. It is a account security issue from my perspective.

I can see both sides of it, slippery slope is a valid concern. However, I think Blizz-GM overhead and “other factors” are going to skew it towards allowing them. I don’t really see it as a hill to die on, but I do think it’d be a (very) slight net-positive all things considered.

I also do agree that Guild-Bank access in 6 locations across the Classic Game world is a little too convenient for Classic. As to the implementation being different from what even happened in retail? Meh.

As has previously been mentioned, that’s a few lines of code and 3 tweaks to the game world. (Making it so players can’t interact with the guild bank widgets in the Goblin Cities; which the Classic Devs probably have figured out how to do anyway, without regard to what implementation they ultimately do)

People keep confusing themselves as to what’s going on with Classic WoW. It is the Classic WoW data/game mechanics on the modern client. Deference is made to the 1.12 reference client in nearly all cases(unless they decide to differ, and they have on a few points already). But while it may be the 1.12 mechanics, it is very unlikely to be the 1.12 code making those mechanics happen. But rather a mix of “reformatted data” paired with “(slightly altered) code”(“wrappers”) to make it work inside the modern client.

The Modern Client Features that won’t be available for players in Classic? They’re probably still there, or least “the hooks” for them will be there. They’ll just have “wrappers” of their own to allow the client to operate normally without anything happening client side to make things not work.

From a long-term maintainability standpoint, they’re very likely to be coding this to use as much of the active “retail” code as is possible. Which means making Classic Work with the fewest changes to the retail code base as possible.

The final “Classic Client” will be running on the same exact “engine” version as the retail client is on. The only things that will be different is the datasets they’re using, and the state of those “wrappers.”

As such the hooks for the guild bank code will be in the client at a minimum, so will most of the despised “Slippery slope” stuff. They’ll just be dormant, or not, as the case may be.

I’d be surprised if Guild Banks aren’t implemented in the game, or don’t otherwise end up in the game within the first few months(after they start having “enough” GM ticket issues that the Guild Banks would resolve/prevent to justify doing so). But they’re not going to make or break my choice to play or continue playing.

You willingly and deliberately CHOSE to violate the TOS and now want to claim that guild banks are a “security feature”? You got hacked because you CHOSE to violate the TOS, not due to the lack of guild banks.

I, and others, have shown numerous times that account sharing is NOT necessary with guild bank alts.

Those “hooks” for guild banks were never part of the 1.12 code and would have to be added to classic. In some cases, those hooks resulted in vastly different “landscapes” or city layouts.

[Redheadchild-kul-tiras (Redheadchild)]

Again you act like making Location access points changes for guild banks would be hard work. Let alone the fact they already would need to spawn said NPC/object into the world to add guild banks.

It’s as simple as making the spawn point in SW and ORG. And NOT adding the other spots. They would have to add them to classic, choosing to not add in certain spots.

[Fesz-cenarius]

Again you act like making Location access points changes for guild banks would be hard work. Let alone the fact they already would need to spawn said NPC/object into the world to add guild banks.

It’s as simple as making the spawn point in SW and ORG. And NOT adding the other spots. They would have to add them to classic, choosing to not add in certain spots.

Yes, they would have to open that poandora’s box of changing that 1.12 code. That is something they have repeatedly indicated that they do not want to do. That does not even include the ststatements of not wanting to use “modern solutions” to what some considered “vanilla problems”.

You can downplay or dismiss that changing of the 1.12 code as much as you want, but the truth remains that it would be a change of the 1.12 code.

[Starman-zangarmarsh (Starman)]

I, and others, have shown numerous times that account sharing is NOT necessary with guild bank alts.

You actually never did, and you obviously never played vanilla in a raiding guild or you would understand why guild bank alts’ accounts were shared. It was the best people could to.

Remember it’s called a GUILD bank. A guild bank doesn’t serve a guild if one person is the Keeper of the Dreamfoil™.

[Fesz-cenarius]

I, and others, have shown numerous times that account sharing is NOT necessary with guild bank alts.

You actually never did, and you obviously never played vanilla in a raiding guild or you would understand why guild bank alts’ accounts were shared. It was the best people could to.

Remember it’s called a GUILD bank. A guild bank doesn’t serve a guild if one person is the Keeper of the Dreamfoil™.

You choose to ignore the fact that it was very possible to spreadvtgat dreamfoil (and every other resource) among multiple officers.

Of course, that would not support your goal of seeing any number of non vanilla QOL convenience added to classic.

[Starman-zangarmarsh (Starman)]

You choose to ignore the fact that it was very possible to spreadvtgat dreamfoil (and every other resource) among multiple officers.

Of course, that would not support your goal of seeing any number of non vanilla QOL convenience added to classic.

Assuming that everyone holding it is online at the time, which is quite possibly not the case. Hence, your statement fails, and fails hard.

And you still make up stuff about people wanting a non-QOL feature. Dear God, dude, what is wrong with you? People can want something for security and ONLY security.

I just shake my head. And laugh. A lot.