Guild Banks Pt. 9999 ; Guild banks wont be in Classic

WoW Classic WoW Classic General Discussion
1

Guild banks shouldn’t be in Classic.

If you fail to see why adding guild banks is a problem, you clearly don’t understand the spirit of Classic.

Even if the infrastructure were there to support them code wise, the data wouldn’t be there.

Blizzard - “Authenticity is our goal. We want to recreate an experience that feels like playing 2006 World of Warcraft.”

Again they also said they are removing instant mail so people go out and explore the world. Either you go out and hand the items to the person or you mail it to them. This is the same thing with guild banks. Guild banks removes the need to go out and get to the recipient. Instead you just drop it into a guild bank and they go to the guild bank and grab it even though you just put it in at Undercity and they are in Thunderbluff. Why would Blizzard put in a loop hole, that instant mailing is, with guild banks?

Those who want guild banks, should admit you want a QoL feature to be added.

As Ion said, what some people perceive as little changes can cause ripple effects that they never considered. And to say, ‘But it works in Current WoW. It worked in TBC’ is to ignore the fact that Vanilla had a radically different social dynamic. And, again, Ion said they don’t want to mess with that dynamic.

guild banks were NEVER part of vanilla, adding the non vanilla QOL convenience of guild banks to classic would not be as close to vanilla as much as possible and that vanilla not only survived without guild banks, but thrived without them.

Persistence of a bad idea doesn’t make it not a bad idea.

You continue to argue convenience. And it continues to be irrelevant. Vanilla means Vanilla, warts and all. Good and the bad. Deal with it. We did once and we will again.

The player should have to make the choice whether to give up characters slots for the extra storage space or use those slots for characters they will play at the cost of some extra storage space.

A huge part of vanilla’s guilds was trust and loyalty is everything. your gm or whoever would usually keep the guild’s items on an alt and you had to trust them.

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. Guild banks weren’t introduced until patch 2.3, so it really has no right being in classic at this point.

Note not all these came from me but from the Classic community.

38 Likes
4

Guild Banks is one thing I could see Blizzard going for just to reduce GM tickets and account security concerns.

I know it goes against the design of Vanilla, but so does loot trading and Blizzard overruled their desire for authenticity when it came to something that was about GM tickets.

11 Likes
5

Exactly. I have no idea why people want to add things that weren’t in Vanilla.

People, if you want guild banks THAT badly, then continue playing retail. Oh but that’s the problem isn’t it? You want the Classic gameplay but with QoL features from retail.

That’s a bit like having your cake and eating it too. i.e - selfish, greedy

12 Likes
6

Hoping loot trading as well as sharding are explored again by Blizzard. Maybe then they will see how flawed both systems are and why they aren’t healthy for Classic.

12 Likes
7

Guild banks will not necessarily reduce the number of tickets, as the increase in tickets when guild banks were introduced showed. Instead of “Johnny is using his guild bank alt to ‘steal’ from the guild” tickets, the tickets will be “The GM, officer X or guild member Y is ‘stealing’ everything I (we) put in the guild bank”.

As has been noted previously, though, GM’s will not restore anything removed from the guild bank (unless they are overstepping their authority) because anyone who withdrew any items had permission to do so.

Those precious in game logs will not even prove theft or who the thief is, should there even be a thief.

Restricting guild bank access still results in people having to wait for someone with access to be online in order to obtain items from the guild bank.

5 Likes
8

So you started an entirely new thread because all your arguments were shot down in the last one? And all you have to contribute is that guild banks weren’t in vanilla, something that noone has ever debated?

13 Likes
9

I don’t even know what a guild bank is/does. Whatever it is, it won’t be in classic.

3 Likes
10

That thread was close to ending. This one popped up just in time. The verdict is no guild banks in Classic. Have fun waiting till TBC servers where you’ll then cry for LFR.

9 Likes
11

It’s a convenience players are used to, so they want it added to Classic. Obviously it won’t be. Authenticity will prevail.

12 Likes
12

Oh I wasn’t aware of any statement by blizzard saying build banks wouldn’t be in :slight_smile:

But if you really wanted to open another thread just to have all your arguments shot down again?

6 Likes
13

Shot down :roll_eyes: by Blizzard? :face_with_raised_eyebrow:
No? :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

5 Likes
14

YAY The final answer… with opposing views… and no Blzzard comment.

Carry on, forum business as usual.

2 Likes
15

Funny how you assume everything you want will be in until it’s confirmed that it’s not. Why not assume that it’s not and wait until confirmation says that is?

8 Likes
16

“Authenticity is our goal” - Blizzard, right before confirming loot trading, right click reporting, 7.3.5 client, battle.net integration, and expressing a tentative intention to implement sharding.

8 Likes
17

“shot down” aka pro changers completely ignoring facts.

13 Likes
18

The final verdict is they should not be in Classic. That’s just common knowledge. Sorry you don’t have the IQ high enough to understand basic English. Perhaps go back to middle school, wait no that’s too hard for you. Try kindergarten. I know it will be tough for you Ziryus but you have to do it eventually, otherwise you’ll never be able to have adult conversation and be forced to skip over whole pages when reading because you stumble on basic concepts interpreted by basic English composition. Go ahead a run along now. The people with college degrees are talking.

6 Likes
19

This topic really needs an intervention by Ysithiens.

5 Likes
20

I can’t like this post enough. I don’t lean strongly one way or the other, mostly because Blizz will do whatever the hell they want and we’ll either play it or not, but the no-change trolls are just as bad (if not worse, since they refuse to even have a dialogue) than the pro-change trolls.

Right out of the gate we knew things wouldn’t be exactly the same, but OMFG NO CHANGES. Stop listening to what Blizz has said and look at what they are doing; isn’t that kind of the whole point of bringing back Classic anyways? People were sick of what Blizz was doing even though they said it was for the best.

21

Maybe they should have said “Cost effective authenticity is our goal”. All of the changes are designed to save time/money on Blizz’s part. It’s tough for us as players because we don’t know what the mandate from the higher ups at Blizzard is. Is it maximum cost effectiveness? Cost effective authenticity?

Dar, with regards to your point about the refusal to have a dialogue I would counter with this: Players have been lobbying for a decade for the original experience. (Outside of a 10 day in Vanilla, I’m an early TBC baby). To have Blizzard say that technology limits what they can do is tough, but understandable. However, to have spent all of those years dealing with the Wall Of No before having Blizz cave only to have other players suddenly lobby for an altered version of the original is a frustrating thing.

5 Likes
22

Bring back Vanilla as it was consisting only of things between 1.1 and 1.12.1. Yes.

6 Likes