And? Other than that why should we not have guild banks in classic?
As much as I dislike it people have given reasons why proper balancing should not happen in classic. What is an actually good reason against guild banks?
For the same reason why heirlooms shouldn’t be in classic. For the same reason why transmog shouldn’t be in classic. For the same reason flying shouldn’t be in classic.
The answer is in your question.
The answer is ‘classic’. Classic implies it’s a direct facsimile of the original game in which guild banks didn’t exist. The people that want no changes are the people that want the most authentic classic experience possible.
All you’re after is extra storage space.
8 Likes
they don’t understand logic.
Id upvote your post difford but blizzard says I gotta wait 5 hours to like another post. Corporations deciding what you can and cant like and now how fast you can like them.
2 Likes
Then I counter it with “When Blizzard agrees to no changes then that will be the standard we hold” Blizzard has not therefore it’s not an argument. It’s a request.
They absolutely have.
1 Like
If Blizzard was deciding what people can and can’t like, there would be no need for them to hide active sub numbers. What they can decide is the rule set on the forum they own, administrate and maintain.
Only way you can believe that is if you apply confirmation bias to Blizzard statements.
Blizzard has never limited their options to do as they choose with their own intellectual property.
Quick question. If someone purchases 3 years worth of game time with tokens (the max time allowed) Then cancels their subscription.
Is that an active sub, cancelled sub, or some other kinda label you can slap on it?
Why should Blizzard maintain a tally of something they quite possibly no longer find relevant.
Its a cancelled subscription. You answered your own question when you said “Then cancels their subscription.” however I bet Actiblizzard labels it as active to impress share holders. I don’t see how any of this plays into likes on a forum. There is no reason to limit likes.
The question was directed at the statement about Blizzard hiding sub numbers. So I, also, have no link to likes.
Not sure how you can possibly know that Blizzard tracks it as a canceled sub. Maybe multiple labels. Such as canceled/activeGameTime.
Either way simple yes/no tracking on subs isn’t representative of the active player base
1 Like
I did have loved these topic titles ![:laughing:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/laughing.png?v=6" ":laughing:")
Thanks! They make most people laugh while a minority get upset.
Jeb is a mess
Guild banks were not in Vanilla. there is no reason to think they will be in Classic release.
3 Likes
Tell pro changes that, they will report you and flag your message. Already flagged this thread three times in 24 hours because they cant handle facts and want it deleted.
1 Like
They were too in Vanilla, they were a shared account that every guild had. Your choice to make sure Classic is like Vanilla is to either have legitimate guild banks or require Blizzard look the other way when it comes to shared accounts. Guess which one they won’t do? If you want no changes, you basically have to support legitimate guild banks.
Then they can do that and can risk having multiple users abuse the one account.
(Edited to prove that it doesn’t matter what I quoted)
1 Like
Its almost like you only read one sentence and decided to respond to that instead of reading the rest of my post.
I read the entire thing actually. Whether I quoted one sentence or the whole thing, I still would’ve typed the same response.
you cant share account with authentificator;
so it force players to disable authentificator also;
so to disable whole account good security feature which does not normally have any gameplay influence;