No I didn’t but if I did, you should be able to quote it easy enough lol.
This is you basically stating that it’s worthwhile for them to have the Tenders be purchasable.
lol
It’s worthwhile in the sense they would make more money but that’s just a “no duh” sort of statement.
Where exactly is the proposal though, you said I made one lol?
You’re absolutely right and sadly, as long as they’re making profit that’s all that most care about.
2 Likes
Whales. Making games worse with moms credit card since internet access was added to basements everywhere.
1 Like
To be slightly fair, the Scholar set likely included the exact amount of tenders to buy the matching staff instead of including the staff in the bundle so that people who main classes that don’t use staves wouldn’t feel like part of their purchase went to something they can’t use. I can understand the logic there.
The tenders included in expansion bundles are honestly fine imo, 500 bonus every two years if you’re playing the modern game and 500 more if you upgrade the edition, it really just feels like gravy on top of everything else and isn’t gonna break anything.
The corsage bundle was a resounding “meh” though, and they said they learned a lesson in regard to using the store as a vehicle to sell packs that are blatantly just for tenders from the negative feedback on that one, but we’ll see if they hold to that.
The real deep end starts if they ever sell Tender bundles that you can purchase repeatedly.
1 Like
There’s a reason I put that word in quotes. I fully understand that in the greater context of things … you’re right: it doesn’t matter.
But you’re just being obtuse if you think it doesn’t matter in the collecting community. Mount-offs are a big deal. When Panda Remix was first being released, review all the wailing and gnashing of teeth at the prospect of the Challenge Mode skins being added to the vendors.
It’s all subjective, you are completely in your rights to say YOU don’t care.
But why you’re choosing to purposefully confuse this issue is beyond me. Your first two sentences are a direct contradiction.
When Blizzard follows my advice, and puts EVERY pet, mount, xmog, etc back into the game after 5 years, you’ll have more of a point. Until then, fomo exists and there absolutely are things that are “prestigious.” Especially mounts.
No wonder games are the way they are these days with comments like that. You’re not wrong but thinking like that is what causes the monetization practices to keep evolving into worse methods.
You have to think of it from a business perspective, it would be in their best interest to limit how many tenders you could get to push you into buying them. In a similar way in how many f2p games have very long grinds and sell experience boosts and so on. I really wouldn’t want to see tenders in the store because it would ruin something that was pretty nice and felt like an actual part of a mmo that had nothing to do with money.
Because if you can buy them faster itd make the irrelevant so then they would start pushing them to only be paid.
But it’s not an ingame advantage. It wont make me run faster, heal more, or zing a boss down quicker. 
No
/10char
This is untrue.
See: https://www.wowhead.com/guide/trading-post/rewards
If you go thru the rewards month-by-month starting back in February 2023, you will see the prices have remained relatively stable, dependent on the item type.
For instance, flying amounts are always approximately 900 tender. The very first one was sold for that exact amount and both the ones available this month were sold for the exact same amount.
Oh wait, found an exception in battle pets, The very first battle pet (Garrlok) was sold for 750 tenders whereas this month’s battle pet (Worgli) was only 350 tenders and both last month’s (Blub) and the month’s before (Marrlok) were 500 tenders and the month before that (Pokee) it was 400 tenders so their prices have actually come down.
1 Like