I had it wrong initially. I thought they were removing PF entirely.
then I read the statement on here somewhere about it.
just ugh.
All this time and the only players PF screws over is players who dont want to run the maze like a rat chasing the cheese.
Okay. I’ll try again.
When something is being tested. You have two sides. The positive (the person wishing to change the status quo) and the negative (the side that is observing the testing to see if it holds up.)
It is always on the positive to provide proof. You don’t get to make a hypothesis and then say that its on the community to disprove your hypothesis. You need to bring the proof.
I mean if the market goods sell at a lower price because supply is inflated x10 then it does affect you when you try to sell your goods. Specifically gathering goods. Your price is determined not by the wider community but a band of select multiboxers. This aspect of multiboxers have discouraged many people from even trying to enjoy the gathering professions. Its not fun when you try to look for herbs and they are all gone because one multiboxer is 30 seconds head of you. Worse even if there is more than one multiboxer at a given time.
That is exactly what I read.
Its not about our pathetic screams. its about having some uniformity in all the leveling zones (minus BFA, obviously, so they can torment new players with it, lol).
Oh no, I totally understand the burden of proof business.
It’s the opinion that was interjected in the middle of it. “It’s a more reasonable belief to believe the forum didn’t affect the decision than it is to believe that it did.”
Source where they don’t mention player feedback at all:
https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/t/shadowlands-development-update-notes-april-29/490669/8
2 Likes
Yeah…and you know it’s multiboxers that are controlling the markets how? Is there an indicator say “Yes, this is a Multiboxer” on the AH? I guess it’s the wow version of the illuminati.
2 Likes
It’s just like if you make a thread saying the royal family a reptilians from space.
(I’ve actually seen such a thread.)
No-one needs to argue against a baseless absurdity.
I also want to point out that Blizzard has actual statistics regarding multiboxers and their impact on various parts of the game, they just haven’t released any. You don’t have to agree with everything Blizzard does, but it would be very hard to believe Blizzard would allow multiboxing if they had the negative impact so many claim they do. “Muh Economy” is tagged on to every multibox complaint thread and I think Blizzard knows this isn’t true, and that people are conflating legitimate problems they have with the game with some broader multiboxer conspiracy to destroy the economy under Blizzards nose or with their “permission”.
3 Likes
I don’t see anything in the paragraph that is a source for what you’re claiming. Only the fact that it will be implemented.
I flip when I see the prices are low enough.
if theyre high I farm and sell.
if mats cant make me gold, I go farm mogs and pets.
There is literally no reason for anyone to be busted broke in this game.
if ANY farmer is 30 seconds ahead of you, that node is going to die and you aint gonna get it…MBer or not.
Two druid farmers can keep a zone picked clean without MBing
I know factually because i run into it all the time in Zangarmarsh farming ragveil.
Because of the postive interjection. You’re providing a source. Ie the change came from an external source (the forums). It’s more logical to believe that it was a completely internal affair. (ie making all older xpacs more homogenized since you’ll be able to do which ever ones you want.)
Because of this the proof is on the person making the external claim.
That’s not more believable to me. This is my point.
WOW…really?
you missed the FIRST part?
“With the major changes coming to leveling characters from 10-50 in Shadowlands, we want to make sure that there is a navigational parity among all of the different expansions you can choose while questing”
parity
the state or condition of being equal, especially regarding status or pay.
I mean that’s fine, but that doesn’t change things.
You can’t ask for someone to provide the negative of a proof. I mean you can, but you’ll probably be dismissed at that point (at least academically speaking). You can’t say, “well prove it didn’t/doesn’t/etc”
And it seems like he provided evidence anyways, so I’m just yelling into the void.
Kitten, my cat is more believable than you.
I totally agree with that, and it doesn’t apply.
Kinda does though.
And so that gives you the ability to know exactly what’s going on? If you admit that is it purely anecdotal, do you really think I am expected to take your words as fact and objective truth? of course not.
Made by the same people over and over again, yes.
You’re taking away your own agency at this point with these arguments, and it makes me sad.