Player voted changes

[Moonblade-hyjal (Moonblade)]

but since you can not grasp that the definition is referring to essential features, as in the main focus/most important part of any reproduction- and since i dont have the nerve to argue semantics, which is exactly what this is and not the actual meaning- i will post every definition to the word possible.

as in the main focus/most important part of any reproduction

/most important part of any reproduction

As I have repeated several times, this does not apply to the ST class quests. Another self-own. Keep em coming.

RE-production.

REEE-production. learn the word and then come back.

[Missuspowpow-proudmoore (Missuspowpow)]

Despite the negative impact such a change would have

You have yet to specify what that would be, presumably because there is no downside.

[Moonblade-hyjal (Moonblade)]

REEE

Another typical no-changer cliche.

reported for trolling

i guess REproduce/REproduction- does not actually mean RE-creating something that already exists/existed. according to them. lmfao.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

Except opening the door to other post vanilla changes?

[Missuspowpow-proudmoore (Missuspowpow)]

Well since you aren’t able to explain what would hurt the game about this change, I can’t say that’s a problem in and of itself. Except by your own rigid definition, which is irrelevant.

[anon83682923]

instead go in the past I want go in the future with WoW
by introduce the artificial intelligence to team up with em ( AI players style )
since team up with the human players
is just painful due the bad psychotic anti social
altitude of the majority of the human players
I mean pay to play for then deal with super depressed people
it’s just stupid…!!!

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

By allowing a post vanilla addition to the game you open the door to other post vanilla changes.

How is that hard to understand?

[Moonblade-hyjal (Moonblade)]

Well since you aren’t able to explain what would hurt the game about this change, I can’t say that’s a problem in and of itself. Except by your own rigid definition, which is irrelevant.

blizzards own words: recreating an AUTHENTIC vanilla experience.

says the definition of authentic is irrelevant

keep in mind that this is the same company that they expect to fix the so called druid class quest.

not sure how you can give a bigger finger than that.

[Missuspowpow-proudmoore (Missuspowpow)]

Um, I understood it. Might wanna re-read my post. I’m the one who has been saying positive changes with no drawbacks should be added. You’re the one saying that is self-evidently wrong despite backing this up with no arguments. All you have done is lie about being done with the conversation for no reason and tell me I’m not understanding.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

And who gets to decide what is positive with no drawbacks?

[Missuspowpow-proudmoore (Missuspowpow)]

And here come the dishonest argumentation tactics. You are actually willfully twisting my words while accusing me of doing it because you are losing the argument.

blizzards own words: recreating an AUTHENTIC vanilla experience.

Yes. My suggestion is in-line with the definition of authentic that you provided.

says the definition of authentic is irrelevant

Nope.

keep in mind that this is the same company that they expect to fix the so called druid class quest.

They already did. It was easy. Now all they have to do is make sure to put it back in the game. Even easier.

not sure how you can give a bigger finger than that.

Umm, the whole point of player voted changes is to not rely on Blizzard’s judgement. So how is it giving them the finger to agree to the definition of authentic that you provided? These thoughts are completely disconnected.

[Moonblade-hyjal (Moonblade)]

And here come the dishonest argumentation tactics. You are actually willfully twisting my words while accusing me of doing it because you are losing the argument.

blizzards own words: recreating an AUTHENTIC vanilla experience.

Yes. My suggestion is in-line with the definition of authentic that you provided.

says the definition of authentic is irrelevant

Nope.

keep in mind that this is the same company that they expect to fix the so called druid class quest.

They already did. It was easy. Now all they have to do is make sure to put it back in the game. Even easier.

not sure how you can give a bigger finger than that.

Umm, the whole point of player voted changes is to not rely on Blizzard’s judgement. So how is it giving them the finger to agree to the definition of authentic that you provided? These thoughts are completely disconnected.

[Missuspowpow-proudmoore (Missuspowpow)]

Still waiting for someone to identify even one.

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

Your idea already has one.
It opens tge door to post vanilla changes.

Which goes against the goal of making vanilla authentic.
This isn’t osrs. It hasn’t ever been the goal.
The goal has never been to take vanilla and fix all the issues.
The goal has been to make vanilla.

If you want vanilla + go advertise to blizzard that you would like them to make a vanilla + server.

[Missuspowpow-proudmoore (Missuspowpow)]

Way ahead of you! As you may have noticed, I’m in the process of doing exactly that!

[Mohnium-mannoroth]

Correction, it’d have to be 51% to change. That’s how a democracy works, we are a democracy.

what do you mean we? we who? who is we?

[Matcauthon-steamwheedle-cartel (Matcauthon)]

No your in the process of trying to change vanilla into vanilla +. That’s not what I said at all. I said to go ask for a completely different game. Not change the one you don’t want into the one you do want.

[Morehwine-wyrmrest-accord (Morehwine)]

Umm, the whole point of player voted changes is to not rely on Blizzard’s judgement. So how is it giving them the finger to agree to the definition of authentic that you provided? These thoughts are completely disconnected.

The only possible changes to Classic that I might tolerate, and the key word is might, would be if the entire original design team got back together, with their original notes in hand so they could reference what their goals were. At that point, if they offered something for the players to vote on re: unfinished quest chains, I would probably accept Ithe resulting “player voted changes”.

This scenario is so unlikely as to be off in the realm of fantasy land, though, and I don’t think it’s what you have in mind. But to me it’s the only thing that would be near “authentic”.

[Farthir-durotan]

Not all of us want a perfect replication of a 1.12.1 patch. Some of us simply prefer the old playstyle style of Vanilla, and would like balance adjustments, talent improvements, and content delivered in the style of Vanilla, as if TBC never happened, since they can’t enjoy any other version of WoW.

There was a level of ongoing support in Vanilla. Improving your class, making talents more powerful/fun etc. is part of Vanilla. Not having that in Classic would simply not be “Vanilla.”

Although, regrettably, they also moved backwards in some aspects during Vanilla, such as by homogenizing Survival Hunters by making them ranged. But this is also something that a frequent patch cycle would also help with, by allowing us to dial back the mistakes of the past.

[Rözen-the-scryers (Rözen)]

I’m not mad or offended. Just pointing out that your argument loses weight with needless disparaging statements. Leave that to the opposition. Take the high ground.