Pls don't add LFR

[Radalpho-proudmoore (Radalpho)]

It shows how deficient he/she is with their skills and need to feed their HPD so they can stand around in purchased pay for play gear and pretend like they did something.

[Zaalg-ashkandi]

I’m more concerned with the deficiency of logic, reason and common sense.

[Lagenolm-atiesh]

@Ltdán-faerlina

@Lagenolm-atiesh

Again, you deflect, and deliberately ignore the commonly known and established rules of discussion.

Your repeated assertion that my statements are false without providing any evidence to support your claim is a classic example of a baseless assertion. You continue to deflect by demanding sources while failing to address the evidence I have already provided. This approach is not only unproductive but also hypocritical.

1. Burden of Proof: The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.(which is you, since you claim the facts are false) I have provided multiple Factualual statements. Simply dismissing them as false without any counter-evidence does not invalidate my claims.
2. Deflection: Accusing me of deflection while you refuse to engage with the evidence presented is itself a form of deflection. You are avoiding the responsibility of addressing the facts and instead shifting the focus to my supposed lack of sources.
3. Hypocrisy: Your argument is hypocritical because you demand sources and evidence from me while providing none yourself. If you believe my statements are false, it is your responsibility to provide evidence to the contrary. Without this, your claims remain unsubstantiated opinions.
4. Validity of Statements: The validity of a statement is not determined by how many people agree with it but by the evidence supporting it. I have provided factual information to back up my claims. Your refusal to acknowledge this evidence does not make it any less valid.

Ok, you like definitions. How about this 1?
claim·ant
/ˈklām(ə)nt/
noun
a person making a claim, especially in a lawsuit or for a government-sponsored benefit.
You, in this case are the CLAIMANT. You posted in these forums that a regular feature of this game, one that once again, was engineered, and released by BLIZZARD, should be EXCLUDED from release because of a litany of excuses. I’ve simply asked you, the CLAIMANT to provide

Burden of Proof: The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.
Neither myself nor the others that have disputed your REASONING have tried to make an assertion that a regular feature be removed. Therefore, sadly for you, your elaborate attempts to shift and deflect are a complete failure.

[Chéézé-stormrage]

@Zaalg-ashkandi

Him paying 400k gold to be carried through GDKPs is simply amusing. More importantly it points out his utter hypocrisy, and another reason why his arguments make no sense.

Absolutely. The sad part is that he can’t be a man and own it. I’ve done DGKP before (in early wrath) but my parse was blue/purple for every boss even though the others were more geared than I was. The funny part is that I didn’t win anything and made over 20k gold that night. Moist is a victim of his own circumstance.

[Ltdán-faerlina]

@Zaalg-ashkandi

Him paying 400k gold to be carried through GDKPs is simply amusing.

Do you not see how this statement is

@Zaalg-ashkandi

utter hypocrisy,

Stupid a GDKP is a not a carry you continue to confuse GDKP and ticket runs they are not the same.

While also derailing the subject at hand which is that LFR is not needed in the last phase of cata.

@Zaalg-ashkandi

I’m more concerned with the deficiency of logic, reason and common sense.

Wait, logic, reason, and common sense, but you admitted to not even reading what I posted.

@Zaalg-ashkandi

I don’t know what his argument even is.

This shows you are the one lacking everything you just listed.

@Lagenolm-atiesh

Ok, you like definitions. How about this 1?
claim·ant
/ˈklām(ə)nt/
noun
a person making a claim, especially in a lawsuit or for a government-sponsored benefit.

Thank you for your definition. While it is true that I am making a claim, this is not a courtroom or a legal proceeding of any sort. You are the one who made claims that what I stated was not factual, so the burden falls upon you to prove that it is not factual.My argument against the inclusion of LFR in Cata Classic is based on several key points that have already been provided.

@Lagenolm-atiesh

one that once again, was engineered, and released by BLIZZARD, should be EXCLUDED from release because of a litany of excuses.

While it’s true that LFR was engineered and released by Blizzard, it’s important to note that it wouldn’t be the only feature excluded from Cata Classic. The goal of Classic WoW is to recreate the original experience as closely as possible, which means some features introduced in later expansions are intentionally left out. Here are a few examples:

1. Transmogrification: This feature, which allows players to change the appearance of their gear, was introduced in Patch 4.3.0 during the Cataclysm expansion. It is not included in Cata Classic to maintain the original look and feel of the game.(They exchanged it for the retail version.)
2. Cross-Realm Zones: Introduced in Mists of Pandaria, this feature allows players from different realms to interact in certain zones. It is not part of the Classic experience to preserve the sense of community within individual realms.
3. Void Storage : This feature, which provides additional storage space for players, was introduced in Patch 4.3.0 during the Cataclysm expansion. It is not included in Cata Classic to maintain the original inventory management experience.
4. Cash Flow: This perk had two ranks. Rank 1 generated an extra 5% money, and Rank 2 generated an extra 10% money, which was deposited directly into the guild bank each time a guild member looted money from an enemy.
5. Have Group, Will Travel: This perk allowed guild members to summon their entire party or raid group to their location with a single click. It was particularly useful for quickly gathering groups for raids or dungeons
6. Mass Resurrection was originally a level 25 guild perk in the Cataclysm expansion. This perk allowed any guild member to resurrect all dead party members with 35% health and mana, which was a significant quality-of-life feature for guilds. However, in Cataclysm Classic, this perk has been removed from the guild perks and made a baseline ability for any class capable of healing.

Blizzard has already stated that they have no plans to add LFR to Cataclysm Classic but will bring it back in MoP. This proves that they do not mind not releasing features that were originally in Classic.

@Lagenolm-atiesh

Burden of Proof: The burden of proof lies with the person making the claim.

While I understand your point about the burden of proof, it’s important to clarify that the burden of proof lies with the person making the claim. In this case, you are asserting that my facts are false. Therefore, it is your responsibility to provide evidence to support your claim.

I have provided detailed and factual information regarding the exclusion of LFR and other features from Cata Classic. If you believe my facts are incorrect, please provide specific evidence to support your assertion. Otherwise, your claim remains unsubstantiated.

[Redheadchild-kul-tiras (Redheadchild)]

@Zaalg-ashkandi

Separate lockout means it’s an option. Shared lockout means it’s a restriction

Shared lockout means it has an opportunity cost but is still an option. You are being very narrow minded on what an option is…

[Lagenolm-atiesh]

@Ltdán-faerlina

I have provided detailed and factual information regarding the exclusion of LFR and other features from Cata Classic. If you believe my facts are incorrect, please provide specific evidence to support your assertion. Otherwise, your claim remains unsubstantiated.

Where? Where have you provided ANYTHING beyond YOUR SINGULAR OPINION? What source are you quoting that provided this information? I’ve asked and asked, you deflect and deny. If this were a court case, you’d be laughed out of the building at best. If this were a thesis you’d be kicked out of your program. You can post pages of anything you wish, but you failure to acknowledge that it remains simply YOUR SINGULAR OPINION. Here’s another definition for you.

doc·u·men·ta·tion
/ˌdäkyəmənˈtāSHən/
noun
1.
material that provides official information or evidence or that serves as a record.

Where is yours?

[Ltdán-faerlina]

I have provided detailed and factual information regarding the exclusion of LFR and other features from Cata Classic multiple times. If you believe my facts are incorrect, it is your responsibility to provide evidence to support your claim. Simply stating that my facts are false without providing any proof is not sufficient.

[Lagenolm-atiesh]

@Ltdán-faerlina

I have provided detailed and factual information regarding the exclusion of LFR and other features from Cata Classic multiple times.

When? Where?

@Ltdán-faerlina

If you believe my facts are incorrect, it is your responsibility to provide evidence to support your claim.

No, it isn’t, you actually have to provide the evidence. I’m not the one that’s proclaimed LFR unfit for everyone’s use, YOU have. You have yet to provide ANYTHING beyond repeated pages of your idealism. I’m asking, ASKING, for you to prove, with DOCUMENTATION, your statements. You obviously cannot as you’ve spent hours and pages weaving in platitudes, excuses and multitudes of other deflections from this request.

@Ltdán-faerlina

Stop hiding behind an alt and post on a level 85 char.

@Ltdán-faerlina

Look, another person hiding behind a non-level capped alt

@Ltdán-faerlina

You have no raid logs, yet you believe you can express an informed opinion about raiding?

Just a few of your previous attempts to deflect, distract, and invalidate those that have questioned you.

[Zaalg-ashkandi]

I finally just put him on Ignore. Normally I’d assume someone is trolling with those kinds of posts he makes, but I think he actually believes what he’s saying.

So he’s not a troll…he’s just clueless. Which isn’t fun to interact with. It’s just boring.

[Feywaif-atiesh]

@Redheadchild-kul-tiras

but it should share lockouts to avoid hyper gearing which drastically reduces the challenge of the new teir and speeds up the consumption rate.

This is purely subjective and gets to the question of whether lfr is a small benefit or a large benefit. I didn’t debate it when you brought it up since my argument was unchanged in either contingency. But I see no evidence that the small benefit from lfr drastically affects anything. While it may speed up consumption for those guild seeking world firsts they already speed up so much that difference is negligible. Casuals aren’t rushing, they’re doing lfr because they don’t have time for guild runs or don’t have time to schedule guild runs for their alts. There’s no reason to change the game to share lock outs.

[Impsie-atiesh]

LFR is confirmed to be coming to Classic.

The ChatGPT bot has lost yet another forum battle.

[Lagenolm-atiesh]

Kaivax

1754 posts

Community Manager

1h

We’ll soon open the Cataclysm Classic: Hour of Twilight PTR.

This patch will include the Dragon Soul raid (and its LFR mode), 3 dungeons (Hour of Twilight, Well of Eternity, and End Time), the legendary dagger set: Fangs of the Father, and a new iteration of the Elemental Rune Dungeons.

We’re planning to have two Dragon Soul raid testing weekends on the PTR:

• Friday January 24 - Monday, January 27
• Friday, January 31 - Monday, February 3

We’re looking forward to seeing you there!

[Mayle-faerlina]

Hehe the anti LFR got rekt just like with RDF

[Zaalg-ashkandi]

Well that’s that. At least that 1 guy against LFR can keep buying gear in GDKPs.

[Assumi-proudmoore]

Hey be nice, these whiners have been raking in Ls for years now, they’re a bit overwhelmed.

[Sanledish-illidan]

Huge W for the community that believes more game is a better game.

Although lets me real… they probably looked at it… the work required to chop it out, change the gearing system, and whatever other back door spaghetti code problems and just said its in.

Whatever reason this is a good thing. Deminishes the power of small time GDKP lords, gives players another weekly activity, and like said above more game is a better game.

[Marubtw-benediction]

looks like lfr is being added so the people who can’t even do normal can see the 10 year old raids. LFR ruined wow and it has been one of the most controversial things added to the game. Good thing blizzard is still bad at decision making. I’m fine with adding LFR if it shares a lockout with normal and heroic.

[Faytal-pagle]

Keep crying, LFR is the reason raids get still primary development time in this game to this day, as Ion outright stated at BlizzCon 2019. Your ever dwindling raider playerbase isn’t getting development money focus if 2% of players are doing it

[Marubtw-benediction]

development on 15 year old raids? Oh yeah forgot about that