Most people who are altoholics have multiple accounts already, there is a point where they can’t keep multiple subs. They can however like in my case just drop a sub once every 2 years to keep their character’s named.
Heck one of my thoughts for buyable character slots is just let 1 sub on a battlenet account allow any WoW account on that bnet account log in.
Grins menacingly
Thanks for the idea! Mwahahahaha!
I currently have about 150 character names all to myself. May go through my starter accounts and plan out the rest now though before you guys go too crazy 
I would say you are doing an excellent job of backing up my point.
So is the person bragging about locking down 150 names.
My point was that you can already take names
I know? And my point is thats wrong.
Not sure what’s confusing about this. This isn’t a case of what you do doesn’t effect me. Locking these names up like this actually DOES effect me, and it’s not cool.
mmk, gotcha.
well, here’s my thought. It’s already happening. I just can’t play those extra toons for a few months until I decide to re-up a different account. so we’re all coming out losing here.
That isn’t an excuse to keep it going. Of course you would argue to keep the status queue. You have all of the advantage, and that needs to change. They really should do a purge of even active accounts so that people actually need to log in and PLAY their characters to keep their name, otherwise it gets released back into the available pool.
now changing Inactive Character name reservations, that’s a different argument entirely.
Its the solution. It’s not fair you get to lock a name up on a character you don’t even play, and if ya got 150 of them… yea. Sorry, but your names need purging.
not really, There are plenty enough names on various servers to go around. If we were wanting for names Blizz probably would’ve tightened the inactive character name boundaries a bit more.
Your unwillingness to give up names you don’t even use anymore while hurting players that don’t do this is actually the more likely reason Blizz doesn’t do it. Loss aversion is a real thing and people would shat bricks over losing stuff they don’t even use. So they would rather keep hurting players that don’t do this, than open the can of worms from players such as you. Keeping the status quo is easier. Congrats for you.
And that is what saddens me most of all. You don’t care about how this effects other players. Maybe you’ll say you do after I’ve now said this, but it’ll be after the fact so it’ll just be an empty platitude if you do.
So people quit, then you can take their names and rule an empty kingdom! I see your strategy ya sly gob
I kinda thought I covered that when I said people would shat bricks in the post right above yours. Maybe not.
You did, but I felt like touching on it again. 
I get how ya feel though, that’s why I made this thread back in Jan
I have like 130 characters, I’m tired of picking names. I’d rather release all my names for you and just go by a universal name for all my characters. But that won’t happen, and more aggressive name releases likely won’t happen.
Deep narrative voice; on today’s episode of Hoarders…
But nah, I imagine there’s a physical cost to store a person’s characters and in my eyes, 50 is pretty generous. Reaching the cap is something I’m nowhere near so maybe I just don’t understand.
I’ve suggested merging accounts and paying the cost of two subs + two xpacs but getting 50 more characters.
… no offense intended, but this sounds entirely like a you problem if you are tired of picking names. You pretty much did it to yourself by massively going overboard, and hurt other players in the process.
It is! Not a “you” (as in me only) but a “that person” problem 
I didn’t go overboard
I also didn’t hurt anyone