If someone wants Wrath servers, then they should be over in General asking for it. And hopefully they won’t be met with same hostility the Wall of No posters gave to those who wanted Vanilla servers.
2 Likes
Classic is not going to be vanilla. I have a clear understanding of what I want from classic.
Never once has be ever been against it being made, and correcting someone saying something that is wrong is far from enabling, I’d do the same for anyone.
Now if you can show me where he stated he didn’t want it made or was against Blizzard doing it,then I would happily correct myself.
Yah I do, the second I disagree with you , I am ‘trolling’, thats not how that works.
or we can keep subjects to their own threads?
Yeah you want classic +.
So go advocate for that and stop trying to change classic.
The goal of classic is authentic. That doesn’t include adding sharding full time or balancing it wrath style.
2 Likes
Ok? This has what to do with what we are talking about?
No I want classic, a product that does not yet exist. After classic is released we can discuss what classic+ might even mean.
But if you mean I want classic to include various improvements, then yes, I’ve never made a secret of that.
It’s called a self-fulfilling prophecy. “It’s not going to be like Vanilla, so let’s add all kinds of things to make sure it’s not Vanilla.”
The intent is obvious given his past behavior.
2 Likes
It’s called being realistic given we are not getting a time machine.
We also have a clear idea what you want from classic.
You want Classic to be as far from vanilla as possible.
At best, you want Classic+, vanilla lite, EZ mode vanilla or possibly even a level 60 capped retail in a vanilla setting.
Classic has been advertised since day one as authentic recreation of vanilla.
3 Likes
Except ion actually said someone who fell asleep and woke up should see very minimal change. So yeah. Time machine seems pretty dang accurate
3 Likes
Yeah… I wouldn’t take anything Ion says too seriously.
But we’ll know more at the next dev water cooler or whenever beta is I guess.
Maybe may Be not but that’s blizzards rope to hang from.
Changing it only drives away those who would sub.
2 Likes
We’ll know more whenever there’s another dev watercooler or in beta I guess.
I think that you missing the “forest for trees”.
If you look at just one of his “requests” (a single tree), or even at each “request” individually (individual trees) you could possibly make a stretch and say that “request” isn’t unreasonable.
If you step back and look at the totality of his posting history, the truth of his opposition to classic (the forest) becomes clear.
I can explain it to you, but I cannot understand it for you. I can point out the forest, but I cannot see it for you. Only you can do that, and only if you choose to actually open your eyes to the bigger picture.
1 Like
Vanilla did not have sharding and it did just fine. Classic™ can be the same.
![:cocktail:](https://d38bqls1q93fod.cloudfront.net/en/wow/images/emoji/twitter/cocktail.png?v=6" ":cocktail:")
1 Like
Lol my eyes are fine, all of that is very pretty but all he is guilty of is not liking Vanilla the same way as others, not wanting the same things from it as others, and neither of those is him being against it being made in the first place , or having egg on his face when it was announced.
Now there are a few posters where that is 100% accurate, but they do not post here.
Look, there is no ambiguity here. Blizzard is not looking to add features from expansions to ‘improve’ Classic. Ion even said they’re thinking of re-introducing bugs they fixed because it felt more like Vanilla. Authenticity is not some minor goal they have in mind. It is the entire focal point of the project. Some posters can’t understand or can’t accept that. Some are just trolls. But reality is what is.
3 Likes
As I said, I can point out the forest, but I cannot see it for you. Refusal to see that forest in front of you does not negate the truth of the forest.
1 Like
Except for the features that they are adding.