We are not on burning crusades patch

It’s this, exactly. Way too much gold, way too easy to down bosses, etc. I can somewhat understand why Blizz picked this patch, but it’s 100% not representative of what vanilla was during most of its lifespan (I was there, check my armor). The game launched Nov 2004 and this is basically a Nov 2006 patch, a few months before TBC came out in Jan 2007.

People mistake 1.12 for the pre-tbc patch, even though the pre-tbc patch gave us access to the new talents and abilities.

I don’t know for sure.

Neither do you.

I do know that this is not a pure 1.12 version of vanilla WoW. Limitations have been lifted in the version we’re playing. But it’s been 15 years. I can’t honestly recall what we had at what stage back then, or when it was nerfed heading into TBC or even before TBC.

I do know late vanilla WoW got a lot easier across the board, and it was a combination of bug fixes, boss mechanic changes and class balancing.

Wut?

They were always this easy. Seriously how hard do you think it is to hit Remove Lesser Curse and spam Frostbolt?

It is, it just can’t make people spec/gear/play stupidly, or make blundering and stupid guild politics return.

All I’m saying is that 1.12 for the most part made significant changes that prepared for the BC launch. That was the last Vanilla patch before BC. 2.0 was actually more BC than Vanilla. Sorry if I wasn’t clear.

Hence the conspiracy. You rely upon a doubt of the gaps, which just makes you silly because everything, literally everything, has the possibility of having an alternative, unknown source or cause.

You can compare things that seem off to you now with the patch notes from over a decade ago. Likewise with things like damage and armor formulas, etc.

Vanilla is easy because it was never hard, and people had to learn how to stop trying to be a fully fledged Mage and just optimize down to spamming Fireball or Frostbolt. Avoiding Deep Breath from Onyxia was never a difficult matter, likewise with not killing your raid with Burning Adrenaline or Living Bomb.

Except there were no significant changes in 1.12.

They did do a lot of clean up and data packs were reformatted for the Legion engine. Corpse walking from gy to gy was removed from Classic although it remained in game till Cata; they also included the ability to dismount mid-flight (formerly required relog).

Class builds and talents are just as they were before BC dropped (i.e., before BC talents :D)

Well, perhaps they weren’t significant to you:

  • Major [Mount changes - i.e., mount speed no longer tied to mount

  • Rogues were revamped (by this time many classes already had had their talent revamps)

  • Several World PvP “enhancements” and

  • Cross-Realm Battlegrounds were introduced.

Classic, however, includes and excludes things that were available in Vanilla 1.12. Some of it may be bugs; some may be awaiting its planned “phase”

You listed… mount changes… /siiiiiiiigh

Also the Rogue revamp didn’t affect Combat or Assassination but for the replacement of Throwing Weapon Specialization with Weapon Expertise. Everything else that SF-Daggers and Combat Swords does is exactly the same. The lion’s share of changes happened to Subtlety and no one goes Hemo for raids.

The wPvP enhancements were lame capture-the-flag or node things in EPL and Silithis that no one did and aren’t relevant.

Cross-Realm BGs didn’t impact anything concerning balance.

You had to literally pad your list with a bunch of irrelevant things around the single most minor class rework of all the reworks (that’s why it was last, they needed the least amount of changes).

Just stop while you’re behind.

I’m not “padding my list” I took this information directly from the source.

You may disregard these changes as trivial, that’s fine. Dismissing changes because they didn’t impact “balance” doesn’t mean they were insignificant.

The patch we are playing provided for a smooth transition to BC. What I don’t recall is when the invasions began. I seem to recall it was before any BC patches dropped.

I’ve studied you.

No. it wasnt. Get your facts straight and look it up.

I stand corrected.

If this was truly TBC pre patch, we’d see Druids everywhere Mangle spamming for 2k+. I’d not object, and would be awesome to see.

Because the whining over the present game has nothing to do with the streamlining of mounts or access to cross-realm battlegrounds… bringing them up is stupid at best, willfully dishonest at worst. No one is attacking the speed at which Ragnaros dies because they can use their preferred aesthetic mount at 100% riding speed… ffs.

The demon invasion was 2.0.1, which was December of 2006, a month before TBC released.

The scourge invasion was 1.11 as part of the Naxx event and release.

December 5, 2006 - Patch 2.0.1

January 16, 2007 - The Burning Crusade expansion released

You’ve been wrong like 10 times in this thread and it needs to stop.

You know what is significant? The nerf to threat reduction effects that all you people ignore.

Patch 1.12.0

Threat Reduction Effects

  • This system has been redesigned to eliminate inconsistency in how the effects work. Previously, some were additive (for example: 30% reduction + 20% reduction = 50% reduction) while others were multiplicative (30% reduction and 20% reduction made 44% reduction, from 0.7*0.8). They are now all multiplicative. This also prevents unpredictable behavior when the total reduction percentage was equal to or greater than 100%. Please note that in almost all cases, when stacking multiple threat reduction effects you will experience less threat reduction than previously.

Ah I think I was referring to the Naxx event – the scourge invasion.

BTW I don’t recall Rags being “tauntable” in any iteration of Vanilla, but apparently he is in Classic. I think that was a later change or a stealth one.

I was only noting changes made to the game. You can ignore them, consider them significant or not. And who is “whining” over the state of the game? Apart from a few killer bugs, overall I’m pretty happy with it.

ZOMG call out the army!

This is called being ‘dismissive.’