Why arent the unarmored mounts going to be available in vanilla. I am outraged....:(

Can you provide a link to the statement suggesting that is the only thing influencing them how classic wow is going to be? If I recall, they are adding stage content (which includes updating the vendor tables) in order to achieve a more classical experience.

How does including the unarmored mounts affect the eligible inclusion of other items similar to its power influence? If you think they would further the classical experience, you should give feedback on them.

Should I level a dwarf (dat frost resist) for naxx or?
The player’s knowledge about other aspects of the game ( future raid content and class tuning) is already establish; there will be many hindsight factors that will influence their initial start and progression through each phase.

The Winterspring frostsaber says subjective.

If Blizzard wanted them gone, they would’ve outright removed them (even if they were in your possession). But, the players who acquired them before their retirement still got to keep them long after (they even made a FoS acknowledging them on retail).

There was a vendor in vanilla that allowed players to exchange their unarmored mounts for the new armored ones. imo, not having unarmored mounts at all would be less authentic than having them both.

4 Likes

Philmahuders you are entertaining them way too much by replying. They will circle around your post and after a few hours to a day will post the same thing you just replied to.

2 Likes

I’ll address your points backwards.

The same response will address both of these points. The reason there was a vendor is because Blizzard knew it would be a bad idea to invalidate rewards they had already given out. Rewards are what underpin an MMORPG. If you show players there accomplishments might get taken away after the fact, that’s a huge blow to player motivation. So the people who did get them got to choose. They mounts were still removed for everyone else.

In this case, the rewards are never going to be introduced, so there is nothing to take away, hence everything works out.

The frostsaber is a special case. Very, very few players ever get the frostsaber as it requires a lot of grinding. Epic mounts are sort of the “standard package” of what a player should expect to get at end game and you never had a choice between armor or no armor when you bought one for the same speed mount. Also, the frostsaber will obviously be unlockable forever. So it’s really apples to oranges.

There are two axis we can measure this on: definiteness and impact. Naxx is supposed to be in the game, and is part of the definitive rendition of Vanilla. The mounts were removed during Vanilla, as they were not what the Vanilla devs wanted. The impact of Naxx on the meta is also low. Very few people will choose their class based on Naxx, as it’s a very long term goal that isn’t going away. The mounts, however, are an achievable goal if you set yourself to it and power level. They are also on a timer, and therefore the limited nature skews the axis of impact to the point where they start to influence the meta too much for what they are.

Because we need consistency. If you take a little bit from this patch and a little bit from that patch, you end up with a permutation of Vanilla that is very off from what ever existed. The line is drawn at 1.12 as the definitive edition of Vanilla, and we’re only adding very major pieces of content. No balancing, no individual items, etc.

I’m only bringing that point up as a counter to people saying that Blizzard is doing something they wouldn’t have done in Vanilla. I’m not saying they’ve committed to following the Vanilla devs in all their decisions. Certainly if the Vanilla devs took something out, it means they really didn’t want it to be there, it was either a test that failed or something they did out of a lack of time.


What it really comes down to is the impact of the change versus how impactful the change should be. In this case you’re taking what is essentially something pretty niche, an unfinished mount that some people got for some period of time that Blizzard didn’t want to be there, and then working it up to a launch goal with its limited nature, and therefore exclusivity. It would essentially be the lowest hanging fruit in that regard, as the other exclusives are maybe going to go to a handful of people on the server.

Posting for my friend Shimy,

Hello everyone, the thread was in fact closed BECAUSE of the petition and the petition link. Please continue to talk about this subject, I will be back on June 25th and if a new thread has not been created than I will create a new one. Someone who feels just as passionate about this could also make a new thread which I completely support.
Blizzard Please implement the Original Epic Mounts that were removed in patch 1.4, keep them in the game forever and remove the “non blizzlike” race to 60 that you are so afraid of.

2 Likes

Someone who has the privilege to post links should make the thread. That way they can show pictures and links to the unarmored mounts etc.

1 Like

Yes, that is why they kept them in for those who have them. But, it doesn’t support why they are not including them in classic wow. Which makes

Not a very compelling point.

It is a special case because it visually shows that having armor doesn’t always equal epic speed. Hence,

Isn’t very compelling either (especially if there are exceptions to the rule of mount visuals).

The point of the example was to show that players, are already spoiled with knowledge of future outcomes and already basing their goals (regardless of how farfetch it is) around them (what would I do differently?). which makes

not very compelling since everyone is spoiled to some degree on different things.

Blizzard never stated they are 100% going with 1.12.

They are using 1.12 as a template/guide for clarity, not as a rule of law or an opposition to other changes. Which is why Blizzard is more than willing to add layering and 2 hour trade windows(not that I’m in support of these) to help them achieve (what they believe) a more classical experience/health of the game. For that reason,

doesn’t sound very compelling.

There were at least some things in vanilla that were a mistake or they wanted to implement. But, this isn’t just an opportunity for current Blizzard to go back and do things right by fixing them (bugs/launch experience). It’s to recapture that classical experience in whatever way they can. With that in mind, some players believe that unarmored mounts should be included in some way for that experience.

Thanks again for responding and being civil. :slight_smile:

5 Likes

No, thank you for your good points and civility.

Correct, I was trying to explain that the vendor was not added because they wanted the mounts in the game still. It was a necessary evil. This point can be taken generally, however, to support one of my main points, which is that Blizzard sees the mounts as a mistake they had to fix in Vanilla, and they don’t feel that Vanilla mistakes make Vanilla authentic.

I take your point. You have a counterexample, and so I can’t claim that Blizzard thinks no armor == not epic. What I am trying to show is that by making the Wintersaber really, really hard to get they have limited the scope of the problem to only a few players. So maybe the Wintersaber is just an exception to the rule that you have to earn through lots and lots of effort. If everyone could get an epic unarmored mount for way less effort, then it would in fact be invalidating the Wintersaber mount which is supposed to very an incredibly unique reward for lots of work.

My response was that the impact of this “meta knowledge” is sized proprtional to how important the content is. For example, Naxx is a hugely important piece of content that is a definitive part of Vanilla. In the case of the mount, something that is a “bug” so to speak is having perhaps more of an influence on players decision making than Naxx is.

Layering and two hour trade windows were never in Vanilla, so it doesn’t support your argument that Blizzard is not firm on patch 1.12. For the content that was in Vanilla, it’s 1.12. The content patches on top of that only include very, very big features as time gates.

It may not be compelling to you because your bias places a heavier weight on this change than someone else’s bias. By not being selective, Blizzard doesn’t have to play the game of trying to make everyone happy.

They aren’t fixing them. It was fixed in Vanilla. They are simply trying to launch the most definitive version of the game. It would be impossible for them to be “authentic” in the sense that the course of the game follows an accurate timeline of patches and events, or at least they are not willing to do that.

2 Likes

Still trying circumvent your forum vacation by posting on an alt, I see.

1 Like

Yes, and that reason is that we’d be leveling up too quickly, so why are people going on about placeholder mounts and patch 1.12?

2 Likes

For anyone who hasn’t heard the original Unarmored Mount Megathread was deleted I have created a new one for us to use at:

1 Like

might wanna remove scarab lord then cause when a death knight get’s it in WOTLK ya not so “rare”

1 Like

They’re pruning Classic like they prune everything else. They can’t help but prune the game - and consequently, they can’t help but destroy it.

Blizzard = WoW killers

bump because blizzard is trying to silence the player base on this issue and delete threads with almost 2k posts about this.

3 Likes

I want unarmored mounts as much as the next person. And I definitely think Blizzard’s excuse of “we don’t want people to feel obligated to rush” is just that an excuse. It’s not a valid reason. The people whom protested for Vanilla WoW servers are the more hardcore crowd. You don’t pester a company for ten years for legacy servers if you’re extremely laid back. Honestly, I would want to believe as a kind gesture they would give us the unarmored mounts, but they’re too stuck using a poor excuse as to why we can’t have them.

And lets take this for example. They aren’t holding MC back saying “lets wait for them to hit 60 before we release raids because we want them to take their time”. I’d be more to give Blizzard the benefit of the doubt if the data for the mounts were corrupt or lost than their current excuse.

5 Likes

Actually someone already opened a new one.

Post here New Unarmored Mounts Megathread Tzuyux.

1 Like

i can show my support in any and all threads.

3 Likes

Your support is as irrelevant as unarmored mounts.

That still makes it twice more relevant than you will ever be.

And I will still be the one happy on release day without unarmored mounts :wink:

Blizzard Logic: They were not “Buy-able” in 1.12
Player Logic: They were obtainable in vanilla & people had them in 1.12

Solution?:

Blizzard: Do nothing and pretend the want for them goes away. (Making the artists work on the mounts and models become forgotten for all time.)

OR!

Player: Find a way to convince blizzard to put them into the game. Even if it means removing them part way through. Turning them into a vanity item like the Scarab Lord & Raid Mounts, except these would be a rewards for anyone who hit level 60 in the early days of classic and had the gold to purchase them. (TRUE STORY)

1 Like