Why Dishonorable Kills failed at their intended purpose

And similarly I’m good with DHKs not existing in CP2, but being added in CP3. Because that’s the timeline we’re following.

If you’ve read my post history, you know I’m dead set against anything but the starters. So feel free to strawman, but that’s all it is. A fallacy concocted in your own head. The argument that any sharding is all sharding is basically “I don’t trust Blizzard”. And its not what those of us who are watching the Classic team come out with good choice after good choice, reasonably expect.

And the starters is not for “convenience”. Its for launch success and long term viability. I don’t want Classic to fall into a heap because of a bad launch, or end up with dozens of dead servers. If you think there aren’t a lot of people going to try the product immediately on launch, you’re a pessimist, and that kind of plan makes Classic fail.

Feel free to make up lies to salve your own conscience. Only “you” know the right thing to do. “Everyone else is a hypocrite”. But I’ve held to a consistent pattern across all the posts I’ve made. The only changes that should be made are those that are required for the product to be a viable product for years to come. No guild banks. No sharding past launch. No removing integral parts of the historical experience for the sake of “Well it would make it a ‘better’ game”.

We accept that Blizzard has to make financial decisions such as loot trading, because we know we can’t stop it, and it will make sure the product isn’t shot down by angry shareholders. But letting one minor change in doesn’t mean we can let another minor change in. Or another, or another. That path leads eventually to saying that we should “un-remove” LFD because it would make the game ‘better’. So you hold the line wherever the line can be held.