Nov 15 Classic Box Cost Disappointed in the decision to bundle the subs and (at least for now) not have a separate Classic sub option. That said, can we at least get a separate box cost for access to classic? It would: - help alleviate temporary bloat and subsequent dead realms - servers would be more stable population-wise over time - remove the bulk of the need for sharding - give a solid idea of how many servers will be needed - allow blizzard to set up a separate classic forum for those with a monetary commitment - with a separate forum group, feedback would be limited to those with a vested interest The subs would still be bundled, but there would be a box cost, akin to what one would have to pay for BFA access. A very good to-the-point post from later on in this thread:... Another good post about how the current setup would necessitate sharding:... A decent (albeit short-term) alternative:...Brokenwind314 Nov 15
Nov 15 Professions Hey guys. Can you think of good items that you crafted and lasted for several levels at least? I have played on private servers and with 1.12 itemization, there was barely anything that I could use for even 3 levels. I have leveled up a leartheworker and only thing I remember using was Deviate Scale Belt. Yes, it's very decent and could last a few levels. But later, there are some blue gloves which are fine, but nothing brilliant. And "Guardian Belt"(+6 spirit, +6 stamina) is pathetic for a blue. I remember trying to craft Robe of power as Tailor for a mage but it wasn't that brilliant either, maybe you digress. :) Sure, at level 60, there are nice robes for tailors but before that, do you think using the 1.12 client diminishes the role of crafting professions for leveling? Imagine ability to craft some brilliant item(for each profession) at level 30 that would last full ten levels just like Warrior's Whirlwind Axe, would be decent, no? Warlocks also have similar quest for Enchanted Gold Bloodrobe, but for classes that don't have such class quests would be an enormous boost.Holylr34 Nov 15
Nov 15 Classic is too easy for 2019 playerbase I'm not big on gameplay changes, really I'm not but... The game is just too easy for today's standards. I really think some of these raids and instances need a serious increase in difficulty. MC is a joke, most of the tier sets are unbalanced, and a lot of seasoned players agree but fear the toxic Classic community to speak up on this issue.Hopera237	Nov 15 

In this form, there is much less wasted space and spells are no longer limited to three effects. But before we can load any database data, we need to transform the old data layout into the new one. This is not limited to spells, as almost every game system (including items, creatures, player characters, spawning, AI, and more) has had its database layout altered over the years.
As you level, you will buy new ranks of spells. If you splurge out on an item upgrade, you will not have enough gold readily available to upgrade to the latest ranks of spells: placing you behind. Moreover, you can buy gear upgrades from the Auction House (AH) or vendors. Furthermore, you may have large investments that need to be paid for professors. You will need to purchase reagents and items such as leather, bolts of cloth, alchemy supplies – unless you have a charitable friend or another high-level alt.
Nov 15 Guild Banks Pt. 14 So let's take our minds off subs and sharding and have a nice classic discussion about guild banks. Guild banks are still by far the least impactful on gameplay and most spirit of Vanilla community change one could request. Not only that the log keeps officers and gm's honest. Without logs they are free to skim off the top of donations and trivialize their epic mount purchase. Thoughts?Padrepwn91 Nov 15
Nov 15 Spell Mechanic Questions and Hopes on Items I am not necessarily looking for any discourse that would lead to an answer, but hopefully this would gain enough traction that Blizzard might see it, and offer some insight to intended function come summer 2019. I know there is a current wall of text somewhere regarding questions on almost every item with a spell damage effect and whether or not they will be granted coefficients from character gear grand spell damage. I noticed one in particular that was left out and wanted to reiterate my personal favorites. Shard of the Fallen Star: Originally benefited in part or completely 1:1 ratio from spell damage and was capable of critting. It was nerfed in patch 2.0 which is after classic wow content. In the spirit of keeping things as they were, do you think Blizzard will keep this mechanic or change it to a post nerf state which although is not classic wow maybe seen as a balanced fix. Weapon List: Hand of Ragnaros, Netzerek the Blood Drinker, Corrupted Ashbringer, Shadowstrike - all received 2:1 coefficent originally in classic. I believe they were a little too strong but did not receive any nerf to my knowledge. Do you think these will remain as it was or be changed to satisfy the hopes for balance?Tunnelboy6 Nov 15
Nov 15 Skeletons RIP Please allow skeletons of dead players to Rest In Peace. Witnessing the aftermath of a city / town raid and seeing a blanket of bones that told a story of how the battle went down, really helped add to the MMORPG feel. I did not play the “demo” but reports say that skeletons disappear fairly quick. #nochangesMakinb17CEDC26 Nov 15
The Horde 12-20 (Barrens + Stonetalon Mountains) guide has been rewritten and revamped.  In addition, there has been numerous tweaks to the speedrun route to make things faster and easier to follow.  Also, in case you haven't noticed I am now adding about 40% more info per step and redoing all the images.  Unlike with my previous vanilla guides, I am now giving a brief explanation of where to go and what to do with each step along with any other helpful tips.
 ":"  -  Any time a step ends in a ":" instead of a "." means that the next step is part of the current step you are on.  This generally means the next step should be done while working on the current step.  This means every "start working on" or "continue working on" will end in a ":".  But this is used with other occasions as well, so keep this in mind.
×