Finally, a new stat I'm adding to this round-up: the number of moderator actions performed for the past 30 days! We performed ~6,000 actions 60 to 90 days ago, ~11,000 actions 30 to 60 days ago, and in the past 30 days we've performed a whopping ~19,000 actions. That's a lot of permabanned plebs, let me tell you. I assure you, the rumors of power-tripping mods hell-bent on getting our jollies from holding power over an internet forum is really, really true. Especially u/Undoer. But for real, y'all have unleashed the biggest zergling rush of posts and comments I've ever personally had to deal with, and we're a squad of about four Firebats in a bunker with one SCV doing our best to hold this ish down... wrong Blizzard game, but you get the point.
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
":" - 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.