Dungeon Finder Call To Arms extra mounts rewards - More mounts!
Looking back on it I have to admit it's worded fairly poorly. The intent
has always been that they won't contain raid mounts, but can contain
mounts from anywhere else. It's really at the discretion of the
designers to choose the mounts, we just didn't want people to think it'd
be dropping Mimiron's Head or anything like that. You're right, it's a
bit misleading. I wish we had caught that.
Sorry for the confusion.
Battlegrounds Win/Loss Ratio - Does the Horde win more in Battlegrounds?
Assuming the numbers you referenced from a third-party site about
win/loss ratios between factions are accurate -- color me skeptical --
do you believe the Horde won 10% more often in Battlegrounds because of
the way the two factions are designed (in terms of gameplay)?
If so, what distinct design imbalances exist between the two factions
that you believe would cause the Horde to win overall in Battlegrounds
10% more often? They'd have to be major imbalances to produce such a
If it's not by design, but by player preference -- meaning more
PvP-oriented players perhaps tend to roll Horde -- then what do you
suggest we do? You say people will quit if we do nothing. Would they not
quit if we maybe forced a percentage of PvPing Horde players over to
Here is my take. If there are any discrepancies in Battleground
performance between Horde and Alliance, they exist in each individual
Battleground (not all of which favor Horde), are almost negligible in
the grand scheme of balance to which you're referring, and really aren't
reflective of overall design flaws. In terms of gameplay, the two
factions are roughly equivalent. We designed both with love and care --
what faction, race, and class you choose to pick should entirely be
based on your personal preference.
So, while there might be very small design flaws in making all
Battlegrounds absolutely even for each faction, every other discrepancy
is more a sociological issue. Could you argue we've designed one faction
to be more appealing than another? I guess so, but then you're really
starting to press into subjective arguments.
Are bosses too hard/is information too difficult to find?
When you use the word "study" here, are you referring to a normal
learning curve (which is standard for most games, even simple ones like
checkers and hopscotch)? Or are you being more specific, suggesting that
even if someone learns how to play World of Warcraft, the only way he
or she can progress through any kind of end-level or dungeon content is
by spending countless hours pouring over manuscripts of boss encounters,
class specializations, and item spreadsheets?
Standard learning curves aside, I'd argue that most players are capable
of tackling dungeon content reasonably well (albeit not necessarily
willing to, and that's fine) without referring to outside resources . Do
those resources help? Definitely. For a lot of people, they do a great
job at breaking important information into palatable, easy-to-digest
pieces. And, of course, the more you know about a certain subject, the
easier it is to approach. The same applies for most things in life:
riding a bike, driving a car -- even playing other popular video games
like Portal, Smash Bros, and League of Legends.
Now, could we make it easier for players who want to become more
proficient to get their hands on helpful information? Absolutely. To
touch upon your concerns specifically, we think the upcoming Dungeon
Journal in 4.2 will be a huge boon to players when it comes to jumping
into new encounters (http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/2456449381
We also think that the game could do more to prepare players for those
situations, in general -- in terms of actual gameplay -- and have a few
ideas regarding how we might be able to accomplish that in the future.
Amani War Bear Color
It's purple. Yes, the one we originally previewed is a different color
and we may make use of it one day. We try to get information to you as
quickly as possible via content previews. The major issue we run into
though, is that we're pushing for image assets and functionality
information as soon as they come off the presses from our developers. So
the quicker we are about getting you information, the more likely it is
that something will change between the time the preview is posted, and
the time the feature/content goes live. This is one of those cases and
we're trying to work on ways to minimize them as much as possible.
Flying mounts in no-fly areas
Allowing more flying mounts to be used as ground mounts in no-fly areas
is definitely something we're looking into. Right now, we sort of place
flying mounts into three categories: Those that already make sense
running around on the ground, and look good doing it. Those that would
require a few more animations before they'd really look and feel
appropriate. And those that would still seem out of place no matter what
kind of visual tweaks we'd make to their ground run/walk.
Hippogryphs are a good example of a flying mount that we feel could work
in no-fly areas with some additional animations. It's something we'd
like to do in the future, definitely, but we wouldn't be able to
guarantee any sort of timeframe when a change like that could occur.
Paying for premium services
These are premium services added to better accommodate the wants and
needs of players. They do not factor into what you get for buying the
game/expansions and paying monthly for access to the serers. By no means
do you need any of these premium services to enjoy World of Warcraft
gameplay to the fullest extent. Should you desire to take advantage of
some extra services to enhance your enjoyment of the game though,
they're certainly there for you... if you feel it's worth the price.
We've made countless quality-of-life improvements to the game in terms
of content, UI, data storage, character profiles, etc. We've expanded
upon what you get for your monthly subscription by leaps and bounds
since the game was first released, but the subscription price has not
Everything we do and every service we add costs more money than you
might realize. So, if we do occasionally add some premium services which
are purely to give you more options for enjoying the game how you want
(changing your realm, faction, race, name, physical appearance, etc.),
we need to make sure there is an appropriate value added to those
services so we can sustain them, sustain our business, and keep focusing
on making this the best game possible.
WarlockUnstable Affliction Hotfix
Spell power still affects it, but we felt the buff to the "backlash"
damage from UA being dispelled was a little too high when the
coefficient remained the same. Now you're getting about half the spell
power bonus to the UA dispel damage, but the net effect should still be a
buff to that damage in 4.1 compared to 4.0.6.
[...] It was my understanding that this hotfix was to compensate for an
oversight. I believe it was intended that the coefficient be changed
along with the buff in 4.1, but was missed originally, then caught when
we started parsing the post-4.1 class performance data. I could be wrong
though, so I'll see if I can get a better answer for you when I'm not
at home trying to level an alt.
Yay! Let's nerf things before we fix the bugs!
That's a bit of an oversimplification of the issue here. When I say "a
bit," I'm oversimplifying how drastically off the mark your comment is.
We pushed a hotfix for the pushback issue on April 27. Around the same
time a change was checked in to tone down the dispel damage of Unstable
Affliction. We understand some of you disagree, but the numbers were too
high. Affliction warlocks are faring quite well right now, particularly
in Arenas where this change really matters.
The reduction to the UA dispel damage was made on May 2, but we also
found out that a programming issue prevented the original hotfix to the
pushback bug from working correctly.
Performing server-side fixes to the game is tricky. Sometimes a bit of
trial and error is involved to ensure the code changes we're making
don't have major adverse affects on gameplay. We've been doing extensive
testing on ways to fix the pushback issue for the last few days now. It
looks like a client-side patch will be required. That's still not going
to stop us from making other necessary adjustments. Even with the
pushback issue, UA dispel damage was too high.
[...] I take it back. The pushback fix should now be live. You might
need to log out for about 10 minutes to ensure it's picked up properly.
It otherwise doesn't require a realm restart though.