Open Letter from a Private Server Developer

Classic Discussion
Prev 1 8 9 10 Next
07/01/2018 10:15Posted by Tempests
04/01/2018 05:46Posted by Mailan
While it will never be the same due to knowledge of the content before it launches, it can be as close to the original as possible.

- Including the original flawed interface design for flightpaths and Auction Houses.
- Including the strange and illogical tuned talent trees
- Including the old ugly and weak gear.

Without these things, you're playing a streamlined version. You won't know the joy of overcoming limitation. You won't enjoy the new talent tree. You won't enjoy linked auction houses or flight paths. You won't enjoy the stronger gear. Because everything was thrown into your lap.

It sounds crazy, but the more clunky, limited and frustrating classic WoW launches, the better. Because THAT will challenge us to play it to still try and beat it. And WHEN we beat it, which we shall if we persevere and read up, we will feel MUCH better about ourselves than if we would have played some streamlined reddit version.

In Dark Souls, if you die, get good. In Classic WoW, if you don't like it and complain, go back to Retail WoW. Then you're obviously not up to the challenge. Comfort yourself with some pet battles. Here, have some legendaries.

I hope Blizzard developers have the balls to just say this to paying customers and their shareholders. It would be the most epic and amazing thing a game company can do.


What limitation do you overcome and feel joy? You mention linked AH, bad flightpaths and ugly gear as... limitations that you feel satisfying having to deal with? Well, ok. I get it. There are people that like to be whipped on the balls but they do not take pride on it :P

And really. What are you talking about challenge now? I mean what content have you not found challenging in later wow that makes you feel the urge for a challenge? How would you like to get an answer like "if you don't like people ideas, go back to your private server"?

What is your problem with pet battles? You are not obliged to play. They are not even part of any progression. Tell us. What part of vanilla you think as a challenge apart from leveling? Tell us our story. How easy you cleared content across expansions? Did you find mythic mechanics trivial comparing to MC and BWL? Really tell us your feats!

Why I write all these? Not because I disagree with you. I don't want changes tbh (apart from world buffs). It is because of your attitude. Because of all the stupid things (you cannot call these arguments) you see from people in private world chat. The "legion kids that get gear for free" type of attitude. And you bring this attitude here.


But you do get a lot of gear for free in Legion. There is hardly anything you have to do for it.

Vanilla is not so much the difficulty challenge. It's the endurance challenge. Preparing. Organizing. Finding new ways to prepare and organize, because of the limitations.

Finding ways to reduce levelling to 60 from 13 days played to 8 days feels good, yes. 4 Horsemen may be easy by todays raid mechanics, but it certainly wasn't at first. For anybody who did or does it. Btw I agree on removing world buffs, or at least a better original implementation of them (cooldown for 3-6 hours, so you cannot count on them as a guild).

I have an attitude ye, a positive attitude to protect something original and authentic.
11/11/2017 08:18Posted by Darkshamans
10/11/2017 20:34Posted by Whiss
There are a number of smaller QoL issues which are largely aesthetic and can be dealt with fairly easily; people will like them or not, but they aren't game breakers. Updated graphics, AoE looting, guild banks, etc

10/11/2017 20:34Posted by Whiss
guild banks

It wont be vanilla with gameplay changes like this.

Limited bag space without guild bank was the magic of original World of Warcraft.

First ppl will ask for Guild Bank, next they gone ask for few class changes, and next its will be another WOD/Legion/BFA and not vanilla.


Whats magical of having dozen of level 1 bank alts running around?

Also for all progression patch wishers. Seriously for what purpose? Most of patches were there for reason to fix things. Also If anyone played actually Paladin during vanilla will remember that damn class actually became little usefull and bearable on later patches. Blizzard has now great chance to make WoW expreince that drawns strenght for all those good things that were in vanilla 2005-2006. While also making it even better!
...

Sorry, but that's utter bullcrap.

no u

Used to log NA realms from friends laptop,that have outdated dsl with limited and shared bandwidth on multiple PCs yet had 174ms, here is screenshot.

https://i.imgur.com/Rg8f4c2.jpg

Folks playing on NA servers from EU with proper DSL reporting to have about 100-150ms.


http://www.speedtest.net/

Tell those people to post their results to you and you post their results here.

Here is my result, using a Washington DC server, whereas i'm in Norway on an 80mb/80mb connection.

http://www.speedtest.net/result/6971756581

If they are using a standard DSL connection, i highly doubt they're getting 51ms more latency. More like 277ms latency if they're from scandinavia or central europe. Worse if they're from southern europe, but as i said, post their results, then we'll see. I won't believe it until i see it, as i've been on DSL myself before switching to fiber, and i had the worst latency ever to NA servers in any game i played.

On top of all of that, there's the peak hours, where latency is bound to increase as well, in which case, european players will get hit by lagspikes that last for a couple of seconds to five+ seconds. Response time gets so bad during peak hours it's impossible to play regardless.
Actually i don't get those people who want "NO CHANGES". You had possibility to play vanilla for 13 years on all private servers which existed, and you still have it now to get this "vanilla experience". The only argument you say is that "BECAUSE ITS VANILLA". But what is vanilla?

Vanilla was way too rough game, based on MMOs which existed in early 2000s. Those games were based on hooking players by making them to spend more time in game. Vanilla was never hard or even hardcore, it is just time consuming.
Examples of time-consuming experience: no mount until level 40, high cost on 100% mount (personally i'm okay with this one), PvP system with zero skill required but just grinding for ~4-5 months to r14, 2 items from boss for 40 people (and sometimes those items were not useful for anyone in the raid), no summoning stones, high mats requirements to make flasks and special places to make them, lack of graveyards, lack of some flight masters; tons of trash in raids, where actually trash > bosses.

How does vanilla raiding looks like: firstly you need 40 ppl, but it is hard to maintain same 40 people every raid. When it comes to Raid time you need all of those 40 people to be online, then you need your warlocks to summon them. Oh wait, i forgot, raid time starts 0.5-1hour before listed raid time, firstly raid needs to get Dire maul buffs, then Zul'gurub buff, and Onyxia/Nefarian head buff, then summoning starts. Raid duration is usually 4 hours, 3hours for clearing trash/rebuffing/summoning some1/ressing 40 people etc. and 1h or even less is enough to kill all bosses in raid. From all vanilla encounters there are just a couple of "hard" bosses - C'thun, Kel'thuzad, 4Hoursmen, other bosses are just about "Spam your 1-3 button rotation and watch KTM". But if you compare mechanics of those 3 "Hard bosses" to retail, they are more like to be first bosses of some raid on HC or even normal difficulty today. As i said, there is nothing hardcore in those raids, the only hard thing is watching for some1 in the raid to not asspull trash groups or overagro the boss.

So what kind of QoL i would accept:
-Guild bank - i dont see any point not to add it, because every guild will have lvl 1 bank alt
-Summoning stones. I dont want to play running simulator
-Mount from level 30. I dont want to play running simulator
-Dual spec. It will cost you a huge ammount of money if you want to raid and PvP. And you do want, because you get better PvP gear from raids. 50g is a lot in vanilla. It means you will need play almost 24/7 to farm gold for respecs, consumables, Raid, and grind your honor.
Idk why people talk about mount tabs, if you basically have only your race mounts available and like 4 from ZG/Strath/winterspring questline.

What about changes: Raids require more and new mechanics, because vanilla raids are boring and exhausting and if there will be no changes all guilds will clear raids just in days of release. Most of bosses are zerg.
PvP trinkets should have cd of 2minutes instead of 5, and PvP sets should be BiS for PvP for every class, because otherwise there is no point of getting them. PvP overall needs balancing.

So personally i would like to see New classic servers to be a sort of mix of TBC and Vanilla. To keep vanilla atmosphere with more reasonable mechanics, because it is techinally and morally out of date. And i don't see any point to release same game with same flaws in 2018 or whenever it will be released.
17/01/2018 05:25Posted by Тессуэт
Actually i don't get those people who want "NO CHANGES". You had possibility to play vanilla for 13 years on all private servers which existed, and you still have it now to get this "vanilla experience". The only argument you say is that "BECAUSE ITS VANILLA". But what is vanilla?


Because Private servers are not anywhere near how the actual experience was back then.

Private servers are at best, a poor attempt at emulating the original game, but with the last patch before TBC was released. That's not a true vanilla experience.

I'm not sure if you're serious when you ask what vanilla is, but ok.

Vanilla is the original version of the base game, patch 1.1. Not a tweaked out, poor excuse of an emulated version that signaled the end of the original classic version.

17/01/2018 05:25Posted by Тессуэт
-Guild bank - i dont see any point not to add it, because every guild will have lvl 1 bank alt
-Summoning stones. I dont want to play running simulator
-Mount from level 30. I dont want to play running simulator
-Dual spec. It will cost you a huge ammount of money if you want to raid and PvP. And you do want, because you get better PvP gear from raids. 50g is a lot in vanilla. It means you will need play almost 24/7 to farm gold for respecs, consumables, Raid, and grind your honor.
Idk why people talk about mount tabs, if you basically have only your race mounts available and like 4 from ZG/Strath/winterspring questline.

What about changes: Raids require more and new mechanics, because vanilla raids are boring and exhausting and if there will be no changes all guilds will clear raids just in days of release. Most of bosses are zerg.
PvP trinkets should have cd of 2minutes instead of 5, and PvP sets should be BiS for PvP for every class, because otherwise there is no point of getting them. PvP overall needs balancing.

So personally i would like to see New classic servers to be a sort of mix of TBC and Vanilla. To keep vanilla atmosphere with more reasonable mechanics, because it is techinally and morally out of date. And i don't see any point to release same game with same flaws in 2018 or whenever it will be released.


You don't want classic, you want an abomination.

You need to go back to your private server (as you clearly never played the actual vanilla) or retail and stay there.
17/01/2018 06:22Posted by Geronîmoo
You need to go back to your private server (as you clearly never played the actual vanilla) or retail and stay there.
What he says actually proves that he has played the "actual" vanilla and has a quite deep knowledge of it.
Blizzard isn't doing Vanilla WoW, they're doing Classic WoW.

Calling 1.1 Vanilla is just an arbitrary definition. You might as well call 1.0 Vanilla, and claim that it's the real experience, before they had to change things to accomodate for those lowbob casual players that flooded in after release.
Or call the open beta the real Vanilla, with way more bugs, for those wannabe-hardcore players.
Or, like anyone else, you can just accept that Vanilla WoW is anything from release to the TBC prepatch.

Some things in Classic are just horribly out of date, and might hurt the game.

World buffs and stackable elixirs just mean that you have to spend an excessive amount of time outside of raids preparing for raiding. In the same game where every raider on the planet complained about the borderline retarded AP grind in Legion. In Legion, people became so sick of the AP grind that they immediately stopped giving the mildest jolly bother about it once they hit a certain level. First it was 54, then it was the first concordance level, then it was 75.
Blizzard won't want to intentionally burn out players, and they know that players will do anything to get an edge during preparation.

If they want to release a polished product, they should start with making world buffs only benefit you outdoors, so you still get a nice boost when leveling, without it being mandatory for raids.
Then they should vastly reduce the consumable stacking.

Also keep in mind that farming consumables isn't enjoyable content. It's the most boring thing in the game.

It would also benefit the game by making the raids less trivial. The only downside I can see is that tanks might get killed on hard-hitting bosses. However, this can easily be solved by tuning.

Of course, it wouldn't be the same as it was in Vanilla. But let's be honest, people usually don't cite farming consumables as the reason they want Classic. It's just a mindless borefest that keeps you from playing content you like.
Vanilla is the original version of the base game, patch 1.1. Not a tweaked out, poor excuse of an emulated version that signaled the end of the original classic version.

Vanilla Fanatic detected. 1.1 had nothing, and will have nothing with even more weird talents, less gy's, less fly masters, less everything, no BGs and pvp system, no Dire Maul and Maraudon. Blizzard made changes because people asked for them, if you still do not understand it. And not casual new players asked for all these changes, but everyone who had clear mind without fanaticism to this myth that Vanilla is the best expansion, that Vanilla is hardcore. They asked because it was unplayable garbage.

And wtf is this "original classic version"? Just name things their name - irrational, pointless, uncomfortable, content-lacking version. It will have same success as private servers do, noone will play for more than month when it releases.
10/11/2017 20:34Posted by Whiss
Just reposting this in the EU forums for the sake of visibility, I thought it was a decent read. To be clear, I didn't write it.

Yes, I am one of those people. Kind of. Worth noting, I am not an IT professional; I do this as a hobby, and I won't be applying for a position on the new team. The emulator I am working on is not public, and our small team works on it entirely at our own expense. For me, it's just a fun and interesting way to learn about programming and game design. However, my experience does give me some understanding of the technical and non-technical challenges ahead.

From a technical standpoint, the 1.12 client is a relic. It is entirely unsuitable for modern gaming, in the same way that Windows 95 is unsuited for modern gaming. Trying to push 12 years of functionality, accessibility and security updates on software designed for use on antiquated systems would be a waste of time. If they aren't using the original client, they cant use the original server code either, since the packets they send back and forth to each other have to match up, and the number and structure of those packets has changed dramatically over the years as new features have been added to the game. Not to mention how many changes to the server code/database structures have occurred, and the fact that the old code is optimized for use on ancient, legacy hardware.

The result of these incompatibilities is that the Blizzard team will likely either create a new standalone client, or else build a "Retro UI" functionality into the current client, and appropriate server-side code to effectively emulate a Vanilla server. In essence, remaking the Vanilla world using the current game engine, and restoring the functionalities that have been abstracted out, such as spellpower or spirit. None of that is particularly difficult for a professional developer, but it is a very large and very tedious job. They aren't kidding when they say they have a mammoth task ahead of them.

The main challenge with a venture like this isn't on the technical side, it's pleasing the community and convincing them to accept any changes you intend to make. There are a number of smaller QoL issues which are largely aesthetic and can be dealt with fairly easily; people will like them or not, but they aren't game breakers. Updated graphics, AoE looting, guild banks, etc. None of these things particularly matter to me one way or the other. In my experience in dealing with the Vanilla private server community, and we're talking about the most hardcore of Vanilla enthusiasts, the two big questions that come up, always, are regarding itemization and tuning (there are a couple other important ones, but I'll summarize those later).

Itemization is a big issue because of changes made in 1.9 through 1.11, where new items were added to loot tables, green items were turned into blues, and a new PvP set was added. Most of this stuff was largely irrelevant at the time, since most raiding groups had superior gear by then. My understanding is that these were intended as catch-up items for players late to the game, so to speak. However, the itemization on them is so vastly superior to the prior offerings that these level 50-55 blues actually surpass Tier 1 and even Tier 2 epics (here's looking at you, Ban'thok Sash). Some of the new PVP blues from 1.11 are genuinely absurd. Having them available from the beginning of the realm trivializes a lot of content, both from a difficulty and a reward perspective. I'm not going to make any suggestions as to how this should be addressed, but it is certainly one of the things the team will need to look at.

Secondly with tuning, the reality is that players already know how to defeat the encounters, and the end-of-expansion talent trees and itemization changes combine to help trivialize much of the content. The initial wonderment of figuring out strategies is long gone. A big one that typically gets overlooked as well is the change to taunt with the release of Naxxramas, prior to which it didn't actually cause an aggro swap, just a short duration fixate and a threat match. To compensate for all this, the encounters can be buffed to reduce margin of error, or altered to change the mechanics, blanket nerf auras on players entering specific zones, or left entirely as-is, among other options. Again, I'm not going to try to tell a professional designer what the best answer is, but it's something which merits consideration.

A couple other points.. A progressive content release in terms of talent changes, etc. is a tremendous amount of work, but content gating / itemization changes are trivial. Talent changes mean UI updates and client data updates, meaning a constant cycle of patches being pushed to players (the reason private servers don't do this is because it would require custom patches, which have been used in the past to spread viruses etc. Players don't trust them anymore, so servers don't do them anymore - not an issue for official realms). Updating mob stats, unlocking portals, or changing item stats only require a quick database update and can be done entirely server-side during a maintenance outage. I think it's worth investigation as to how far the team is willing to go with this, and whether/how often progression should reset if the realms are to last a long time. I'd think a "Path of Exile"-style approach with fresh realms starting and existing characters being pushed to a static 1.12 realm every so often might work best, but that's up to the team, assuming they even want to go progressive in the first place.

There's a lot of argument about rolling back talent specs, or altering them to buff underpreforming class/spec combinations. Personally I think rolling back talents to the original trees is not very likely to occur. Many of the original trees were objectively bad from a design and playability perspective, and I don't see a major game studio intentionally putting objectively bad content back into a game they hope to make money from. I could be wrong; it's just something the development team will have to look at.

As far as buffing underpreforming specs, by 1.12 things were in a pretty good place as far as balance. Not every spec was A++ for raiding, but people seem to forget that the game wasn't only about raiding, either. They also forget that there is plenty of flex room for offspecs in a 40 man raid. Boomkins were pretty bad, sure, but stuff one in a group with four fire mages and opinions start to shift a little. You certainly won't hear those mages complaining anyways. No, you couldn't just always swap out one class/spec for another, but they were never intended to be hot-swappable. Each build excelled at it's own thing, and sometimes that meant raiding, sometimes pvp, sometimes levelling, etc. Some builds didn't excel at anything but simply offered greater versatility. I could give my opinion on how I would handle it, but my opinion isn't worth any more than anyone else's, just more things for the team to consider.

Population caps make sense, a big part of Vanilla was seeing the same people and building both friendships, and rivalries. However, I worry about how the initial "tourist" rush will affect this.

The Honor System is kind of a mess, but in my experience nostalgia wins on this one. People are diehards for it and react violently to any proposed change. I don't expect to see a significant change here (though I would applaud it).

I don't think anyone will complain about bug fixes and exploit loopholes getting closed. Nobody should be able to solo group content by utilizing bad terrain geometry to infinitely kite bosses, for example. I could be wrong, though. In my experience nothing makes an exploiter angrier than trying to take away their exploit.

Lastly, consideration needs to be given to re-implementing the spell batch system. It's a huge part of Vanilla, basically defining raid healing and a myriad of PvP interactions. The inability to cancel a cast for fear that a tank might not get enough healing, or the ability for two players to simultaneously crowd control each other are hallmarks of Vanilla, even if it does make the game feel less responsive.

So yeah, I do wish the team the best of luck in satisfying the player base with this ambitious project. I'll be intrigued to see how things develop as time goes on. And thanks to anyone who took the time to read this ridiculously long post.


EDIT: Followup, 11/9/2017, 9:13 AM EST

Ok, well, that post got a lot more legs than I ever thought it would, and I've seen the comments from a couple sources. First of all, I'm grateful to everyone who stuck through reading what was a pretty long and rambling letter, and for taking the time to post your thoughts and opinions. I figure it would be appropriate to make a short response to clarify a few points:

First, I'm still not a professional software engineer. That's true, but I have been working with Vanilla/TBC for several years, and I have a fairly strong understanding of how they work under the hood. I purposely avoided going into technical details because the letter was meant to be understood by the layman. I regret rephrasing Client and Server Opcodes as "packets", in fact I regret mentioning them at all. What I was trying to get at was that the old client and server code are really outdated. This is from both from a functionality standpoint (bnet, authenticator, smooth movement, etc.), and from a code efficiency standpoint (almost 20 years of improvements to C++). It makes sense that they will either create a new client or backport the current one. This will be a big job and a tedious one, but it's not incredibly difficult for a team of professionals. Several other people have done a much better job than I of explaining this point in considerable detail, so I'm grateful to them for that.

Secondly, I tried to avoid including my own personal opinions into the topic of QoL and tuning changes. My intention was to point out and clarify a few areas of contention, several common proposals for addressing them, and (hopefully) politely and impartially frame a conversation about those topics. Including my own opinions wouldn't have accomplished that. I do have thoughts on each of the points mentioned, among others, but I don't assume that I speak for the majority and didn't want to come off seeming like I did. In re-reading it, I see that I let a few things slip, and I apologize for that. (Except for the bit about the Honor System. That really is a torturous design.) The proposed solutions I included come from my experience and interaction with the rabidly pro-Vanilla private server community, and represent several (but not all) of their preferred methods for recreating the experience they want. Consensus on any of the issues is hard to reach.

I don't really have anything else to add to the topic without expressing personal beliefs, so again I thank everyone who took the time to read and reply. Here's hoping for a fun nostalgia trip when the realms go live.


Probably the most useful post that was written since the announcement of classic wow
17/01/2018 15:53Posted by Тессуэт
Vanilla is the original version of the base game, patch 1.1. Not a tweaked out, poor excuse of an emulated version that signaled the end of the original classic version.

Vanilla Fanatic detected. 1.1 had nothing, and will have nothing with even more weird talents, less gy's, less fly masters, less everything, no BGs and pvp system, no Dire Maul and Maraudon. Blizzard made changes because people asked for them, if you still do not understand it. And not casual new players asked for all these changes, but everyone who had clear mind without fanaticism to this myth that Vanilla is the best expansion, that Vanilla is hardcore. They asked because it was unplayable garbage.

And wtf is this "original classic version"? Just name things their name - irrational, pointless, uncomfortable, content-lacking version. It will have same success as private servers do, noone will play for more than month when it releases.


You still have no clue.

Go back to your 'successful' private server and stay there.

17/01/2018 11:19Posted by Inposshiburu
Calling 1.1 Vanilla is just an arbitrary definition.


Vanilla - "The original version". A version of a software or a game that has not been updated with any patches past release. That, is the actual definition of Vanilla.
17/01/2018 20:39Posted by Geronîmoo
Vanilla - "The original version". A version of a software or a game that has not been updated with any patches past release. That, is the actual definition of Vanilla.
Which won't happen for "classic". Sorry.
You still have no clue.

Go back to your 'successful' private server and stay there.


Tell me the clue of "true vanilla experience". Why will it be better to have all the same problems of Vanilla than fixing them and making this game playable? Still you haven't brought any arguments except that "1.12 vanilla is not vanilla".

Anyway, even if Classic servers will have the same timeline and everything same from 2004, it will never be the same. Firstly because people have experienced it already and they have a lot of knowledge, secondly because mechanics of this game are just opposite to logics and simply out of date. Most of people will not deal with those flaws only "Because it is Vanilla". You need to understand this.

For e.g: "Oh there is just 1 fly master in STV for alliance, AH OKAY ITS VANILLA", "Warrior PvP trinket doesn't remove polymorph/charm, Ah yea right, its VANILLA", "I need to wait for my Officer to get online so he can give me mats for AQ40 tier set, ITS Vanilla". You can deal with it only when you have a lot of hype and enthusiasm for it, but these feels are not infinite.
17/01/2018 22:34Posted by Тессуэт
Still you haven't brought any arguments except that "1.12 vanilla is not vanilla".


I have, many times on this forum, and so have others.

Patch 1.12 signaled the END of vanilla and the start of 2.0. aka TBC.

17/01/2018 22:34Posted by Тессуэт
Anyway, even if Classic servers will have the same timeline and everything same from 2004, it will never be the same. Firstly because people have experienced it already and they have a lot of knowledge, secondly because mechanics of this game are just opposite to logics and simply out of date. Most of people will not deal with those flaws only "Because it is Vanilla". You need to understand this.


That is exactly what we have been pushing for, for the past decade and then some.

Most of us don't want an improved version of the base game that was released right before the first expansion. Most of us wants an authentic experience from start to finish, and that's what we've been pushing for, and that's what we're getting. An authentic classic WoW with all the pros and all the cons.

You're the one who seem to be incapable of understanding any of this.

If you don't want it, then why are you here posting on the Classic forum?
17/01/2018 20:39Posted by Geronîmoo
Vanilla - "The original version". A version of a software or a game that has not been updated with any patches past release. That, is the actual definition of Vanilla.


1.1 is a patched version of 1.0. There was an open beta. Why should vanilla be the release version? It's still arbitrary.

According to Wikipedia (and feel free to bring your own source):
Computer software, and sometimes also other computing-related systems like computer hardware or algorithms, are called vanilla when not customized from their original form, meaning that they are used without any customizations or updates applied to them.

So 1.1 is definitely not vanilla, if you want to define on a patch level. If you don't want to to it on a patch level, then anything in between beta and TBC prepatch is vanilla.

Here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanilla_software

And you say yourself that
Patch 1.12 signaled the END of vanilla

So even YOU think that 1.12 is vanilla.
18/01/2018 18:58Posted by Inposshiburu
1.1 is a patched version of 1.0. There was an open beta. Why should vanilla be the release version? It's still arbitrary.


You don't even post a source.

Patch 1.1.0 7 November 2004 4044
Initial US Release Version for World of Warcraft

Patch 1.1.1 17 November 2004 4062
Many bug fixes and additions

Patch 1.1.2 6 December 2004 4125
The EU release version[1]

Removed time zone tabs from realm list for U.S., all servers now appear in one list.

Taken from WoWWiki

http://wowwiki.wikia.com/wiki/Patches/1.x

Anything prior to 1.1.0 are pre-release patches and have nothing to do with vanilla.

18/01/2018 18:58Posted by Inposshiburu
So 1.1 is definitely not vanilla, if you want to define on a patch level. If you don't want to to it on a patch level, then anything in between beta and TBC prepatch is vanilla.


But this is where you are wrong, on every single level, buddy!

In information technology, vanilla is an adjective, meaning plain or basic. The unfeatured version of a product is sometimes referred to as the vanilla version. The term is based on the fact that vanilla is the most popular or at least the most commonly served flavor of ice cream. Or, as Eric Raymond, editor of The New Hacker's Dictionary , puts it, the default ice cream


http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/vanilla

Computer software, and sometimes also other computing-related systems like computer hardware or algorithms, are called vanilla when not customized from their original form, meaning that they are used without any customizations or updates applied to them.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanilla_software#cite_note-1

What it means, is the software state in which it was released. The original version. The first edition. Betas have nothing to do with the definition whatsoever because beta is a stage of development.

I suggest you actually sit down and read your 'sources' properly before you use them as an argument.

18/01/2018 18:58Posted by Inposshiburu
So even YOU think that 1.12 is vanilla.


No. I have never said that i think 1.12 is vanilla. Learn how to read properly.

Now, for future reference, if you want to argue with someone who knows what they're talking about, make sure you don't.
18/01/2018 18:58Posted by Inposshiburu
1.1 is a patched version of 1.0. There was an open beta. Why should vanilla be the release version? It's still arbitrary.


You don't even post a source.

Patch 1.1.0 7 November 2004 4044
Initial US Release Version for World of Warcraft

Patch 1.1.1 17 November 2004 4062
Many bug fixes and additions

Patch 1.1.2 6 December 2004 4125
The EU release version[1]

Removed time zone tabs from realm list for U.S., all servers now appear in one list.

Taken from WoWWiki

http://wowwiki.wikia.com/wiki/Patches/1.x

Anything prior to 1.1.0 are pre-release patches and have nothing to do with vanilla.

18/01/2018 18:58Posted by Inposshiburu
So 1.1 is definitely not vanilla, if you want to define on a patch level. If you don't want to to it on a patch level, then anything in between beta and TBC prepatch is vanilla.


But this is where you are wrong, on every single level, buddy!

In information technology, vanilla is an adjective, meaning plain or basic. The unfeatured version of a product is sometimes referred to as the vanilla version. The term is based on the fact that vanilla is the most popular or at least the most commonly served flavor of ice cream. Or, as Eric Raymond, editor of The New Hacker's Dictionary , puts it, the default ice cream


http://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/vanilla

Computer software, and sometimes also other computing-related systems like computer hardware or algorithms, are called vanilla when not customized from their original form, meaning that they are used without any customizations or updates applied to them.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vanilla_software#cite_note-1

What it means, is the software state in which it was released. The original version. The first edition. Betas have nothing to do with the definition whatsoever because beta is a stage of development.

I suggest you actually sit down and read your 'sources' properly before you use them as an argument.

18/01/2018 18:58Posted by Inposshiburu
So even YOU think that 1.12 is vanilla.


No. I have never said that i think 1.12 is vanilla. Learn how to read properly.

Now, for future reference, if you want to argue with someone who knows what they're talking about, make sure you don't.


None of your sources say anything about release. Because that isn't relevant. Maybe you're the one who should actually learn how to read sources properly.
The sources say that it is the original version, which would be 1.0. Anything beyond that is a patched version, even if it was patched before release. You shot yourself in the foot pretty bad with your source there.

And you clearly said that 1.12 signaled the END of vanilla, which means it was still vanilla, according to you. That's literally what you said.

Vanilla is anything from 1.0 to 1.12, and there is nothing you can do to change that. Besides, Blizzard never said they'd release vanilla. They announced WoW Classic, which is not the same.
Gotta love all these trolls denying the facts Geronîmoo drops. He has served you privateers many times here in different posts, and yet you still argue!
The old talent trees were appallingly designed. That people have any fondness for them indicates they did not play with them at all.

Vanilla was arguably at its height in the period between 1.3 and 1.9. After that, the first in a long series of extensive class changes began to progressively change the design of the game, starting first with the paladin talent revamp and eventually following through to the armour progression system in 1.10, leading far into TBC and beyond. By 1.12, the game was TBC. It was not vanilla WoW any more.

This pattern lead to the anticipated revamps for each individual class which occured for each expansion. These revamps WERE NEEDED. A number of classes in vanilla were not in a playable state. Several (shamans, paladins, druids) were not playable until WoTLK.

From my perspective, a game which consisted of a more restained version of the Wrath of the Lich King changes to each class combined with the content from Vanilla and the removal of a lot of the basic systems that underpin the model experience would scratch what little itch I have for vanilla WoW. Perhaps adding in Burning Crusade content downscaled to level 60.

Wrath was the first period where the design of the classes was really nailed down. As an example, here are the paladin talent trees from the time:

https://www.dkpminus.com/wotlk-talent-calculator/paladin.php

Compare this to vanilla WoW (this version is post 1.9):

https://db.vanillagaming.org/?talent#s

If you could trim the WoTLK talent trees and place them into the vanilla WoW talent tree, keep the HP/damage scaling from vanilla WoW and keep class balance approximately equivalent to WoTLK, you could very easily come up with a good way of meshing the three 'classic' periods of WoW together. You would get the best and most coherent period of class design (minus a few changes which you would need to make) with the most interesting content design and the most 'real' world. Examples of changes you would need to make include a method of mana regeneration for the hybrid melee classes.

I for one would love to see a stripped down WoTLK esque Ret paladin (with spell power/Divine Storm and some limited melee based regen) facing off against a WoTLK esque Shaman of the same time.

Something like this is likely to be the solution Blizzard take. They know why they made those class changes. The masochists who play Classic on Private Servers do so under an entirely different set of rules to those of vanilla WoW. Any attempt to implement a true vanilla WoW experience is going to cause an awful outcry of "BUFF" "NERF", exactly as it did back in the day.

PvP alone is going to cause unimaginable whining.

Rogues. Remember the first time you ran into a Reckadin and they one shot you?
Mages. Remember the time a rogue stunlocked you to death without you being able to do anything?
Priests. Remember how useless you felt?
Everyone. Remember the time a warlock literally fear dotted you to death?
Warriors. Remember trying to kill a Shaman in melee combat?

Remember reblessing time. Every 5 minutes, a cycle of blessings. Remember no class other than a warrior being able to tank. Remember requiring a suite of approximation addons to keep yourself from being one shot by a boss due to an invisible mechanic. Remember Cleanse Spam. Remember spell downranking. Remember endless mana pots. Remember ultra simple box mechanics. Remember obtuse solutions to easy problems.

All that will be yours again, if you demand vanilla WoW as it is and worse, if you demand an early version of vanilla WoW, rather than its relatively well designed later versions.
Every class was playable in TBC, but not in every spec.

I genuinely don't understand why people keep asking for Classic, and then ask for class balance. That already exists with TBC. I don't mind people asking for TBC, but I think asking for a hybrid is a bit weird.

If you balance classes in Classic, you'll run into a really stupid problem:
Horde doesn't have Paladin, Alliance doesn't have Shaman. That's OK if raids are easy, and the only useful specs for the Classes are the heal specs. If you make Paladin a viable tank, then Alliance has a tank class more, which can, in the worst case, make a fight trivial for Alliance, and completely suck for Horde. That would just be piss poor game design. I could imagine that Paladin tanks would make the Nef Adds easier to handle, for example, and giving one faction an advantage over the other on the last boss of a tier is probably the worst thing you can do. It wouldn't become trivial, but easier, and that's already stupid.

The most important thing for class balance would be that Horde gets Paladin and Alliance gets Shaman, in Classic. This would lead to the Classic community completely losing their !@#$, though, so I think it shouldn't be done.

So basically, if you want class balance, you should also think about faction balance, and consider giving both factions all classes. That should come as a package.
But knowing this forum, there's just a bunch of idiots running around who are salty because ret sucks DPS wise, and they don't care about such trivial things as actual balancing or other people with other opinions, as long as their GM let's them raid as ret...
First post of this old thread is worth reading now after Blizzard revealing Classic on the modern client :)

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum