Mar 26th 2010 6:51PM side note: the Light of Dawn is quite possibly the coolest title ever. Mr. Ziebart is clearly uninformed. :p
Mar 7th 2010 11:00PM http://www.merriam-webster.com/medical/reactivity
Oct 15th 2009 4:31PM Bjarn has no problem on this fight. Between ironform and def stance, he can take skadi's WW and poisoned spear, he doesnt even need to run out of WW. Skadi on the other hand has zero defense against Bjarn's WW. Bjarn makes it thru the drake phase fine, as he has lieutenants to heal his party up if they take a little frost cloud damage.
Far too often, despite wow.com's attempts to emphasize this to the voters, these polls come down to which fight annoys players more, and has nothing to do with the actual comparisons of abilities between bosses. In that kind of poll, Skadi is def the winner cause his air phase is annoyingly long, and there is VERY little room to maneuver away from his WW on that little platform.
Aug 13th 2009 12:55PM I think something interesting to note is the implication that 3.2.2 will be in November. Putting 3.3 and IC sometime closer to Christmas. Not a huge deal, just interesting.
May 28th 2009 11:43AM What follows is rather long, you've been warned. :p
While Varian is not the picture of perfect leadership, I find the article flawed. I agree that it was a misstep by Blizz to not properly reintroduce Varian to the game, so people could understand his mindset and his history. That alone could make a world of difference in people's perception of him. The only other individual with enough character to actually lead the alliance is a trapped in a dream atm, so to speak.
In any "alliance" of nations there is always one party that rises to that position of leader. Someone has to take the reins, steer the ship, etc. The other members could certainly overrule that leader as he is unofficial, but oftentimes that person rises to that position because they have the willpower to carry it and because, stated aloud or not, they do in fact represent the deeper goals/desires of the collective...
This ties into the issue of Stormwind's sovereignty over the rest of humanity. The nation-states of Stormgarde and Lordaeron are mentioned in the article. The problem here of course is that both no longer exist. Kul Tiris does not factor into the game right now, and is small and intentionally self-isolated. Theramore is in Kalimdor, and is smaller even than Kul Tiris, it's an outpost more than anything. Stormwind is humanity's beacon, and it's the only one they have left.
The article states that "if Varian has more power than the House of Nobles, he's simply incompetent, is indirectly responsible for the existence of the Defias, and has no business representing the Alliance as a whole. Or else he has less power than the House of Nobles (and) he's more a figurehead than an actual statesman and lacks the power to make decisions on behalf of the Stormwind kingdom, let alone the Alliance as a whole." This is flawed, as it insists that the situation remained unchanged between the time of Varian's disappearance and his return. I seem to remember something occurring regarding the broodmother of the black dragonflight during that time... Aside from which, the article also assumes that Varian returned unchanged, that perhaps his captivity did not harden, strengthen, or grow him in some fashion. The issue of reclaiming his kingship isn't even worth the time or words the article gives it. Sorry. No self-respecting king with a love for his people would abandon his responsibiltiy as the article suggests. The article also seems to be under the misconception that Varian's hatred of the Horde and love for his people are not in fact the same emotion.
As for the question of whether the other races were consulted, I reference the second paragraph of this post. The article talks about the meeting we see in the Ulduar trailer. Which I find odd, as it was Garrosh and his purposefully inflammatory comment who instigated the conflict there. This brings us to Thrall. Why the heck he chose to have Garrosh and not Saurfang accompany him to the meeting, who knows. A great weakness of Thrall's is his weak will and waning influence. He has no control over Garrosh, as the trailer shows. He is also always so afraid of doing the wrong thing, that it locks him into inaction. (i.e. Sylvanas) Sylvanas, btw, knew EXACTLY what the plague did. There is no POV issue here anymore, not after what is revealed in the book.
May 20th 2009 9:15AM According to MMO Champ's datamined version of Aesir's Edge and Hammer of Crushing Whispers, the speeds on these are now 3.6.
Apr 28th 2009 6:06PM @ andy
actually, thats not why they chose the healer mace, tho it may be a supplemental reason.
GC stated some time back that they have a rotating "list" of roles/classes as far as legendaries go. For instance, rogues and fury warrs just had glaives last xpac and hunters had thoridal. therefore these roles are towards the bottom of the list.
Atiesh has dps caster variants, so dps casters are prob somewhere in the middle of the list.
While thuderfury was a "dps" weapon, you'd see lots of tanks using it for the threat.
I'd put money on seeing a tank legendary in the 3.2 raid. DK's and Paladins are almost garunteed to get either ashbringer or some kind of redeemed frostmourne in 3.3/icecrown.
Apr 24th 2009 2:55PM @ Ferarro
Your argument is ridiculously flawed, to the point you should be ashamed for making it. You cannot compare the success of any given 25 man raid group in the 10 man version since they already out-gear the instance.
I love when people say things like "My guild did Ulduar-10 last night, on our off-night for 25-man raiding. I was blown away by how much easier it was. It's ridiculous."
Of course it is. It's like going back into Kara after farming SSC/TK and being surprised that it's so much easier.
Apr 24th 2009 2:38PM I think the question HAS to bee looked at by taking loot out of the equation. Like the OP said, doing so gives 10 mans a significant advantage. But isn't that quite revealing?
Assuming equal or no loot, what percentage of the player-base would chose 10? If it's an abnormally large percentage (like the polls here suggest) then that is indicative that players would rather do 10 in the first place, and the only reason they do 25 is for the marginally better gear.
So do you continue to make content for both progression paths when 80% or more of the player base would be content with truly challenging/hard modes in 10 man?
What then, assuming equal loot, is the attraction or point of 25?