Apr 7th 2010 4:45PM Didn't Wow.com report on a closed alpha that began on Jan-12?
There are a series of posts but it looks like there was a closed alpha confirmed for friends an d family and a scam that coincided with it.
Apr 5th 2010 1:38PM My primary toon was a warrior and I think this change sounds great. I particularly like how it helps correct for damage avoidance not penalizing rage generation.
I have always seen Rage generation as the only fully gear resource.
Energy - Generates over time. Only haste on gear helps
Mana - Granted by ability scores. Better gear allows for less downtime/longer fights
Runes - regenerates with cool downs. gear doesn't help
Runic Power - Secondary resource that builds by using runes. Gear doesn't help
Rage - Based on dmg done/taken. Requires better gear to scale.
Rage with change - Generates by attacking taking dmg independent of gear. It will scale like energy with regards to haste but also with Sta by being able to take more hits.
Feb 10th 2010 3:23PM In the defense of Wow.com they were simply getting the message out and stating that if this was real it would be advisable to download it.
It is the responsibility of the individual mobile phone users to validate that they are installing legitimate software.
- The application is called "Battle.net Authenticator".
- It is published by "Blizzard Entertainment, Inc".
- It contains the following link "Visit the developer's Web page: http://us.blizzard.com/support/article/BNETMOBILE
- It is free
- It does not ask for any username or account information
- It directs you to http://www.battle.net/bma" for activation
It is fairly easy to tell this application is produced by Blizzard opposed to the dozens of other WoW applications form others. There has to be a time to hold individuals accountable for their own ability to think for themselves with application installation.
Feb 10th 2010 3:06PM Confirmed that it works on the Verizon Droid. Just migrated my authenticator off my iPod Touch onto my Droid and logged in with it successfully.
Jan 21st 2010 10:44PM I work for a major software company (not related to WoW) and help security conscious customers design networks every day. Prior to that I was a consultant who among other things handled antivirus cleanups and prevention for companies. I know a thing or two on how to keep safe but that still didn't stop my account from being hacked.
I fell victim to an Adobe Flash vulnerability about a year ago. I knew the about the vulnerability and I meant to install the patch but it really wasn't on the top of my mind. After all I always have up to date antivirus software, firewall software, some security on my network and know what to click on and what not to click on when web browsing.
Luckily a friend of mine noticed the strange behavior and lack of responses when I was logged in at a time I'm generally at work. I was able to get in and change my password before the damage got to far. Of course now I had inconvenienced my guild (I was an officer and much of the bank needed to be restored) along with myself (I had to wait about 4 days before all my items were restored).
But in addition to that I had to scan through my computer to ensure there was nothing left (I ended up rebuilding it to be safe). I had to change my other passwords reinstall and patch WoW along with all my other programs. All of this because I was too lazy to download and install a less than 1MB Adobe Flash patch that I knew existed.
Had I had an Authenticator than all of that could have been avoided. Is it really that hard to type a short code in along with your password?
Dec 24th 2009 11:54AM I agree for sanity's sake that Anub'Arak would win in the end but it appears that many commenters are being one sides with "the rules". After all in the end this is a popularity and story flavor contest, the tribunal is boring on all levels.
If in the spirit of the rules it's assumed that Anub's borrow would work no matter where he was shouldn't it also be assumed the the Tribunal's lasers would still hit him while he was borrowing? Afterall it is "only dirt" he's hiding under. Since the rules won't allow Anub's borrow to not work why should they allow Tribunal's lasers to be neutralized?
Oct 28th 2009 2:10PM I do not believe this initial post deserved to be downranked as much as it has been. If you think about it automatic disenchanting will greatly increase the amount of enchanting reagents available to players and thus the AH thus reducing their value. Also from a players perspective there are many times when I prefer to make a quick buck by vendoring green items rather than waiting for an AH sale. Reagents tend to sell for a lot more on the AH while the items themselves are more valuable to a vendor than the reagents. Now that being said, I do think it is about time that reagents see a price reduction at the auction house, they do tend to be priced rather rediculously for the average player.
With regards to enchanting being forced to use their profession I can see only one legitamate complaint other than (I don't want to be helpful). It is the same complaint tailors have to a lesser extent. Nobody thinks twice about letting a skinner/minner/herbalist keep the materials they gain on a run even if there are other non-gathering crafters in the group. But people do expect tailors and enchanters to share their resoruces (cloth & disenchantable items). The only real solution I have seen to that occurs when helpful players offer to give their shards to the enchanter or cloth to a tailor as they know they can use it. This tends to happen much more frequently on a guild run opposed to a PUG.
I do disagree with the follow-up response. The "too lazy/cheap" comment is a bit unfair. WIth regards to a BoP item somebody may not have their enchanter in the party for example. This statement also does not take into account many of the buffs other party/raid members freely give out multiple times throughout a run. As a priest I generally carry 60 devout candles (valued at 12g, 20s each) and expect to use a good numbe of them throughout the run. This actually costs me a resource to use opposed to doing a disenchant.
Nov 12th 2008 7:15PM My assumption is that you would be able to "hop" a level 55+ character between realms with a paid transfer leaving your Death Knight behind. From a Blizzard stand point each of those paid transfers cost $25. So it is a financially limited loophole that only benefits them in the end.
I would also assume that you would not be able to transfer more than a single Death Knight to a server as the limit of one is easily enforceable at a character database level.
This of course is just speculation.