Nov 8th 2011 9:01PM I recently had the immense pleasure of introduce Lego [and Mega Block] bricks to my nephew. Three giant crates of bricks, that were until recently only taking up space, have transformed into dungeons and space ships and wonderful adventure through a different set of four year old eyes.
As for the Warchief figure... My nephew always loved my WoW pets, so it would be hilarious for him to have his own 'pet' Thrall.
Apr 8th 2011 4:26AM I think a common misconception about this argument is that there is only one valid point of view.
I collect; I place the value of the item on the amount of work I invest to get said item. If i see someone else get it the same way, there is a kindred feeling in that we both worked very hard. If said item becomes easier to get, I lose a sense of investment and the item does feel different; it loses a certain something, that the french call... yeah. I think it's hard to argue that people don't understand why I would feel this way.
But at the same time, those who do not feel that the item is worth, say 17+ weeks in Molten Core, still value the pet for it's "awesomeness". But, it is a different type. Many people may have the item before them, but it doesn't affect them in the same way. If they did not feel the need to grind to get the item as soon as possible, they probably don't mind that there are more out there. And to avoid misunderstanding, I don't think they are lazy or anything of the sort. They just value the pet's "awesomeness" in a different way. Their idea of whether a pet becomes less neatos mosquitoes is inherently seen from a different perspective.
There is no right or wrong answer. And more importantly, it is not selfish or strange to feel a pet has lost a value that is truly only assigned by the owner. :D If value is assigned by an individual, leave it to the individual to decide how that value changes.
Oh and read ZAMM, by Robert Pirsig... It's a good one! :)
Mar 27th 2011 9:14AM This was described as being a guild achievement with progress shared among members in 3.3.5. Sadly, you are correct, it only counts the member with the most exalted reps. It seems players are getting varied responses from GMs... from a fix being in the works... to it being intended solely as an incentive for guilds to help that aforementioned member get the last few reps he needs.
Unfortunately, this is one of those bugs that is clearly just that, a bug. I understand priorities. But I hope for all the guilds which don't have that special achievement, um, person, that this does not become another "Working As Intended" issue. They want their pets too! Hopefully by 4.1...
As an aside, it's these issues that remind me sometimes GMs need sympathy too. :D It seems when the dev team shifts a fix priority, it's sometimes shifted so low they forget to even tell the GMs what's up!
Mar 3rd 2011 12:03AM Sorry, was I who needed to re-read. Thought that passage referred to the second chart, but it does say 'theoretical'. Can't edit, but just wanted to admit to my /footmouth there. :D
Mar 2nd 2011 11:54PM There are two graphs in this article. Graph one is theoretical. Graph two is actually logged dps data. Read the article and not just the comments. :D
Dec 24th 2010 9:51AM Happy Holidays!
Dec 7th 2010 8:22AM /Install new GPU...
/Commence to hum famous Beatles song on vent to the protests of guildies on grounds of sheer cheese factor...