Holiday Titles should NOT be that Rare.

#0 - Oct. 20, 2008, 5:58 p.m.
Blizzard Post

http://www.wowhead.com/?achievement=1691

Those achievements will all be obtainable within the first day of Winter's Veil, except for the "Open a present" one which you will just have to wait until they are available. The HARDEST achievement (imo) on that list is http://www.wowhead.com/?achievement=252 which will still be pretty easy. Notice how none of the achievements listed require winning the RNG on rare drops. Everyone and their mother will be running around with the "Merrymaker" Title come Christmas morning.

People need to stop using the argument that The Hallowed should be a rare and unique title. Because it shouldn't be. Please remove the Sinister Calling achievement from the title requirement. Thank you.

Edit: Since the blue post came out that they won't be changing it, this is now an opinion post.
#66 - Oct. 20, 2008, 7:35 p.m.
Blizzard Post
The fundamental disconnect here is that there is a group of individuals (a percentage of whom are familiar faces from last month) who believe there should be no achievement that involves the random number generator, particularly if it involves a title or an item reward.

We disagree. We believe it's reasonable in moderation. Truly rare drops are feats of strength, but if we feel them reasonable, they can be normal achievements that award points and, at times, more cosmetic rewards.

There is a degree of chance to a great deal of World of Warcraft's gameplay and reward systems, PvP and PvE included. That chance plays a part in some achievements should not come as a surprise.

The majority of the achievements for World Events are achievable in a few hours' time, but there are a few that require some dedication to complete (and yes, a little bit of luck can come into play on a few of them). If the chance of completing a given achievement is incredibly low by the end of the holiday -- as was the case with A Mask For All Occasions -- we'll consider it and change it. We keep tabs on the feedback and we play the game alongside you. We're reviewing the achievement lists all the time.

Sinister Calling, Perma-Peddle and achievements like them are considered reasonable enough to include in the meta-achievement; they are not common, but an occasional achievement based on chance with reasonable numbers backing it is considered in line with what we designers are intending.
#84 - Oct. 20, 2008, 7:43 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:


Thank you for responding Kisirani, I'm sorry if my other posts have seemed inflammatory.

Now I agree that some luck can be involved in an achievement. Just yesterday I finally got my Mr. Pinchy after fishing over 600 crawdads. The difference here is that I can go fish anytime. Hallows end is only available 2 weeks out of the year.

Also you brought up Perma-Peddle. That achievement is also much easier to get because you can get the package on any one of your characters and trade it to the one character you want it on. Headless Horsemen, due to the daily restrictions can only be done on average 75 times per character. If you get the pet on an alt you don't want it on, tough luck. These are the core of my complaints


I wasn't saying that Perma-Peddle was of equal probability to Sinister Calling, only that it was another example of an application of chance we felt reasonable enough to include in the meta achievement. Have Keg, Will Travel is another.

The drop rates for these things are much higher than items like Mr. Pinchy due to the fact that they're not around all year.
#88 - Oct. 20, 2008, 7:44 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
What about the Brewfest "Brew of the Year" achievement? People who did not know about the specifics of this one and who did not purchase the Membership last month are stranded for an extra year... Is anything going to be done about that?


It's remaining as-is.
#125 - Oct. 20, 2008, 7:56 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:


But once I finally DID get my Mr. Pinchy I didn't have to roll against 5 other people. I also wasn't restricted to only one cast per day, 2 weeks out of the year.

You can't JUST consider the drop rate, there are other factors involved as well. With all these factors added up, very few people will have the title. Some of those people who dont have the title will have killed the HH 70 times. Some who DO have the title will have killed him once. RNG is simply not fair with the limited amount of factors on this achievement.


We do consider all those factors, believe it or not, and we're still of a mind that it's reasonable. You don't think it is; we do. You want the achievement to be easier to obtain than we do. In the end, that's where the disagreement lies, and while I understand and respect that you disagree with the design surrounding how easy achievements are to obtain, and I appreciate your feedback, we don't feel that achievements like Sinister Calling should be removed from the meta-achievements.

If at some point you feel that an achievement is too difficult to complete for a meta-achievement, we still welcome the feedback, and the answer may be "You're right," as was the case with A Mask For All Occasions; but the answer will, at times, be "No," as is the case here. We're not going to remove the achievements like Sinister Calling from the meta-achievements.

That isn't to say that we absolutely will not tweak the relative availability of the items needed in the future, but the actual mechanic will continue to be involved in achievements, and we're not adjusting the drop rate this year.
#141 - Oct. 20, 2008, 8 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
No, we dont want it easier. Hell, I'd like it to be harder. However I would like it also to NOT BE RANDOM.


Your feedback has been heard the many, many times you've said this, but we still disagree and are of the mind that achievements based on chance are fine within moderation. Saying it again isn't going to change that, I'm afraid.
#151 - Oct. 20, 2008, 8:03 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:

This is understandable, you want this one t be based on a bit of luck. I see your point.

But what is the reasoning behind the Brew of the Year? If I would know that it is going to be he requirement I would actually hand in all the keg quests I have done day after day. Why wasn't there an official announcement like with Amani War bear letting people know that the membership will be a requirement for the meta?


Similar to how we feel some element of chance is reasonable, we feel some element of time is reasonable as well. Requiring three years was a bit too much, but a straight year of drinking every brew of the month is within those reasonable bounds.

The Amani War Bear was disappearing permanently. That is not really comparable.
#173 - Oct. 20, 2008, 8:08 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:

Makes sense. But Brew of the Year is not a one-year achievement anymore. From the moment the achievement system was released people who were unaware about it will have to wait 2 years to achieve it. 2 years, not 1.

Why does it feel like I am wasting my breath trying to make sense on this one?


The Achievement system wasn't active when Brewfest was up. The people who have Brew of the Month this year have a head start on the achievement; we're still fine with the duration for those getting it in 2009.
#312 - Oct. 20, 2008, 9:23 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:

Could it at least be made group-lootable, to discourage douchebaggery?

Also, when you say you're removing "A Mask for All Occasions", you mean from the meta requirement, and not the from the game right? My Dwarf Hunter would be very upset if you axed it from the game altogether.


Yes, just from the meta-achievement.
#374 - Oct. 20, 2008, 11:14 p.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:
The Brewfest Mount was removed from the Brewmaster title...


No, it wasn't.
#490 - Oct. 21, 2008, 2:33 a.m.
Blizzard Post
I will reiterate for those of you going off your drop rate experience last year:

The drop rate of the items was raised. It's a good deal higher than what it was last year, and a good deal higher than what third-party sites report it to be.
#499 - Oct. 21, 2008, 2:39 a.m.
Blizzard Post
Q u o t e:


so.... how bad was the drop rate last year? because it seems to me that the drop rate is about the same.


Significantly lower, last year, for the squashling.