#0 - May 5, 2009, 4:46 p.m.
The proc is very underwhelming with the internal cooldown and the 10% RNG to even proc it.
Please add stats to this mace to make it feel as special as it should be.
Please buff Val'anyr
The proc is very underwhelming with the internal cooldown and the 10% RNG to even proc it.
Please add stats to this mace to make it feel as special as it should be.
#9 - May 6, 2009, 5:37 p.m.
Q u o t e:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
Petitions are frowned upon.
Dont expect this thread to get much dev attention, if anything it'll just get deleted with the others.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Which would just show Blizzards own immaturity since we aren't cussing them out or creating crapstorms...
Petitions are a poor use of forum space in our opinion. Here's why.
Petitions work (to some extent) in real life politics or perhaps to rarely save cult TV shows when you can get a reasonable chunk of the audience to participate. You aren't going to get a resonable chunk of the WoW audience (or even the hardcore, raiders capable of acquiring the legendary) to participate here.
Even more to the point, though, posts that consist of "signed" aren't informative posts. We want these forums for back and forth discussion among players (and sometimes developers). Single words of agreement are not discussions. If you don't like the mace (or any part of the game), explain why. See if other players agree with you. If not, why not?
Because only a relatively tiny percent of players participate on the forums, your qualitative feedback is a thousand times more valuable than trying to make a statement by the quantity of the player responding. I try to offer the same response when players say "Wow, look how long this thread is. Therefore it must really be a problem."
We also don't generally delete threads unless they contain offensive or other inappropriate content. We do lock threads that we consider to not be contributing to the type of forum we want to have.
#89 - May 7, 2009, 6:17 p.m.
Q u o t e:
GC, logic please. If they agree, they /sign. Why would they need to add more?
I really don't care about the mace but the concept of "/agree" being bad, is wrong. This is simply folks that agree with the OP's petition. Adding more fluff is counterproductive if they just plain agree.
I was trying to say, perhaps too gently, that petitions are not an appropriate use of the forums. We don't want to see posts that are just /agree. You aren't contributing additional points or issues to the debate, and since the sample sizes are going to be too small and the method of collection unscientific, your /agree is of very limited use in lending strength to someone else's arguments. It's just not a useful post -- just slightly more valuable than a post that says /hi. If all you've got is a /agree or /disagree and you don't want to add "fluff" then my advice is not to hit that Post button at all.
There are many other threads on the actual topic of the hammer, but I'll continue to read this one too so long as the replies contribute something.