Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

MOP account wide mount exceptions.Follow

#1 Jun 01 2012 at 8:15 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,679 posts
MMO Champ just posted a list of the mounts that are currently NOT account wide.


Acherus Deathcharger
Argent Charger
Argent Warhorse
Azure Cloud Serpent
Cataclysmic Gladiator's Twilight Drake
Crimson Cloud Serpent
Dawnstone Panther
Deadly Gladiator's Frost Wyrm
Dreadsteed
Emerald Panther
Felsteed
Furious Gladiator's Frost Wyrm
Goblin Mini Hotrod
Golden Cloud Serpent
Grand Expedition Yak
Grand Ice Mammoth
Ice Mammoth
Jade Cloud Serpent
Jeweled Onyx Panther
Mechano-Hog
Mekgineer's Chopper
Onyx Cloud Serpent
Relentless Gladiator's Frost Wyrm
Ruby Panther
Ruthless Gladiator's Twilight Drake
Sandstone Drake
Sapphire Panther
Subdued Seahorse
Summon Charger
Summon Exarch's Elekk
Summon Great Exarch's Elekk
Summon Great Sunwalker Kodo
Summon Sunwalker Kodo
Summon Thalassian Charger
Summon Thalassian Warhorse
Summon Warhorse
Swift Mooncloth Carpet
Swift Shadoweave Carpet
Swift Spellfire Carpet
Traveler's Tundra Mammoth
Traveler's Tundra Mammoth
Vicious Gladiator's Twilight Drake
Winged Steed of the Ebon Blade
Wrathful Gladiator's Frost Wyrm

GC is backpedaling.
____________________________
"anything added to the game is technically content, even if it was only a giant, steaming pile of turds for us to climb for a paltry achievement." - Drusas

#2 Jun 01 2012 at 9:03 AM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
While quite a few of those are class/ race based mounts and I never expected them to be BoA I am saddened that things like the chopper will not be. Smiley: frown

On a side note, how is GC backpedaling?
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#3 Jun 01 2012 at 9:14 AM Rating: Default
***
1,679 posts
May 4, 2012 [http://wow.joystiq.com/2012/05/04/mists-of-pandaria-beta-account-wide-mounts-are-a-go/[/link]
____________________________
"anything added to the game is technically content, even if it was only a giant, steaming pile of turds for us to climb for a paltry achievement." - Drusas

#4 Jun 01 2012 at 10:24 AM Rating: Excellent
**
970 posts
The original list makes sense to me. Class-specific mounts, vendor mounts, and those created through professions. All of which either aren't appropriate for all characters or are "easily" available to everyone. IMO, what account-wide sharing should be for (if it should even exist at all, and I'd personally vote thumbs-down) is for rare drops and achievements which require massive grinds or massive luck. Not plunking down $1700 in Dalaran.

Not to mention that it's wrong to see a paladin on a dreadsteed or even the HH mount. Any feature which gives us warlocks or shadow priests on chargers should have been laughed out at the design stage.
#5 Jun 01 2012 at 10:58 AM Rating: Good
I can understand why you feel that way, but not everyone cares that much about RP factors. There's nothing wrong with someone using a charger mount on a warlock, nor using a HH mount on a paladin. I do agree that class specific mounts should stay class specific though.

Would be nice if the more expensive mounts were BoA too. I've yet to get myself the Sandstone drake or the Mechanohog, but if I did, it'd be nice to have it available on all my toons. A mount that only costs 2k, I can understand not making that BoA. But mounts that cost you 20k+, I think those deserve to be BoA.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#6 Jun 01 2012 at 12:33 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
So RAWDEAL let me get this straight. Just because every mount was available on the beta when the whole thing went up for testing that "GC is backpedaling" when they removed some of them? Talk about grasping for straws there. Smiley: oyvey
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#7 Jun 01 2012 at 12:39 PM Rating: Default
***
1,679 posts
Criminy wrote:
So RAWDEAL let me get this straight. Just because every mount was available on the beta when the whole thing went up for testing that "GC is backpedaling" when they removed some of them?
Yes, it's called Backpedaling " To retreat or withdraw from a position or attitude:" another question?
____________________________
"anything added to the game is technically content, even if it was only a giant, steaming pile of turds for us to climb for a paltry achievement." - Drusas

#8 Jun 01 2012 at 2:42 PM Rating: Excellent
***
1,877 posts
Until you show me a link that has GC stating that all mounts will be BoA I will have to stick by my guns and say you are just hunting excuses to hate. So, how about that blue link?
____________________________
#swaggerjacker
#9 Jun 01 2012 at 5:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Does it from behind...
Avatar
*****
13,048 posts
Ghostcrawler never said that all mounts would be available, and it was largely suspected from the beginning that not all mounts would be included. You're being obtuse, Raw.
____________________________
The·oph·a·ny (thē-ŏf'ə-nē)
An appearance of a god to a human; a divine manifestation.
Rogue Hunter
#10 Jun 01 2012 at 6:43 PM Rating: Good
***
2,944 posts
I can understand PvP Mounts, I can understand "Gold Sink Mounts", I can even understand Class-Specific Mounts...

But c'mon, Profession mounts?

It would actually be in WoW's best interest to make Profession Mounts account-wide, because it'd encourage people to level more characters to level those professions to get account-wide access to those mounts.

I have an engineer on both the Horde and Alliance side, but these two engineers are two lesser-played characters. I love my flying machine; it is one of my favorite mounts. Sadly, I almost never see it because I rarely play these characters.

Would it be THAT bad if I could have anyone on my account using it? It isn't like the Flying Machines are hard to get or expensive, really. And I think it'd be a nice little perk to having an engineer levelled.

Same goes for the carpets.

The chopper? Yeah okay, that's a gold-sink mount that's also a passenger mount. I can understand that being excluded. Vial of the Sands? Same. Bummer, but I can understand.

But c'mon, the carpets and flying machines wouldn't hurt anything......

Note: I know the Flying Machine is not listed, but yet 3 of the obsolete carpets are; I assume they meant carpets and flying machines will be exempt, as are the new jewelcrafting mounts; they somehow forgot that the proper names are the "Frosty Flying Carpet", "Flying Carpet" and "Magnificent Flying Carpet" instead of Mooncloth/Spellfire/Shadoweave Carpets"

Edited, Jun 1st 2012 8:45pm by Lyrailis
#11 Jun 01 2012 at 7:04 PM Rating: Excellent
*****
19,854 posts
PigtailsOfDoom wrote:
I can understand why you feel that way, but not everyone cares that much about RP factors. There's nothing wrong with someone using a charger mount on a warlock, nor using a HH mount on a paladin. I do agree that class specific mounts should stay class specific though.


That's really a poor argument. You're essentially saying that RP factors shouldn't inhibit player options and gameplay, because not all players care about it. But the reverse argument is just as valid--that player options and gameplay shouldn't inhibit RP factors.

Ultimately, WOW is an RPG. And every decision needs to be balanced around the various needs of a role playing game. The game world is created by the hundreds of small details, not just the grandiose ones. Because, generally speaking, the grandiose constructs are the ones you can most easily compare to other games. What makes Stormwind Stormwind and not some random, human Medieval-style city? It's all those small details--that kid chasing his sister, the park, the Mage Quarter (complete with Warlock pub), the tailors shop on the water, etc. When you play multiple games with similar cities, those small details are what keep them from becoming the same thing in your mind.

Of course, that's an example from the world environment, but the same thing applies. You create classes to be distinct because they're supposed to represent fundamentally different styles of life. The reason your Paladin can't ride a Dreadsteed is because he's a Paladin who abhors anything that does not serve the Light, which that mount most certainly doesn't. The more you gloss over these lines, the less distinct the classes become. The less distinct they become, the less interesting they become. And, ultimately, the more generic they feel.

Take away the fluff that makes a Warlock feel like a Warlock, and he just feels like "generic shadowy mage archetype".

Yes, we're just talking about one system here, but limited quantity is never a good argument--you can apply it to anything, and eventually you've made one too many changes on the grounds that "just one won't make a difference."

So, no, not caring about RP factors doesn't magically make it okay to ignore RP factors, because your play experience there affects the experience of everyone. There's no meaningful increase to the non-RP player by allowing class-specific mounts to be cross-class, but there is a meaningful decrease in enjoyment to the players that do care about the RP.

What makes it even worse is that all the one side would be gaining is aesthetic options, where the other side would be losing something that's part of the fundamental fabric of why they enjoy the game. You see your Paladin on a Dreadsteed, laugh for a moment, then go on your merry way. They see your Paladin on a Dreadsteed and feel the crumbling of the lore that created the world they're enjoying.
____________________________
IDrownFish wrote:
Anyways, you all are horrible, @#%^ed up people

lolgaxe wrote:
Never underestimate the healing power of a massive dong.
#12 Jun 02 2012 at 12:54 AM Rating: Decent
Scholar
Avatar
*
70 posts
well out of the 40ish on that list i own 5 that are supposedly not going to boa so my other 128 mounts are good to go. though this is still beta and they could change their minds in the upcoming weeks but im not too upset. i agree class mounts cant be given to a class that cant ride it but other then that hopefuly the few that dont fall into this category will be taken off this list and be made boa

Edited, Jun 2nd 2012 2:57am by Jallil
#13 Jun 02 2012 at 3:54 AM Rating: Excellent
Digg, I think you misunderstood my post. I agree that the class mounts should stay class specific. What I was disagreeing with, was the idea that certain classes/specs should not use certain mounts that are available to everyone, because it wouldn't feel right. I use the Tyreal's charger on my shadow priest all the time. That thing looks awesome when it's purple. Smiley: grin My ex used his HH mount on his paladin all the time too. Why should someone get to say that we can't do that? He's entitled to his opinion of course, I just happen to disagree with it.
____________________________
Proudmoore US server:
Popina, 90 Priest
Digits, 86 Shaman
Thelesis, 85 Mage
Willowmei, 85 Druid
Necralita, 85 DK
Shrika, 72 Warlock
Jaquelle, 54 Paladin
Grakine, 32 Hunter
The MMO-Zam's FB group. Please message me first so I know who you are.
#14 Jun 05 2012 at 2:17 AM Rating: Excellent
*
162 posts
RAWDEAL wrote:
Criminy wrote:
So RAWDEAL let me get this straight. Just because every mount was available on the beta when the whole thing went up for testing that "GC is backpedaling" when they removed some of them?
Yes, it's called Backpedaling " To retreat or withdraw from a position or attitude:" another question?

There is backpedaling and there is clarification, this list is an example of the latter.

Edited, Jun 5th 2012 3:18am by NeoJaecin
____________________________
Only the left handed are in their right mind!

Mistress Darqflame wrote:
This thread is done, thanks for playing, come again soon.

Theldurin the Lost wrote:
I said to myself, 'I'm going to punch that dragon in the face!



#16 Jun 25 2012 at 7:55 PM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,961 posts
Rather than start a new thread, here's the update on account wide mounts:

Quote:
We have been discussing this issue the last couple of days and we made the call to make the following mounts account-wide:

Traveler's Tundra Mammoth
Grand Expedition Yak
Mechano-Hog
Mekgineer's Chopper
Sandstone Drake
Grand Ice Mammoth
Ice Mammoth
Jeweled Onyx Panther (all color variants)
Cloud Serpents (all color variants)

At this point, the only mounts that are not account-wide are either class specific or rewarded from PVP. We feel like both these types of mounts should still be character specific.
____________________________
In Chinese: glasses are yanjing; eyes are yanjing, and the beer of Beijing is Yanjing. When speaking, the difference is in the tones. Did I just order a glass of beer or a glass of eyes?
#17 Jun 25 2012 at 8:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Happy Dance!!

OK, now I for sure will be adding a Grand Expadition Yak to my collection.

Smiley: nod
____________________________
Wahu - Disc Priest (main)
Get an Authenticator!!
#18 Jun 25 2012 at 9:06 PM Rating: Good
***
2,944 posts
Freaking YES!

This will make stuff much easier for mom and I to do once Pandaria goes Live.

Allowing her to ride on my passenger mounts would greatly speed up questing and such, instead of me having to constantly tell her where I'm going and how to follow me, because the mini-map keeps messing up (my dot appearing a mile away from where I actually am, etc).

That way, any pair of our characters can level/quest/etc together and not have to worry about this sort of stuff happening.

Thanks, Blizz!
#19 Jun 26 2012 at 12:08 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
**
939 posts
I really think they should make the Gladiator-mounts account-wide too. They are not that easy to get and look pretty awesome.

Note: I don't have any Gladiator-mount nor will I ever do so, because I suck at PvP. It just doesn't make much sense to me to exclude them.
____________________________
Osseric
#20 Jun 26 2012 at 2:22 PM Rating: Excellent
***
2,944 posts
TherealLogros wrote:
I really think they should make the Gladiator-mounts account-wide too. They are not that easy to get and look pretty awesome.

Note: I don't have any Gladiator-mount nor will I ever do so, because I suck at PvP. It just doesn't make much sense to me to exclude them.


You'd think the PvP Mounts would have had more priority to be AW than Crafted ones.

A character who does a lot of PvP and ends up winning an Arena tournament or something should get to show that mount off, no matter what character he plays on his account; people would know that he is simply badass to get a mount like that. I don't get why it matters which character he happens to be playing at the time.

Although, devil's advocate, I suppose this would encourage people to roll FOTM classes for each season in hopes of having better chances at getting AW rare mounts.

Meh.

Maybe if they'd do a better job at PvP Class Balance, then we wouldn't have FOTM classes for months on end before they finally get fixed, then that'd be a non-issue.
#21 Jun 26 2012 at 3:02 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,882 posts
Wait, I thought Rawdeal was leaving the forums?
____________________________
Painda - 90 Monk <IXOYE> (Christian guild, Medivh, US)
The Adventures of Captain Blazer - Facebook Sci-fi Story
CorpseCamp.Us - Funny, ironic, or pathetic things that happen in MMOs
"Trade Chat" wrote:
We've had talking cows from day one, and you're throwing a fit about talking panda's? Get over it.

#22 Jun 26 2012 at 3:09 PM Rating: Excellent
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,128 posts
He was. This thread is not new.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#23 Jun 27 2012 at 9:14 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,998 posts
Mazra wrote:
He was. . . .

Your cynycism (yes, that is the correct spelling) is showing. I like it.
____________________________
One of my opinions is worth three of your facts.

#24 Jun 27 2012 at 2:34 PM Rating: Excellent
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,128 posts
cynyck wrote:
cynycism


I see what you did there. Smiley: sly
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#25 Jul 13 2012 at 10:36 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
799 posts
Mazra wrote:
cynyck wrote:
cynycism


I see what you did there. Smiley: sly


I don't :-(

____________________________
FAQ2.0 wrote:
Most people consider a rouge to be over-powdered.

Guild: "That Kind of Orc" Server: The Scryers
#26 Jul 13 2012 at 11:44 AM Rating: Excellent
Ghost in the Machine
Avatar
******
36,128 posts
Cynicism is how it's normally spelled, but cynyck spelled it cynycism.
____________________________
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
#27 Jul 15 2012 at 6:14 AM Rating: Excellent
Scholar
**
799 posts
Mazra wrote:
Cynicism is how it's normally spelled, but cynyck spelled it cynycism.



oh god, I should downrate myself for not even noticing the poster's name.

thanks Maz.
____________________________
FAQ2.0 wrote:
Most people consider a rouge to be over-powdered.

Guild: "That Kind of Orc" Server: The Scryers
#28 Jul 15 2012 at 4:56 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
1,998 posts
Quote:
noticing the poster's name.
Quote:
the poster's name.
Quote:
poster's name.
Quote:
cynyck.
Smiley: eek
____________________________
One of my opinions is worth three of your facts.

#29 Jul 16 2012 at 9:43 AM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
799 posts
cynyck wrote:
Smiley: eek


I'm very sorry, I didn't mean to offend you.
I just rapidly read the responses and rarely look at the names of posters.
____________________________
FAQ2.0 wrote:
Most people consider a rouge to be over-powdered.

Guild: "That Kind of Orc" Server: The Scryers
#30 Jul 16 2012 at 11:34 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
***
1,998 posts
capcanuk wrote:
cynyck wrote:
Smiley: eek


I'm very sorry, I didn't mean to offend you.
I just rapidly read the responses and rarely look at the names of posters.

I'm not offended at all! Truth be told, I thought it was pretty funny.

I know you're just dying to know, so. . .

Sometime back in the late 90s (who can remember?) I wanted a hotmail account but someone had taken cynic@hotmail.com. So I quickly tried cynyck and it worked. Up to then I had used "cynic" as my nic in a2600w, so that was why I wanted the cynic@hotmail.com. Now, I had to check dictionary.com to make sure I'm spelling cynic correctly!

Anyway, I'm figuring you're a captain in the Canadian army, hence the capcanuck.

Mazra, of course, is really Japanese and the CEO of Mazda Motor Corporation.

Then again, you could be Henrik Sedin . . . hmm . . .

____________________________
One of my opinions is worth three of your facts.

#31 Jul 16 2012 at 12:14 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
**
799 posts
well, I much prefer Cynyck...

and no, no hockey for me.
____________________________
FAQ2.0 wrote:
Most people consider a rouge to be over-powdered.

Guild: "That Kind of Orc" Server: The Scryers
#32 Aug 14 2012 at 4:55 PM Rating: Decent
***
1,679 posts
Got the sandstone drake...Finally!
____________________________
"anything added to the game is technically content, even if it was only a giant, steaming pile of turds for us to climb for a paltry achievement." - Drusas

#33 Aug 16 2012 at 3:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
939 posts
After losing it many many times I finally got the ZA mount yesterday. Would have gotten it way earlier but very few people I know are playing right now so I couldn't assemble a full group of my own. Winning it felt really good because I had already begun to dread that I would somehow manage to never own it.
____________________________
Osseric
#34 Aug 21 2012 at 5:01 PM Rating: Decent
Sage
**
678 posts
Well, I dunno. I guess it's a good think SOME of the mounts are account-wide. I do feel Blizzard has gone a bit too far on this one though. IMO, and it probably is an opinion not shared by many, grindable mounts, either by gold or some other currency, should be account wide. RNG, Raid and PvP mounts should not. Mains ARE mains after all ...
#35 Aug 22 2012 at 2:42 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
939 posts
LGarth wrote:
RNG, Raid and PvP mounts should not. Mains ARE mains after all ...


I kind of disagree. I admit that you have a good point there. It certainly is not a bad thing if you feel a special connection to the character you play most.
But on the other hand the reason Blizzard is doing this is taking away some of the reservations people have when it comes to switching their main. And I have to say that is a very good reason in my book. I'm a completionist. Before this change I would never have considered changing my main. For me to feel comfortable with the new character he/she would have to earn every mount/pet/achievement/FoS my old character already has. Even if that was possible it would mean a huge time investment to achieve things I have already done in the past. So I for one really dig this.

And specially things like the Raven Lord/the Molten Front pet I don't ever EVER want to farm again. Smiley: lol

In the end I would rather build the connection with my main via him/her having the best gear of all my characters or (if you're into RP) creating a really awesome backstory (NOT Mary Sue please) or something like that.

Edited, Aug 22nd 2012 4:45am by TherealLogros
____________________________
Osseric
#36 Aug 22 2012 at 10:16 AM Rating: Decent
Avatar
**
395 posts
TherealLogros wrote:
LGarth wrote:
RNG, Raid and PvP mounts should not. Mains ARE mains after all ...


I kind of disagree. I admit that you have a good point there. It certainly is not a bad thing if you feel a special connection to the character you play most.
But on the other hand the reason Blizzard is doing this is taking away some of the reservations people have when it comes to switching their main. And I have to say that is a very good reason in my book. I'm a completionist. Before this change I would never have considered changing my main. For me to feel comfortable with the new character he/she would have to earn every mount/pet/achievement/FoS my old character already has. Even if that was possible it would mean a huge time investment to achieve things I have already done in the past. So I for one really dig this.

And specially things like the Raven Lord/the Molten Front pet I don't ever EVER want to farm again. Smiley: lol

In the end I would rather build the connection with my main via him/her having the best gear of all my characters or (if you're into RP) creating a really awesome backstory (NOT Mary Sue please) or something like that.

Edited, Aug 22nd 2012 4:45am by TherealLogros


Agreed. Mains are NOT mains. I have no intention on switching my main at the moment, but I did switch mains just before Wrath launched. My mage (old main) had a bunch of stuff that I wanted on my new main, which meant I did Skyguard and Netherwing rep again, farmed for hours for another Firefly pet, etc. My paladin (current main) now has 178 pets, 138 mounts and nearly 12k achievement points. I was talking to a friend a few months ago before the account wide changes were announced and told him that I would never switch mains again because of all the work I've put into my paladin. At least now, if I change my mind I won't feel like I have to start over on a new main. And I am a completionist - I would want to grind everything again.
#37 Aug 24 2012 at 9:59 AM Rating: Excellent
**
436 posts
I agree with Tellaria here. Since I started, my warlock was my main and had all the pets/mounts/titles/etc. When cata hit, I didn't like what they did with warlocks at all - the whole bane/curse/dot/boom thing I find more annoying than fun - but none of my other toons ever really had any "goodies" to speak of, and I had no desire to go re-grind everything again so my "main" through this entire expansion has been running around with a dozen or so of the basic mounts and whatever handful of pets she happened upon.

And then there's stuff like, the druid I leveled and ran at 85 for, oh, 2 weeks or so lucked into stonecore mount. Great. The druid. The one who never uses mounts. And one of my others - don't even remember which - got the Phoenix hatchling - which I don't think I've ever used because I'm rarely on that toon.

I think the same goes for really grindy stuff like the Green Proto, Polar bear (which I have *still* never gotten), Netherwings & Talbuks . . .I'm just simply not going to do all that stuff 10, 11, or 20 times.

If all my people had all the stuff I worked for (or lucked into) available to them, honestly I'd probably be more inclined to play them more, thus playing the game more. Which, I would assume is Blizzard's goal.
#38 Aug 24 2012 at 11:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Avatar
**
395 posts
Pantherfern wrote:
And then there's stuff like, the druid I leveled and ran at 85 for, oh, 2 weeks or so lucked into stonecore mount. Great. The druid. The one who never uses mounts. And one of my others - don't even remember which - got the Phoenix hatchling - which I don't think I've ever used because I'm rarely on that toon.


I have a druid who has the Headless Horseman Mount and my main still doesn't have it. When Cataclysm was released, I decided I wanted a worgen druid instead, so I deleted the NE druid who had the mount, cried a little, but since that toon was level 71 still and I really don't care for NEs, I got over it and figured I'd keep farming the Horseman every year. However, when they announced accountwide mounts, I was a little annoyed that I no longer had the toon with the Horseman's mount. And then I remembered that sometimes Blizzard will restore deleted toons! So I submitted a ticket last week and 4 hours later had my druid and her Headless Horseman Mount back. Currently on beta you keep the mounts even if you delete the original toon that had them, so I'm hoping that remains the case cause I don't need 2 druids when I don't really plan on playing either of them.
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 51 All times are in CDT
Anonymous Guests (51)