Blizzard "The technology for acct wide-heirlooms isnt here"?

[Celista]

Because however they're bound, they still otherwise follow all the normal rules of items, which includes being limited to the server and faction in which they were obtained.

Heirlooms can be traded cross-faction.

[DarkTZeratul]

Heirlooms can be traded cross-faction.

They can now, but it certainly wasn't that way when they first came out.

[Celista]

They can now, but it certainly wasn't that way when they first came out.

To my knowledge, they have been cross-faction since 2009.

In any case, I don't see the big technological hurdle regarding cross-server heirlooms, but they never should have been labeled BoA in the first place if their intended function wasn't BoA. Perhaps bind to server + account or something similar.

[Lochton]

7 servers with all looms.....i am talking about all looms in existence on 3 servers with the best enchants possible, i guess you mean just for 1-2 classes, if you really have them all on 7 servers you should get your own achievement.

To be completely honest, i prefere them to be gone, they spoil the level expierence anyways and are very unbalanced in low bgs.(in some brackets at least, later the unbalance comes from cata/mop greens)

to delete them would be another solution i like, but probably this won't happen as too many people invested too much time in them to get them by now.

Actually, no. I ment what I said. I have 7 servers with all looms you can get, all upgraded and enchanted as well. I bought them because I have too much JP generation ever since they were released. On the first day they were released, I bought every single piece on one server, even doubles of some.

But really, I can live without them. They are still just there as an easy step, but in the end, 85 to 90 can be done with casual speed in 1-2 days. 80 tp 85 can be done with casual speed 1-2 days. (My record is levelling 3 paladins from lvl 1 to 80 in 24 hours total of played time (without looms)).

I do understand your achievement idea, but just don't find it right. I still think it's important that the project lies with the equipment you already have, and you use what you have - be it 1,2,3 or 4 pieces of heirlooms, or more. That's your number of heirlooms you have. Dislike the view of, "Oh, I bought one for cheap points, now I have it on all servers as I wish. If that was to work that way, then I am the bastard to say that one major heirloom (chest, shoulder, leggings, helmet - 10%) shoulder cost about, 4000 JP, 4000 HP and 4000 gold - sounds about right for me. I'm not trying to seperate people from heirlooms, but if it went with the unlock mechanic - then it would most likely become more expensive. And if it went with the unlock mechanic, you still wouldn't benefit from you enchants since they would need to be put on the weapons everytime you pull out a set on a server.

- - - Updated - - -

To my knowledge, they have been cross-faction since 2009.

In any case, I don't see the big technological hurdle regarding cross-server heirlooms, but they never should have been labeled BoA in the first place if their intended function wasn't BoA. Perhaps bind to server + account or something similar.

Back then, BoA was normal to - "Bound to Account", as in that you can take them where you wish. Just move a character and they would follow. If they were "Bound to Server", that wouldn't make much sense as they would technically be stuck on the original server you bought them on. And really, no one complained about BoA being what it is till now. We all knew what it ment, it ment that we could send them around the server as we wished - and move them with us as we leave. That is what "Bound to Account" is. The name wasn't pointed towards you being able to send them to any server you wanted, as that idea back then was still only on paper.

- - - Updated - - -

They can now, but it certainly wasn't that way when they first came out.

Indeed not, the cross-faction heirloom transfer was made in 3.3 (2009-12-08), and they were created in 3.0.3 (2008-11-04)

((Maybe not completely sure about the dates, but I think it's those))