Azeroth Choppers Discussion Thread (All Azeroth Chopper Discussion here, thanks)

[Punisher069]

Faction pride is something that is nice in the game. I don't see the wrong in only having one winner. I do, however, see how petty it is for the loser to butch and whine and think the outcome was unfair and want the prize too.

I see your point, but a lot of the things in game are about making the game even for both sides. Before cata the alliance had more ally-only questing zones than the horde and in cata they made it more even. When the goblins got the trikes and the worgen got the cool running(pun intended) they added generic horses for worgen to even out the mount count. Or the wintersaber and the ravasaur mounts. The ravasaur was just a quest a day for however many days, and the wintersaber was endless rep farming. then in cata they made the wintersaber mount quest like the ravasaur, help your cat grow once a day for however many days.

[Splatter]

I play horde but I would have prefered the Alliance one both should be in game imo

[Knough]

I play horde but I would have prefered the Alliance one both should be in game imo

Hail Splatter! Good Splatter nicely counterpoints pretty much everything Nasty Winter Blossom says;
Some players of both factions and preferences think both should get the mount, like Good Splatter, and me!
Nasty Winter Blossom thinks that because his side won a vote that, while not rigged or unfair, wasn't perfect democracy (repeated votes, not all Wow players knew, reason to vote for a mount you dislike and would get, as opposed to a nicer one you wouldn't), he should get to gloat and call some out wanting equal-mount-having-ness

Good Splatter.
(Smiley face)

[Anzaman]

It seems this is only now being brought up after the Alliance lost. If there was such a concern for mount imbalance, then those same people should of been mentioning it before the results, instead of saying "go Alliance".

I always wanted them to add both mounts.

[Punisher069]

It seems this is only now being brought up after the Alliance lost. If there was such a concern for mount imbalance, then those same people should of been mentioning it before the results, instead of saying "go Alliance".

I thought from the start only having one faction get the mount was dumb. I was hoping for both to be put in the game or the winning bike would go to everyone regardless of faction. And I saw quite a bit of people on the official forums asking for the same thing as I, when the contest was announced.

[Knough]

I always wanted them to add both mounts.

Me too.
If Alliance had won, I'd still be here, saying that Horde should get the mount too, and what I wouldn't be doing; gloating and scorning those who want happy-mount-yay-ness.

[zura]

samwise didier is the art director at blizz he's more qualified than methzen to help his team create a better bike

[Deleted]

I always wanted them to add both mounts.

Indeed. As someone who usually/mainly plays Horde, I'd still like to see the Alliance bike ingame. Also: the more mounts to collect, the better.

[Punisher069]

I had hoped that when revealing the votes it would be some lame twist, "AMG equal votes down the middle, well let's add both."

[Arrashi]

I thought from the start only having one faction get the mount was dumb. I was hoping for both to be put in the game or the winning bike would go to everyone regardless of faction. And I saw quite a bit of people on the official forums asking for the same thing as I, when the contest was announced.

Where is fun in that ? Making one side win and other lose definately adds excitement.

[Deleted]

The alliance bike was better looking imo. The armor theme was 10/10.

Would probably use the Alliance bike on some of my alliance toons, the horde one however is just gonna be a +1.

[Scufflegrit]

My analogy fits perfectly. No1 is stopping you from making an Alliance toon if you want one of the Paul Jr bikes that badly. It's typical "bring enough for the whole class" mentality that's being displayed by many upset Alliance players.

If you're going to use another example, use a proper one. "Bring enough for the whole class" usually is because a person brought something just for themselves and not the other ~29 kids in the class. The proper example would be you made enough for the whole class, but only brought enough for half of the class sitting on the left side of the classroom, then told the other half "well if you sat on the left side of the classroom instead of the right side, you would have had some too."

The Alliance out-number the Horde. You guys had a slight advantage over the Horde.

Assuming 100% of everyone playing for both factions voted, maybe. But the way it was set up, anyone could vote. Active players, inactive players, people that have never downloaded the game.

ANYONE could vote. So it was a flawed system from the get go.

[Anzaman]

ANYONE could vote. So it was a flawed system from the get go.

Even multiple times.

[Yarathir]

Accept that the Alliance faction lost and be mature about it - instead of acting like some kid on a playground that lost at a game.

In a voting contest where anyone could vote, account or no, and even multiple times by deleting your cookies.

[Yarathir]

But Allaince players could of done the same thing. It wasn't an exclusive "cheat" to only Horde players.

That isn't relevant. They could have easily made it a one-time vote where you had to be logged in to vote, and after that, you would be locked out of voting again. They could have easily done that, and there would not have been a doubt about whether it was truly legitimate. They decided to be amateurs for some inexplicable reason. Whether or not x or y side could have done something about it is irrelevant. They still made a poll where the votes couldn't be 100% trusted to be legitimate. That was their mistake.

[Stelio Kontos]

It's ok, Horde fanboys are always louder, that's how they get all the attention.

I'll just make up for it by killing a few extra orc npcs in SoO and maybe killing some NPCs in Horde towns in WoD. Put my Draenei's hoof through some empty Orc skulls :P

[chezwickcheese]

Even multiple times.

Which completely nullifies the accountability of the voting system. Anyone could vote and vote 1000 times a day if they really wanted too.

Both will end up in the game as a 10 year gift to players.

[Armourboy]

Do you have answers to your own questions? Cause what I said about there being more Alliance players is true.

Actually its a half truth, or rather a statement that needs an asterisk. There are more Alliance characters, which is 100% different than more Alliance players. As I said earlier, that data is almost empty and meaningless, because all it tells you is the number of faction above level 10 that have been created. It actually tells you nothing about the activity of those characters and which faction is actually played more.

Its the type of data that needs one of those disclaimer messages like you see at the end of commercials.

Also the lack of controls on the voting completely negates the size of character totals as well. There is simply no way to know who was voting for what because people who don't even play anymore could have mostly voted Horde.

[Anzaman]

Both will end up in the game as a 10 year gift to players.

Companion is already found tagged under Anniversary reward, but it's for some reason called "Hogs". And meantime, won't some people call these motorcycles or w/e they are, as hogs? At least my Google search found picture of one with that word.

We can hope, would be sweet if 10th anniversary would be a companion pet and the bikes, one for each faction.

[Armourboy]

Companion is already found tagged under Anniversary reward, but it's for some reason called "Hogs". And meantime, won't some people call these motorcycles or w/e they are, as hogs? At least my Google search found picture of one with that word.

We can hope, would be sweet if 10th anniversary would be a companion pet and the bikes, one for each faction.

Yeah motorcycles are often referred to as " hogs". I actually expect that both will end up being in the game. The voting part was nothing more than a marketing ploy, which is why they probably didn't have more controls on voting.