Blizzard, Sha and Galleon mounts

[Deleted]

I stand with the OP, until someone provides a valid armory link discussing this is pointless. If it did drop then the information about it is out there.

[Joán]

Because your question assumes that the longer a forum thread is up the more people will see it and eventually everyone will have seen it.

That is not an assumption, it is not possible for the number of people that have heard about this to go down by any appreciable amount.

and eventually everyone will have seen it.

That would indeed be an assumption, fortunately it's one I did not make. I only ask how long you think people will ask their friends if they know anyone with these mounts before one is either found or it becomes implausible to believe that it doesn't exist.

If you believe the answer to my question is "never" then that might be perfectly acceptable to you, but assuming that people would give this up and eventually stop asking the question without getting an answer either way is an assumption that is so ridiculous that it can be summarily dismissed.

You assume that because 2 forums have threads in them that someone is going to see them and suddenly say "Yeah I have one of those mounts, I better reply so these forum posters can sleep peacefully at night knowing that the sky isn't falling." Hell even if they did see these forum posts which is highly unlikely that still doesn't mean that they will register an MMO-C account, if they don't already have one, and validate it to any of us.

To help you understand my question I shall illustrate the two extremes:

At one end, one person has never seen either of these mounts and therefore conclude that they do not exist. This would be highly subjective and in no way meaningful evidence of anything.

At the other end, every single person playing the game has heard this question, and have answered it, giving us a 100% factual evidence as to whether anyone has the mounts or not.

In between these two extremes slide a scale, and we are currently (still) very close to the former end of it. Compared to the whole, few people have asked this question.

At what point on this scale do you believe it becomes more likely that no one has these mounts than the alternative, that someone has them and is either unaware of the question or unwilling to answer it?

And remember, the very moment someone can post an armory link, my entire argument is INSTANTLY AND PERMANENTLY DESTROYED.

[Rankin]

You mean the multiple independent sites that pull from just one site that may not be showing the mounts? Oh you mean the less than 1000 people who have heard of this topic out of the 10 million players?

It is tracked under "not collected". Which means anyone who has it would have it show up under "collected".

[Xeraxis]

snip

No I understand your question. The issue however is that you believe that this issue is so important that just because you ask your circle of friends that they are suddenly going to out and ask their friends and eventually word will get around. You need to understand that with 10mil players this issue isn't going to reach a large enough base to have any effect that even if someone does have the mount they're going to care enough to validate it to you. Hell even then if they do have the mount and the issue is just with armory tracking these mounts in the mount page it still wouldn't validate it to you since their armory would do squat. That's assuming that the couple hundred people that have seen this forum thread have all gone out and asked their friends about it, hell I haven't because it honestly isn't an issue in my eyes. But you keep waiting on your proof and I'll keep waiting on the blue post stating it is an issue and we'll see who is validated first.

[khalltusk]

Just ask blizzard if it exists and await the official reply!

Anything else is speculation and should be ignored until then.

[Xeraxis]

It is tracked under "not collected". Which means anyone who has it would have it show up under "collected".

When the pet and mount api was first updated with MoP there was an issue with pets not updating properly for people. I'm not saying that it is the same issue but to assume that because it correctly appears in 'not collected' that it must appear in 'collected' is foolish.

---------- Post added 2013-02-07 at 09:35 AM ----------

Just ask blizzard if it exists and await the official reply!

Anything else is speculation and should be ignored until then.

That's the problem it's been on the official forums for one day, if even a full 24 hours, and people expected the answer within minutes of the first post.

[Mahadev]

No I understand your question. The issue however is that you believe that this issue is so important that just because you ask your circle of friends that they are suddenly going to out and ask their friends and eventually word will get around. You need to understand that with 10mil players this issue isn't going to reach a large enough base to have any effect that even if someone does have the mount they're going to care enough to validate it to you. Hell even then if they do have the mount and the issue is just with armory tracking these mounts in the mount page it still wouldn't validate it to you since their armory would do squat. That's assuming that the couple hundred people that have seen this forum thread have all gone out and asked their friends about it, hell I haven't because it honestly isn't an issue in my eyes. But you keep waiting on your proof and I'll keep waiting on the blue post stating it is an issue and we'll see who is validated first.

You seem to be consistently trying to prove that there is nothing to see here. And that these, in your eyes, "small sample sizes" don't suggest anything. After reading through various threads I personally disagree. What I don't understand is why you are so hell bent on proving a point on a matter you care little to nothing about.

[Rankin]

When the pet and mount api was first updated with MoP there was an issue with pets not updating properly for people. I'm not saying that it is the same issue but to assume that because it correctly appears in 'not collected' that it must appear in 'collected' is foolish.

So your assumption is that maybe the Armory is bugged, yet the game itself can't possibly have any errors involving these mounts?

[Xeraxis]

So your assumption is that maybe the Armory is bugged, yet the game itself can't possibly have any errors involving these mounts?

I've never said that it wasn't possible that these mounts were bugged. I just find it highly unlikely and rather funny that everyone else seems to believe that is the only possible explanation.

[Rankin]

I've never said that it wasn't possible that these mounts were bugged. I just find it highly unlikely and rather funny that everyone else seems to believe that is the only possible explanation.

It's the more likely explanation. It wouldn't be the first time they've screwed up an item drop, and it won't be the last.

[Xeraxis]

It's the more likely explanation. It wouldn't be the first time they've screwed up an item drop, and it won't be the last.

The other explanations are just as likely. Hell the number of items that they haven't screwed up far out weighs the number you seem to believe that they have.

[khalltusk]

It's the more likely explanation. It wouldn't be the first time they've screwed up an item drop, and it won't be the last.

While that is true, we should await an official reply. Anything else regardless of anyone's calculations or wild speculations is not a fact yet. If blizzard state it has dropped and isn't bugged then that's that. If they admit its bugged and are fixing it (normally this is spotted rather quickly these days to be fair) then we will rejoice that something is being done!

[Deleted]

Starting to get curious too now

[Joán]

But you keep waiting on your proof and I'll keep waiting on the blue post stating it is an issue and we'll see who is validated first.

Exactly!

There's two different ways this can conclusively end:

A: A blue post states that no, the mounts have in fact not dropped and there is an error/bug/oversight/whatever that is now on our issues tracker.

B: Someone who has the mount on a live server will serve up irrefutable proof that it exists.

Both of these are acceptable and (scientifically) very welcome outcomes!

(Of course we have also option C: it will be completely ignored by Blizzard and we'll either see a drop eventually because it's silently fixed, or after years and years we'll just accept that these mounts were never in the game. This is not satisfying for anyone and therefore somewhat unlikely.)

The problem that I was arguing against is zealotry - the fact that a large amount of people accept the less likely explanation without reasonable grounds. Conflicted with an increasingly large pile of circumstantial (but fairly solid) evidence they pick at individual claims, disregarding context, and eventually come up with complete speculations that can explain their point of view.

This is something you would do well to consider in any argument as simple as this: There are two sides, both plausible explanations, but only one truth. They both start out on equal grounds but one of these explanations can present evidence after evidence after evidence that all point towards a clear conclusion, while the other explanation stands firm with only the original supposition, and not a single verifiable fact is presented in favor of it. Which explanation is more likely to be true?

You are free to believe your point of view is the right one, but you should be able to recognize when that point of view is based on faith, and not reason.

[Xeraxis]

You are free to believe your point of view is the right one, but you should be able to recognize when that point of view is based on faith, and not reason.

You mean like your ability to put all your faith in an outside websites beta tracker to prove to you there is an issue?

[Alskonda]

@Xeraxis, the biggest problem I have with this is not how big a population of the wow players who read this, but how many per realm. Is it 1? 10? 100? If there is just 5 active posters for each faction and realm, someone should have seen this mount and be able to post an armory link.

[Kuja]

I'm 100% sure I saw someone riding a black cloud serpent quite a while ago, but only once. May have been from BMAH though. o.O

[Xeraxis]

@Xeraxis, the biggest problem I have with this is not how big a population of the wow players who read this, but how many per realm. Is it 1? 10? 100? If there is just 5 active posters for each faction and realm, someone should have seen this mount and be able to post an armory link.

Right 5 people are able to actively scan their realm over a whole day to see who is on what mounts. Keep believing that everyone on here plays 24hrs a day.

[Alskonda]

Right 5 people are able to actively scan their realm over a whole day to see who is on what mounts. Keep believing that everyone on here plays 24hrs a day.

I didn't say those five players play 24/7, but even though I only play 20-30 minutes a day, sometimes not even that, I still have a good idea about my server's mount population. I know the onyx panther for some reason is down to 40k which means everyone who wants one will have it and it is a pretty common mount. We are only 4-5 people on the realm with Alani and I could go on and on and on. The point being, someone should have seen the mount if it had dropped.

[khalltusk]

Exactly!

There's two different ways this can conclusively end:

A: A blue post states that no, the mounts have in fact not dropped and there is an error/bug/oversight/whatever that is now on our issues tracker.

B: Someone who has the mount on a live server will serve up irrefutable proof that it exists.

Both of these are acceptable and (scientifically) very welcome outcomes!

(Of course we have also option C: it will be completely ignored by Blizzard and we'll either see a drop eventually because it's silently fixed, or after years and years we'll just accept that these mounts were never in the game. This is not satisfying for anyone and therefore somewhat unlikely.)

The problem that I was arguing against is zealotry - the fact that a large amount of people accept the less likely explanation without reasonable grounds. Conflicted with an increasingly large pile of circumstantial (but fairly solid) evidence they pick at individual claims, disregarding context, and eventually come up with complete speculations that can explain their point of view.

This is something you would do well to consider in any argument as simple as this: There are two sides, both plausible explanations, but only one truth. They both start out on equal grounds but one of these explanations can present evidence after evidence after evidence that all point towards a clear conclusion, while the other explanation stands firm with only the original supposition, and not a single verifiable fact is presented in favor of it. Which explanation is more likely to be true?

You are free to believe your point of view is the right one, but you should be able to recognize when that point of view is based on faith, and not reason.

There is another option;

Blizzard states its working as intended and someone has the mount on the live servers.