Cataclysm

[Mattemeo]

You could have just upped the current bank system by another 80 slots and everyone would have been happy with that.

Except this is on a different scale than the bank.  An item in Void Storage is just an item ID (and maybe condition, although I think the fee is in part a way to mask that they're not storing this).  An item in your bank is: item ID, condition, crafter, reforge, gem(s), and enchant(s).

The casual user base will neither understand that nor care about it. The fact of the matter is, Void Storage is effectively an in-game premium bank; item or 'item ID' regardless. A lot of people are going to be wondering why they have to toss gold at it.

[Amaron]

The fact of the matter is, Void Storage is effectively an in-game premium bank; item or 'item ID' regardless. A lot of people are going to be wondering why they have to toss gold at it.

Doesn't it destroy the item you put in it?  That doesn't give me a very premium bank vibe.

[Sjofn]

It doesn't destroy it, it strips it down to what it was when it dropped. So it's for your level 60 shit you'll never wear for real again but like the look of or whatever. Who cares if the enchant gets stripped off?

[Samprimary]

Literally half my bank is full of shit i kept in anticipation of this day. Including the game's only mail eyepatch.

The one thing I didn't anticipate was the weapons.

HMM.

[Samprimary]

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/item/50303

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/item/50759

And if they drop this whole retarded "You can change your ranged weapon type but not your general melee weapon type!" so I can finally use 1h swords,

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/item/34164

[Sjofn]

If you're a shaman, they're not going to let you change your shit to swords, I am sure.

[Ingmar]

Yeah pipe dream. Even if they do relax those slot restrictions I'd be incredibly surprised if they let you go outside your class's usable things.

[Sheepherder]

If they were wise they would make archaeology supply a bunch of models without consuming bank space, then it wouldn't be such a dismal failure.

[Paelos]

The void bank thing seems needlessly complex for something reasonably simple.

Why is Blizzard so stingy about the bag space? Who cares if I want to create 20 bank slots?

[Koyasha]

When I was still playing, the 'transmogrification' appearance changes would have gotten me pretty excited cause I would have been able to wield my Thunderfury, basically.

Man, I bet the few people who actually got Ashbringer from original Naxxramas are really, really happy about that, cause now they can wield it again in real combat and it will look awesome.

[Sjofn]

The legendaries (or whatever they're called, I am too tired to remember) can't get transmogified, so you'd be annoyed instead. Was the Other Ashbringer orange too? I assume yes.

That's something I disagree with, personally I think people with legendaries should be able to just wield those bitches forever if they want.

[Hawkbit]

The void bank thing seems needlessly complex for something reasonably simple.

Why is Blizzard so stingy about the bag space? Who cares if I want to create 20 bank slots?

I've always had the idea that they hit the upper limit on database storage for characters.  There has to be a legitimate reason for it being so weird to them.

[Ingmar]

Corrupted Ashbringer was purple, so we should see some of those floating around.

[Rendakor]

I get that they need a gold sink, and I don't mind the fact that it strips enchants and everything, but...why the fuck is it so small? 80 slots isn't even 4 bag slots. If you're going to charge me for it, just make it so I can pay fucking 20k gold for a 500 slot VS bank. I have 52 (yes I just counted) pieces of gear saved up already on my DK, and that's just old gear I had kept on the hope that they might one day implement appearance gear. Now that I'm actually going to start farming for cool shit I'm going to need a ton of space to store it in.

[Ingmar]

Worth remembering you can almost never see your bracers when you're deciding what to keep. Given you're going to pay every time you change your appearance transmogrifying as well I wouldn't think you're going to need a huge pile of stuff.

I figure on one set of alt gear per spec, essentially. Probably my heroism suit for tanking, and warrior T5 for DPS, at least until I can farm up T8 again.

[ezrast]

(Cost shown to unlock Void Storage is not final)

I'm guessing they're serious about this, considering that rolling a bank alt and running it to Org is free, and only slightly more inconvenient. Wouldn't bet my life on it though.

[SurfD]

(Cost shown to unlock Void Storage is not final)

I'm guessing they're serious about this, considering that rolling a bank alt and running it to Org is free, and only slightly more inconvenient. Wouldn't bet my life on it though.

Except bank alts cant store Soulbound stuff for you, and as a druid, I literally have like 100+ pieces of assorted crap i have held on to filling up my normal bank that I cant pass to other characters for easy storage.

[Samprimary]

Yeah pipe dream. Even if they do relax those slot restrictions I'd be incredibly surprised if they let you go outside your class's usable things.

EVERYTHING we are experiencing here is a relative pipe dream outcome. An appearance tab, in world of warcraft. That extends to weapons. And hunters can swap weapon types to compensate for blizzard being unable, apparently, to update gun noises to a less annoying sort of staccato, even given about a decade. Even at my most gormless idealism (which is why I have saved my collection since BC) I never expected this much.  By and large swords tend to be the least obnoxious weapon models, tend to have the best overall models, and 1h axes and maces are a cesspool of one blunt, ugly, stumpy weird weapon after another. I think I can stand to continue my tradition of irrational optimism here.

especially considering — and yes, Blizzard, this is a message for you — much like how the appearance tab is a valuable tool for figuring out how readily rejected certain parts of your design are (the WWE championship belts vanish, etc) which allows you to productively change those tendencies on your behalf — weapon type swaps may be a bitter pill in the short run, 'design wise,' but players like me will love you for it and any resulting homogenization will allow you to pinpoint what parts of your design you need to up the ante on.

Por exemple, the blunt ugly stumpy weird cesspool of 1h axes and maces. I literally went through them all yesterday. Every single in-game model. I would literally take a basic rapier model over any of them, no jokes.

/ edit

"This design decision," says the (probably strawmanned) blizzard design lead in my head, "relates to affording some distinction between classes. Letting shaman have sword models, as an example, goes too far in making them indistinct from other class 'silhouettes,' and we don't want to go that far in rendering different classes completely visually muddled with each other with the implementation of this appearance tab."

Bypassing the evident failure of the class silhouette argument that was fronted for years, what you have done has effectively rendered that argument more obsolete than you would care to admit. The muddling is there in a way which can actually distinctly be aided by letting weapon types get swapped. It would actually create more variety in those pools that are the most muddled, which include the plate wearers (who will mostly be wandering around as indistinct sword-bearing plate wearers) and cloth wearers (who can now mostly look like whatever they want between the previous fairly differentiated design palates for mages, priests, warlocks).

I would even go so far as to say that even if you deny me my swards, an option you might want to consider is letting casters have more leeway in switching to a staff model if they want one but are stuck like most of them using onehanders.

[caladein]

I think letting a 2H Mace look like a 2H Axe isn't a bad thing if you could use both, especially as we're post-weapon specializations (except Rogues).  That said, 2H Axes/Swords/Maces can't look like Staves or Polearms until they add in 1H animations for them for Titan's Grip.

They do seem to be of the opinion of this being relatively limited outside of what one would normally use, so the freedom is choosing the "when" of a character's look moreso than anything else.  We're several steps removed from what you're suggesting.

[Lantyssa]

Use the axe from the troll in Sunken Temple.  Their design is pretty nice.

[Kirth]

Corrupted Ashbringer was purple, so we should see some of those floating around.

That and there was the whole side quest that was never finished that made people hold on to them hoping it would eventually be.

[Rendakor]

Weapons should be interchangeable, as long as a) you can equip them and b) it's the same wield-type (1h, 2h, shield, etc).

[Ingmar]

Yeah pipe dream. Even if they do relax those slot restrictions I'd be incredibly surprised if they let you go outside your class's usable things.

Por exemple, the blunt ugly stumpy weird cesspool of 1h axes and maces. I literally went through them all yesterday. Every single in-game model. I would literally take a basic rapier model over any of them, no jokes.

Man, I think there are a bunch of pretty sweet 1h maces, personally.


Cool 1h axes are perhaps a little less common, but...


I didn't even get into the blues and greens where there are plenty of more subdued options too. In other words, you are crazy! 

[Merusk]

I loved that dragon mace. I still break it out on the Pally when in town once in a while.

[Samprimary]

I didn't even get into the blues and greens where there are plenty of more subdued options too. In other words, you are crazy! 

this one is good.

http://us.battle.net/wow/en/item/50191

still would take rapiers

[caladein]

Perdition's Blade is pretty big.  These also seemed kinda big:

http://www.wowhead.com/item=34604#screenshots
http://www.wowhead.com/item=40408#screenshots
http://www.wowhead.com/item=45214#screenshots

There's also a few daggers that share models with swords:

http://www.wowhead.com/item=44173#same-model-as
http://www.wowhead.com/item=69621#same-model-as
http://www.wowhead.com/item=31745#same-model-as
http://www.wowhead.com/item=66880#same-model-as

[Ingmar]

Of course using daggers presupposes they'll even let us change models within class at some point (other than ranged) as daggers are not viable as enhance weapons right now AFAIK.

[Lantyssa]

Man, I think there are a bunch of pretty sweet 1h maces, personally.

Those were hideous.

[caladein]

Of course using daggers presupposes they'll even let us change models within class at some point (other than ranged) as daggers are not viable as enhance weapons right now AFAIK.

Ah, Enhancement.  And yes, that's my understanding as well as to their viability.

[Ingmar]

Man, I think there are a bunch of pretty sweet 1h maces, personally.

Those were hideous.

Seriously? Even the first one? You have to be just trolling me. 

[Ivanneth]

So I'm a little fuzzy on the class restrictions for armor. Will a plate-wearer be able to use the appearance of any plate? Some sets are class specific, so for instance will a DK be able to run around with the appearance of the Tier 4 Warrior set even though the original states 'Classes: Warrior' as a restriction?

[Ingmar]

I don't think they've clarified that yet.

[Lantyssa]

Seriously? Even the first one? You have to be just trolling me. 

Yes the first one.  The dragon ones were tolerable.  I'm not trolling you, I just think you have lousy taste.  It's not like we haven't constantly clashed about what looks cool.

This is the axe I like.

[Ingmar]

Hideous at least has to be hyperbole. I mean, it's essentially a hammer that looks like... a hammer. Hideous?

[Fordel]

So I'm a little fuzzy on the class restrictions for armor. Will a plate-wearer be able to use the appearance of any plate? Some sets are class specific, so for instance will a DK be able to run around with the appearance of the Tier 4 Warrior set even though the original states 'Classes: Warrior' as a restriction?

You have to be able to wear the armor in question.