Patch 1.27

[Dr Super Good]

They should update the BLP backend to support BLP2 and also add DDS support. BLP2 adds many features missing in BLP1 such as S3 Texture Compression and lossless compression. DDS is a standard file format which is interchangeable with StarCraft II/Heroes of the Storm so could make development more easy for modders.

The MPQ API should also be updated to Version 3 (StarCraft II). This will give access to new and possibly better compression for map files to enable smaller maps.

 

[EagleMan]

I would prefer stuff that primarily appealed to gamers, not map makers. I know that might sound like heresy here, but WC3's already done phenomenally well with its current limitations. What's more important is drawing people back to the game, not something that will make an editor's life easier for a map that will only be played a handful of times.

So on that front I would prefer HD/widescreen support, and something to help with game hosting. In my view, a large part of the decline of the WC3 custom games playerbase was the proliferation of host bots, even if they are currently the life blood today. Casual players would log on to BNET and see dozens of auto-hosted games, and almost every single one would be completely empty for hours at a time. Even if it's second nature to some of us now to check MakeMeHost.com or wherever else for current game lobbies and the player count, most casual players won't know about this. Especially if a new wave of them come back after the patch. All they'll see are dozens of dead lobbies and conclude there's nothing here to see and go back to whatever other game they were playing before.

However if the bots are killed or neutered en masse, there needs to be a viable replacement, such as the ability to host cross-realm or host powers (such as swapping slots) that have been incredibly useful. It's 2016 and most of us are no longer "56k noobs" as used to be a common insult a decade ago, some of us will be able to handle uploading maps of 25-50MB to other players in the lobby. But you would still have the problem of everyone disconnecting if the only host leaves.

So I can't really offer my view as to what a good solution would be - all I know is that host bots were a huge factor in the decline of WC3 custom gaming, but I don't think wiping them out at this point without a good substitute would help. If only all the auto-host bots were wiped out, I think that would be ideal. With the manually made bot games, you have a host who is invested in staying and building up the lobby. That host can then educate returning WC3 players about MakeMeHost, ENT, etc. or even about the map to be played. Auto hosted lobbies are a plague upon WC3.

My background: I have played WC3 regularly since its release, have built up a still alive WC3 website (Diplomunion.com), and have edited Azeroth Wars: LR, Greece, Legends of the Second War and World War One: ISH. So even though improvements to the editor would be welcome, first and foremost I want a player base to map make for. Anything that brings players back and keeps them is infinitely more important than fixing or improving anything with the editor.

Edit: That's not to say tune ups, improvements or additions wouldn't be welcomed, but I know there's only going to be so much work put into this patch.

 

[PurgeandFire]

I would prefer stuff that primarily appealed to gamers, not map makers. I know that might sound like heresy here, but WC3's already done phenomenally well with its current limitations. What's more important is drawing people back to the game, not something that will make an editor's life easier for a map that will only be played a handful of times.

...

Don't worry, your valuable comments won't be taken as heresy.

In fact, that is exactly what most of our draft will consist of--the primary issues. Adding a new patch with a balance change won't necessarily bring the community back to life. It might surge for a little, but as you said, people will get frustrated with empty games/auto-hosts and probably leave (especially those who haven't played it much within the last decade).

And yes, your point about host bots is invariably true. A lot of them are bad, but there are a few that hold the community together. We'll try to make that as clear as possible in our draft. In an ideal world, Warcraft 3's networking and game-finding would receive a rather large revamp to make host-bots mostly unnecessary, but they might not be willing to go that far in their edits. Rest assured, while we will put some suggestions for extra features, we'll try to keep everything as succinct as possible and the focus will mostly be aimed towards matchmaking/hosting and possible approaches to the problem.

P.S. Thanks everyone for all the suggestions! Keep them coming if you have any!

 

[DracoL1ch]

P.S. Thanks everyone for all the suggestions! Keep them coming if you have any!

should I post "features i'd like to see"? 'cause Im still not sure they won't be waste of time

 

[Kazeon]

I would prefer stuff that primarily appealed to gamers, not map makers. I know that might sound like heresy here, but WC3's already done phenomenally well with its current limitations. What's more important is drawing people back to the game, not something that will make an editor's life easier for a map that will only be played a handful of times.

Disagreed. What keeps the game alive? Players. But who keeps the players playing the game? Map makers.
Making map makers more comfortable in map making is the greatest way to draw people back/stay to play this game. Why? Because, by extending those limits will let us map makers to be able to create even greater and more enjoyable projects/maps. Thus indirectly, it makes the game seems more appealing to players.

And when you guys said that improving graphic is the least important thing to do here, actually you're going against (probably) the goal of this patch itself: (like what people said) to bring more people to play this game again or (like the people's craziest fantasy) to revive wc3. Think about it, today's popular game industry are racing to create games with insane graphic quality as possible to attract more players. So when we talk about reviving wc3, and they're patching it without any graphical improvements, it is not going to work well obviously. And some simple balances in melee maps is not going to work as well. Since basically, there are more people playing custom maps more than melee maps (afaik).

Unless if the goal is not to revive this game but just simply to satisfy some of those pro gamers' demands. Then there is no point to discuss anything here.

 

[PurgeandFire]

should I post "features i'd like to see"? 'cause Im still not sure they won't be waste of time

If they're important to you, yes--even if they are reiterated suggestions that have already been made.

Disagreed. What keeps the game alive? Players. But who keeps the players playing the game? Map makers.
Making map makers more comfortable in map making is the greatest way to draw people back/stay to play this game. Why? Because, by extending those limits will let us map makers to be able to create even greater and more enjoyable projects/maps. Thus indirectly, it makes the game seems more appealing to players.

To an extent, mods can keep games alive. But I don't think the reason for Wc3's decline is that the mods were unexciting. There have been plenty of fantastic, innovative mods all around. Some were complete revamps, some had amazing production quality, and some were just plain fun.

The thing is, as a player, I wouldn't get too excited for dev changes. All that is Greek to them. I still firmly believe that the decline is just from the slew of problems with Battle.Net. Wc3 has stood the test of time--even when LoL came out, even through DotA 2 for the first part of it, and even through Starcraft 2.

But times change. 12 years ago I'd be willing to mount a CD-rom and do hacky commands just to play Warcraft 2. I still remember doing port-forwarding for Warcraft 3, downloading patches from FTP when the downloader was acting shitty (it always was), getting crashes at 99% into installing WoW (keep in mind it took all day to install the game at the time :< ). Nowadays, I expect to be able to press "Play" and just begin my adventure. I imagine everyone else has similar expectations. That's why the current wc3 battle.net system is so problematic. You have to jump through hoops to find matches, to host, and to just play a game with friends. It feels fine for all of us who have been playing the game for over a decade, but no one wants to have that experience.

Ultimately, the end goal (if they are serious about reviving Warcraft 3) isn't about eliminating host bots or wiping out the melee PvPGN servers. Instead, they should ideally work towards making those services unnecessary for the average player. And if that succeeds, then perhaps we can worry about extending the functionality of things.

And when you guys said that improving graphic is the least important thing to do here, actually you're going against the goal of this patch itself: (like what people said) to bring more people to play this game again or (like the people's craziest fantasy) to revive wc3. Think about it, today's popular game industry are racing to create games with insane graphic quality as possible to attract more players. So when we talk about reviving wc3, and they're patching it without any graphical improvements, it is not going to work well obviously. And some simple balances in melee maps is not going to work as well. Since basically, there are more people play custom maps more than melee maps (afaik).

It depends. Wc3 has an old engine. If they port it to the Sc2 engine or a new engine, then I'd certainly expect to see some graphical changes (show off those models from HotS!). Otherwise, any reasonably high-end model will just suffer in quality and it'll eat frames. The engine just isn't optimized for it.

But I agree. It would probably bring players back if it was done correctly. I think that is part of the reason why there was so much hype for Warcraft IV or Warcraft 3 HD--fans really want to see Warcraft 3 brought in a new light.

 

[Krotos]

Things I wish to see:
1. Integration or replacement of services like MMH and ENT - what I mean by that is a simplified game search interface that doesn't require knowing about these two beforehand. Something similar to how Valve handles custom games (every week 10 different maps are featured by Valve's hosting servers) or something different perhaps.
2. Increased map size limit - 8MB isn't enough these days. There are plenty of great maps, which suffer from it. 12 is the least I'd hope for, although any higher amount is always welcome.
3. BLP2 and MDS formats - higher quality is always welcome.
4. A new single target ability that deals damage only - every single spell in wc3 that is single target, has some effect or condition attached to it. A core spell like that is welcome.
5. A multi-target ability that can apply crowd control - think of chain lightning, but with stuns, silences, roots and disarms as options to use. That's also something that could open up some new windows of opportunity for map makers.
6. Improved clearing of wc3's memory cache - so many maps are incompatible with each other, because if you play map X, you'll instantly DC in map Y because of memory leftovers from map X, forcing you to restart wc3 to play map Y. This one's - in my opinion - big as it tends to be a reason behind most 0:00 leavers in maps like Lordaeron the Aftermath, Fall of Quel'thalas, Azeroth Wars, Gaias Retaliation and the likes.

As to why I am looking at these improvements and who I am: I used to be involved with development of Azeroth Wars: Legacy Reborn, edited Dark Ages of Warcraft and currently take care of Lordaeron the Aftermath as one of its devs as well as my own project, Fall of Quel'thalas. I find points #1, #2 and #6 to be the most crucial for map makers and players alike. Here's to hoping one of them gets in.

 

[DracoL1ch]

ok then
http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/...-27-wish-list-257163/index10.html#post2782665

 

[Kazeon]

We’re restoring them to glory, and we need your engineering talents, your passion, and your ability to get tough jobs done.

Just took that from this page. I think they are ready to work on big updates that we thought were impossible. I suppose some balances ain't the tough jobs they're talking about. I'm being optimistic here. ;]

 

[Eagle XI]

obligatory comment:

nerf blademaster

 

[Epimetheus]

^( Quilnez) and rightfully so. Also, couldn't agree more with your previous post. Although many good points have been raised against it, I think an improvement of the "creation kit " aspect of wc3 would be the best possible step towards its revival. Mabey I'm just caught up in my own personal wants, but my 2c.

 

[PurgeandFire]

Just took that from this page. I think they are ready to work on big updates that we thought were impossible. I suppose some balances ain't the tough jobs they're talking about. I'm being optimistic here. ;]

They actually recently added another position that wasn't there before. It used to just list "Senior Software Engineer" and "Art Outsource Supervisor", but now they added another Software Engineer position. Although, they made a funny typo in the job description:

Qualities that made StarCraft, World of Warcraft III, and Diablo II the titans of their day.

Lol.

obligatory comment:

nerf blademaster

Especially if you have 4 claws of attack.

 

[deepstrasz]

I'd like it if they enabled more than one save/player for LAN.

 

[karaulov]

Need reconnect as in Dota2
(save full game state for all players at server, and after reconnect - send data to needed player)

 

[lolcats121]

16:9 aspect ratio support would be nice.

 

[Chaosy]

16:9 aspect ratio support would be nice.

I play wc3 with 1920x1080 so yeah that works. You just need the latest patch.

 

[Dr Super Good]

I play wc3 with 1920x1080 so yeah that works. You just need the latest patch.

It works but does not work. You can get it to render the full 1920*1080 display with unique pixels, but the aspect ratio is wrong as it remains ~4:3 so everything appears stretched horizontally. If you do this in StarCraft II, Heroes of the Storm or Diablo III the aspect ratio is adjusted with the screen resolution so your 1920*1080 display still looks correct.

They need to add support for wide screen aspect ratios like 16*10 etc. They do not need to add support for stupid aspect ratios like 48*10.

 

[_lycan]

Whatever they give us be glad that they are deciding to update the game and at the same time asking for input to the admins, this is actually really nice of Blizzard.

 

[GhostThruster]

goddamn if blizzard ain't my favourite dev company (soz bungie)

list of changes i'd like to see:
- raise map size limit to at least 25mb
- remove in-built 250ms delay in b.net games
- re-activate warden program to kill hackers
- introduce a few new natives/events that would really go a long way
- getplayermousex/y, and event that detects left/right-click. this could replace the much more inflexible trackables, allow custom interfaces to be easily made, and possibly allow for custom fps maps to arise
- set & get crucial object editor data, especially pertaining to stuff like the unit's stats, art fields & hero name
- compatibility issues & windscreen support (the latter is low priority imo)

new set of proposed balance changes:
- slight nerf siege tank hp (to around 650)
- slight buff spirit/dire/shadow wolf HP (+20 to all) & armour (+1/2/3), buff earthquake mana cost (100)
- slight nerf windwalk mana cost (no more than 10 mana), blademaster -1 start strength +2.15 strength per level
- slight buff headhunter, shaman & tauren dps (offset orc's loss of dps from weaker blademaster)
- slight buff carrion swarm mana cost, buff sleep mana cost to something like 80/60/40
- buff cripple's mana cost (to around 100)
- slight buff move & attack speed of crypt lord
- nerf wyrm's frost attack duration to 5 seconds, remove wyrm's AoE splash dmg (keep the AoE slow effect from its frost attack)
- buff mountain giant's normal attack by 10 (39 avg w/ no upgrades), buff war club attack by 20 (56 avg)
- questionable, but maybe give ancient protectors splash damage. because right now, bats are too effective in night elf bases

so to summarise, the goals of my balance changes:
- buff obviously underpowered units (namely, necro's & mountain giants), nerf op 4v4 units (namely, tanks & wyrms) without impacting 1v1 balance too much
- spread more utility around the heroes of races which lack the least hero variety
- decentralise the orc race's dps away from the dps, so they can actually kill something without a blademaster

 

[Dr Super Good]

GhostThruster and what proof do you have that the balance changes you propose will make the game more balanced? Have you play tested them at a professional level?

The Chinese tournament players can deal with the balancing. It is up to us to give ideas for the modding side.

 

[GhostThruster]

GhostThruster and what proof do you have that the balance changes you propose will make the game more balanced? Have you play tested them at a professional level?

no, they're pure theorycraft. if you can hook me up with a few pros that are willing to test it out, pls do tell.

The Chinese tournament players can deal with the balancing. It is up to us to give ideas for the modding side.

the whole fucking thread has been users giving great (and terrible) ideas for the modding side, so excuse me if i take a slightly different approach on patch suggestions.
and pro players in general are always biased towards the race they play. they tend to ignore any imbalances that favour or are neutral for them, and complain only when they get beaten (i imagine that's why warden nerf is being talked about). plus, they don't know shit about 3v3 or 4v4 balance ("but who cares about those, those aren't in touranments" - many people do, wtii has a whole channel built on 4v4).

 

[Kyrbi0]

GhostThruster and what proof do you have that the balance changes you propose will make the game more balanced? Have you play tested them at a professional level?

He may not... But while I'm all for letting the 'professionals' give balance notes too, it doesn't take a professional to see certain over-arching imbalances; heck, the Blademaster has literally warped each race to require T0/1 detection! The Warden is insane. DK & Crypt Fiends is crazy. Etc etc.

It doesn't take a professional to get some analytics going & determine "what is built in X% of the match-ups?" Figuring out what is 'always' built or trained (and conversely, what isn't) should be some pretty good indicators.

The Chinese tournament players can deal with the balancing. It is up to us to give ideas for the modding side.

Uh-huh... There's nothing saying we can't do both; they can pick & choose who to pay attention to, after all. We don't know what they are doing, or how they are doing it.

In fact, we don't know very much at all about their methods or mechanisms; no one has responded yet to our questions about "how" and such. If you guys (Ralle, et al) don't know; fine, tell us. If any of you do, it behooves us to work together as a site to craft the best & most cohesive possible set of suggestions.

Personally, GhostThruster & (that one guy I can't remember the name of)'s "Patch List" thread are, perhaps, our best bets so far; very well organized, and they contain things that range from easy to hard, from "ESSENTIAL!!" to "well, this'd be nice".

 

[Somebassoon]

Here's some slightly more complex stuff that would go a long way if they added, which is probably very complex but would still significantly help the game:

-A way to make it so you can have multitudes of skins for a single model. Right now, as an example, the quilboar and Misha models have 3 skins that appear based on tileset. If there was a way to properly chose this in maps, and if there was a way for players to have multiple kinds of imported skins for the same model, a decent amount of space would be saved up in a lot of maps. Being able to remove hero glows without re-importing a model would also be amazing, and would lover the size of a good number of maps.
An in-built model editor of sorts to save up space, that works by saving "changes" to a model rather than whole models would be amazing and allow for saving up a lot of space but that's a very unrealistic idea that would take a lot of work. It would work by saving the "changes" as a smaller archive and then, when the map is loaded, it would create it's own model based on those changes but again it is a lot of work and I don't even know if the WC3 engine could handle something like that properly. Example: You delete all the verticies from the

-Orbs that work with Artillery attacks.

-New Variables of "Orb of Lightning", that don't have to function as OoL. First and simple one would be OoL that works with point target spells, with of course options to work with attacks (eg will the spell be targeted on top of the damaged unit or the original location?).
A "Chain Orb of Lightning" that's chain lightning but does no damage and instead applies a spell on each target hit and an "AoE point target orb of lightning" that just applies spells in a target point or area (both of which could work with Point/Unit target spells, and of course with each other and Orb of Lightning itself) would allow for a massive new variety of spells but again, this might take a bit of work, and although it might seem a bit complicated I do not think it is that unrealistic when you consider it, even though it may be something Blizzard doesn't care about. And of course, mixing up all these 3 varieties of Orb of Lightning would be amazing in and of itself. Additional options for both the point and chain lightning OoL would include projectile art(s) (the Chain orb of lightning wouldn't have to function as an actual chain lightning), maximum targets, a random pool of effects or maybe multiple effects applied at once, whether or not COoL would be able to bounce multiple times to the same target and if so up to how many times and so on.

-Fixing a bunch of old screwy stuff, like change flying height not working with negative numbers, or not working on units without speed. Living Sylvanas' voice pack is still buggy. Orb of Lightning doesn't have a proper "level selector" meaning you have to make 4 different abilities instead of one with 4 levels to work with Orb of Lightning.

-Being able to change animations of attachments, and reffer to them as units, along with being able to rotate units in the Z axis would allow for more visual work.

Those are the most unrealistically-realistic things I can come up with.

 

[Spacebuns]

Afaik, there exists Hive tutorials for changing textures on a model in-game.

 

[Eat_Bacon_Daily]

I think any change would be good. Just some sign of life will surely get at least some people to comeback to good ol wc3. Of course if they do more flamboyant changes the surge of returning players would be larger. The most important thing to keep in mind though is, PLEASE DON'T BREAK CUSTOM MAPS.

 

[WhiteFang]

Well,judging from what they said in that link Quilnez posted,I they are going to do a lot

RESPONSIBILITIES
Make gameplay first again on modern operating systems.
Create conditions for experiences that look as good as they play.
Own implementation and curation of features new and old.
Combat hacking to improve multiplayer.
Diagnose and fix all the things: crashes, deadlocks, overflows, heap corruptions, etc.

 

[Zwiebelchen]

I meant having multiples of the same texture that can be used for the same model.
So lets say I have model A which by default uses skin A and import skin B as a replacement. I can no longer use skin A on the model without re importing the model which takes up way more space.

Use the warclub ability. That's all I can say. It allows doing exactly that.

I use it to change skins of my hero models dynamically by equipped items.

 

[Eat_Bacon_Daily]

X-post from NoX_FunnyDog (reddit.com/r/wc3)Link

Patch Notes

If these were the patch notes I would be happy, just because of the map size limit. But of course i am very skeptical and don't really believe the source of these notes, i'm simply linking them for the sake of conversation.

 

[DracoL1ch]

X-post from NoX_FunnyDog (reddit.com/r/wc3)Link

Patch Notes

If these were the patch notes I would be happy, just because of the map size limit. But of course i am very skeptical and don't really believe the source of these notes, i'm simply linking them for the sake of conversation.

complete fake, 'cuase at least 5 lines stolen from original 1.22a patch notes

 

[Somebassoon]

X-post from NoX_FunnyDog (reddit.com/r/wc3)Link

Patch Notes

If these were the patch notes I would be happy, just because of the map size limit. But of course i am very skeptical and don't really believe the source of these notes, i'm simply linking them for the sake of conversation.

Needs more performance enhancements if you ask me, being able to run more complex triggers more often and have more units out at once, whether for actual usage or visuals like used in LTA would go a long way, and considering WC3 doesn't use modern hardware to its fullest extent it seems like something they would certainly try and add.

 

[A Void]

I'm sorry to disappoint people. As long as those three job positions are listed in Blizzard's recruitment page - no patch will be released. Since there will be no one to do it. But yes, Blizzard is planning on updating all classic games.

The streamer one is a complete fake to gain attention.

 

[stormone]

Wow, i hope they can fix also Mh players. Now the best host is wc3arena

 

[Spellbound]

I just thought of something that will be of tremendous help (to me anyway). A GetClosestWidgetWithPathing native would be great for custom resource harvesting, but it can have many applications. It picks the closest unit/destructible/item/w.e by checking the shortest amount of time it will take to get there if a unit's movement type is foot/fly/amphibious/etc and its collision is on/off. I mean, workers kinda do that already, so maybe make it accessible via a native?

Also ways to retrieve minimum/maximum damage of a unit with/without bonuses, mana cost of spells, missile launch events/missile landing events, etc.

Less needed but cool to have nevertheless would be the ability to assign multiple models to a unit, like the Dark Templar in Sc2.

 

[karaulov]

1.27:
Need JASS natives for memory reading, JASS TCP/HTTP client (Load/send data to server, load jass code from server, map auto update from server ), etc.

 

[_lycan]

I'm sorry to disappoint people. As long as those three job positions are listed in Blizzard's recruitment page - no patch will be released. Since there will be no one to do it. But yes, Blizzard is planning on updating all classic games.

The streamer one is a complete fake to gain attention.

You think that Blizzard only has 3 people working on classic games? they probably need more people to actually port old games to Battle.net 2.0 but can still update old games.

 

[A Void]

You think that Blizzard only has 3 people working on classic games? they probably need more people to actually port old games to Battle.net 2.0 but can still update old games.

Why release a patch that is incomplete? Unless battle.net 2.0 will be delayed until those job entries are full. Meaning that it will be set aside for 1.28.

 

[Darxy]

Along with this good list, a good thing would be to implement a reconnect system (so random crashes after X minutes/hours of playing don't make you cry in a corner) and fix the annoying unit lag.
Selection size bigger than 12 would be great, as well.

Oh and allowing the item of a cooldown to be longer than 5 minutes!!!!!!!

 

[MasterHaosis]

- Garbage collection
- TCP stack
- Mouse movement events
- Redo Mac support (Also for World Editor)
- BNet 2.0
- MasterHaosis

I see you!
You do not want me inside patch 1.27 unless you want invasion of haosis everywhere haha

 

[chobibo]

That would be nice, don't forget to impale the peasants though. Been waiting for years.

 

[MasterHaosis]

You need to contact Vlad the Impaler (if he is busy, I can do that)

About patch itself... I do not know personally what could they add (we now speak WHAT IF, without any proof that it will happen), but I personally would like to see some new Tavern heroes for example, maybe skirmish playable Naga and some races (not for multiplayer of course, jut human vs AI), or some bonus campaign/maps...

 

[IloveRoC]

Hi guys.

I was searching info about the upcoming patch.

I found this website and saw that you have contacts with Blizzard themself.

I just have to say that the biggest problem in wc3 Battle net is the massive delay in ladder games.

I wish blizzard look into this and fixed the delay in ladder so I could enjoy my RoC ladder when I still can, I absolutely love this game and have played it ever since 2002.

Also some balance issues could be nice

(tft)

Human

Elf

Buff undead

Roc

Night elf - Metamorphonis(dh ultimate)
Night elf - moonwells(gives too much hp)

Human - Tanks dmg/armor
Human - Water elemental dmg/hp

Undead - Too hard to expand and is punished too easily by mistakes.


Thanks all of you!

 

[StoPCampinGn00b]

Hi guys.

I was searching info about the upcoming patch.

I found this website and saw that you have contacts with Blizzard themself.

I just have to say that the biggest problem in wc3 Battle net is the massive delay in ladder games.

I wish blizzard look into this and fixed the delay in ladder so I could enjoy my RoC ladder when I still can, I absolutely love this game and have played it ever since 2002.

Also some balance issues could be nice

(tft)

Human

Elf

Buff undead

Roc

Night elf - Metamorphonis(dh ultimate)
Night elf - moonwells(gives too much hp)

Human - Tanks dmg/armor
Human - Water elemental dmg/hp

Undead - Too hard to expand and is punished too easily by mistakes.


Thanks all of you!

Hey, I think they are very aware of the ladder lag, imbalances, and maphackers (which you didn't mention). It's been reported (somewhere?) that they're asking the pros, more specifically those playing in Chinese tournaments, for their input on ladder. I do think they're focusing on TFT though so it'd be hard to create a voice for RoC since it's by far not as active.

 

[Archimmonde]

Wait I though blizzard left this game to die...... what why who where when

 

[PurgeandFire]

Wait I though blizzard left this game to die...... what why who where when

1. what: New patch. Or potentially new content/new engine? We just know something is coming for sure.

2. why: http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/2782208-post81.html

3. who: Blizzard

4. where: everywhere

5. when: The time to make suggestions is now. The patch/updates will come soon^TM.

 

[Somebassoon]

Any chance of them adding new assets from WoW? Not models, but icons, music, sound effects and such? Would go a long way, and wouldn't take up much space.

 

[Spellbound]

Any chance of them adding new assets from WoW? Not models, but icons, music, sound effects and such? Would go a long way, and wouldn't take up much space.

That would actually be pretty sweet. Music would make a great addition.

 

[WhiteFang]

1. what: New patch. Or potentially new content/new engine? We just know something is coming for sure.

2. why: http://www.hiveworkshop.com/forums/2782208-post81.html

3. who: Blizzard

4. where: everywhere

5. when: The time to make suggestions is now. The patch/updates will come soon^TM.

Beautiful xD

 

[Dr Super Good]

Any chance of them adding new assets from WoW? Not models, but icons, music, sound effects and such? Would go a long way, and wouldn't take up much space.

They have the wrong boarders so would need too much work. Also it would raise the requirements of HDD space.

Also they did not even add the assets to StarCraft II. They did add the Warcraft III assets to StarCraft II so if anything the WoW icon assets should have also been added there but were not.

 

[Archimmonde]

Maybe they will add + 18 mechanism.
If you know what I mean.

 

[chobibo]

You mean assets? I hope not.