Views on Frostbitten ?

[sixfifteen]

See my story in the writing forum about my obsession with this one :p



I love this acheivement to be honest; i'll complete it one day.. I hope.

[Samskeyti]

Frostbitten was my favorite achievement of all. So was bloody rare, although I completed that one when Outland was empty. It took be about a year to complete, and some kills where just the biggest luck ever, such as King Krush.

I completed Frostbitten on the first of January 2010. As some of you know, I spent the last days looking for the time-lost protodrake. In joke, a guildie said I'd get it yesterday, on the first of January 2011. I laughed but... then it came along!

[Novikova]

Note I said 6 months from now. And see the other post. GC will not be a casual kill.

No no and no.

Did I say no?

We dont need a stupid achievement like that. Not everyone is leveling their hunters right now and can get those pets.

Last think we need is people given MORE reason to ninja rare tameables.

This. Pretty much this. Competing for rares is already tough enough, especially post MMO champ/holidays/leveling catching up - just look at some of the griefing going on. It's tragic. Read some of the posts, some hunters took over a /year/ to catch their rare (Hi Skoll, my own white whale!). I camped for days and weeks and no Skoll. Oh well, the one time I saw him a paladin had killed him for the 7th time for 'the lols'. Fantastic! Some people might reroll, some people might level their hunters in time (I know people who didn't get Cata/can't afford WoW time due to financial circumstance). I myself - Novikova's player - rolled Novikova and sent her over with bags and heirlooms so I could join my friends.

While GC will not be a 'casual kill', it's still incredibly easy to rip threat from the hunter and steal their tame.

Keep your rare hunting achieve - whack Armagedillo, take out Cyrus the black or that darn phoenix - but leave the *pets* out of it and I agree with Taluwen.

And the funny part is? After myself and several other hunters had tamed our King Krushes, we helped a guy get his Frostbitten achiev because he was nice enough to let us have our turns in peace. If there's no hunters horde or Alliance that I can find who want them, yeah, I might lead a rare hunter over. It's a fun aspect for some people and I am VERY happy they put in conspicuous non-tamable rares for treasure hunters.

[cowmuflage]

I think tameables should stay in theses things as it pisses me off when ever i see a hunter act like blizz puts tameable rares in game just for hunters. They make them tameable for us yes but the rare themselves? Thats for every body to have not just some hunter who wants a shiny pet. I'm sick of hunters who go out of there way to get rid of or bully someone who was there first at a rare tameable just becouse they think they have the "right to it first". Some hunters forget thats there are other classes in this game and that they have just as much right to a tameable rare as we do.

Not saying rare stealing is not wrong but acting like we own them just cos of our class is.

[Loki]

Yeah, that's a fair point. I guess that since the achi gives no awards, it's harder for hunters to see why people would want it, if it gave a title or something then that'd make it more understandable to go for. However, that'd make even more people do it, which would make even more hunters complain ...

I dunno. The items dropped are worth less than the live mob to a hunter 9/10 times, so it can't be for the drop much of the time. I guess it's just the "see a rare, kill a rare" mentality people have had from the beginning. I know I do it even in low level zones, try and avoid killing tameables though.

[cowmuflage]

I like kliing rares more than tameing them XD no rare skins makes me of "oooh" so yeah. If no ones around its fair game.

[Aeliel]

I like achievements, I completed Frostbitten on my main (plus helped my boyfriend complete it on two characters)... but I agree that rare tamables should stay out of achievement of that kind. Blizzard clearly does mean the tamable Cataclysm rares (with the obvious exception of Jadefang) as just hunter pets, otherwise they would've put an actual blue on the loot table (much like they did for all the other rare spawns) rather than just the grey tear.

I'm not going to throw a stroppy fit if somebody kills the TBC or Northrend tamable rares for the achievement, or even just for the blue loot (even for the rares who aren't in the achievement, such as Skoll, Gondria and Arcturis), even if I'm looking for them and I've been looking for a long while. They found it first, they can get some use of the kill, good for them.

On the other hand, I've been circling Karoma for a week now and the only two times I was there when she spawned, she got killed - for nothing (once for griefing, once because "lol I thought it would drop something sorry"). No, I wouldn't want the Cataclysm tamables in a "kill all the rares" achievement, and furthermore, I would absolutely love it if they were all made to be like Ghostcrawler (non-aggressive and very, very deadly). No reason to move the ones in trafficked areas to a different spawnpoint, just make them yellow so they don't aggro and kill some poor random guy.

[Ryai]

If there are no hunters in zone, and it's not being camped for a tame, I'm fine with it. (Killed a few of them myself).

Would be nice if they added the achieve for Cata in 6 months or so, but not yet, but GC needs to be on that list.. ;-)

Yeah because people camping the tamable rares thinking they have loot, or to be assholes so they can spam the tear to try and get hunters to QQ isn't bad enough?

I've not even seen another Karoma, nor a Madexx tame. Anywhere. By anyone yet. They're the god damn new Krush and Aotona. And speaking of which, Frostbitten, along with their rare status is keeping me from getting Krush for my orc. I camped nearly 10 hours the other day, and I've camped 20+ total for 3 days, nada.

And you never know, I left Loque up after finding him again and he was alive for 30 nminutes- others had flew over him and left him alive too, most likely thinking like I had at the time, someone may possibly come along with the intent to tame.

If you don't need to kill and the rare is tamable, and you aren't going to get anything worthwhile from it, why kill it? If you already have it on your achieve you honestly don't need to go and kill it again.

[Novikova]

I think tameables should stay in theses things as it pisses me off when ever i see a hunter act like blizz puts tameable rares in game just for hunters. They make them tameable for us yes but the rare themselves? Thats for every body to have not just some hunter who wants a shiny pet. I'm sick of hunters who go out of there way to get rid of or bully someone who was there first at a rare tameable just becouse they think they have the "right to it first". Some hunters forget thats there are other classes in this game and that they have just as much right to a tameable rare as we do.

Not saying rare stealing is not wrong but acting like we own them just cos of our class is.

No one here condones bullying or getting rid of anyone. Tamable rares *should* be left to the hunters because honestly, how many untamable rares are there? BUCKETS of them to hunt or choose from. Many more than there are tameables. So no, tamables should not be in the achievement. It only gives people justification to kill them or KEEP killing them (Hi Mr. paladin who's killed Skoll 7 times!) or grief people. Frankly, I'm glad they moved towards the 'boe dropping rare for rare hunters' and 'tamables for hunters' model. And I hope they keep it that way. It's something for everyone. Northrend rare hunting was a nightmare - ask us how many of us had people after the achieve try to pay massive amounts of gold for a kill to the despair of hunters in the area, or who have had pets killed under us, or someone tag it and hold it for ransom. Because 'lol achievement' or 'lol loot'.

Cata rares that are tamable only drop a tear and give 0 achievement points for a reason - they're FOR hunters and the BoE bosses drop loot anyone can have and provide a good hunt for rare/treasure hunters. So no, other classes do not have a right to tamable rares in Cata. The Northrend ones? It's a bit more grey but honestly - the hunter is gonna use and love that pet if they camp for it. Still, if one gets beaten to it, that's that. So it pisses me off when someone who likes to hunt rares acts like every single freaking rare needs to be murderized for a few imaginary fairy points or an old expansion BoE. Sorry. But no. And yes, I've helped people with Frostbitten - a nice priest even let us tame first and we helped him camp his last rare.

Just because you enjoy killing tamable rares more than taming them doesn't mean other people don't feel the opposite or that some poor soul just barely missed the tame because you killed it. I stand by the 'no loot/achieve' mobs for hunters and treasure droppers for rare hunters. It doesn't solve the problem completely, but it's a ggood start.

[cowmuflage]

No the Northrend ones are not grey every one has the same amount of right to them.

[Ryai]

No the Northrend ones are not grey every one has the same amount of right to them.

A grey area or gray area (see spelling differences) is a term for a border in-between two or more things that is unclearly defined, a border that is hard to define or even impossible to define, or a definition where the distinction border is dynamic (that is, tends to move). The concept comes literally from the distinction between an environment of only pure black and pure white (on one hand) and an environment where a grayscale gradient can exist between them (on the other). The literal idea has been figuratively extended to serve as a metaphor in various domains of life:

* A grey area of definitions signifies a problem of sorting reality into clearly cut categories. Example: where is the border between erotica and pornography?
* A grey area of law is an area where no clear legislation or precedent exists, or where the law has not been applied in a long time thus making it unclear if it is applicable at all. See non liquet and case of first impression.
* A grey area of ethics signifies an ethical dilemma, where the border between right and wrong is blurred. Example: is killing always abominable?

Most likely;

A grey area of ethics signifies an ethical dilemma, where the border between right and wrong is blurred. Example: is killing always abominable?

Is what she means. The northrend rares ARE a grey area when they are focused on the TAMABLE rares because while Blizzard made them for hunters, they gave them loot and part an achievement to make them for others too. Ergo because Blizzard was STUPID TO THINK CAMPING FOR A RARE ON TOP OF FIGHTING OTHERS FOR IT, makes it a 'CHALLENGE' to tame.

._. sitting on my ass for 10+ hours just makes my ass hurt.

[Novikova]

No the Northrend ones are not grey every one has the same amount of right to them.

Which is why so many of us took ages to get any of them? Sorry, I respectfully disagree and stick to my guns that hunters should have priority on tamables. What happened in Northrend was a colossal mistake that lead to a lot of frustration and heartbreak for hunters and rare seekers alike. And it's also why Blizzard moved away from it in Cata.

I wouldn't pitch a hissy fit because someone kills a Northrend rare - IF there's no one around to tame it. Hardly. But it's foolish to think someone deserves to miss out on a pet because Jimbob the paladin or DARTHSEPHIROTH OF DARKNESS the DK has a slightly faster mount speed and wants imaginary points that give him nothing over a hunter who will love and use a pet. Just because *YOU* aren't wowed by any of the rares doesn't mean someone isn't drooling over a parrot or ghost kitty of their own. I'm glad they moved away from it. It needs to stay this way. There's enough griefers and competition between hunters for tameables already.

And Ryai is right. Sitting for 10+ hours only to lose a pet because one has to fight off 99 million people is not a challenge. It's a pain in my rump roast.

[Cialbi]

I think tameables should stay in theses things as it pisses me off when ever i see a hunter act like blizz puts tameable rares in game just for hunters. They make them tameable for us yes but the rare themselves? Thats for every body to have not just some hunter who wants a shiny pet. I'm sick of hunters who go out of there way to get rid of or bully someone who was there first at a rare tameable just becouse they think they have the "right to it first". Some hunters forget thats there are other classes in this game and that they have just as much right to a tameable rare as we do.

Not saying rare stealing is not wrong but acting like we own them just cos of our class is.

Name one other class/spec, aside from the Beast Mastery Hunter, that has to camp a rarespawn in order to get a decent self-healing ability that has very clear utility for that class/spec. Heck, just name one other class/spec that can only get an ability by camping a rarespawn.

Whilst unique & tamable rares are not actually reserved for hunters, I really don't give a shit about your 'equal right' for other classes to kill them (with a humongous exception for Jadefang), and am not about to lose any sleep over having tamed Arcturis, Grubthor, and Zora, and thus denied someone else the chance to kill and loot them.

[Lisaara]

I think tameables should stay in theses things as it pisses me off when ever i see a hunter act like blizz puts tameable rares in game just for hunters. They make them tameable for us yes but the rare themselves? Thats for every body to have not just some hunter who wants a shiny pet. I'm sick of hunters who go out of there way to get rid of or bully someone who was there first at a rare tameable just becouse they think they have the "right to it first". Some hunters forget thats there are other classes in this game and that they have just as much right to a tameable rare as we do.

Not saying rare stealing is not wrong but acting like we own them just cos of our class is.

Name one other class/spec, aside from the Beast Mastery Hunter, that has to camp a rarespawn in order to get a decent self-healing ability that has very clear utility for that class/spec. Heck, just name one other class/spec that can only get an ability by camping a rarespawn.

Whilst unique & tamable rares are not actually reserved for hunters, I really don't give a shit about your 'equal right' for other classes to kill them (with a humongous exception for Jadefang), and am not about to lose any sleep over having tamed Arcturis, Grubthor, and Zora, and thus denied someone else the chance to kill and loot them.

^ This Hardcore!

Thank you. I find it was ballsy to say such a horrible thing on a HUNTER forum. It's one thing to state an opinion, it's another when you bash a class completely on a class specific forum. It sounds like elitism to me.

Now then, if the rare spawn drops pets or mounts, then sure whatever, fair game. But 9 times out of 10, rarespawns dont drop nothing useful or anything you can really sell. Blizzard's making a point to prove that with the tear.

[Saturo]

It's always so fun to see people gang up on other people with a slightly differing opinion. So Cowmuflage thinks all rares should be in a rare achiev? How does that affect anyone? In fact, it makes sense. Blizzard didn't implement rares for hunters, they implemented them for players. i don't think we should have rare-achieves at all, as it's just a massive waste of time in the already massive waste of time WoW is. But if we have to have rare-achieves, all RARES should be in it-simply because it makes sense. And who's to say DARTHSEPHIROTH OF DARKNESS doesn't value those achievementpoints just as much as a hunter would value a pet? It might be the last achieve he needs for his [Over 9000!], even.

Rares are for everyone, not just hunters. Someone finishing their achieve is worth just as much as a hunter getting a sparkly pet.

[cowmuflage]

Well so sorry for haveing a fucking opinion. my god.

[Lisaara]

It's always so fun to see people gang up on other people with a slightly differing opinion. So Cowmuflage thinks all rares should be in a rare achiev? How does that affect anyone? In fact, it makes sense. Blizzard didn't implement rares for hunters, they implemented them for players. i don't think we should have rare-achieves at all, as it's just a massive waste of time in the already massive waste of time WoW is. But if we have to have rare-achieves, all RARES should be in it-simply because it makes sense. And who's to say DARTHSEPHIROTH OF DARKNESS doesn't value those achievementpoints just as much as a hunter would value a pet? It might be the last achieve he needs for his [Over 9000!], even.

Rares are for everyone, not just hunters. Someone finishing their achieve is worth just as much as a hunter getting a sparkly pet.

It's fun when someone misses the point entirely too. Just sayin.

Reread cow's post and how elitist it sounded. It was incredibly offensive. Infact, I felt it attacked all hunters here and pretty much bashed us. If you played your hunter, Saturo, you'd feel the same.

"It's not what you say, it's how it's said/presented."

It was presented very VERY poorly. It didn't sound like a mere opinion being stated. It sounded like an angry rant/attack on all hunters.

Plus, if I recall, this topic was about the frostbitten achievement, not about if hunters are exclusive to rare pets or not. Just a thought on the subject.

[Saturo]

Oh, I understood every little nuance of that post. I agree completely with it. Rares aren't for hunters, they're for PLAYERS, some of whom are hunters. Saying that non-hunters have no right to rares is plain stupid, and something that always irks me. It's like saying that only ret pallies should be allowed to wield twohanded maces.

[Ryai]

^ This Hardcore!

Thank you. I find it was ballsy to say such a horrible thing on a HUNTER forum. If the rare spawn drops pets or mounts, then sure whatever, fair game. But 9 times out of 10, rarespawns dont drop nothing useful or anything you can really sell. Blizzard's making a point to prove that with the tear.

Also there are also the people who will kill just to kill too, achieve or not. I just foind Ainamiss. As we all know she is not needed for an achieve, I had her targeted, a druid flew by. Saw me- saw Ainamiss, before I could do anything flew in and ganked her. When I calmly explained that I was looking for someone to tame her, he loled at me, when I then went on to explain I was also interested in taming her if no one else had come along. So next time don't jump the gun for slaughtering a rare that drops nothing. He just went silent and I expect he was trying to just make me Q.Q

But then again these people already posted and I quoted one. So here I just posted proof. When you get to greedy and kill something even when you don't need to kill it, just because a 'it's up, it's not dead yet, it's free game' attitude, you might ruin someone's possible tame. So I'm just going to stand by what I said.

If you don't need the gold [and come on if you've got cata you don't, I made like 6k gold on Rosalyn in a god damn week] and you don't need the achieve, and you really don't need the blue to DE or the cloth for a tailoring alt... just let the tamable rares be. You'll be a better person, and possibly make a hunter happy.

Blizzard didn't implement rares for hunters, they implemented them for players. i don't think we should have rare-achieves at all, as it's just a massive waste of time in the already massive waste of time WoW is. But if we have to have rare-achieves, all RARES should be in it-simply because it makes sense. And who's to say DARTHSEPHIROTH OF DARKNESS doesn't value those achievementpoints just as much as a hunter would value a pet? It might be the last achieve he needs for his [Over 9000!], even.

All Outland rares are in for the achieves.

All northrend rares are too.

Cata rares are an exception to this as there are only a handful of rare spawns that drop loot. Then there are a handful of rare tamables that drop no loot really. Then there are the world boss rares that drop exceptional loot. There is no cata rare achieve and I don't see the need for there to be one. And honestly if you want blizzard to go around tinkering with achievements, why not tinker with the whale shark achievement. I want the title it had originally damnit, but no now it's just a petty achieve. Blah.

And no honestly all rares does not make sense. Blizzard implimented rares after the frostbitten achievement that while still dropped loot, added nothing to the rare achievement. So honestly this proves Blizzard can cater to those wanting achievements, and loot, and those that want special skins, or hard tames.

Which they did in Cata- and honestly they could do the same for Frostbitten- remove the tamable rares and perhaps just suppliment with a boost to the gold, cloth and item drops. That way hunters are happy, achievement hunters are happy, and no one has to feel bad because; Do I kill Loque? Do I let Loque live or etc rare tamable grief.

It was bad enough people were slaughtering Skoll and Gondria and claiming/screeching they had a right because I NEED IT FOR FROSTBITTEN.

[Lisaara]

While usually I have many disagreements with you Ryai, I agree with you 100%. I'm sorry about your loss. That druid was a jerk. Shameful, cause my main is a druid so thats a disgrace. I'd never do that on my non-hunter toons.