Fire Pets are now FIXED

[Aleu]

There was no exploit involving the slime. Blizzard accidentally labeled it as a tameable beasts. Same goes with the Ghost Wolf. Neither were supposed to be labeled as tameable beasts, but it was a mistake on Blizzards part.

[Chimera]

Those were legit, not at all did someone need a macro to tame them or a kill+revive method, nor do they have an appearence buff, they are their own original model and they were tamed legitimately via some very interesting and unique methods in which to speed up the tame (talking about the grimtotem), i believe blizzard even applauded the players in general who figured out how to speed their tame up enough to aquire even. The slime and the hydra was a complete mistake on blizzards part because they gave them a crocolisk family, they have, obviously corrected that but because it was not via an exploit, nor some hard brain-work to learn the tame, blizzard didnt see a reason to ban nor applaud it.

[bluddy]

Goodbye my Hyde i'll remember you

though i'm sad they did it i understand why they needed to do this

[Ijomi]

I personally would have no trouble seeing all glitch tames removed, Rockso. Blizzard is obviously trying to maintain a reasonable compromise with glitch tamers, allowing them to keep what does not cause difficulty to other players in PvE or PvP--likely because of blanket tantrums accusing them of hating hunters and their insidious plot to spoil our fun by giving us legitimate cool tames. The fiends.

The fire pet, like the Tiny Beetle (who was actually a legit tame) and boss wasps the size of a bus, were dealt with because they presented playability problems on a whole, and were already being misused. It was a matter of time, and since they were never intended to be tamed that way, it is Blizzard's call whether or not it would be kept or fixed. Therefore, bigger beetle, smaller wasp, and raptor and tallstrider as they were meant to be tamed.

Sorry, PBC, but I was one of those melee on the receiving end of lulzy Molten Front grief, and I do not miss it in the slightest. It was ridiculous and rude.

[Paciphae]

Well then to be fair all the slimes and or ghost wolves should be taken away if you want to be fair since those where also exploit tames

Amen, brother.

And oil stained wolves, and burning boars, and so on and so forth.

[Serenith]

Well, I loved mine. I hope whoever made the executive decision to "fix" them gets bed bugs.

I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy. Those things are a nightmare.

And I'm not surprised they are fixed. I abandoned mine shortly after I tamed it. I figured I wouldn't get to keep it, and it wasn't really that fun for me anyways.

[Kalliope]

Now that they've been fixed, banning is a distinct possibility.

I know it's against the rules of the game, but it is no more or less against the rules than before blizzard fixed it. The chances of people being banned now for trying to tame it are actually LESS than the chance of being banned for using the pet in pvp situations, because the tame method doesn't even work anymore.

Using an untargettable pet in pvp sounds like something you can be banned for. Trying a previously glitchy tame method that no longer works, and is no longer glitchy in any way, doesn't sound like a bannable offense. To use your own words... use common sense.

Actually, the implication (which apparently needed to be spelled out) was that IF YOU SUCCEEDED in taming a new fire pet, you would be more likely to be banned, since the pet would still be an exploit in PvP situations. So why bother trying?

[Paciphae]

Well, I loved mine. I hope whoever made the executive decision to "fix" them gets bed bugs.

I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy. Those things are a nightmare.

Would you prefer heel spurs? Or maybe fleas?

[Ijomi]

Real-life harm on someone over a pixel pet. Stay classy, hunters of Warcraft.

[Serenith]

Nope, I prefer nothing since they were doing their job, they don't deserve to suffer.

[cameralady]

Actually, the implication (which apparently needed to be spelled out) was that IF YOU SUCCEEDED in taming a new fire pet, you would be more likely to be banned, since the pet would still be an exploit in PvP situations. So why bother trying?

To see if it would be possible. Since it's not, trying is not a bannable offense.

And if it were, I'd cross my fingers, keep my pet, and hope for the best.

At the end of the day, if blizzard doesn't want you to do something or have something, the onus is on them to prevent it. If they're not preventing it, then it's fair game for all players. In the face of that, asking "why bother trying?" is sort of nonsensical - the answer is in the question.

[Moderator]

Locking the thread. Four pages of drama is enough, I think.

A couple of notes:

- We do not wish real life harm on anyone.
- Once the potential to be banned over an action has been brought up (as a warning for anyone who might not understand the potential consequences), the subject can be dropped.
- If an argument is going around in circles and others don't seem to be understanding your point of view, repeating yourself probably isn't going to help. So stop.