Need some help with loque

[Snike]

So i was camping for loque in sholazar basin after i have tamed aotona and king krush about a couple days b4. and this morning i woke up early hoping i would find loque. i Fly my average circle and in the west of sholazar near the gorillas my npc scan went of!(yes yes! YES!) but he was dead... and my npc scan went of again king krush dead right next to loque nahak. next thing i saw was a lvl 85 rouge in between them i whisper him saying "why? you could've atleast whispered a hunter in sholazar." Rouge says" srry, i was killing them just this once for the frostbitten. but if it helps i killed vyragosa about an hour ago. its possible the time lost proto drake might spawn." i say "well thxn i guess"

Anyways thought i should just explain what happend because i was prtty upset about loque.
So anyone have tips for this spirit beast? spawn time, how to or anything? would be helpful because i just dont want to lose him again.

BTW: srry if i made this post in the wrong area.

[Lisaara]

Well hun, the trio of the basin are on the list for Frostbitten so the rogue did nothing wrong. He found them first and wanted the achievement.

I've found he was 6 - 16 hrs but also only 3 rares can be up in Northrend at any one time so come back to the basin in 6 hrs, maybe have a guildie kill rares for you.

[Vephriel]

Well hun, the trio of the basin are on the list for Frostbitten so the rogue did nothing wrong. He found them first and wanted the achievement.

I've found he was 6 - 16 hrs but also only 3 rares can be up in Northrend at any one time so come back to the basin in 6 hrs, maybe have a guildie kill rares for you.

The limited number of rares theory has been refuted, there is no link between which rares are up or how many of them. It's only dependent on the individual mob's spawn timer.

[Lisaara]

Well hun, the trio of the basin are on the list for Frostbitten so the rogue did nothing wrong. He found them first and wanted the achievement.

I've found he was 6 - 16 hrs but also only 3 rares can be up in Northrend at any one time so come back to the basin in 6 hrs, maybe have a guildie kill rares for you.

The limited number of rares theory has been refuted, there is no link between which rares are up or how many of them. It's only dependent on the individual mob's spawn timer.

I think I believe the data shown by aeonaxxresource.com and tlpdresource.com and I've done the rare killing thing PERSONALLY. I've made Vyragosa spawn faster that way. So unless a Dev comes up with a blue post to confirm they aren't connected, then the research done by many players isn't refuted.

[Aeladrine]

Jess, there is no data shown by them. I've searched both sites up and down. They claim that they have data, but they never actually give it to you. There is no script of coding they show off to say, "Yes, this is proof, this is what makes this anomaly happen." I would never believe someone else's spawn timers if they were trying to "help" me on my server; I would require screenshots that show the creature in the exact same coordinates at the exact same time that they say they found it dead. Why would I ever accept someone's word for it?

And, sorry, but your word for it doesn't do anything for me, either. This is not an attempt to offend you, it's a simple fact. You're someone on the internet who I barely know. If I believed you, it's be like believing the crazy guys on the side of the road who say they have "proof" the end of the world is coming. Take a second and look between the example you're making and the ones that they do. You'll understand why soon enough. And anyone who believes crazy old men who talk about the end of the world is probably crazy themselves.

Even if this did happen to you with the timers, I would say that it's just coincidence.

We've talked about this before. The theory has been debunked by more reliable sources and, on top of that, the sources you list aren't reliable at all. Many of us would appreciate it very much is this myth would stop spreading around.

OP; Come back in about six hours. Viola! You will probably have your pretty kitty.

[Lisaara]

Jess, there is no data shown by them. I've searched both sites up and down. They claim that they have data, but they never actually give it to you. There is no script of coding they show off to say, "Yes, this is proof, this is what makes this anomaly happen." I would never believe someone else's spawn timers if they were trying to "help" me on my server; I would require screenshots that show the creature in the exact same coordinates at the exact same time that they say they found it dead. Why would I ever accept someone's word for it?

And, sorry, but your word for it doesn't do anything for me, either. This is not an attempt to offend you, it's a simple fact. You're someone on the internet who I barely know. If I believed you, it's be like believing the crazy guys on the side of the road who say they have "proof" the end of the world is coming. Take a second and look between the example you're making and the ones that they do. You'll understand why soon enough. And anyone who believes crazy old men who talk about the end of the world is probably crazy themselves.

Even if this did happen to you with the timers, I would say that it's just coincidence.

We've talked about this before. The theory has been debunked by more reliable sources and, on top of that, the sources you list aren't reliable at all. Many of us would appreciate it very much is this myth would stop spreading around.

OP; Come back in about six hours. Viola! You will probably have your pretty kitty.

They held a RAID....a huge guild RAID multiple times to prove the theory true. That's not a mere coincidence and I am slightly insulted because everytime you say "Oh it's been debunked", no one, and I mean, NO ONE has backed that up. You can't ask them for codes then not provide the codes yourself.

And you can't say a GM said it cause GMs can't tell you any information like that.

So this is where my frustration comes from. The people who have proven it true have done so through experimentation over a period of months and some people, like myself, have done the experiment too with guildies. The people who say its not true haven't proven anything cause there's no data, no record, nothing, but demand codes from those who did the experiment. That's not right and not fair to expect codes. I'm also pretty sure revealing codes is against Blizzard ToS too.

So I'm sorry if you don't believe the evidence given, but unless you actually get a raid together to experiment yourself or have some sort of sold proof, you can't say it's debunked by some source that doesn't exist(since everytime this comes up, this mystery source is never provided).

Anyway, thats another topic and we should stop talking about it here. It's wrong to start an argument in someone elses thread.

[Sarantha]

That is so weird. I found Loque just walking around alone and tamed her my first time looking for her. Aotona it took me TWO YEARS to finally get. King Krush, I just don't care about him. And I've HEARD the limited rares thing was taken away. Just hearsay, but as they say, until the Devs say something, there is no proof. I'd say just keeping flying around Northrend kiling rares you find (maybe get lucky and get TLPD) and then fly back to Sholazar and just wait it out. You're working on an achievement and camping your pet, so no time wasting. I had someone REALLY wanting Dirkee the other day, but no, TLPD spawned instead. He was happy he got his proto drake, but not happy that he didn't get his achievement he's been working on. LOL. First time someone HASNT been elated to see TLPD up and ready to die. I told him in my channel that TLPD was up, but Dirkee wasn't, and I'd summon him to me if he wanted a proto drake (no one else was around) so I did and he got it. I hate proto drakes and my hunter is my alt, so I wasn't about to kill it for me.

[Aeladrine]

I never said a GM said anything. I don't trust GMs.

Give me video proof of this raid and I might just believe it then. You have yet to provide any proof yourself, yet you lash out at others for doing the same? I am not the one trying to prove a ludicrous theory; I don't need to search for a string of code proving the idiotic thing wrong.

As you said, there has been "no data, no record, nothing". You've just admitted that no data was kept. In what scientific experiment would you not keep data? What other scientists would believe you if you didn't have data? Here's an answer for you: none. And yes, what you claim to have done does qualify as a scientific experiment.

There is no reason to be insulted by someone asking for proof. Any good experiment should come with proof behind it. Any one that doesn't is, invariably, a bad experiment.

[Lisaara]

I never said a GM said anything. I don't trust GMs.

Give me video proof of this raid and I might just believe it then. You have yet to provide any proof yourself, yet you lash out at others for doing the same? I am not the one trying to prove a ludicrous theory; I don't need to search for a string of code proving the idiotic thing wrong.

As you said, there has been "no data, no record, nothing". You've just admitted that no data was kept. In what scientific experiment would you not keep data? What other scientists would believe you if you didn't have data? Here's an answer for you: none. And yes, what you claim to have done does qualify as a scientific experiment.

There is no reason to be insulted by someone asking for proof. Any good experiment should come with proof behind it. Any one that doesn't is, invariably, a bad experiment.

Or you could just talk to the guy. He has a chatroom on his site. He described his experiment on one of his sites(he's got many).

As I said in previous posts, let's just drop it. We're not gonna agree regardless.

[Aeladrine]

Again, someone saying something is not proof. It never has been and never will be. Do people get convicted just because someone is pointing fingers at them and claiming they did it? No. There is always evidence to support that claim. Do scientists create a new law because they say it worked out a certain way? No. There is always large amounts of data.

Why should we treat this any differently?

[Lisaara]

Again, someone saying something is not proof. It never has been and never will be. Do people get convicted just because someone is pointing fingers at them and claiming they did it? No. There is always evidence to support that claim. Do scientists create a new law because they say it worked out a certain way? No. There is always large amounts of data.

Why should we treat this any differently?

You don't wanna even try bringing law into it cause I can get into the Casey Anthony trial and how despite evidence supporting she did it, she didn't get charged for anything except lying.

So I'm gonna drop it now since my last two comments were ignored and that's frustrating and just getting me irritated. ><;

[Aeladrine]

In the Casey Anthony trial, there was not sufficient proof that she did it. People screwed up in various places and the evidence simply wasn't to be found by that time. Besides that, innocent until proven guilty. Does that ring a bell? They could not prove that she was guilty. In the same manner, we should not assume that Blizzard is guilty of instating such a ludicrous system to only one continent unless we can prove that they are guilty of it.

And I apologize. I did not see those. However, this discussion does help the OP. He can see both sides of the argument and decide for himself which is correct. This will greatly affect his camping of Loque. However, in the end, it is up to the OP whether we are off-topic or not.

[Lisaara]

I suppose it does help.....

and the ancient saying was actually "Guilty until proven innocent." but in the US, they flipflopped it with our law system.

[Aeladrine]

It doesn't matter, now does it? Because, in the US, it is innocent until proven guilty.

"The presumption of innocence, sometimes referred by the Latin Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty), is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial, recognized in many nations. The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which has to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the trier of fact, who is restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissible, and in most cases lawfully obtained, that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In case of remaining doubts, the accused is to be acquitted. This presumption is seen to stem from the Latin legal principle that ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies)." (sniped from Wikipedia)

As you can see, it is up to the prosecution, which, in this case, would be you, to provide enough compelling evidence that we can be sure without a doubt that you are correct. So far, you have yet to do so.

[Lisaara]

It doesn't matter, now does it? Because, in the US, it is innocent until proven guilty.

"The presumption of innocence, sometimes referred by the Latin Ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the principle that one is considered innocent until proven guilty), is a legal right of the accused in a criminal trial, recognized in many nations. The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution, which has to collect and present enough compelling evidence to convince the trier of fact, who is restrained and ordered by law to consider only actual evidence and testimony that is legally admissible, and in most cases lawfully obtained, that the accused is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. In case of remaining doubts, the accused is to be acquitted. This presumption is seen to stem from the Latin legal principle that ei incumbit probatio qui dicit, non qui negat (the burden of proof rests on who asserts, not on who denies)." (sniped from Wikipedia)

As you can see, it is up to the prosecution, which, in this case, would be you, to provide enough compelling evidence that we can be sure without a doubt that you are correct. So far, you have yet to do so.

Neither have you to prove I'm wrong. The innocent needs to prove they're innocent as well, means providing facts and proof they didn't do it or in this case, providing evidence that more than 3 rares can be up at any one time in northrend

The prosecution, which would be the players of WoW, is pretty split on which side is true.

[Aeladrine]

"The burden of proof is on the prosecution"(wiki). That means that you do not have to prove your innocence. You are innocent until proven guilty.

"The presumption of innocence is in fact a legal instrument created by the French cardinal and jurist Jean Lemoine to favor the accused based on the legal inference that most people are not criminals.It is literally considered favorable evidence for the accused that automatically attaches at trial. It requires that the trier of fact, be it a juror or judge, begin with the presumption that the state is unable to support its assertion. To ensure this legal protection is maintained a set of three related rules govern the procedure of criminal trials. The presumption means:
With respect to the critical facts of the case - whether the crime charged was committed and whether the defendant was the person who committed the crime - the state has the entire burden of proof.
With respect to the critical facts of the case, the defendant does not have any burden of proof whatsoever. The defendant does not have to testify, call witnesses or present any other evidence, and if the defendant elects not to testify or present evidence, this decision cannot be used against them.
The jury or judge is not to draw any negative inferences from the fact the defendant has been charged with a crime and is present in court and represented by an attorney. They must decide the case solely on evidence presented during the trial."(still wiki)

Sorry, your statement is completely incorrect.

[Qinni]

Ripped right off wowhead for a fail proof tame.

IGNORE THIS IF YOU (like me) ACTUALLY WANT TO "HUNT" this amazing pet.

Here it is: The FOOL-PROOF way to tame this beauty.

What you need: Patience and know-how

Where: 65,77, near the neutral apes, is the best spot I can imagine to camp, seeing as I have tamed Loque'nahak twice, helped someone else tame it (for a fee XD) and killed as well.

http://i401.photobucket.com/albums/pp98 ... 081402.jpg

This is the EXACT spot it will spawn, within the red circle (literally! It will spawn, along with King Krush RIGHT there!) I mean, come on now, it can't get any easier than that! Sure, sitting in only one location might take longer, but in the end, think about it! Would it take longer to fly around, overlooking it or missing it by a few minutes? Or sitting in a GUARANTEED location? You be the judge.

They are right, I got many Loque sightings here by just sitting here.

As for missing the pet seems like you weren't there on time and just happen to miss it. You'll get her next time I promise.

[Aeladrine]

Ripped right off wowhead for a fail proof tame.

IGNORE THIS IF YOU (like me) ACTUALLY WANT TO "HUNT" this amazing pet.

Here it is: The FOOL-PROOF way to tame this beauty.

What you need: Patience and know-how

Where: 65,77, near the neutral apes, is the best spot I can imagine to camp, seeing as I have tamed Loque'nahak twice, helped someone else tame it (for a fee XD) and killed as well.

http://i401.photobucket.com/albums/pp98 ... 081402.jpg

This is the EXACT spot it will spawn, within the red circle (literally! It will spawn, along with King Krush RIGHT there!) I mean, come on now, it can't get any easier than that! Sure, sitting in only one location might take longer, but in the end, think about it! Would it take longer to fly around, overlooking it or missing it by a few minutes? Or sitting in a GUARANTEED location? You be the judge.

They are right, I got many Loque sightings here by just sitting here.

As for missing the pet seems like you weren't there on time and just happen to miss it. You'll get her next time I promise.

This is how I've camped for everything. It's never failed me!(:

[Lisaara]

I've found Loque in every spot EXCEPT the one by the birds in the north.

BTW, witnesses isnt the only evidence. the defendant does have to have evidence to defend themselves.

[Nubhorns]

Holy thread derail Batman. You two play nice. And play on topic.

I've found Loque more frequently near the Nesingwary base camp - I've never seen him up by the birds, but I don't really extensively camp for him anymore since he hates me and won't hand over his cloak.