So, you know how we weren't getting expanded stables?

[Kyria]

Not sure why anyone would oppose this - you don't need to fill up your stables. O_o Just leave space empty.

That topic was actually covered in this very thread! I think Veph worded my problems with it very well:

I know it's easy for people to say "If you don't want more pets, then don't tame any." but it's not that simple really. If the space is there it's hard to justify not picking up an old friend, even if you had reasons to let them go in the past. I'm sad about this removing the hard decision factor since it used to let me keep a nice solid lineup of pets that I knew were there because I wanted them to be, but that's how I've always liked dealing with my pets personally. Having a limit, to me, ensured a stronger bond.

[Maizou]

Eh. To each their own.

I had to release cherished pets because I liked newer models better.

This allows me to choose pets for looks again, without having to rely on raid buffs or spirit beast skins.

[Kalliope]

Eh. To each their own.

Exactly this. No one's opinion is invalid.

I personally was more than thrilled to announce the news, but am personally having a bit of trouble grappling with what Caelan and Vephriel were talking about. Part of me is COMPELLED to fill those spaces, but thus far, stubbornness is winning out.

[Snowwalker]

The grand thing is though, is now everyone has a choice in the matter. If you do not want a collection.. Then you don't have to. But if you do.. Now you can also have your choice. Personally I'm thrilled with the news!

[HunterFTW]

Not sure why anyone would oppose this - you don't need to fill up your stables. O_o Just leave space empty.

this.be happy.

[Mozag]

Veph couldn't have worded it better. I am having the same problem across all four hunters, and fighting to control my cat-lady instincts. I am sure I will fail now and then, but I hope I manage to keep as tight a leash on who actually remains in my stables, as before the change. But I am still incredibly happy for those who wanted this.

[Zhinru]

I agree myself, I never wanted this many stable slots, but it's most definitely not a bug, so we'll just have to accept it. It's not too bad, as long as I don't let my stables get carried away hopefully.

I'm going to try to only make modest additions, just grab a few familiar faces that I wouldn't mind having back, and that's about it. I know it's easy for people to say "If you don't want more pets, then don't tame any." but it's not that simple really. If the space is there it's hard to justify not picking up an old friend, even if you had reasons to let them go in the past. I'm sad about this removing the hard decision factor since it used to let me keep a nice solid lineup of pets that I knew were there because I wanted them to be, but that's how I've always liked dealing with my pets personally. Having a limit, to me, ensured a stronger bond.

Again, though, this seems to be what we have now. Though I wouldn't have chose it myself, I'm just going to make the best of it, and I am genuinely glad for people who have been wanting an expanded stable.

Let's look at it that way:

Situation A) 25 slots. Your gain: a slight convenience. Our loss: having to release some of our favorites to make room for our new favorites.

Situation B) 55 slots. Your loss: you get to exert a tiny bit of self-control over yourself. Our gain: we get to keep all the pets we love.

I think that makes the situation pretty clear. Old stables make a big loss for us, new stables make a very minor loss for you. Just keep that in mind.

[Vasken]

More pets won't even affect the bond I have with my pets, in brutal honesty. If anything, it'll improve it. I absolutely adore variety! I didn't really click with my hunter until Cataclysm offered a 25-slot stable, even though I've played one since vanilla. I've tried to rotate pets weekly through my spare stable slot, though it's too hard to bond with them when I know they'll be abandoned sooner or later. Honestly, with more expansions-- and more pets- upcoming, more stable slots might actually be needed.

Currently, if I have the yearning to try out a new pet, a new skin, a new anything, I'll need to scour my stable for a pet I can potentially part with-- a feat that's easier said than done. I've bonded strongly with all 25 pets, whether it's appearance wise, personality wise, or even just plain, simple nostalgia value. With the changes, I can happily experiment without throwing out an old, pixelated friend. If I don't particularly click with the one I've tamed, I don't need to frantically ticket Blizzard and ask for my pet back. Bonds also wane over time-- you wouldn't be hard-pressed to throw out a nostalgia-smothered pet that you're struggling to remain attached to.

Whilst I'm not sure if I'll use the entire 55, I'm definitely planning on picking up a few more raptors, crocolisks and turtles for roleplaying use; these changes are absolutely perfect for a trollish raptor breeder! I've found it so hard to strike a balance between my roleplaying pets, my "ooh shiny" rares and the raid-buff pets; the change will give folk a lil' breathing room.

Honestly, there's no requirement to fill up the additional slots-- or even use them. Whilst the temptation will inevitably be there, utilize your willpower to ignore the extra pages; it's better to have more of a choice than less, even if it's something you'd personally rather not use! It's understandable that folk bond in different ways. Some people just really wanted this change-- and it won't even effect you if you exert self-control.

Love for pixelated critters isn't a finite resource-- if you can bond with 25, you can potentially bond with 55; it's more opportunity! If you'd rather keep things small, then do so, and let the others enjoy these newfound changes.

TL;DR: If new stable slots aren't introduced, Floof is the next pet on my list to be abandoned if a new pet catches my interest. Think of the Floof.

[Snowy]

More pets won't even affect the bond I have with my pets, in brutal honesty. If anything, it'll improve it. I absolutely adore variety!

This. I honestly don't see any reason to complain about having more space. There are currently 25 slots and I have 13 pets. When Veph made the 55 pet grid for us, I filled up every slot. Why did this happen? Because now I can actually do what I wanted to do since the very start - have one of each family *and* still have room for extra favourites, what with me being a crazy cat lady and all. Why didn't I fill up all 25 slots previously? Because I can't do what I wanted to do. Therefore, until now, I just went with pets that clicked for me and were my favourites. I adore the idea of switching out pets a lot to use others and... I dunno. Each to their own of course, but I love the variety, like Vasken said. Even though I have that one very special, most favourite pet (I wonder who that is...) I still love all my others and love to take it in turns, use a different pet per day or something.

I don't know, I just don't see any reason to complain. Of course it's each to their own and even with Veph's explanation, I still don't see why people would feel bad for not filling up the slots. No, I'm not saying people should fill up their slots. I'm sure there are people like me who have wanted one of each family plus extras and I'm sure there are people who want to stick to their favourites only.

[HunterFTW]

varity is can help with my mod and chill outs.i can now have my rares and common skins that i just didn't have room for like the black wolf.i can chill out in goldshire without someone calling me a show off cause i happen to be useing my rare pets that i have.

[Kalliope]

Let's look at it that way:

Situation A) 25 slots. Your gain: a slight convenience. Our loss: having to release some of our favorites to make room for our new favorites.

Situation B) 55 slots. Your loss: you get to exert a tiny bit of self-control over yourself. Our gain: we get to keep all the pets we love.

I think that makes the situation pretty clear. Old stables make a big loss for us, new stables make a very minor loss for you. Just keep that in mind.

I think you missed Veph's point.

Situation B is definitely the happier situation for everyone, so those of us who don't want to fill their stables to the brim can and will suck it up. However, we're also entitled to flail a bit at now having to exert self-control where we formally did not have to.

We're all on the same side here. Just because there is a difference of feeling regarding individual reactions to the extra space, it doesn't mean that anyone is calling for them not to be added for personal reasons.

TL;DR: there is no need to be so defensive and try to convince others that the 30 extra slots are overall a good thing for the majority, since that is already known and acknowledged.

[Vephriel]

Let's look at it that way:

Situation A) 25 slots. Your gain: a slight convenience. Our loss: having to release some of our favorites to make room for our new favorites.

Situation B) 55 slots. Your loss: you get to exert a tiny bit of self-control over yourself. Our gain: we get to keep all the pets we love.

I think that makes the situation pretty clear. Old stables make a big loss for us, new stables make a very minor loss for you. Just keep that in mind.

I think you missed Veph's point.

Situation B is definitely the happier situation for everyone, so those of us who don't want to fill their stables to the brim can and will suck it up. However, we're also entitled to flail a bit at now having to exert self-control where we formally did not have to.

We're all on the same side here. Just because there is a difference of feeling regarding individual reactions to the extra space, it doesn't mean that anyone is calling for them not to be added for personal reasons.

TL;DR: there is no need to be so defensive and try to convince others that the 30 extra slots are overall a good thing for the majority, since that is already known and acknowledged.

I'm also rather bemused over the discussion. We're getting the new stable slots, so my opinions on the matter are moot, no need to get defensive. I already mentioned that I was fine with the way things turned out, I was simply expressing how I'm not personally a fan of more slots and trying to explain why. Not trying to change anyone's mind or even trying to start a debate, just wanted to toss out a different view. I'm well aware I'm in the minority and not even attempting to somehow persuade Blizzard to change their mind on this.

[Kyria]

I'd also like to add that those of us that are slightly negatively affected by this change have been polite and friendly with our opinions almost across the board. I'd ask that you please, please give our feelings the same respect that we're giving yours. :/ I'm very tired of saying "This is a little sad for me, but I'm so happy for you!" and getting "this is awesome for me, too bad for you, have some self-control" in return.

[PorrasouxRex]

I remember the days of only THREE stable slots. Now we advance to the 50's.

Anyway, while I am happy I can have more, and retame those I had to abandon, I feel like at least 40% of stabled pets for every hunter, those will be sitting in the stables for an expansion or two.

Poor lonely leftovers.

[Vasken]

I really don't see any negativity or defensiveness...? Or any lack of respect? Not entirely sure where people are plucking these from. There's nothing wrong with responding to other's opinions; I didn't lather any hostility in my post-- nor did Zhinru. I thought we were allowed to reply to opposing viewpoints.

The self-control isn't an insult at all! It's a little blunt, but far from rude. I'll admit to having no self-control on my main hunter-- and far too much on my alt hunter, who only has 6 pets.

[Kalliope]

I really don't see any negativity or defensiveness...? Or any lack of respect? Not entirely sure where people are plucking these from. There's nothing wrong with responding to other's opinions; I didn't lather any hostility in my post-- nor did Zhinru. I thought we were allowed to reply to opposing viewpoints.

The self-control isn't an insult at all! It's a little blunt, but far from rude. I'll admit to having no self-control on my main hunter-- and far too much on my alt hunter, who only has 6 pets.

It seems defensive, or unnecessary at best, because the merits of the additional stable slots were being argued when those very same reasons were acknowledged in the original post.

[Kyria]

I'll try to break it down a little more... this is what we're saying and how you're responding:

"This is a little inconvenient for me, but it's wonderful for everyone else, and I'm glad it's happening! I'll just have to adjust to it and control myself."

"This is a little inconvenient for you, but it's wonderful for everyone else. You should be glad it's happening! Just have some self-control!"

Can you see how that might come off as a little defensive and confusing?

[Vasken]

But-... I wasn't even getting defensive; I was posting and backing up my opinion on the matter- as little as it may count. Apologies if I'm being a brick, but I thought I was fully allowed to do so. It's a discussion-- not a "let's all agree with Vephriel and leave it at that" topic; my opinion differs entirely! No offense intended, I'm just confused as to how I'm in the wrong.

How's it any more unnecessary than quoting someone and pasting "agreed" beneath it? I wanted to develop on the subject and touched on things that weren't mentioned by anyone. :\

Anyway, I'm out.

[Kalliope]

The point is that they were touched on. There's a difference between agreeing with a point and attacking the opposition.

I don't understand why this sort of thing is such an issue on these forums. :/

[GormanGhaste]

We all have strong feelings for our pets, it can sometimes lead to strong discussions

As far as my stable prep goes, I found Paraliss today (really didn't feel like going all the way to Silverpine, and was poking around in that area for other rares as well). Zora is being elusive, so I tamed Ffexk instead.