Probably won’t happen, they seem to be changing the paintings of the skimpy ladies now, no fun allowed.
4 Likes
If you visit Boralus there are some really funny lady paintings in the houses 
2 Likes
Indeed, it is weird how only leather has good piece.
Need good lewd stuff for all armor types and not just 1 piece… but plenty.
https://giphy.com/embed/l2JJHgjz1uaEncXew
better bring the new ones, sets can be both impressive but tasteful…
no reason not to, cause onlybra nelf lady players look so out of place atm
and being more puritan than catgirls is a losing move
1 Like
The woke crowd at Blizzard have declared that skimpy outfits are objectification and females need to be covered up, the irony…
3 Likes
Would be nice if they would, and allow skimpy outfits for both genders. But they won’t, because some lady at Blizzcon asked them to stop making skimpy outfits(this game has so few anyways) ages ago and they laughed at her. So now, no more skimpy anything. Won’t be surprised if women in this game when they remove their armor just get covered up by very plain clothing instead of allowing them to be skimpy.
I mean, they changed in-game paintings of women no one’s ever talked about into literal objects(fruit), if that’s not treating women like objects I don’t know what is.
While I don’t like the look of some of them, I have No objection to skimpy outfits.
That first one would look great on a Blood Elf Fire mage, with a slight colour shift towards red.
Not a great fan of the plate skimpy sets shown though, but that might be down to how old they are.
This is about as skimpy as my characters get though:
Vixis - Character (worldofwarcraft.com)
3 Likes
and this is what i see as a perfect example of both attractive pleasant and tasteful
7 Likes
No way in hell to see either set is being updated while censorship is ongoing.
The thing is: this is not skimpy. These people want bras and thongs on plate based characters.
IMO do whatever you want, but as someone else said: it makes 0 sense if you are a heavy duty class. Yes you can say you can’t move in plate or run or do extreme movements and it doesn’t protect against spells. But you have paladin… you have warrior deflects etc.
I do believe it’s degrading towards people, but we also live in a society where the Kardashian body is the ideal and the more you show, the more popular you will be.
So yeah, don’t particularly like it, but hopefully you get what you want.
1 Like
I dont like poor business decisions
Skimpy outfits arent smth that people need someones approval to use, if warcraft bans it the skimoy enjoyers will move on to play catgirls. So its not about skimpy outfits, its about which game offers more.
If its offensive to some people add filters to their client, let them see some closed sets instead of that
Developer must be a master of finding compromises and resolving differences, not enhancing every irl issue in game.
A positive post from a positive person 
1 Like
But…but…
Would have got her backside handed to her before the end of the first series… (For Balance’s sake, so would Conan the Barbarian in the first film)
Probably because they mostly design armour as armour, not for sexiness factor, so, kinda the way that actual female armour was designed historically!
If there is anything we have learned from a Galaxy a Long Time Ago, Far Far Away it is this. The more armoured you are (Especially if said armour is white) the less protection you have. Wearing cloth, despite all modern day evidence to the contrary, was the best armour you could have. You can trip up colossal war machines with piano wire, as famously happened in the Ardennes in WWII, oh, wait, it was at the battle of Hoth… and that morality is defined by the colour of one’s sword…heh heh…
Dead in seconds. Even in a fantasy world, that is some ridiculous piece of kit! 
That is absolutely ridiculous. Perhaps the most ridiculous thing, is that I had no idea it was a ‘risque’ quote, I still have no idea where from, Google just brings up pages and pages of links to the WoW achievement. I presume it is something to do with Paris Hilton, possibly her Sex Tape? So ironically, by changing it, they have now highlighted it to me, that it is a dirty joke, amazing, absolutely astounding in how a gesture can backfire…
Presumably the same people who think ‘Sisters before Misters’ is sexist? I mean it’s slightly sexist, but they thought ‘bromance’ was a better alternative? Seriously? Talk about tone deaf…
I mean…Yeah.
That.
I mean in real life they actually made Dancing armour! No, seriously, they made suits of platemail specifically to be worn whilst dancing, I have seen them with my own eyes, Warwick castle has a collection of them.
Those Dancing suits of armour cover more of the body and afford more protection than the lewd sweaty 1970’s fantasy book covers showed women wearing…
It’s a cool idea, because we like action movies to have nippy hero’s doing ninjamatics in it, but the thing is, it’s just Hollywood.
Ninja weren’t backflipping all-dodging, all parrying, able to defeat everything. They were generally little old ladies and men who poisoned your tea.
Assassin’s creed is entertaining. Has nothing to do with historical Assassin’s in the slightest, who actually got rid of most people via politics and ironically hiring paid thugs to kill people themselves!
Much is made of the ‘nimble combatant’ trope, whereas it pretty much ended up with them being utterly murderised by someone essentially dressed as a M1A2 Abrams tank…by the standards of their day.
Spartans? Heavily armoured by the standards of their day.
Amazon Warriors? Never really existed.
Viking beserkers? Legends. Never really existed.
That’s why if you wear plate, you have non-conductive armour underneath it!
(Actually, it’s not, because Lightning bolts never featured in real life warfare, but you get the idea) Alright, that and so that it doesn’t -massively- bruise your weight bearing parts…trust me, not a mistake I will make again…
Pretty safe to say that bullets and arrows are less deadly in WoW than they actually are, as to be fair, otherwise Hunter’s could just one shot anyone else in PvP, and from a lot further away than ‘60 yards’ also!
Didn’t take long for someone to use the phrase ‘Woke’. We all knew it was coming…
You -can- say that. You would be wrong, but you can say it. It’s like the hilarious scenes when medieval Knights had to be hoisted onto their horses via winch, or people saying they couldn’t run, or swim in it. Absolute Balderdash, Absolute complete nonsense. A Knight back then was wearing armour that weighed about half as much as the average combat trooper in most European armies does today!
I don’t want that world, I find them utterly vile and unattractive…
That…is kind of more a signifier as to what they are looking for in a game…
Besides, as a straight bloke, a woman in full plate armour, soaked in the blood of her enemies, looking savage as anything is 100 times more sexy than one wearing a combat bra and knickers, with perfect makeup… 
1 Like
So you’re saying they shouldn’t wear heavy armour? Just because some people find it “ridiculous” that they had to be helped to get on a horse? The technology wasn’t the same back then as it is today…
What?
That literally is the exact opposite of what I said…
1 Like
My apologies in that case. However that doesn’t change the fact plate wearers in this game doesn’t like the bulkiness of the whole suit. Anyhow if Blizzard approves, they’ll get metal thongs
Not every one RP’s when they play the game.
Some just want a dress up doll as their ingame avatar.
The “Offensive” part is “Sack” for that achivement.
and yes, it’s really dumb reasoning.
I’m all for choice, if someone wants to dress covered completely that’s great but also let the people who like the skimpy fantasy look have some updated models too.
5 Likes
No worries,
It’s actually pretty amazing what you -can- do in full Plate armour that Hollywood tells us you can’t, swim, jump, forward rolls, climb trees, run, dance, etc etc…
That is true, and our definition of what is full body armour changes over time, as the weapons do. So a Spartan was considered fully armoured at the time, even though they only wore metal greaves on their shins, and Helms (Which is ironic, given that they spent ages oiling and braiding each other’s hair before battle). No breastplate or anything, just their Hoplon Shield.
Fast Forward a few hundred years, and you have your Roman Legionary, Still not fully protected No vambraces yet, nor anything guarding the thighs really, and your feet? Oh my, totally unprotected apart from sandals. (usually)
You did have troops who would go into battle naked, a few decades later, the ancient Briton’s, who would paint themselves blue, throw wasps nests at the invading Romans, and basically ‘grenades’ (Clay pots) filled with quicklime (Horribly effective) and attack naked. They relied on Psyops, so Psychological Warfare, rather than protective warfare, because the last thing you want to see as a Roman Soldier is a whole army of naked men charging at you with swords, painted in blue swirls in…shall we delicately say, a state of excitement…
Then Vikings, who wore chainmail,
Then Knights, then just stupid red coats because guns had made them irrelevant, and then where we are now, pretty much, where we’re back to breastplates, just generally Kevlar and stuff.
The history of Armour is pretty much the history of War, and sometimes it goes in weird directions! 
Oh, well, that’s…fair enough I guess…
Wow…For real?
That’s the reasoning? they haven’t considered the fact that Santa was described as having a giant sack long before ‘sack’ came to be a slang term for the (WOW! They Have Blocked a non explicit medical term! They really are going crazy! )
Wow…That’s blocked. That is…just insane…They live in a country where ancient white dudes get to decide what happens to a woman’s body because of a two thousand or so year old book, but the idea of discussing parts of the body that 49% of the population possess using clinical medical terms is somehow scary?
America, you need to sort yourself out, right now, you’re going Taliban level cray cray…
So, Well before ‘Sack’ became a reference to the bodily part that contains the (ANOTHER CENSORED WORD!). Wow, ermm. How can I … Ok, say you had a spherical object, or actually ovoid, but let’s go with spherical, and it was integral in producing something that makes babies possible, and there are two of them, and they are in a bag seemingly made out of the wrinkly skin on your elbow.
Now Imagine me saying that the word ‘Sack’ has an innocent meaning, and existed long before that slang term that Blizzard both censor, and some of their employees were a bit too fond of trying to press upon female employees,
Now, America, can you stop being disgusting, and also can you please let us speak the English Language on the forums, including non obscene terms, I mean it -is- our language after all…
I’ve just had to butcher a statement because you’re squeamish. That’s a ‘you’ problem America, Sort it out.
2 Likes
I’ve heard that they have hired a firm that has just ONE! purpose, and one purpose only.
To find every thing that can even have the slightest chance of offending any one
and when i say “slight” i really mean “slight” Nothing is going to slip through the cracks.