i added the enchantments section. this is MY PERSONAL OPINION, so.... yeah, if u have another opinion, post it ^^ Alliance 15HJT (t/c) 07:27, 20 April 2007 (EDT)

Sort Order? Edit

I believe the established order is: First categorize by loot category (green items, blue items, purple items), then within each category sort by the amount of +heal. If two items have the same plus heal, then break by item level. Everyone agree? Bregdark 23:31, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Why are people changing the BC Healing set-up? It was good the way it was, you could compair side-by-side which had the best healing/int/spirit/mp5, and where you could aquire the items was already listed on the right, now people have changed the Head/Neck setup and it takes scrolling up and down to try and figure out which is better for you. As a 70-Healer who looks at this perhaps once a day or once every other day, I must say, whomever is doing this is making the page -less- user friendly.

[Resilience of the Scourge] Edit

IMO this item belongs to the enchantments, as it is as good as the aldor one and FAR better than the scryer one :)

ok, its probably harder to get than the others, and its an 'old item', but so what? Alliance 15HJT (t/c) 02:57, 25 April 2007 (EDT)

IMO it has no purpose in this article. 99% of people who read this article are looking to upgrade their gear now that they are in the expansion, and would not plan to go to Naxx, and kill the 2nd to last boss to get an enchantment. --Tecnobrat t/c 12:21, 26 April 2007 (EDT)
Exactly - these days everybody play in Outland and nobody sane would go through all Naxx in order to get an enchant. It's just not worth the effort (that's why there is no, say, epic Hammer of the Twisting Nether on this list, even if it's slightly better than Lightsworn Hammer). Besides, all BC equipment pages contain ONLY BC equipment and I can't see why this one should be different. -- Vysogota T / C
my point was: if an old item is better than the (atm) best BC item available, we still may mention it. AND this discussion is about enchantments, so not the item itself, but how to make it better. as there is only 1 enchantment for cloaks that makes sense for a healer, add it and let ppl search for an enchanter. on most server they may find one. Alliance 15HJT (t/c) 02:44, 27 April 2007 (EDT)

can trinkets have sockets? Edit

Alliance 15HJT (t/c) 11:02, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

nope. --Sky (t · c · w) 00:33, 30 April 2007 (EDT)

adding 'old' content? Edit

as i see this page, we can absolutly add old stuff, coz for me its a collection of the best stuff available

clearly, most of that stuff is BC, but there r a few things (mainly enchantments) where not yet better stuff exists in BC. Alliance 15HJT (t/c) 12:00, 26 April 2007 (EDT)

No, this is The Burning Crusade equipment page (hence BC in the title) and should contain only expansion items. -- Vysogota T / C

Mana per FiveEdit

  • Right now, with the changed format to tables, there's a whole column for mp5. All I see are question marks. Does this mean there is no mp5 on that item or that it has not been looked up yet? It's very distracting, on a page that is getting busier and busier looking.. --Zules 08:25, 30 April 2007 (EDT)
ah, thats easy, a question mark means mostly 'not yet here' or 'feel free to add it yourself' or something that way... AND, as u may see on the sockets, if there r none, then its a '-' :) Alliance 15HJT (t/c) 08:31, 2 May 2007 (EDT)
  • Thanks. I will know to help update those, then, if I get some free time. :) --Zules 10:54, 2 May 2007 (EDT)

Ideas Edit

First off, I'd think the enchantments would be better off in the slot's section instead of all in their own. Second, drop the Wowhead links, {{loot}} will create these on it's own if the page doesn't exist. Lastly, maybe we should make a consistant boilerplate and make pages like this for every class. I certainly don't know where they are if they already exist... TeжubԎ Ҩ Ѡ 23:47, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

There's a mail healing, and I've seen a leather healing as well. Also a dps priest one floating around here. I plan to do a based on mages, however, Skosiris has to get off his butt and make it so we can weight items. -_-
Other than that... :) --Sky (t · c · w) 02:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Got rid of the EL on this page. I don't have a comment about the enchantments, but I would probably go with that. I was actually thinking of templating the rows, but we shall see. --Sky (t · c · w) 02:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
I've been moving the non-cloth specific items out into seperate, includable, pages, so that the plate, mail, leather and cloth articles all have exactly the same items for Neck, Rings, Back, Trinkets etc. I plan to do something similar with weapons, but obviously will need to mark which ones are available for which classes in the table. Timb0h 12:00, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Gear while leveling Edit

I'd like to make a mention/discussion about "of the hierophant" versus "of the physician" vs "of the prophet" for gear while leveling up, but I'm not sure where to put it. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Legaia (talkcontr).

I'd suggest somewhere on BC cloth DPS equipment, rather than on this article.--Tiwuno 20:03, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

Format changes Edit

I don't like the format changes made by User:Tekkub. They make it a lot harder to compare the different gear. It was a lot easier when they were ordered purely by the stats. If I have [[[A'dal's Recovery Necklace]]] and want to look at possible upgrades, I have to look all over the place, in the Solo, PvP, Heroic and Raid sections, comparing all of the possible new items which are no longer ordered by how good they are. In the old format, all I had to do was find my current item and then look below it to see the possible upgrades, looking accross to the notes so that I can see if it comes from somewhere that is available to me. I would rather we reverted it back to the standard format used on the rest of this article and the other simliar articles. What do other people think? Timb0h 09:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Agree. Revert! Bregdark 20:15, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.