WHAT THE COMMUNITY WANTS:
You don’t speak for me. Personally I don’t care how much a bunch of no-lifers exploited for their world first Rag kill.
Also it’s not really an exploit when they’re just using the system as implemented. If there had been a cool-down they were somehow circumventing, that would be an exploit.
Lol. Until you prove how the techniques are flawed, you literally have no argument. But yes, I am done now. Sometimes it must be nice to be gullible.
There was certainly a way to exploit layers, but the method you keep posting about utilizing the search function isn’t exactly how it works.
You, like the author of the thread you linked, seem to have a misunderstanding of how it actually does work.
Certainly, sometimes you can use the search to determine layers, but it’s not going to work every time. Those functions just search for specific terms (Orgrimmar zone, and anything containing Orgrimmar, such as name, guild, etc).
Either way, Blizzard is already down-ramping layers aggressively and soon all of it will be moot anyway.
Yeah, like believing that /who can tell you details about layers. 
I highly doubt this will be an economic issue long term. Most of the people who farmed using this method won’t be here long term. Many will be streaming Borderlands 3 by next week. The others will just be too few in numbers to matter against the majority of the players.
You are right, it searches other info as well. But we had 2 queries in which query 1 had a small subset of players (all “Orgrimmar”) and query 2 had a larger set of players (all “Orgrimmar” as well). It’s not like we had players from random other zones that had “Orgrimmar” in their names or guild or whatever else. Question was simple - why weren’t players from query 2 showing up in query 1 as well, given that they were also in the “Orgrimmar” zone.
Did you just post why it seems fishy as a response to your own argument? The pictures were clearly not taken at the same time.
I see a bunch of envious folks who don’t know how to level quickly and efficiently upset that some people put in the effort, got to 60 faster, and are now farming gold weeks ahead of everyone else.
Even without layering, these people would have a mass of resources and gold. Layering is what makes it easier, not possible.
If not layering, you’d be crying for them to be banned for account sharing because you don’t think anyone would possibly play 16 hours a day.
If not layering, you’d be crying for them to be banned for buying gold because you don’t think anyone could possibly have their epic mount already.
You’ll find any excuse to feel better about yourselves.
By the way…
You can go ahead and open that thread and you will see that issue was addressed as well LOL. OP was multiboxing. There’s other screenshots, not multiboxing, posted afterwards.
Seriously, no one even went through that thread but they are skeptical lol. Love it.
I can attest that Blizzard has fixed a serious hunter pet bug – pets were runaways not due to negligence but because they weren’t gaining loyalty levels.
Fixed as of today.
Apparently.
Blizzard used to be much more forthcoming about exploits and to their customers, in general.
A quick glance at the Stormwind park then, and now (retail) tells a very sad tale, imho…
Yeah, when I have an exploit and I am trying to cover up its effect, I too would say that “this is not a problem”, avoid more people exploiting it, and patch it 1 day later. This is what a lot of software companies do.
If you mean using /who to determine your layer, it was demonstrably false. You could see results including people in another layer.
If you mean using layering to swap layers, that’s not an exploit. It’s an intended mechanic of layering.
Ok well there’s enough evidence of /who showing different results, for characters situated in the same zone. Call that whatever you want, but the evidence is there and it does not work anymore. The reason in certain areas you would see the same result (for /who and /who z-) is probably due to having only 1 layer. Otherwise, I would like to hear a reasonable explanation on why there were different results.
Helps to read.
Helps to actually look at examples and see that we are talking about results that are not hitting the “max” of 50 in the /who list. Also you would see that, even if that would be true, we still get the same exact subset and larger set of results.
Do you know what “truncates” means?
Yes, Blizzard is lying and players trying to prove a point are correct here.
Sadly, I think you don’t… truncation happens when a list is above the maximum length defined by Blizzard. For the /who operation, that is 50. So yes I know, but you don’t. They are not truncating a list of 5 people.
Well, you were given the explanation.
If you want to come up with some conspiracy theory to explain otherwise, go ahead.
Lol I am amazed by some people and how they are just missing information. I am done wasting my time. Look over the examples. None of them get even close to reaching the maximum of 50, there is no reason for truncation. Truncation is an answer for when both lists would be maxed at 50. Anyway, good luck and keep believing corporations. Again, as I stated at the top of this thread, this is not even about “Blizzard is lying” or such. Blizzard tried to minimize the damage, a very standard move by software companies when exposed by an exploit.