Blizzard, talk to your community

Isn’t the 30/24hr a taken measure to quell it?

Incorrect. The Blue Post clearly stated both “exploitative” and “automated” gameplay. This just isn’t about the Bots. But, for -all- Cheaters (whether you’re a Bot or not, doesn’t matter. Cheating is still Cheating). And, non-Botting Cheaters shuldn’t get a free pass simply because they’re not Botting. That’s silly.

Again, I already agree that I don’t think this Change is going to stop whatever it is Blizz was hoping to stop.

Agreed, that they actually didn’t “fix” the problem. I’m just saying it’s better to fix the problem than just outright actioning people using the tools already provided by Blizz.

It doesn’t matter what I think. It only matters what Blizz thinks. Clearly, they think the Classic Community should be limited down to 30 Instances per 24 Hours. The company believes their Classic Community is “exploiting” their instances hence the Cap.

It does matter because those things have soft pauses, like the que, deserter debuffs, and somebody expressed earlier there is a cap on the LFD, and you won’t see it until running Stocks, a lot. Meaning, the Ques help slow down these dungeon spams.

Because they’re two different Games with their own systems. I mean, Retail has LFD, why not Classic? That’s the level of your question, here.

Then stop talking to me, if you don’t care :smiley:

Aside from that, we’re here to discuss why Classic and not in Retail. I’d be happy to log into Retail for a day and compare the advertising of Paid Dungeon Boosts vs Classic. Last I checked I barely saw any compared to Classic. Two different Culture Practices.

If you know this, you’ll know that Blizz tackles both of these games, differently.

I never said this. You assumed I did.

I’m not defending it. I’m correcting the fact that people seem to think Blizz is -just- focusing on the Bots, they’re not.

Only if you assume they believe farming is an exploit, which you have yet to prove.

Nope, you have yet prove that farming is exploitative. Furthermore, even if we grant this, this doesn’t stop a lot of various forms of instance farming, so if it was meant to, it doesn’t do that.

Unfortunately, our definitions of exploitation vary greatly.

It doesn’t matter what you think either, but the difference is that you are putting words into Blizzard’s mouth, and I am demanding evidence.

It’s not on me to prove that it’s “exploitative” because I’m not making that claim that it is. Blizzard’s the one that seems to think so hence the cap.

You took that quote out of context. The “incorrect” was directed towards your assumption that this change was to counter -just- Bots. It’s not:

Agreed. However, I am curious as to why some think it is stopping them from farming, though…

It’s possible, but it really doesn’t matter, since Blizz is the official arbiter in that scenario.

I -literally- just said this LOL

I already did, when you said this:

Couldn’t this refer to the fly hack some bots were using?

I see your opinion is it refers to people farming instances or boosting, but I don’t agree.

Blizzard generally isn’t so shy about saying which behavior they consider cheating. Usually they only play coy when they don’t have a fix ready yet and don’t want people to look up how to do an exploit.

Like the fly hacking.

It is, because you’re making the claim.

Oh no, I knew you think the change wasn’t aimed at bots, but you’re wrong and haven’t proven a damned thing.

I really do hate repeating myself, so could you go away until you get some evidence?

Could be. Again, the word “exploitative” is so vague.

It’s all Dungeon Spamming, whatever that means to everyone. And, if it’s not about that, why have a Cap?

The words “generally” and “usually” doesn’t equal “all the time”.

Which doesn’t mean Botting, only.

You keeping taking my words out of context. Let me add in the rest, for you:

I didn’t say this. I said it’s not -just- for the Bots.

You’re making this claim yet haven’t proven, anything.

I have, you just don’t like it. Lemme quote the Blue Post, for you, and how it’s not -just- directed towards the Bots:

This suggests, to me, that it’s not -just- about Bots.

Then don’t.


I have, you just don’t like it.

Well, since they are making gold in retail to buy tokens to play (or bot or exploit) in Classic, yeah. I’d say it started in retail. Kick em to the curb lol.

Do BGs too. Sick to death of cheats/bots/exploiters in there as well. Let’s just hit all areas of the game and call it a day.

You just literally admitted to me your evidence does not prove what you said it did.

If you want to claim what you think they mean, go ahead. But don’t call it evidence. You don’t have that.

1 Like

“I’m not making a claim here, but Blizzard clearly thinks instance farming is an exploit.


1 Like

You’re taking my words out of context, as well. That wasn’t directed towards you.

Nothing you said was taken out of context, you disingenuous troll.

No, I’m really not.

Your evidence is the use of the word exploitative. Unless you have some other evidence you’ve been saving?

I find people who claim their opinions as facts insufferable, personally.

1 Like

They clearly do hence the Cap. Why have a Cap, if they didn’t think our Community was spamming them, too much?

They were.

Thank you for name calling.

Yes, you are. As I already said that comment was not directed towards you.

Not just the word “exploitative” but the Cap, as well.

What else is there to know? Blizzard seems to think we’re (the Classic Community) is spamming dungeons too much and wants us to stop. I don’t understand what’s so difficult to see here.

My opinions differ from that of Blizz because I don’t consider Dungeon Spamming to be “exploitative”, at all. Just that Blizz seems to think so. If they didn’t they wouldn’t have given us this Cap. Period.

1 Like

None of that is evidence, either.

You’re really bad at this. You know they can make bad decisions that have unintended consequences, right?

Feral druids who need MCP and pre bis farmers say otherwise.

Makes about as much sense as seperating the east and west regions for bgs because of a holiday. I mean they only make great and genius decisions you know.

Then explain why 'cause you’re not providing evidence as to why I’m wrong. Just that I am.

Insults are not arguments. Try again.

Never said it was a “smart” decision.

You are attaching your personal, limited viewpoint, on limited available information, as to why they made these decisions. This is not evidence.

And if I were to argue the opposite, it would not be evidence either.

It’s opinion. Stop calling it fact if you want to be taken seriously.

By the way, saying someone isn’t good at something isn’t an insult, either.

It’s evidence to how I came to my conclusion. Is that better for everyone?

Why have the Cap? What’s the point in having a Cap, if -not- to slow us down, in spamming Dungeons? What else could it possibly mean?

I didn’t say it’s a fact. Just that the Cap seems (keyword here) to indicate such. Don’t assume my discussion here as me being all “factual”. It’s all opinion based.

It is. You were attacking me, personally providing nothing substantial to the conversation, at hand.

Yes, much better. Comes off as much less smug and condescending, too.

I’d be inclined to believe your line of thought if this was the blizzard of several years ago. But this blizzard has a history of not listening to feedback, making changes that negatively affect the playerbase in unintended ways, and overall taking the easy way out of a situation rather than developing nuanced solutions that work for more people.

The bottom line for me is, Blizzard would not have been shy about their reasons if they wanted to nerf instance farming. That’s out of character for them. They don’t generally consider exploits ok as long as you do them 30 times a day instead of 31+.

I’m much more inclined to believe they don’t care about instance farming at all, and just didn’t think about how their change affects players.

Of course, this is my opinion. Notice how I didn’t go into several threads claiming I know exactly what blizzard thinks?

You should try that.