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.
Or, people cannot assume what my intentions are, that works, too.
I used the word “seems”, each time. Implying that it’s still an opinion, I formed, myself, based on the evidence, around me.
Or, you know, people can actually read what I’m actually saying instead of assuming what I’m saying. Just like they keep assuming Blizzard is -only- targeting Bots because it’s clear, in what they said, that they’re not.
It’s not -just- about the Bots.
For every 1 of you, there is 100 that are fine with the changes. You know the saying, Don’t let the door…
They get 210 a week
Assuming they can schedule 6 hours a day for meeting the daily reset requirements and that they do 0 raids.
Yes, I am aware of the word exploitative, thank you. I thought we begun our conversation by establishing this could refer to several things, and you have no idea what?
I am well aware it is not just about bots.
You’re welcome.
Agreed. It could mean so many things.
I have an idea. Hence, the reason why I brought up the whole Cap thing.
Perfect. Because some (not all) think it’s -just- about the Bots, when it’s not. I keep chiming in with possible scenarios that isn’t -just- about Bots. So, again, why have the Cap, if not to slow us down?
Let’s have the conversation.
Because they think it slows the bots down?
I have no idea why you keep inventing reasons when they give you their reason… in the same blue post you keep quoting.
Try reading all of it.
Bots are fly hacking which is an exploit. Perhaps it is about bots too?
1 Like
What do you expect them to say? You’re asking them to make stuff up out of thin air? This is classic. They told us what they’re going to do with it. They’ve communicated on everything that’s happening in the game. What more could they possibly tell us?
They could tell us why they don’t use anticheat detection software to reset flyhackers before they touch anything in a raid. It’s commonly used on private servers.
Also autodetection for bots can be used without a general restriction on all players to force botters into the open world so they are more often right click reported, which, is a hamhanded solution.
Considering the blow up threads being angry at Boosters, and Boosters expressing their discontent over this change, just maybe (keyword) it was, also, directed at them, too. Not saying Boosting is “exploitative”, but it’s possible (keyword) that Boosting may (another keyword) not have been intended Gameplay and maybe just maybe it’s to combat that, as well.
I’m not “making-up” anything. I’m discussing possible (keyword) scenarios as to what “exploitative” means.
They just said “exploitative” and “automated” Gameplay. The rest is them discussing how this new Cap works.
I did, and they only said “exploitative” and “automated”. The rest is how this change, works.
Yes, IK. I’m just saying, it’s not -just- about the Bots. You can still Fly Hack, without being a Bot. Which is still Exploiting.
Sure, that’s one opinion.
It’s all an opinion. That’s what these Forums are designed for to discuss our opinions.
Instead of doing live strat 30 times… do live strat + ud strat 30 times… like doin 60 instances
And like I said earlier, I have no problem with that.
You’re calling opinions opinions instead of evidence.
See? Already getting better at this.