Of course you did. A 120 level Lightforged Dranaei Paladin would likely hit this cap rather quickly in classic.
Some of us understand that this was not simply targeting botting.
1 Like
Okay, so the argument isn’t over botting. The argument is about what behavior you consider to be legitimate in the game by actual players regardless of whatever negligible impact it may have on botting. Good to know.
1 Like
Yes I saw it in vanilla, though it was more because that was just what the group found for dps.
It’s kind of funny that the moment the white knights realized this wouldn’t do what Blizz said it would do- fight automated gameplay (bots)- they decided there was another reason, to punish legitimate players, and that was a good reason.
At this point there’s no real reason to discuss this is hurting real players and not bots with them- because that’s their goal. That’s why they’re so happy, because they have a complex that makes them happy when other players aren’t having fun with something. You can’t argue the point that this is really hurting real players because that’s what they want to happen.
Blizzard explicitly said it wasn’t just targetting bots.
1 Like
Not really. Their post was ambiguous at best, if they explicitly stated anything we would be having a much different conversation.
1 Like
I don’t find anything ambiguous about
Seems real clear it’s not just targetting bots.
1 Like
Bots were fly hacking.
Blizzard didnt make any changes until vid of bot fly hacking surfaced
Cant be just targetting bots noooooope
1 Like
Until they put ‘automated’ under the ‘exploitative’ blanket in a later post claiming they suspended 74,000 accounts.
4 Likes
Blizzard uses the word exploitative and people come out the woodwork expressing their dislike of how players are playing the game must be what they meant
1 Like
‘Automated and exploitative behaviour’- so yeah, pretty much did. Unless you know what automated means that doesn’t refer to bots. Exploits is a bit hazier, but even more confusing when you think of it. There’s actual exploits, like fly hacking- but if you know how 30 instance cap prevents fly hacking please let me know because I don’t see the connection.
So all that’s left to you is that playing too long is an exploit for the first time ever- but only if you do so in a dungeon. So bots on black lotus spawn points 24/7, not an exploit. Layer hopping, not an exploit. 24/7 pvp grind for r14, not an exploit.
Playing 4 hours on a friday night in a dungeon, then 2 hours sat morning because it’s your weekend and that’s how you like to spend it- an exploit? Because that’s the behaviour being targetted, and I’ve never until now heard that playing the game too long is an exploit- and if Blizz considers it to be one maybe they should grow some balls and just say it.
3 Likes
Exploitative is an umbrella that covers more than just botting, yes.
If blizzard had just said exploitative and not mentioned automated at all would you still try to claim this change was specifically targeted at botting?
Fly hacking is the exploit. Your dislike for people running 30+ instances a day doesn’t make it an exploit. Blizzard actively encourages people to spam instances in retail yet they’re gonna have a different view of it in Classic? Not likely.
3 Likes
I think I would be asking the same thing I’m still asking: What is the exploitative behavior they are targeting specifically?
I just wouldn’t claim they muddied the waters with the second post. I would however claim the second post opens botting as a possible ‘exploitative behavior’ they were aiming for.
1 Like
Stop exploiting Blizzard’s use of the word “Exploitative” to give us your unfounded opinion of what you think Blizzard said.
1 Like
Behavior that harms the game is behavior that should be dealt with, as blizzard clearly has done in this case.
1 Like
Playing the game for 8+ hours or grinding instances is not behavior that harms the game.
3 Likes
I love how you invent scenarios on the fly to hearken back to.
You sure add a lot of fluff to a simple belief that this is a good and needed change. But hey, that’s just you being you.
Seems real clear to me that exploitative given the context of what was happening on the servers relates to fly hacks.
This is the definition of ambiguous where two people can see the same sentence and come to two vastly different conclusions.