They will just make more accounts. Win Win for blizzard.
daily complaint response
4 Likes
By limiting instances it reduces how many logs they have to look at to try to manually find exploiters.
By limiting the instances to 30 it reduces the profit exploiters make with 0 work / risk. Reducing the gold they can sell and gives blizzard more time to review logs.
You may think, so it buys blizzard more time to remove the problem before they harm the economy! The problem Is blizzards solution is to reduce the profit of botters/exploiting instead of improving their bot prevention and adding moderately simple fly/ground/walk back detection.
Their solution is to put a speed bump in the road to keep people from breaking their car in the pot holes… Instead of fixing the pot holes.
Times change, and players with them. Dugeon spamming may have happened in Vanilla but not to the extent it is happening in Classic. Changes were, from the beginning of Classic, inevitable. BoTs have evolved along with players. I played from January 2005 until now. I don’t think I ever met a single person in Vanilla that would have hit the 30 instance cap.
I guess Blizzard did not get your memo.
1 Like
Bosses were killed in vanilla but not to the degree of classic, so should we make all bosses do 300% damage and have 5 million more hp?
Actually, yes we should. That is exactly what private servers did to make the raids more challenging since they too started with 1.12. When you know all of the mechanics, glitches, strategies ahead of time there are only two ways to even approach the original difficulty. Change the mechanics or buff the damange/health of the bosses.
Keeping the mechanics the same and buffing the bosses/mobs seems truer to the goal of creating a Vanilla like experience.
I disagree
Maybe, that doesn’t make it bad.
As someone that played for about the same amount of time, I don’t think I did either, but I didn’t come to classic to re-live my vanilla experience. I came here to play a game that I know I will enjoy with some sense of STABILITY.
I’ve played a few games now where I was playing in the past by a few years ( US releases of eastern games) and honestly, it’s a damn wonderful experience to me.
1 Like
Same here. I did all of the dungeons/raids back in Vanilla. Now I just cruise the world enjoying it before that nasty Cata changed everything. But, putting caps on instances to moderate explotive behavior (Blizzards words) seems a reasonable step to mitigate a behavior that is excessive and not true to that vision.
It’s directly opposed to how I feel. The game will be enjoyable to me no matter how others play it. Any change is always at risk of ruining the game for me, and is always going to reduce my enjoyment.
1 Like
We’ll just have to disagree then. I think some of these changes improve the overall experience and keep the game philosophy closer to the original vison. MCP is a good example. There was never a feral druid in any of our curent content raids, only in the alt farming runs. To keep it true to, at least my Vanilla experience, they would have to do something like nerf MCP to the ground. This compromise still lets ferals raid if they want to put in the time.
I only had 3 60s in Vanilla, my NE priest (main), a warlock, and a druid. I did take my druid through a number of the raids, but as an alt on farm runs.
I guess so. Like I said the experience/philosphy/vision that was there originally is not my concern. I’m fine with how the game from the past is played now even if it in some ways contradicts those things.
I see change only as risk.
2 Likes
You make the assumption that Blizzard knew what they were doing with this. I do not make the same assumption. As someone that’s written a fair amount of code, it seems like someone said “we have to do something about these bots” and a lazy developer came up with a solution that required the least amount of effort to implement that would sound good.
Everyone is inferring what they believe the developer post to mean, they’re stretched the meaning of exploitative to everything they hate: boosting, MCP, farming runs, mages.
I prefer a more strict reading of the word exploitative especially since the word was used in developer notes. Exploits are things that cause the software to operate in a way that wasn’t intended such as flying and wall hacking. Exploits are not clever or unintended uses of game mechanics like fishing for Jed or MCP.
5 Likes
Clever and or unintended use of mechanics can 100% cross into the realm of exploits or something to address at blizzard’s discretion. And dungeon spam was something they considered an issue during vanilla and added rules for during vanilla.
And also during vanilla they saw the 5/hr as enough of a limitation that they went to far as to make an April fool’s joke about a 40/day lock out. Showing that the designers at the time thought such a restriction was a joke, and here we are with a more restrictive change than what was in the April fool’s joke…
2 Likes
Holy hell, a voice of reason.
All these morons thinking that any and everything they dislike is an exploit have been driving me crazy.
I heard world buffs and LOSing firemaw in the suppression room are exploits.
Then you didn’t play vanilla, because DM:N farms were packed non stop with solo mages an warlocks. I have no idea if lashers were as popular back then, but me an several other warlocks had a chat channel to talk while we all solo’d bugs and dogs.
Is this satire?
The april fools joke took things to ridiculous extremes, cause you know, april fools joke. 30 runs a day is entirely reasonable. And oh yeah then in BC they went ahead and put a 1 run per day restriction per dungeon on heroic dungeons. So yeah the developers clearly did not think limiting dungeons runs was inherently a bad thing.