Reminder -- Silithus Stress Test Today at 3:00 p.m. PDT / 6:00 p.m. EDT

You help us by removing the instance cap change - or at least making it something that won’t effect normal players (like 50 or 60 a day, with a separate raid lockout, and different solution for ZG), and we’ll consider helping you ‘stress test’ the Silithus event.

1 Like

Oh nice positive feedback you just gave im sorry i mean demand. this is the kind of reason responses dont come oftin its because people make anything a fuss for the hell of it without takeing everything into prospective. you see one thing a cm says and focus on that instead of the entire picture

That post was viewed by nearly 40,000 people. You think the WoW Classic Population is nearly 4,000,000? Can you provide any source whatsoever that indicates anything at all even close to this value? Or are you just making baseless guesses and assumptions to devalue those 40,000 people - of which only around 100 thought is was worth adding a like to?

1 Like

How about you address our stress test of unmanaged servers

By all means. Enlighten us as to how this stops bots when all they have to do is open up a few more accounts. Bot them to max level and rotate them as they hit the 30 instance cap.
This adds to their overhead. This will increase their costs for the gold they are selling.
In turn all farmed mats will cost more gold too.
If i didn’t know any better(truthfully we don’t) I’d think Susan herself came up with this to increase the costs of her products…

There sure are a lot of self made representatives in here of late. You do not speak for anyone beyond yourself, and perhaps the frog in your pocket.

Unbelievable how dumb your comment is


Thought you quit?

Don’t believe any of it is available on the PTR. Sticking to how it was in Vanilla rather than what the Vanilla devs said they would’ve done it they could.

You have never spoken for anyone except for you alone in your basement and it shows.

If you understood economics, you would understand how reducing the quantity of gold farmed per day impacts the supply and reduces profitability. Even if you argue that the gold farmed per day remains the same because more accounts, the fact remains that accounts are a limited resource, and they either have to pony up extra sub fees or steal even more accounts than they already do, which is not something that’s going to happen. If they could easily steal even more accounts, they would be doing so already. If botting isn’t profitable anymore, then you get rid of the for-profit botters.

I’ve never felt the need to post on Blizzard forums, but I very much want to voice my pinion that the new 30 instance per day limit is not going to help fight botting whatsoever and seems to be a hugely controversial decision given the response from the community.

Please consider reverting this hotfix, it is punishing people who are playing the game properly and most likely will not be a deterrent to botters in the long run since this does not apply across all realms (one bot account will only need 1 character on 4 different realms to get around this completely.)

1 Like

If you think botters can’t get around this by just creating more characters on different realms then you understand economics much less than you purport; they don’t care about which realm their gold resides on, there are people playing on each realm and willing to buy gold with real money.


It sounds like you have basically no understanding of any of this and its very evident through your off based comments

1 Like

Except it doesn’t. This is easily bypassed with an investment of a couple more accounts. All they did was drive the value up!
Accounts that will drive up the price of Susan’s gold and drive up the cost of the mats in game for gold.

Dude. You’re talking about a business that generates millions of dollars in cash flow. 10 accounts is around $150 a month. Compare $150 investment to a 6 figure+ return. Maybe ask your economics teacher if that’s a good return on money invested into an almost fully automated business.

If they’re stealing accounts they’re morons and the idiots going on their sites, buying their gold, with no 2fa on their accounts are morons as well.
My guess is 9/10 “hacked” accounts bought gold. Maybe blizz should start their investigation there? Naw because they would be banning more subs.
They practically have blizz’s blessing to run automated farms.
$15 dollar investment into an account that is automated. Compared to the time it takes to hack an account, strip it, and resell it?

Only way to do that is for blizz to sell gold outright. Not a token to broker gold sales so Susan can still remain in business like on retail. Produce and sell gold directly to players.
That is the only way. Devalue the gold and they will walk away but as long as players buy it. Susan will sell it.
Class dismissed.


Majority of stats here are just made up to support their arguments.

You familiar with how subs work? Just cause he canceled it doesn’t mean it restricts access to the account immediately. He still has the duration of his existing sub to play out.

Nice try.

Reducing the supply of something generally increases the profitability. Like that’s day one in Econ 101 info there.

If there’s 1000 people that each want one unit of product, in this case gold, then each of those people have their own price they’d be willing to pay for it, for some it might be $1 per gold, for some it might be $20 per gold. In a perfectly competitive economy, that gold ends up being as close to the cost as possible because if the price is higher than the cost more suppliers enter the market, if the price is lower than the cost suppliers exit the economy until it reaches equilibrium. (I should note I don’t consider the gold seller economy to be a perfectly competitive one- but if it were that’s how it’d function)

If there’s only 100 units of gold though, a scarcity of supply well below the profitable demand, suppliers can price it as high as the top 100 buyers will buy at and still sell it all, that might be something like $10.

If cost were say, $1, and at equilibrium price is $1 there’s no profit. If cost remains the same across the market, but price goes up to $10 and supply is only 100 units, the profit is $900.

That’s actually completely wrong, in fact accounts are a pretty good example of being one of the closest things on the planet to being limitless, and while there’s a technical limit that’d be based on technological limitations- the ‘limit’ would effectively be how many characters can be on a realm at a time. Not only is that an extremely improbable limit for any botter to hit, but if you hit it you’d actually get rid of anyone’s ability to buy gold as they could not play the game itself due to bots taking every single slot.

Even then, technically it’s not wow accounts that are the limited resource, but server capacity.

Do you have even the slightest understanding of economics? Because the irony here is that you really don’t seem to be at even a grade school level.

If I want an actual limited resource, such as say gold, no cost in the world can make a mine I own that has 100 pounds of gold have more than 100 pounds of gold. But I can absolutely make a thousand, a million, a billion accounts for WoW if I incur the cost.

Why? Because real life gold is an actual limited resource, and wow accounts and WoW gold are not a limited resource.

They have ways around this, the most obvious of which is to just use a retail account to buy tokens with gold they’ve botted there. They may have numerous other methods, but even if we solely thinking in terms of legitimate ways that we could do ourselves, it can be done without a sub cost to them. Stealing accounts is not as common as you think, it’s not a part of their business plan, and it’s not necessary- getting to level 60 is not a challenge for them, because they don’t have to do anything- they’re bots, they literally get to 60 on their own, that’s what they do.

BUT, let’s just say for a moment that bots indeed were using a VPN to a place with a lower sub, so they did have to pay the $3 per month sub fee from pretending they’re in Argentina. That means to be profitable, a bot needs to recoup initial costs (botting software, their set up, etc…), but after that their cost per month is that $3 plus overhead costs like internet/electricity/computer maintenance split between however many bots they have running. I’m sure you don’t know how much a bot can make in a month, but it’s a lot more than $3.

No, it doesn’t. If you had taken econ, 101, you would know that. The relationship between demand and profitability is a curve, not a linear progression. If you don’t have enough goods to sell, you jack up the price to maintain profits. That reduces demand because fewer buyers are willing to pay higher prices. As supply decreases, prices rise higher and higher, until they reach a level that no one wants to pay. You can’t turn a profit if you can’t find buyers.

You’re clearly confused, if you think I’m missing the basic concepts. There are two forces at work here: The Law of Supply, which states that as prices increase, producers have more incentive to produce, causing them to increase the supply. Then there’s the Law of Demand, which states that as prices increase, buyers have less incentive to buy, so demand goes down.

All this holds in a market with unlimited production. However, production isn’t unlimited. Blizzard cut it by 75%. You can try to dance around it by claiming they’ll shift to less lucrative servers, and then transfer back, but that’s laughable. The costs required to do that exceed the cost of an additional account. Blizzard is placing an artificial cap on the supply, which is why your simple-minded obsession with the Law of Supply isn’t valid here. On your fairy-tale graph, supply indefinitely increases along with the price. In reality, Blizzard just added an inflection point where the supply line goes horizontal.

In other words, as prices go up, botters will want to increase supply, but they can’t do that because Blizzard is restricting their activity from 24/7 to 6/7. In order to get around that, they will have to buy four times as many accounts. That cuts into their bottom line, and they’re going to have to jack up prices to compensate.

Here’s what you’re missing: They’re not going to jack up prices due to increased demand. They’re going to have to jack up the prices in order to stay above water. If you had paid attention in economics class, you would know that the Law of Demand dictates that demand will decrease in response to price increases.

So the question remains: Will the demand decrease enough to decimate the bottom line, or will the botters be able to stay afloat by jacking up prices? If the latter is true, then at least we’ll see less gold selling, which will help to bring the server economies back down to reasonable levels. If the bottom line goes negative, then the botters stop, and Blizzard wins. Either way, this change is positive.

On what planet? Accounts are limited by the amount of money that you’re willing to pay for them. At $15 a month, there’s a limit on the number of accounts that you can maintain while remaining profitable.

still #icantInstance