Since there’s a 30 per day limit

It was not sold as a solution to botting.

1 Like

Yes it was. Read the blue post again.

If it’s not an outright lie, then it’s pure delusion.

1 Like

I do not see the word botting in there. Blizzard may very well consider excessive use of instance reseting as exploitative.


The 5/hour didn’t work. The 30/day isn’t working. All I’m asking inside the confines of the stupid system they made is to let me cap in 2 hours instead of 6. That account is still locked out. Farmers will get their sellables regardless of the limits. I’d think as a Druid you’d be happy not having to spend 6 hours of lockouts your get your consumes if you play feral. Or do you not bother with those?

Yes you do.

1 Like

Still waiting for you to cite where blizzard sold this as the solution to botting, and only botting.

Perhaps the word “and” threw you off.

1 Like

The 5/hr worked for what it was originally intended for: cutting down on the number of concurrent dungeon instances putting a strain on the system. The 30/24 is fine as is, and as blizzard explained, is relative to the 5/hr cap.

Just because you do not like it does not mean it is not working.

30 instance runs a day, 5 per hour is not remotely a heavy cross to bear. (pun intended) At 33% drop rate that would average out at 70 MCPs a week. Sorry, but using feral druids as a victim is disingenuous as all hell. Not all of us are looking to parse on every trash mob that we tag. Dig this: some of us do not chase parses whatsoever, but rather enjoy using all of our bells and whistles, as the earth mother intended. Are you picking up what I am laying down?

That is a citation. Your reading comprehension fails. It says exploitative AND automated gameplay. They did not say exploitative OR automated gameplay. Therefore, the instance limit is enacted to directly combat botting. It was sold as a solution to botting.


Eliminating exploitative and automated gameplay?
This 30/day change hasn’t stopped bots.
And instead of making solid changes to ACTUALLY remove the exploitative gameplay entirely from dungeon farming (which can be done quite easily), Blizzard has done 1/4 of a job and made it so we can still “exploit” the game, but only 1/4th as much. So exploitative gameplay 24 hours a day is not okay, but 6 hours a day is completely fine? Smh.

1 Like

Your semantics gymnastics are tiresome.

1 Like

The exploitative behavior could be based on frequency, not the actual act itself.

1 Like

I hope this is just trolling. You’ve been given the citation. You’ve had the citation explained to you. You’ve persisted that the instance cap is not related to measures taken against botting. Now you have the gall to chastise someone for arguing semantics. What is wrong with your brain? How do you manage to hold normal conversations when you’re willing to jump through so many hoops to ignore that you’re wrong? Unreal.

You’re a joke, my dude.


I did no such thing. I refuted your claim that it was “sold as a solution to botting”. I explained that is was not a “solution” by pointing out the rest of that sentence, the part where it states “part of ongoing efforts to eliminate”.
Part of ongoing efforts =/= the entire solution.

I bolded the part about “exploitative”, showing the it was not JUST botting it was part of ongoing efforts to eliminate. But hey, keep pretending that the change is just about botting and that the change was “sold as a solution”.

I love when you lot resort to insults.

There are plenty of alternatives to those items that are only barely worse. It is not worth the grind to get them. The amount of variance in your parses due to random luck will be much higher than the variance due to replacing those items with their alternatives.

If you take stabs at them periodically for fun or got them while leveling, cool. But anyone who actually just goes in there and grinds it out is exhibiting serious OCD-like addictive behavior and probably needs therapy.

1 Like

Incremental gains is the entire endgame of WoW. Alternative to items isn’t relevant to a discussion of allowing players to grind at all or limiting how much a player can grind for them. The point is that a player is being gated from grinding for this item for reasons that don’t involve them. They are not exploiting the game. They are not botting the game. They are playing it legitimately to participate in a very long grind, but being met with an additional time gate. On top of that, it’s an account wide time gate. It’s completely ridiculous to dissuade players from playing the game in a an attempt to throttle botting; especially so when it’s an ineffective but cost effective attempt at that.

exploitative gameplay AND automated gameplay

does putting the noun on both sides make it easier to understand?

we’ve had 5 instances/hr cap for years - we’ve already had limitations

i would be inclined to agree with you if you have the data that shows this opinion to be true, but it sounds like “my feels” cause you are personally affected by the change.

Learn how to read. The positioning of the noun matters. It is not lumping exploitative gameplay and automated gameplay together. It is defining the gameplay as both exploitative and automated. Grammar matters. The meaning of this sentence matters. For the love of god, learn how to read.


Just ignore the Misadventure guy, he’s been coming in and posting in every one of these threads about 3 minutes after they are posted 24/7 for the past 3 weeks. This guy is the actual biggest turd in these entire forums and just wants attention. Tbh, the guy needs to be banned from the forums. I put him on ignore and every thread I click on he has 3-4 posts. The guy is a straight up loser. He has over 200 replies to the main thread.


Oh look, it is the anti-cap player who said they quit because of the cap, created a slew of threads on it, and is still here harping on it.

See it took a whole 3 minutes to get the forum troll to come in and opinion spout. Imagine that. All I see is “View Hidden Reply” and it’s so satisfying like looking at poop on toilet paper after wiping.

1 Like