Creative use of mechanic, or exploit

[Knobley]

They've made their statement by nerfing the current "creative use of game mechanics". Now that Zolo is a no-no, we can safely say that doing anything similar to Zolo NOW would be an exploit.
…
Given that Blizzard has put their foot down on Zolo, it's reasonable to expect that they do not believe that similar methods should be used for other bosses.

I respectfully disagree.

Let me be clear here, in no way am I encouraging anyone to seek out and implement questionable practices that may get their accounts in trouble. That’s not my purpose, and I’m not defending that.

But I do think there’s a difference between “creative use of game mechanic” and “exploit” and that difference is more than semantics. It’s my hope that this post will be viewed in the spirit that it’s intended, which is a discussion of this difference.

I see two parts of the TOS that come into play here:



“Using or exploiting errors in design, features which have not been documented, and/or "program bugs" to gain access that is otherwise not available, or to obtain a competitive advantage over other players;”


There were no programming defects, bugs, or geometry glitches that were being “exploited” with the Zolo trick. There was (possibly) an error in design. But who we to say whether this was what Blizzard intended or not? I don’t know anyone I would trust to speak on behalf of Blizzard’s intentions other than Blizzard.

It can be found in these forums that Blizzard’s position with regard to the Zolo trick were sought for and obtained.

Now we have Vrakthris saying:


“Don't think of it as a nerf, Ekodas, think of it as adjusting a method of gaining massive amounts of very easy relatively no risk experience which our developers never intended.”


It seems that Blizzard’s has “adjusted” their position with regard to Zolo.

So what else is new? Blizzard adjusts things with every patch.

Sure this was a side effect that the developers never intended, but we have no authority for saying that until THEY say that.

Moreover, it’s not that Zolo is a no-no now. Zolo is not a no-no now. There’s nothing in the world stopping anyone from running Zolo just like they have been all along, there’s just no profit in it anymore. What’s changed is the game mechanic. Policing game mechanics is part of Blizzard’s job and they have adjusted this particular mechanic as they saw fit. To make the blanket claim that other “zolo-like” mechanics that Blizzard has (through neglect, oversight, or, and this is important, purposeful intention) allowed to remain in the game is an exploit is, respectfully, to overstep your bounds. Policing game mechanics is Blizzard’s job.

Using game mechanics to maximum benefit is what we do as players. We do it all the time, with builds, spell combinations, group make-up, what have you. Indeed, it’s essentially what the game IS.

To my thinking, calling the Zolo trick an exploit (then or now) is akin to calling “cheat death” an exploit. There’s no way that Blizzard (composed of fallable people) is ever going to have their game mechanics perfect, or balanced in such a way that everyone’s happy. Part of what we agree to when we play the game is that this is Blizzard’s sandbox we’re playing in. The Zolo trick was within the rules of Blizzard’s sand box. They said so. It still is. So are any zolo-like mechanics that remain in the game, whether they yield results we care for or not. We may have opinions about whether those mechanics are “good” or “bad” or “balanced”, but we need to recognize those opinions for what they are… opinions.

The other part of the TOS that comes into play says:


”Anything that Blizzard considers contrary to the "essence" of the program.”


That’s a loophole big enough to drive a freight train through, but the deciding factor is still Blizzard. Blizzard’s consideration with regard to Zolo was sought for and obtained. Who’s to say that Blizzard considers Zolo-like mechanics that remain in the game contrary to the “essence” of the program? Maybe other zolo-like mechanics that remain in the game are intended. Heck, the zolo-mechanic itself remains in the game.

It’s a game mechanic. It was programmed in. It’s not a bug, it’s not a geometry glitch, it’s not an undocumented feature. It’s a game mechanic. Game mechanics in WoW are relatively fluid. They change often. This one changed. Others may not have. That doesn’t make them not a mechanic.

Respectfully,
Knobly

[Talamarr]

Personally, I agree with you Knobley. However, I think the disconnect with some of us here is the scope of the definition of "exploit" and what is acceptable to discuss. I have very strong feelings about how creators of MMOs can jump on people for finding and using things in the game that the creators did not intend. If anything, they should be thanking these people for acting as testers and finding bugs, or "errors in design" not punishing people. As a software developer myself, I can't blame my clients for an error they discovered in one of my apps. It's my fault. I'm not sure why game companies get to act differently.

It's human nature to want to find more efficient ways to do things. And finding tricks and shortcuts can be fun and exciting if they're within the rules. It IS a game, after all.

Regardless, like I said before and like you said, it really doesn't matter; it's Blizzard's sandbox and ultimately their choice to do whatever.

And to speak to your point; I really like this community, it's contributors and it's drive to play within the rules and keep things honest. But I would like to at least voice my opinion that topics shouldn't be censored unless there is clear indication from Blizzard that they are against the rules (botting, account sharing, win trading, etc) and let grey area discussions continue.

[Sanctume]

The Zolo encounter is not trivial. That event for the level it is intended can be quite difficult if the skeleton totem is not contained quickly.

Furthermore, not all 70 classes can efficiently take advantage of that design flaw. It was specific enough that Blizzard did not bother with it for some time until some video of it was posted.

The side benefit of this was the exp gains were really fast. Blizzard removed that side benefit and left the encounter as is.

There was no "exploit" that violated the ToS--it's the same encounter even after the exp nerf. There is no bug in the encounter, it's an intended mini boss fight.

[Vyndree]

There is no bug in the encounter, it's an intended mini boss

The bug in the encounter was the amount of experience gained.

Exploiting a bug for the purposes of faster-than-usual experience gain could be considered an exploit by:
1) exploiting an error in design
2) using such exploits to gain a competitive advantage over other players

Granted, it was allowed and confirmed to be allowed (for the time being) by blue posters. In that sense, I think doing it back then was ok. In fact, you can still do the fixed-Zolo today and I don't consider that an exploit. However, given the fact that Blizzard has nerfed both Athene-methods and Zolo-methods of speed-boosting (that is, boosting at an accellerated rate through the specific use of design flaws) you can clearly see that it was neither intended, nor allowed to continue.

Blizzard may be a benevolent deity at times, and choose not to hastily ban for things like this, but I wouldn't count on their benevolence continuing now that they've made their stand. They've hotfixed both situations.

I never said Zolo was an exploit THEN. I'm saying Zolo, or Zolo-similar encounters, would be an exploit NOW.


That being said -- did we really need to start a brand new topic on the exact same subject?

[Knobley]

That being said -- did we really need to start a brand new topic on the exact same subject?

If you see this as the exact same subject, then you TOTALLY missed my point.

Where I see a tweeked game mechanic in an, until recently, obscure little corner of the game, you see a Fell Reaver-like foot coming down. Where I see a specific adjustment, you see a sweeping generalization. I can’t overstate the enormous disparity between these two perspectives.

Knobley

[Basilikos]

I think you missed the point of the other thread.

Quoted for truth.

[Draz]

If you see this as the exact same subject, then you TOTALLY missed my point.

I think you missed the point of the other thread.

I understand where he is coming from, the fact that Vyndree seems to know EXACTLY what blizzard is thinking about when coming up with these encounter designs, skews the issue hah!

[MoonD0G]

There is no bug in the encounter, it's an intended mini boss

The bug in the encounter was the amount of experience gained.

If you really want to get technical, the amount of experience gained was not a bug. If you were around that lvl doing the instance like normal, the encounter was normal. The "bug" you could refer to is that a specific class was designed in such a way that they could expand that experience gained indefinitely. change the class or change the encounter, take your pick, but it was not a "bug". they just made a change to an encounter as they do all the time.

But like knobley said, that wasnt even the point of this post in the first place.

[Basilikos]

Blizzard may be a benevolent deity at times, and choose not to hastily ban for things like this, but I wouldn't count on their benevolence continuing now that they've made their stand. They've hotfixed both situations.

I never said Zolo was an exploit THEN. I'm saying Zolo, or Zolo-similar encounters, would be an exploit NOW.

Everybody needs to read this again.

[Knobley]

I never said Zolo was an exploit THEN. I'm saying Zolo, or Zolo-similar encounters, would be an exploit NOW.

Everybody needs to read this again.

I'm saying that's a HUGE inference based on insufficient evidence.

[Mosg2]

I'm with Knobley on this one: You can't expand Blizzard's intent to all encounters that have summoned components. I'm sure with a little bit of creativity and gearing you could do the exact same thing to the Baron in Strath, yet I'm pretty sure they didn't change the XP on those summoned skeletons.

[Vyndree]

The "bug" you could refer to is that a specific class was designed in such a way that they could expand that experience gained indefinitely. change the class or change the encounter, take your pick, but it was not a "bug".

Just because it only affects one class mechanic does not mean that it is not a bug. Classes can have bugs, and encounters can have bugs, and classes plus encounters can have bugs.


I'm saying that's a HUGE inference based on insufficient evidence.

Blizzard can ban you for no reason at all. (though I have no evidence of them actually doing so)
Blizzard has banned people for exploits without giving ANY warning.
Blizzard has not banned people for hotfixed "exploits" (and I say that in quotes for a reason).

What defines an exploit? Much like "the spirit of the game " or "automation" (as it applies to WoW) -- Blizzard does.



Taming spirit wolves was an unintended game mechanic. Could it have been considered an exploit? Yes. After all -- hunters were using a unanticipated flaw in the game mechanics to tame a beast that had unique visual qualities not found in other pets. Could they have banned hunters for taming these pets? Yes. Did they? No. They hotfixed it.

If I were to show up today walking around with a newly-tamed Spirit Wolf that I managed to get yesterday because I found a new loophole in the system -- would I expect to be banned? I mean, the other hunters weren't banned for getting wolves back in the day, but I have clear information from Blizzard (via hotfixing the spirit wolves) that they do not intend for the spirit wolves to ever be tamed again.

Is it so illogical to think that while they were patient the first time and allowed hunters to keep the wolves they had tamed, that I wouldn't be overstepping the line to try and find a NEW loophole, KNOWING that blizzard didn't intend for it to be done anymore? Would I be so cocky to think that it wouldn't now be a bannable offense to continue striving for a ghost wolf now that Blizzard has given me the clear indication that it is not something I should do?

[Heenan]

I'm with Knobley on this one: You can't expand Blizzard's intent to all encounters that have summoned components. I'm sure with a little bit of creativity and gearing you could do the exact same thing to the Baron in Strath, yet I'm pretty sure they didn't change the XP on those summoned skeletons.Because we haven't posted a video and let the entire WoW community see that it is possible... yet.

You can't tell me that the developers were sitting around designing these encounters saying, "Hey, this will also be a cool way for higher levels to completely bypass 21 levels of content."

[Knobley]

We agree that Blizzard can ban me at their whim... for any reason. It would be stupid to give them reasons. We're in agreement there.

But let's look at your example... I'm wandering along and I see a pretty creature that I want to tame. Unbeknownst to me Blizzard didn't intend that I be able to tame this pretty pet, but I tame it anyway. Unfortunately for me, this unintended behavior is similar to something that got hot-fixed at some point earlier in the game (perhaps even before I started playing).

Therefore I'm an exploiter.

Is that what you're saying?

The more I think about it, the more your example makes my point. How am I supposed to magically know every creature that Blizzard may or may not want me to be able to tame? The ONLY thing I have to go on is what the game allows me to do. Honestly, I never heard of the spirit wolf thing before your example. Am I supposed to be worried that I might be exploiting every time I tame a pet now?

Knobley

[Vyndree]

Unbeknownst to me Blizzard didn't intend that I be able to tame this pretty pet, but I tame it anyway

But it's not unbeknownst to you. This is my point. Zolo was NOT an exploit -- until Blizzard removed it.

Spirit wolves were NOT an exploit -- until Blizzard removed it.

Reck bombing Kazzak was NOT an exploit -- until Blizzard removed it (and remove it they did... I believe it only took 24 hours for that one).

Even AFK'ing in the cave in AV was not considered exploiting until they implemented non-participation rules. They didn't even bother to warn people either -- they implemented the "change" the moment they started banning people.


We NOW know that Zolo is not intended by Blizzard, because they removed the ability to do it. CONTINUING to strive for the same Zolo-style leveling grind AFTER blizzard has removed Zolo would be ASKING for retribution -- don't you think?

[shaeman]

We can argue this back and forth, but unfortunately all this comes down to are opinions.

However Blizzard is the only opinion that matters.

Personally I would think that Blizzard with deal with exploits such as this with hotfixes (there seems to be an established precedent of this).

If they did go the ban route I'm pretty sure it would be a bunch of temporary bans.

Is this based on any fact, inside knowledge - Nope. Does it change what blizzard would actually do. Nope.

Should I have bothered posting. Nope :D

[Xar]

I don't understand why it's so hard for some of you to see that you *know* you are doing something that is outside the norm of what Blizzard intends and yet you still want to to do it and are trying hard to justify continuing to find new ways to do it. Just because you CAN doesn't mean you SHOULD, but hey it's your accounts that are potentially at risk. I just hope new people to this site don't think all of us are as lazy as some of you sound.

You all trying to justify this behavior reminds me a lot of the perpetual level 1-9's hanging around Goldshire dueling, complaining about how hard it is to level up past that. 8|

[Knobley]

But it's not unbeknownst to you.

Of the examples you mention, the only one that was beknownst to me was the zolo trick. In any case folks can still go to zolo and fight him just like they did before the last patch, so THAT wouldn't be exploiting. (although who would want to?). By defination you can't exploit something that has been "fixed", (at least if it's been fixed correctly).

Before the change, as you have said, it wasn't exploiting.

Wasn't then, isn't now.

If I see something that I consider zolo like (pre patch), I will avoid it. I would, as you are doing, encourage others to avoid it as well. Of course it is foolish to knowingly raise the ire of those who have power over you, just as it's ignorant to do so unknowingly.

But that's just a matter of my personal comfort level.

What I don't feel comfortable wih is calling all things zolo-like exploitive. That's not my pejorative, and not, I think, yours either. After all, how like zolo does something have to be? Or, say, if someone were to find at after the 15th totem, the skellies start giving xp again, would it be an exploit to take advantage of that? Would that be a bug, or would it be exactly the "fix" that Blizzard intended?

I will hush on this topic now.

Knobley

[Mosg2]

Xar, it's a little over the line for you to arbitrarily call everyone lazy who used Zolo. Using the most efficient means possible to level is a far cry from being lazy--It's being smart. We reward that in every aspect of society.

On topic: I think, if anything, them not changing all similarly designed summoned mobs to only giving 1xp is a sign that they don't care. It wouldn't have taken that much longer to get'em all. In any case, until they make a post or something saying that they consider using similar mechanics then I don't think it's against the ToS.

[Stabface]

Unbeknownst to me Blizzard didn't intend that I be able to tame this pretty pet, but I tame it anyway

But it's not unbeknownst to you. This is my point. Zolo was NOT an exploit -- until Blizzard removed it.

Spirit wolves were NOT an exploit -- until Blizzard removed it.

Reck bombing Kazzak was NOT an exploit -- until Blizzard removed it (and remove it they did... I believe it only took 24 hours for that one).

Even AFK'ing in the cave in AV was not considered exploiting until they implemented non-participation rules. They didn't even bother to warn people either -- they implemented the "change" the moment they started banning people.


We NOW know that Zolo is not intended by Blizzard, because they removed the ability to do it. CONTINUING to strive for the same Zolo-style leveling grind AFTER blizzard has removed Zolo would be ASKING for retribution -- don't you think?

To me, the line between exploit and unintended game mechanic is: did they dole out punishment? If they did, then it was an exploit and *similar* actions in the future will also be considered an exploit, people who do the new thing will be actioned. If they didn't, then it's an unintended game mechanic and *similar* actions in the future will also be an U.G.M. and changed without action-ing those that partake of them.

unintended game mechanic:
Spirit Wolf, Mojo frog, Kazzak*, training world boss or blasted lands servants to IF, standing in fires next to the auctioneers, being able to use DS and then BoP on yourself when that wore off, getting SSO supplies from Nagrand quest, etc.

exploit:
AFKing in BGs, win-trading, blowing up the AH with pets + living bomb / hakkar disease, PvPing from rooftops, Hunter FD pull to split boss/adds, using Deadmines to get to GM Island, etc.

I put Zolo into the 1st category. BG-non-participation was warned about before they started putting people in time-out for it BTW.


*as far as I know the paladin on Azgalor did not get banned and was able to keep the loot from the kill.

[Stabface]

I'll go one further, just to be completely silly!

We know that Blizzard in WotLK is changing the amount of XP needed to level from 60-70. They have already in the past changed the amount of XP needed from 1-60.
Leveling from 1-60 previous to the change was not an exploit since we didn't know it wasn't working as intended. Leveling from 1-60 now is not an exploit, since it's now working as intended post-fix. However! If we level now from 60-70 under the current level formula this *is* an exploit, since Blizzard does not intend you to earn that many XP points and will be changing the mechanic.

:P :P

hey ! not in the face with the rotten fruits!!!

[Knobley]

However! If we level now from 60-70 under the current level formula this *is* an exploit, since Blizzard does not intend you to earn that many XP points and will be changing the mechanic.

Crap! And since it's now knowingly, I guess that means I have to quit leveling.

[Eteocles]

I'd have used Zolo had I known about it...but that's because, yknow, I've played since launch and know every alliance quest by heart without silly little paid guides or mods that hold your hand ;p and have levelled the early stuff enough as it is...cuz technically it's not an exploit...but technically it's not quite "in the spirit" either.

Stab, retroactively doesn't that make us all exploiters since our 1-60 was changed? ;)

"Creative Use" is a blanket term that can and will be abused as Blizz sees fit; roofing in Azeroth = Exploit; Roofing in Outlands = "Creative Use of Terrain Mechanics"; same for arena pillaring and druids HoT-kiting sadly(aka a crutch for you pansy-asses ;p); Boxing falls under "creative use" right now too ;) Not to mention...as a Boomkin I can fly up to the Scryer Tier, land on the fountain in the middle, and as long as I keep the guards Rooted, they can't Banish me nor do they go into Evade mode..I've killed many of them in this manner ;p Unless Blizz says otherwise...or it's FREAKIN OBVIOUSLY WRONG...go for it! It's game, have some damn fun if it's not at others' expense :p

[Vyndree]

In any case folks can still go to zolo and fight him just like they did before the last patch, so THAT wouldn't be exploiting. (although who would want to?).

Correct. The exploit wasn't the way it was done -- it was the end results achieved (XP).

If you were to find a new way to get the same XP out of Zolo, as was done pre-patch, that would be the exploit. I'm not saying killing (or grinding) Zolo was the exploit -- but the massive amount of XP gained for the minor amount of effort (I hear many people claiming the important part to Zolo is jumping often so that your other characters don't go AFK). Don't pick on semantics -- you know I've never had a problem with Zolo pre-nerf, but just post-nerf the same result should not be achievable without expecting retribution from blizzard. Nobody did Zolo in that fashion "just because I wanted to see the encounter". They did it because of the massive amount of XP gained.

The exploit of Zolo was the advantage of XP per hour per effort. Not the encounter itself.

[Vyndree]

BG-non-participation was warned about before they started putting people in time-out for it BTW.

It was literally done consecutively with a banwave, or within a day of the announcement. I remember only because I trolled the Customer Service forums back then too -- the amount of QQ "but you didn't warn us!" quickly flooded the forums.

[Sanctume]

Blizzard may be a benevolent deity at times, and choose not to hastily ban for things like this, but I wouldn't count on their benevolence continuing now that they've made their stand. They've hotfixed both situations.

I never said Zolo was an exploit THEN. I'm saying Zolo, or Zolo-similar encounters, would be an exploit NOW.

Everybody needs to read this again.There are still a few Zolo-similar encounters in the game. But in order to get that thing going takes some initial time sink.

And I suppose, it is enough of a time-sink that grinding or questing elsewhere in the same amount of time will net about the same exp.

[Zaelar]

There was no bug with zolo, it was just poorly balanced with specific conditions.

That rogue talent that lets them live and take 90% less damage for a few seconds got nerfed. It is still possible with the right gear to obtain nearly the same effect it had before. It must be an exploit.

Shaman's lightning bolt is getting a lower co-efficient in wotlk. Using lightning bolt now is ok, and using it after is ok, but stacking spell power to get the damage back up will be an exploit.

People were clearing the level 60 5-mans too easily with 10 people so they lowered the max number of people allowed to 5. Anyone clearing these instances quickly now must be exploiting.

People were getting 100-200g/hour by killing Jania Proudmore pre-bc. These people even got 3-day suspensions apparently. Anyone getting near this amount of gold per hour is exploiting.

And if the only "bug" here is the exp/hour, then looking for zolo-like encounters should be fine as long as they don't give too much exp, and how much exp is too much exp is for blizzard to decide when regarding "exploiting".

[Suvega]

How can you even argue this keeping a straight face?

Zolo was a leveling EXPLOIT. If you searched for it on google, how would you find it? (Yes, searching for exploit).

What's the difference between exploit and creative use of game mechanics? Impact.

If I found a "Creative use of game mechanics" way to duplicate items in my bag, do you think I'd get banned? @#$@ yes I would. Doesn't even cross my mind.

Alot of exploits are considered "non-bannable" however are NOT DISCUSSED (infact intentionally removed from posts on forums to hide it), as blizzard does the following:

1) How big of an impact is it, does it effect visual apperance, or large effects on the economy?
2) How many people are doing it? Will I ban 10% of my player base if I start actioning on it?

For Zolo, obviously (2) was big enough to say "Hey it isn't actionable right now, but lets not share this info k?", until they could get it fixed.

If (1) was big enough where you had some far reaching impacts, you could guarentee that bans would be inc.
Remember the "Insert way for a shaman to kill same faction people here" exploit? Banable. (Because it impacted many people)

Finding "creative use of game mechanics" to do ANYTHING in this game is risky. You know what blizzard intends or doesn't, it's not freaking hard to figure it out. Don't play stupid (Wuut you mean they didn't want me to level at the rate of GOD when I move this npc to this one and start aoeing?). You just make yourself look ignorant.

[Zaelar]

If you found a way to duplicate items you'd only get banned if you spread it through the economy. If you told a GM about it and didn't do anything with it I doubt anything would happen other than losing the items. As you said, impact is an important factor.

The shaman bug is an obvious bug that did things that weren't supposed to be possible(killing allies)(and wasn't this fixed?). The only thing unintended with zolo is how well it worked. So, how fast are we allowed to level? Standard instance 1-pull aoe power leveling is ok, athene/zolo aren't. That's a pretty wide gap of uncertainty.

[Kayley]

How can you even argue this keeping a straight face?

Zolo was a leveling EXPLOIT. If you searched for it on google, how would you find it? (Yes, searching for exploit).


I can find multiboxing by searching google for exploits too :D

It was a design flaw obviously, it wasn't serious enough to have the lolbans but it was enough for a fix. I'd argue that it was a creative use of game mechanics though - if people tried to recreate it? then I would expect a more firmer stance on this particular 'exploit'.
(I really just think people have a different view on what an exploit is)

[Vyndree]

The only thing unintended with zolo is how well it worked.

I.e. the leveling rate?

I.e. leveling faster than normal boosting?

I.e. leveling faster than other players are able?

I.e. gaining a leveling rate advantage over other players?

Aren't they giving us a clear signal that leveling at that rate is something that they don't intend to be possible anymore? I mean, they've nerfed both Athene methods (which, admittedly takes a bit of effort) and the Zolo method (which, as I understand, takes little effort).


The gap of uncertainty isn't that difficult to see. From what I understand, you could get 100k+ exp per hour from Zolo, whereas normal questing could only net 20k. If it weren't "beneficial" in some way to do Zolo over questing, or normal boosting, or grinding.... why is everyone all up in arms now that it's nerfed? Because you could "nearly afk" and get XP? Don't you think there's a problem when you can net more than 4x the normal questing rate of XP with little to no effort involved?

That's not an exploit?

[Greythan]

How can you even argue this keeping a straight face?

Zolo was a leveling EXPLOIT. If you searched for it on google, how would you find it? (Yes, searching for exploit).

What's the difference between exploit and creative use of game mechanics? Impact.

If I found a "Creative use of game mechanics" way to duplicate items in my bag, do you think I'd get banned? @#$@ yes I would. Doesn't even cross my mind.

Alot of exploits are considered "non-bannable" however are NOT DISCUSSED (infact intentionally removed from posts on forums to hide it), as blizzard does the following:

1) How big of an impact is it, does it effect visual apperance, or large effects on the economy?
2) How many people are doing it? Will I ban 10% of my player base if I start actioning on it?

For Zolo, obviously (2) was big enough to say "Hey it isn't actionable right now, but lets not share this info k?", until they could get it fixed.

If (1) was big enough where you had some far reaching impacts, you could guarentee that bans would be inc.
Remember the "Insert way for a shaman to kill same faction people here" exploit? Banable. (Because it impacted many people)

Finding "creative use of game mechanics" to do ANYTHING in this game is risky. You know what blizzard intends or doesn't, it's not freaking hard to figure it out. Don't play stupid (Wuut you mean they didn't want me to level at the rate of GOD when I move this npc to this one and start aoeing?). You just make yourself look ignorant.

Baloney.

PL'ing lowbies with a Protection Pally is an exploit? Oh, you mean just doing it with Zolo is an exploit. But, doing it in SM or any other instance to gain geometric increases in xp/hour versus other methods is okay?

This is hardly a cut and dried case of an "exploit". If it was, the entire ability for AE boosting would be engineered out of the game.

Now, was the Zolo thing more extreme than SM or some other traditional AE boosting tactic? Sure. But its not worlds apart as the "you're a moron if you don't see this to be an exploit" crew is making it out to be.

[Suvega]

1) leveling 100k xp an hour, when normal quests give 10k, is an exploit. Come on, stop sounding dumb.

2) The difference between exploits and MB is Blizzard's stance. Blizzard comes out openly and defends multiboxing. Blizzard delete's posts on exploits.


Stop trying to defend shady activity, you're just making yourself either look Naive or Ignorant.

[Suvega]

How can you even argue this keeping a straight face?

Zolo was a leveling EXPLOIT. If you searched for it on google, how would you find it? (Yes, searching for exploit).

What's the difference between exploit and creative use of game mechanics? Impact.

If I found a "Creative use of game mechanics" way to duplicate items in my bag, do you think I'd get banned? @#$@ yes I would. Doesn't even cross my mind.

Alot of exploits are considered "non-bannable" however are NOT DISCUSSED (infact intentionally removed from posts on forums to hide it), as blizzard does the following:

1) How big of an impact is it, does it effect visual apperance, or large effects on the economy?
2) How many people are doing it? Will I ban 10% of my player base if I start actioning on it?

For Zolo, obviously (2) was big enough to say "Hey it isn't actionable right now, but lets not share this info k?", until they could get it fixed.

If (1) was big enough where you had some far reaching impacts, you could guarentee that bans would be inc.
Remember the "Insert way for a shaman to kill same faction people here" exploit? Banable. (Because it impacted many people)

Finding "creative use of game mechanics" to do ANYTHING in this game is risky. You know what blizzard intends or doesn't, it's not freaking hard to figure it out. Don't play stupid (Wuut you mean they didn't want me to level at the rate of GOD when I move this npc to this one and start aoeing?). You just make yourself look ignorant.

Baloney.

PL'ing lowbies with a Protection Pally is an exploit? Oh, you mean just doing it with Zolo is an exploit. But, doing it in SM or any other instance to gain geometric increases in xp/hour versus other methods is okay?

This is hardly a cut and dried case of an "exploit". If it was, the entire ability for AE boosting would be engineered out of the game.

Now, was the Zolo thing more extreme than SM or some other traditional AE boosting tactic? Sure. But its not worlds apart as the "you're a moron if you don't see this to be an exploit" crew is making it out to be.


One involves a friend using his paladin to help you kill thigns in an instance.

One involves standing still after kiteing a mob to the other side of the instance, and then /afking while mobs spawn and get killed over and over again indefinetly.

One has a instance cap per hour, one you can go afk?

ARE YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEEING A DIFFERENCE?!? lol.

[Greythan]

4x the normal questing rate of XP
So what multiplier of "normal questing rate" is defined as non-exploitive? That's the point. If another spot pops up that allows me to AE mobs at a geometric rate using standard game mechanics, I'll do it. I'm very confident I won't get banned either. Now, if Blizzard comes out and states that AE boosting is an exploit that's another story. They haven't done that.

[Greythan]

One involves a friend using his paladin to help you kill thigns in an instance.

One involves standing still after kiteing a mob to the other side of the instance, and then /afking while mobs spawn and get killed over and over again indefinetly.

One has a instance cap per hour, one you can go afk?

ARE YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEEING A DIFFERENCE?!? lol.

First, for a multi-boxer there is never a friend involved unless you choose to get one. No differentiator there.

Second, standing still isn't much different than rounding up SM Cath and "standing still" watching them die on the Pally's AE/Melee effects. There's next to no risk to the Pally at all in either case. Also, very little effort involved.

Instance caps have nothing to do with the original argument which is the exploit is based on gaining extreme exp rates over "traditional" questing/leveling tactics.

Are you seriously no seeing the similarities here? lol

[Suvega]

One involves a friend using his paladin to help you kill thigns in an instance.

One involves standing still after kiteing a mob to the other side of the instance, and then /afking while mobs spawn and get killed over and over again indefinetly.

One has a instance cap per hour, one you can go afk?

ARE YOU SERIOUSLY NOT SEEING A DIFFERENCE?!? lol.

First, for a multi-boxer there is never a friend involved unless you choose to get one. No differentiator there.

Second, standing still isn't much different than rounding up SM Cath and "standing still" watching them die on the Pally's AE/Melee effects. There's next to no risk to the Pally at all in either case. Also, very little effort involved.

Instance caps have nothing to do with the original argument which is the exploit is based on gaining extreme exp rates over "traditional" questing/leveling tactics.

Are you seriously no seeing the similarities here? lol

God this is getting great. I'll keep going to watch you pull at strings more.
Guess what, instance caps limit how much you can clear the instance per hour. It's a determined cap on how much xp you can get per hour. If you have EVER tried boosting via SM, you'd DEF know that instance caps are a pain in the ass. Not to mention blizzard already nerfs the xp earned for a low level character when a 70 touches the mob you kill. The combination of instance cap + the XP is a pretty good cap on the xp/hr you can get.




However methods like zolo involve literally some interesting methods to get your spawns. Instead of I dunno, zoneing into an instance, you move a bunch of mobs around, and find an INFINTE MOB SPAWN THAT GIVES XP. Sounds legit AMIRIGHT?!?
I guess I find it obvious that if it involves dragging mobs across the map, or evading mobs, or doing something other then just @#$@ KILLING SOMETHING, it's probably ain't intended now is it?

I'm not saying you'll get banned, I'm just saying it's not wise if you value your accounts. I'm pretty sure anyone reading this thread realizes that lookign for "interesting ways to exploit the game to get a much bigger return on investment" realizes that their is an inherent risk.

For people who are "Exploit Challenged" lets say this. If you think your method involves no risk of being banned, post it on the customser service forums. If it lives, go ahead. If it burns, your accounts will follow in a matter of time. Even if they "allowed" zolo, they gave a very clear message that it wasn't supported. Pretty clear hint amiright?

For your next argument, I forsee you explaining how blizzard intended for us to find these "secret" leveling methods, and that they will encourage us to find more interesting ways to level faster....

[Kayley]

God this is getting great. I'll keep going to watch you pull at strings more.
Guess what, instance caps limit how much you can clear the instance per hour. It's a determined cap on how much xp you can get per hour. If you have EVER tried boosting via SM, you'd DEF know that instance caps are a pain in the ass. Not to mention blizzard already nerfs the xp earned for a low level character when a 70 touches the mob you kill. The combination of instance cap + the XP is a pretty good cap on the xp/hr you can get.

However methods like zolo involve literally some interesting methods to get your spawns. Instead of I dunno, zoneing into an instance, you move a bunch of mobs around, and find an INFINTE MOB SPAWN THAT GIVES XP. Sounds legit AMIRIGHT?!?
I guess I find it obvious that if it involves dragging mobs across the map, or evading mobs, or doing something other then just @#$@ KILLING SOMETHING, it's probably ain't intended now is it?

Instance cap was to stop the DM farmers. It doesn't effect instance boosting in SM at all. Just add SM:Armory to your Cath runs and you are fine :) - But I digress.

The exploit wasn't the way of doing it, dragging mini-bosses together is fine. Fighting them both together is fine (evading, terrain exploiting isn't) but the end result (100k-250K+ while 'nearly afk') was considered an exploit. You aren't reading what people are saying, you are just OMGMUSTPOAST.. so chill, read, then post :) people so far have just argued your points.

[Kayley]

Correct. The exploit wasn't the way it was done -- it was the end results achieved (XP).

If you were to find a new way to get the same XP out of Zolo, as was done pre-patch, that would be the exploit. I'm not saying killing (or grinding) Zolo was the exploit -- but the massive amount of XP gained for the minor amount of effort (I hear many people claiming the important part to Zolo is jumping often so that your other characters don't go AFK). Don't pick on semantics -- you know I've never had a problem with Zolo pre-nerf, but just post-nerf the same result should not be achievable without expecting retribution from blizzard. Nobody did Zolo in that fashion "just because I wanted to see the encounter". They did it because of the massive amount of XP gained.

The exploit of Zolo was the advantage of XP per hour per effort. Not the encounter itself.Missed that ^_^ This is pretty much it :P (from my POV)

[Suvega]

Correct. The exploit wasn't the way it was done -- it was the end results achieved (XP).

If you were to find a new way to get the same XP out of Zolo, as was done pre-patch, that would be the exploit. I'm not saying killing (or grinding) Zolo was the exploit -- but the massive amount of XP gained for the minor amount of effort (I hear many people claiming the important part to Zolo is jumping often so that your other characters don't go AFK). Don't pick on semantics -- you know I've never had a problem with Zolo pre-nerf, but just post-nerf the same result should not be achievable without expecting retribution from blizzard. Nobody did Zolo in that fashion "just because I wanted to see the encounter". They did it because of the massive amount of XP gained.

The exploit of Zolo was the advantage of XP per hour per effort. Not the encounter itself.Missed that ^_^ This is pretty much it :P (from my POV)

My point basically is, everyone who was doing it, knew it wasn't legitimte. They knew it was going to be hotfixed, just a matter of time. The fact that they chose to hotfix over ban is just their views now, not in the future. Finding interesting tactics to get an upperhand in the game (protip: thats the defintion of exploit), is not a recommended hobby when wanting to keep your account. People who try to "convince" us that it was legitimate, or that they never thought it was going to be fixed, are either living in a fantasy world, or are trying to convince themselves ;)

[Kayley]

My point basically is, everyone who was doing it, knew it wasn't legitimte. They knew it was going to be hotfixed, just a matter of time. The fact that they chose to hotfix over ban is just their views now, not in the future. Finding interesting tactics to get an upperhand in the game (protip: thats the defintion of exploit), is not a recommended hobby when wanting to keep your account. People who try to "convince" us that it was legitimate, or that they never thought it was going to be fixed, are either living in a fantasy world, or are trying to convince themselves ;)Agreed :D

[wererabbit]

My point basically is, everyone who was doing it, knew it wasn't legitimte. They knew it was going to be hotfixed, just a matter of time. The fact that they chose to hotfix over ban is just their views now, not in the future. Finding interesting tactics to get an upperhand in the game (protip: thats the defintion of exploit), is not a recommended hobby when wanting to keep your account. People who try to "convince" us that it was legitimate, or that they never thought it was going to be fixed, are either living in a fantasy world, or are trying to convince themselves ;) Ok, I've read all the way through here, and I realize this is merely my second post, but I feel I need to respond to your hyperbole.

I'm not trying to flame you but this is silly. You're not completely wrong. But mainly, you're just sitting and arguing a set of semantics so you appear better than other people.

Truthfully, it doesn't matter what you think about whether people should be banned or not, it's just your opinion, and your opinion doesn't really count in the grand scheme of things. Blizzard makes the rules, they made the game, they goofed up a boss fight, people saw it was goofed up, some smart people used the goof to their advantage. Big whoop. Blizzard ignored the public forum request for a response (if you would bother to read older posts you would see that) and then moved it to a bug report forum. Classifying it as a bug (not an exploit), they then terminated the goof up by toasting the xp gain. Whoopdeedoo. Nobody was banned, nobody lost credit with Blizzard, Blizzard had obviously screwed up.

Stop trying to lord it over people that somehow you are superior because you choose to spend hours of your life grinding a specific way that is different than their way. Yes, yours is the nice, hard-working time-consuming way. Nobody is arguing with that. Some people prefer to drive 80mph in the 55mph zone. They get tickets. Some people prefer to drive 55mph in the 55mph zone. They don't get tickets. Some people prefer to drive 80mph when the sign says 80mph, and everyone knows it should really be 55mph. So the city ordinance gets passed and the sign gets changed. Doesn't really change anything except the speed limit. You can't give tickets to drivers for doing the stated speed limit in an inconsistently delineated zone.

[Zaelar]

Exploiting is only against the rules if you're exploiting certain things. You can exploit class imbalances to win in arenas, for example. Suvega's definition is pretty accurate.

Unless you adversely effect the economy or bother other players I doubt you'll get banned. Worst case you get rolled back, and even then I doubt they would unless you find a way to get to 70 in under 24h unrested.

In 2.0 macros pretty much went from 150k xp/hour usefulness to 5k xp/hour usefulness. You could pretty much have had an entire raid macroed to one button back then and would only need to worry about movement. Heals that always target the lowest raid member? Easy, even down ranks for you. Programmed dps cycle that checks for buffs and debuffs that proc and uses cooldowns? You got it. Stop casting if your threat is too high? I think we had this. Someone even had a healer that afk-healed AV by using autofollow for movement and just mashed one button while watching tv or something. So does that mean we shouldn't be discussing macros that work now since blizzard removed them? The only difference here is that one was public.

[Greythan]

Finding interesting tactics to get an upperhand in the game (protip: thats the defintion of exploit), is not a recommended hobby when wanting to keep your account.

I'll try this one more time. Some people would consider the use of a 70 to instance boost a lowbie, just such an "interesting tactic". See the similarity? Forget the actual tactics. I realize that thus far Blizzard hasn't taken that stance or they'd have "hot fixed" it. That doesn't change the fact that with their tolerance of instance boosting (or boosting at all) they are at a minimum passively endorsing the tactic. Therefore, those that used Zolo (I never had the chance myself) very easily could have seen it as nothing more than following precedence. Either way is sort of a "cheesey" approach to leveling in that the lowbies do NOTHING and gain levels. Sound like an exploit or an intended game mechanic?

So, if someone finds an event, instance, mob-set that generates a higher rate of exp than a comparable instance, that's automatically an exploit? That's some stretch considering the policies that are in place.

[Vyndree]

the use of a 70 to instance boost a lowbie, just such an "interesting tactic".

It wasn't the mere use of a 70.

The fact that you had to jump through hoops using a specific 70 doing a specific thing on a specific boss to SPECIFICALLY get an unrealistic amount of XP -- that is the exploit.



Forget the actual tactics.

Ignorance of the details doesn't make it right. Sure, a 70 was used. That doesn't mean that there STILL wasn't an exploit involved.

Like the blues in the CS forum say -- just because you didn't read the rules doesn't mean they don't apply to you.


ANY 70 can speed through normal instances as fast as he/she can to get XP for their friends/lowbies. ANY 70 can rip through quests with their lowbies to try and get them faster quest credit. ANY 70 will hit the instance cap if they do this at a rate that is unrealistic. ANY 70 can use ANY instance to get XP for their lowbies. Certain instances are more efficient for certain classes -- prot pallies excel at SM and warlocks at ZF -- however, you still can't exceed the XP/hour that's determined by the instance cap, no matter HOW fast you are. ANY 70 can NOT "nearly afk" doing it either.



the use of a 70 to instance boost a lowbie, just such an "interesting tactic".

Let me paraphrase this a bit to make a bit more sense.

you: "the use of 5 shaman to PvP is not botting -- it's a multiboxing playstle"
me: "just because you're multiboxing, doesn't mean you aren't also botting. A anti-afk bot connected to 5 multiboxed shaman is still a bot, multiboxed or not."

There are similarities, yes. But the situation around those similiarities is vastly different. One does not exclude the other.

[Greythan]

Well, we're into who's going to get the last word in on this as either I'm not understanding you or vice versa.

Would it be reasonable to presume that using the Zolo technique elsewhere in the game would be frowned upon by Blizzard? Yes. Is it black and white as to what level rate using standard game mechanics is acceptable to Blizzard? No.

Is there a similarity between me using my 70 Warlock to boost my crew in SM and another boxer boosing their crew in Zolo? Yes.

So, my problem was not with the general consensus that Blizzard has opined on Zolo, but rather the rather heavy handed way some posters were taking an "I told you so" approach. Anyone who's boosted is "guilty" of circumventing "normal" exp/hour rates. Period. From there its a question of degree and Blizzard has been less than clear on what they find acceptable. (i.e., one booster who has a Pally main has a HUGE leveling advantage over another who might have a rogue main. Pally can clear, what, 6 or more of SM Cath/Armory in one hour while the rogue can do 3?)

[darkcaster]

i just wanted to say hi...

its done, its over. ... you cant do it any more.

Find another spot and dont post about it, if you want to keep it.

[Tdog]

I was going to post my views on this in length but this post seems to sum up the jist of what is really important to take away from all this...
i just wanted to say hi...

its done, its over. ... you cant do it any more.

Find another spot and dont post about it, if you want to keep it.

[pinotnoir]

My name is Pinotnoir.. And I am a Zolo lover. Yes I used him to level from 35-56. Blizzard changed the encounter so it’s done and over with. I really find it funny that all you people are arguing over something that doesn’t exist anymore. Let’s quit all the post about how you think it’s an exploit or you think its fine. Remember the saying about opinions... They are like assholes. We all have them and think everyone else’s stinks. It makes me sad :( reading the forums and seeing all this bickering. Let’s move on because this doesn’t exist anymore.

Cheers, here is to the future.

[Suvega]

Stop trying to lord it over people that somehow you are superior because you choose to spend hours of your life grinding a specific way that is different than their way. Yes, yours is the nice, hard-working time-consuming way. Nobody is arguing with that. Some people prefer to drive 80mph in the 55mph zone. They get tickets. Some people prefer to drive 55mph in the 55mph zone. They don't get tickets. Some people prefer to drive 80mph when the sign says 80mph, and everyone knows it should really be 55mph. So the city ordinance gets passed and the sign gets changed. Doesn't really change anything except the speed limit. You can't give tickets to drivers for doing the stated speed limit in an inconsistently delineated zone.

A) I'm not trying to hold myself high and mighty, all I'm saying is that anyone who was dragging mobs around and instance to exploit a game mechanic to allow for phenominally high xp/hr (4-5x questing rate) probably knew that it wasn't 100% legit. Trying to 'convince' us that you had 'no clue' that this would be nerfed if ever found out, is a bit of a stretch :P

B) You're analogy is flawed. It is more like the law states that you must not go over speedlimit posted. There is no speedlimit posted so you go 200 mph in a suburb. Law is graciuos enough to not take your drivers license, and instead puts a 25mph sign up.
You can choose at the next suburb with no sign to go 200mph, you might keep your license you might not, however you knew it was risky when you did it.

In the end, you can admit it was shady, or lie to us/yourself to the contrary, but it was not 100% legit.

[Drizzit]

There is no speedlimit posted so you go 200 mph in a suburb. Law is graciuos enough to not take your drivers license, and instead puts a 25mph sign up.
You can choose at the next suburb with no sign to go 200mph, you might keep your license you might not, however you knew it was risky when you did it.

A nun was driving 3 other nuns. A cop pulls them over. The Cop says to the nun that you are going too slow the speed limit is 55 not 10. The nun says that the sign says 10 (as the nun points to the sign). The cop says that is the route number not the speed limit. The cop then looks in the back seat and see that 3 nun are scared and pale like they seen a ghost. The cop asks the driver why are they like that. The driver says oh we just got off of route 138. :P

[Sanctume]

So, is this an exploit, or creative use of game mechanic?

http://www.wowhead.com/?quest=1957


!)(Secret)(Secret)(Secret)(Secret)(!

Always hear about Mage AoEing is the best thing since sliced bread? Never been able to REALLY do it? Now you can! Go to the Dustwallow Marsh to receive this quest, Mana Surges, but be aware you would have to complete the quest to go to Uldaman before you can gain access to Mana Surges. This is a really nifty trick that I have never heard anybody talk about. I just happened to find this out on my own and startd to use it on my mage. With this nifty trick you can gain up to 55,000 xp/hr at level 40-45 easily, and yes, solo. Here's what you do:

1.) Make hundreds of food/drinks.

2.) Accept Mana Surges quest.

3.) Walk outside near the two torches and buff up. (Mage Armor, Dampen Magic, Arcane Intellect, Mana Shield)

3.) DELETE THE QUEST! (This is the most important part.)

4.) The mobs spawn, 2 sets of 2's, 2 sets of 3's, 2 sets of 4's, all the way up to 2 sets of 5's. The mobs will spawn 1-5 seconds after they die. So AS SOON as the mobs die, run away and start resting up for the next set of AoEs.

5.) Your able to AoE these mobs and get as much XP as you possible can, for 10 minutes, then the mobs despawn. After this, go back to step number 2.

Repeat all of the above steps to get some of the best xp in the game.

What about Baron in Strath--that an exploit too?

[Suvega]

So, is this an exploit, or creative use of game mechanic?

http://www.wowhead.com/?quest=1957


!)(Secret)(Secret)(Secret)(Secret)(!

Always hear about Mage AoEing is the best thing since sliced bread? Never been able to REALLY do it? Now you can! Go to the Dustwallow Marsh to receive this quest, Mana Surges, but be aware you would have to complete the quest to go to Uldaman before you can gain access to Mana Surges. This is a really nifty trick that I have never heard anybody talk about. I just happened to find this out on my own and startd to use it on my mage. With this nifty trick you can gain up to 55,000 xp/hr at level 40-45 easily, and yes, solo. Here's what you do:

1.) Make hundreds of food/drinks.

2.) Accept Mana Surges quest.

3.) Walk outside near the two torches and buff up. (Mage Armor, Dampen Magic, Arcane Intellect, Mana Shield)

3.) DELETE THE QUEST! (This is the most important part.)

4.) The mobs spawn, 2 sets of 2's, 2 sets of 3's, 2 sets of 4's, all the way up to 2 sets of 5's. The mobs will spawn 1-5 seconds after they die. So AS SOON as the mobs die, run away and start resting up for the next set of AoEs.

5.) Your able to AoE these mobs and get as much XP as you possible can, for 10 minutes, then the mobs despawn. After this, go back to step number 2.

Repeat all of the above steps to get some of the best xp in the game.

What about Baron in Strath--that an exploit too?


Easy way to figure this out, ask yourself 2 questions:
1) Did the developers intead for this to happen, or is it a bug?
2) Does it give you a gain over anyone who does not know of this "trick"?

"Exploit" or "Creative use of game mechanics" or "Bug" are all the same thing, just classified in different levels of severity.
You -probably- will never get banned for using these explots / bugs / tricks / etc, however if you find one that is -exceptionally- beneficial, you might want to be careful. S'all I'm saying.

Hell I use http://www.wowhead.com/?item=18284 for every progression raid. Probably isn't spossed to stak with every spirit buff in the game (except mistletoe), but I use it anyways. Obviously this will prob get changed in the future, however the impact is small IMO (10mp5 in a boss encounter).

Now if you find a method to walk through walls to pull to C'Thun (people got banned)
Or to dupe items (Ban)
or to kill same side faction with your totems (small bans)
or wall jumping (ban)
or getting around the starting gate in ZA (ban)
or communicating with people of the opposite faction in game through the use of babelfish (ban if you use it. Developer asked to stop development)
... etc.

If they ban people for using an addon to communicate back and forth with horde, why do you think finding a way to level 5* faster then the other 'shmucks' couldn't?

[Sanctume]

So, is this an exploit, or creative use of game mechanic?

http://www.wowhead.com/?quest=1957



!)(Secret)(Secret)(Secret)(Secret)(!

Always hear about Mage AoEing is the best thing since sliced bread? Never been able to REALLY do it? Now you can! Go to the Dustwallow Marsh to receive this quest, Mana Surges, but be aware you would have to complete the quest to go to Uldaman before you can gain access to Mana Surges. This is a really nifty trick that I have never heard anybody talk about. I just happened to find this out on my own and startd to use it on my mage. With this nifty trick you can gain up to 55,000 xp/hr at level 40-45 easily, and yes, solo. Here's what you do:

1.) Make hundreds of food/drinks.

2.) Accept Mana Surges quest.

3.) Walk outside near the two torches and buff up. (Mage Armor, Dampen Magic, Arcane Intellect, Mana Shield)

3.) DELETE THE QUEST! (This is the most important part.)

4.) The mobs spawn, 2 sets of 2's, 2 sets of 3's, 2 sets of 4's, all the way up to 2 sets of 5's. The mobs will spawn 1-5 seconds after they die. So AS SOON as the mobs die, run away and start resting up for the next set of AoEs.

5.) Your able to AoE these mobs and get as much XP as you possible can, for 10 minutes, then the mobs despawn. After this, go back to step number 2.

Repeat all of the above steps to get some of the best xp in the game.

What about Baron in Strath--that an exploit too?


Easy way to figure this out, ask yourself 2 questions:
1) Did the developers intead for this to happen, or is it a bug?
2) Does it give you a gain over anyone who does not know of this "trick"?

"Exploit" or "Creative use of game mechanics" or "Bug" are all the same thing, just classified in different levels of severity.
You -probably- will never get banned for using these explots / bugs / tricks / etc, however if you find one that is -exceptionally- beneficial, you might want to be careful. S'all I'm saying.

Hell I use http://www.wowhead.com/?item=18284 for every progression raid. Probably isn't spossed to stak with every spirit buff in the game (except mistletoe), but I use it anyways. Obviously this will prob get changed in the future, however the impact is small IMO (10mp5 in a boss encounter).

Now if you find a method to walk through walls to pull to C'Thun (people got banned)
Or to dupe items (Ban)
or to kill same side faction with your totems (small bans)
or wall jumping (ban)
or getting around the starting gate in ZA (ban)
or communicating with people of the opposite faction in game through the use of babelfish (ban if you use it. Developer asked to stop development)
... etc.

If they ban people for using an addon to communicate back and forth with horde, why do you think finding a way to level 5* faster then the other 'shmucks' couldn't?I think the main difference between that you listed is that power leveling does not hurt the economy, or directly impact other player's gaming experience.

Your spirit buff is not an exploit, it is what it is--a benefit for some negative.

The rest griefs other people's play or a huge impact on the economy.

Easy way to figure this out, ask yourself 2 questions:

1) Did the developers intead for this to happen, or is it a bug?


That's not my job. I pay to play. Given, that it's Blizzard's rules; they can intend things whatever they want.

2) Does it give you a gain over anyone who does not know of this "trick"?



Now that sounds too general. You can apply that to raiding progression because each event has their own tricks. It don't differ with leveling, power leveling, or raiding.

[Stabface]

If getting 55k XP an hour solo at 40-45 is an exploit, I'd better stop doing quests!

[Vyndree]

If getting 55k XP an hour solo at 40-45 is an exploit, I'd better stop doing quests!

Just to clarify -- the 55k XP/hour solo is from a quest in Dustwallow that can be abandoned before completion in order to spawn mobs continually for 10 minutes. This is questionable, but not severe (since, as you mention, you can get similar xp/hour from doing quest normally).

The XP you could get from Zolo pre-nerf was much, much higher.


Powerleveling doesn't hurt the economy, but it does hurt the rest of the leveling playerbase when one player uses an exploit to gain experience that is substantially higher than ANY other method. They cannot realistically compete, and while you won't be flooding the market with items, you will be flooding the populace with newly-dinged 70's at a faster rate than anyone else.

[Suvega]

I think the main difference between that you listed is that power leveling does not hurt the economy, or directly impact other player's gaming experience.

Your spirit buff is not an exploit, it is what it is--a benefit for some negative.

The rest griefs other people's play or a huge impact on the economy.

Easy way to figure this out, ask yourself 2 questions:

1) Did the developers intead for this to happen, or is it a bug?


That's not my job. I pay to play. Given, that it's Blizzard's rules; they can intend things whatever they want.

2) Does it give you a gain over anyone who does not know of this "trick"?



Now that sounds too general. You can apply that to raiding progression because each event has their own tricks. It don't differ with leveling, power leveling, or raiding.

This is worthless, you can't honestly say with a straight face that you can't see the difference between exploits and tactics?
Why are you even arguing, other then to convince yourself that dragging mobs around to enable infinite mob spawns, evading mobs, etc to gain a leveling advantage is NOT an exploit.

Stop trying to defend shady activity with arguments that have no factual background.
"That's not my job. I pay to play."
Are you serious? You have to actually think longer then 5 seconds on wether zolo was an exploit or not.... Come on, wake up.

[Vyndree]

1) Did the developers intead for this to happen, or is it a bug?

That's not my job. I pay to play. Given, that it's Blizzard's rules; they can intend things whatever they want.

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5464367421&postId=53773931287&sid=1#59

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
There are several inescapable facts about people, in general.

They will not read user agreements.
They will break rules they are ignorant of.
They will circumvent rules they are aware of if they think they can get away with it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Aye. Which is regrettably why we've implemented penalties, albeit some more guided toward reformation. Education is a hand only offered once, though.

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=7475398109&postId=74746963073&sid=1#22

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
Did not know because how the system is set up once your reported you gain nothing past that point. Also if you do nothing for 5 minutes you are afked out. With those rules in place i would interpret that i could do whatever i wanted outside of use a 3rd party program or exploiting game mechanics with are obvious offenses. And the other reasons that i have posted that logically its very hard to justify non participation. I actually thought that if you got the afk debuff it kicked you out of the game. It was friend that told me no that you just don't get honor past that point. So i should just stand there and move around every so often because they do it all the time. And none of them are suspended at all. Hell every game i get in there is at least 7 people that have 0 damage and 0 healing and do nothing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ignorance is not absolution, and your interpretation is incorrect.

Regardless, this issue was very publicly announced and discussed months ago:

Battleground Non-participation Account Action
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=3881821974&sid=1

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5461386699&postId=53753719563&sid=1#8

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Q u o t e:
Hey

Recently i got a 72 hours account suspension because i abused of the Steam Tonk bug that bypass normal casting speed and give advantage up other World of Warcraft players.

I understand i did something wrong but i think you have to understand how frustrating is playing a Mage at PvP with resto Druids and Disc Priests around (lets not talk about the others, just this 2 are enough).

Im not trying to justify, i know i did something wrong, i wouldn't do it again but i think 72 hours is really too much because this is my first account action by using "exploit", i never used it before allways played clean.

I send a mail to Account Administration but i think i got ignored.

Im happy that Blizzard punish people that exploit but i think you are beign too hard with a good player like me because of a minor bug exploit that im sure 90% of the Mages are using it or used it least 1 time.

Thanks,

Undersky Undead Mage - Altar of Storms
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Actually, I think you're mistaken. First, this is not 'minor'. I keep seeing that word bandied about in reference to various forms of exploitation. One of the methods that people use to justify use of an exploit is the mistaken belief that 'everyone else does it too', or that it's only 'minor'. I assure you, they really don't, and it isn't. Even if they did, it would remain equally wrong, and equally a violation.

There are no justifications or mitigating explanations for exploitation. There are rules within World of Warcraft, and part of the agreement when you opt to play World of Warcraft is to follow those rules. It's quite simple really. For reference:

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html

Disputing the matter with Account Administration is the only available course, but given the nature of the situation, it is highly unlikely that this action will be overturned.

The penalty suits the severity of the issue by our standards, and those are ultimately the only standards that we apply.

[pinotnoir]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v234/U2Lover78/Beat_Dead_Horse.jpg

[Elili]

While I can agree with both points, I think it's beyond reasonable for anyone to think Blizzard would ban you for acting out a readily available game mechanic. Even if we were to assume that Blizzard is against the idea of using "Zolo like encounters" for boosting in this manner, Blizzard, as a company would not want to assume that all players, from this day to the end of days, would know that they even Hot Fixed Zolo. Until the day Blizzard makes the blanket rule "You may not use summoned creatures during an encounter to gain endless experience without moving." then there is nothing that makes it an exploit, or against the rule.

Intended or not this is a function of the game. In all reality, this is no different then a paladin running into the SM Cath, smacking the last boss in the face, then running back quickly to the door, and killing every mob in the zone in less then a minute. The fact is this was a known game mechanic. A party of 5 could have killed skeletons that Zolo summoned until their fingers were numb from playing if they so desired, long before a person used it to boost characters. Even still you can do that. Blizzard attempts to discourage things, not ban them, as such they will most likely continue to discourage more "Zolo like encounters" as well as further continue to discourage boosting in general.

I think we have to come to the realization that this isn't a stand by Blizzard against using encounters like Zolo to your advantage. This is a stand by Blizzard to attempt to further discourage boosting. Boosting is not an intended part of any game to the best of my knowledge. Blizzard has been kind enough not to make it so it's not impossible to boost, just discouraged it. They could easily just make it so any group with a party member X+ level's higher, causes the group to receive next to no XP, and suddenly boosting is over. No one is going to boost a party if they get 3 XP a kill. We should take this for what it is, it's Blizzard tweaking the game so that people have to work to earn their levels, rather then quickly rush through them, not make a policy statement.

**Edit** I'm adding to this because I feel it came out not saying exactly what I wanted. I need to learn brevity.

In no way do I want to sound like I support the use of this type of encounter. I believe that common sense and logic should have said this wasn't an intelligent thing to do, but I stand by it not being an exploit. Blizzard (And any other company) keep their EULA somewhat vague and open to interpretation for the same reason the Constitution is sometimes vague and open to interpretation. Because things change. Blizzard, just like anyone else, can not predict the future. They cannot predict what new and interesting ways people will find to do things, or to break the rules. By leaving the EULA vague something such as the Zolo encounter can just as easily be banned for, as hot fixed. This isn't to say Blizzard would, it's bad business to ban for something 'You' failed to account for, so they attempt to avoid it at all costs. Had the Zolo encounter somehow effected the rest of the world (Say all the skeletons dropped loot, and suddenly you just rained the Auction house with items from it) their decision may have been different. We don't know, we aren't Blizzard, and as such cannot speak for them. When you signed the EULA, you put yourself into a contract, that has only one exit. Quitting the game. If you did not agree with this contract you were offered a refund, their decisions will be final. Your free to break this contract, so long as your willing to pay the penalty (Being banned).

With all this being said, I've put together a very simple flow chart that I believe illustrates how to approach this type of situation.

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/3308/flowchartcopypy8.jpg

[Vyndree]

With all this being said, I've put together a very simple flow chart that I believe illustrates how to approach this type of situation.

http://img337.imageshack.us/img337/5725/flowchartep9.jpg

I agree 100% with this flowchart. :)

Very nicely done. :)

[Dorffo]

/thread

all hail the flowchart

[Elili]

I've noticed my ability to think late at night is bad, and I placed a Yes / No in the wrong place. But I guess the idea stands..

Please refer to revised flow chart for all future questions.

http://img177.imageshack.us/img177/3308/flowchartcopypy8.jpg

[Zaelar]

The flowchart says I shouldn't get my mounts at 30.

Running heroics by myself sounds too good to be true too...

[Elili]

The flowchart says I shouldn't get my mounts at 30.

Running heroics by myself sounds too good to be true too...Maybe it's just me .. but running heroics by myself is sooo not too good to be true. It's the toughest gameplay I've ever been able to find.

[Catamer]

lets face it, using a level 70 to run a bunch of toons through any instance is an exploit that they don't currently ban anyone for.

CoH used to level limit the characters to the instance, so a level 10-15 instance would reduce the level 70 to 15 for that instance. No free rides there. Hopefully we won't ever be seeing that type of patch in WoW.

[Tonuss]

The only thing unintended with zolo is how well it worked.I think this is really what it came down to. That it was relatively easy to set up and the experience rate was extremely fast, which could make it a really popular way to PL groups. After all, they have not forbidden players to powerlevel lower characters through dungeons, including using a paladin or mage to AoE places like Ragefire Chasm or Scarlet Monastery. You can probably clear those dungeons in 2-5 pulls.

I suppose the only other 'exploit' with Zolo was that you were deliberately keeping him alive, deliberately spawning skeletons, and not even killing the skeletons, just allowing them to despawn and provide experience. Whereas in zones like SM you are doing what a normal group would also do-- trying to kill the mobs for experience.

I think we're getting a bit too hung up on the term exploit. My only concern with the Zolo exploit was whether or not Blizzard considered it a ban-worthy offense, and it seems as if they did not. GMs appeared to advise players not to do it, but stopped short of warning them of any adverse consequences. For me, as long as we were not discussing something bannable, I was not concerned. And Blizzard changed it, and that is pretty much that.

[Vyndree]

lets face it, using a level 70 to run a bunch of toons through any instance is an exploit that they don't currently ban anyone for.

Zolo wasn't either since it was a confirmed by a blue. It wasn't supported, but it wasn't an exploit due to the fact that Blizzard themselves said "we're not going to ban anyone over this, but don't expect us to help you".

Now that Zolo is nerfed, it's no longer "safe" to assume that finding a way to "fix" it such that the now-exploit works again, or doing a similar thing to another boss with a similar mechanic, would prevent you from getting banned.

Boosting with a 70 is still penalized by the instance reset cap per hour, and XP decay mechanics (for grouping with a much higher level). You also go in and out of combat appropriately, which decays your durability, forcing you to have to leave to repair. Granted, being hit by mobs also decays your durability, but going in and out of combat frequently accellerates the process.