4000 that aren't getting more loot than the other 240 guilds that are actually full with members that can complete heroics.... Nothing wrong there.
Actually I disagree with you because it's about progression as you have said before. Those 4000 (whatever the number is) were able to get T7 rewards a few months faster than they should have been.
Full disclosure I have no problem with guilds asking for help but if you want the mods to punish hoppers then they have to punish those that also benefited from hoppers. Since fairness is a big issue for you, how is it fair that weaker guilds were able to get T7 materials when guilds of the same strength who didn't seek outside help couldn't? Now players who had been playing say 2-3 months were able to get the same gear as players who had been playing 5-6 months.
That's wrong though isn't it. Because if the mercs joined those guilds, they would of been able to beat heroics like they did.
Ahh and that's where things become tricky. Yes some random hoppers got lucky and hopped into guilds doing T7 raids who would have normally been able to complete the raid on their own. But other guilds especially those that needed an officers approval to join actively sought outside help once the guild ran out of toons.
So do you ban everyone that hopped and everyone that hoppers join? How do you differentiate hoppers from people who were active hoppers and people who just left weak guilds for better guilds? Is it ethical to ban people when a mod had already stated that hopping was an accepted practice until further notice? These are retrocical questions but you can see how difficult it would be for the developers to rule on.
I've just said the host guilds aren't doing anything wrong and that if they had a full guild including the mercs they would or should of been able to complete the raid. Is that not the case?
The number of raids completed is the indicator surely. Just as the number of times people collected multiple rewards, it would be subjective but entirely enforcable by the ToS regardless of what the devs said in the update if they chose to change their position. All they would have to say is guild hopping was given the ok but some people have severely abused it and boom, accounts are having extra rewards removed....
I've just said the host guilds aren't doing anything wrong and that if they had a full guild including the mercs they would or should of been able to complete the raid. Is that not the case?
The number of raids completed is the indicator surely. Just as the number of times people collected multiple rewards, it would be subjective but entirely enforcable by the ToS regardless of what the devs said in the update if they chose to change their position. All they would have to say is guild hopping was given the ok but some people have severely abused it and boom, accounts are having extra rewards removed....
It most likely won't happen but it could.
Ohhh so that's what it comes down to. Because you said the host guilds (who knowingly took on mercs) didn't do anything wrong. So because that's your opinion regardless of facts they shouldn't be punished, I guess the developers are gonna start make decisions based on your opinion now.
I want to incite the exploit definition because that's very controversial and I don't believe it was an exploit but if that's what you're going to call it then every guild seeking help broke ToS. Because they communicated this known exploit and took advantage of it.
So if it's a witch hunt you want then you have to ban and punish both sides
If they did, the game wouldn't be riddled with exploits. So i guess that would be a positive choice for the integrity and reputation of the game and devs although that doesn't seem to be high up on their priorities.
The point I made which you haven't argued against is that if those guilds contained the temp members, they would be able to complete the raids and get the rewards. Is that statement innacurate? Then by inviting the members to join, what have they done that breaks the rules?
I don't understand what you're trying to argue. If those guilds didn't contain the temp members then no they wouldn't have been able to finish the raid (the reason why the sought help). By seeking help they were communicating and exploiting guild hopping a feature of the game that you have deemed as an exploit.
I think I see what you're saying and the answer is no you can't assume that weaker guilds would have normally contained the stronger temp players. The reason for this is because the stronger players could have done a multi of things besides joining weaker guilds. 1. They could have formed their own guilds. 2. They could have joined guilds that were already able to do T7 raids. 3. They could have made an alt account and hopped between a main and alt.
Regardless of what they could have done, it doesn't take away from the fact that guilds took advantage of, communicated and actively sought outside help I.e. Exploiting your exploit which is against TOS
You don't have to subscribe to the subreddit to be following it.. But he provided you with one example mercs and guilds alike also use discord, the forum, Reddit, and plenty of other channels to post. He gave you an example and a pretty good one at that you just choose to belittle it.
I understand that, but active mercs who are 'hiving' at that site will probably subscribe. And he said to look back a few days to see all the guild-hopping merc posts. I did (and provided a link), and didn't see many/any merc posts. If it's a pretty good example, why don't I see those posts?
If those guilds didn't contain the temp members then no they wouldn't have been able to finish the raid (the reason why the sought help). By seeking help they were communicating and exploiting guild hopping a feature of the game that you have deemed as an exploit.
Except that very few—if any—guilds who were recruiting required that their helpers leave as soon as the raid was finished. Most, if not all, of those guilds would have preferred the hopper to stay on.
You talk like completing a heroic raid is some super hard thing that normally requires a guild full of mature accounts with multiple 7-star squads. That's simply not true, as it really requires maybe 10 strong players and a bunch of coin farmers. Players with young accounts can do heroic raids, in guilds that require no assistance, by simply playing the role of coin farmer while the heavy hitters take top rewards and do heavy damage. And just like established T7 guilds often recruit coin farmers, nascent T7 guilds often recruit heavy hitters. No hopping is required.
You don't have to subscribe to the subreddit to be following it.. But he provided you with one example mercs and guilds alike also use discord, the forum, Reddit, and plenty of other channels to post. He gave you an example and a pretty good one at that you just choose to belittle it.
I understand that, but active mercs who are 'hiving' at that site will probably subscribe. And he said to look back a few days to see all the guild-hopping merc posts. I did (and provided a link), and didn't see many/any merc posts. If it's a pretty good example, why don't I see those posts?
If those guilds didn't contain the temp members then no they wouldn't have been able to finish the raid (the reason why the sought help). By seeking help they were communicating and exploiting guild hopping a feature of the game that you have deemed as an exploit.
Except that very few—if any—guilds who were recruiting required that their helpers leave as soon as the raid was finished. Most, if not all, of those guilds would have preferred the hopper to stay on.
You talk like completing a heroic raid is some super hard thing that normally requires a guild full of mature accounts with multiple 7-star squads. That's simply not true, as it really requires maybe 10 strong players and a bunch of coin farmers. Players with young accounts can do heroic raids, in guilds that require no assistance, by simply playing the role of coin farmer while the heavy hitters take top rewards and do heavy damage. And just like established T7 guilds often recruit coin farmers, nascent T7 guilds often recruit heavy hitters. No hopping is required.
No you're right heroics now are not difficult but during the peak of hopping yes it was difficult and guilds have stated on the forum they were able to complete T7 raids months ahead of time due to mercs.
Furthermore it doesn't matter if the guild would have wanted hoppers to stay. Guilds who contacted mercs knew they were going to leave after the raid was over, no one was under the false impression that a merc was going to stay. Because guilds had prior knowledge that a merc would leave, so by your definition they exploited guild hopping.
When guilds posted ads stating that they needed help with a T7 rancor at 25%, they were clearly asking for temporary help.
I don't understand what you're trying to argue. If those guilds didn't contain the temp members then no they wouldn't have been able to finish the raid (the reason why the sought help). By seeking help they were communicating and exploiting guild hopping a feature of the game that you have deemed as an exploit.
Exactly, without inviting members to fill the spots they wouldn't of completed the raid. So by doing so, what is outside of normal gameplay? The fact those spots were filled with temp members again, what is wrong with that? The fact people who were guild hopping took those spots, what's wrong with that?
So lets get this straight - the posters on this thread who feel strongly against hopping and have likely never hopped/merced/alt farmed etc etc seem to know more than actual hoppers about
- how many hoppers/mercs/alt farmers there are in this game
- their spending habits, strength of rosters etc.
- how mercing is organized, and how many members are part of the various communities of mercs
- what guilds actually want when they ask for merc help
- when and how often guilds need help
These same guys also know
- what the dev's were ACTUALLY saying
- how the devs ACTUALLY intended to design the game
- what's good or bad for the game everyone who plays
I don't understand what you're trying to argue. If those guilds didn't contain the temp members then no they wouldn't have been able to finish the raid (the reason why the sought help). By seeking help they were communicating and exploiting guild hopping a feature of the game that you have deemed as an exploit.
Exactly, without inviting members to fill the spots they wouldn't of completed the raid. So by doing so, what is outside of normal gameplay? The fact those spots were filled with temp members again, what is wrong with that? The fact people who were guild hopping took those spots, what's wrong with that?
You just stated the problem with it in your first sentence, they would have never been able to finish the raid hence exploiting the use of mercs or members that they wouldn't of otherwise had. You love to cite the ToS but re read it and I guarentee you it prohibits people from communicating known exploits. When guilds talk amongst each other or post on the forum asking for guild hoppers it's communicating and exploiting that exploit.... But let me guess it's not an exploit in this case because you benefitted from hoppers joining your guild.
I know that you have an alt account and I know you have an alt guild on that account. I also know that you've mentioned alt farming and potentionally doing that. Therefor you should be punished for communicating a "known exploit"
Hey, @Lithium, thanks for coming back with more fallacies!
By the way, I'm not the one who claimed there were thousands of hoppers hiving at places like that subreddit—all I did was show that the evidence presented did not support the claim.
Furthermore it doesn't matter if the guild would have wanted hoppers to stay. Guilds who contacted mercs knew they were going to leave after the raid was over, no one was under the false impression that a merc was going to stay. Because guilds had prior knowledge that a merc would leave, so by your definition they exploited guild hopping.
When guilds posted ads stating that they needed help with a T7 rancor at 25%, they were clearly asking for temporary help.
You don't think intent has anything to do with culpability? When a hopper racks up a lot more raids than they could do without hopping, that shows pretty clear intent. When a guild asks for immediate—not temporary—help, this doesn't prove they intended for recruits to hop out, much less prove that all guild members intended for this to happen.
No you're right heroics now are not difficult but during the peak of hopping yes it was difficult and guilds have stated on the forum they were able to complete T7 raids months ahead of time due to mercs.
Wait: mercs allowed them to complete heroics months earlier than they otherwise would have? You mean they would continue to need mercs for months if they wanted to keep completing heroics? In other words, they would have welcomed strong players who could stay for months, instead of hopping away after each raid? It sounds like you're saying they didn't want temporary help at all...
You're assuming that guild hoppers would have otherwise been in weak guilds which isn't true. Nor does this take away from a guild knowingly seeking and accepting mercs into their guild when it was previously known by both sides they weren't going to stay.... I know you're going to say guilds were ignorant of this but we both now that's not true.
So you're saying it's not in the terms of service... And are you really comparing the Vader exploit to this? A couple clear differences. 1. Guild hopping was acknowledged and okayed by the mods. 2. The Vader shard exploit was deemed an exploit from when it was discovered. 3. It was an in game glitch that allowed people to get more Vader shards by adding and removing allies. How are these two related?
You're assuming that guild hoppers would have otherwise been in weak guilds which isn't true. Nor does this take away from a guild knowingly seeking and accepting mercs into their guild when it was previously known by both sides they weren't going to stay.... I know you're going to say guilds were ignorant of this but we both now that's not true.
I'm saying it's easy to prove intent when you have people doing a raid every day because they hopped. I'm saying it's harder to prove intent on the part of guilds—and even harder on the part of individual members—when they didn't exceed normal raid limits and would have welcomed strong members to stay. Sure, hoppers might not have stuck with weak guilds. But if they wanted to maximize their rewards, as they obviously did, it make a lot more sense to be #1 in a weak guild than average in a strong guild.
Of course, I'm not advocating punishment for what happened before, anyway, so this doesn't really matter.
So you're saying it's not in the terms of service... And are you really comparing the Vader exploit to this? A couple clear differences. 1. Guild hopping was acknowledged and okayed by the mods. 2. The Vader shard exploit was deemed an exploit from when it was discovered. 3. It was an in game glitch that allowed people to get more Vader shards by adding and removing allies. How are these two related?
How are they related? Well, to the extent they show that something doesn't have to be mentioned in the ToS for it to be an exploit. If you're going to demand something appear in the ToS as an exploit, I'll demand it, too.
Anyway, like I've said multiple times, I'm really only concerned with things going forward. While alting and hopping may have been condoned in the past, the very update this thread is about talks about known exploits.
Your original comment was about banning those who had participated in guild hopping. The difference is that hopping was documented and approved for time being. The Vader exploit and multiple raid reward exploit were undocumented in game bugs/glitches. They were addressed from the beginning as glitches and exploits, the mods never said go ahead and get as many Vader shards as possible from completing the same achievement.
Your original comment was about banning those who had participated in guild hopping. The difference is that hopping was documented and approved for time being. The Vader exploit and multiple raid reward exploit were undocumented in game bugs/glitches. They were addressed from the beginning as glitches and exploits, the mods never said go ahead and get as many Vader shards as possible from completing the same achievement.
Go back to page one and take a look at the post that started this thread. Here's what I wrote: "So my question is whether those who continue to guild hop and alt farm will be punished for taking advantage of this "known exploit.""
Your whole focus on punishing guilds who hosted mercs is a giant red herring, as I don't think anyone has suggested that mercs be punished for mercing in the past.
From Georgerules argument he definitely called for mercs to be punished for mercing in the past and for rewards to be taking. Don't change the argument now.
Hey if someone needs mercs, wait I mean a strong member to join and permanently stay in your guild until the end of time (or a few days if I happen to change my mind).
Im without a guild and have 65 raid toons.
I like coining weaker guilds so if your t5 but u wanna do heroics hit me up on line app.
My I'd is sithlordluke on line app.
Mercs are bad I'm not a merc I just only like joining guilds that need help beating heroics.
Replies
Actually I disagree with you because it's about progression as you have said before. Those 4000 (whatever the number is) were able to get T7 rewards a few months faster than they should have been.
Full disclosure I have no problem with guilds asking for help but if you want the mods to punish hoppers then they have to punish those that also benefited from hoppers. Since fairness is a big issue for you, how is it fair that weaker guilds were able to get T7 materials when guilds of the same strength who didn't seek outside help couldn't? Now players who had been playing say 2-3 months were able to get the same gear as players who had been playing 5-6 months.
Ahh and that's where things become tricky. Yes some random hoppers got lucky and hopped into guilds doing T7 raids who would have normally been able to complete the raid on their own. But other guilds especially those that needed an officers approval to join actively sought outside help once the guild ran out of toons.
So do you ban everyone that hopped and everyone that hoppers join? How do you differentiate hoppers from people who were active hoppers and people who just left weak guilds for better guilds? Is it ethical to ban people when a mod had already stated that hopping was an accepted practice until further notice? These are retrocical questions but you can see how difficult it would be for the developers to rule on.
The number of raids completed is the indicator surely. Just as the number of times people collected multiple rewards, it would be subjective but entirely enforcable by the ToS regardless of what the devs said in the update if they chose to change their position. All they would have to say is guild hopping was given the ok but some people have severely abused it and boom, accounts are having extra rewards removed....
It most likely won't happen but it could.
Ohhh so that's what it comes down to. Because you said the host guilds (who knowingly took on mercs) didn't do anything wrong. So because that's your opinion regardless of facts they shouldn't be punished, I guess the developers are gonna start make decisions based on your opinion now.
So if it's a witch hunt you want then you have to ban and punish both sides
The point I made which you haven't argued against is that if those guilds contained the temp members, they would be able to complete the raids and get the rewards. Is that statement innacurate? Then by inviting the members to join, what have they done that breaks the rules?
Regardless of what they could have done, it doesn't take away from the fact that guilds took advantage of, communicated and actively sought outside help I.e. Exploiting your exploit which is against TOS
You talk like completing a heroic raid is some super hard thing that normally requires a guild full of mature accounts with multiple 7-star squads. That's simply not true, as it really requires maybe 10 strong players and a bunch of coin farmers. Players with young accounts can do heroic raids, in guilds that require no assistance, by simply playing the role of coin farmer while the heavy hitters take top rewards and do heavy damage. And just like established T7 guilds often recruit coin farmers, nascent T7 guilds often recruit heavy hitters. No hopping is required.
No you're right heroics now are not difficult but during the peak of hopping yes it was difficult and guilds have stated on the forum they were able to complete T7 raids months ahead of time due to mercs.
Furthermore it doesn't matter if the guild would have wanted hoppers to stay. Guilds who contacted mercs knew they were going to leave after the raid was over, no one was under the false impression that a merc was going to stay. Because guilds had prior knowledge that a merc would leave, so by your definition they exploited guild hopping.
When guilds posted ads stating that they needed help with a T7 rancor at 25%, they were clearly asking for temporary help.
Exactly, without inviting members to fill the spots they wouldn't of completed the raid. So by doing so, what is outside of normal gameplay? The fact those spots were filled with temp members again, what is wrong with that? The fact people who were guild hopping took those spots, what's wrong with that?
- how many hoppers/mercs/alt farmers there are in this game
- their spending habits, strength of rosters etc.
- how mercing is organized, and how many members are part of the various communities of mercs
- what guilds actually want when they ask for merc help
- when and how often guilds need help
These same guys also know
- what the dev's were ACTUALLY saying
- how the devs ACTUALLY intended to design the game
- what's good or bad for the game everyone who plays
Hilarious.
You just stated the problem with it in your first sentence, they would have never been able to finish the raid hence exploiting the use of mercs or members that they wouldn't of otherwise had. You love to cite the ToS but re read it and I guarentee you it prohibits people from communicating known exploits. When guilds talk amongst each other or post on the forum asking for guild hoppers it's communicating and exploiting that exploit.... But let me guess it's not an exploit in this case because you benefitted from hoppers joining your guild.
I know that you have an alt account and I know you have an alt guild on that account. I also know that you've mentioned alt farming and potentionally doing that. Therefor you should be punished for communicating a "known exploit"
By the way, I'm not the one who claimed there were thousands of hoppers hiving at places like that subreddit—all I did was show that the evidence presented did not support the claim.
You don't think intent has anything to do with culpability? When a hopper racks up a lot more raids than they could do without hopping, that shows pretty clear intent. When a guild asks for immediate—not temporary—help, this doesn't prove they intended for recruits to hop out, much less prove that all guild members intended for this to happen.
Wait: mercs allowed them to complete heroics months earlier than they otherwise would have? You mean they would continue to need mercs for months if they wanted to keep completing heroics? In other words, they would have welcomed strong players who could stay for months, instead of hopping away after each raid? It sounds like you're saying they didn't want temporary help at all...
Sure, just as soon as you send me a snapshot of the ToS where it lists Vader shards as an exploit.
So you're saying it's not in the terms of service... And are you really comparing the Vader exploit to this? A couple clear differences. 1. Guild hopping was acknowledged and okayed by the mods. 2. The Vader shard exploit was deemed an exploit from when it was discovered. 3. It was an in game glitch that allowed people to get more Vader shards by adding and removing allies. How are these two related?
This comes directly from the ToS the Vader exploit was an undocumented acheviment bug. But wait wasn't guild hopping widely documented?
Of course, I'm not advocating punishment for what happened before, anyway, so this doesn't really matter.
How are they related? Well, to the extent they show that something doesn't have to be mentioned in the ToS for it to be an exploit. If you're going to demand something appear in the ToS as an exploit, I'll demand it, too.
Anyway, like I've said multiple times, I'm really only concerned with things going forward. While alting and hopping may have been condoned in the past, the very update this thread is about talks about known exploits.
Interesting way of watching from the sidelines.
Please tell me when,what and how I can comment so that I don't breach your TOS.
Your whole focus on punishing guilds who hosted mercs is a giant red herring, as I don't think anyone has suggested that mercs be punished for mercing in the past.
Sorry for taking your comments at face value. I'll try not to make the same mistake again.
Thanks Mr. Wheredidisaythat.
Im without a guild and have 65 raid toons.
I like coining weaker guilds so if your t5 but u wanna do heroics hit me up on line app.
My I'd is sithlordluke on line app.
Mercs are bad I'm not a merc I just only like joining guilds that need help beating heroics.
Hope I don't get banned for helping others.
Some guys are ruthless on this forum.