hard facts about wizards wardrobe breaking the add-on terms and CoC

Ardriel · 11:52AM

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.
Your problem is that you don’t want to be forced to use this add-on. Am I getting that right?

However, all the other add-ons that are commonly used in raids—Combat Alerts, Raid Notifier, etc., etc.—also offer an advantage. None of them are exploits or provide an unfair advantage in leader board content as anyone is free to use them.
In your opinion, should we ban all of them too, or do you actually use some of them? If you really use any of these add-ons, your arguments are just hypocrisy. Whatever your reasons for not wanting to use WW - it does not violate ZOS’s Terms of Service. As has already been mentioned here several times.

Your only concern is that you don’t want to use this add-on and don’t want others to use it and gain an advantage.
I think you should ask for this thread to be closed. It’s getting us nowhere.

Blood_again · 11:55AM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

I used the AI to map those real-world gameplay problems to the actual language in the TOS and CoC so the devs can't ignore the connection.

The problem is:
Using AI for interpreting documents and cases will make people ignore your input.
Just because they can get that kind of input at any time by opening AI chat window. No need for proxies.

frogthroat · 12:08PM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

I’m not "hallucinating" rules.

Can you give me a link to the specific part in "API Access is NOT Legal Consent (TOS, Section D)"

It needs to be in TOS, not Addon Terms. It needs to talk about the API Access. And there has to be a section D.

heimdall14_9 · 12:10PM

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.
Your problem is that you don’t want to be forced to use this add-on. Am I getting that right?

However, all the other add-ons that are commonly used in raids—Combat Alerts, Raid Notifier, etc., etc.—also offer an advantage. None of them are exploits or provide an unfair advantage in leader board content as anyone is free to use them.
In your opinion, should we ban all of them too, or do you actually use some of them? If you really use any of these add-ons, your arguments are just hypocrisy. Whatever your reasons for not wanting to use WW - it does not violate ZOS’s Terms of Service. As has already been mentioned here several times.

Your only concern is that you don’t want to use this add-on and don’t want others to use it and gain an advantage.
I think you should ask for this thread to be closed. It’s getting us nowhere.

i have and use 0 add-ons in playing eso , and my personal opinion is all combat advantages gave out by add-ons should be removed from the game not because i dont use them but because its a burden on the player base as a whole regardless if youd like to admit it add-ons puts a devide into the player base . once add-ons hit psn that devide was seen like the parting of the red sea 3/4 of the players ive played with for over 7 years some 10 ALL left the game , 8 core groups broke up over if add-ons should or shouldnt be used/mandatory in their runs , but i can only fight one issue at a time and wizards wardrobe so happen to also burden the development of the UI respec making it need to be reverted so as wizard's wouldnt become even stronger than it already was , giving me more reason to look into it and test out what it could and couldnt do , but i have ALWAYS OPENLY STATED THAT ALL COMBAT ADD-ONS need to be changed or removed

xylena · 12:19PM

hard facts: op owes me 337.5 million gold

heimdall14_9 · 12:24PM

xylena wrote: »

hard facts: op owes me 337.5 million gold

how would i owe anything ???

heimdall14_9 · 1:02PM

frogthroat wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

I’m not "hallucinating" rules.

Can you give me a link to the specific part in "API Access is NOT Legal Consent (TOS, Section D)"

It needs to be in TOS, not Addon Terms. It needs to talk about the API Access. And there has to be a section D.

no i cant as ( "API Access is NOT Legal Consent") was a title made by me while talking about
ZENIMAX MEDIA TERMS OF SERVICE
D. Game Mods
ZeniMax may, but is not required under the Terms of Service to, validate, test, evaluate or pre-screen Game Mods.

ZeniMax does not endorse, sponsor, guarantee or approve any Game Mods, including without limitation Game Mods available for download from a ZeniMax website.

as having API access in not legal consent that zos supports any add-on
nice try at playing with words but taking parts out of context dont help you look good

my formatting

4. API Access is NOT Legal Consent (TOS, Section D)

“ZeniMax does not endorse, sponsor, guarantee or approve any Game Mods... ZeniMax may, but is not required to, validate, test, evaluate or pre-screen Game Mods.”
The Fact: The argument "If ZOS didn't want it, they'd break the API" is a fallacy. ZOS explicitly states they do not pre-screen.

keep things whole dont break them down to fit a narrative that dont exist
just as none of these title exist

The "Spirit of the Game" Catch-all (Code of Conduct, Section 5.1)
Abuse of Scoring Systems (Code of Conduct, Section 5.2)
The "Unfair Burden" Rule (Add-on Terms, Section 1-iii)

only part of them that wasnt self made is ending ( xxxx)

spartaxoxo · 1:14PM

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

HatchetHaro · 1:20PM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

I used AI to help aggregate and review these specific legal clauses for accuracy.

<insert slop here>

i used AI so i can put all of your reasonings into one post and shoot them all down at once as nothing anyone is saying shows that wizards wardrobe doesnt in fact break the rules set forth by zos in their ToS/ add-on terms and CoC

Aight, if you're going to slop your responses using AI, then the gloves are off.

__________________________________________________
It's interesting that you used AI to aggregate these clauses, but AI is only as good as the prompts provided. If you ask a machine to find 'evidence of a crime,' it will ignore the 'evidence of innocence.'

Let’s apply some actual Systems Analysis to these specific legal points:

1. Re: The "Unfair Burden" Rule (Add-on Terms 1-iii)

Your AI has misinterpreted 'Burden.' In a technical and legal sense within ZOS's framework, an 'undue burden' refers to Server-Side Stress or Client Instability. It means an addon cannot spam the server with so many requests that it causes lag for other users or crashes the service.
The Fact: Wizard's Wardrobe sends a discrete burst of packets only when triggered out of combat. It does not stress the Megaserver.

Social vs. Technical: If a Trial group requires an addon, that is a Social Contract, not a Technical Burden. ZOS does not regulate how players form groups; if they did, 'requiring a certain DPS' would also be an 'unfair burden.'

2. Re: Abuse of Scoring Systems (CoC 5.2)

The claim that swapping gear 'manipulates' time-based scores fundamentally misidentifies the nature of a speed-run.
The Fact: In ESO Trials, the leaderboard timer runs continuously from the first pull to the final boss's death. This timer includes combat, movement, and preparation. Optimization of any of these phases is the core objective of competitive scoring.

The Logic: If saving time between pulls via a UI shortcut is 'abuse,' then using a mount to move between bosses faster or using 'Major Gallop' is also 'abuse.' Both use game-authorized mechanics to reduce the total elapsed time.

The Intent: Scoring systems are designed to reward the group that completes the trial the fastest. ZOS provides an API that allows for gear swapping precisely because they recognize that 'Inventory Management Simulator' is not the skill being tested in a Trial—combat execution and group coordination are. By your AI’s logic, the only 'legitimate' score would be one where players are forbidden from running or using synergies to save time.

3. Re: The "Spirit of the Game" (CoC 5.1)

This clause is a 'Catch-all' designed to ban harassers and gold-sellers. To apply it to a UI mod is a massive reach.
The Fact: ZOS defines 'Integrity' as the prevention of exploits (like clipping through walls).

The Reality: If ZOS believed 'community fragmentation' due to addons harmed the game's integrity, they would have removed the API in 2014. Instead, they have consistently expanded it. The 'Spirit of the Game' is defined by the developers, and the developers have provided the tools for this addon to exist.

4. Re: API Access is NOT Legal Consent (TOS Section D)

While ZOS doesn't 'endorse' specific mods, they do Authorize the API. There is a legal distinction between Endorsement (marketing) and Authorization (permission).
The Fact: ZOS regularly 'breaks' certain API functions (like the ones that used to allow auto-interrupted casts or automated dodging). By not breaking the "EquipItem" or "SlotSkill" functions, they are maintaining an Explicit Permission for those functions to be used by the community.

Your AI analysis focuses on the words of the ToS while ignoring the Enforcement History and Technical Implementation.

If Wizard's Wardrobe were a violation, the 'Hard Fact' is that the authors would be banned and the API functions would be revoked. Since neither has happened in nearly a decade, the only thing being 'burdened' here is this thread by a fundamental misunderstanding of how MMO architecture works. We aren't playing an 'automation suite'; we are playing a modern MMO that values player efficiency.
__________________________________________________

Two can play at that game. You want to continue with the slopfest, or do you want to just ask your AI in a fresh chat whether it thinks Wizard's Wardrobe should be allowed or not?

@HatchetHaro — You’re missing the point of why I’m using AI. I didn't ask it to "find a crime"; I gave it the specific issues I’ve witnessed as a release-day vet with 16 accounts—like the fact that raid groups are falling apart and players are being forced into 3rd party setups just to keep a spot. I used the AI to map those real-world gameplay problems to the actual language in the TOS and CoC so the devs can't ignore the connection.

Let’s talk about your "Systems Analysis":

On "Unfair Burden": You’re focused only on the technical side (server lag). But Section 1-iii specifically says "and/or to other users." When a player is excluded from content because they won't download a 3rd party automation tool, that is a social and gameplay burden placed on that user by the addon’s existence. ZOS doesn't just regulate servers; they regulate the user experience.

On "Scoring Systems": You claim it has "zero effect" because it happens out of combat. That's a technicality that ignores the Score. If Group A swaps 12 people’s gear/CP/Skills in 2 seconds and Group B takes 45 seconds to do it manually, Group A has a massive time advantage on the leaderboard. That is a mechanical manipulation of the time-based scoring system, period.

On "Authorization": There is a huge difference between "leaving a door unlocked" and "giving you permission to enter." Just because the API hasn't been nuked yet doesn't mean the way it's being used in Trials doesn't violate the spirit of the CoC. Section D explicitly says they don't endorse or approve these mods.

I’m not "hallucinating" rules. I’m holding ZOS to the ones they actually wrote. If you think "player efficiency" should override the written Code of Conduct, then you’re the one arguing against the facts.

Oh hey look! AI hallucinates! Who woulda thunk it?

heimdall14_9 · 1:32PM

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

you know you are right about what you say and maybe if for years others wouldnt try bashing me belittleing me i might have came off differently on how to change up some of these issues but i have no love nor loyalty to this community by their own choices to insult me instead of focusing on the facts being put forth , but no its my writing, its my use of AI , its me being jealous , its always something other than facts

frogthroat · 1:40PM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

ZENIMAX MEDIA TERMS OF SERVICE
D. Game Mods
ZeniMax may, but is not required under the Terms of Service to, validate, test, evaluate or pre-screen Game Mods.

ZeniMax does not endorse, sponsor, guarantee or approve any Game Mods, including without limitation Game Mods available for download from a ZeniMax website.

The section 2.D is basically a disclaimer. In layman's terms it's "there are mods, we give no guarantees if they work. Not our responsibility if you download them and they don't work, even if you download them from our website." Nothing to do with API access. It doesn't say anything for it, or against it.

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

nice try at playing with words but taking parts out of context dont help you look good

Just pointing out what irrelevant things you quote.

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

The Fact: The argument "If ZOS didn't want it, they'd break the API" is a fallacy. ZOS explicitly states they do not pre-screen.

Incorrect. You have the text in front of you.

They say they may, but are not required to pre-screen. As in, they may if they feel like it. But they are not required to do so. The whole section is basically "we can, but we don't have to".

You are reading a section that is essentially a disclaimer, missing key words, and treating it as a rule book.

And the "break the API" is a bit harsh wording. But yes, if ZOS didn't want automatic item equipping, they would not have EquipItem parameter in the API. It is also possible to add timeouts, which in many cases are used to avoid spamming. The automatic equipment equipping had to be deliberately coded into the API. It's not an accident. It is there by design. They paid a programmer to add that into the code. If they wanted, they could just add a small line of code that states you can only call EquipItem every 1000ms. They haven't done that. Can you guess why?

Well, you know very well why. You just refuse to believe ZOS is fine with having WW as an addon. They do not endorse it because they do not endorse any addon. And they do not have an approval process, so there is no explicit approval requirement either.

Reginald_leBlem · 1:41PM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

you know you are right about what you say and maybe if for years others wouldnt try bashing me belittleing me i might have came off differently on how to change up some of these issues but i have no love nor loyalty to this community by their own choices to insult me instead of focusing on the facts being put forth , but no its my writing, its my use of AI , its me being jealous , its always something other than facts

If consoles don't even have access to this addon how are you getting banned from groups for not using it?

spartaxoxo · 1:44PM

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

you know you are right about what you say and maybe if for years others wouldnt try bashing me belittleing me i might have came off differently on how to change up some of these issues but i have no love nor loyalty to this community by their own choices to insult me instead of focusing on the facts being put forth , but no its my writing, its my use of AI , its me being jealous , its always something other than facts

If consoles don't even have access to this addon how are you getting banned from groups for not using it?

PlayStation 5 users have the add-on. PlayStation 4 users do not. They are the same server.

heimdall14_9 · 1:50PM

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

you know you are right about what you say and maybe if for years others wouldnt try bashing me belittleing me i might have came off differently on how to change up some of these issues but i have no love nor loyalty to this community by their own choices to insult me instead of focusing on the facts being put forth , but no its my writing, its my use of AI , its me being jealous , its always something other than facts

If consoles don't even have access to this addon how are you getting banned from groups for not using it?

while for starters when i switched over to PC and hit 160cp i joined a raid group after getting VSS, VCR+2, VAS+3 and VMoL and being 3rd average dps for my group i was kicked out soloy because i refused to get add-ons , then when they came to psn 1/2 my friends left the game because they was ps4 users , then after that and other 1/4 slowly one by one left because they to like myself wouldnt use add-ons ... that how i know players are being kicked out of guilds players are being left out of run due to add-ons

SolarRune · 1:57PM

Yeah as part of addons coming to consoles they should have removed support for older consoles, as they have essentially made a two tier community. But I suppose with Sony putting their sunsetting action into plan this year PS4 probably wont be around for the end of the class refresh in a supported way.

spartaxoxo · 2:01PM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

you know you are right about what you say and maybe if for years others wouldnt try bashing me belittleing me i might have came off differently on how to change up some of these issues but i have no love nor loyalty to this community by their own choices to insult me instead of focusing on the facts being put forth , but no its my writing, its my use of AI , its me being jealous , its always something other than facts

Okay but how you present an argument greatly impacts how people react to it. Nobody is ever going to win everyone over. But you can't fight negativity with more negativity. Haters don't care some of them even enjoy watching crash outs. And you lose new people who may otherwise have been on your side.

The best way to change something that you don't like on here is to make good arguments that are designed to explained your issue clearly and figure out solutions that work for as many people as you can. Everything can't be for every body but if you attack a system, then people who might otherwise agree have to defend the gameplay systems they like instead.

Like I have bad eyesight (but am not legally blind or anything like that). Add-ons have been a massive help for me. I'm never going back to not having them because I used to find doing certain activities much more annoying than I do now simply because not being able to see things negatively impacted my gameplay and now I can. So, now, I gotta push back against this post when I actually agree with your underlying sentiment.

heimdall14_9 · 2:15PM

spartaxoxo wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

you know you are right about what you say and maybe if for years others wouldnt try bashing me belittleing me i might have came off differently on how to change up some of these issues but i have no love nor loyalty to this community by their own choices to insult me instead of focusing on the facts being put forth , but no its my writing, its my use of AI , its me being jealous , its always something other than facts

Okay but how you present an argument greatly impacts how people react to it. Nobody is ever going to win everyone over. But you can't fight negativity with more negativity. Haters don't care some of them even enjoy watching crash outs. And you lose new people who may otherwise have been on your side.

The best way to change something that you don't like on here is to make good arguments that are designed to explained your issue clearly and figure out solutions that work for as many people as you can. Everything can't be for every body but if you attack a system, then people who might otherwise agree have to defend the gameplay systems they like instead.

Like I have bad eyesight (but am not legally blind or anything like that). Add-ons have been a massive help for me. I'm never going back to not having them because I used to find doing certain activities much more annoying than I do now simply because not being able to see things negatively impacted my gameplay and now I can. So, now, I gotta push back against this post when I actually agree with your underlying sentiment.

again you give whats been given and from the gate ive been given nothing but hate by the community here . but hey im glad to hear that add-ons any add-on has helped you out im not against players getting help im just not for players being held down eather

Reginald_leBlem · 3:18PM

It's unfortunate that older consoles can't support raid addons, but it's actually insane that the only solution you can come up with is that NO ONE should have them. How is it fair to artificially limit people who's hardware CAN support addons by taking them away?

tmbrinks · 3:40PM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

you know you are right about what you say and maybe if for years others wouldnt try bashing me belittleing me i might have came off differently on how to change up some of these issues but i have no love nor loyalty to this community by their own choices to insult me instead of focusing on the facts being put forth , but no its my writing, its my use of AI , its me being jealous , its always something other than facts

Okay but how you present an argument greatly impacts how people react to it. Nobody is ever going to win everyone over. But you can't fight negativity with more negativity. Haters don't care some of them even enjoy watching crash outs. And you lose new people who may otherwise have been on your side.

The best way to change something that you don't like on here is to make good arguments that are designed to explained your issue clearly and figure out solutions that work for as many people as you can. Everything can't be for every body but if you attack a system, then people who might otherwise agree have to defend the gameplay systems they like instead.

Like I have bad eyesight (but am not legally blind or anything like that). Add-ons have been a massive help for me. I'm never going back to not having them because I used to find doing certain activities much more annoying than I do now simply because not being able to see things negatively impacted my gameplay and now I can. So, now, I gotta push back against this post when I actually agree with your underlying sentiment.

again you give whats been given and from the gate ive been given nothing but hate by the community here . but hey im glad to hear that add-ons any add-on has helped you out im not against players getting help im just not for players being held down eather

People not unequivocally agreeing with you does not equal "hate". False equivalencies do nothing to advance your premise.

heimdall14_9 · 4:05PM

tmbrinks wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

spartaxoxo wrote: »

Ardriel wrote: »

Your argument is that WW is an exploit because it gives an unfair advantage in end-game content. It’s been said several times in this thread that it’s not an unfair advantage because every player can use this add-on if they want to.

And that point has been wrong every time. OP is a console user and everyone cannot use it there.

Additionally, if that was the metric of fairness then subclassing would be fair. And trials players wouldn't have asked for respecs to be disabled from leaderboard content before the feature even released. But it's not the case.

If Add-ons are practically mandatory and everyone uses them then that shows that the difference between using one and not is enough to be an uneven playing field same as any other balance issue.

That being said, this does not mean that add-ons should be banned.

OP could be equally asking for a free version of the armory assistant or to at the least allow it to be used in leaderboard content since WW is an add-on.

OP could be equally asking for combat tells to be more reasonably visible instead of telling users with bad eye sight they gain an unfair advantage by making them bigger.

OP could equally asking for speed run times in the newer trials to be extended to that which is realistic without the use of add-ons.

OP could be equally asking for the add-on developers to get a paycheck and their add-ons become base game.

But instead they just keep fighting against one add-on and that's unfortunate imo. Because ZOS has clearly already decided that WW does not violate the tos. If it did, then they would have disabled years ago. This crusade just completely undermines valid concerns about the disparity on consoles between those who can use add-ons and those who cannot.

But they should also do an honest assessment of the design choices that make add-ons so practically mandatory as there are a lot of player unfriendly UI choices that have made them so necessary. There's no reason for the interrupt symbol to be so difficult to see, for example.

you know you are right about what you say and maybe if for years others wouldnt try bashing me belittleing me i might have came off differently on how to change up some of these issues but i have no love nor loyalty to this community by their own choices to insult me instead of focusing on the facts being put forth , but no its my writing, its my use of AI , its me being jealous , its always something other than facts

Okay but how you present an argument greatly impacts how people react to it. Nobody is ever going to win everyone over. But you can't fight negativity with more negativity. Haters don't care some of them even enjoy watching crash outs. And you lose new people who may otherwise have been on your side.

The best way to change something that you don't like on here is to make good arguments that are designed to explained your issue clearly and figure out solutions that work for as many people as you can. Everything can't be for every body but if you attack a system, then people who might otherwise agree have to defend the gameplay systems they like instead.

Like I have bad eyesight (but am not legally blind or anything like that). Add-ons have been a massive help for me. I'm never going back to not having them because I used to find doing certain activities much more annoying than I do now simply because not being able to see things negatively impacted my gameplay and now I can. So, now, I gotta push back against this post when I actually agree with your underlying sentiment.

again you give whats been given and from the gate ive been given nothing but hate by the community here . but hey im glad to hear that add-ons any add-on has helped you out im not against players getting help im just not for players being held down eather

People not unequivocally agreeing with you does not equal "hate". False equivalencies do nothing to advance your premise.

ive been bashed about my writing ive been bashed about trying to use AI like asked , ive been insulted left and right without reasoning guess you just aint seen it or cared to look its nothing to do with disagrees or not its about actual personal attacks and belittlement over personal things that i speak of TBH i could careless how many agrees with me as long as they stay to facts about the topic but 85% or more dont

Morvan · 4:16PM

I actually had no idea that PS4 had no access to add-ons while PS5 does, so that's an important detail I missed, definitely not okay.

But on the other hand, if the reason for that is due to a hardware limitation, I guess last gen should be grateful they even still have support, expecting the same features when most games dropped last gen is just ask for too much.

That doesn't erase the issue though, consoles are in an environment where some have access to add-ons while others do not, but still, asking them to remove a feature from people who have better hardware just so you won't feel excluded is the most illogical and unrealistic solution.

Judging by how much the last gen already holds this game down, I'd rather see it getting support cut than anything else.

heimdall14_9 · 4:18PM

Morvan wrote: »

I actually had no idea that PS4 had no access to add-ons while PS5 does, so that's an important detail I missed, definitely not okay.

But on the other hand, if the reason for that is due to a hardware limitation, I guess last gen should be grateful they even still have support, expecting the same features when most games dropped last gen is just ask for too much.

That doesn't erase the issue though, consoles are in an environment where some have access to add-ons while others do not, but still, asking them to remove a feature from people who have better hardware just so you won't feel excluded is the most illogical and unrealistic solution.

Judging by how much the last gen already holds this game down, I'd rather see it getting support cut than anything else.

Reginald_leBlem wrote: »

It's unfortunate that older consoles can't support raid addons, but it's actually insane that the only solution you can come up with is that NO ONE should have them. How is it fair to artificially limit people who's hardware CAN support addons by taking them away?

i dont get where you two get im against add-ons because i cant get them i have 2 ps5s and 2 PCs i can get add-ons for all 16 of my accounts if id like to i just dont as i have no NEED to use them i have and can do anything in eso i set myself to doing might be why ive gotten emp 19xs 99% done with full game and have all vet content done ND SR HM ... VMoL, VAS+3 , VSS , VCR+2 all while being under 200cp and 3rd averaged DPS of my raid group AND GOT KICKED FOR NOT NEEDING ADD-ONS LMAO i am against combat add-ons that give undue advantages in leaderboard / scored content

Gabriel_H · 4:41PM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

LunaFlora wrote: »

why is there another discussion on whether or not time saving add-ons are allowed?

this aint about time saving add-ons being allowed this is about how a add-on is braking add-on terms and CoC

Add-on Terms of Use 1 (iii) undue or unfair burden to the Game, its Services, including customer service support, and/or to other users.

Code of Conduct 5.2 In relation to online/competitive games, you will not exploit any bug, or abuse any game system (such as the scoring or award systems) in a ZeniMax game

The addon does not violate those terms. Countless people have pointed this out to you, but you simply won't accept what the commonly agreed definition of words mean.

Gabriel_H · 4:50PM

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

The Fact: The argument "If ZOS didn't want it, they'd break the API" is a fallacy. ZOS explicitly states they do not pre-screen.

That's an opinion not a fact. A fact would be: ZOS have altered the API to stop addons working in the past in a way they were not wanting to allow.

heimdall14_9 wrote: »

The "Spirit of the Game" Catch-all (Code of Conduct, Section 5.1)
Abuse of Scoring Systems (Code of Conduct, Section 5.2)
The "Unfair Burden" Rule (Add-on Terms, Section 1-iii)

CoC 5.1 - is about bots and hacking, not addons
CoC 5.2 - is about colloborating with other players to deliberately fix scores such as in Cyrodiil (Keep capture/re-capture)
AoT 1-iii - A "Burden" is not the same as "Advantage". The rule does not apply.

LadyGP · 5:04PM

Don't have any "facts" to share but maybe my comments will spark something.

UI had heard rumors about this add-on having an exploit right now in Cyrodiil that allows people to "wear" 2x the amount of sets and multiple mundus stones simultaneously.

If anyone has more info please share... again just putting my "what I heard" comments here to bring awareness to a potential issue that may/maynot be legit.

Gabriel_H · 5:18PM

LadyGP wrote: »

Don't have any "facts" to share but maybe my comments will spark something.

UI had heard rumors about this add-on having an exploit right now in Cyrodiil that allows people to "wear" 2x the amount of sets and multiple mundus stones simultaneously.

If anyone has more info please share... again just putting my "what I heard" comments here to bring awareness to a potential issue that may/maynot be legit.

It cannot do any of that. The change slotted gear command is executed in LUA (which the API allows access to) and passes it to the C++ code for completion (which API does not allow access to) which contains the error checking and confirmation the gear was slotted.

As for Mundus stones, not only does WW not alter Mundus Stones, but it is only possible to get a Mundus buff from interaction with the stones themselves.

spartaxoxo · 5:24PM

LadyGP wrote: »

Don't have any "facts" to share but maybe my comments will spark something.

UI had heard rumors about this add-on having an exploit right now in Cyrodiil that allows people to "wear" 2x the amount of sets and multiple mundus stones simultaneously.

If anyone has more info please share... again just putting my "what I heard" comments here to bring awareness to a potential issue that may/maynot be legit.

I don't know anything about that exploit. How's it done. What it involves. Nothing. But I have heard that there is an exploit somewhere that exists where a person can wear 2x sets. If someone does know more they should really dm Kevin/submit a ticket.

Poss · 5:33PM

LadyGP wrote: »

Don't have any "facts" to share but maybe my comments will spark something.

UI had heard rumors about this add-on having an exploit right now in Cyrodiil that allows people to "wear" 2x the amount of sets and multiple mundus stones simultaneously.

If anyone has more info please share... again just putting my "what I heard" comments here to bring awareness to a potential issue that may/maynot be legit.

Had to scroll through six pages of ridiculous back and forths before finally landing on the reason why this add-on SHOULD be removed.

Yes people are using WW to stack multiple mundus buffs which is an exploit. The fact people aren’t talking about it baffles me.

Blood_again · 5:33PM

Let's get back to hard facts.

1. You are in the crusade against some part of the community that uses add-ons for leaderboard activities.
Disambiguation: You pretend to be against add-ons, but it is far from the truth. Add-ons do not reach the leaderboards themselves. Add-ons do not exclude players for not using them.
Your goal is to make these add-ons banned so those people who use them get banned or just can't use them anymore.

2. You make your crusade public.
Considering you try to go the path of legislation, proving that using those add-ons is a prohibited practice or should be prohibited, it doesn't require publicity as it is.
However, you push your narrative on general forum and argue actively, getting attention to the point despite the fact that the community doesn't look supportive of your ideas.
Probably (not a hard fact) you want those players to know who did it when you won.

3. ZOS is a mighty ally. It is good to have them on your side.
However, they are not in a hurry to stand under the banners of your crusade.
Why? Is the info you provide not full and require some additions, or do you thoroughly miss some hard facts? Who knows.

4. I really hope your vendetta has a plan B.
You've chosen a really hard battle. My compassion. While it is destructive, it is good to also have a constructive one.
Every year I read that somebody in the community fights against a part of the game that is unfair for them. It is a golden pvp-gear for lowlevels, animation canceling, unfair dlc sets etc.
Every time I try to suggest they gather their own sub-community that accepts their own rules of fair play. So they could enjoy the game with like-minded people and put their efforts into building something they value.
Will it work for you? Only you may know. A hard fact.

Soarora · 5:48PM

Blood_again wrote: »

Let's get back to hard facts.

1. You are in the crusade against some part of the community that uses add-ons for leaderboard activities.
Disambiguation: You pretend to be against add-ons, but it is far from the truth. Add-ons do not reach the leaderboards themselves. Add-ons do not exclude players for not using them.
Your goal is to make these add-ons banned so those people who use them get banned or just can't use them anymore.

Here’s the beginning of the story as I recall it:
- ZOS announces free respecs anywhere, any time
- A collection of people, including endgamers and scorepushers, argue against free respecs in scored content because (1) the trial community would certainly force people to change subclasses between fights and (2) at least some scorepushers believed it to be too far against the spirit of theorycrafting. People didn’t want to theorycraft so hard as to make subclass distinctions between pulls but they would have felt pressured to
- Heimdall makes his first post, arguing that the respecs got taken away because scorepushers would abuse the respecs
- I clarified that it was not scorepushers that are to blame and that free respecs would be problematic across a large portion of the trial community and that’s why we argued to have it removed
- Heimdall moved from attacking scorepushers to latching onto Wizards Wardrobe. I don’t recall mentioning Wizards myself, especially considering Wizards doesn’t even have the capability to change respecs
- Heimdall has gone from “Wizards bad because it can swap your gear faster than you can manually” to “Wizards bad because it has an auto swap function” to “Wizards bad because it can swap your gear faster than you can manually and that affects scores”