lathbury wrote: »

The math wizard still here spouting rubbish about devs intent and relogging magically changing the odds. It's faster that is it I'm gonna explain it again but really simply. Let's say rolling a 6 on a dice is getting a purple item. Me and you both roll the odds are 1/6 if I roll again guess what still 1/6 now if you choose to only roll 100 dice and I do a thousand who is gonna have more 6's do you reckon?
Does that mean I've changed the odds no it does not. Now imagine if you are rolling 20 times in an hour and I'm rolling 100 but as soon as I get a 6 I have to stop as someone rubs the 6 off the dice for 3 hours..
Then there is the week long no dice for you ban. Literally the difference between ppl who relog and those who don't is that they're rolling the dice more frequently.
Now for it's breaking the economy argument I have seen bandied about with no explanation of how. It is not and the reason it is not is because it introduces no new gold into the economy all it does is move gold around. Which is the sign of a healthy game economy. Bringing in more rare items to the market also with the way supply and demand works lowers the cost of those items making them more obtainable for everyone.
So really those recipes and motifs you "got fairly with your hard earned gold were either bought from a farmer or at a lower price because of them'".
Whether I agree that you obtained them fairly when you have insinuated you farm dungeons and dolmens for gold is another thread but I will say that killing any mob over and over for gold is a lot more detrimental to the economy as it brings gold in and had to be countered with high repair costs etc.
Next you stating the devs intent when Jessica (the one who actually has that job) has already done it. The link has been posted read it absorb the information contained with in it. Then for the love of god stop saying you know what the devs intent is or that they were speaking in code when they said it was working as designed and not a bannable offence. That last part is key as it answers the op.
Now if you can stop QQing long enough to dry your eyes and log in you will probably have better luck finding motifs etc.

Such irony is sarcastically calling someone a math wizard then showing complete and utter ignorance to statistics and probability theory. Please, go on.

lathbury wrote: »

No you enlighten us how does relogging change the chance of a rare drop

Sheesh, now I have to educate you? You explained it yourself, in your own post, but you came to the wrong conclusion. The more something is done, DOES in fact change the odds. Please read up on probability theory before continuing.

Re read my post I actually state that if someone rolls 1000 times they will get more 6's then someone who rolls 100 times. But the chance on each roll remains 1:6. So rather than call me ignorant and tell me to read up come up with a decent counter argument or prove that statement is factually incorrect.

Lol no counter argument then just another personal attack. Wilfully ignorant twice I've asked for you to enlighten us with your unique take on the above scenario . Doesn't seem wilfully ignorant but I've still yet to see you present your actual argument.

lathbury wrote: »

Lol no counter argument then just another personal attack. Wilfully ignorant twice I've asked for you to enlighten us with your unique take on the above scenario . Doesn't seem wilfully ignorant but I've still yet to see you present your actual argument.

You're not understanding that the amount of times something happens affects the odds. Let's make this simple.

We both have the goal of getting heads on a coin toss. You have 10 tosses, I have 1. Yes, the odds of each individual toss is 50/50, but your chances are higher. I'm not arguing against this. It's just a fact.

Makkir wrote: »

TheSojourner wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

No you enlighten us how does relogging change the chance of a rare drop

Sheesh, now I have to educate you? You explained it yourself, in your own post, but you came to the wrong conclusion. The more something is done, DOES in fact change the odds. Please read up on probability theory before continuing.

I hate to break it to you, but the other guy is right and you are wrong. I don't know the rare drop of these items. If it is 1:100, it is 1:100 each time you log in. After 5 log ins, it does not magically become 5:100

Actually it does, just not magically. I think you mean it wouldn't magically become 1:25. Which I would agree.

Alphashado wrote: »

zaria wrote: »

Alphashado wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

Alphashado wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

KariTR wrote: »

I've read it. They are basically saying they screwed up the design (my take - because people were using it in a way that was not intended) which is why we have seen so many 'improvements' since April.

They've nerfed other things, too. Is that everyone else's fault, giving one segment of players who like one playstyle licence to tell another that likes a different playstyle how to play, or is it part of tuning the game?

Could be, but in light of the official post, I go with what they actually say rather than what my own personal tastes make me wish they said.

People are so entrenched in the belief that there is something wrong with this that even when shown an official post that settles the matter they still don't believe it. Denial is a powerful thing, apparently.

Pretty funny, really.

When they say farming isn't intended, I'll stop doing it. But until then they have said it is, so I will. I started doing it because they said it was part of the game design. LOL

If you want the drops maybe you should too.

The difference between "designed" and "intended" is pretty cut and dry here. "Working as intended" is a convienient phrase for your reasoning when in fact "working as designed" is what the devs say.

It is a very clear distinction unless you turn a blind eye. They are basically saying "We screwed up and failed to recognize the unforeseen side effect of the phasing system in regards to how it effects container drops. We cannot change this system therefore it would be impractical to consider it a violation or a banable offense. Logging to farm containers is an unforeseen consiquence of the way our system is designed".

Now of course they will never say that. But reasonable evaluation of their response makes it pretty clear. I challenge you to a supply a quote from a developer saying they intended us to log in and out in order to farm containers. You won't find it. The best you can provide is that the phasing and logging system is working "as designed".

So again, if you're going to do it then fine, but quit trying to use the same quote to convince yourself and others that they envisioned everyone logging out 50 times a day in order to easily find rare items. Just admit that you are taking advantage of the situation and move on.

I only hope they can find a true solution to the problem besides blanket nerfs though so that people playing the game as intended ( checking containers they come across in their travels) actually have a reasonable chance to find rare motifs.

The denial is strong with this one.

He's even inventing developer "intentions" that contradict what they've said, based on how they used one word other than "intended."

LOL. Just LOL.

Sorry but you are the one in denial. You keep insisting that the developers intended for you to log out 100 times a day in order to easy aquire rare items. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

The best you can do is supply a quote saying it isn't a banable offense because the system is working as it was designed. That is not even close to how you are twisting it. Again I challenge you to prove that anyone from zos intended us to circumvent the rare drops by logging out over and over. You can't do it.

The quote you keep plastering everywhere like some holy relic only says they screwed up and won't punish us for their mistake.

Do you REALLY think a developer of ANY game would say "hmm let's make it so that if they logout 100 times a day, they get all the rare stuff super easy!"

If you believe that, then YOU are the one in denial because it is OUTLANDISH to believe any developer would do that on purpose. I mean really. You are just making yourself sound silly.

Its not intended gameplay however it don't hurt anyone.
If they wanted to stop it its simple to make an limit on repeated log in like they have on deleting characters. Still it had to be pretty high like 10/ hour and should be soft caped so it take longer time each time

I respectfully disagree that it doesn't hurt anyone. Those of us that would rather find motifs the old fashion way suffer nerfs set in place as a result of log farming. Main reason I won't do it is because it spams everyone on my friends list with log notifications. Plus it just feels wrong.

It would be tewibew for you to have to do something that FEWS wong!

Congrats, you just summed up the logic of the anti farming crowd. No facts. No logic. Just BS like "feelings" and what you think you know to be true despite the repeated quoting of what the devs have said is true to the contrary.

You might get out of egotistical the world revolves around me land long enough to realize that everybody has to deal with the "nerfs." I put that in quotes because it's really not that big of a deal considering the cooldown.

All log farming does is optimize your chances of looting something at the moment the cooldown is up, nothing more. As has been discussed, there are multiple other ways to do this. Stop focusing on one of them and making up your own "facts" that don't apply, because it has been officially stated they don't apply. You are mistaken, it has been proven repeatedly, so give it a rest, please. Again, when you can quote an official post to the contrary, I'll concede you have a point. But you can't. And you know it.

I don't particularly like killing bears, dogs, harpies and the like, either. Doesn't feel right to me. But I don't go on the forums crying about how it needs to be changed just for me because I invented in my head the illusion that I know what the devs "indeed" even after someone showed me a post stating the complete opposite.

If you feel this places you at a disadvantage, feel free to farm. Don't want to? Then that falls under the category of "your problem." I don't particularly like questing all the time to level either, but I don't expect them to change the game just for me and I certainly don't cry about other people questing. And I most certainly don't invent in my head some fictional rationalization that the devs intend for me not to have to quest to make myself feel indignant about it.

It's ridiculous.

Short version here:

1. Technically this is not an exploit. CS Rep states this.
2. System is working as designed. CS Rep states this also.
3. Pretty sure everybody here knows this is not playing as Dev's Intended.
4. Changing such things involve a number of factors: cost, time, money, etc. and are not as simple as toggling a switch at the home office.
5. CS reps and Mods don't comment on 'how the Dev's Intended.'
6. The fact that it continues to be does not change what it is.
7. No one's telling anyone how to play. Knock yourself out, but at least call it what it is, technicalities or not.
8. Right and wrong don't change with mass approval or disapproval.
9. Everyone here makes a choice, one way or the other.
10. Either way you go with it, have the guts to call it like it is.

Extended version here:

kitsinni wrote: »

This is ESO in a nutshell. Even with a link to a ZOS employee stating specifically that this exact thing is not an exploit there is someone calling it "exploiting" and "cheaters".
I have never seen any other game where people throw the word exploit out so much. You can barely find a post with ten replies without exploit and entitled in it.

@kitsinni, See above. You don't need someone to tell you whether it's how the Dev' intended and they don't foresee every possible method of abuse that will be found and utilized as long as it can be.
Some things will be decided not worth the return to change and will remain. See #4

KitLightning wrote: »

kitsinni wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Ok, so I guess the game was designed with the intent that we sign in and out multiple times to get rare things. Hard to believe a forums moderator signed off on this, but whatever. Probably the one time exploiters got the green light to abuse faulty game mechanics, but if you have the time then whatever floats your boat.

I think what you meant to say was "Sorry I was obviously wrong and spoke out of place".

No he didn't! The players are directly attempting to bypass the set timer by logging in and out, which is an exploit of game-mechanics that the timer is there to prevent farming of chests etc., by a single character. Remember that it wasn't enough in the first place to have timers on chests that was accessible to all characters in a zone, so the objects in question was instanced to the character instead. I find it amusing that you cannot see that that is not an exploit of game-mechanic, though equally amusing that the development have set a reset on those objects since its a direct approval of farming those instances which inevitably will cause more load on the hosts due to reloading the profiles, again and again.

@Kitlightning, @SFBryan18, they know exactly what they're doing, if they're doing it, or what they're condoning if they aren't.
It's a loophole that works to advantage. They're not about to give it up without a fight, and they're obviously not going to choose the intended way.
The argument that because it's still allowed makes it justified wouldn't be necessary if it was as intended. Only the Dev's can truly comment on this, but I'm counting on the fact that everyone is able to make reasonable assumptions about their intent.

Fleymark wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

And for those arguing the finer points of exploit/non-exploit, it may not be bannable, but pretty sure this was not the dev's intent. Doesn't need to be carved in stone to figure that one out, or the argument wouldn't even be taking place.

Saying that because the system currently allows you to do it makes it 'ok' is uses the same logic as 'It's not wrong unless you get caught.' C'mon.

It's why the ToS tell you to report anything you 'think' might be one.

Kudos to the characters with character.

As for the rest of your post, I direct you to my other post. No, in fact, farming isn't an exploit and is, in fact, entirely legitimate gameplay. Hence, your sanctimonious assertion about "character" is ridiculous. You have no moral superiority over choosing to play the game your way than anyone else does. The debate only "takes place" as you say because this game is infested with a brand of player that thinks it's their prerogative to tell others how they should play.
I don't know what it is about this game that it simultaneously has such a distinct lack of required player interaction and economy, yet attracts a hoarde of players who not only think it is their business how others play, but that if it doesn't align with their own personal tastes other players are morally wrong.
Mind boggling, really.

@Fleymark, it's not about the farming, and you know it. It's about the method and the BS argument that because the Dev's didn't foresee people using the design this way automatically means they intended players to do this.

I'm not telling you hot to play or what to do at all. I'm saying call it what it is, without the 'legal technicalities.' I don't believe you believe, for one minute, that what's being discussed here is what the Dev's had in mind.

Nothing sanctimonious about it. Everybody has the chance to do the right thing.

Character isn't always about morals. I can have more respect for someone doing not doing the right thing and being honest about it than someone that's trying to justify what they know isn't right as being the right thing.

Huge difference there.

This kind of thing is usually more indicitive of the character of the person behind the character, anyway.

Do what you will, but call it what it is. I'll sleep just fine at night, either way.

Fleymark wrote: »

TheSojourner wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

It is an exploit, I had a very long number of mails with a ZoS CSR. She told she'd forward this exploit to the "upper spheres" to have it removed, but I see these upper spheres are fine with their economy being destroyed by cheaters.

It's not an exploit or cheating if no bug is explored or no rule is broken.

Your exchange with a CSR is meaningless. Most CSRs in most games are clueless and are glorified telephone operators reading out of a manual. They likely were telling you what you wanted to hear just to get you out of their hair. CARs don't make policy. The devs do. And the community relations people speak for them.

And I will continue to farm with my game time, thank you, safe in the knowledge that I'm playing the game entirely as intended.

I can tell you're very happy with yourself but a dev saying it's working as designed (containers resetting on logout) does not mean they intended you to log out and back in over and over again.

READ the quote, ffs. It SAYS it's working as DESIGNED.

It's really hard having a discussion with people in complete and utter denial.

A lot of you people might consider that you are worrying too much about what others do or are complaining just to complain. Or both.

@TheSojourner, you may be incorrect by the technicality. Certainly not the same as being wrong.

@Fleymark simply doesn't like your opinion. Most people don't like being called out.

TheSojourner wrote: »

You're kinda missing the point. Let me be clear. I'm not against this method of "farming". Sure, I find it weird that someone would spend their finite time, by doing something as repetative and uninteresting as bypassing playing the game, just to get certain items to play the game, but I'm ok with it. Stop trying to assume and label me.

My point is, the people (you) that absolutely love and revel in doing this, seem to take that quote completely out of context. The design (containers resetting on logout) is working correctly. Before you go on, stop and re-read that. It's very important. Nothing about farming or repeated log outs is meantioned as the design. I agree, the farming method is NOT an exploit, but it is FAR from the intention of the developers. You have to realize this. If you honestly think the developers intentionally designed it that way so players could log out and in repeatedly, you're being intellecutally dishonest.

@TheSojourner, he's not missing it. He's avoiding it.

Vahrokh wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

From this thread in April:

I don't even need a ZoS employee to tell me what is an exploit and what's not.
I have played EvE Online many years, who plays it SHALL learn what's about cheating, exploiting and scamming.

You keep spamming an ancient thread when the game was young and when the devs could not even find the time to look at "lesser issues" like this, whereas I had an escalate ticket (not just "frontline CSR") made very recently.

If this was truly intended, then we would not have chests / boxes timers at all. You'd always have fresh stuff up every time you looked.

Tell me with a straight face, in which game (online and not) EVER you could bypass its chests timers and perma-grind them however long you want. It does not exist.

And I am going to ask ZoS employees to fix this bug until they'll fix it, in the face of the dirty cheaters who are laughing right now and inventing pathetic excuses to justify their actions.

@Vahrokh, what a novel idea. A moral compass? Self determination about what's right and what's not regardless of whether it fits with the approval of the masses or isn't explicitly stated as such?
I'm willing to bet anyone over the age of 14 posesses this. Funny how some people are still determined to disregard it, though.

silascb wrote: »

I think the real problem here is that some people don't like the way other people play this game, regardless of what staff - developers or moderators - have said on that particular subject.

And, actually, that type of response is a typical human response. It is natural for humans to be selfish, and in this particular discussion, it is obvious that others are jealous of others using the game in a way to obtain items that they might not have obtained otherwise. Seriously, if the developers or moderators specifically said this is not an exploit, it becomes clear that the reason this discussion is occurring is because some players are jealous of other players.

Let it go. At the end of the day, ESO is just a game and you have a real life that you will return to.

@silascb, doesn't take someone's approval to know the difference. That's what this is about. It's certainly not about jealously. Have as much virtual stuff as you like.

It's more about hypocrisy and the all-too-accurate reflection this kind of thing provides on the sorry state of the world right now.

The typical human response I see is trying to find the easiest way to obtain something for selfish reasons, instead of the intended way, and then using any means to defend it.

sinisterNL wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

not an exploit, feature that is not being use as intended , but not an exploit. Exploits get you banned, this doesn't. ZOS can't guess every use of a given feature, so some will be used in an unexpected way, but that doesn't mean they will ban you for it or that you are in the wrong.

A feature that is not beeing used as intended is the definition of an exploit.

Not that i care about this...

@sinisterNL, this is why by the TOS they expect reasonable determination by the player.
@smeeprocketnub19_ESO states it - they can't predetermine every way someone's going to find a way to get unintended benefit from it and block it in advance.

DenverRalphy wrote: »

It comes down to one simple principle... ESO says no. You don't like it? Too bad so sad. Get over it.

And this coming from somebody who has never abused the privilege.

@DenverRalphy, Again, right due to the technicality. Funny, however, your choice of wording at the end.

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

I don't even need a ZoS employee to tell me what is an exploit and what's not.

And I am going to ask ZoS employees to fix this bug until they'll fix it, in the face of the dirty cheaters who are laughing right now and inventing pathetic excuses to justify their actions.

Apparently you do, because it's their game and they make the rules for THEIR game, not you.

You might not like me drinking a beer as I type this, either, but that doesn't make it illegal. Your disagreeing with the law doesn't mean I'm breaking the law.

No rule broken means there's no exploit. Period.

As I said before, I did not start farming like this until I saw the Jessica post in that other thread. I started doing it because A HIGH LEVEL ZOS EXEC SAID IT WAS OKAY TO DO.

Ancient thread? It was April, dude. Get out of denial and get over the fact that that you are WRONG.

@Vahrokh, he's running with the logic that before law were written, technically nothing was illegal.
Again, just because the feature wasn't immediately changed and they choose to tolerate it (for now) does not make it ok.

Fleymark wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

MercyKilling wrote: »

The act of farming in and of itself is not bannable.

I often wonder at the thought processes of people that enjoy such activities, if they can be said to have any. Mindless repetition isn't my idea of fun.

People aren't idiots just because they play differently than you.

Of course, notice the healthy dose of sanctimony in that post. "I don't like playing a certain way so no one else should either," essentially. He insinuates that farming is cheating, and then suggests that you're misguided if you aren't. Lol
Frankly, I find it to be pathetic.
Of course it's wrong to farm, because if you accomplish anything by putting in extra effort that they can't be bothered to do, it's just unfair. Cry more, babies.

Again, most aren't bothered by the farming, but the method. You repeatedly disregard that key point.

I find it utterly amusing that you consider logging repeatedly "putting in extra effort."

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

Frankly, I find it to be pathetic.

I find pathetic this bottom feeding attitude. "I can't do something completely simple (in the simplest profession in game) that just requires 2-3 weeks to do the straight way so I'll resort to either try "force the system"

Guess what, without a single re-log I had provisioner 50 and all the recipes but 1 within 2 weeks of the game day zero

Not an easy ride enough? Let's beg on the forums to bypass the minimum effort the others did OR openly admit do circumvent the system to avoid such minimum effort.

First of all your post makes no sense. I'm putting extra time and effort into filling a recipe book. Doing WORK for it. ...im doing the opposite of that...going and getting it myself. And I'm not "crying" about anything. I'm using this as an example of why farming is necessary in a discussion where you and others are crying about farming. Also the complete opposite.

Nice try though. I've levelled two provisioners. Don't insult my intelligence, please.

As far as your personal insults, those aren't allowed here, so please refrain from calling me a "bottom feeder" and I'm not "circumventing" anything. I'm just playing the game as intended. Because ZOS officially told me I should do this before I started.

It's not work if you're sitting in front of a container, constantly relogging until you get what you're looking for.

As for insulting your intelligence, I'm pretty sure there's not much chance of that happening.

If you read @Vahrokh's post, you'll see that it doesn't make direct reference to you, but merely a general statement about an attitude. Later, a general statement is made about forum post vs circumvention.

There is no direct reference to you, since we're dealing with technicalities and all.

And, once again, you're not playing as intended, you're playing as designed (with a very specific flaw). Not the same thing.

Fleymark wrote: »

Alphashado wrote: »

I couldn't really care less what you guys do. Never really have. I've ways viewed it as a design flaw that zos will just have to live with until they figure out a reasonable solution. Which they will.

What I disagree with is the amazingly predictable lvl of denial we get from you log farmers. You are free to do it w/o repricussion. But please give up with the notion that you are somehow just using another playstyle. You are taking advantage of a broken and poorly designed flaw in the system and you know it.

Do you honestly believe the folks at zos are admiring you unique "playstyle"?

There being a design flaw here is purely your opinion. That's it. Nothing is broken at all. You know how I know this?

That's the official word. I didn't start doing it until I read that. It's not about a "unique playstyle" or anything else. The makers of the game have said that this is an intended option for those who choose to use it. How freaking hard is that to understand?

Feel free to find an official post to the contrary since. When you do, I'll concede you have a point. Until that time, stop deluding yourself that you aren't completely wrong and hold some moral high ground.

@Alphashado, that level of denial is precisely why this won't change until they fix it in code. If it was as intended, it wouldn't matter because it wouldn't be getting abused.

Alphashado wrote: »

Doesn't say working as intended. It says working as designed. Huge difference. Do you REALLY believe they INTENDED for people to log in and out all day long to farm containers? Do you really believe that was part of what they envisioned for the game? Please.

The system is working as designed. And the design is flawed. They know it, I know it, and you know it.

Accepting the fact they made a poorly designed system with an unforeseen side effect is entirely different than working as intended which would imply they intended for you to log out all day long and collect motifs.

Working as designed and working as intended are two different things.

Plus like I said. I don't care either way. But I do find it very sad that the average explorer stands very little chance of finding rare motifs as a side effect of the "changes" made to deal with log farming.

Designed vs intended...he seems to get those two confused a lot, interchanging where convenient.

Alphashado wrote: »

You keep on playing the game as it was "designed" and I will keep on playing the game as it was "intended".

There's more of that character I was referring to earlier.

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

You are building a lot of self made excuses for your cheating.

Deal with it, those with a modicum of patience and capability to actually *make money* with provisioning and other crafts, had full bag expansion and a number of bank expansions and the recipes, while you were still figuring out how to circumvent the system.

I don't cheat. Nor am I "circumventing" anything. I'm playing the game the way it was designed.

@Vahrokh, give it up. They know, and they're not going to change.
The good news is, @Fleymark actually used the right word this time.

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

Is is BS and it's caused by your inability to read (besides inability to achieve something in a game by following a decade old MMO established practices).

You, instead, went the quick'n'dirty way.

What respect should people have for a completionist who cheated? It's like the one who buys all with RL purchased money or the one who duped.

Again, it's not "cheating." Simply wishing something to be so does not make it so. Personally attack me again and I will report you. Have whatever debate you like, but making up what you think is cheating doesn't fly. The official statement that proves you wrong has been quoted repeatedly. You can have your own opinion but you can't have your own facts. It is a FACT that farming this way was intended weather you like it or accept it or not. As I said, I didn't start until I readthe official statement that this kind of farming is by design.

@Vahrokh, fully agree with that generalized question and statement.

Fleymark wrote: »

Alphashado wrote: »

The difference between "designed" and "intended" is pretty cut and dry here. "Working as intended" is a convienient phrase for your reasoning when in fact "working as designed" is what the devs say.

It is a very clear distinction unless you turn a blind eye. They are basically saying "We screwed up and failed to recognize the unforeseen side effect of the phasing system in regards to how it effects container drops. We cannot change this system therefore it would be impractical to consider it a violation or a banable offense. Logging to farm containers is an unforeseen consiquence of the way our system is designed".

Now of course they will never say that. But reasonable evaluation of their response makes it pretty clear. I challenge you to a supply a quote from a developer saying they intended us to log in and out in order to farm containers. You won't find it. The best you can provide is that the phasing and logging system is working "as designed".

So again, if you're going to do it then fine, but quit trying to use the same quote to convince yourself and others that they envisioned everyone logging out 50 times a day in order to easily find rare items. Just admit that you are taking advantage of the situation and move on.

I only hope they can find a true solution to the problem besides blanket nerfs though so that people playing the game as intended ( checking containers they come across in their travels) actually have a reasonable chance to find rare motifs.

The denial is strong with this one.

He's even inventing developer "intentions" that contradict what they've said, based on how they used one word other than "intended."

And please quote or link a thread where it is officially stated that "checking containers they come across in their travels" exclusively is what is officially intended. LOL. Just because you and the rest of the "play my way or you are WRONG" cadre think that what you prefer is one in the same as what is "intended" does not make it so. The egotistical sanctimony on some of you guys is nothing short of astounding. Quote or link or it's simply not the case.

Of course, by your logic that would mean it's not the case, I'm sure. ROFL

@Fleymark, once again, take note of the phrase: "reasonable evaluation of their response makes it pretty clear."

Alphashado wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

The denial is strong with this one.

Sorry but you are the one in denial. You keep insisting that the developers intended for you to log out 100 times a day in order to easy aquire rare items. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

The best you can do is supply a quote saying it isn't a banable offense because the system is working as it was designed. That is not even close to how you are twisting it. Again I challenge you to prove that anyone from zos intended us to circumvent the rare drops by logging out over and over. You can't do it.

The quote you keep plastering everywhere like some holy relic only says they screwed up and won't punish us for their mistake.

Do you REALLY think a developer of ANY game would say "hmm let's make it so that if they logout 100 times a day, they get all the rare stuff super easy!"

If you believe that, then YOU are the one in denial because it is OUTLANDISH to believe any developer would do that on purpose. I mean really. You are just making yourself sound silly.

I believe this the part where that link gets posted again?
Again, it's understood, but it won't get conceded to.

TheSojourner wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

No you enlighten us how does relogging change the chance of a rare drop

Sheesh, now I have to educate you? You explained it yourself, in your own post, but you came to the wrong conclusion. The more something is done, DOES in fact change the odds. Please read up on probability theory before continuing.

I'll take this one. How about a more realistic example? Let's call it 1/1000 odds, which is probably a bit closer to the drop rate than using anything found in a Milton Bradley game.

Normal reset time for a container is 10 minutes. Don't empty the contents, the contents don't change.
Empty the contents, the timer starts.
I can check that container 6 times an hour. I've got 6/1000 chance of getting that item every hour.
Your relog time, we'll call 25 seconds (we'll give you the 10 second timer every log off and a really long load screen.
You take 5 seconds to check (not even empty) the container.
You relog. You get 120/1000 to get that item.
Who do you think will end up with it first?

(166 hours likely for me, vs 8 hours for you. Nothing off about that at all.)

Though technically not an exploit (We don't need the link to Jessica's post, thanks), if there was no advantage to it, we would not be having this discussion at all right now.

If you're gonna do it and they're gonna let you, then do it, but cut the BS and call it for what it is.

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

I'll take this one. How about a more realistic example? Let's call it 1/1000 odds, which is probably a bit closer to the drop rate than using anything found in a Milton Bradley game.

Normal reset time for a container is 10 minutes. Don't empty the contents, the contents don't change.
Empty the contents, the timer starts.
I can check that container 6 times an hour. I've got 6/1000 chance of getting that item every hour.
Your relog time, we'll call 25 seconds (we'll give you the 10 second timer every log off and a really long load screen.
You take 5 seconds to check (not even empty) the container.
You relog. You get 120/1000 to get that item.
Who do you think will end up with it first?

(166 hours likely for me, vs 8 hours for you. Nothing off about that at all.)

Though technically not an exploit (We don't need the link to Jessica's post, thanks), if there was no advantage to it, we would not be having this discussion at all right now.

If you're gonna do it and they're gonna let you, then do it, but cut the BS and call it for what it is.

As all ready stated the person opening the most containers has the most chance of getting the item. Well excuse me if I'm not surprised but it DOES NOT change the drop rate it gives you a larger sample of containers.
the reason ppl do this is for that reason it is faster than running around the whole area.
The point here is ppl dont like other ppl resetting the containers that way and would prefer them to use the run around the whole town port to next town run around repeat untill first town resets method.
I'm fine by either method and use both depending on if im after something specific or not.
also using your example you would have a 0.6% chance the other guy about 11% or 110/1000. Your maths is off because using your maths opening a thousand containers would equate to 1000/1000 ie guarenteed it is not it's about 63% or 630/1000. 2000 is around 840/1000. Even 3000 is only 950/1000.

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

Short version here:

1. Technically this is not an exploit. CS Rep states this.
2. System is working as designed. CS Rep states this also.
3. Pretty sure everybody here knows this is not playing as Dev's Intended.
4. Changing such things involve a number of factors: cost, time, money, etc. and are not as simple as toggling a switch at the home office.
5. CS reps and Mods don't comment on 'how the Dev's Intended.'
6. The fact that it continues to be does not change what it is.
7. No one's telling anyone how to play. Knock yourself out, but at least call it what it is, technicalities or not.
8. Right and wrong don't change with mass approval or disapproval.
9. Everyone here makes a choice, one way or the other.
10. Either way you go with it, have the guts to call it like it is.

Extended version here:

kitsinni wrote: »

This is ESO in a nutshell. Even with a link to a ZOS employee stating specifically that this exact thing is not an exploit there is someone calling it "exploiting" and "cheaters".
I have never seen any other game where people throw the word exploit out so much. You can barely find a post with ten replies without exploit and entitled in it.

@kitsinni, See above. You don't need someone to tell you whether it's how the Dev' intended and they don't foresee every possible method of abuse that will be found and utilized as long as it can be.
Some things will be decided not worth the return to change and will remain. See #4

KitLightning wrote: »

kitsinni wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Ok, so I guess the game was designed with the intent that we sign in and out multiple times to get rare things. Hard to believe a forums moderator signed off on this, but whatever. Probably the one time exploiters got the green light to abuse faulty game mechanics, but if you have the time then whatever floats your boat.

I think what you meant to say was "Sorry I was obviously wrong and spoke out of place".

No he didn't! The players are directly attempting to bypass the set timer by logging in and out, which is an exploit of game-mechanics that the timer is there to prevent farming of chests etc., by a single character. Remember that it wasn't enough in the first place to have timers on chests that was accessible to all characters in a zone, so the objects in question was instanced to the character instead. I find it amusing that you cannot see that that is not an exploit of game-mechanic, though equally amusing that the development have set a reset on those objects since its a direct approval of farming those instances which inevitably will cause more load on the hosts due to reloading the profiles, again and again.

@Kitlightning, @SFBryan18, they know exactly what they're doing, if they're doing it, or what they're condoning if they aren't.
It's a loophole that works to advantage. They're not about to give it up without a fight, and they're obviously not going to choose the intended way.
The argument that because it's still allowed makes it justified wouldn't be necessary if it was as intended. Only the Dev's can truly comment on this, but I'm counting on the fact that everyone is able to make reasonable assumptions about their intent.

Fleymark wrote: »

Merlin13KAGL wrote: »

And for those arguing the finer points of exploit/non-exploit, it may not be bannable, but pretty sure this was not the dev's intent. Doesn't need to be carved in stone to figure that one out, or the argument wouldn't even be taking place.

Saying that because the system currently allows you to do it makes it 'ok' is uses the same logic as 'It's not wrong unless you get caught.' C'mon.

It's why the ToS tell you to report anything you 'think' might be one.

Kudos to the characters with character.

As for the rest of your post, I direct you to my other post. No, in fact, farming isn't an exploit and is, in fact, entirely legitimate gameplay. Hence, your sanctimonious assertion about "character" is ridiculous. You have no moral superiority over choosing to play the game your way than anyone else does. The debate only "takes place" as you say because this game is infested with a brand of player that thinks it's their prerogative to tell others how they should play.
I don't know what it is about this game that it simultaneously has such a distinct lack of required player interaction and economy, yet attracts a hoarde of players who not only think it is their business how others play, but that if it doesn't align with their own personal tastes other players are morally wrong.
Mind boggling, really.

@Fleymark, it's not about the farming, and you know it. It's about the method and the BS argument that because the Dev's didn't foresee people using the design this way automatically means they intended players to do this.

I'm not telling you hot to play or what to do at all. I'm saying call it what it is, without the 'legal technicalities.' I don't believe you believe, for one minute, that what's being discussed here is what the Dev's had in mind.

Nothing sanctimonious about it. Everybody has the chance to do the right thing.

Character isn't always about morals. I can have more respect for someone doing not doing the right thing and being honest about it than someone that's trying to justify what they know isn't right as being the right thing.

Huge difference there.

This kind of thing is usually more indicitive of the character of the person behind the character, anyway.

Do what you will, but call it what it is. I'll sleep just fine at night, either way.

Fleymark wrote: »

TheSojourner wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

It is an exploit, I had a very long number of mails with a ZoS CSR. She told she'd forward this exploit to the "upper spheres" to have it removed, but I see these upper spheres are fine with their economy being destroyed by cheaters.

It's not an exploit or cheating if no bug is explored or no rule is broken.

Your exchange with a CSR is meaningless. Most CSRs in most games are clueless and are glorified telephone operators reading out of a manual. They likely were telling you what you wanted to hear just to get you out of their hair. CARs don't make policy. The devs do. And the community relations people speak for them.

And I will continue to farm with my game time, thank you, safe in the knowledge that I'm playing the game entirely as intended.

I can tell you're very happy with yourself but a dev saying it's working as designed (containers resetting on logout) does not mean they intended you to log out and back in over and over again.

READ the quote, ffs. It SAYS it's working as DESIGNED.

It's really hard having a discussion with people in complete and utter denial.

A lot of you people might consider that you are worrying too much about what others do or are complaining just to complain. Or both.

@TheSojourner, you may be incorrect by the technicality. Certainly not the same as being wrong.

@Fleymark simply doesn't like your opinion. Most people don't like being called out.

TheSojourner wrote: »

You're kinda missing the point. Let me be clear. I'm not against this method of "farming". Sure, I find it weird that someone would spend their finite time, by doing something as repetative and uninteresting as bypassing playing the game, just to get certain items to play the game, but I'm ok with it. Stop trying to assume and label me.

My point is, the people (you) that absolutely love and revel in doing this, seem to take that quote completely out of context. The design (containers resetting on logout) is working correctly. Before you go on, stop and re-read that. It's very important. Nothing about farming or repeated log outs is meantioned as the design. I agree, the farming method is NOT an exploit, but it is FAR from the intention of the developers. You have to realize this. If you honestly think the developers intentionally designed it that way so players could log out and in repeatedly, you're being intellecutally dishonest.

@TheSojourner, he's not missing it. He's avoiding it.

Vahrokh wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

From this thread in April:

I don't even need a ZoS employee to tell me what is an exploit and what's not.
I have played EvE Online many years, who plays it SHALL learn what's about cheating, exploiting and scamming.

You keep spamming an ancient thread when the game was young and when the devs could not even find the time to look at "lesser issues" like this, whereas I had an escalate ticket (not just "frontline CSR") made very recently.

If this was truly intended, then we would not have chests / boxes timers at all. You'd always have fresh stuff up every time you looked.

Tell me with a straight face, in which game (online and not) EVER you could bypass its chests timers and perma-grind them however long you want. It does not exist.

And I am going to ask ZoS employees to fix this bug until they'll fix it, in the face of the dirty cheaters who are laughing right now and inventing pathetic excuses to justify their actions.

@Vahrokh, what a novel idea. A moral compass? Self determination about what's right and what's not regardless of whether it fits with the approval of the masses or isn't explicitly stated as such?
I'm willing to bet anyone over the age of 14 posesses this. Funny how some people are still determined to disregard it, though.

silascb wrote: »

I think the real problem here is that some people don't like the way other people play this game, regardless of what staff - developers or moderators - have said on that particular subject.

And, actually, that type of response is a typical human response. It is natural for humans to be selfish, and in this particular discussion, it is obvious that others are jealous of others using the game in a way to obtain items that they might not have obtained otherwise. Seriously, if the developers or moderators specifically said this is not an exploit, it becomes clear that the reason this discussion is occurring is because some players are jealous of other players.

Let it go. At the end of the day, ESO is just a game and you have a real life that you will return to.

@silascb, doesn't take someone's approval to know the difference. That's what this is about. It's certainly not about jealously. Have as much virtual stuff as you like.

It's more about hypocrisy and the all-too-accurate reflection this kind of thing provides on the sorry state of the world right now.

The typical human response I see is trying to find the easiest way to obtain something for selfish reasons, instead of the intended way, and then using any means to defend it.

sinisterNL wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

not an exploit, feature that is not being use as intended , but not an exploit. Exploits get you banned, this doesn't. ZOS can't guess every use of a given feature, so some will be used in an unexpected way, but that doesn't mean they will ban you for it or that you are in the wrong.

A feature that is not beeing used as intended is the definition of an exploit.

Not that i care about this...

@sinisterNL, this is why by the TOS they expect reasonable determination by the player.
@smeeprocketnub19_ESO states it - they can't predetermine every way someone's going to find a way to get unintended benefit from it and block it in advance.

DenverRalphy wrote: »

It comes down to one simple principle... ESO says no. You don't like it? Too bad so sad. Get over it.

And this coming from somebody who has never abused the privilege.

@DenverRalphy, Again, right due to the technicality. Funny, however, your choice of wording at the end.

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

I don't even need a ZoS employee to tell me what is an exploit and what's not.

And I am going to ask ZoS employees to fix this bug until they'll fix it, in the face of the dirty cheaters who are laughing right now and inventing pathetic excuses to justify their actions.

Apparently you do, because it's their game and they make the rules for THEIR game, not you.

You might not like me drinking a beer as I type this, either, but that doesn't make it illegal. Your disagreeing with the law doesn't mean I'm breaking the law.

No rule broken means there's no exploit. Period.

As I said before, I did not start farming like this until I saw the Jessica post in that other thread. I started doing it because A HIGH LEVEL ZOS EXEC SAID IT WAS OKAY TO DO.

Ancient thread? It was April, dude. Get out of denial and get over the fact that that you are WRONG.

@Vahrokh, he's running with the logic that before law were written, technically nothing was illegal.
Again, just because the feature wasn't immediately changed and they choose to tolerate it (for now) does not make it ok.

Fleymark wrote: »

smeeprocketnub19_ESO wrote: »

MercyKilling wrote: »

The act of farming in and of itself is not bannable.

I often wonder at the thought processes of people that enjoy such activities, if they can be said to have any. Mindless repetition isn't my idea of fun.

People aren't idiots just because they play differently than you.

Of course, notice the healthy dose of sanctimony in that post. "I don't like playing a certain way so no one else should either," essentially. He insinuates that farming is cheating, and then suggests that you're misguided if you aren't. Lol
Frankly, I find it to be pathetic.
Of course it's wrong to farm, because if you accomplish anything by putting in extra effort that they can't be bothered to do, it's just unfair. Cry more, babies.

Again, most aren't bothered by the farming, but the method. You repeatedly disregard that key point.

I find it utterly amusing that you consider logging repeatedly "putting in extra effort."

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

Frankly, I find it to be pathetic.

I find pathetic this bottom feeding attitude. "I can't do something completely simple (in the simplest profession in game) that just requires 2-3 weeks to do the straight way so I'll resort to either try "force the system"

Guess what, without a single re-log I had provisioner 50 and all the recipes but 1 within 2 weeks of the game day zero

Not an easy ride enough? Let's beg on the forums to bypass the minimum effort the others did OR openly admit do circumvent the system to avoid such minimum effort.

First of all your post makes no sense. I'm putting extra time and effort into filling a recipe book. Doing WORK for it. ...im doing the opposite of that...going and getting it myself. And I'm not "crying" about anything. I'm using this as an example of why farming is necessary in a discussion where you and others are crying about farming. Also the complete opposite.

Nice try though. I've levelled two provisioners. Don't insult my intelligence, please.

As far as your personal insults, those aren't allowed here, so please refrain from calling me a "bottom feeder" and I'm not "circumventing" anything. I'm just playing the game as intended. Because ZOS officially told me I should do this before I started.

It's not work if you're sitting in front of a container, constantly relogging until you get what you're looking for.

As for insulting your intelligence, I'm pretty sure there's not much chance of that happening.

If you read @Vahrokh's post, you'll see that it doesn't make direct reference to you, but merely a general statement about an attitude. Later, a general statement is made about forum post vs circumvention.

There is no direct reference to you, since we're dealing with technicalities and all.

And, once again, you're not playing as intended, you're playing as designed (with a very specific flaw). Not the same thing.

Fleymark wrote: »

Alphashado wrote: »

I couldn't really care less what you guys do. Never really have. I've ways viewed it as a design flaw that zos will just have to live with until they figure out a reasonable solution. Which they will.

What I disagree with is the amazingly predictable lvl of denial we get from you log farmers. You are free to do it w/o repricussion. But please give up with the notion that you are somehow just using another playstyle. You are taking advantage of a broken and poorly designed flaw in the system and you know it.

Do you honestly believe the folks at zos are admiring you unique "playstyle"?

There being a design flaw here is purely your opinion. That's it. Nothing is broken at all. You know how I know this?

That's the official word. I didn't start doing it until I read that. It's not about a "unique playstyle" or anything else. The makers of the game have said that this is an intended option for those who choose to use it. How freaking hard is that to understand?

Feel free to find an official post to the contrary since. When you do, I'll concede you have a point. Until that time, stop deluding yourself that you aren't completely wrong and hold some moral high ground.

@Alphashado, that level of denial is precisely why this won't change until they fix it in code. If it was as intended, it wouldn't matter because it wouldn't be getting abused.

Alphashado wrote: »

Doesn't say working as intended. It says working as designed. Huge difference. Do you REALLY believe they INTENDED for people to log in and out all day long to farm containers? Do you really believe that was part of what they envisioned for the game? Please.

The system is working as designed. And the design is flawed. They know it, I know it, and you know it.

Accepting the fact they made a poorly designed system with an unforeseen side effect is entirely different than working as intended which would imply they intended for you to log out all day long and collect motifs.

Working as designed and working as intended are two different things.

Plus like I said. I don't care either way. But I do find it very sad that the average explorer stands very little chance of finding rare motifs as a side effect of the "changes" made to deal with log farming.

Designed vs intended...he seems to get those two confused a lot, interchanging where convenient.

Alphashado wrote: »

You keep on playing the game as it was "designed" and I will keep on playing the game as it was "intended".

There's more of that character I was referring to earlier.

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

You are building a lot of self made excuses for your cheating.

Deal with it, those with a modicum of patience and capability to actually *make money* with provisioning and other crafts, had full bag expansion and a number of bank expansions and the recipes, while you were still figuring out how to circumvent the system.

I don't cheat. Nor am I "circumventing" anything. I'm playing the game the way it was designed.

@Vahrokh, give it up. They know, and they're not going to change.
The good news is, @Fleymark actually used the right word this time.

Fleymark wrote: »

Vahrokh wrote: »

Is is BS and it's caused by your inability to read (besides inability to achieve something in a game by following a decade old MMO established practices).

You, instead, went the quick'n'dirty way.

What respect should people have for a completionist who cheated? It's like the one who buys all with RL purchased money or the one who duped.

Again, it's not "cheating." Simply wishing something to be so does not make it so. Personally attack me again and I will report you. Have whatever debate you like, but making up what you think is cheating doesn't fly. The official statement that proves you wrong has been quoted repeatedly. You can have your own opinion but you can't have your own facts. It is a FACT that farming this way was intended weather you like it or accept it or not. As I said, I didn't start until I readthe official statement that this kind of farming is by design.

@Vahrokh, fully agree with that generalized question and statement.

Fleymark wrote: »

Alphashado wrote: »

The difference between "designed" and "intended" is pretty cut and dry here. "Working as intended" is a convienient phrase for your reasoning when in fact "working as designed" is what the devs say.

It is a very clear distinction unless you turn a blind eye. They are basically saying "We screwed up and failed to recognize the unforeseen side effect of the phasing system in regards to how it effects container drops. We cannot change this system therefore it would be impractical to consider it a violation or a banable offense. Logging to farm containers is an unforeseen consiquence of the way our system is designed".

Now of course they will never say that. But reasonable evaluation of their response makes it pretty clear. I challenge you to a supply a quote from a developer saying they intended us to log in and out in order to farm containers. You won't find it. The best you can provide is that the phasing and logging system is working "as designed".

So again, if you're going to do it then fine, but quit trying to use the same quote to convince yourself and others that they envisioned everyone logging out 50 times a day in order to easily find rare items. Just admit that you are taking advantage of the situation and move on.

I only hope they can find a true solution to the problem besides blanket nerfs though so that people playing the game as intended ( checking containers they come across in their travels) actually have a reasonable chance to find rare motifs.

The denial is strong with this one.

He's even inventing developer "intentions" that contradict what they've said, based on how they used one word other than "intended."

And please quote or link a thread where it is officially stated that "checking containers they come across in their travels" exclusively is what is officially intended. LOL. Just because you and the rest of the "play my way or you are WRONG" cadre think that what you prefer is one in the same as what is "intended" does not make it so. The egotistical sanctimony on some of you guys is nothing short of astounding. Quote or link or it's simply not the case.

Of course, by your logic that would mean it's not the case, I'm sure. ROFL

@Fleymark, once again, take note of the phrase: "reasonable evaluation of their response makes it pretty clear."

Alphashado wrote: »

Fleymark wrote: »

The denial is strong with this one.

Sorry but you are the one in denial. You keep insisting that the developers intended for you to log out 100 times a day in order to easy aquire rare items. Do you have any idea how ridiculous that sounds?

The best you can do is supply a quote saying it isn't a banable offense because the system is working as it was designed. That is not even close to how you are twisting it. Again I challenge you to prove that anyone from zos intended us to circumvent the rare drops by logging out over and over. You can't do it.

The quote you keep plastering everywhere like some holy relic only says they screwed up and won't punish us for their mistake.

Do you REALLY think a developer of ANY game would say "hmm let's make it so that if they logout 100 times a day, they get all the rare stuff super easy!"

If you believe that, then YOU are the one in denial because it is OUTLANDISH to believe any developer would do that on purpose. I mean really. You are just making yourself sound silly.

I believe this the part where that link gets posted again?
Again, it's understood, but it won't get conceded to.

TheSojourner wrote: »

lathbury wrote: »

No you enlighten us how does relogging change the chance of a rare drop

Sheesh, now I have to educate you? You explained it yourself, in your own post, but you came to the wrong conclusion. The more something is done, DOES in fact change the odds. Please read up on probability theory before continuing.

I'll take this one. How about a more realistic example? Let's call it 1/1000 odds, which is probably a bit closer to the drop rate than using anything found in a Milton Bradley game.

Normal reset time for a container is 10 minutes. Don't empty the contents, the contents don't change.
Empty the contents, the timer starts.
I can check that container 6 times an hour. I've got 6/1000 chance of getting that item every hour.
Your relog time, we'll call 25 seconds (we'll give you the 10 second timer every log off and a really long load screen.
You take 5 seconds to check (not even empty) the container.
You relog. You get 120/1000 to get that item.
Who do you think will end up with it first?

(166 hours likely for me, vs 8 hours for you. Nothing off about that at all.)

Though technically not an exploit (We don't need the link to Jessica's post, thanks), if there was no advantage to it, we would not be having this discussion at all right now.

If you're gonna do it and they're gonna let you, then do it, but cut the BS and call it for what it is.

I've got to give you credit. It's the rare person that puts so much work in to twisting semantics. Eventually though, you'll learn that twisting semantics to justify your perceived rationale is futile.

In a nutshell... You're championing a lost cause. Fighting to the bitter end is never glorious when you're just simply wrong.

@Merlin13KAGL‌ The development implemented a reset upon log-out, that is the exploit to their own fix on farming ID's in the game. Only reason for this, as I see it, is that the timers are stored per ID in the cache on the server-side until the timer expires or the character exit from the server.
A solution may be to have a temp-file containing all farmed ID's with a time-stamp, tied to the character/account. That way the character would need to undergo a check per ID upon log-in, and all expired time-stamps would then be removed while the still active time-stamps remain until they expire per "new" check which could be either a check upon opening an ID or be it a timed checked. We would then have a time-limiter on loot that would be consistent at all times, regardless of the characters/accounts activity status on the server.