fred4 wrote: »

No they marked it as an exploit because it was never supposed to be able to happen. "Reports" don't automatically make something wrong. If it was intended they'd say so.

Yes, I agree that is exactly why ZOS do some of the incomprehensible things they do. They feel a sense of ownership over the product much like George Lucas did over Star Wars. As a software developer I am a bit the same, but I know that some of my colleagues and customers don't share that view.

I have a big problem when ZOS fix "unintentional" features, such as:

(1) Getting rid of the unkillable NPC that people used for DPS testing. What was the harm in that?

(2) Any changes that reduce build variety, such as the change to Trapping Webs. If people only used ZOS' intended skill rotations, we'd all be running around with meta builds. Part of the fun is making new builds and discovering skills that work well together regardless of ZOS intentions. Play as you like ... except when ZOS decide otherwise, right? It's like the guard who says "There are no rules, but I'll tell you if you break one."

(3) The way ZOS curtailed the duelling scene by their changes to IC. Players from different factions previously respawned in the same district, which often led to ad hoc duelling underneath the spawn points. It's something you could participate in as a solo player without having an alliance member there to resurrect you.

Duelling of course still happens, and the IC is still the best place when there's just two of you. But the respawn timers that ZOS are introducing are making this more painful. This one really gets me. It is in response to people complaining about spawn points close to the flags. It assume that your objective, in capturing the flag is, well, to capture the flag. That is not at all my objective, when I go there! I go there, because the flags are a focus for PvP. I go there to find players I can fight (and no I'm not good at it, but that's another story). When respawning more slowly, this will only be a nuisance all round.