Canned_Apples wrote: »Proc sets aren't an exploit. They're meant to close the skill gap.
0 skill > pro
pauld1_ESO wrote: »Canned_Apples wrote: »Proc sets aren't an exploit. They're meant to close the skill gap.
0 skill > pro
Agree they are not an exploit....but if what you say is true why are known "elite" players using them?
Does it involve a set that gives buffs with specific conditions and can remain active after removing said set? I have also sent multiple clips in with full descriptions.
Does it involve a set that gives buffs with specific conditions and can remain active after removing said set? I have also sent multiple clips in with full descriptions.
@MincVinyl I've heard this one got fixed, can you please verify and update here?
I can't do it on my own as i don't know how to reproduce it.
Not going to name the set, but it got ninja-fixed on PC live. No idea as regards the consoles.Does it involve a set that gives buffs with specific conditions and can remain active after removing said set? I have also sent multiple clips in with full descriptions.
Honestly, if this is known in some circles and they are reaping the benefit of it on live, wouldn't it be fairer to publish everything? Or is that against the TOS? I kept my mouth shut and reported to ZOS, because it was the first time in 5 years I discovered something on my own that gave a major advantage - the now fixed set I mentioned. It's disheartening to hear there are many exploitable sets. What kind of advantage do they add up to?Does it involve a set that gives buffs with specific conditions and can remain active after removing said set? I have also sent multiple clips in with full descriptions.
@MincVinyl I've heard this one got fixed, can you please verify and update here?
I can't do it on my own as i don't know how to reproduce it.
considering there are multiple exploits of this nature still on the pts as of an hour ago.....no
There are also many exploitable sets that are simple coding mistakes where they copied a pre-existing set/ability but failed to remove certain variables.
Honestly, if this is known in some circles and they are reaping the benefit of it on live, wouldn't it be fairer to publish everything? Or is that against the TOS? I kept my mouth shut and reported to ZOS, because it was the first time in 5 years I discovered something on my own that gave a major advantage - the now fixed set I mentioned. It's disheartening to hear there are many exploitable sets. What kind of advantage do they add up to?Does it involve a set that gives buffs with specific conditions and can remain active after removing said set? I have also sent multiple clips in with full descriptions.
@MincVinyl I've heard this one got fixed, can you please verify and update here?
I can't do it on my own as i don't know how to reproduce it.
considering there are multiple exploits of this nature still on the pts as of an hour ago.....no
There are also many exploitable sets that are simple coding mistakes where they copied a pre-existing set/ability but failed to remove certain variables.
Honestly, if this is known in some circles and they are reaping the benefit of it on live, wouldn't it be fairer to publish everything? Or is that against the TOS? I kept my mouth shut and reported to ZOS, because it was the first time in 5 years I discovered something on my own that gave a major advantage - the now fixed set I mentioned. It's disheartening to hear there are many exploitable sets. What kind of advantage do they add up to?Does it involve a set that gives buffs with specific conditions and can remain active after removing said set? I have also sent multiple clips in with full descriptions.
@MincVinyl I've heard this one got fixed, can you please verify and update here?
I can't do it on my own as i don't know how to reproduce it.
considering there are multiple exploits of this nature still on the pts as of an hour ago.....no
There are also many exploitable sets that are simple coding mistakes where they copied a pre-existing set/ability but failed to remove certain variables.
Yeah it is against TOS to bring it up, which tbh bringing it to the publics attention is really the only way that zos will ever fix anything of this nature.
Yeah it is against TOS to bring it up, which tbh bringing it to the publics attention is really the only way that zos will ever fix anything of this nature.
Yeah it is against TOS to bring it up, which tbh bringing it to the publics attention is really the only way that zos will ever fix anything of this nature.
Make the exploit public. That is the only way anything will ever get done about it.
We've seen this many times, if you try to work with ZOS, they will sweep it under the rug and nothing will ever happen.
If you make it public and people start using it in large numbers, the forum(s) will blow up and ZOS will be forced to actually fix it.
Yeah it is against TOS to bring it up, which tbh bringing it to the publics attention is really the only way that zos will ever fix anything of this nature.
Make the exploit public. That is the only way anything will ever get done about it.
We've seen this many times, if you try to work with ZOS, they will sweep it under the rug and nothing will ever happen.
If you make it public and people start using it in large numbers, the forum(s) will blow up and ZOS will be forced to actually fix it.
That's a good way to get banned, not that I have played much since murkmire due to the direction the combat team has taken. Even so there are no other games to invest in for a long time, so I don't plan on risking an account that has spent over a grand and a half with probably close to ten thousand hours into it.