A developer stated that's not intended so it's an exploit. Nothing else.
Technically, a Dev simply stated a change to how a particular skill will now function if/when this update goes live. Correlating this change to being the result of an exploit is a bit of a jump and at this very moment is only an assumption. However, later on a Dev could potentially elaborate their reasoning for the change. This however, would not make you right because your being right is after the fact.
What we do have at the moment is a function in the coding that allows an overlooked/unexpected result in execution when the user invokes multiple functions. People who are arguing it is game mechanics are actually arguing this, in some aspects their argument is wrong because they are making a jump and bundling their argument under the idea of game mechanics.
Technically, a Dev simply stated a change to how a particular skill will now function if/when this update goes live. Correlating this change to being the result of an exploit is a bit of a jump and at this very moment is only an assumption. However, later on a Dev could potentially elaborate their reasoning for the change. This however, would not make you right because your being right is after the fact.
What we do have at the moment is a function in the coding that allows an overlooked/unexpected result in execution when the user invokes multiple functions. People who are arguing it is game mechanics are actually arguing this, in some aspects their argument is wrong because they are making a jump and bundling their argument under the idea of game mechanics.
And again a word rapist.
Faster as intended = NOT INTENDED
Nothing else. Developer can't check all possibilities how a program interact. SUCH lead to bugs and exploits, that aren't intended but because not occur on Developer testing it is possible to happen by players. Going from this point in mind, that every possibility is WAI, because the Dev team not post for every BUG/happening a 185757 side long Comment that's not intended and so are a bug, make it not automatically WAI.
It's like cheating in school. Because you can use your handy Internet for searching the solution for your math test, doesn't make it WAI. Especially if handy are forbidden in the school terms! Arguing like you and other guys 'It's possible to use' != Allowed!
Regardless if this is an exploit or not. Regardless if its WAI or not, it does not answer the question that everyone should be asking. Why is it only the GWFs that are getting this fix? Why aren't the other classes getting any of their skills that have animations that can be canceled getting fixed? After all, Im guessing this "fix" was to help balance the classes so why only fix one class?
So please everyone, stop arguing over petty wordplay and lets try and get some real answers.
Regardless if this is an exploit or not. Regardless if its WAI or not, it does not answer the question that everyone should be asking. Why is it only the GWFs that are getting this fix? Why aren't the other classes getting any of their skills that have animations that can be canceled getting fixed? After all, Im guessing this "fix" was to help balance the classes so why only fix one class?
So please everyone, stop arguing over petty wordplay and lets try and get some real answers.
Report the animation cancelable skills. As some mention GWF get this fix due extra attack. I don't know any skill that be cancelable which can hit too at cancel.
Regardless if this is an exploit or not. Regardless if its WAI or not, it does not answer the question that everyone should be asking. Why is it only the GWFs that are getting this fix? Why aren't the other classes getting any of their skills that have animations that can be canceled getting fixed? After all, Im guessing this "fix" was to help balance the classes so why only fix one class?
So please everyone, stop arguing over petty wordplay and lets try and get some real answers.
It is not really only GWF getting the fix.
I suspect that it may have been much easier to animation cancel WMS on a GF using Guard. That would make it too difficult to cross-balance the two fused classes. So, they removed the possibility entirely.
So, I finally had a chance to go to the preview server today, was the fix added to the preview server? I'm still able to do what I did before, unless what I was doing wasn't animation cancelling : holding a direction w/WMS. However, there is a new issue now. Between animations my character glides in the running animation but this doesn't deplete sprint.
And again a word rapist.
Faster as intended = NOT INTENDED
Nothing else. Developer can't check all possibilities how a program interact. SUCH lead to bugs and exploits, that aren't intended but because not occur on Developer testing it is possible to happen by players. Going from this point in mind, that every possibility is WAI, because the Dev team not post for every BUG/happening a 185757 side long Comment that's not intended and so are a bug, make it not automatically WAI.
It's like cheating in school. Because you can use your handy Internet for searching the solution for your math test, doesn't make it WAI. Especially if handy are forbidden in the school terms! Arguing like you and other guys 'It's possible to use' != Allowed!
Your example is a bad one. The difference is that using a device to get the solution for a math problem would have specific guidelines. Yes! Guidelines for what is and what is not allowed. For example lets say part of the guideline is that students are allowed to use calculators. If the student uses an online calculator through their device then it is not cheating. Rather, to avoid grey areas, most guidelines try to be very specific when it can or very vague in order to compensate for wide range of variables. In that sense, at least when I went to school the types of devices allowed were specific in order to avoid grey areas. Furthermore, the method for getting the answers were specific. Also, as reassurance they wanted students to write out their method for calculating the math problems as a check and deterrent to cheating with the help of teachers.
The gaming industry is probably one of the only industries that doesn't have any real guidelines as to how elements in their games are supposed to work. In the old days we had cartridges, and since there was NO BUG FIX whatever was in the vanilla game had met the threshold of acceptability.
Fortunately, we do have bug fixes now. The only real "guideline" is the ToS & EUA. Technically to determine if what I am doing is an exploit I would have to question whether the action is violating the ToS/EUA/ Something a Dev stated is an exploit!!!!
(l) Using or exploiting any bugs, errors, or design flaws to obtain unauthorized access to the Service or to gain an unfair advantage over other players
Armor swapping (enchantments) = exploit!
WMS/animation cancel falls into the grey area if you read the "guidelines" technically!!! (elaborated below)
Faster than intended is simply leeway for the dev's to make changes they find appropriate because it can be incorporated under design flaw (this is the vagueness I mentioned above when not specific).
I did not argue it was WAI, instead I presented the logic that someone who might argue WAI is doing when they are arguing their statement.
Your example is a bad one. The difference is that using a device to get the solution for a math problem would have specific guidelines. Yes! Guidelines for what is and what is not allowed. For example lets say part of the guideline is that students are allowed to use calculators. If the student uses an online calculator through their device then it is not cheating. Rather, to avoid grey areas, most guidelines try to be very specific when it can or very vague in order to compensate for wide range of variables. In that sense, at least when I went to school the types of devices allowed were specific in order to avoid grey areas. Furthermore, the method for getting the answers were specific. Also, as reassurance they wanted students to write out their method for calculating the math problems as a check and deterrent to cheating with the help of teachers.
The gaming industry is probably one of the only industries that doesn't have any real guidelines as to how elements in their games are supposed to work. In the old days we had cartridges, and since there was NO BUG FIX whatever was in the vanilla game had met the threshold of acceptability.
Fortunately, we do have bug fixes now. The only real "guideline" is the ToS & EUA. Technically to determine if what I am doing is an exploit I would have to question whether the action is violating the ToS/EUA/ Something a Dev stated is an exploit!!!!
(l) Using or exploiting any bugs, errors, or design flaws to obtain unauthorized access to the Service or to gain an unfair advantage over other players
Armor swapping (enchantments) = exploit!
WMS/animation cancel falls into the grey area if you read the "guidelines" technically!!! (elaborated below)
Faster than intended is simply leeway for the dev's to make changes they find appropriate because it can be incorporated under design flaw (this is the vagueness I mentioned above when not specific).
I did not argue it was WAI, instead I presented the logic that someone who might argue WAI is doing when they are arguing their statement.
Every expedient outside of paper, pen and non-programming calculator are forbidden. It don't interest if you only search a calculator online. It was a bug with WMS and it got addressed. So simple enough that's a breach against the EUA to use this exploit.
I suspect that it may have been much easier to animation cancel WMS on a GF using Guard. That would make it too difficult to cross-balance the two fused classes. So, they removed the possibility entirely.
If the guardian could even use cancellation, this makes the changes most reasonable .
the problem is that, by an insensitivity of creation, the gwf will suffer more so lost.
I'm still trying to understand the effort of trying to blame the players for a "retroactive crime."
* I thought that our damage was weak and bad sprint since, "for balance" had to speed. this was a vote of confidence that I gave to "assign" the gwf. a class for those who like action.
the alteration only showed that I was wrong. all lost, and the game also. class "outside the box" was just a bug.
Every expedient outside of paper, pen and non-programming calculator are forbidden. It don't interest if you only search a calculator online. It was a bug with WMS and it got addressed. So simple enough that's a breach against the EUA to use this exploit.
Every expedient outside of paper, pen and non-programming calculator are forbidden.
Like I said before it depends on the guidelines; contents allowed during the test. In a written test for example when I was going to school a Thesaurus was allowed. Therefore you are technically wrong because .1% is an exception. You could be right 99.9% of the time but the second there is an exception not matter how small you are "technically wrong."
Obviously you might think I am using a written test as an example just to prove my argument. However, when I went to school in math test we were also allowed to an abucus. I highlighted what you wrote because an abacus does not fit into the catergory of paper, pen, nor non-programming calculator. With the right word play you may be able to try to incorporate abaci under the non-programming calculator which would make a good laugh not needing a reply.
As for the second part of your argument which I could argue against I will simply rolleyes :rolleyes: and passively mention Night Mare lockbox... (and add an ellipsis).
Comments
Technically, a Dev simply stated a change to how a particular skill will now function if/when this update goes live. Correlating this change to being the result of an exploit is a bit of a jump and at this very moment is only an assumption. However, later on a Dev could potentially elaborate their reasoning for the change. This however, would not make you right because your being right is after the fact.
What we do have at the moment is a function in the coding that allows an overlooked/unexpected result in execution when the user invokes multiple functions. People who are arguing it is game mechanics are actually arguing this, in some aspects their argument is wrong because they are making a jump and bundling their argument under the idea of game mechanics.
And again a word rapist.
Faster as intended = NOT INTENDED
Nothing else. Developer can't check all possibilities how a program interact. SUCH lead to bugs and exploits, that aren't intended but because not occur on Developer testing it is possible to happen by players. Going from this point in mind, that every possibility is WAI, because the Dev team not post for every BUG/happening a 185757 side long Comment that's not intended and so are a bug, make it not automatically WAI.
It's like cheating in school. Because you can use your handy Internet for searching the solution for your math test, doesn't make it WAI. Especially if handy are forbidden in the school terms! Arguing like you and other guys 'It's possible to use' != Allowed!
So please everyone, stop arguing over petty wordplay and lets try and get some real answers.
Report the animation cancelable skills. As some mention GWF get this fix due extra attack. I don't know any skill that be cancelable which can hit too at cancel.
It is not really only GWF getting the fix.
I suspect that it may have been much easier to animation cancel WMS on a GF using Guard. That would make it too difficult to cross-balance the two fused classes. So, they removed the possibility entirely.
That gliding is annoying!
Your example is a bad one. The difference is that using a device to get the solution for a math problem would have specific guidelines. Yes! Guidelines for what is and what is not allowed. For example lets say part of the guideline is that students are allowed to use calculators. If the student uses an online calculator through their device then it is not cheating. Rather, to avoid grey areas, most guidelines try to be very specific when it can or very vague in order to compensate for wide range of variables. In that sense, at least when I went to school the types of devices allowed were specific in order to avoid grey areas. Furthermore, the method for getting the answers were specific. Also, as reassurance they wanted students to write out their method for calculating the math problems as a check and deterrent to cheating with the help of teachers.
The gaming industry is probably one of the only industries that doesn't have any real guidelines as to how elements in their games are supposed to work. In the old days we had cartridges, and since there was NO BUG FIX whatever was in the vanilla game had met the threshold of acceptability.
Fortunately, we do have bug fixes now. The only real "guideline" is the ToS & EUA. Technically to determine if what I am doing is an exploit I would have to question whether the action is violating the ToS/EUA/ Something a Dev stated is an exploit!!!!
(l) Using or exploiting any bugs, errors, or design flaws to obtain unauthorized access to the Service or to gain an unfair advantage over other players
Armor swapping (enchantments) = exploit!
WMS/animation cancel falls into the grey area if you read the "guidelines" technically!!! (elaborated below)
Faster than intended is simply leeway for the dev's to make changes they find appropriate because it can be incorporated under design flaw (this is the vagueness I mentioned above when not specific).
I did not argue it was WAI, instead I presented the logic that someone who might argue WAI is doing when they are arguing their statement.
Every expedient outside of paper, pen and non-programming calculator are forbidden. It don't interest if you only search a calculator online. It was a bug with WMS and it got addressed. So simple enough that's a breach against the EUA to use this exploit.
If the guardian could even use cancellation, this makes the changes most reasonable .
the problem is that, by an insensitivity of creation, the gwf will suffer more so lost.
.......................................................................................................................................
I'm still trying to understand the effort of trying to blame the players for a "retroactive crime."
* I thought that our damage was weak and bad sprint since, "for balance" had to speed. this was a vote of confidence that I gave to "assign" the gwf. a class for those who like action.
the alteration only showed that I was wrong. all lost, and the game also. class "outside the box" was just a bug.
Wrong!
This is what you wrote:
Like I said before it depends on the guidelines; contents allowed during the test. In a written test for example when I was going to school a Thesaurus was allowed. Therefore you are technically wrong because .1% is an exception. You could be right 99.9% of the time but the second there is an exception not matter how small you are "technically wrong."
Obviously you might think I am using a written test as an example just to prove my argument. However, when I went to school in math test we were also allowed to an abucus. I highlighted what you wrote because an abacus does not fit into the catergory of paper, pen, nor non-programming calculator. With the right word play you may be able to try to incorporate abaci under the non-programming calculator which would make a good laugh not needing a reply.
As for the second part of your argument which I could argue against I will simply rolleyes :rolleyes: and passively mention Night Mare lockbox... (and add an ellipsis).