Don't like multi-maps

[Shagaliscious.6281]

> @Blude.6812 said:

> > @Shagaliscious.6281 said:

> > They should disable mounts in Silverwastes too. It's an unfair advantage for the people with PoF to be able to loot more chests just because they bought the expansion.

>

> WAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Just buy the expansion but NEVER punish those that have bought it.

 

First off, I have the expansion, just showing the other side of this stupid argument. If you want to say unfair advantages should be removed, then mounts in SW is an unfair advantage, and they should be disabled. It allows people with mounts to get more loot. Similar to multimapping to loot more chests.

[Batelle.1680]

> @Charrbeque.8729 said:

I've always found it odd that I can open the chests in Istan even though I didn't participate in the events.

 

Why? You can open chests in Bitterfrost even if you don't do any of the events. It's not unprecedented by any means.

[Asur.9178]

> @Charrbeque.8729 said:

> > @Asur.9178 said:

> > [Fix] ...the new multi-map nonsense ASAP. This is not healthy for the game.

>

> Maybe they should change it like they did to AB multi loot: require players to get credit for the final part of the event before they can open chests. I've always found it odd that I can open the chests in Istan even though I didn't participate in the events.

 

You can do the same in AB, but you cannot multi-map loot it because there's a time restriction preventing that.

 

Istan and all future maps with such reward mechanics should have the same system.

[DakotaCoty.5721]

> @Rennie.6750 said:

> > @DakotaCoty.5721 said:

> > > @Menadena.7482 said:

> > > > @TheGrimm.5624 said:

> > > > Not sure what the answer is to this one, just a shame that people will look to game the system when the map design is like this. I think one of the better options might be less timer based and more event base triggers to advance the map. Now that said we don't have visibility into the upcoming maps so this might cause issues with maps we have no information on yet and conflicting events, but map advances driven by events do require players to play the content versus just jump to the rewards section. I don't have problems with farmers unless they farm at the expense of everyone else playing the content as designed, that becomes an issue.

> > >

> > > Actually, they do cause a problem: they spike the population, making the event scale up, then leave for another map all at once. I joined the squad near me during one of the new metas yesterday and they were openly hostile about there being another commander on the map, even trying to figure out a way to get them to disconnect.

> >

> > This is completely and utterly false, the entire point of hosting a multimap is to complete the events on each map, and with great succession - I am waiting for a response on my ticket and from various twitters w/ ArenaNet employees to see whether or not this was intended or unintended.

> >

> > If the commander was threatening with a "ddos" then you should report it to the appropriate authorities, but your entire view and stance on how multimaps work is really out of whack with how they actually work - it's all about getting all the maps to succeed, not to bail the events and fail them at all.

> >

> > ----------

> > On the word "exploit", in ArenaNet's own legal documents of ToS, section 17 outlines an exploit as taking advantage of a bug to unfairly benefit the user. (**You will not exploit any bug** in Guild Wars 2 and you will not communicate the existence of any such exploitable bug (bugs that grant the user unnatural or unintended benefits) either directly or through public posting, to any other user of Guild Wars 2.) Link: https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/guild-wars-2-rules-of-conduct/

> >

> > **To what MO said:**

> > "Auric Basic ML is exploity" (notice the Y), within English language, when you disapprove of something but isn't explicitly stated, you add something to demean the value or strength of the word. Saying "exploity" isn't calling it an exploit, they are outlining that the mechanics they added into it weren't being used as intended. An exploit this does not make.

> >

> > **Domain of Istan ML:**

> > This multiloot map has mechanics that have been coded to prevent unlimited gathering of these resources. Someone had to have sat down and planned out this and the evidence is in game.

> >

> > I've had people make up their own definition of what ArenaNet's ToS mean, I've also had people insult me, call my guild gold sellers, personally whisper my commanders to flame them and report them for botting, I've had people insulting other people for farming in squad chat.

> >

> > Let's talk about this:

> > **Why is ML actually good within mechanic limitations** (anti-floodgates)?

> > When GC forms a squad and we get 10 maps, 95% of the time those 10 maps succeed due to the numbers they have, this means, within the maps populations up to 100 player on each map has filled these spots. so in a 10 map-squad, we're effectively communicating a 1,000 player-wide effort to complete these events on time and successfully. And yet, we have people disgruntled that we finally have a farmable meta because the method of the farm in question is being manipulated into a narrative that it is not and actually scaring people away from participating

> >

> > Multiloot map by ArenaNet's own ToS standards is not an exploit, it is not generating infinite gold, it takes time and effort to set up these events - and making stuff up like the quote above, is not helping the cause and is only throwing fuel on the fire.

> >

>

> The fact that there is some sort of limit is obviously an attempt at minimizing the effects of a potential unintended use of game mechanics. It does not mean it's intended gameplay at all. This is the dev team's safety net, it's not meant to be used. It's going to greatly effect the prices of a lot of materials and I doubt the guys balancing the economy are going to be thrilled when they see the results, because prices already dropped a lot already. In 2 days most mats lost 10%, some a lot more. That's obviously not intended. Of course this does not fit your mental narrative of "if the game lets me do it it's fine", but that has always been the motto of every exploiter ever.

 

Again, you're shifting the meaning of "exploit" when I link the VERY definition of an exploit by ArenaNet themselves. Also, I find your condescension laughable "mental narrative", there are people that enjoy this farm, and yet the people that don't enjoy it label the people that do enjoy it as exploiters and cheaters, where's the logic?

[Erasculio.2914]

Just got a "New Build" message in-game, I hope it's something stopping multi-looting. I hope ArenaNet will fix this exploit soon.

[Charrbeque.8729]

> @Batelle.1680 said:

> > @Charrbeque.8729 said:

> I've always found it odd that I can open the chests in Istan even though I didn't participate in the events.

>

> Why? You can open chests in Bitterfrost even if you don't do any of the events. It's not unprecedented by any means.

 

Or airship cargo in Verdant Brink, or Noxious Pods in Dragon's Stand, or......etc.

 

Good point. The irony is I've been farming Bitterfrost Frontier lately for some berries to get an ascended trinket I need. The thought never occurred to me.

 

2+2=cheese to me LOL

 

You're right. There is a precedent already where chests that spawn around the map can be opened by anybody, even if they didn't participate in any events.

 

Perhaps this whole thing is working as intended. Players have complained before about the game not feeling rewarding enough for time spent actually playing the game.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Here's the patch note: _Supply chests in the Mordant Crescent Great Hall meta-event can no longer be looted without first participating in the event_.

 

What does this tell us about the ML issue?

[Charrbeque.8729]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> Here's the patch note: _Supply chests in the Mordant Crescent Great Hall meta-event can no longer be looted without first participating in the event_.

>

> What does this tell us about the ML issue?

 

We realized it wasn't a big deal a little too late?

 

Edit: Thinking about it some more, these chests in Istan didn't require keys or any other items to open.

[Zaklex.6308]

> @"Inculpatus cedo.9234" said:

> Here's the patch note: _Supply chests in the Mordant Crescent Great Hall meta-event can no longer be looted without first participating in the event_.

>

> What does this tell us about the ML issue?

 

That tells us nothing about the multi-loot event which leans more towards the assault on Palawadon, though GC did mention the Great Hall event as well, they are focused on the 30 chests that spawn in Palawadon during the Sunspear attack.

[Inculpatus cedo.9234]

Ahh, thanks for the information. I know little about multi-looting.

[Rennie.6750]

> @DakotaCoty.5721 said:

> > @Rennie.6750 said:

> > > @DakotaCoty.5721 said:

> > > > @Menadena.7482 said:

> > > > > @TheGrimm.5624 said:

> > > > > Not sure what the answer is to this one, just a shame that people will look to game the system when the map design is like this. I think one of the better options might be less timer based and more event base triggers to advance the map. Now that said we don't have visibility into the upcoming maps so this might cause issues with maps we have no information on yet and conflicting events, but map advances driven by events do require players to play the content versus just jump to the rewards section. I don't have problems with farmers unless they farm at the expense of everyone else playing the content as designed, that becomes an issue.

> > > >

> > > > Actually, they do cause a problem: they spike the population, making the event scale up, then leave for another map all at once. I joined the squad near me during one of the new metas yesterday and they were openly hostile about there being another commander on the map, even trying to figure out a way to get them to disconnect.

> > >

> > > This is completely and utterly false, the entire point of hosting a multimap is to complete the events on each map, and with great succession - I am waiting for a response on my ticket and from various twitters w/ ArenaNet employees to see whether or not this was intended or unintended.

> > >

> > > If the commander was threatening with a "ddos" then you should report it to the appropriate authorities, but your entire view and stance on how multimaps work is really out of whack with how they actually work - it's all about getting all the maps to succeed, not to bail the events and fail them at all.

> > >

> > > ----------

> > > On the word "exploit", in ArenaNet's own legal documents of ToS, section 17 outlines an exploit as taking advantage of a bug to unfairly benefit the user. (**You will not exploit any bug** in Guild Wars 2 and you will not communicate the existence of any such exploitable bug (bugs that grant the user unnatural or unintended benefits) either directly or through public posting, to any other user of Guild Wars 2.) Link: https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/guild-wars-2-rules-of-conduct/

> > >

> > > **To what MO said:**

> > > "Auric Basic ML is exploity" (notice the Y), within English language, when you disapprove of something but isn't explicitly stated, you add something to demean the value or strength of the word. Saying "exploity" isn't calling it an exploit, they are outlining that the mechanics they added into it weren't being used as intended. An exploit this does not make.

> > >

> > > **Domain of Istan ML:**

> > > This multiloot map has mechanics that have been coded to prevent unlimited gathering of these resources. Someone had to have sat down and planned out this and the evidence is in game.

> > >

> > > I've had people make up their own definition of what ArenaNet's ToS mean, I've also had people insult me, call my guild gold sellers, personally whisper my commanders to flame them and report them for botting, I've had people insulting other people for farming in squad chat.

> > >

> > > Let's talk about this:

> > > **Why is ML actually good within mechanic limitations** (anti-floodgates)?

> > > When GC forms a squad and we get 10 maps, 95% of the time those 10 maps succeed due to the numbers they have, this means, within the maps populations up to 100 player on each map has filled these spots. so in a 10 map-squad, we're effectively communicating a 1,000 player-wide effort to complete these events on time and successfully. And yet, we have people disgruntled that we finally have a farmable meta because the method of the farm in question is being manipulated into a narrative that it is not and actually scaring people away from participating

> > >

> > > Multiloot map by ArenaNet's own ToS standards is not an exploit, it is not generating infinite gold, it takes time and effort to set up these events - and making stuff up like the quote above, is not helping the cause and is only throwing fuel on the fire.

> > >

> >

> > The fact that there is some sort of limit is obviously an attempt at minimizing the effects of a potential unintended use of game mechanics. It does not mean it's intended gameplay at all. This is the dev team's safety net, it's not meant to be used. It's going to greatly effect the prices of a lot of materials and I doubt the guys balancing the economy are going to be thrilled when they see the results, because prices already dropped a lot already. In 2 days most mats lost 10%, some a lot more. That's obviously not intended. Of course this does not fit your mental narrative of "if the game lets me do it it's fine", but that has always been the motto of every exploiter ever.

>

> Again, you're shifting the meaning of "exploit" when I link the VERY definition of an exploit by ArenaNet themselves. Also, I find your condescension laughable "mental narrative", there are people that enjoy this farm, and yet the people that don't enjoy it label the people that do enjoy it as exploiters and cheaters, where's the logic?

 

I never said this was an exploit, I said that you were using the very words every exploiter ever used to justify what he did. Don't look at enjoyment, look at the numbers. Is it good for the economy? What will be the long-term impact of such a massive mats influx? How much does it effects other areas of the game? The effects on the trophies market is brutal, nowhere near previous LS releases, and they're a key element of legendary crafting. I'm not sure it's intended to make that significantly cheaper and easier. It also greatly devalues the current legendary weapons a lot of veteran players own and the devs should be extremely careful about that, because saying someone that his very expensive sellable gear is now worth half of what it used to be can be very damaging.

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

Here's my own position:

 

@"DakotaCoty.5721" shouldn't bother trying to defend the Istan farm (especially since the method has been nerfed). It's the mission of _Grind Coven_ to find lucrative farms and I think they should keep doing so. I also admire them for publishing their findings so everyone can benefit (or so ANet can decide it's something they want to address), so folks who like to farm have an opportunity to decide which method they prefer.

 

In the end, it's up to ANet to decide what is or isn't an exploit. If you think something is, report it (and don't do it yourself, not even "for testing purposes"). If you're convinced there's nothing wrong with it, keep on keeping on & don't let others distract you by name-calling; don't respond to baiting.

 

That said, let's also be careful about assuming we know ANet's stand on any specific exploit, unless they've been 100% explicit (spoiler alert: they almost never are).

****

 

 

> @DakotaCoty.5721 said:

> On the word "exploit", in ArenaNet's own legal documents of ToS, section 17 outlines an exploit as taking advantage of a bug to unfairly benefit the user. (**You will not exploit any bug** in Guild Wars 2 and you will not communicate the existence of any such exploitable bug (bugs that grant the user unnatural or unintended benefits) either directly or through public posting, to any other user of Guild Wars 2.) Link: https://www.guildwars2.com/en/legal/guild-wars-2-rules-of-conduct/

>

> **To what MO said:**

> "Auric Basic ML is exploity" (notice the Y), within English language, when you disapprove of something but isn't explicitly stated, you add something to demean the value or strength of the word. Saying "exploity" isn't calling it an exploit, they are outlining that the mechanics they added into it weren't being used as intended. An exploit this does not make.

 

You are stretching Mike O'Brien's words to mean something that clearly wasn't intended and that was only possible because you cut off the quote. The main point of his statement was to warn people that AB/ML was being shut down because it was harming the game. Yes, harming the game (agree or disagree with AB/ML being an exploit, clearly ANet was looking at the impact on the game, not just whether this was an intended mechanic or not).

 

ANet's definition of "exploit" is _anything_ that can be done by players that harms the game, regardless of whether it was explicitly allowed by the design (as AB/ML was) or by accident (as with typo prices at vendors).

 

Based on the context, I'd argue that O'Brien was trying to avoid emotional arguments after his comments, with people claiming that ANet was allowing exploiters to profit or from AB/MLers getting hot & bothered that they were being called exploiters, after being allowed to multiloot for months and months.

 

Of course, only O'Brien can clarify why he used "exploity" instead of "exploit". In my opinion, it's a typical example of his inability to communicate his thinking to the community; he often creates an issue by use of "clever phrasing" or loaded rhetoric, resulting in losing his main points to confusion. For example, even today, we are still arguing about whether AB/ML was or wasn't an exploit, something he could have cleaned up ages ago by using simple language.

 

****

[Here's the full quote](

):

 

> We’ll have to fix Auric Basin multi-looting in a future release. Shocking, I know. It’s a fun farming spot, but there are lots of fun farming spots, and this one is exploity and is trashing the ecto market. So consider this fair warning. :)

 

Note how he uses "exploity" and "trashing the ecto market" in the same sentence — it's a stretch to say he's trying to lessen the importance of his remarks; he's trying to avoid a fight about the word.

[Zaron.1987]

They fixed great hall multliloot exploit but left same multliloot exploit at palawadan untouched.

 

Don't get it:/

[Asur.9178]

> @Zaron.1987 said:

> They fixed great hall multliloot exploit but left same multliloot exploit at palawadan untouched.

>

> Don't get it:/

 

Maybe oversight...not finished developing yet? Who knows!

[Oldirtbeard.9834]

I for one support them since it makes it easier for me to avoid buying gems, which I've decided is now the lowest thing on my priority list.

[Zaron.1987]

> @Asur.9178 said:

> > @Zaron.1987 said:

> > They fixed great hall multliloot exploit but left same multliloot exploit at palawadan untouched.

> >

> > Don't get it:/

>

> Maybe oversight...not finished developing yet? Who knows!

 

Hope so.

 

At reddit someone also said some GM s already joined palawadan ml. I hope they did it for science reason to shut the exploity ml down. :/

[Erasculio.2914]

> @Zaron.1987 said:

> At reddit someone also said some GM s already joined palawadan ml. I hope they did it for science reason to shut the exploity ml down. :/

 

And to take names =)

 

Considering they already closed the same exploit in the Great Hall, it's likely a matter of time before the same thing happens with the Palawadan one.

[AliamRationem.5172]

I disliked AB ML. I felt compelled to participate for the rewards, but looting so many chests is just boring. It also makes everything else seem less rewarding by comparison. I know players will tend to go to the most efficient farm, but when one is so far above everything else it starts to seem inefficient to do anything else. As a result, many of the other group farms kind of died. For instance, SW often had no groups in LFG, where previously it was going 24/7. I was even in a guild that was devoted to nothing else! That guild disbanded shortly after AB ML blew up, as it happens.

[Zedek.8932]

> @Shagaliscious.6281 said:

> > @Blude.6812 said:

> > > @Shagaliscious.6281 said:

> > > They should disable mounts in Silverwastes too. It's an unfair advantage for the people with PoF to be able to loot more chests just because they bought the expansion.

> >

> > WAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Just buy the expansion but NEVER punish those that have bought it.

>

> First off, I have the expansion, just showing the other side of this stupid argument. If you want to say unfair advantages should be removed, then mounts in SW is an unfair advantage, and they should be disabled. It allows people with mounts to get more loot. Similar to multimapping to loot more chests.

 

Yeah, and people with a car can travel faster and more independent than me who has not spent a single cent on a driver's licence (€2,000+), a car (whatever price) and insurance (easily €800+ a year). Now let's take all the cars away and we are finally equally slow and unconvenient, because this is socialism.

[Shagaliscious.6281]

> @Zedek.8932 said:

> > @Shagaliscious.6281 said:

> > > @Blude.6812 said:

> > > > @Shagaliscious.6281 said:

> > > > They should disable mounts in Silverwastes too. It's an unfair advantage for the people with PoF to be able to loot more chests just because they bought the expansion.

> > >

> > > WAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH. Just buy the expansion but NEVER punish those that have bought it.

> >

> > First off, I have the expansion, just showing the other side of this stupid argument. If you want to say unfair advantages should be removed, then mounts in SW is an unfair advantage, and they should be disabled. It allows people with mounts to get more loot. Similar to multimapping to loot more chests.

>

> Yeah, and people with a car can travel faster and more independent than me who has not spent a single cent on a driver's licence (€2,000+), a car (whatever price) and insurance (easily €800+ a year). Now let's take all the cars away and we are finally equally slow and unconvenient, because this is socialism.

 

Exactly my point. I guess you didn't catch my sarcasm.

[Shiyo.3578]

Ectos were 27s before multimapping.

 

They are now 20s.

 

FIX THIS **_NOW_**

[Zaron.1987]

> @Shiyo.3578 said:

> Ectos were 27s before multimapping.

>

> They are now 20s.

>

> FIX THIS **_NOW_**

 

Soon vendor price:(

[Illconceived Was Na.9781]

> @"Zaron.1987" said:

> > @"Shiyo.3578" said:

> > Ectos were 27s before multimapping.

> >

> > They are now 20s.

> >

> > FIX THIS **_NOW_**

>

> Soon vendor price:(

 

* During Summer 2013, ectos were below 20s.

* Prior to multiloot, in Spring 2016, supply was below 70k & prices were 40-45s

* A month after [multi-loot became possible](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Game_updates/2016-04-19), the price was 50-56s, supply below 30k

* A month before ML ended with [the Feb 2017 update](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Game_updates/2017-02-08), ecto was at over 840k supply and priced 29-32

* Right before PoF launched, the supply was over 600k and prices were 35-37

* After launch, supply went up to over a million and prices were 22-25s

* Supply is currently around 1.1 million and prices are 20-21s

 

tl;dr Istan ML isn't the primary cause of the current ecto valuation. It's certainly had an impact, but only marginally.

[Drecien.4508]

Everyone got hurt over POF lacking HOT type metas, and the prices of leather. No we have a perfect lootfest with tons of Meta and leather prices are dropping. and people still arent happy. kitten me.

[eldrjth.7384]

How does the new meta influence the price of ectoplasm anyway. Ive run it a little bit and there doesnt seem to be a connection.