My goodbye forever rant

Nah I'm not even leaving; that title was just too provocative to pass up. I'm just posting this log in the interest of transparency. I don't think a warning is a big deal for people that aren't intentionally bad actors, so I was perfectly happy to let the issue drop after the warning was issued. This is really all the information we have regarding this issue.

Together with a few of my closest associates, in secret, we formed what would later come to be known as "The Coraesine Cabal." That's what some people's interpretation of the message from staff would have you believe anyway. The truth is way more lame, unfortunately. Here's a log of my time in the slammer:
https://pastebin.com/LmAT7vFN

Aaaand that's about all I know. The "pretty damning evidence" has yet to make an appearance, but the best we can figure is that someone found some chat on our discord server that was construed as malicious intent.

tl;dr
The log is the only communication I've received from staff on the matter.

• >report Hello! I have been in the Consultation Lounge for over four hours and have not seen or heard anything from anyone. I understand that I have done something wrong and am not a priority. Is there a time I could arrange to come back to meet someone.. or what?
  
• REPORT should only be used to notify the GemStone IV staff of emergency situations or gamewide technical errors. Please use ASSIST for general support.
  
• 
  
• 
  
• Message sent to all online game staff. While no staff members are currently on duty, there are likely to be several lurking behind the scenes to investigate your report. If you feel the need to speak with the staff, please type ASSIST for a list of options.
  
• 
  
• Note that only GameMasters receive reports, not GameHosts.
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• SEND[Mazreth] I'll be with you in just a moment.
  
• 
  
• 
  
• You say, "Hello sir."
  
• Mazreth says, "Afternoon."
  
• You nod to Mazreth in greeting.
  
• >l maz
  
• Mazreth says, "Sorry for the delay, I needed to figure out why you were in here."
  
• You see GameMaster Mazreth.
  
• He appears to be a Klingon.
  
• He appears to be one super fly dude dressed in a mezmerizing combination of awesomesauce and golden win.
  
• He has a pair of white-feathered wings protruding from his back and wrapped protectively around him.
  
• He has several gnarly tattoos of nymphs in various stages of undress frolicking up and down his arms.
  
• A palpable aura of intense badassery emanates from his very person.
  
• He is in good shape.
  
• He is wearing an ensemble too impressive for you to fully comprehend.
  
• Mazreth asks, "Though I suppose you already know?"
  
• You nod understandingly.
  
• You say, "I have a suspicious."
  
• You say, "Err."
  
• Mazreth says, "If not we can go over it."
  
• You say, "Suspicion."
  
• You say, "I would very much like to go over it."
  
• Mazreth says, "Sure."
  
• You say, "However."
  
• You say, "I know your time is valuable."
  
• Mazreth says, "So you are here to be issued an official warning for Game Mechanics Abuse bsed upon exploitation of an enchanting bug."
  
• Mazreth says, "That's as sussinct as I can make it."
  
• You say, "Okay."
  
• You say, "I understand and accept the punishment."
  
• Mazreth says, "There's no lockout or anything else with the warning based upon your relatively good prior record."
  
• 
  
• ***
  
• 
  
• 
  
• ************************************************** ******
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• Ragz, this is an official warning, that engaging in system mechanics abuse is against GemStone IV policy. If you persist in ignoring these warnings, you risk losing permanent access to GemStone IV on all of your accounts.
  
• 
  
• If you feel this warning was received in error, please speak to a GameHost by typing ASSIST REQUEST.
  
• 
  
• You can also learn more about GemStone IV policies online, by typing POLICY while in the game or by visiting http://www.play.net/gs4/gamepolicy.asp.
  
• 
  
• 
  
• 
  
• ************************************************** ***********
  
• 
  
• 
  
• Mazreth says, "If you haven't read the post from Coase concerning GMA in general I can link you to that as it might better explain policy regarding bugs."
  
• Mazreth says, "Http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/GemStone%20IV%20Announcements/Important%20Announcements/view/3446."
  
• You ask, "For my own edification, may I please be directed to the "documents and version notes" referenced in GM Coase's Policy post?"
  
• You say, "Yes, sir, I have read it."
  
• You say, "Many times."
  
• Mazreth says, "Now you're going to make me read it."
  
• You say, "I don't understand why I'm being punished here, but I don't want to make you have to explain it to me."
  
• You say, "I know that's not your job."
  
• You say, "So I will glady go over the documentation if I can just be directed to it."
  
• Mazreth says, "Well, since all I have are the notes to go on, I can say that a discussion about intentions to exploit the bug before it was discovered are the primary reason anyone and everyone involoved is getting a warning."
  
• Mazreth says, "Let me see if I can find the documentation he's referring to."
  
• You say, "Yes, sir, I understand that it's been labeled as intentions to exploit the bug, but I don't understand how I am supposed to have known it was a bug."
  
• You say, "I only cast the spell."
  
• You say, "I didn't even get an item."
  
• Mazreth says, "You've played long enough to know what metals shouldn't be enchantable and if they are...."
  
• Mazreth says, "You should know beetter."
  
• You say, "The 925 spell was just updated, sir."
  
• Mazreth says, "You didn't just start playing this game."
  
• Mazreth says, "I realize that, but nowhere was it released that suddenly you can enchant new things."
  
• You say, "We were encouraged to experiment on old previously unenchantable items."
  
• You say, "Respectfully, I disagree sir."
  
• You say, "I can link you the forums posts."
  
• Mazreth says, "So what Coase is referring to by "documentation and version notes" is Policy 7 specifically."
  
• Mazreth says, "So if you've read policy 7, you've read what he's referring to."
  
• You say, "Okay."
  
• You say, "I have read it."
  
• You ask, "It is understood that I did not profit from this action?"
  
• Mazreth says, "It is."
  
• You say, "Thank you."
  
• Mazreth says, "You're welcome."
  
• Mazreth says, "I just happened to see your report and didn't want you to languish in here. If you'd like I can set you up with an SGM referral to speak with Coase about it."
  
• Mazreth says, "Or you can reach out to feedback."
  
• You say, "I would consider the issue closed at the end of our conversation here unless escalating it is required."
  
• Mazreth says, "It is not required and that's fair by me."
  
• Mazreth says, "I just wanted you to have the option."
  
• Mazreth says, "If you desired."
  
• You say, "Perfect."
  
• Mazreth says, "In that case, I jknow your time is as valuable as mine so I'll set you back down."
  
• You say, "Thank you."
  
• Mazreth says, "You're welcome. Thank you for handling this professionally."
  
• Mazreth says, "I appreciate it."
  
• Mazreth says, "Have fun, report all bugs."
  
• Mazreth winks.
  
• You say, "Yeah."
  
• The world grows blurry and indistinct. After a moment everything becomes clear again. Looking about, you see...

Just in case it goes poof later on before I can read it.

There has to be more to it than that though. If you just tried to enchant coraesine and found it to now be enchantable, I don't think that is what the announcement was about... especially given your reasoning of: "We were encouraged to experiment on old previously unenchantable items."

Many people suspected high ranking among the HotA. Guess we were right!

Big respect Ragz for your coming out clean

The GM was right. Someone like Ragz should have known that an item like this shouldn't be enchantable (or at the very least EXTREMELY difficult), yet they did so anyways.

I love the lawyering in the log though.

I too am one of the Evil, H@Z0r, Coraesine Cabal!

Here is a lovely post by Naos on the official forums:

Quote:

---

The intention is to open up more items to be potentially enchanted that strictly could not have been even tempered in the past due to their properties.

Many items will still not be able to be enchanted due to any number of factors that are intended. Some materials are not enchantable; some scripted item are not enchantable, and so on.

When I say this, I don't mean "difficult to enchant and you might be able to enchant them with effort".

I mean literally not able to be enchanted because we don't want those items to be enchanted, for whatever reason.
-- Naos ---

---

http://forums.play.net/forums/GemSto...zard/view/1134
[formatting is mine]

I interpreted this post as though it was up to us to experiment and figure out what we can and couldn't enchant going forward.

Here is a few of my personal logs from experimenting:

Level 66 wizard:

Quote:

---

You sense that the coraesine spear already bears an enchantment and that this enchantment is completely beyond your abilities.

---

Level 100 wizard (150 wizard ranks):

Quote:

---

You sense that the coraesine spear already bears an enchantment and that you can only fail to enchant it if you are horribly unlucky.

---

It's not like a level 25 wizard could enchant these things with no effort, nor was this some infinite enchanting bug.

They were very hard to enchant for the average (not post capped) wizard through my experimentation, though I admittedly did not have access to any wizards between 66 & 100 for testing.

Low steel and high steel also became enchantable during this release, and apparently that is now confirmed not to be buggy (until Coase changes his mind again).

Guess it's my fault for being an idiot and not knowing this was an obvious bug.

Without explicit spell update notes, I don't see how SIMU could punish anyone. If I understand correctly, new materials could be enchanted that previously were not and no one said explicitly these are now enchantable (therefore identifying those that remained NOT enchantable).

Maybe SIMU should provide real QA and spell notes/documentation instead of blaming their paying customers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortybox

The GM was right. Someone like Ragz should have known that an item like this shouldn't be enchantable (or at the very least EXTREMELY difficult), yet they did so anyways.

I love the lawyering in the log though.

---

Was the GM right though? Literally, a new version of enchanting comes out and literally GMs were saying that this will open up new materials to be enchantable and that the players should experiment.

Players experimented and they found items made from coraesine were now enchantable.

If I were one of these players that received a warning.. and that's really the extent of what happened.. I would fight the warning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m444w

I too am one of the Evil, H@Z0r, Coraesine Cabal!

Here is a lovely post by Naos on the official forums:


http://forums.play.net/forums/GemSto...zard/view/1134
[formatting is mine]

I interpreted this post as though it was up to us to experiment and figure out what we can and couldn't enchant going forward.

Here is a few of my personal logs from experimenting:

Level 66 wizard:


Level 100 wizard (150 wizard ranks):


It's not like a level 25 wizard could enchant these things with no effort, nor was this some infinite enchanting bug.

They were very hard to enchant for the average (not post capped) wizard through my experimentation, though I admittedly did not have access to any wizards between 66 & 100 for testing.

Low steel and high steel also became enchantable during this release, and apparently that is now confirmed not to be buggy (until Coase changes his mind again).

Guess it's my fault for being an idiot and not knowing this was an obvious bug.

---

STFU - you're full of it.

Quote:

---

Reply Reply
The intention is to open up more items to be potentially enchanted that strictly could not have been even tempered in the past due to their properties. Many items will still not be able to be enchanted due to any number of factors that are intended. Some materials are not enchantable; some scripted item are not enchantable, and so on. When I say this, I don't mean "difficult to enchant and you might be able to enchant them with effort". I mean literally not able to be enchanted because we don't want those items to be enchanted, for whatever reason.

---

Someone like you, especially you, should know that coraesine shouldn't have been that easy. Stop being retarded.

I continue to think this was probably unfair, based on the little information that is public. I don’t know what the GMs secret evidence is or what was in anyone’s hearts or minds, but the changes to 925 leave me with the impression this was unfair.

The main reason I feel that way is because permabless was not enchantable. Now it is. If you’d done it before the 925 changes, it would be GMA. It was the prototypical never be enchantable example. They never explicitly told us it was OK or intended that you could enchant permabless. We just know it’s OK because we enchant it and no one gets in trouble. Coaresine is not OK, because people enchanted it and got in trouble.

That’s my read of the situation on the public information. I know others draw the opposite conclusion. But it seems unfair IMO.

Fortybox, what you are saying seems more based off emotion then instead of looking at all of the evidence in front of you. You seem to be making a conclusion that everyone should know all the rules when it was specifically stated that things that weren't previously enchantable are now enchantable. I personally haven't enchanted coraesine but to be honest I wouldn't of known based off the comments that were made. I don't have time to keep up to date with all the details. If someone asked me to enchant a coraesine weapon I would of casted 925 at it. If it said I could enchant it I would of enchanted it. I'm still new to wizardry though and still have to ask which potion I should use. But I think you making the statement that people should of known is absolutely wrong.

It didn't help that the GM that brought you there wasn't even involved in the matter. They really should have waited until a GM involved in the whole process could have met with you. This log essentially tells us nothing outside of what we were already told in the announcement.

Also, people keep referencing that we were encouraged to experiment with enchanting old items - Does someone have a link to this?

Honestly, I don't have all the facts, so I can't really say anything outside of pointing out how Nodyre getting warned for enchanting Krodera is at least a load of BS. Any krodera enchanting cabal is doomed to loosing quite a bit of money :D.

The power dynamic at play here is bonkers. I'm polite to the GMs, but when they overstep their bounds, I am very quick to remind them that they are customer service representatives, not arbiters. They approach most situations like police officers would and as a result people walk on eggshells around them. It's ridiculous, and people really should knock it right off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

Mazreth says, "You've played long enough to know what metals shouldn't be enchantable and if they are...."

---

I bet if you took a poll right now, most GMs wouldn't know either, especially after the recent changes.

Well, I'm not saying that everyone who got a warning knowingly broke the rules, but it sounds like the GMs have something they are using as evidence. I don't see why they would lie about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

Well, I'm not saying that everyone who got a warning knowingly broke the rules, but it sounds like the GMs have something they are using as evidence. I don't see why they would like about that.

---

Uh, so they can be in the right without having to produce any evidence, because they know that they released no documentation for their half finished system that even they weren't properly aware of how it functioned?

Like how when they swore up and down that when they accidentally sold 6x HCW/HCP stuff off the shelf that their data said it would crash the market if they left them for sale, when in reality they just wanted to release the smithy a couple months later?

They probably intended to make coraesine enchantable at some point, via simucoin voucher or something at a future event, and accidentally left that part of it enchantable by players. That's the first thing that came to my mind when that particular material was enchantable and other historically un-enchantable items weren't.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

Well, I'm not saying that everyone who got a warning knowingly broke the rules, but it sounds like the GMs have something they are using as evidence. I don't see why they would lie about that.

---

As best as we can tell, they saw people talking about enchanting coraesine in our Discord server and took that as evidence of collusion and intentional BUG abuse. So, yeah...

It's hard to take the line of "maybe we really were allowed to do this" serious when you start off with "I have a good idea of why I am here in the consultation lounge."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnOrdim

It's hard to take the line of "maybe we really were allowed to do this" serious when you start off with "I have a good idea of why I am here in the consultation lounge."

---

Never admit guilt when you're dealing with any type of authority figure.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m444w

I too am one of the Evil, H@Z0r, Coraesine Cabal!

Here is a lovely post by Naos on the official forums:


http://forums.play.net/forums/GemSto...zard/view/1134

---

There are a few more posts in that thread that add context:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Naos

VEYTHORNE

>> Who made the decision about what can be enchanted, and what cannot be enchanted? Can they speak up in this conversation?

It depends on the item in particular. If it is due to the material; it was decided when the material was designed. If it's due to the script, it was decided when the script was designed. If it's due to a property (e.g. Creature Bane under the old spell) it was decided when that property was designed. There is no one answer for this.

As a concrete example, I designed and built the "steel weapons" that went out during an EG auction; these weapons cannot be enchanted and never will be. This is a part of their design, conceptually, as well as a concession mechanically to support how they function.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m444w

Low steel and high steel also became enchantable during this release, and apparently that is now confirmed not to be buggy (until Coase changes his mind again).

Guess it's my fault for being an idiot and not knowing this was an obvious bug.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Naos

No, not the low/high steel materials. Two weapons were released at the 2009 EG auction: "a steel short sword" and "a steel katana", which have some fancy properties. That's to what I am referring. There might be a wiki article talking about them; I'm too lazy to check. ;)

---

I always took the enchanting changes to refer to flares, padding, that sort of thing, not materials that were always considered to be anti-magic or unenchantable. How many enchants did you do?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

Uh, so they can be in the right without having to produce any evidence, because they know that they released no documentation for their half finished system that even they weren't properly aware of how it functioned?

Like how when they swore up and down that when they accidentally sold 6x HCW/HCP stuff off the shelf that their data said it would crash the market if they left them for sale, when in reality they just wanted to release the smithy a couple months later?

They probably intended to make coraesine enchantable at some point, via simucoin voucher or something at a future event, and accidentally left that part of it enchantable by players. That's the first thing that came to my mind when that particular material was enchantable and other historically un-enchantable items weren't.

---

If I said, "Check it out, Coraisine is bugged and you can enchant it!!" Or some such, then yeah, that is good evidence.

Again, not saying that is the case here, or at least with everyone that got warnings. But again, I don't have all the facts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bunnymustdie

Never admit guilt when you're dealing with any type of authority figure.

---

+ 1

You're not helping yourself when doing so, you're making THEIR job easier

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortybox

STFU - you're full of it.



Someone like you, especially you, should know that coraesine shouldn't have been that easy. Stop being retarded.

---

If Simu had any brains or foresight, they would have published a list of metals that still can't be enchanted, and then be like "If you have an item made of any of these metals that read as enchantable, please submit a BUG report, as these metals should not be player enchantable under any circumstances."

I really want to know how coraesine got by QC when they were redoing enchant in the first place. Did not even 1 person even bother trying to cast 925 at coraesine anything during the QC process?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

If Simu had any brains or foresight, they would have published a list of metals that still can't be enchanted, and then be like "If you have an item made of any of these metals that read as enchantable, please submit a BUG report, as these metals should not be player enchantable under any circumstances."

I really want to know how coraesine got by QC when they were redoing enchant in the first place. Did not even 1 person even bother trying to cast 925 at coraesine anything during the QC process?

---

I totally understand your point on this, but it's like blaming me for leaving my car unlocked when something got stolen from it. Sure, I was stupid and should have known better - but that doesn't make the criminal any less of a criminal.

Now, if they didn't know that it wasn't some intended change, I can totally see that.

But seeing as no GM has chimed in on this really, we only have one side's word to go on. The side that presents its evidence first always seems right - until the other side makes its case. Again, we simply do not have all the facts here to be maligning the GMs over this. (Though yeah, they certainly need to get their QC act together. Maybe less pay event planning and more QCing?).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

If I said, "Check it out, Coraisine is bugged and you can enchant it!!" Or some such, then yeah, that is good evidence.

Again, not saying that is the case here, or at least with everyone that got warnings. But again, I don't have all the facts.

---

But how would a player know this is a bug and not an intended part of the new enchantment system.

There has to be more to this story than what is being told. It's not just a couple people who found out that Coraesine is now enchantable and enchanted a couple of their weapons.

Qc people are a bunch of little bitches though. Just in my opinion. Some of the stuff they get anal about it ridiculous. Seriously if its your stupid fault something was lower dont punish the people at fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

If Simu had any brains or foresight, they would have published a list of metals that still can't be enchanted, and then be like "If you have an item made of any of these metals that read as enchantable, please submit a BUG report, as these metals should not be player enchantable under any circumstances."

I really want to know how coraesine got by QC when they were redoing enchant in the first place. Did not even 1 person even bother trying to cast 925 at coraesine anything during the QC process?

---

Have to agree with this. I understand SIMU plays by their own made up rules that only they can decide to enforce for their own made up reasons, and players literally have zero recourse. Provide us a list, don't encourage experimentation then punishments when players discover programming shortcomings. If it wasn't enchantable before the 925 update yet was enchantable afterwards...why would anyone assume it wasn't intended?

Shout out to Ragz and O for coming forward.

I think the warnings were excessive. They aren't the end of the world, and nobody got a lockout, but warning someone for failing to be clairvoyant is meh.

SIMU now and forever fail at coherent and cohesive messaging.
- one GM posting about how you can now enchant things you may not have been able to before
- another GM in discord saying how they were just going to fix the items but not warn anyone
- another GM saying that you should know when bugs are bugs and to report all bugs and you're a bad bad bad person for casting 925

On its best day SIMU is about as professional and organized as two dogs wearing rollerskates having sex.

Months later 925 is still as clear as mud and we're nowhere near having 8x-10x potions avaialble for the new system. I doubt any single GM on staff even knows everything about how the spell is meant to function. The utter lack of transparency is wild.

As much as I like the new system. I would of liked it better with the 8x-10x potion trader being available. If I had to continue infusing potions I probably would of been done fast enchanting my voln armor to 10x. I was halfway there at the time and would probably be finished now. Even though they left the old system as an option they took away the ability to infuse.

The fun thing is my voln armor was enchantable under the old system. Now it's a bit more difficult. So yeah... it probably won't be enchantable at all once they release the rules even though I specifically purchased the 9x and 10x potions to enchant them when they were easily enchantable under the old system.

I still think they had better things to spend their time on than fix a system that wasn't broken. They had even already added benefits for enchanters who hunted.

But I guess that's what happens when GMs work on what they want to, and not so much what needs to be worked on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

I totally understand your point on this, but it's like blaming me for leaving my car unlocked when something got stolen from it. Sure, I was stupid and should have known better - but that doesn't make the criminal any less of a criminal.

Now, if they didn't know that it wasn't some intended change, I can totally see that.

But seeing as no GM has chimed in on this really, we only have one side's word to go on. The side that presents its evidence first always seems right - until the other side makes its case. Again, we simply do not have all the facts here to be maligning the GMs over this. (Though yeah, they certainly need to get their QC act together. Maybe less pay event planning and more QCing?).

---

Did they ever actually say coraesine shouldn't be enchantable when the changes went live? Because I wouldn't have had a fucking clue. If I had a coraesine item I would have just been like PREP 925 > CAST SWORD > OH COOL CORAESINE IS ENCHANTABLE NOW WHAT A NIFTY UPDATE MAYBE SIMU ISN'T SO GAY AFTER ALL!!!!!!!!1

Because you know, I don't live on Discord 24/7 with my mouth open waiting for a GM to shart down my throat or keep up with every bit of new info that comes out that's buried 873 messages up since last time I logged onto Discord like an hour earlier or whatever.

And even though I really shouldn't anymore because of their god awful track record of incompetence, I typically expect QC to be able to do their jobs right, or at least be able to handle a super simple task like HEY LET'S TRY 925 ON CORAESINE JUST TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T WORK!!!!!!!

gg QC, keep failing it up.

And just to nitpick because reasons:

Quote:

---

Mazreth says, "Well, since all I have are the notes to go on, I can say that a discussion about intentions to exploit the bug before it was discovered are the primary reason anyone and everyone involoved is getting a warning."

---

What happened to "We don't discuss disciplinary action of other players."?

So much whining over a warn. Good god people.

Quote:

---

Mazreth says, "Well, since all I have are the notes to go on, I can say that a discussion about intentions to exploit the bug before it was discovered are the primary reason anyone and everyone involoved is getting a warning."

---

That's some minority report shit right there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

What happened to "We don't discuss disciplinary action of other players."?

---

No one was named.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taernath

No one was named.

---

Yeah, they've discussed punishments for large amounts of unnamed players abusing a bug before. Such as when they banned those retards for abusing the scarab bug and making $15m during the H4H event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Did they ever actually say coraesine shouldn't be enchantable when the changes went live? Because I wouldn't have had a fucking clue. If I had a coraesine item I would have just been like PREP 925 > CAST SWORD > OH COOL CORAESINE IS ENCHANTABLE NOW WHAT A NIFTY UPDATE MAYBE SIMU ISN'T SO GAY AFTER ALL!!!!!!!!1

---

Regarding enchantability, the only thing I can find is the material difficulty table, which I believe is referenced elsewhere across the wiki:
https://gswiki.play.net/Material
However, whether or not that is GM supported, or old data based on changes, it's absolutely ambiguous.

The only thing I can think of from a QC perspective is that it could have been an omission in the materials table. Imagine having a list of materials like that and then asking someone to confirm, but ohh, one line was missing... What should have been caught would be a novalue command in the lookup to bring in a restriction rather than a 0. But, that's 100% speculation based things I've seen on the job.

I agree with Parkbandit on this one. This doesn't appear to be the whole story... Based on the GM posting, it appears that there were more conditions that are a little weird:
1) Knowledge that the enchanting should have been impossible (This seems to be where a lot of debate is)
2) Not discussing whether the enchanting is possible with GMs, or the bug not being properly reported. (This is also the current area of debate, considering your interpretation of 1)
3) Interfacing with people to capitalize on the enchanting
4) Profiting off of #3

As far as Nuadhja's comments... Yeah, there's about a 100% guarantee that there are GMs in HotA, but they can't say who they are... we used to speculate. But, knowing how much Simu got shit in the past for utilizing LNET and Discord conversation in the past, they'd be super shitty and dumb to utilize that in issuance of a warning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by audioserf

I doubt any single GM on staff even knows everything about how the spell is meant to function. The utter lack of transparency is wild.

---

The GMs who created the system barely even know how it works. That first week or two on Discord was overflowing with GM fail.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Did they ever actually say coraesine shouldn't be enchantable when the changes went live? Because I wouldn't have had a fucking clue. If I had a coraesine item I would have just been like PREP 925 > CAST SWORD > OH COOL CORAESINE IS ENCHANTABLE NOW WHAT A NIFTY UPDATE MAYBE SIMU ISN'T SO GAY AFTER ALL!!!!!!!!1

Because you know, I don't live on Discord 24/7 with my mouth open waiting for a GM to shart down my throat or keep up with every bit of new info that comes out that's buried 873 messages up since last time I logged onto Discord like an hour earlier or whatever.

And even though I really shouldn't anymore because of their god awful track record of incompetence, I typically expect QC to be able to do their jobs right, or at least be able to handle a super simple task like HEY LET'S TRY 925 ON CORAESINE JUST TO MAKE SURE IT DOESN'T WORK!!!!!!!

gg QC, keep failing it up.

And just to nitpick because reasons:



What happened to "We don't discuss disciplinary action of other players."?

---

I agree. I sure as hell didn't know whether Coraesine was enchantable. I remember someone asking on Discord and I thought to myself "Hmmm, I don't actually know the answer to that."

I'm also not saying that everyone that got a warning was part of some Cabal trying to make a happy buck off the mistake. But the GMs do claim that that was going on, and if it was, then that is GMA, plain and simple.

I'm not accusing anyone of anything here, and maybe the GMs really are being ridiculous. But I also am not going to just believe what I am told by all the players involved, either.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

So much whining over a warn. Good god people.

---

It's more about how Simu is just stupid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

Yeah, they've discussed punishments for large amounts of unnamed players abusing a bug before. Such as when they banned those retards for abusing the scarab bug and making $15m during the H4H event.

---

https://media.giphy.com/media/gBpY4p7bbhsiI/giphy.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whirlin

Regarding enchantability, the only thing I can find is the material difficulty table, which I believe is referenced elsewhere across the wiki:
https://gswiki.play.net/Material
However, whether or not that is GM supported, or old data based on changes, it's absolutely ambiguous.

The only thing I can think of from a QC perspective is that it could have been an omission in the materials table. Imagine having a list of materials like that and then asking someone to confirm, but ohh, one line was missing... What should have been caught would be a novalue command in the lookup to bring in a restriction rather than a 0. But, that's 100% speculation based things I've seen on the job.

I agree with Parkbandit on this one. This doesn't appear to be the whole story... Based on the GM posting, it appears that there were more conditions that are a little weird:
1) Knowledge that the enchanting should have been impossible (This seems to be where a lot of debate is)
2) Not discussing whether the enchanting is possible with GMs, or the bug not being properly reported. (This is also the current area of debate, considering your interpretation of 1)
3) Interfacing with people to capitalize on the enchanting
4) Profiting off of #3

As far as Nuadhja's comments... Yeah, there's about a 100% guarantee that there are GMs in HotA, but they can't say who they are... we used to speculate. But, knowing how much Simu got shit in the past for utilizing LNET and Discord conversation in the past, they'd be super shitty and dumb to utilize that in issuance of a warning.

---

Either way, Simu just needs to put out a list of metals that shouldn't be player enchantable for any non-bug related reasons.

If they don't after this fiasco, then they're basically embracing their own stupidity and showcasing it for everyone to see.

It's ok to be stupid, just don't brag about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

https://media.giphy.com/media/gBpY4p7bbhsiI/giphy.gif

---

https://r11.fodey.com/2591/28c910f62...548e0159.0.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whirlin

Regarding enchantability, the only thing I can find is the material difficulty table, which I believe is referenced elsewhere across the wiki:
https://gswiki.play.net/Material
However, whether or not that is GM supported, or old data based on changes, it's absolutely ambiguous.

The only thing I can think of from a QC perspective is that it could have been an omission in the materials table. Imagine having a list of materials like that and then asking someone to confirm, but ohh, one line was missing... What should have been caught would be a novalue command in the lookup to bring in a restriction rather than a 0. But, that's 100% speculation based things I've seen on the job.

I agree with Parkbandit on this one. This doesn't appear to be the whole story... Based on the GM posting, it appears that there were more conditions that are a little weird:
1) Knowledge that the enchanting should have been impossible (This seems to be where a lot of debate is)
2) Not discussing whether the enchanting is possible with GMs, or the bug not being properly reported. (This is also the current area of debate, considering your interpretation of 1)
3) Interfacing with people to capitalize on the enchanting
4) Profiting off of #3

As far as Nuadhja's comments... Yeah, there's about a 100% guarantee that there are GMs in HotA, but they can't say who they are... we used to speculate. But, knowing how much Simu got shit in the past for utilizing LNET and Discord conversation in the past, they'd be super shitty and dumb to utilize that in issuance of a warning.

---

The new enchant system didn't take into account material difficulty at all. Coraesine was just what they are publicizing, people also enchanted zelnorn. Since coraesine was just sold at DR it's what people got caught for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drauz

The new enchant system didn't take into account material difficulty at all. Coraesine was just what they are publicizing, people also enchanted zelnorn. Since coraesine was just sold at DR it's what people got caught for.

---

Whoever got pinged for the zelnorn wasn't in HoA, to my knowledge. We just had a few people who thought they could enchant coraesine now, and one poor bastard who got GMA warned for enchanting some fake old krodera that has no mechanical benefits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

https://r11.fodey.com/2591/28c910f62...548e0159.0.jpg

---

I don't know who Methais R. Tinklesmith is.

Probably your mom.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

I don't know who Methais R. Tinklesmith is.

Probably your mom.

---

It is your birth name, according to Government records.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whirlin

Regarding enchantability, the only thing I can find is the material difficulty table, which I believe is referenced elsewhere across the wiki:
https://gswiki.play.net/Material
However, whether or not that is GM supported, or old data based on changes, it's absolutely ambiguous.

The only thing I can think of from a QC perspective is that it could have been an omission in the materials table. Imagine having a list of materials like that and then asking someone to confirm, but ohh, one line was missing... What should have been caught would be a novalue command in the lookup to bring in a restriction rather than a 0. But, that's 100% speculation based things I've seen on the job.

I agree with Parkbandit on this one. This doesn't appear to be the whole story... Based on the GM posting, it appears that there were more conditions that are a little weird:
1) Knowledge that the enchanting should have been impossible (This seems to be where a lot of debate is)
2) Not discussing whether the enchanting is possible with GMs, or the bug not being properly reported. (This is also the current area of debate, considering your interpretation of 1)
3) Interfacing with people to capitalize on the enchanting
4) Profiting off of #3

As far as Nuadhja's comments... Yeah, there's about a 100% guarantee that there are GMs in HotA, but they can't say who they are... we used to speculate. But, knowing how much Simu got shit in the past for utilizing LNET and Discord conversation in the past, they'd be super shitty and dumb to utilize that in issuance of a warning.

---

Welcome back man, you've been missed by many.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Either way, Simu just needs to put out a list of metals that shouldn't be player enchantable for any non-bug related reasons.

If they don't after this fiasco, then they're basically embracing their own stupidity and showcasing it for everyone to see.

It's ok to be stupid, just don't brag about it.

---

There is a list. It is the same list they had. All the metals with -999 are never meant to be enchanted.

I'll add that I also received a warning. Here is my log of the interaction.

Code:

---

A shaft of scintillating light suddenly pierces the ceiling and strikes the ground next to you.  The beam of light then explodes in a shower of sparks and Coase is standing in its place.
>
Coase says, "Hello."
>
Coase says, "I'm sorry for the wait."
>'Hello
You say, "Hello."
>
Coase says, "Unfortunately, I've pulled you up to talk to you regarding a matter of game mechanics abuse."."
>
Coase says, "Http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Help%20for%20Players/Policy%20Discussions/view."
>
Coase says, "In summary, there was a bug that existed in the enchanting system that was introduced a few months ago and was correct in the last week or two."
>
Coase says, "It allowed for the enchanting of materials that should not be allowed be enchanted, to be enchanted with zero difficulty instead."
>
Coase says, "It was fixed and we did a search of items that might have been affected."
>
Coase says, "And we discovered that you were involved in multiple enchantments of these items."
>'Multiple?
You ask, "Multiple?"
>
 * Nitewisper is dust in the wind!
>
Coase says, "A coraesine tetsubo and a krodera falchion."
>
Coase says, "We also, unfortunately, discovered evidence that that you were aware that this was a bug, discussed it with others, did not report it, and continued to abuse it."
>'I thought it was just a krodera weapon in name, not a real one
You say, "I thought it was just a krodera weapon in name, not a real one."
>'Isn't it just a whatever X enchant weapon?
You ask, "Isn't it just a whatever X enchant weapon?"
>
Coase says, "No, it wasn't."
>
Coase says, "I will be issuing you a warning for Game Mechanics Abuse."
>
Coase says, "No lockout is being assessed, due to recent good behavior."
>
Coase says, "All enchanted items affected by this are being reset back to their initial enchantment statistics."
>

                ***


********************************************************



XXXXX, this is your SECOND official warning, that engaging in system mechanics abuse is against GemStone IV policy.  Further warnings could result in your being temporarily locked out of the game.

If you feel this warning was received in error, please speak to a GameHost by typing ASSIST REQUEST.

You can also learn more about GemStone IV policies online, by typing POLICY while in the game or by visiting http://www.play.net/gs4/gamepolicy.asp.



*************************************************************


>'I don't argee with that, but sure.
You say, "I don't argee with that, but sure."
>
Coase says, "I understand."
>
Coase asks, "Do you have any questions for me regarding this matter?"
>'Nope
You say, "Nope."
>
Coase says, "Alright, I will be returning you to the game now.  Please take care to follow POLICY going forward."
>shrug
You shrug.
>
The world grows blurry and indistinct.  After a moment everything becomes clear again.  Looking about, you see...

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drauz

>
Coase says, "No lockout is being assessed, due to recent good behavior."

---

So perhaps they did lockout some folks?

Quote:

---

"Coase says, "We also, unfortunately, discovered evidence that that you were aware that this was a bug, discussed it with others, did not report it, and continued to abuse it."

---

Well, is this true? He made the accusation and you didn't try to defend it. I'm inclined to believe Coase here.

It's that I'm guessing this damning evidence was taken from the HoA Discord server where we publicly and shamefully admitted our evil ways.

On the HoA server there is a long standing inside joke where we discuss everything from choosing a profession other than Rogue, wearing a tophat, and using 709 as GMA... In fact, we have 9 pages of GMA references going back to 2017.

Someone clearly took something out of context and abused the fact we invited them to our server and participate in the HoA community, and somehow GM's decided that our OOG jokes are worthy of IG warnings.

Just kind of odd to get what amounts to a GS speeding ticket for the "privilege" of beta testing their barely glued-together rollout.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drauz

I'll add that I also received a warning. Here is my log of the interaction.

Code:

---

A shaft of scintillating light suddenly pierces the ceiling and strikes the ground next to you.  The beam of light then explodes in a shower of sparks and Coase is standing in its place.
>
Coase says, "Hello."
>
Coase says, "I'm sorry for the wait."
>'Hello
You say, "Hello."
>
Coase says, "Unfortunately, I've pulled you up to talk to you regarding a matter of game mechanics abuse."."
>
Coase says, "Http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Help%20for%20Players/Policy%20Discussions/view."
>
Coase says, "In summary, there was a bug that existed in the enchanting system that was introduced a few months ago and was correct in the last week or two."
>
Coase says, "It allowed for the enchanting of materials that should not be allowed be enchanted, to be enchanted with zero difficulty instead."
>
Coase says, "It was fixed and we did a search of items that might have been affected."
>
Coase says, "And we discovered that you were involved in multiple enchantments of these items."
>'Multiple?
You ask, "Multiple?"
>
 * Nitewisper is dust in the wind!
>
Coase says, "A coraesine tetsubo and a krodera falchion."
>
Coase says, "We also, unfortunately, discovered evidence that that you were aware that this was a bug, discussed it with others, did not report it, and continued to abuse it."
>'I thought it was just a krodera weapon in name, not a real one
You say, "I thought it was just a krodera weapon in name, not a real one."
>'Isn't it just a whatever X enchant weapon?
You ask, "Isn't it just a whatever X enchant weapon?"
>
Coase says, "No, it wasn't."
>
Coase says, "I will be issuing you a warning for Game Mechanics Abuse."
>
Coase says, "No lockout is being assessed, due to recent good behavior."
>
Coase says, "All enchanted items affected by this are being reset back to their initial enchantment statistics."
>

                ***


********************************************************



XXXXX, this is your SECOND official warning, that engaging in system mechanics abuse is against GemStone IV policy.  Further warnings could result in your being temporarily locked out of the game.

If you feel this warning was received in error, please speak to a GameHost by typing ASSIST REQUEST.

You can also learn more about GemStone IV policies online, by typing POLICY while in the game or by visiting http://www.play.net/gs4/gamepolicy.asp.



*************************************************************


>'I don't argee with that, but sure.
You say, "I don't argee with that, but sure."
>
Coase says, "I understand."
>
Coase asks, "Do you have any questions for me regarding this matter?"
>'Nope
You say, "Nope."
>
Coase says, "Alright, I will be returning you to the game now.  Please take care to follow POLICY going forward."
>shrug
You shrug.
>
The world grows blurry and indistinct.  After a moment everything becomes clear again.  Looking about, you see...

---

---

Thus, they had an inside man listening in on probably Discord. I’m willing to bet a HotA member who also moonlights as a GM.

If anything I would like to think Ragz, O, and now Drauz are innocent by the fact of sheer incompetence in bungling this enterprise. That is to say people who were trying to cheat would not have been so obviously blatant in not trying to hide it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m444w

It's that I'm guessing this damning evidence was taken from the HoA Discord server where we publicly and shamefully admitted our evil ways.

On the HoA server there is a long standing inside joke where we discuss everything from choosing a profession other than Rogue, wearing a tophat, and using 709 as GMA... In fact, we have 9 pages of GMA references going back to 2017.

Someone clearly took something out of context and abused the fact we invited them to our server and participate in the HoA community, and somehow GM's decided that our OOG jokes are worthy of IG warnings.

Just kind of odd to get what amounts to a GS speeding ticket for the "privilege" of beta testing their barely glued-together rollout.

---

Sounds like it's about time to find out who the GMs in your organization are and get rid of them from your third party chats.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drauz

I'll add that I also received a warning. Here is my log of the interaction.

Code:

---

A shaft of scintillating light suddenly pierces the ceiling and strikes the ground next to you.  The beam of light then explodes in a shower of sparks and Coase is standing in its place.
>
Coase says, "Hello."
>
Coase says, "I'm sorry for the wait."
>'Hello
You say, "Hello."
>
Coase says, "Unfortunately, I've pulled you up to talk to you regarding a matter of game mechanics abuse."."
>
Coase says, "Http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Help%20for%20Players/Policy%20Discussions/view."
>
Coase says, "In summary, there was a bug that existed in the enchanting system that was introduced a few months ago and was correct in the last week or two."
>
Coase says, "It allowed for the enchanting of materials that should not be allowed be enchanted, to be enchanted with zero difficulty instead."
>
Coase says, "It was fixed and we did a search of items that might have been affected."
>
Coase says, "And we discovered that you were involved in multiple enchantments of these items."
>'Multiple?
You ask, "Multiple?"
>
 * Nitewisper is dust in the wind!
>
Coase says, "A coraesine tetsubo and a krodera falchion."
>
Coase says, "We also, unfortunately, discovered evidence that that you were aware that this was a bug, discussed it with others, did not report it, and continued to abuse it."
>'I thought it was just a krodera weapon in name, not a real one
You say, "I thought it was just a krodera weapon in name, not a real one."
>'Isn't it just a whatever X enchant weapon?
You ask, "Isn't it just a whatever X enchant weapon?"
>
Coase says, "No, it wasn't."
>
Coase says, "I will be issuing you a warning for Game Mechanics Abuse."
>
Coase says, "No lockout is being assessed, due to recent good behavior."
>
Coase says, "All enchanted items affected by this are being reset back to their initial enchantment statistics."
>

                ***


********************************************************



XXXXX, this is your SECOND official warning, that engaging in system mechanics abuse is against GemStone IV policy.  Further warnings could result in your being temporarily locked out of the game.

If you feel this warning was received in error, please speak to a GameHost by typing ASSIST REQUEST.

You can also learn more about GemStone IV policies online, by typing POLICY while in the game or by visiting http://www.play.net/gs4/gamepolicy.asp.



*************************************************************


>'I don't argee with that, but sure.
You say, "I don't argee with that, but sure."
>
Coase says, "I understand."
>
Coase asks, "Do you have any questions for me regarding this matter?"
>'Nope
You say, "Nope."
>
Coase says, "Alright, I will be returning you to the game now.  Please take care to follow POLICY going forward."
>shrug
You shrug.
>
The world grows blurry and indistinct.  After a moment everything becomes clear again.  Looking about, you see...

---

---

It's a good thing you're not Drauz in game!

I'm sorry, but enchanting Coraesine is a pretty big deal. It's already a crazy powerful material, and it makes no sense to me that it would be made enchantable. Sure, I wasn't certain myself, but I never really cared much about it, let alone cared about enchanting.

If people knew that it wasn't normally enchantable, and the GMs have good evidence for this, then I really think a warning is being let off easy. I am inclined to take the GMs side on this, due to the huge advantage gained by enchanting Coraesine and/or Zelnorn. I am not so quick to take the side of all the players involved, just because they come on the forums and claim they are innocent of knowing it was a bug.

Now, enchanting krodera is a different matter, and pretty silly to give a warning over, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

If people knew that it wasn't normally enchantable, and the GMs have good evidence for this, then I really think a warning is being let off easy.

---

Just to be argumentative... can you point to the definitive, SIMU sanctioned documentation of what materials can and cannot be enchanted? If you cannot, it doesn't seem like this is a salient point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m444w

It's that I'm guessing this damning evidence was taken from the HoA Discord server where we publicly and shamefully admitted our evil ways.

---

https://i.imgflip.com/39l14z.jpg

Require future members to post on the PC as their main, since GMs aren't supposed to post here and all.

Then require them to run .breakgs as their final task before joining.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

https://i.imgflip.com/39l14z.jpg

---

How does Simu prove that people are who they are on a server they do not control? or were who they were at that moment in time? Just interesting if they really did take any info as evidence from a server that isn't their server.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Just to be argumentative... can you point to the definitive, SIMU sanctioned documentation of what materials can and cannot be enchanted? If you cannot, it doesn't seem like this is a salient point.

---

That is essentially moot when it comes to whether or not punishment is valid. They clearly stated the reason for the punishment was not simply because they did it, but because they have evidence of them doing it even though they knew it wasn't supposed to be enchantable.

Now, if anyone that got a warning claims they had no knowledge of it being a bug and in no way discussed it, then I'd say the warning may not be warranted. But even then, Coraesine isn't exactly something that you just purchase willy nilly and throw 925 at just for kicks - It's a god tier material that makes logical sense that it shouldn't be enchantable.

Even when I saw someone ask on Discord whether or not it could be enchanted, even though I was not certain if it was or not, my initial thought was "Surely they wouldn't make a material that powerful enchantable!"

In fact, like the guy who asked on Discord, they too should have thought to ask. But even so, in this case the warning is not because they didn't know, but because there is evidence that they DID know.

And whether or not the evidence came from Discord is pure speculation. But even if it was, it can easily be provable by a GM that the person in Discord is in fact that player in game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Just to be argumentative... can you point to the definitive, SIMU sanctioned documentation of what materials can and cannot be enchanted? If you cannot, it doesn't seem like this is a salient point.

---

The materials difficulty chart. Anything -999 isn't meant to be enchantable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

The materials difficulty chart. Anything -999 isn't meant to be enchantable.

---

From https://gswiki.play.net/Low_steel

Quote:

---

The flaring properties of the material reside in the Category B slot, hence preventing player enchanting due to no pretemper potion available for the unique flare present in this material.

---

Took me all of 2 seconds to find something on the wiki that's wrong under the new system. I don't think anyone can use the wiki as a reliable source of information.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

I'm sorry, but enchanting Coraesine is a pretty big deal. It's already a crazy powerful material, and it makes no sense to me that it would be made enchantable. Sure, I wasn't certain myself, but I never really cared much about it, let alone cared about enchanting.

If people knew that it wasn't normally enchantable, and the GMs have good evidence for this, then I really think a warning is being let off easy. I am inclined to take the GMs side on this, due to the huge advantage gained by enchanting Coraesine and/or Zelnorn. I am not so quick to take the side of all the players involved, just because they come on the forums and claim they are innocent of knowing it was a bug.

Now, enchanting krodera is a different matter, and pretty silly to give a warning over, IMO.

---

Regardless of what POLICY says, it's still hard to take Simu's side on bullshit like this when they release unfinished systems into the live game and use the players as beta testers, all while dev barely even knows how half of it works.

Because let's not roll it out on the test server for a few months first to actually test it before going live. WHAT WOULD BE THE POINT OF THAT????

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

Well, is this true? He made the accusation and you didn't try to defend it. I'm inclined to believe Coase here.

---

I was tired and got pulled out of dragonbones. I was made to wait 10-15 minutes and my eyes were closing on their own at this point. I had a pretty good idea what it was about.

I didn't know I shouldn't have been able to enchant the krodera falchion, and thought coraesine was now enchantable with the new system. I did all the enchanting myself. I had a bunch of essence saved up and took it from +20 to +28 in one sitting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m444w

From https://gswiki.play.net/Low_steel



Took me all of 2 seconds to find something on the wiki that's wrong under the new system. I don't think anyone can use the wiki as a reliable source of information.

---

Come on, you should know that Low Steel isn't meant to be enchanted, period. In fact, according to the GMs, you DID know that whatever you enchanted wasn't supposed to be enchantable. So again, my question for you is this: Are the GMs incorrect in saying that you knew it was not enchantable, and discussed it prior to enchanting it?

I am predisposed to say that you DID know, and it's probably the main reason you purchased it. Especially players that have as much knowledge about these systems as you do.

I'd say that you should have at least questioned whether or not it should be enchantable, but then I come to the conclusion that "Oh, he probably DID, and enchanted it anyways." That's what the GMs are saying - Do you deny this?

You knew. This wasn’t innocent. It was oh damn guess what guys!? Check this out!! Hurry before they change it!

Or am I wrong?

Sounds like purge time for the HOA discord channel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Orbstar

You knew. This wasn’t innocent. It was oh damn guess what guys!? Check this out!! Hurry before they change it!

Or am I wrong?

---

Who cares if they did say that? Point to the specific and SIMU published document that states explicitly you cannot enchant X?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

The materials difficulty chart. Anything -999 isn't meant to be enchantable.

---

Is the GSWiki a simu sponsored website maintained by staff?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Is the GSWiki a simu sponsored website maintained by staff?

---

Yes? Non-staff make edits to it as well, but it's overseen by staff.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Is the GSWiki a simu sponsored website maintained by staff?

---

Yes. It is administered by Simu. Anyone can edit, but you have to have an active account.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taernath

Yes? Non-staff make edits to it as well, but it's overseen by staff.

---

If it's a SIMU document, maintained by the paid or unpaid official SIMU staff and it says you can't enchant X, then I say they should have been banned. If it's not maintained by staff, it doesn't sound like there is a specific SIMU document.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Is the GSWiki a simu sponsored website maintained by staff?

---

I don't care what the wiki says! Pointing to the wiki is just trying to draw attention away from the real question. Did they or did they not PERSONALLY know that it was meant to be un-enchantable?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

The materials difficulty chart. Anything -999 isn't meant to be enchantable.

---

My wizard hat grants +999 to enchanting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

If it's a SIMU document, maintained by the paid or unpaid official SIMU staff and it says you can't enchant X, then I say they should have been banned. If it's not maintained by staff, it doesn't sound like there is a specific SIMU document.

---

I mean, the address itself ends in play.net.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

I mean, the address itself ends in play.net.

---

So do the message boards. Can you edit it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

So do the message boards. Can you edit it?

---

I don't see what that has to do with this? The wiki is an official source of information for GS, overseen by staff. The message boards are a message board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

I don't see what that has to do with this? The wiki is an official source of information for GS, overseen by staff. The message boards are a message board.

---

It has nothing to do with it, so I'm not sure why you brought it up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

It has nothing to do with it, so I'm not sure why you brought it up.

---

You were asking if it was official. I was saying it was. It ends with play.net. The forums that end with play.net are also their official forums.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

You were asking if it was official. I was saying it was. It ends with play.net. The forums that end with play.net are also their official forums.

---

And can you edit the wiki if you are non-staff with an account?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

And can you edit the wiki if you are non-staff with an account?

---

Yes, but if you put in BS it'll get reverted pretty quick. There are some very... active... editors.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

Yes, but if you put in BS it'll get reverted pretty quick. There are some very... active... editors.

---

Aren't there entire threads about wiki moderation?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

Come on, you should know that Low Steel isn't meant to be enchanted, period. In fact, according to the GMs, you DID know that whatever you enchanted wasn't supposed to be enchantable. So again, my question for you is this: Are the GMs incorrect in saying that you knew it was not enchantable, and discussed it prior to enchanting it?

I am predisposed to say that you DID know, and it's probably the main reason you purchased it. Especially players that have as much knowledge about these systems as you do.

I'd say that you should have at least questioned whether or not it should be enchantable, but then I come to the conclusion that "Oh, he probably DID, and enchanted it anyways." That's what the GMs are saying - Do you deny this?

---

You seem to be having trouble holding the thread of conversation, so I will sum it up for you in one post.

Gelston said the Wiki was the source of truth. I disagree because it is full of inaccuracy, to illustrate this I pointed out how the wiki says that Low Steel/High Steel are not enchantable.

Naos has confirmed they are enchantable under the new 925.

I'm sorry I kicked your dog or whatever, but it doesn't change the point that the Wiki is not a good source of actual game documentation.

I guess it's as official a document as any SIMU produces then. Should ban everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m444w

I'm sorry I kicked your dog or whatever, but it doesn't change the point that the Wiki is not a good source of actual game documentation.

---

It's pretty good for the most part. What would you recommend we use instead?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by m444w

You seem to be having trouble holding the thread of conversation, so I will sum it up for you in one post.

Gelston said the Wiki was the source of truth. I disagree because it is full of inaccuracy, to illustrate this I pointed out how the wiki says that Low Steel/High Steel are not enchantable.

Naos has confirmed they are enchantable under the new 925.

I'm sorry I kicked your dog or whatever, but it doesn't change the point that the Wiki is not a good source of actual game documentation.

---

That isn't based on the material, but rather the category of the flares.

And why wouldn't you bother confirming that coraesine or zelnorn or anything else was meant to be enchanted, if you did such with low steel?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

I guess it's as official a document as any SIMU produces then. Should ban everyone.

---

"Due to a recent round of bug abuse, we have decided to ban everyone."

One day later...

"Due to player demand, we've introduced UNBAN POTIONS in the Simucoin store."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whirlin

Aren't there entire threads about wiki moderation?

---

Oh god. I don't know if Allereli is still around actually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

Oh god. I don't know if Allereli is still around actually.

---

I don't think she handles the wiki much anymore, she at least is way less active.

She was the wiki lead manager, basically, then got it yanked out from under her by a GM appointee. She was insane sometimes, but she did a lot of really useful work.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

She was the wiki lead manager, basically, then got it yanked out from under her by a GM appointee. She was insane sometimes, but she did a lot of really useful work.

---

Oh, she went fucking nuts about things. You couldn't ever say she wasn't dedicated though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Whirlin

I agree with Parkbandit

---

This is a rule everyone should live by.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

https://r11.fodey.com/2591/28c910f62...548e0159.0.jpg

---

I never knew his last name was Tinklesmith, but it makes SO MUCH sense now.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drauz

I'll add that I also received a warning. Here is my log of the interaction.

Code:

---

A shaft of scintillating light suddenly pierces the ceiling and strikes the ground next to you.  The beam of light then explodes in a shower of sparks and Coase is standing in its place.
>
Coase says, "Hello."
>
Coase says, "I'm sorry for the wait."
>'Hello
You say, "Hello."
>
Coase says, "Unfortunately, I've pulled you up to talk to you regarding a matter of game mechanics abuse."."
>
Coase says, "Http://forums.play.net/forums/GemStone%20IV/Help%20for%20Players/Policy%20Discussions/view."
>
Coase says, "In summary, there was a bug that existed in the enchanting system that was introduced a few months ago and was correct in the last week or two."
>
Coase says, "It allowed for the enchanting of materials that should not be allowed be enchanted, to be enchanted with zero difficulty instead."
>
Coase says, "It was fixed and we did a search of items that might have been affected."
>
Coase says, "And we discovered that you were involved in multiple enchantments of these items."
>'Multiple?
You ask, "Multiple?"
>
 * Nitewisper is dust in the wind!
>
Coase says, "A coraesine tetsubo and a krodera falchion."
>
Coase says, "We also, unfortunately, discovered evidence that that you were aware that this was a bug, discussed it with others, did not report it, and continued to abuse it."
>'I thought it was just a krodera weapon in name, not a real one
You say, "I thought it was just a krodera weapon in name, not a real one."
>'Isn't it just a whatever X enchant weapon?
You ask, "Isn't it just a whatever X enchant weapon?"
>
Coase says, "No, it wasn't."
>
Coase says, "I will be issuing you a warning for Game Mechanics Abuse."
>
Coase says, "No lockout is being assessed, due to recent good behavior."
>
Coase says, "All enchanted items affected by this are being reset back to their initial enchantment statistics."
>

                ***


********************************************************



XXXXX, this is your SECOND official warning, that engaging in system mechanics abuse is against GemStone IV policy.  Further warnings could result in your being temporarily locked out of the game.

If you feel this warning was received in error, please speak to a GameHost by typing ASSIST REQUEST.

You can also learn more about GemStone IV policies online, by typing POLICY while in the game or by visiting http://www.play.net/gs4/gamepolicy.asp.



*************************************************************


>'I don't argee with that, but sure.
You say, "I don't argee with that, but sure."
>
Coase says, "I understand."
>
Coase asks, "Do you have any questions for me regarding this matter?"
>'Nope
You say, "Nope."
>
Coase says, "Alright, I will be returning you to the game now.  Please take care to follow POLICY going forward."
>shrug
You shrug.
>
The world grows blurry and indistinct.  After a moment everything becomes clear again.  Looking about, you see...

---

---

First of all.. way to bend over and take it up the ass without a fight or even a stern word. You would make a nice prison wife.

Second of all.. this is your SECOND warning. What was your first one for? AND DO NOT LIE TO ME FOR I WILL KNOW!

ACT smoking pothnir

keeping mining chits in his pants and playing with them in public.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

keeping mining chits in his pants and playing with them in public.

---

I have a glistening engorged bulb in one of my character's pants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taernath

I have a glistening engorged bulb in one of my character's pants.

---

You might want to see a doctor.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taernath

I have a glistening engorged bulb in one of my character's pants.

---

I used to grab severed limbs from 709 and put them in my pants. The smell was fun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

I used to grab severed limbs from 709 and put them in my pants. The smell was fun.

---

I never did stuff like that because I was an adult when I started playing.
Just kidding, I'm sure I did stuff like that.

I remember Vif kept all kinds of gross things in her pants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

I never did stuff like that because I was an adult when I started playing.
Just kidding, I'm sure I did stuff like that.

---

But you're not an adult anymore, right?

To summarize the issue:

new things are enchantable
wait no not those

On the one hand I don't like the excuse "you should have known better."

I've been playing this game on and off for almost 30 years now and there is still A LOT I don't know about this game. The idea that I have to know everything about the game is crazy.

On the other hand why was this only being discussed on a private Discord server? I would imagine something this major would have been mentioned on the official Discord, or the official forums, or heck even on the PC.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donquix

To summarize the issue:

new things are enchantable
wait no not those
This is your fault
Pay us
Reported

---

Fixed. And correct.

Where I take issue is that right or wrong on a given issue, they're not even being subtle about spying on third party conversations anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

Where I take issue is that right or wrong on a given issue, they're not even being subtle about spying on third party conversations anymore.

---

It was probably a GM player that just saw whatever in the chat and was like TIME TO BE HALL MONITOR as opposed to Coase and Estild conducting some wannabe sting operation, showing up wearing a false nose and glasses all like

https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/MpA2...09.20_PM.0.png

Coase and Estild's last sting operation:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5ZlqqO_AyYA

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

Where I take issue is that right or wrong on a given issue, they're not even being subtle about spying on third party conversations anymore.

---

If a GM was a member of this group, it's not spying nor third party.

It's on the internet. Nothing is secret.

Oh.

Wait.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Parkbandit

• You say, "We were encouraged to experiment on old previously unenchantable items."

---

..!? Dude, if I was told to specifically experiment on previously unenchantable item(s) then … *cranium asplodes.* But if you are profiting from it in some way that violated Policy 7 then that might not be good. I feel like … I have no effin' clue as to whether or not your fellow peepz who you were handing the items back to were walking around with 12x McGrail claidhmores.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

Oh god. I don't know if Allereli is still around actually.

---

Allereli left? That's a shame. She could be annoying but I think she always meant well when it came to the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Allereli left? That's a shame. She could be annoying but I think she always meant well when it came to the game.

---

Why do I think of that name as a man who played a woman and was a total asshole? Is the name similar to someone else?

She is still around, just maybe not on the wiki.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

On the one hand I don't like the excuse "you should have known better."

I've been playing this game on and off for almost 30 years now and there is still A LOT I don't know about this game. The idea that I have to know everything about the game is crazy.

On the other hand why was this only being discussed on a private Discord server? I would imagine something this major would have been mentioned on the official Discord, or the official forums, or heck even on the PC.

---

On the third hand I'm kind of disappointed that the "evidence" they supposedly found was on a private Discord server of people apparently...discussing things?

This is why I'm skeptical of what Simu is saying without knowing what evidence they have.

Were people on this Discord server just like...talking about this shit being enchantable now? That hardly screams "We know this is a bug and we're going to exploit it! ROFL!" And no using the lame argument of "Well they SHOULD HAVE KNOWN" isn't going to cut it.

But honestly, assuming the logs we have seen so far are real (and I have no reason to believe the people who posted them would edit the logs) it sure does sound like their "proof" is that people enchanted multiple things and they should have known those things aren't enchantable. That is to say Simu saying people knew it was a bug and rushed to exploit it as much as possible before it was fixed sounds like bullshit.

But on the fourth hand maybe some of the more innocent people just got caught up in all of this and there really were bad actors exploiting this as much as possible with enchanting dozens of things and Simu decided to cast a wide net to be sure they got everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Why do I think of that name as a man who played a woman and was a total asshole? Is the name similar to someone else?

---

I suppose it could be a man in real life but I never heard anything about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

On the third hand I'm kind of disappointed that the "evidence" they supposedly found was on a private Discord server of people apparently...discussing things?

This is why I'm skeptical of what Simu is saying without knowing what evidence they have.

Were people on this Discord server just like...talking about this shit being enchantable now? That hardly screams "We know this is a bug and we're going to exploit it! ROFL!" And no using the lame argument of "Well they SHOULD HAVE KNOWN" isn't going to cut it.

But honestly, assuming the logs we have seen so far are real (and I have no reason to believe the people who posted them would edit the logs) it sure does sound like their "proof" is that people enchanted multiple things and they should have known those things aren't enchantable. That is to say Simu saying people knew it was a bug and rushed to exploit it as much as possible before it was fixed sounds like bullshit.

But on the fourth hand maybe some of the more innocent people just got caught up in all of this and there really were bad actors exploiting this as much as possible with enchanting dozens of things and Simu decided to cast a wide net to be sure they got everyone.

---

I get the impression some of them let slip on the discord that they believed it was a bug, forgetting that GMs are members of HotArd and can read the discord, too. There were certainly lots of coraesine/otherwise unenchantable sales and enchants done recently. What, 4 or 5 from this thread alone? They track that shit.

https://i.imgur.com/H61Q5Pg.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Methais

Did they ever actually say coraesine shouldn't be enchantable when the changes went live? Because I wouldn't have had a fucking clue.

---

I wouldn't have either, and the first time I'd even heard of krodera was after reading the discoord log about it a few days ago. To assume that most players should know about XYZ however long they've been playing is very very out of touch. I've been playing GS on and off since 1999 and genuinely don't understand the majority stuff that's released in this game almost everything is so needlessly complicated. Honestly half the stuff that's posted by GMs on the officials is gibberish unless you've done your own research, it's also part of the reason why I've stuck to mainly playing one class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Winter

I wouldn't have either, and the first time I'd even heard of krodera was after reading the discoord log about it a few days ago. To assume that most players should know about XYZ however long they've been playing is very very out of touch. I've been playing GS on and off since 1999 and genuinely don't understand the majority stuff that's released in this game almost everything is so needlessly complicated. Honestly half the stuff that's posted by GMs on the officials is gibberish unless you've done your own research, it's also part of the reason why I've stuck to mainly playing one class.

---

This is exactly it. I enchanted Cor (partially) for someone but I had no fucking idea it wasn't supposed to be enchant-able. How the hell are you supposed to know that? No warning so far but I'd be pretty livid if I received one on account of their incompetence.

I didn't get tangled up in this mess, as my one enchant capable character is still using the old system. However, I picked up a couple of TD and defender items out of playershops when I heard from people who had converted that they were enchantable now. I was like cool, what used to be totally worthless shit items (a random +12/+8 sword) would now be a cool item for an alt after a few enchants. It never crossed my mind to ask a GM about it. I had read all the release notes given and it all seemed to totally fit what they said.

Are they still enchantable, was that a bug I would have gotten a warning over if I enchanted. I have no idea. The fact that I still have no idea and no clear documentation came out with this release, and yet I would be held culpable if they deem it a bug is damning enough evidence of simu incompetence in both game-making and customer service. I get the strong feeling I would have been warned for experimenting with random old shit I have lockered if not for the lucky fact that I took one look at the dumpster fire of a release and said "fuck that shit, I am sticking with the old working one as long as I can." How comical, I was saved from simu incompetence by a slightly different set of simu incompetence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Menos

I didn't get tangled up in this mess, as my one enchant capable character is still using the old system. However, I picked up a couple of TD and defender items out of playershops when I heard from people who had converted that they were enchantable now. I was like cool, what used to be totally worthless shit items (a random +12/+8 sword) would now be a cool item for an alt after a few enchants. It never crossed my mind to ask a GM about it. I had read all the release notes given and it all seemed to totally fit what they said.

Are they still enchantable, was that a bug I would have gotten a warning over if I enchanted. I have no idea. The fact that I still have no idea and no clear documentation came out with this release, and yet I would be held culpable if they deem it a bug is damning enough evidence of simu incompetence in both game-making and customer service. I get the strong feeling I would have been warned for experimenting with random old shit I have lockered if not for the lucky fact that I took one look at the dumpster fire of a release and said "fuck that shit, I am sticking with the old working one as long as I can." How comical, I was saved from simu incompetence by a slightly different set of simu incompetence.

---

I'd say you could ask in the discord.

I haven't enchanted since GSIII and I knew which metals are able to be enchanted. I guess you can't force people to read up on mechanics though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taernath

I haven't enchanted since GSIII and I knew which metals are able to be enchanted. I guess you can't force people to read up on mechanics though.

---

im pretty sure 925 tells you, and it was saying enchant that shit, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taernath

She is still around, just maybe not on the wiki.

---

She's still around, and even works with the wiki every now and again.... just not nearly as fanatically as she used to.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mgoddess

just not nearly as fanatically as she used to.

---

Due to a lack of time or burnout or what? I need to know everything about everyone!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tgo01

Due to a lack of time or burnout or what? I need to know everything about everyone!

---

I would guess due to the smack-down, wiki-yanking she got a while back, when Simu decided they should have an actual, proper GM leading/managing the wiki.... I'm pretty sure there was some other shenanigans involved at the time, too, but I don't remember what they were.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Why do I think of that name as a man who played for Polk High and scored four touchdowns in one game? Is the name similar to someone else?

---

Because the "Al" in "Allereli" makes you think of Al Bundy.

https://media0.giphy.com/media/CkK2O...&rid=giphy.gif

I was told by cool guy GM that if I couldn't use specific verbs for two of my items, that I should BUGITEM them on a somewhat 1-2 weekly basis. THEN other cool guy GM was like, "Dude, I see what you're doing here, but you don't need to be doing that."

https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohs7V...UkU/source.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stanley Burrell

I was told by cool guy GM that if I couldn't use specific verbs for two of my items, that I should BUGITEM them on a somewhat 1-2 weekly basis. THEN other cool guy GM was like, "Dude, I see what you're doing here, but you don't need to be doing that."

https://media.giphy.com/media/3ohs7V...UkU/source.gif

---

I hope you told him HEY FUCKFACE I'M ONLY DOING WHAT THE OTHER GM TOLD ME TO DO SO SIT DOWN AND FUCK OFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF!!!!!!!!!!!!

Or something similar.

Yeah, me too.

WELL DID YOU?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?

LOL - what about a bunch of lawyering BS from AotA. This coming from an organization that is highly engaged with the game and events of Simu. Pretending to be ignorant is laughable.

Simu alleges the following:

1. Those warned were AWARE that this was a bug
2. COLLUDED with others
3. FAILED to report the bug
4. Continued to ABUSE the bug

So we can discuss all day about what a giant cluster enchanting is but these are the allegations. Mobius pointed this out several times in this thread and has been deflected each time. So Anus of the Arkati, what do you have to say about the allegations stated above? More crickets?

And screw you for making me defend Simu.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mgoddess

I would guess due to the smack-down, wiki-yanking she got a while back, when Simu decided they should have an actual, proper GM leading/managing the wiki.... I'm pretty sure there was some other shenanigans involved at the time, too, but I don't remember what they were.

---

She was a massive bitch when you did something she didn't like too.

did anyone get banned? if not, you fools need to get a mf'n job.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beldar17

did anyone get banned? if not, you fools need to get a mf'n job.

---

My sense of innocence was banned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beldar17

did anyone get banned? if not, you fools need to get a mf'n job.

---

That's the problem, bans should have been given out but AotA lawyered up:

https://media.giphy.com/media/f6sjDe...TSF2/giphy.gif

Team Anus of the Arkati will FIGHT for your rights!!

https://media.giphy.com/media/j9TXZA...mhBG/giphy.gif

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by beldar17

did anyone get banned? if not, you fools need to get a mf'n job.

---

As far as I know, this is bitching about a warning. It will look a lot worse on their mentor applications.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

As far as I know, this is bitching about a warning. It will look a lot worse on their mentor applications.

---

Because the customer is always wrong right? Keep continuing to have that mentality and we won’t have a game to play. People are going to start leaving if a company treats their customers like crap. Accepting that mentality is detrimental to the health of the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neovik1

Accepting that mentality is detrimental to the health of the game.

---

That ship sailed a long time ago. Why people give SIMU any money at all is a mystery to me. That being said, you should have known better getting involved with this group. You had to of known something like this would happen at some point and it's just as much a mystery to me why you're trying to defend them.

::passes an ale:: Come on dude, they knew what they were doing.

Honestly, you have 2 possible stories here. A. They knew it was a bug or B. The officer/s of the most elitist MHO in GS history are retarded.

:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortybox

LOL - what about a bunch of lawyering BS from AotA. This coming from an organization that is highly engaged with the game and events of Simu. Pretending to be ignorant is laughable.

Simu alleges the following:

1. Those warned were AWARE that this was a bug
2. COLLUDED with others
3. FAILED to report the bug
4. Continued to ABUSE the bug

So we can discuss all day about what a giant cluster enchanting is but these are the allegations. Mobius pointed this out several times in this thread and has been deflected each time. So Anus of the Arkati, what do you have to say about the allegations stated above? More crickets?

And screw you for making me defend Simu.

---

https://media2.giphy.com/media/TAL5aIYmYu1os/source.gif

Personally for these super high end items who gives one way or another if it even is enchantable. Those super amazing items are for a scant few so if someone can make it even more awesome it will have no impact on me and most of the other folks playing so just let them be bananas.

Also limit wizards to 1x spell aim

Posts about this on the GemstoneIV reddit are being removed.

"You broke the rules. Don't do it again."

"Okay sorry, what rule did I break?"

"...what are you a fucking lawyer or something? Don't do it again."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neovik1

Because the customer is always wrong right? Keep continuing to have that mentality and we won’t have a game to play. People are going to start leaving if a company treats their customers like crap. Accepting that mentality is detrimental to the health of the game.

---

This has been said for 30 years... yet the game still exists.

Simu is known for treating their customers like shit.. and some people seem to enjoy it that way.

Whatever floats your boat.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Neovik1

Because the customer is always wrong right? Keep continuing to have that mentality and we won’t have a game to play. People are going to start leaving if a company treats their customers like crap. Accepting that mentality is detrimental to the health of the game.

---

I don't give a shit one way or another. I know in this situation a lot if the customers are being bitches though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gelston

I don't give a shit one way or another. I know in this situation a lot if the customers are being bitches though.

---

no argument over being bitches... but they are still a customer, the company is still responsible for putting the product out as it should be if they are collecting the check.. Which they didn't do. Simu doesn't give a fuck about someone that spends 80 bucks for two premium accts or even 120.. They have taken the attitude that they have because, nobody that spends more than that a month on their accts.. Is going to just walk away... and if they did it will only be for a month or two.

Sabreon is probably the only one that I can remember that did the ultimate fuck it and walked off... Everyone else comes back in their own time.

Again, 2 camps.
Those against simu because Simu et cetera et cetera
And those against players for being opportunists / ignorant.

What do you do when you play a single game and there's a bug that can change the whole thing if you exploit it?

Some will abuse it saying: it's there, fuck the rest. Even if it destroys the game for him, make him go from point A To X instantly, no regards to his experience of growing within the game
Some will say: NO, and will skip it.

I, for me, will NEVER abuse a bug

But second point: were players AWARE it was a bug cause of documentation deficient?

In law: you can't plaid ignorance. But simu is crap! Yeah, maybe, but we got a crappy kind of players too.

Last question: Was that bug something you could monetize? If answer is yes: players's fault.

i plaid on the fifth!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by drauz

https://media2.giphy.com/media/TAL5aIYmYu1os/source.gif

---

Answer the question and stop deflecting. I believe Simu more and more the longer this thread goes and the lack of responses to the actual allegations Coase is making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortybox

Answer the question and stop deflecting. I believe Simu more and more the longer this thread goes and the lack of responses to the actual allegations Coase is making.

---

Exactly this. People keep making references to the wiki not having enough info, so on and so forth. But that in no way has any bearing on what Simu is ACTUALLY accusing them of.

To quote the accusations from the logs posted:

Quote:

---

Mazreth says, "Well, since all I have are the notes to go on, I can say that a discussion about intentions to exploit the bug before it was discovered are the primary reason anyone and everyone involoved is getting a warning."

---

Quote:

---

Coase says, "We also, unfortunately, discovered evidence that that you were aware that this was a bug, discussed it with others, did not report it, and continued to abuse it."

---

So again, I ask for like the third or fourth time - Is Simu lying, and you did not know it was supposed to be un-enchantable, and you did not discuss it with anyone?

I know of several people that enchanted it and did not get warnings. Likely because Simu had no evidence that they knew it was a bug. But the ones that got warnings, they claim there is evidence of exploitation. Not only that, they claim that it was even purposefully being exploited BECAUSE they found out about it.

So you can tell me all you want that the wiki isn't clear about it, but were you TRULY ignorant about its enchantability?

If what Simu says is true, consider yourself lucky you didn't get a ban.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

Exactly this. People keep making references to the wiki not having enough info, so on and so forth. But that in no way has any bearing on what Simu is ACTUALLY accusing them of.

To quote the accusations from the logs posted:





So again, I ask for like the third or fourth time - Is Simu lying, and you did not know it was supposed to be un-enchantable, and you did not discuss it with anyone?

I know of several people that enchanted it and did not get warnings. Likely because Simu had no evidence that they knew it was a bug. But the ones that got warnings, they claim there is evidence of exploitation. Not only that, they claim that it was even purposefully being exploited BECAUSE they found out about it.

So you can tell me all you want that the wiki isn't clear about it, but were you TRULY ignorant about its enchantability?

If what Simu says is true, consider yourself lucky you didn't get a ban.

---

No one is going to come out and publicly tell you they knew it was a bug and were planning on exploiting it. Get real.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

No one is going to come out and publicly tell you they knew it was a bug and were planning on exploiting it. Get real.

---

Let me amend that to say, no one with a live account.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

No one is going to come out and publicly tell you they knew it was a bug and were planning on exploiting it. Get real.

---

And silence is generally taken as an admission of guilt.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

And silence is generally taken as an admission of guilt.

---

WTF country do you live in?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

WTF country do you live in?

---

A country where we have a decent capability to use deductive reasoning?

The GMs said there is evidence they knew. Evidence that was compelling enough for them to give warnings to some of their beloved Pay 2 Win players.

My question has been deflected several times, even by you, such as right now. So what is any reasoning individual supposed to conclude? I'd say the scales weigh heavily on Simu's side.

It's even more telling, since Simu did not give warnings to everyone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

A country where we have a decent capability to use deductive reasoning?

The GMs said there is evidence they knew. Evidence that was compelling enough for them to give warnings to some of their beloved Pay 2 Win players.

My question has been deflected several times, even by you, such as right now. So what is any reasoning individual supposed to conclude? I'd say the scales weigh heavily on Simu's side.

It's even more telling, since Simu did not give warnings to everyone.

---

Ok, lets play your guilty unless you respond game.

Did you, or did you not, touch an underaged girl without her permission?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Ok, lets play your guilty unless you respond game.

Did you, or did you not, touch an underaged girl without her permission?

---

Yes

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

Yes

---

Well there you go. You are correct, it's so much easier when you assume guilt with no facts at all.

How much was discussed in outside channels that led to the conversation starting this way:

Quote:

---

Mazreth asks, "Though I suppose you already know?"
You nod understandingly.
You say, "I have a suspicious."
You say, "Err."
Mazreth says, "If not we can go over it."
You say, "Suspicion."
You say, "I would very much like to go over it."
Mazreth says, "Sure."
You say, "However."
You say, "I know your time is valuable."
Mazreth says, "So you are here to be issued an official warning for Game Mechanics Abuse bsed upon exploitation of an enchanting bug."
Mazreth says, "That's as sussinct as I can make it."
You say, "Okay."
You say, "I understand and accept the punishment."

---

It really sounds like the warned players were given advanced notice that they were going to be "punished". Of course, if they knew what they were doing was wrong they knew it could catch up to them sooner or later.

Here is my log

Quote:

---

Mazreth says, "Hey, we think you are abusing a bug, and unless you tell me you are not abusing a bug, you are guilty."
You say, "LOL WUT?"
Mazreth says, "This log is factual evidence, not editable by anyone, so proof of your guilt or innocence. You better tell me if you are guilty or not."
You say, "Oh, I'm innocent."
Mazreth says, "Oh, fantastico. I'm awarding you an RPA and a get out of jail free card, cause you will post this log to the gsplayers corner and we all know logs there are fact! I'm so happy you responded, otherwise it's clear you were guilty."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

Well there you go. You are correct, it's so much easier when you assume guilt with no facts at all.

---

Guilty of what? No accusation of wrongdoing was made. This is not even close to being a similar situation.

In this case, they were accused of wrongdoing, and there was evidence claimed by Simu. It's also not in Simu's best interest to give warnings to these people, if the accusations were false. The fact that there is no denial that the accusations are false, is plenty good evidence to me.

At this point I question why you are even putting up a defense at all? Those who knowingly took advantage of the bug should be glad they got off with a warning. I'd give kudos to them had they just admitted they did it, learned from the experience, and moved on. Trying to lawyer out of it isn't going to accomplish much when this isn't even a court of law.

I know I've been guilty of breaking policy by AFK scripting in the past. It was bloody well deserved, and I should have known better. We all make mistakes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnOrdim

How much was discussed in outside channels that led to the conversation starting this way:


It really sounds like the warned players were given advanced notice that they were going to be "punished". Of course, if they knew what they were doing was wrong they knew it could catch up to them sooner or later.

---

Yep, there was a private Discord server, where Wyrom and Naos and Coase pulled everyone aside and said, "If you do this, we're going to give you warnings." And people said, "We're doing this! Let's schedule our warnings for 3 p.m. Friday." And then followed a flurry of cancellations and reschedulings, but it all came out right in the end.


In other words, don't be ridiculous. He knew he was getting a warning because other people had mentioned that they were getting warnings. I have seen three or four logs from Coase now, and he literally gave exactly the same spiel every time. He probably had it scripted.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Suppa Hobbit Mage

WTF country do you live in?

---

If Simu gave me a warning when I didn’t do anything wrong I’d call them out. I’d say their evidence is BS and that they had nothing on me.

That’s not happening here and my suspicion is that Simu actually has evidence that they willfully were trying to exploit the bug to their benefit.

Stop deflecting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnOrdim

How much was discussed in outside channels that led to the conversation starting this way:


It really sounds like the warned players were given advanced notice that they were going to be "punished". Of course, if they knew what they were doing was wrong they knew it could catch up to them sooner or later.

---

I have a hard time believing that everyone who was caught up in this just decided to "test" coraesine and other formerly unenchantable materials out of the blue. They're all capped, been playing literal decades, and are experienced enchanters. I don't buy that they didn't know, on some level, this was a bug. I'd love to see the trail of evidence that leads back the the ur-GMAer, but this isn't CSI: Elanthia and we will probably never know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taernath

I have a hard time believing that everyone who was caught up in this just decided to "test" coraesine and other formerly unenchantable materials out of the blue. They're all capped, been playing literal decades, and are experienced enchanters. I don't buy that they didn't know, on some level, this was a bug. I'd love to see the trail of evidence that leads back the the ur-GMAer, but this isn't CSI: Elanthia and we will probably never know.

---

Let me be lucidly honest here. People noticed that coraesine could be enchanted, said, "Huh, that's weird. Is that because of the new enchanting changes? Is it supposed to be enchantable now? Well, may as well enchant this now that I can." What they *didn't* do, and apparently this is a huge crime, is double-check with staff six times before enchanting things. So, the burden was on them to make sure that what the system allowed was what was right -- and that's why the warnings are ridiculous.

Quote:

---

Yep, there was a private Discord server, where Wyrom and Naos and Coase pulled everyone aside and said, "If you do this, we're going to give you warnings." And people said, "We're doing this! Let's schedule our warnings for 3 p.m. Friday." And then followed a flurry of cancellations and reschedulings, but it all came out right in the end.

---

Well there was, until it had to be moved into the "official" Discord. Started by Whirlin, same with the alternative forums they tried to start as well. Don't pretend that HoTA hasn't been balls deep in GM connections from day one.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnOrdim

Well there was, until it had to be moved into the "official" Discord. Started by Whirlin, same with the alternative forums they tried to start as well. Don't pretend that HoTA hasn't been balls deep in GM connections from day one.

---

BRB, have to go bang my GM wife.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

Let me be lucidly honest here. People noticed that coraesine could be enchanted, said, "Huh, that's weird. Is that because of the new enchanting changes? Is it supposed to be enchantable now? Well, may as well enchant this now that I can." What they *didn't* do, and apparently this is a huge crime, is double-check with staff six times before enchanting things. So, the burden was on them to make sure that what the system allowed was what was right -- and that's why the warnings are ridiculous.

---

So then you are saying the GMs are not telling the truth? Again, to quote the accusations:

Quote:

---

Mazreth says, "Well, since all I have are the notes to go on, I can say that a discussion about intentions to exploit the bug before it was discovered are the primary reason anyone and everyone involoved is getting a warning."

Coase says, "We also, unfortunately, discovered evidence that that you were aware that this was a bug, discussed it with others, did not report it, and continued to abuse it."

---

They are saying there was more going on than what you are claiming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

Let me be lucidly honest here. People noticed that coraesine could be enchanted, said, "Huh, that's weird. Is that because of the new enchanting changes? Is it supposed to be enchantable now? Well, may as well enchant this now that I can." What they *didn't* do, and apparently this is a huge crime, is double-check with staff six times before enchanting things. So, the burden was on them to make sure that what the system allowed was what was right -- and that's why the warnings are ridiculous.

---

Wrong. They should have bugged it.

Simu also alleges that they knew they should have done this and colluded to take advantage of it. That’s a huge difference in all of this and your propaganda campaign to avoid those allegations is very telling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

So then you are saying the GMs are not telling the truth? Again, to quote the accusations:



They are saying there was more going on than what you are claiming.

---

It's possible they have something. I reviewed all messages (and deleted messages) in the HOA Discord server, and there's nothing more incriminating than: "Did they mean to make this enchantable? Huh. I wonder if they'll fix it." To equate that response with "intentionally abusing a bug in collusion with other players for profit" is a pretty big leap. Players don't generally get punished for GMs forgetting to do something (like flag coraesine as unenchantable).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortybox

Wrong. They should have bugged it.

Simu also alleges that they knew they should have done this and colluded to take advantage of it. That’s a huge difference in all of this and your propaganda campaign to avoid those allegations is very telling.

---

You have an insane hatred for me and HoA that's blinding you to the obvious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

So then you are saying the GMs are not telling the truth? Again, to quote the accusations:



They are saying there was more going on than what you are claiming.

---

They won’t address it because it’s likely true. I also have a very strong suspicion that others who did not enchant were complicit too. BriarFox is a known merchant and would benefit from a sale if they were able to get away with it.

Betcha Simu uncovered conversation in game about this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortybox

They won’t address it because it’s likely true. I also have a very strong suspicion that others who did not enchant were complicit too. BriarFox is a known merchant and would benefit from a sale if they were able to get away with it.

Betcha Simu uncovered conversation in game about this.

---

Dude, you're insane. I wasn't even involved in this, own no coraesine, and benefited in no way, shape, or form. I'm only involved now because I'm an officer for HoA and because I know a handful of people who unfairly got warnings. What really seems to be happening is that because we have a Discord server and we talked about this in it, Simu thinks we're a cabal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

Let me be lucidly honest here. People noticed that coraesine could be enchanted, said, "Huh, that's weird. Is that because of the new enchanting changes? Is it supposed to be enchantable now? Well, may as well enchant this now that I can." What they *didn't* do, and apparently this is a huge crime, is double-check with staff six times before enchanting things. So, the burden was on them to make sure that what the system allowed was what was right -- and that's why the warnings are ridiculous.

---

And how many of you thought to report, bug, assist, or otherwise notify the GMs even once? Discord is right there, it's basically a GM chat room. Nobody asked in mechanics?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

You have an insane hatred for me and HoA that's blinding you to the obvious.

---

You and others have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo that blinds you to how obvious the lies and deflections are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taernath

And how many of you thought to report, bug, assist, or otherwise notify the GMs even once? Discord is right there, it's basically a GM chat room. Nobody asked in mechanics?

---

People did talk about it in the official server, too, and openly in our unrestricted logs. I have no idea if anyone bugged it. But again, why is on the player to make sure that what the system allows is not a bug? The 925 changes *told* people that some previously unenchantable things were now enchantable.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnOrdim

You and others have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo that blinds you to how obvious the lies and deflections are.

---

Maintaining the status quo? What the actual fuck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

Maintaining the status quo? What the actual fuck.

---

If you and others honestly believe that all of this is a "misunderstanding" from "throwaway comments" on your "third party discord server" why aren't you fighting it tooth and nail. You saw what happened when everyone collectively shit all over Liescum for bringing up Zaoloo over an Lnet comment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

Dude, you're insane. I wasn't even involved in this, own no coraesine, and benefited in no way, shape, or form. I'm only involved now because I'm an officer for HoA and because I know a handful of people who unfairly got warnings. What really seems to be happening is that because we have a Discord server and we talked about this in it, Simu thinks we're a cabal.

---

I also own no coraesine and did not stand to profit in any way, shape, or form!

I accept that I am an experienced enough enchanter that perhaps I “should’ve known better.” I don’t think a warning was warranted, but I probably won’t get anymore for awhile and it made Coase feel good so I call that a win.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AnOrdim

If you and others honestly believe that all of this is a "misunderstanding" from "throwaway comments" on your "third party discord server" why aren't you fighting it tooth and nail. You saw what happened when everyone collectively shit all over Liescum for bringing up Zaoloo over an Lnet comment.

---

So, now the people who got warnings are legitimately bad people because they aren't protesting it hard enough, to the best of your limited knowledge? Let me know if you find the cheese at the end of that logic maze.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

So, now the people who got warnings are legitimately bad people because they aren't protesting it hard enough, to the best of your limited knowledge? Let me know if you find the cheese at the end of that logic maze.

---

Which is it? Are the things HoTA members saying true or not? If they are in fact true and its bullshit using evidence from a third party source, why did they all just roll over?

Random reminder we're coming nearing 5 full months since enchant was updated.

There is still no way to use 8x+ potions bought with cash (equivalent) with the new system
There is still no way to get elemental temper potions
There are still numerous bugged scripts (realm flaring is an lol one) that are far, far too difficult to enchant. Specifically fusion which has very likely been bugged since the difficulty change on the old system, is getting 2x or more than it should.

Can get the bloodhounds out to hotfix 4 coraesine items getting enchanted but no time to go through and get those difficulty reductions for obviously broken things reduced. There's only so many hours in the day!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Donquix

Random reminder we're coming nearing 5 full months since enchant was updated.

There is still no way to use 8x+ potions bought with cash (equivalent) with the new system
There is still no way to get elemental temper potions
There are still numerous bugged scripts (realm flaring is an lol one) that are far, far too difficult to enchant. Specifically fusion which has very likely been bugged since difficulty change on the old system, is getting 2x or more than it should.

Can get the bloodhounds out to hotfix 4 coraesine items getting enchanted but no time to go through and get those difficulty reductions for obviously broken things reduced. There's only so many hours in the day!

---

If anything, maybe this whole mess will light a fire under them to finally get all the enchanting issues fixed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

If anything, maybe this whole mess will light a fire under them to finally get all the enchanting issues fixed.

---

https://i.imgur.com/Mu97d3v.jpg

Well, won't the 8x+ potions be cash items? :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mobius1

Well, won't the 8x+ potions be cash items? :D

---

They at least controlled themselves somewhat by only putting one of each up as treasure trove items. Shame it was the old system enchanting potion.

Completely unrelated, see my thread in the auction folder for a 7x coraesine lance. I've had it in a locker forever, didn't just get it or anything. MB 1B BO 3B

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fortybox

They won’t address it because it’s likely true. I also have a very strong suspicion that others who did not enchant were complicit too. BriarFox is a known merchant and would benefit from a sale if they were able to get away with it.

Betcha Simu uncovered conversation in game about this.

---

WRONG Dalabro

By selling the fruit of collusion, you are exposing yourself up. Your logic is flawed.

The long and the short of it is:

1. Simu should've released a finished product with actual documentation in the first place and/or fixed their bugs way faster.

2. Some people seem to have a serious schadenfreude boner for HotA because they lag the game (not necessarily their fault) and some of them are kinda dicks about it (their fault). It could've just as easily been another group of people being finger wagged.

If I had a coraesine item to enchant I probably would've fired 925 at it too and then upon it working would've probably continued, assuming it was now enchantable, like crit weighted items, like flaring items, et cetera. Asking on lnet only ends in confusion and the wiki page was never updated when I was trying to figure it out. I would've further assumed that if it was a mistake they were probably planning on making it a cash shop item to do it later, based on history, and therefore fuck 'em. If you change a system, tell people to experiment and offer no documentation, it's not the fault of the person who figures it out.

Edit to add: While I'm at it, is Veil Iron enchantable now? If so, is it supposed to be? Not that it has any spectacular properties, but I mean, it starts at 5x a lot, so saves some time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stumplicker

The long and the short of it is:

---

Seems like you have no less of a boner with your disgust of Simu practices. Hell, most of us here agree that Simu isn't spot free in all of this. They should have bloody locked the car door, so to speak.

But the situation you describe of enchanting Coraesine, would not have resulted in a warning. So I don't agree with your point here.

Okay, I've been hesitant to post here since y'all are just super fucked up to one another, but I feel I should briefly address this topic.

My rogue, Nodyre, received a warning over enchanting a 90's era krodera sword. He is also a "Captain" in HoA, for the record. I got the same spiel from Coase in the consultation lounge that the others did. I was hyper-communicative with staff about this item, going so far as to ask Wyrom about it in the official discord. It's mechanically deficient (as others have noted in this thread) and I didn't even bother paying to have it enchanted beyond +32 (above the "normal" +25) in the months I had it. I don't use the sword except to wave it around due to the silly alteration it has. And there was no conspiracy to have this enchanted, either – it was discussed openly in-game in the remote locale of Gardenia Commons. Most notably, the item is just weird in general. It's blessable, unlike other "anti-magic" metals, which is why no wizard I hired ever thought twice about enchanting it.

Yet, despite all this, I received a warning for GMA. So I ask you to pause for a moment and reflect on this question: If Coase didn't hesitate to issue *me* a warning for something that was clearly above-board, why should he receive the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the warnings he issued to others?

Thank you for your time and attention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HebrewToYou

Okay, I've been hesitant to post here since y'all are just super fucked up to one another, but I feel I should briefly address this topic.

My rogue, Nodyre, received a warning over enchanting a 90's era krodera sword. He is also a "Captain" in HoA, for the record. I got the same spiel from Coase in the consultation lounge that the others did. I was hyper-communicative with staff about this item, going so far as to ask Wyrom about it in the official discord. It's mechanically deficient (as others have noted in this thread) and I didn't even bother paying to have it enchanted beyond +32 (above the "normal" +25) in the months I had it. I don't use the sword except to wave it around due to the silly alteration it has. And there was no conspiracy to have this enchanted, either – it was discussed openly in-game in the remote locale of Gardenia Commons. Most notably, the item is just weird in general. It's blessable, unlike other "anti-magic" metals, which is why no wizard I hired ever thought twice about enchanting it.

Yet, despite all this, I received a warning for GMA. So I ask you to pause for a moment and reflect on this question: If Coase didn't hesitate to issue *me* a warning for something that was clearly above-board, why should he receive the benefit of the doubt when it comes to the warnings he issued to others?

Thank you for your time and attention.

---

I believe the very nature of GMA, is that it is something that gives you some sort of advantage. I make the argument that enchanting krodera is not any sort of advantage. In fact, you net lost money doing this, since enchanting a non-krodera item would have had more value.

I don't think that in your case, what you did was serious enough to be considered GMA.

But I am not a letter of the law kind of guy, and I certainly am not making the arguments I am here out of some vindictiveness toward HoA.

But enchanting things like Coraesine and Zelnorn is a pretty serious advantage, in my mind, and should be taken more seriously.

Don’t trust him, he’s a motherfuckin’ rogue!

Damnit, Mobius cut between us. Joke ruined

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Roblar

Don’t trust him, he’s a motherfuckin’ rogue!

---

Quite frankly, I'd say Nodyre is one of the most trustworthy rogues I know, haha.

But hey, he's not a REAL rogue, anyways. He's technically a warrior-lite.

This is true and I thought of this briefly.

In light of his endeavor to be better then he began in life, I say trust him!

Can we get him to post 19?

<bashes forearms with Roblar in greeting>

@Mobius1: I don't think there is such thing as a "pretty serious advantage" in this game anymore. The easy access to massive spellups, the ridiculous gear inflation, and the move to pay-to-win has cemented that in my mind. So it seems very foolhardy for the staff to pick *this* event as the straw that broke the camel's back, especially considering that it's their shoddy development/testing/deployment process that allowed this in the first place. It's not hard to generate a changelog and documentation, but it does take time. They chose the "easy button" approach and, lo and behold, it had unintended consequences.

The answer to this is not to punish your loyal, paying customers – it's to do better next time. Reverting the enchantments (a loss of currency and/or tears) should have been an entirely sufficient resolution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by HebrewToYou

<bashes forearms with Roblar in greeting>

@Mobius1: I don't think there is such thing as a "pretty serious advantage" in this game anymore. The easy access to massive spellups, the ridiculous gear inflation, and the move to pay-to-win has cemented that in my mind. So it seems very foolhardy for the staff to pick *this* event as the straw that broke the camel's back, especially considering that it's their shoddy development/testing/deployment process that allowed this in the first place. It's not hard to generate a changelog and documentation, but it does take time. They chose the "easy button" approach and, lo and behold, it had unintended consequences.

The answer to this is not to punish your loyal, paying customers – it's to do better next time. Reverting the enchantments (a loss of currency and/or tears) should have been an entirely sufficient resolution.

---

Again, you can't just blame Simu for not locking the door.

And I'd call it a very serious advantage. If you had me rate which materials in the game would benefit the most from an enchant, I'd put Coraesine and Zelnorn at the top of that list. It's an advantage that people would probably pay hundreds of millions of silvers for.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BriarFox

Maintaining the status quo? What the actual fuck.

---

Someone is jelly. That's all.