Devs ever address this issue? A year+ ago was "in the near future"?

[kpak01]

No-no-no, David Blaine, it doesn't work like that! I will not spend a second of invaluable life in order to fruitlessly search for evidence or refutation of your fantasies.
You put forward a sentiment - you have the burden of evidence.

You keep trying to pretend the devs explicit statements, on multiple occasions, is somehow my personal preference. If you actually believe that, and are not just playing stupid word games to defend cheating, then the one living in a fantasy is you. Release notes are not my original research. Dev posts are not my original research. The devs already proved it; I don't need to.

Now stop calling players deceivers only because they use the features of the use of some in-game items that were originally unplanned by the developers, but not forbidden by them.

"Cheaters", not "deceivers", and you are once again ignoring the facts. It's not simply "unplanned". The exact opposite was planned and stated. I will continue to call cheating, cheating.

And I will continue to have suspicions about why people are defending cheating.

[kpak01]

So by this logic, one could say that the fact the devs know about for over a year and decided it’s not a priority…one could conceive this as one and the same.

Somehow, to you, the devs explicitly saying it's not intended is one and the same as saying it's intended? They've already made their clear statements, multiple times. Not repeating themselves on a weekly basis is somehow proof that they changed their minds to you? OK, there's no more attempts at rational conversation needed here.

[kpak01]

Give it up already

No. You think non-cheaters have to be permanent second-class citizens in DDO? I don't. I want everyone to be following the same rules, instead of the cheaters getting an advantage.

A huge majority of the player base use this so called exploit

We have someone else demanding I provide proof that Release Notes actually exist. So I'll ask where your proof is that a "huge majority" of players are deliberately cheating. I don't have any proof either, but I'd expect it to be more like 10-20%.

[jskinner937]

Somehow, to you, the devs explicitly saying it's not intended is one and the same as saying it's intended? They've already made their clear statements, multiple times. Not repeating themselves on a weekly basis is somehow proof that they changed their minds to you? OK, there's no more attempts at rational conversation needed here.

No you are wrong. The community manager made a statement, who has no authority to make a game change. The flow of information goes to the dev team and they decide if something is game breaking or not. Clearly it is not. That is why someone asked for proof that the devs themselves have commented, which no one apparently can provide that comment.

At this point, what is the point of your posts? The devs know, if its gamebreaking they will fix. End of story. Continuing to post rants on and on about how the entire game community is cheating is just silly. My example of sonic blast is exactly on par. If something comes along that makes this more game breaking than what it is they will fix it as they did with sonic blast. But for now they don't care and it is not a priority. Maybe when new artifacts and sentience stuff is introduced, they may revisit it. For now, maybe you should just accept how things work in this game. Many bugs, lag, actual game breaking stuff should be a focus of players discussion, not this.

And by the way, you seem to be alone in your thoughts, so maybe that should be a clue on how your perspective should change.

[kpak01]

At this point, what is the point of your posts? The devs know, if its gamebreaking they will fix. End of story. Continuing to post rants on and on about how the entire game community is cheating is just silly.

So what is the point of your posts, and all the other cheater-defenders? Continuing to defend cheating is way worse that "just silly".

...your thoughts...your perspective...

More personal attacks to try to cover up the cheating. It's not my thoughts. The devs are the ones who designed the system, and yeah, they have a bug in it, but it's (some of) the players are deliberately exploiting that bug to cheat. It has nothing to do with "my" thoughts. I didn't design the system, and I'm not the one exploiting the bug. I'm just one of the honest players left at a disadvantage.

[ahpook]

Continuing to defend cheating is way worse that "just silly".

Here is the problem. No one is defending cheating.

What is under contention is the definition of cheating. You propose that it is cheating to use "something" allowed by the game because the community manager said quite a while ago that the "something" is not WAI. Others are saying that is not an appropriate definition. That is what is being "defended". If your definition is correct then a person who never reads the forums would be a cheater if they used that something. Even though there is no official rule book to inform them of that rule. That seems quite ridiculous of a definition of cheating to many.

So far it appears that 1 person believes your definition and everyone else rejects it. Making up your own rule (note that no one at SSG has ever called it cheating, that is only your interpretation) and calling anyone who doesn't follow it a cheater is rather at odds with how rules work. But go ahead and continue being pure of heart and signalling your incredible virtue. Just don't let the windmill knock you down.

[Tuxedoman96]

I'm not defending cheating or anything, but this seems like such a minor case to be worked up about. I maintain that using an ability that has been denoted as not WAI, by the devs or by the CM, is grounds for exploitation only insofar as it runs counter to design intent. That being said, impact is probably the most important aspect to look at. There are several abilities for example that are not working as intended, G. Shout and the stun upgrade to the US Shield throw to name a couple. But what I'm getting at is does making it WAI make it okay? There was a time where G. Colorspray from Feydark Illusionist didn't have a save, which was different from it's description. Would declaring that as WAI make it any less of a ridiculous ability? It's with that line of reasoning that I don't think that the question of WAI should take precedence over how combat engagement is affected by an ability WAI or not. With that in mind, using abilities not WAI is less of an issue for me, with the understanding that if I build based off of not WAI mechanics and then they fix or change it that I'm the person that suffers the most from that (which is why I don't build around exploits). In a similar vein, if I use an ability, enhancement, feat, etc. that is clearly over performing WAI or not then I'm not particularly surprised or disheartened if and when a change occurs (although I can still be concerned about the way in which the change occurs).

So I have to ask what in particular about this exploit or whatnot troubles you, at the least to warrant you prioritizing this over other not-WAI mechanics.

[Cordovan]

After doing yet another round of cleanup as the thread spirals out of control due to personal attacks and fighting, this thread is now closed. People are welcome to discuss topics without engaging in fighting or personal attacks.