Curse

isildorbiafra · Feb 24, 2009, 01:36 AM // 01:36

In case you just tuned in: aparently the everlasting mischievous tonic is glitched; cause unlike any other tonic it gives 2 points to the party anmimal title track.

Aparently some guilds have been taking advantage of the situation.

Some argue that its intended to do so. Others say its an exploit and users are at risk of getting banned.

Whatever. Point is; if this was intended anet should confirm it; if not anet should take the nessesary measures quick.

Yes i know i could use a spelling course...........

king_trouble · Feb 24, 2009, 01:44 AM // 01:44

Regular tonics give 2 points each, everlasting are suppose to give 0 points per use.

Inde · Feb 24, 2009, 03:53 AM // 03:53

All right, I can see the other thread ID but it is indeed gone. I will apologize for this. You are welcome to continue discussing the issue. I apologize for any lost data. I'll move this to game bugs and clean it up so a discussion can continue.

Joe Fierce · Feb 24, 2009, 04:10 AM // 04:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Inde

All right, I can see the other thread ID but it is indeed gone. I will apologize for this. You are welcome to continue discussing the issue. I apologize for any lost data. I'll move this to game bugs and clean it up so a discussion can continue.

thank you very much.

Tom Swift · Feb 24, 2009, 04:19 AM // 04:19

Well then, I will post the gist of my post from the previous thread.

In the past, ANet has been known to penalize those who took advantage of bugs on the grounds that the players should have realized that it was an unintended bug and that, therefore, exploitation was against the eula. (some post in the previous thread were saying ANet could not take action against people on the basis of the eula and I wanted to remind people that ANet has done exactly that in the past)

So, until Anet clarifies the situation (and I hope they do so quickly), I would recommend caution when using this tonic if it indeed gives points to the party animal track.

And, yes, I do think they very well might take action against those who exploit this as the price of this tonic could easily skyrocket on the basis of this bug/rumor to the level where it would be a concern for the game.

Joe Fierce · Feb 24, 2009, 04:40 AM // 04:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tom Swift

Well then, I will post the gist of my post from the previous thread.

In the past, ANet has been known to penalize those who took advantage of bugs on the grounds that the players should have realized that it was an unintended bug and that, therefore, exploitation was against the eula. (some post in the previous thread were saying ANet could not take action against people on the basis of the eula and I wanted to remind people that ANet has done exactly that in the past)

So, until Anet clarifies the situation (and I hope they do so quickly), I would recommend caution when using this tonic if it indeed gives points to the party animal track.

And, yes, I do think they very well might take action against those who exploit this as the price of this tonic could easily skyrocket on the basis of this bug/rumor to the level where it would be a concern for the game.

Well, the recommendation of caution isn't that big of a thing, because it'll be obvious to anet who all of a sudden pooped out ten thousand party points without getting more than one tonic on their account. IMO, but don't quote me on it.

Razon · Feb 24, 2009, 08:38 PM // 20:38

Congrats, you got your nerf.

EDIT: From what I heard the "crash fix" anet made is a lie and its actually its the tonic nerf.

Luminarus · Feb 25, 2009, 12:07 AM // 00:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Razon

Congrats, you got your nerf.

EDIT: From what I heard the "crash fix" anet made is a lie and its actually its the tonic nerf.

Its funny, that when they fix crash bugs, half the time noone has been complaining about it, and problems alot less then that have been complained about all ready.

On the other hand, it wouldnt really be that efficient, because you would need to zone 5000 times to max party hunter... thats along time @ approx 10 seconds/load. Even at 5 seconds, thats like 7 hrs... hmm suppose thats not that bad after all, but still would be very tedius.

Joe Fierce · Feb 25, 2009, 12:22 AM // 00:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by Luminarus

On the other hand, it wouldnt really be that efficient, because you would need to zone 5000 times to max party hunter... thats along time @ approx 10 seconds/load. Even at 5 seconds, thats like 7 hrs... hmm suppose thats not that bad after all, but still would be very tedius.

people were running bots to do it.

Zidane Ortef · Feb 25, 2009, 07:33 AM // 07:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Joe Fierce

people were running bots to do it.

Bots and macros are two different things. and if you click fast enough you can get off two tonic at once and still receive the points.

4 points every zone cuts the time down tremendously.

Also I know there will be people that wanna argue the fact of bot vs macro you can find countless topic of Anet give an O.K. to such things as the G11,G15 serious keyboards and such things as Texmod for cartography titles. Been playing for 3 years using my G15 for Months maybe a year, year and a half to do stuff like pick up drops vent info giving dropping kegs at vaiteers, to Guild recruitment adds in town and not once have I been banned for any of these such things.

Also Bug is no longer a Bug it was fix as a so called Crash Bug and this topic can be closed.

Bleiken · Feb 25, 2009, 09:44 AM // 09:44

Anyone being banned exploiting the bug ? 4 hours of macro rezoning with an everlasting tonic = max partytitel

maxparty titel = 10.000 @150g =1500K

This bug saved people alot of money and time.

Kattar · Feb 25, 2009, 12:23 PM // 12:23

I need some confirmation this has been fixed before I close this. I know there's been some discussion about it on the wiki, but none of that has been official.

Anyone have proof?

Zidane Ortef · Feb 25, 2009, 06:40 PM // 18:40

Before:

After:

Kattar · Feb 25, 2009, 06:50 PM // 18:50

PHOTOSHOP.

Kidding. That's all the proof I needed. Thanks!

Closed.