SPF Reform Proposals and Discussion

[fearedbliss]

TLDR; Current SPF Reform Survey Voting and Results

Hello folks,

Late in December of 2017, I sent a detailed messaged to @Dredd describing my concerns about the state of the SPF, including but not limited to rules that could/should be modified, and improvements that we could do to the management of the SPF (and possibly new sub-forums that may or may not be created depending on community needs).

This is part of the response that @Dredd wrote:

"If you happen to know other posters who would like to see a chance in policy about mod use, please ask them to shoot me a PM and share their thoughts. Some people may not be speaking out due to peer pressure. I'm not here to judge, just to listen."

With this, I want to let everyone know to please message Dredd on changes that you would like to see in the community. Any proposals that you send to Dredd as a PM, will be posted in a private moderator forum which will be discussed with internal staff. As Dredd said, he is here to listen to your suggestions without judgement. Do not feel silenced because some people may not agree with you on your views. Everyone is part of the community and we all deserve our voices to be represented.

The following are the proposals that I sent out to him. Some of these may or may not be accepted. I wanted to post these in here rather than just send it to him privately so that people could see all of the viewpoints out there. I believe it will bring a healthier and more open community.

------------------------

Discussion of Mods
Discussion of mods in the forum should not be banned (But can be placed in a separate sub-forum). Sure PhrozenKeep is the primarily place for mod development, but a lot of the recent mods (Such as Singling's consolidation of FAM) has actually happened because of the many hours and experiences that the player base has been having. Without everyone here, Singling might have been much different or it wouldn't have existed.

Adding Item Level and Fingerprint support to Singling
@GalaXyHaXz has developed a small improvement (That will be added to Singling if it becomes SPF approved) for Singling that allows the user to see the item level. This would not pollute the stats since you will need to press "Shift" or "Ctrl" in order to see it. The "Shift" allows us to develop the display of "Extended attributes" which are really any attributes we want to see. For example, if we want to see the item level and the fingerprint of an item, holding Shift and hovering over the item will allow you to see this information directly inside the game. This feature has also been requested by many Diablo II members around the world.

At the moment the community is forced to use outside applications to do this (ATMA/GoMule).

Allowing trading in all Diablo II versions (Including the previously stopped 1.00-1.11 trading)
Currently the SPF doesn't allow trading in old Diablo II versions (And even versions up to 1.11 I believe) due to the game not having strong anti-dupe features. This lack of security should not prevent, people from trading with each other, and it doesn't make sense. People that are legitimately playing old versions of 1.00 or any other version cannot trade with each other even if they aren't duping themselves. The SPF has aways been an honor system and this should continue to be followed. Not allowing trading effectively kills the pre 1.11 multi-player community which is something that I'm working very hard to build with the Xyinn Network.

Allowing the play of LOD 1.07.41 Beta
The Bliss Complete Collection includes support for version 1.07.41 Beta. This version hasn't really been formally approved (or really mentioned much) by the SPF, but noting it here to bring awareness to this.

Map Seeds
Map seeds should be allowed to be backed up, and used for personal play as the player sees fit. This includes allowing the map seed to be backed up, and recovered when you are muling.

At the moment the SPF only allows the map seeds to be used in case you accidentally lost your map.

However, muling is a good situation where intentionally using the map seed would be beneficial. A lot of people are using GoMule/ATMA muling as a way to bypass this rule so that they don't lose their map. However, not everyone uses GoMule/ATMA, and those people should not be forced to use third party muling applications. It's also not a sustainable model since if Blizzard releases a new version of Diablo II that changes the character format, this might break compatibility with GoMule/ATMA, and thus you won't be able to mule with those apps anymore (Unless you decide to forever, stay on an older version, or wait until someone -maybe- updates GoMule/ATMA to the new version). We already see that those muling applications haven't been actively developed for years.

So to recap:
- Using Map Seeds for recovering your lost map when you mule should be allowed.
- And more generally, Map Seeds should just be allowed to be backed up and used as desired
for personal play. For example, if during your adventure you discover a nice Andy/Meph map,
but you want to go do Baal now, you should be allowed to save that map, go baal (find a good baal map and save that as well), and then when you are done you can go back to your Andy/Meph map.

I actually also don't have a problem if people were to share the map seeds, BUT, if people want to just allow the map seeds to be used as people see fit for _personal play only_, I would definitely be willing to compromise with that.

Most people (including myself now) are against using map seeds. However some exceptions can be made. The current rule in the SPF is that the map seed can be used for recovery purposes (Not sure what this means since I thought it meant if you misclick and lose your map, however people say that isn't allowed). What does the current SPF rule mean?

The other exception is for muling. At the moment people use GoMule/ATMA as a way to:

1. Efficiently mule
2. Bypass them losing their maps since GoMule/ATMA allow you to transfer your items between characters/stashes without you having to make a new LAN game.

Using the map seed for muling purposes only should be allowed since it would allow people that don't use those applications to mule and be on equal grounds with GoMule/ATMA users.

Enabling ladder-only runewords in 1.10
Why are ladder-only runewords allowed in 1.11+ but not in 1.10? Doesn't make sense. We should allow this and make things consistent.

HC to SC item transfers should be banned
Currently the SPF allows HC to SC item transfers. This doesn't make sense and violates the separation between HC and SC. If a HC item started in HC, then it shouldn't be allowed to be moved to SC whether or not the HC character is currently dead or not (Which would violate the HC stripping rule). This rule would only make more sense if dead HC characters could be converted to SC characters which some members in the forum are strictly against even though it doesn't affect HC in any way because -THEY ARE DEAD, AND NOT IN HARDCORE ANYMORE-.

Maybe allow distribution of Classic/LOD 1.00/1.03/1.07 ISOs [Still requires legal CD KEY from user]?
The new Blizzard installer for version 1.12a has an updated MPQ file format. If any players
that want to time travel and play any versions of D2 before 1.12, they won't be able to using
that Diablo II installation because the old versions will think the new MPQs are corrupted.
The solution to this issue is for the player to find an old pair of ISOs and re-install D2 using
the pre 1.12 images. These ISOs would be the exact ISOs found on the CD and they wouldn't be modified in any way. Which means that the installer will still prompt for a CD key. The user must have purchased a copy of D2 from Blizzard in order to install the game. This is the same concept that Microsoft uses for their Windows Vista, 7, 8, and 10 ISOs. Anyone can download and use the ISO, but the installer will prompt for a cdkey on installation.

Removed above since new installer uses 26 length keys rather than 16. Users with new installers and keys will need to find another way on getting the old MPQ files. Maybe grab old discs from eBay?

Solution for this problem has been found.

Allow players within minor versions of a game to play with each other
Currently the SPF considers every single patch a completely separate trade pool. This doesn't make sense. For example, 1.09[a b c d] would segregate the player base 4 times even though those were minor patch versions and all the files are fully compatible. 1.09b and 1.09d players cannot play with each other because of this rule.

1.13[a, b, c, d] also suffers the same type of fragmentation. And actually, there haven't been THAT many changes to the game starting from 1.10, sure we had re-specs in 1.13, but if you look at all of the other minor fixes, it isn't that much. Ubers were introduced in 1.10 and 1.11, but those are bnet only so it doesn't affect us.

Removing this fragmentation will increase the player base. For technical reasons, people should all use the same version, but if someone made a 1.13d character and everyone else decided on 1.13c, than that 1.13d player should be allowed to bring his character back to 1.13c considering it's all within the same patch version and no technical file format changes took place.

I haven't looked at all the forum rules but these are the ones that have caught my attention during my 6 years at the SPF.

Color Rune Mod / Color Gem Mod (Cosmetic Changes)
I don't see what the problem is with coloring runes in 1.07+. Blizzard added this in 1.13, and not having it in 1.07 and other pre 1.13 version doesn't make that particular version any better. Just stresses out your eyes more. You finding a rune and then missing out on that because everything is colored the same color (White) doesn't provide any "additional fun".

Gems can be colored as well since they are a socketable type and something we also look forward to pick up amongst the 100s of white items that drop.

- Jonathan

 

[GalaXyHaXz]

A few things I want to add...

Map Seeds
I think it would make tournaments more interesting and fair if the host could specify a map seed and everyone used that seed for the duration of the tourney. But otherwise, I think sharing map seeds is a little overpowering, especially in older patches where racking is already easy/cheezy enough.

Item Level Display
The mod not allowed to be discussed on the forums has a feature to display item level. This is something requested by many people over the years. Currently, you have no way of seeing this stat without a 3rd party program. Being able to see the ilvl is useful if you're rerolling "Baal Charms", which also you cannot trade for because you cannot see the ilvl. But now you can! Just to recap, you must hold shift to see this stat. Here is what it looks like:

Spoiler

View attachment 7721

ISOs for Older Versions
The only issue I see with this is that the Digital Installer uses 26-digit cd-keys, where as the old pre 1.12 discs use 16-digit. So even if we allowed downloading of these images, legit players couldn't install them without buying the game again.

 

[fearedbliss]

@GalaXyHaXz hmm yea I forgot about the new cd key length, it's been a while since I have multiple 16 and 26 character keys from the years of playing haha. There are no converters between 26 and 16. So only way would be to redistribute the MPQs which I definitely won't be doing for legal reasons. At least with the ISOs the MPQ are on there but the CD key is still asked. I guess people will need to figure out a way to acquire these files on their own. I will cross this one out from my OP.

 

[ioupain]

Interesting proposals guys.

Not agreeing or disagreeing with everything here, but just some thoughts/refinements about the changes mentioned, assuming they were accepted by the SPF:

[HIGHLIGHT]Map Seeds[/HIGHLIGHT]
There should be an additional element to this: A rule that map seeds must not traverse a difficulty level. Hell map seeds are much bigger for Countess/Mephisto etc. than Normal map seeds for the same areas.

Map seeds give some people a competitive edge and some people may not like this proposal.

[HIGHLIGHT]Item Level Display[/HIGHLIGHT]
I'm guessing the pressing of 'Shift' can show other attributes (as mentioned), but it could get lengthy and go off the screen. What other attributes might be shown? If it is a case of just the Item Level being added, I see pressing 'Shift' as just a waste of time, it may as well be added to the item and save a key press!

One immediate benefit is being able to throw away useless amulets/charms based on item level without going to GoMule.

[HIGHLIGHT]Colour Rune Mod[/HIGHLIGHT]
I don't have issues with coloured runes being added to older patches.

Approaching this from a UI/Accessibility/Inclusivity perspective, being able to change the colour of items (in general) may benefit people who suffer from colour blindness, poor vision or other medical conditions affecting vision.

In other aspects of my life, I often have to change colours in Excel (where someone has used what I refer to as 'Toxic colours'), in programming languages (e.g. syntax highlighting) or maybe reduce contrast and brightness on my monitor because I suffer from migraines. I have used a more muted colour palette here for a Flavie report (it's from 2013 because Webs won't let me update it).

[HIGHLIGHT]Minor versions[/HIGHLIGHT]
Allowing people on minor version could break the 'Going back' rule. Although I presume you've considered this and would only apply that rule to major versions. I think it would help to include a link (or code) showing all patch revisions, both major and minor so that we can refer to them in discussions to evaluate the merits of this idea.

[HIGHLIGHT]Trading[/HIGHLIGHT]
I don't trade, so I won't muddy the waters with my thoughts, interested to hear other people's opinions.

@fearedbliss I appreciate your candour, I think that historically, there have been some arbitrary rules that are overdue for review.

From what I can gather (and remember), in many cases in the past, it was about avoiding the 'thin edge of the wedge' and the moderator not wanting to police minutae. Having a hard line rule set was easier to moderate and clearer to new forumites. However, the demographics of the forum have changed. Most people are seasoned veterans that don't need hand holding and we've always worked on the honour system. I can't help but feel that some of the rules were because any of the following:

1. The moderator wanted an easier time moderating
2. Lack of understanding of minor patch changes - not delving into code to understand breaking changes vs quality of life improvements vs non-game play changes etc.
3. 'Holier than thou' attitudes that were more about status than logic...

Anyway, interested to see what comes of this. At the very least, it could provide a good insight into any past reasoning for certain things which is a good refresher to us old timers and good insight for newer members.

 

[fearedbliss]

Thanks for your thoughts @ioupainmax.

Map Seed
A map seed for Normal, NM, and Hell are probably different even if the same number is used. I haven't tested this
but will soon. But yea I agree that it's best to keep the map seed to the difficulty it was found on and that's actually what I meant when I was writing it.

Also do note that maps only increased in size in NM and Hell in patch 1.10. Pre 1.10 maps are all the same size on all difficulties.

Item Level Display
I think @GalaXyHaXz will just implement Item Level in order to not pollute the UI. He can speak more about this but it could be done either way (With or without shift for just the Item Level display).

Colour Rune Mod
We could just make all of the runes the same color as 1.13. So everything will be orange across all versions (1.07+) unless there is a need to have something otherwise.

Minor Versions
That is correct, characters can only play within their major version. So All 1.13[abcd] characters can play, All 1.09[abcd] characters can play, but 1.09 vs 1.13 are still considered separate.

 

[TheNix]

Thanks @fearedbliss for raising these points, I will respond when I've had time to consider things.

Map Seeds
I think it would make tournaments more interesting and fair if the host could specify a map seed and everyone used that seed for the duration of the tourney.

I mentioned this technique for a tournament years ago and I was almost lynched; I still think it is a great idea though! Perhaps the first to the new difficulty level can call the new speed as a bonus.

 

[Fabian]

Old timers,

I hope you guys will speak up against this type of garbage, otherwise this forum will lose its SPFiness and just become some generic hack forum. Which would be a big shame imo.

 

[fearedbliss]

@TheNix the future is bright.

@Fabian Oh, thanks for your feedback. Take care.

 

[ffs]

I disagree about the map seeds suggestion. Yes GoMule is already a step in that direction, but it shouldn't be taken any further as this will lead to major abuse (thinking about Trav running and the like where maps are really the biggest challenge).

Apart from that, I don't see major issues with these suggestions. When it comes to time-travelling and in particular forwarding time-travelled items, I guess everyone is following his/her own set of rules allowing for a clean conscience. Personally I think a little bit too much is FAM currently, but don't really care too much. Same with trading and MPing on earlier (and different) patches.

However, there is only one point I want to raise if changes are to be sincerely discussed:

ATMA bugging should be addressed and IMO banned without thinking twice. Yes I know about the history of it and all the arguments, spare me. Again: It allows the use of items that the game is not -- and at no point in time has been -- able to generate. IMO crossing this line simply cannot be justified and it's ludicrous that this is currently accepted practice in a community that takes pride in considering itself legit. I know most newer players at least don't use it and I don't consider it to be a major issue in tournaments, trading or whatever. It's just a huge blot on this community and its framework that I would love to see go away.

My personal ceterum censeo Carthaginem esse delendam.

 

[maxicek]

No, no and 1000 times no. You joined under certain rules, you don’t then get to fundamentally change the forum because you want to push your mods. Find another forum if you don’t like the rules of this one.

Sorry but we already had a long discussion on this last year - are you going to keep asking until you get the answer you want? Do you really have to open this up again?

Same comment to @ffs - you only joined last year, you didn’t have to join if you object so much to ATMA bugging.

 

[Lemstar]

I think that quality of life stuff modded into the game is a slippery slope that the official position shouldn't go any further down on. RWM is content that's designed by Blizzard, trivial to enable, and very meaningful for prolonging the lifespan of the game, but I was never a fan of RRM back before orange runes were made official, and I don't think we should be modding in ingame fingerprinting or ilvl or generally anything beyond ladder runewords and strictly technical fixes.

I can see the logic behind permitting using -seed specifically to restore a map after muling, but permitting it for general use right now sounds like an awful idea. the futureproofing argument doesn't really hold water when we have no indication that a new patch is coming with the potential of breaking everything (an actual HD remaster seems far more likely given recent developments).

Realistically, the only cross-version barrier that's still meaningful is between 1.13d and 1.14d. I've always been in favor of at least relaxing trading restrictions between those.

There's one specific thing I'm an advocate of with regards to mods - I don't think PlugY should be something to chase people off for. We don't have to like it, but PlugY is very widely recommend elsewhere on the internet and it's stubborn to reject people who could be benefiting and contributing.

There's one thing that bothers me about this thread, though:

Not allowing trading effectively kills the pre 1.11 multi-player community which is something that I'm working very hard to build with the Xyinn Network.

I don't really like the implication that you're trying to mold the standards of this community to accommodate yours.

 

[Kitteh1]

Discussion of Mods
Discussion of non-FAM mods should be banned. Moderators (perhaps an area itself that does need addressing - is Noodle currently taking over the SPF role?) can be contacted about mods. If we don't accept the mod here, don't discuss it here.

Adding Item Level and Fingerprint support to Singling
Absolutely for this, unless there is any technical aspect that would work against the forum's rules. I don't know much of the technicalities of programming, so can't really comment. As a concept, good idea.

Allowing trading in all Diablo II versions (Including the previously stopped 1.00-1.11 trading)
I'm not 100% convinced either way on this. I appreciate the lack of safety features against duping, then again, we also use an honour system here already. I'd need some time to form a proper opinion on this one.

Allowing the play of LOD 1.07.41 Beta
Not sure what this is. How different is it from standard 1.07? Do we need it?

Map Seeds
Absolutely not. If you want to keep your map, don't change difficulty. Weigh it up - do you want to keep your perfect Baal map or see if you can get a pair of very good Baal and LK maps? Make your mind up and choose one or the other. Definitely no to sharing map seeds like some sort of SPF off the shelf collection - to me, that is akin to duping. Even if only one copy is allowed at a time, that would still allow people to be swapping their map seeds around at will. So, my view is no.

Enabling ladder-only runewords in 1.10
I'm not sure why this is the case - I'd be interested to hear of it if anybody knows. If there is no technical reason for not allowing, then I'd be happy with this.

HC to SC item transfers should be banned
'-THEY ARE DEAD, AND NOT IN HARDCORE ANYMORE-' is incorrect as previously discussed, it alters the philosophy behind hardcore.

I would actually support not allowing HC to SC transfer. However, the current state of that rule does not justify the moving of dead HC characters to SC - it is not the same thing. You can't transfer dead items from HC to SC, and once you transfer it, it can't come back. When you change a dead HC character to SC, you LOST that item/character, you don't get to have a second go like a 5-year-old who lost to their older sibling. I repeat - if people can't accept losing items or characters, don't play HC. I'm not sure that I appreciate twisting a current rule to justify it.

Maybe allow distribution of Classic/LOD 1.00/1.03/1.07 ISOs [Still requires legal CD KEY from user]?


Allow players within minor versions of a game to play with each other
If there are differences between patches, thus different versions of the game (however small), then they should be separate. There may be specific patches which are entirely B.net related, and I would be open to hearing of those, but otherwise no. 1.13d for example, has changes relating to auras, which I believe is included for SP?

I would be open to examples of patches which have zero effect on the SP game.

Color Rune Mod in older versions than 1.13.
I'm not sure about this - technical stuff again. Is there a technical aspect to doing this which currently conflicts with the SPF rules? Otherwise, I don't see any harm from it.

 

[GalaXyHaXz]

Time traveled items
Problem: One of the biggest controversies lately has centered around various exploits and items possible in older patches. Due to the fact that such a large number of things changed, and people often travel solely to do things no longer possible, it would be unwise to try and make provisions for everything. It is unfair in some manner, however, that people gain the upper hand towards those who do not travel.

Proposed Solution: Requiring a little basic information regarding the "cheesiest" exploits should be declared by players, in both their trader profile and for tournaments. This way, each tourney can clarify its' rules and players may have a clear outline before trading. The current "exploited" items are:
- Moving items directly from 1.00-1.06b to 1.10+, resulting in bugged/impossible stats
- Using beta "Call to Arms" from 1.10s, giving significant advantage in life boost
- Using "Harlequin Crest" or "Arkaine's Valor" from 1.07-1.08, again an unfair life boost
- Using bugged Mana per Kill or Leech items from 1.07, speaks for itself
Any player using any or all of these should declare "Using cheezed items".

Diablo II/Expansion beta
Problem: Awhile back, a beta tester from 2000-2001 shared copies of his beta discs online. The Expansion beta was modified so that it could be playable again, after almost 20 years. However, the current rules do not allow for it to be posted or shared. This shuns a rare piece of gaming history into the shadows, where no one will ever see it again.

Proposed Solution: Although the actual beta ISO rips cannot be posted or shared, the patch files needed to run it may be. A dedicated thread for the history of Diablo II's development and the playable patch may be downloaded. This will allow everyone to experience a rare slice in Diablo's history. Any items or characters within the beta are to remain in the beta alone, separate from the rest of the SPF. Any discussion of the beta remains in the aforementioned thread.

 

[ffs]

@ffs - you only joined last year, you didn’t have to join if you object so much to ATMA bugging.

@maxicek That's an unfortunate response to be honest with you. As apparently mentioned between fearedbliss and Dredd, "Some people may not be speaking out due to peer pressure." - congratulations for illustrating that.

I am just voicing an opinion, and you're implying that I don't have the right to do that just because I joined later.

You're also implying that there is a rule saying "don't join this community unless you agree 100% with what is FAM". Such a rule doesn't exist. You can and rightly should ask for people joining to act within the parameters of the rules here, which is very different. Most people disagree with this or that FAM practice, while adhering to all of them. This is totally fine. Nobody forces anyone to ATMA bug, and honestly: I don't actually even care that much if others do it, it has little effect in practice. I just singled it out as a problem because I think using items that never existed in the game is crossing a decisive line and is inconsistent with the notion of legit play. I also believe that this view is not exactly a minority position. However, responses like yours are unfortunately likely to discourage others from sharing their arguments on topics like that.

 

[maxicek]

@ffs Sorry but we did the whole ATMA bugging debate about ten years ago. What are you proposing, that everyone who made ATMA bugged items in the intervening period should just delete them?

As I have said before, it was not the SPF’s finest hour, but what’s done is done. I’m fed up with constant attempts to re open this topic. Same goes for bring items forward from earlier versions, which was happening before I even joined the SPF.

 

[Kitteh1]

@ffs Sorry but we did the whole ATMA bugging debate about ten years ago. What are you proposing, that everyone who made ATMA bugged items in the intervening period should just delete them?

As I have said before, it was not the SPF’s finest hour, but what’s done is done. I’m fed up with constant attempts to re open this topic. Same goes for bring items forward from earlier versions, which was happening before I even joined the SPF.

I agree that sometimes people can have an attitude of 'I've been here longer, therefore I have some sort of imagined superiority', but I'm not sure that maxicek intended such an attitude, as he/she has never struck me as such before.

Regarding ATMA and time travel etc, I appreciate you bringing that point up because personally, I actually hadn't considered what would happen to those who have such items already. I don't see an issue with people bringing things up, but I do feel like we are going through this stuff on a regular basis and it is beginning to feel a bit like the Scottish referendum.

Personally, I think that we have a good standard here in the SPF and in fact, changing things may just fragment the forum further. Most importantly, I think that people need to remember that even if something (such as time travel etc) is not within your personal preferences, none of us have to interact with each other. Ultimately, I think that our boat isn't perfect, but it keeps us afloat, so lets not start rocking it.

P.S. Apologies for the awful analogy

 

[D2DC]

- Moving items directly from 1.00-1.06b to 1.10+, resulting in bugged/impossible stats
- Using beta "Call to Arms" from 1.10s, giving significant advantage in life boost
- Using "Harlequin Crest" or "Arkaine's Valor" from 1.07-1.08, again an unfair life boost
- Using bugged Mana per Kill or Leech items from 1.07, speaks for itself

I've got a bit of an issue lumping all these time-travel "cheese" together.. For me at least, there are significant differences.

Beta RW, and 1.07-1.08 uniques are items that the game programmers intended to exist. The vast majority of S/U items from those versions are worse than their 1.14 counterparts. The fact that someone decided to re-balance the game, and nerfed certain items in a later patch, (while boosting most others, and making HRs 100x more common..) does not make them any less legit.

With the 1.07 Crafts, and other "bugs" we are entering into a murky area. I'm assuming that they never intended a +30% LL item, but as with every game there are certain in-game tricks that players exploit. Did the programmers intend to let you purchase unlimited Full rejuv pots? I don't know. Did they intend to let you sliver every monster with Static Field, and make CM break immunities? Does that mean buying rejuv pots, or slivering with static needs to be declared as "cheese"? To me, you're playing the game. If you find some tricks that give you an edge, more power to you. 1.09 had the charge "bug", and I have no problem with that either. For those players against this category of "cheese", ask yourself this: Did the programmers intend for HRs to be found so easily in LK? Imagine if 1.15 was released, and the "bugged" mechanics/chests for LK were completely changed. Does that make all the HRs we found in 1.13/1.14 LK now non-legit? As gamers we naturally look for any exploit/bug/trick/whatever you want to call it to gain us an advantage.

I don't know a whole lot about the 1.00 to 1.10+ items, so I won't really comment. But, from what I've read, this should be regarded as it's own category, and not lumped in with other Time Travel "exploits".

 

[maxicek]

I feel like the grumpy old guy sat in the corner of a nice pub quietly enjoying a beer and a chat, when a load of people walk in and start proposing to change it into a wine bar and install a big sound system.

 

[GalaXyHaXz]

@DiabloTwoinDC One could argue alot about the developers intentions. For two years guided arrow and pierce worked together. 1.10 patch notes stated that charges worked with synergies, but then 1.11 said it was actually a bug. 1.10 came out, the rust storm deleted items Blizzard thought were too powerful (08 shako/valor). If they intended CTA or Valor to have OP stats, then they would have kept them that way instead of it being limited to one patch for a brief amount of time.

With that said, I'm not opposed to anything with time traveling. I take advantage of all bugs and items available. But the last debate never reached any conclusion, so my list is based on items that seem to be upsetting people.

You are right though, there is a difference. There are "cheezed items" and there are "bugged items". Neither of which were technically intended.

 

[D2DC]

I agree it's kinda impossible to establish programmers' intentions. As someone said in the other thread, you could argue that everything EXCEPT current patch was not intended. So, basically to stay "clean" you'd be required to do a full restart on every patch. I'm not doing that..

With that said, I'm not opposed to anything with time traveling. I take advantage of all bugs and items available.

I pretty much agree with this as well. How can one take advantage of certain "bugs" while condemning others? It's an all or nothing deal in my book. When the "bug" starts straying outside of the game is where the issues begin for me.