The SPF I know

[espr]

The D2client and D2win in question... the only difference between those and singling(FAM), were:

nocd patch (because modern computers aren't playing nice with ancient DRM), which has since been added to singling.
and a CPU loop bug fix. Which stops D2 from eating up any and all available CPU time on the core on which it launched.

That's it. There is no secret patch that makes exploits happen or anything.

Regarding the beta, the story is thus: Elsewhere on the web someone posted an image of their old D2C and D2X beta discs that they received way back when from Blizzard. A couple people went, "hey, that's kinda neat". One in particular said, "Huh, wonder if I can get this working?", and tried, and did (for D2X, anyway). Someone then asked the mods if sharing this discovery would be permissible; perhaps thinking that this is one of the very few communities still around that cares about this old game, and some might be interested in getting a glimpse at a slice of time in the history of the game that they may have not been able to experience directly. They were told no, and it was dropped.

That this person a) asked permission, and b) was told "no. That's not the sort of thing we (SPF) are about.", should, I think, be an affirmation of the SPF identity, not evidence that it's all gone to the dogs.

 

[ThomasJohnsen]

(From post above - shortened)

The D2client ... to the dogs.

I did not know any of this. Thanks for clarifying.

 

[ioupain]

She hasn't made a post in 19 days. And her last two posts were very sad posts about the state of things as she saw them. How else do you interpret this?

I recall seeing several posts from Thy stating that she doesn't like when people speak for her, e.g.:

...I appreciate you're trying to help but please don't speak for me. I'd rather speak in my own words then if it's misunderstood, it's no one's fault but mine.

She also mentioned that she was dealing with RL and Noodle had stepped in to cover mod duties unofficially. So there are a number of ways to interpret all of this.

--

Back on topic, as we have already touched on, there are several different classes/categories/types/strains of Mod, so it gets very difficult to debate things when 2 very different types of mod are conflated in an argument against 'mods' (comparing apples to oranges = false equivalence). This is further complicated by some mods that have multiple functions.

It might be worth categorising mods, although even that feels like it could have significant overlaps.

 

[Noodle]

To clarify, my thoughts on the whole cracked beta thing was that it was a version of DII that Blizzard very clearly wanted available for a limited period of time, and then to have no longer available. They host other patches on their site, which in my mind makes them fair game.

 

[zoo]

I do use GoMule and RWM. And that might be considered unvanilla by some, I agree. For me however it is not. I use only items that are available in any given version (RWM to emulate ladder additions ofc) and use GoMule for storage. For me, enabling something that is available on ladder is very different from forwarding something found in an old patch.

In my world, using any third party addition to this game will make it "unvanilla". Seriously, isn't the very definition of "vanilla" that something is unaltered? But again, this is in my world of thinking and I don't expect my interpretation of the word to be the same as everyone elses.

 

[maxicek]

In my world, using any third party addition to this game will make it "unvanilla". Seriously, isn't the very definition of "vanilla" that something is unaltered

Vanilla in the context of this forum is not using ladder runewords (or pre-1.13 using the Red Rune Mod)

 

[maxicek]

For most people the rules of the forum were already well established when they joined. The ATMA wars were over before I joined. RWM was also old news.

It used to be the custom here to write an intro thread when you join, with a reasonable amount of detail in it. Normally the first comments would be *kicks shins* and "Read the stickies." When we join the community, we join by its rules, for better or for worse. Those who choose to follow a more restricted approach should not be looking to restrict practices that are already accepted by the rules. Equally you don't join the community and immediately try to push the rules to the limit.

Some History:
There were also accepted mods that people have forgotten about. Nightfish completed many of his guardians with a mod from RTB that limited FE damage in 1.10.

How many people here are currently using macros on their mouse to enter multiple commands in one go? Are you aware it is not accepted and several people restarted as a result?

Jae's Time Travel guide (written at Thy's request) dates from 2008. He certainly was not the first to step into the DeLorean, it was being done for a long time before that. Liquid was PvPing with a Beta Bramble before I even had Enigma.

ATMA bugging dates back to at least 2007.
(https://www.purediablo.com/forums/threads/so-whats-matter-with-my-highland-blade.603518/). I wrote a short history in another post. Maybe not the SPFs finest moment, but remember this was pre-1.13. The IFT still contained comments like "wow nice Oath!" We just didn't have as many people making high end runewords, for me at the time Unsocketing a nice Oath was crazy.

For me the SPF has changed. Interesting to read so many comments about how civil this thread is. I'm going to be deliberately controversial here to make a point - maybe this isn't a good thing. I actually think we were far less tolerant in the past. We cared more about keeping the integrity of the community. The "What you do on your computer" rule was always there but the second part now seems forgotten - "If you do something against our rules, don't tell me about it, don't post your item finds or Guardian write ups. I don't want to know." There are now several posts that mention, directly or indirectly, practices that are against our rules. In the past these would have been swiftly shut down. I see more mentions of the P-word in the last year than I ever have. Even people arguing it should be allowed.

Taint is a concept that has also gone out of fashion. Anyone who has ever traded is tainted by HC->SC transfers and ATMA bugging. There is no way we can put this genie back in to the bottle. PvP and MFOs have included 1.07 items as long as I have been playing. Would I consider changing PvP rules to "only items with stats from 1.10+" if it meant more people would enter? Maybe, but from previous threads I don't think it is this that is holding people back. Similarly I don't see people not entering MFOs because someone may be using a Beta CtA.

Moving Classic items to 1.13 skipping 1.07 is a new one. For me you always had to go Classic -> 1.07 -> 1.10+. I think this is being done more for interest than active use at the moment though, but I think the rule should be tightened.

I also don't agree with exploiting the 1.07 dual wield bug. Alter Ego already locked a thread where this was mentioned, so it clearly was not seen as acceptable then. This isn't an always on bug that is unavoidable, like the Ethereal armour cube bug. You have do things in a certain way to achieve it, this is not the same.

We should also ban chasing chickens to Blood Raven to get Annihilus.

 

[BKC]

We should also ban chasing chickens to Blood Raven to get Annihilus.

This made me lol a lot!

 

[Grape1]

Hey maxicek, nice post and for surely gives some perspective. We have quite a history, which is awesome.

I also don't agree with exploiting the 1.07 dual wield bug. Alter Ego already locked a thread where this was mentioned, so it clearly was not seen as acceptable then. This isn't an always on bug that is unavoidable, like the Ethereal armour cube bug. You have do things in a certain way to achieve it, this is not the same.

How do you know why AE closed that thread? Dual wield bug was just one thing among many others, mentioned briefly, and then there were things that _clearly_ fell to the dark side of things, things that are not accepted. (I'm just typing this from memory, but I've read that topic couple of times). I thought that thread got closed because of those.

It's quite a slippery slope to start restricting people from doing things that happens 100% within the patch, without any mods, outside programs, etc. Diablo 2, every patch, is full of such things that can be exploited such, things that were not meant to be originally. Quite many of these are avoidable by us. Should we try to list such things and start avoiding those? I don't think so.

 

[pharphis]

In 1.07 you can buy full rejuvs, which is another example of an obvious exploited bug that could be completely avoided but has always been allowed as far as I know. It's a lot more obvious of a bug, too, since it is the successor to classic where this was not at all possible, whereas other allowed bugs aren't quite as obviously bugged (crafting set rings with resistance, for example)

 

[GooberGrape1]

So I made a flowchart that may help us navigate these turbulent waters. Obviously I am not a moderator so my word is not law, I am simply offering my own opinions as a potential solution to help unify our little group. Your input is welcome, please let me know what you think.

View attachment 6106

 

[PandadudeSP]

While I like the flowchart, it doesn't include the nuances which we are also debating. ATMA and gomule are allowed as FAM, but you're obviously not allowed to use them to dupe items. These hybrid rares would also be classified as vanilla or FAM by your definition (idk the specific procedure), but I don't think that means they should be allowed.

Edit: Aren't hybrid rares created by exploiting a loophole?

 

[GooberGrape1]

Well to be fair you can also easily dupe with just the base game. Perhaps this could be used more as a way to govern behavior or "fair use" rather than a way to encourage exploitative loopholes. Yes I know that's a slippery slope but it's a start.

 

[ThomasJohnsen]

So I made a flowchart that may help us navigate these turbulent waters. Obviously I am not a moderator so my word is not law, I am simply offering my own opinions as a potential solution to help unify our little group. Your input is welcome, please let me know what you think.

(I get that you posted this to poke fun at me, but I really do think that it deserves a straight answer).

That is exactly the way things are perceived now by SPF. But for me the current amount of playstyles cannot be contained within that simple a framework. From what I've seen in this thread there are dozens of members that play this game in multiple ways. And I think that's what this thread should really be about: trying to establish a framework that will befit all and make room for all. Vanilla simply means "having no special or extra features; ordinary or standard." but that can be understood in very different ways. For me that definition certainly does not include timetravel but for you (and by the forum definition) it just as clearly does. For some (me) a vanilla definition might even include using 3rd party software to provide an ordinary and standard ladder (or as close to it we can get) experience.

I look at this kind of like the card game magic. First edition (alpha) was a lot of fun but way too unbalanced and untested and some of the cards were waaaay too powerful. So cards had to be banned or restricted in order to keep the game playable in tourneyform. More editions followed, but the older cards were still very sought after and rose dramatically in prize; and the tourneys were still won by the ones that had these powerful cards. So slowly a system formed and today magic tournaments (and even most casual games) are divided into groups of available cards from various editions - each group with it's own restrictions and bannings. This ofc mainly to prevent newer players from feeling completely lost and having to spend thousands of dollars to even stand a chance, and to provide an even playingfield where everyone knows what cards are available and what they might encounter. You will also find builders, that love to tinker with all editions and discover fun and entertaining decks that can never go further than the kitchen-table.

If we view diablo the same way (which I think we should) there could be a fairly simple division of players into categories where they would feel comfortable in that the players in that same group had access to the same items, was interested in the same things and they would know where to turn for help/advice/trading etc.

An example of division could be:
* [x.yz] Items and characters from version x.yz and only version x.yz.
* [x.yz+] Items and characters from versions up to and including x.yz.
* [L] Enhanced 3rd party software used to provide ladder experience.
* [M] Enhanced 3rd party software used to provide muling.
... something about HC/SC and more.
... something about code-muddling - experimental mods.
There could be more or less or different categories - this is just a quick example of my thought process.

Then when a player posts say an item in the showoff thread, she would simply preface the post with [1.14 LM] for instance (which would be my playstyle) and we'd all instantly know what kind of background the item has. Or when a tourney is to be started, it would simply say [1.14+ L] and we'd all know which kind of characters, items and software, we could use in said tourney.
That to me would be an easy way to provide space and acceptance of all (within forum accepted standards ofc), and provide an even and level playingfield for tourneys, trading etc. for any player, new or old. And hopefully avoid situations where someone gets offended by how others play the game or muddle with the code.

Again - I'm quite pedantic, I know (slightly autistic). This will never get implemented - just [tl;dr] is fine.

 

[GooberGrape1]

@ThomasJohnsen if you can believe it I did not post that just for you, but to ignite discussion such as your most recent post which was quite good. I believe somewhere in the middle between your multifaceted solution and my binary solution is the actual answer. I do believe that my answer is best otherwise I wouldn't have posted it, but I am not the only representative of such a large and varied group. Hopefully we can avoid too many divisions, as I feel that our little group needs as much unity as possible, but perhaps division is what is needed.

 

[zoo]

Vanilla in the context of this forum is not using ladder runewords (or pre-1.13 using the Red Rune Mod)

I did not know this. To clarify, you mean that using ATMA or GoMule would still be concidered vanilla and it's not until adding RWM or RRM one ventures into FAM territory?

 

[maxicek]

@zoo: Correct, this is the forum definition. Many play an even purer approach (e.g. Untwinked, single pass, no ATMA) etc but they are all subsets of vanilla.

This is really why those of us who have traded have trade profiles. I don't see any real need for numerous sub categories. The onus has always been on the trader to check who they are trading with. You can always say you don't want to trade.

Most MFOs the entrants have to declare their mod status. This has never stopped vanilla players competing against FAM.

If you don't trade or compete in MFOs does it matter? If you want to show us that your method of playing without ATMA, RWM, and blindfolded is superior we have a way to do that. Write a Pat / Mat / Guardian thread. Show us.

There are some practices that are in a grey area, as I have stated above. Grape, Phar & I can disagree about this all we like, we all have our opinions. But we are like football players complaining about an alleged foul - at the end of the day, our opinion is irrelevant, the referee's (or Moderator's) decision is final.

 

[ThomasJohnsen]

This is really why those of us who have traded have trade profiles. I don't see any real need for numerous sub categories. The onus has always been on the trader to check who they are trading with. You can always say you don't want to trade.

Most MFOs the entrants have to declare their mod status. This has never stopped vanilla players competing against FAM.

If you don't trade or compete in MFOs does it matter? If you want to show us that your method of playing without ATMA, RWM, and blindfolded is superior we have a way to do that. Write a Pat / Mat / Guardian thread. Show us.

I don't think it's quite as certain a you put it. While I don't see vanilla/FAM being much of an issue in tourneys, I can most definately see new/"purist" members not entering a tourney/PvP because of the daunting prospect of battling against someone with multiple versions worth of items and many years of experience (be they vanilla or FAM); myself included.

And I have tried to trade. I even once suggested making an SPF ladder with resets to promote trade, because I think trading makes for a much more fun and interactive environment. But the trade scene is pretty dead in SPF and members need a fair amount of pedigree to be considered trustworthy (which I totally get - but it isn't conducive to trading).

My own experience, conduct and sentiments are pretty irrelevant though. What I think we need to do here is to reach a concensus on some sort of moral compass and/or framework about what the SPF means to each of us. I totally get that the end decision lies with the moderator, and I respect that, but I think a guideline formed by members, where all are given a voice regardless of experience and preference, would help form that decision. If I were a mod, I'd surely appreciate feedback from members, before making any form of conclusion; if only to gauge what makes members tick (and this thread is not it as far as I'm concerned - at least not at present; there's just too much noise here and too much to read through).

And reading through this thread, I have seen very few suggestions on how members think we could/should handle the problem that has arisen lately, namely that the ethical standard and general conduct in/of the SPF is on a decline in the eyes of some. The vast majority of SPF members feel that we maintain agreed upon standards at the present, and that there is no need for any kind of action (this is how I read it anyways). So the conclusion I'd draw, if I were mod, is that things should be accepted are as they are.

 

[Grape1]

I don't think it's quite as certain a you put it. While I don't see vanilla/FAM being much of an issue in tourneys, I can most definately see new/"purist" members not entering a tourney/PvP because of the daunting prospect of battling against someone with multiple versions worth of items and many years of experience (be they vanilla or FAM); myself included.

Against people with multiple versions worth of items?

Do you think Gripphon had a huge success in RFO because he used a beta CtA? Or maybe, just maybe he mastered the game play, perfected the map and ran like no tomorrow?

Do you think Fabian was very tough to beat at the MFOs because his Barbarian used a helm from version 1.07 (one extra socket), or just maybe because he mastered the game play, perfected the map and ran like no tomorrow?

These items worth of multiple versions are giving really, really tiny edge in reality. Working towards something for years and getting an 0,01% edge is quite a fair trade. I hope this is understood! I've never felt that daunting prospect, even when being more of a MFO rookie myself with a very moderate AT Sorc. Those people with crazy equipment felt very inspiring to me!

Perhpaps there might be room for untwinked MF tournaments? Could be fun! @T72on1 hosted a TC3 finding tournament which was a huge success. Everyone had 20 hours worth of items under their belt then. Something similar for higher levels could work, but it's hard to see people crippling themselves for regular MFOs when the characters they join with have been honed for years.

I'm willing to run with normal base Insight/Infinity instead of a 1.07 base if that's what it is needed to you to join the next MFO (I think the only time travel items I've used regularly in MFOs) Ofc everyone wants as much players as possible, I'm just trying to give a hint that these items we talk about don't make or brake a MF tourney character.

And try to think these tourneys more of an opportunity collect some new shinies to yourself and admire what others found. There's no need to feel daunted in any case

 

[GooberGrape1]

That's a good point @Grape I was able to compete rather fairly in an RFO despite using dual Oaths while my competitors had Griefs and Enigmas. Sure I didn't win but I think I was top ten if my memory serves.