AV preamdes and the Blizzard End User License Agreement

Ok so to summarize your opinion.

You do agree that it’s cheating according to the rules but it’s ok becasue Blizzard havn’t banned anyone yet.

You also agree that it gives an unfair advantage but that’s ok because Alliance are so bad that they would never win Alterac Valley on equal terms.

You don’t have any ideas or suggestions because you want people to continue to exploit (according to the eula - your words) because you want Alliance to win.

Is this a correct summarize or do you wish to change anything?

I said its an exploit according to eula. Its not as far as ik cheating, that is for blizzard to decide. It gives an unfair advantage in that it lets people with likeminded mentality to play together (play to win) i dont think alliance casuals/rep farmers are any worse than horde casuals/ rep farmers. Its just that horde casuals/ rep farmers will always have way more rankers carrying them, and are incentivized to prolong the game, while alliance is incentivized to make the game as short as possible. All these facts combined imo put alliance pugs at a far greater disadvantage vs horde pugs than horde pugs vs alliance premades. Therefor i think alliance premading serves as a good way to balance things

Oh wow, so you do actually agree except about the cheat word. This is the word used in the EUAL so it’s not a matter of opinion.

The eula is vague on purpose and is for the most part completly irrelevent.

Actually, technically speaking, Blizzard doesn’t acknowledge it’s a thing that’s happening. They did say it’s against the intended game design when they disabled the addons for it in the API back in MoP (when they shut down oQueue and AVPreform Enabler), but ever since then they haven’t even acknowledged it has been happening. Because it wasn’t happening in the NA, only in the EU split of language’d pools using the same trickery as you’ve been doing (not always, but it was happening quite a lot. Much less now though.).

So they ignored it. For all these years. Until now when NA started complaining about it (first time NA has even noticed it since the addons were used for it in MoP), and Blizzard started moving again.

And the MOST they said about it was that unspecific corporate lingo used in the blue post with those “adjustments incoming”.

So yeah, technically speaking, according to Blizzard it is not a thing that is actually happening. You are not premading. You are not bypassing the limit. According to Blizzard, that is. So why should they ban for something they don’t even acknowledge is happening?

Saving that also.

But thank you for sharing your feelings.

Could you stop editing my posts? Its disingenous to paraphrase

I used the triple dots. You use them to show that you can cut out a part of a quote that is not relevant for the meaning. The source link is in the quote.

Except it is relevent.

Answer this as well please. The context behind all this has quite a long history, actually. It even goes back all the way to Burning Crusade, when they made direct changes in a patch to the AV numbers and linked the threat of all marshals/warmasters to each faction’s “boss” in AV.

Ok well anyone can click the source link and see what the the dots say.

I would like to add, the EULA is not unclear for what we are discussing and that’s why I cut it out with the quote dots. Even you agree on that.

Its vague because its not possible to have an exhaustive list of what is ok and what isnt, they just have a definition that can arguably be applied to just about anything in the game.

An easier way to put it, is that contracts are normally written to benefit the one who wrote it. The same can be said for any game company’s rules, they’re always written to benefit the ones who wrote them (in this case, Activision Blizzard).

Or in this case, when it benefit you.

Or benefit anyone, which is why im arguing its irrelevent and cant be used as a tool to prove anything

Actually it does fall under the definition of the rules, as you’ve stated yourself, it’s just that Blizzard have chosen not to enforce the rule. For all these years.

As stated earlier, which I’m still waiting to see if you’ve got any feedback for it.

When something literally is against the EULA, it’s not irrelevant…

Here is an challenge for you. Name something else that is specifically against the EULA that is still allowed to do.

I know one very good example, can you come up with one?

Lmao, this is entertaining.

He’s fine with premades in AV as he’s one of the premaders.
On another note, the guy is just trolling you mostly.

Blizzard is either lazy or incompetent or both

1 Like

Yeah, that’s definitely true… They’re certainly not driven by passion or aiming for customer satisfaction anymore, that part should be painfully clear to everyone by now.

They just seem to be following an endemic change in the corporate structure to get away with as much as possible while still earning a profit.