wow-classic Classic Hardcore Primer

[Staff 1,402]

Classic Hardcore realms are launching on August 24. Find out more about the Rules of Engagement and how to start playing, in Blizzard's official primer.

We have a Hardcore guides section available on the site that you will find here.

(Source)

Whether new to World of Warcraft or returning to Azeroth, we'll get you ready to take on the challenges ahead with our quick setup guide—but once you’re in there, surviving all depends on you. You’ll face Azeroth's dangers, denizens, and fellow players to see how far you can get on WoW Classic’s new Hardcore realms opening on August 24.

To get a leg up on staying in the realm of the living, you'll want to read through the Rules of Engagement, but the gist of it is that once you've been bested by the environment (or even other players), you'll need to create a new character to try again. Death is permanent, and when you die, the Spirit Healers won't be there to send you back into the world of the living. No rezzes, no regrets.

When you're on the Classic Hardcore realms, you’ll get to prove that you have the edge, the grit, and the will to survive, but first, you’ll need the technical details to get you started.

Getting Into Hardcore

If living life on the edge is for you, first, you'll need to do the following:

• Make sure your graphics drivers are up to date.
• Run the Battle.net desktop app—it may need to update itself if you haven't run it recently. First-time adventurers or those looking for a fresh start will need to create a new Battle.net account.
• Once Battle.net is installed and updated, select World of Warcraft from the list of games.
• Access to WoW Classic Hardcore is included and available to all players with an active World of Warcraft subscription—no additional purchase is required. You can subscribe by visiting the Battle.net Shop.
• In the Game Version drop-down menu above the Play button, choose the World of Warcraft Classic option, then click Install.
• Allow the installation to complete, click Play, and select from the available realms listed in the Hardcore tab.
• Create a new character.
• Enter the game and do your best to live.

Access to the WoW Classic Hardcore realms is available to all players with an active World of Warcraft subscription—no additional purchase is required. For the current system requirements for PC and Mac, visit our support page.

---

We look forward to seeing the defenders of Azeroth survive everything the Hardcore Classic realms have in store for them.

Lok’tar ogar!

[Cham79 76]

Classicbots, roll out! 🤖

[TheRagingwolf 202]

7 hours ago, Cham79 said:

Classicbots, roll out! 🤖

Ah, yes, the trolls are out early.

Seriously, I'm looking forward to hardcore as nice alternative to the usual grind. This should be a lot of fun for those seeking a unique challenge.

[Cham79 76]

10 hours ago, TheRagingwolf said:

Ah, yes, the trolls are out early.

Seriously, I'm looking forward to hardcore as nice alternative to the usual grind. This should be a lot of fun for those seeking a unique challenge.

Just out of curiosity, when classic was released 4 years ago and in the last month Blizzard have allegedly banned 120k bots (which they posted on a classic forum), how will botting not be a talking point or problem in hardcore? 

Blizzard have said that griefing is instantly bannable. So how does this affect griefing a bot? 

Is there anything they've said they'll change to stop botting?

Why change anything now and not 4 years ago?

Why is SSF HC not an option for people that don't want to be associated with AH/gear/gold trading bots?

What's the point in hardcore if bots control the economy? Doesn't it remove any achievement from genuine players as there's no way to differentiate them from people who have bought from bots?

 

 

[TheRagingwolf 202]

12 hours ago, Cham79 said:

how will botting not be a talking point or problem in hardcore?

I never said it would not be. That said, I have played classic for about 2 years and have had no issues with bots.

Quote

Blizzard have said that griefing is instantly bannable. So how does this affect griefing a bot?

I mean, the purpose of a bot is generally for farming so, unless bots are somehow able to respond "yes" to pvp requests, I don't see how you can reasonably affect them.

Quote

Is there anything they've said they'll change to stop botting?

Again, my personal experience has been positive in terms of bots so, I don't see the issue. However, I don't imagine announcing measures to be taken to cut down on botting would be made public. That would just give botters a leg up on defeating those measures quicker.

Quote

Why change anything now and not 4 years ago?

Not sure this question makes sense. Everything is in a constant state of evolution and change is inevitable. There are any number of reasons for changes made 4 years later instead of at launch. My best guess would be, it wasn't the issue at launch that many may think, so there was no reason to make any changes. Additionally, none of us know what is going on behind the scenes in terms of detection/prevention so who are any of us to say nothing has changed?

Quote

Why is SSF HC not an option for people that don't want to be associated with AH/gear/gold trading bots?

How would I know that? I don't work for Blizzard and am not privy to their decision-making process.

Quote

What's the point in hardcore if bots control the economy?

Hardcore isn't about the economy, it's about survival. I have played retail since BC and the last time I bothered seriously with the AH was during WotLK. So, the "economy" is only important if you want it to be. The game doesn't revolve around the AH and any good guild will have professions covered for necessities, making the AH pointless.

Quote

Doesn't it remove any achievement from genuine players as there's no way to differentiate them from people who have bought from bots?

Not sure I understand this question. Are you speaking again of the AH but including bots in the equation? If that is the case, my previous statement regarding the economy still holds.

What is interesting here, is Blizz eliminated or suspended 177,000 accounts that were proven to be botters or cheaters in some capacity. Yet, you seem overly concerned about the presence of bots. It seems this was a deliberate action by Blizzard to do a massive sweep and eliminate those accounts that were real problems while putting less severe cases on notice that they are being watched. Out of all the active accounts in the game, 177,000 is a small number and is some proof that botting is not nearly as lucrative or widespread as many believe.

[Cham79 76]

8 hours ago, TheRagingwolf said:

 

Quote

What is interesting here, is Blizz eliminated or suspended 177,000 accounts that were proven to be botters or cheaters in some capacity. Yet, you seem overly concerned about the presence of bots. It seems this was a deliberate action by Blizzard to do a massive sweep and eliminate those accounts that were real problems while putting less severe cases on notice that they are being watched. Out of all the active accounts in the game, 177,000 is a small number and is some proof that botting is not nearly as lucrative or widespread as many believe.

 

1. I wont argue your previous points as I don't find your personal experience constructive to the discussion when there's countless forums, interviews, posts, youtube videos..e.t.c. about how bots are out of hand dating before, on and after the release of classic WoW. I feel you're being disingenuous and/or lacking knowledge of how botting works.
2. I simply don't believe that Blizzard 'eliminated or suspended 177,000 accounts that were proven to be botters or cheaters' A blue post saying this is not fact. Giving us a stat with nothing to back it up is the business's problem, not the consumer's i.e., it is not the consumers job to find a way to portray how bots are banned without exposing the alleged system that actions this.

I'll include references as to not make myself out to be a hypocrite. (References in green)

'Blizzard has banned 74,000 World of Warcraft classic botters', - Eurogamer 18 June 2020. Also posted by PC Gamer, Blizzard Watch and The Gamer around the same time. 

This number has allegedly more than doubled in 3 years.

2023 (Daily players)

648.7k - MMO Stats
547.96K - esports
528.8k - MMO Populations

I will concede that daily players are not monthly players, but I will also say that the number of monthly players is not too much higher when you take into account the fact that WoTLK has passed it's peak. and most players in classic will log in for most of the month.

When Blizzard makes a statement saying that '177,000 accounts were proven to be botters or cheaters' in a classic forum, and estimates of player count for 2023 averages at around 570k a day, then yes, yes I am 'overly concerned'.

 

 

 

[TheRagingwolf 202]

10 hours ago, Cham79 said:

1. I wont argue your previous points as I don't find your personal experience constructive to the discussion when there's countless forums, interviews, posts, youtube videos..e.t.c. about how bots are out of hand dating before, on and after the release of classic WoW. I feel you're being disingenuous and/or lacking knowledge of how botting works.
2. I simply don't believe that Blizzard 'eliminated or suspended 177,000 accounts that were proven to be botters or cheaters' A blue post saying this is not fact. Giving us a stat with nothing to back it up is the business's problem, not the consumer's i.e., it is not the consumers job to find a way to portray how bots are banned without exposing the alleged system that actions this.

I'll include references as to not make myself out to be a hypocrite. (References in green)

'Blizzard has banned 74,000 World of Warcraft classic botters', - Eurogamer 18 June 2020. Also posted by PC Gamer, Blizzard Watch and The Gamer around the same time. 

This number has allegedly more than doubled in 3 years.

2023 (Daily players)

648.7k - MMO Stats
547.96K - esports
528.8k - MMO Populations

I will concede that daily players are not monthly players, but I will also say that the number of monthly players is not too much higher when you take into account the fact that WoTLK has passed it's peak. and most players in classic will log in for most of the month.

Okay, your entire argument is built around "references" with no links. Worse, a June 2020 article regarding bots doesn't do much for the discussion of today. If you're argument is that botting has become worse, then we need verified sub stats from Blizzard for both, June 2020 and now to make a correct comparision of growth. The issue with the larger bot numbers is likely tied to an increase in player/accounts numbers overall though, as more players/accounts means more opportunities for those players/accounts to be botters/cheaters.

As for stats derived from any of the sites you listed, those are estimations based on mostly social media data. They are in now meant to be accurate representations of true numbers and so, for the purposes factual discussion, really do not help either of us. Below is a screenshot from MMO Stats:

Below this is a screenshot of the about page for MMO Populations:

The above description completely invalidates any data from MMO Populations, especially with the statement "Of course the data is not extremely accurate, or in many cases, accurate at all." But to ice the cake, that statement is followed with "There is no way of really getting MMO subscriber numbers today." So, none of those stats sites offer anything near legitimate, they are more for fun.

Now, I don't doubt that bots can cause issues with a game overall, but WoW and WoW Classic have sustained through many "bot purges" over the years and continue to move forward. Given that neither I nor any of my WoW/Classic friends run into issues with bots, and that we all make purchases on the AH regularly, I truly fail to see that there is a "big" issue with this aside from affecting people that play the AH as it's own side-game.

 

Quote

When Blizzard makes a statement saying that '177,000 accounts were proven to be botters or cheaters' in a classic forum, and estimates of player count for 2023 averages at around 570k a day, then yes, yes I am 'overly concerned'.

The issue is, your concern is not based on fact but on, as you put it yourself, estimations. Worse, those estimations have no basis in fact, they are built around numbers not related to WoW subs (active or dormant). Only Blizzard has the real information and anything not directly from them is laughable at best, and certainly not worthy of building an argument or case for change around.

[Cham79 76]

57 minutes ago, TheRagingwolf said:

Okay, your entire argument is built around "references" with no links. Worse, a June 2020 article regarding bots doesn't do much for the discussion of today. If you're argument is that botting has become worse, then we need verified sub stats from Blizzard for both, June 2020 and now to make a correct comparision of growth. The issue with the larger bot numbers is likely tied to an increase in player/accounts numbers overall though, as more players/accounts means more opportunities for those players/accounts to be botters/cheaters.

As for stats derived from any of the sites you listed, those are estimations based on mostly social media data. They are in now meant to be accurate representations of true numbers and so, for the purposes factual discussion, really do not help either of us. Below is a screenshot from MMO Stats:

Below this is a screenshot of the about page for MMO Populations:

The above description completely invalidates any data from MMO Populations, especially with the statement "Of course the data is not extremely accurate, or in many cases, accurate at all." But to ice the cake, that statement is followed with "There is no way of really getting MMO subscriber numbers today." So, none of those stats sites offer anything near legitimate, they are more for fun.

Now, I don't doubt that bots can cause issues with a game overall, but WoW and WoW Classic have sustained through many "bot purges" over the years and continue to move forward. Given that neither I nor any of my WoW/Classic friends run into issues with bots, and that we all make purchases on the AH regularly, I truly fail to see that there is a "big" issue with this aside from affecting people that play the AH as it's own side-game.

 

The issue is, your concern is not based on fact but on, as you put it yourself, estimations. Worse, those estimations have no basis in fact, they are built around numbers not related to WoW subs (active or dormant). Only Blizzard has the real information and anything not directly from them is laughable at best, and certainly not worthy of building an argument or case for change around.

Yes, I did not use links; as one can type the numbers into google and add 'wow' and my references will be shown. These figures regarding bot bans also didn't originate from an 'article', they originated from a blue post. These are perfectly valid to show the increase in bots from 2020 and 2023 as it comes from Blizzard directly, true or not.

You state that the figures of bots growing from 2020 to 2023 are representative of the player base growing.

-'increase in player/accounts numbers overall'

Quite hypocritical to state this when you're entire argument is based around not being able to prove a player count.

The references I used:

https://www.eurogamer.net/blizzard-bans-74-000-world-of-warcraft-classic-botters

https://www.pcgamer.com/blizzard-has-banned-over-74000-world-of-warcraft-classic-accounts/

https://www.rockpapershotgun.com/world-of-warcraft-classic-just-booted-over-74000-bot-accounts

https://www.mmorpg.com/news/blizzard-suspends-over-74000-wow-accounts-2000118514

https://blizzardwatch.com/2020/06/22/blizzard-bans-74000-accounts-botting-wow-classic/

Forum with Blue Post:

https://us.forums.blizzard.com/en/wow/t/actions-taken-to-address-exploitative-gameplay/558339

Everyone is aware player numbers are never accurate as Blizzard does not share the player count. I used these references because they are still more accurate than you and I could be and anything close to these figures means that an alarming percentage (provided by Blizzard '177k' statement) are bots.

 

 

 

[TheRagingwolf 202]

21 minutes ago, Cham79 said:

Yes, I did not use links; as one can type the numbers into google and add 'wow' and my references will be shown.

As any first year undergrad student will tell you, use of references requires the user to give the exact source of the reference. It's not the job of the reader to find your references in the wild, regardless of how easy it may be to locate said reference data.

 

Quote

These figures regarding bot bans also didn't originate from an 'article', they originated from a blue post

So, a link to that blue post should have been used instead of the title of a PC Gamer article referencing said blue post.

 

Quote

These are perfectly valid to show the increase in bots from 2020 and 2023 as it comes from Blizzard directly, true or not.

The bot numbers are not what I am concerned about in terms of this discussion, it is the player/account numbers and referencing sites that admit their data is completely useless that is the problem. If we are to compare bot numbers from one period to another then in order to understand any change in those numbers, we must also have valid figures regarding active accounts/players. Sure, bots have increased, I have not argued that, but the question I posed with my statements (not directly of course) was "is it because of the increase in accounts, which would mean more opportunity for botters".

Quote

The issue with the larger bot numbers is likely tied to an increase in player/accounts numbers overall though, as more players/accounts means more opportunities for those players/accounts to be botters/cheater

To which you call me a hypcrite:

Quote

You state that the figures of bots growing from 2020 to 2023 are representative of the player base growing.

-'increase in player/accounts numbers overall'

Quite hypocritical to state this when you're entire argument is based around not being able to prove a player count.

There is nothing hypocritical about my statement. It simply posits the most likely scenario for the why regarding an increase in bot activity. Based on the actual, verifiable facts available, Blizzard is continuing to address bots/cheaters and not a single realm has gone down due bots/cheaters nor have any realm economies suffered irreparable harm from them.

So, again, I do not see the overarching theme of "bots are getting worse and making the game worse", because it just isn't true. There are more bots now than 2020 but that is not necessarily correlated to simply that there are more bot accounts. Any rational, likely scenario will show the bot increase is due to an overall active account increase which, again, simply means more people are playing so, statistically, there will be more bots.

I'm sure you will find a way to misrepresent something in this post to try and "win" whatever it is you are trying to "win", but I'm over it at this point. None of your sources lend credence to the assertion that bots are making things worse in the game or are the menace you claim they are. It is simply not true and is just a hot-button issue to hate on the game.

[SpilledStars 60]

re "bots" (and yeah, I'm using air quotes) it isn't the herb that's gonna kill them, it's the murlocs surrounding it.

IMO at truly enforced hardcore, caring real players will survive better than a programmed construct, and that's that.

Asking instead "how shall I make enough gold to buy frost nova when I start with copper" will be the far earlier question.

[Cham79 76]

7 hours ago, TheRagingwolf said:

As any first year undergrad student will tell you, use of references requires the user to give the exact source of the reference. It's not the job of the reader to find your references in the wild, regardless of how easy it may be to locate said reference data.

 

So, a link to that blue post should have been used instead of the title of a PC Gamer article referencing said blue post.

 

The bot numbers are not what I am concerned about in terms of this discussion, it is the player/account numbers and referencing sites that admit their data is completely useless that is the problem. If we are to compare bot numbers from one period to another then in order to understand any change in those numbers, we must also have valid figures regarding active accounts/players. Sure, bots have increased, I have not argued that, but the question I posed with my statements (not directly of course) was "is it because of the increase in accounts, which would mean more opportunity for botters".

To which you call me a hypcrite:

There is nothing hypocritical about my statement. It simply posits the most likely scenario for the why regarding an increase in bot activity. Based on the actual, verifiable facts available, Blizzard is continuing to address bots/cheaters and not a single realm has gone down due bots/cheaters nor have any realm economies suffered irreparable harm from them.

So, again, I do not see the overarching theme of "bots are getting worse and making the game worse", because it just isn't true. There are more bots now than 2020 but that is not necessarily correlated to simply that there are more bot accounts. Any rational, likely scenario will show the bot increase is due to an overall active account increase which, again, simply means more people are playing so, statistically, there will be more bots.

I'm sure you will find a way to misrepresent something in this post to try and "win" whatever it is you are trying to "win", but I'm over it at this point. None of your sources lend credence to the assertion that bots are making things worse in the game or are the menace you claim they are. It is simply not true and is just a hot-button issue to hate on the game.

I think this is a good point to end the discussion. Your main argument is that the increase of bots is not a problem likely due to an increase of player base when you've stated that there no way to tell what the player count is, which was my reason of calling your argument hypocritical.

If you don't believe an increase of around 120% of bots allegedly being banned to be a problem because you believe the player count to have likely increased by 120% or more then that's fine, but according to your own logic use of the word 'likely' is not accurate.

Edited August 11, 2023 by Cham79

[TheRagingwolf 202]

8 minutes ago, Cham79 said:

I think this is a good point to end the discussion. Your main argument is that the increase of bots is not a problem likely due to an increase of player base when you've stated that there no way to tell what the player count is, which was my reason of calling your argument hypocritical.

If you don't believe an increase of around 120% of bots allegedly being banned to be a problem because you believe the player count to have likely increased by 120% or more then that's fine, but according to your own logic use of the word 'likely' is not accurate.

Okay, this is my absolute last post on this matter because I can see you don't understand what I am saying.

I do not "believe" that I am right or you are wrong, period. What I believe, is that growth begets growth. In other words, in any other situation, whether it be an economy, a business, or an entire nation, the more something grows, the more the things which are a part of it grow. So, it is plausible, likely, possible, logical that any increase in player base will result in an increase in bot count. Making this statement is not me saying it is fact, as the words "plausible, likely, possible, logical" indicate, and you seem to look past the meaning of those words and just pretend I am attempting to make these as statements of fact.

The difference here between you and I is that I am hypothesizing a situation while you are using flat-out fictitious numbers (those of accounts, not bots since we know Blizzard is reporting those) and saying they are fact. Hysterically, the very sources of those numbers outright admit their numbers are completely unreliable and are based no facts regarding player numbers but on 100% guesses.

When it comes to a hypothesis, there is at least some basis in historical fact to support the idea. However, your assertions (bots are so rampant and bad that the game is out of control with them) have nothing to support them aside from your own opinion, which is based on your own experience. That is interesting because you have blasted me for stating my own experience of no bots as being hypocritical. See, you talk in circles but never make a point.

I have proven the little bit of data you have presented to be complete rubbish, I have been quite open in that my statements are merely thoughts on why bots seem to be growing at an oddly fast rate, and I have given plenty of opportunity for you to present something sound to support your statements that bots are a huge problem. You simply have not delivered anything but your own opinion on the matte because, let's be honest, just linking to posts about bot ban numbers doesn't mean there is a massive problem that is damaging the game in any way, you just want it to be such so you can be upset.

[SpilledStars 60]

On 8/11/2023 at 12:35 AM, TheRagingwolf said:

Okay, this is my absolute last post on this matter because I can see you don't understand what I am saying.

. . .

What I believe, is that growth begets growth.

but also
 

Quote

Life begets life. Energy creates energy. It is by spending oneself that one becomes rich.  -- Sarah Bernhardt. 

I understand that your argumentation style has churned into "logic is more important than emotion, thereby my logically framed argument is more valid" which denies the underlying fact that a game like ours thrives based on how many people get emotional about it.  Including you, or the discussion wouldn't have even gone this long.

We can wave around verifiable evidence that we've taken statistics classes all week and have a side argument that the word "proof" means "test your stated theory" all year, and it will not change that the game is here, and so is the economy that lives in it.

 

The type of soul who is fascinated with Hardcore play is not really a good customer for what the bots are selling.  

That people are people and there's maybe someone somehow who would be bad at this but wants to be "a whale" to join in that commerce, I look forward to not seeing around.  Although I'll confess if Blizzard sold boosts to level 25 on hardcore then I wager they'd make some money hand over fist and get a lot of gamers in gamer forums yelling at them to identify "pristine non cheater servers" please else and there is a nigh 100% certainty that someone will attempt to "fully automate" something in it endif.

Thank you for coming to my TEDx talk on wargaming players in ever more challenging MMOs.   I can be found in "hardware as an extra challenge" mode on my laptop with trackpad.  See you out there in a land where travel means "run there yourself." 

Edited August 25, 2023 by SpilledStars
Somehow my text came in blue. I am not a blue poster.

[TheRagingwolf 202]

28 minutes ago, SpilledStars said:

but also
 

I understand that your argumentation style has churned into "logic is more important than emotion, thereby my logically framed argument is more valid" which denies the underlying fact that a game like ours thrives based on how many people get emotional about it.  Including you, or the discussion wouldn't have even gone this long.

We can wave around verifiable evidence that we've taken statistics classes all week and have a side argument that the word "proof" means "test your stated theory" all year, and it will not change that the game is here, and so is the economy that lives in it.

 

The type of soul who is fascinated with Hardcore play is not really a good customer for what the bots are selling.  

That people are people and there's maybe someone somehow who would be bad at this but wants to be "a whale" to join in that commerce, I look forward to not seeing around.  Although I'll confess if Blizzard sold boosts to level 25 on hardcore then I wager they'd make some money hand over fist and get a lot of gamers in gamer forums yelling at them to identify "pristine non cheater servers" please else and there is a nigh 100% certainty that someone will attempt to "fully automate" something in it endif.

Thank you for coming to my TEDx talk on wargaming players in ever more challenging MMOs.   I can be found in "hardware as an extra challenge" mode on my laptop with trackpad.  See you out there in a land where travel means "run there yourself." 

WTF are you talking about?

 

[SpilledStars 60]

11 minutes ago, TheRagingwolf said:

WTF are you talking about?

You seem to be pushing very heavily, via walls of grand text, that your position and the other soul's position, are opposites.  That not only isn't true, both your points and his are gonna be an aspect of exactly the same game economy we go into there to play in.

You began with assuming he was trolling, and nobody can seriously accept walls of text as a convincing argument that bots will not exist.  The percentage chance that zero players will attempt to automate any of this is zero.   One might ask about the grey line between one person's tweaks and mass replication of it, but you didn't DO that.

You would have gotten more traction by working in smaller chunks.  "The numbers don't fly" ok, you don't like the sources.  Given limits on PUBLIC sources, why did you want precise numbers anyway?  Statistics works best in conferring orders of magnitude, or comparisons.  Are bot percentages rising or falling is a fascinating question but that particular baby got thrown out with the bath during this discussion.

For that matter "transform and roll out" is such an ancient phrase, a cartoony call to action for people old enough to have enjoyed Autobots as cartoons instead of movies, it could simply have been an identifier of how many people (by vintage, not numbers) are about to joyously dive into the new servers.  He need not have been trolling at all.   You assumed that.

And making such assumptions is an emotional point, not a statistical one.

 

[TheRagingwolf 202]

4 hours ago, SpilledStars said:

You seem to be pushing very heavily, via walls of grand text, that your position and the other soul's position, are opposites.  That not only isn't true, both your points and his are gonna be an aspect of exactly the same game economy we go into there to play in.

You began with assuming he was trolling, and nobody can seriously accept walls of text as a convincing argument that bots will not exist.  The percentage chance that zero players will attempt to automate any of this is zero.   One might ask about the grey line between one person's tweaks and mass replication of it, but you didn't DO that.

You would have gotten more traction by working in smaller chunks.  "The numbers don't fly" ok, you don't like the sources.  Given limits on PUBLIC sources, why did you want precise numbers anyway?  Statistics works best in conferring orders of magnitude, or comparisons.  Are bot percentages rising or falling is a fascinating question but that particular baby got thrown out with the bath during this discussion.

For that matter "transform and roll out" is such an ancient phrase, a cartoony call to action for people old enough to have enjoyed Autobots as cartoons instead of movies, it could simply have been an identifier of how many people (by vintage, not numbers) are about to joyously dive into the new servers.  He need not have been trolling at all.   You assumed that.

And making such assumptions is an emotional point, not a statistical one.

 

The irony here is astonishing. All I say to your "wall of text" is that I made my point, being that the other side was basing their argument off completely made up numbers (aside from the Blizzard supplied figures). Using fictitious data is a dead stop, period.

The rest of what you have to say is just overly grandiose textual posturing for show, and none addresses any of the arguments myself and Cham79 were having.

[SpilledStars 60]

On 8/25/2023 at 4:12 PM, TheRagingwolf said:

The rest of what you have to say is just overly grandiose textual posturing for show

I don't think your data looks any more valid than his for any recognizable, verifiable measure for what percent of the player pie are "players" in air quotes because they're bots.   A number which is identifiable in the format of reduction of accounts (we have numbers from an appropriate source) but .... is it a significant slice?

It isn't even clear whether you lump ordinary players who like to farm the nodes, in with bots because they're doing repetitive work instead of playing the game your way.

"artisanal nut spread on brioche" is still a peanut butter sandwich.   An hypothesis is useful if you have a way to test it.  We do not.

Edited September 2, 2023 by SpilledStars

[TheRagingwolf 202]

12 minutes ago, SpilledStars said:

I don't think your data looks any more valid than his for any recognizable, verifiable measure for what percent of the player pie are "players" in air quotes because they're bots.   A number which is identifiable in the format of reduction of accounts (we have numbers from an appropriate source) but .... is it a significant slice?

It isn't even clear whether you lump ordinary players who like to farm the nodes, in with bots because they're doing repetitive work instead of playing the game your way.

"artisanal nut spread on brioche" is still a peanut butter sandwich.   An hypothesis is useful if you have a way to test it.  We do not.

You are making zero sense.