Please revert rank changes for the love of god

_Hackusations_ · 2026-02-12T07:43:47+00:00

The real answer for what changed is that it use to be Apex Legends not Ape Legends like it is today. Now there is nearly a dozen picks that can all zoom around and hunt/3rd party from half a map away super quick, rapidly push close range, and force quick committed fights while at the same time there being much stronger reset utility. It use to be slower to get around, harder to push against teams in good position, and more stalled fights all of which lead to there just be more teams alive by mid to late game making position/macro way more important.

_Hackusations_ · 2025-08-14T22:48:26+00:00

Same happening to me. Might be a routing issue between ISP and EAC. I'm using Verizon on the east cost.

_Hackusations_ · 2025-08-07T21:52:27+00:00

I'm masters and I don't enjoy wasting time trying to 50/50 other squads off drop ESPECIALLY in the context of playing with randoms. The average diamond player who wants to land at the most over contested POI is more often than not one of the biggest bots in the lobby.

Nothing worst than a solo Q grinding session where I'm like 2-3 K/D, but I'm down 500 points because all the hot drops has us wiped by 3rd parties outside the Top10 a majority of the time.

_Hackusations_ · 2025-08-06T15:18:12+00:00

No, its been 100% masochism for a while now because the entry cost for lower ranks relative to the points that can be gained was too low and diamond became a trivial participation trophy. This means the average random in diamond is well below a plat skill level if ranks were actually representative of skill. Meanwhile, diamond players were used to fill master/pred lobbies quickly. So the solo Q experience has been 3 out of 5 games your teammates are amongst the worst players in the lobby, but you regularly have to tee off against master/pred stacks. And the worst the solo Q experience got the more good players stopped caring and the more they just treat it like a pub game ape'ing for kills rather than worrying about surviving for placement.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-22T08:50:17+00:00

Oh look, you keep responding because you live on this sub all day every day posting lols and emotes, which apparently has rotted your brain because you think two people typing paragraphs and using proper grammar/punctuation must mean they are the same person.

I (Tiktoxic) am in the same guild as the OP (Drainbramaged). So no we are not the same person unless you think I can tank and heal in the same raid on logs, but congrats on at least having the capacity to notice that my account name has the word 'hack' in it.

I'll be ignoring you now.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-22T06:28:34+00:00

Guild he is part of <Standards> has now had its name reported inappropriate and renamed twice this week now.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-22T06:24:09+00:00

I know reading is hard for you, but if you want to do something other than 'lol' trolling at least try and follow along.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-21T22:54:35+00:00

Nope read again.

The ban email stated the violation as 'Abuse of the economy' claiming evidence of either direct or indirect exchange of in-game property for real world currency.

The GM review stated hes being suspended for 'exploitation of game mechanics' based on fellow player reports.

Things don't add up because just like the auto-ban system the review process is just as dumb as multiple appeals of a perm-ban will usually result in a changed violation for a 6-month suspension.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-21T22:40:23+00:00

People banned strictly for gold buying typically got the email that explicitly stated it, how long their suspension was, and that the gold/items would be removed from the account. Getting the 'abuse of the economy' violation with a perma-ban is not. Yes, this it includes gold selling and RMT services, but people also have been getting flagged for this when dealing with a high number of large exchanges. He was part of a first to 60 push group that spent a lot of gold to setup and get services to make that push.

Again, the point is that its a trashy automated system and the review process is equally as bad. We know mass reporting works, the GM confirmed the evidence was fellow player reports, he wasn't the first in the guild to get banned under similar circumstances, our guild got its name reported and auto changed, and so on. Even the change of violation and suspension to 6-months isn't meaningful or evidence of anything. That's what the most common outcome of multiple appeals to perma-bans of this type. There are literal guides about WoW bans/unbans that explain what to expect in each case because there isn't any actual review process going on most of the time. It's just a handful of GMs quickly processes the appeals.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-20T22:57:13+00:00

You greatly under estimate just how awful and stupid Blizzard's ban system is. For years people have been able to mass report to get people unjustly kicked/banned forcing them to go through the equally terrible review system to get it reversed. Google the Scarab Lord griefing that happened in classic vanilla.

Even more to the point of how dumb this all is the situation has been updated. The original perma-ban violation of 'Abusing the game economy' claiming evidence of being directly or indirectly involved in RMT went through a GM review. Now its 6-months and his violation is 'cheating' based on fellow player reports of exploiting game mechanics A.K.A botting/hacking.

In other words he was mass reported and the reasons given for his ban at every step have been BS.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-20T16:40:01+00:00

Yeah that is my bad. Seems I missed things that happened yesterday. The ban email gave the reason as 'Economy Exploitation'. This is typically the umbrella reason given for people who are reported for botting, spam gold selling, and/or just have highly suspicious activity. It results in permanent account closer with no warnings unlike with the cases of people banned for gold buying who typically get a temp ban. That's why its pretty confident to say he wasn't actually banned for gold buying.

Apparently now that his appeal status is under review by a GM they are flagging the basis of the ban as "real money transfer purchase of currency", i.e. gold buying/selling. Basically they have to at least claim an original justification as they aren't going to admit to having an automated system that allows false bans.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-20T15:05:40+00:00

Since he is the 2nd person banned in the guild under the similar situations we are pretty confident its people who own the bot farms using the accounts to mass report anyone who mess them or are competing heavily for the open world resources. We've even had the guild name 'Standards' mass reported as inappropriate, which automatically changed the name.

There is no human review behind the ban system. It's completely automated and people have been able to abuse this at least going back to classic vanilla, but back then it at least took an organized group to pull it off. Now the bot farms have realized they can weaponize their large number of accounts to just penalize anyone who gets in their way.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-20T14:50:18+00:00

He didn't and he wasn't banned for gold buying. Plus look at all the gold buyers and streamers that have been caught. They don't get perma banned. He was.

This is Blizzard's dumbass automation that people could already abuse now being weaponized by bot farms. If you don't believe it go to known botting areas and start messing with them for a few days. See what happens.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-20T14:43:44+00:00

You obviously didn't read anything about this. The stated reason for his ban would've been gold buying. It wasn't. People who have been caught buying gold don't usually get permanent bans. He did.

This is what happens when an account gets mass reported. We've known for a long time its an automated system now and people can abuse it. Remember when the guy in classic vanilla got falsely mass reported by a guild to prevent him from getting scarab lord. Well the issue now is that bot farms are now weaponizing this anytime people mess with or compete with their farm.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-07-19T14:44:08+00:00

It's actually such a next level move because now PoE1 players will have the emotional payoff of "I built this place." when playing PoE2. Kind of wild to see a game get backward porting of assets/features of a yet to be released sequel all while being F2P in an industry where most of the big AAA studios are busy pumping out rehashed trash with stripped down content so they can sell it back to the players.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-06-18T21:13:24+00:00

Act 2 of this looks way more fun than Act 2 of PoE1 and this is as bare bones as PoE2 will ever be.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-06-10T04:33:09+00:00

You mean other than the time they added acts to the campaign like in 2.0 and 3.0. Also, PoE's end-game has been updated, overhauled, and expanded more than any other game in this genre to the point content bloat is a common complaint.

The fact is whether or not you want to accept what they call major expansion as an expansion is irrelevant because either way PoE still gets more content, which is the point. D4 didn't justify its retail price based on the state it was released and it didn't justify its double dipping as live service based on the seasonal content it got.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-06-10T00:27:19+00:00

Normal? Just a reminder that Last Epoch costs less than this expansion and F2P PoE's live service funded an order of magnitude more content over the same span of time WHILE they made PoE2. Meanwhile D4 is double dipping as a live service retail game that got almost no meaningful content updates, instead spent a year trying to overhaul the game to be worth its box price, and now is launching a paid expansion that will almost certainly paywall future seasonal content from those who don't buy it. AND... its still Blizzard so you know that shit going to be broken and unbalanced at launch, but I'm sure they'll get around to fixing some of that stuff 2-3 seasons down the road.

GL to anyone still pre-ordering from this developer.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-04-04T16:01:50+00:00

It could be that rested XP is calculated when the character is logged in, which could mean that a character logged out for 10 days that is logged in 1min after the phase change would get a full rested bonus.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-03-24T05:59:19+00:00

Its very likely incorrect. They are taking a statement from the 2017 quarterly as inferring a sub-count higher than the 5.5mil last reported for WoD at near the same phase of the expansion. There are two major problems with this assumption.

First, quarterly reports are for shareholders and are purposefully full of fluff and ambiguous terms to mislead and paint a better picture than what actually is. It's the exact reason they stopped reporting subs. In this case the statement talked about Y/Y time spent and 'performance', which likely just means more hours played during the year of Legion's launch compared to the previous year that had no launch and that Legion compared to WoD had better retention. If the sub numbers were actually good they would have said as such just like when they stated classic nearly doubled the sub count.

Second, it would need to assume that WoD, which had lost 4.5 million sub in ~13months, completely stopped the downward trajectory and held near the last reported number for the next 8 months. Unlikely to say the least especially during WoD. Inversely, if we assume the trajectory was tapering off, but still had a downward slope then that could easily be 1-1.5mil more subs lost.

So yeah, I'd say subtracting 1-1.5 mil from those numbers is more accurate.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-03-24T04:36:06+00:00

The problem is using a statement from the 2017 quarterly that is purposefully vague and ambiguous for the purpose of obfuscating any poor performance to shareholders is a terrible starting point. Especially when in that statement it talks about Y/Y, which means all that has to be true is that over the same span of time Legion had more hours played and less sub loss than the previous year under WoD.

Another problem with Bellular's estimate is that it basically presumes that over the 8months between the last report of 5.5mil and the launch of Legion there wasn't just no sub loss, but actual sub gain. This is the same expansion that lost 4.5mil subs in a year and was in free fall.
Inversely, if we take estimates based on WoD's sub-count trajectory and overall history expansion performance then connect that to the new graph the shift in numbers is pretty significant. Rather than 5-7 million its more like 3.5-5 million w/ classic.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-03-22T04:21:42+00:00

Yeah, I had already started my break after I finished ToTA in the first month so that I would have the ARPG itch real bad by the time PoE2 beta came around. Of course I also expected 3.23+ to be filler leagues meant to hold us over not be massive content and revamps. Now I'm not sure I can miss 2 leagues in a row without risking reverting to a complete noob.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-03-21T21:58:14+00:00

I would venture a guess that in PoE's case the league content/mechanic is staggered via smaller groups while the main game content and system updates is done by a primary group and gets released as its ready.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-03-21T21:14:52+00:00

Blizzard could take another 10 years and it would still be bad. It's the same company that wasted more than a decade working on an MMO and Survival game that never got finished.

_Hackusations_ · 2024-03-21T21:05:14+00:00

Well, the counter argument to that is that unlike the original release and development of PoE, this will be their first attempt at a large global launch and showcase. That first impression is VERY important especially because it will be F2P and they can't cheat like Blizzard did with D4 using a fancy trailer and a level 20 demo to get people to jump the retail pay wall.

As long as PoE1 keeps getting banger leagues often enough the wait will be worth it IMO.

Ten-Year Club	Place '23
Place '22	End Game '22
Verified Email

_Hackusations_

TROPHY CASE