Let’s Talk Wynncraft Rules

By the look of things, some of the wynncraft regulations weren’t well-thought, and were made with only a singular case in mind, leading to contradictions.

The violation of rules leads to punishment, but the rules themselves violate common sense.


I will first quote the rule I am referring to, and add a comment below stating why the rule should be changed.







[source]
2. Macros.
Macros are only allowed to be used to input a single 3-click spell command at a time or to automate chat commands such as the party system. Macros that loop or are designed to do anything else are not allowed as it gives you an unfair advantage.

Question: Can I use Macros in-game?
Legality: Depends
Additional Information: According to rule 2 you are only allowed to use certain Macros. You're allowed to use Macros that do not loop. You are not allowed to use Macros to gain an advantage over other players. If a command macro is bound to a button on your keyboard, you are not allowed to spam it.

If I understand it correctly, a macro that performs a single spell is alright, however spamming it is not. Although, spells are not cast immediately. An ice snake, for example, takes a couple seconds to be deployed. Thus even if a macros is used, such “quick” spells would be useless.







[source]
Question: Am I allowed to pay someone emeralds to move their market booth, so I can place mine?
Legality: Not legal

So, how does this make any sense? Such an agreement wouldn’t hurt anybody, it wouldn’t violate the EULA since both players already have a champion rank.







[source]
Question: Can I use /class or /switch to reset immunity in Hunted Mode to avoid getting killed?
Legality: Not legal

In that case, why is the exploit even feasible? Shorten the immunity or make it go completely. Players in Hunted Mode could also have a cooldown for the /class command.







[source]
Question: Can I give out loans?
Legality: Legal
Additional information: Failing to pay the money back is not a punishable offense. We generally advise you to avoid giving loans.

What is the reason for that? You cannot trick people into giving you items, that is called scamming. Why shouldn’t loans be interpreted the same?







[source]
Selling unided items (Unique to Legendary) is allowed as long as the buyer of the item gets the item he desires.
Example: Intentionally selling an unidentified Pisces advertised as a Cancer is a bannable offense as the seller has knowledge of the outcome and thus tricks the buyer.
Selling unided Mythics is not allowed in any form.

So, I believe it is painfully clear that you can’t know the true identity of an unidentified item. Therefore, how can an unidentified item be advertised as a certain piece of gear? Moreover, who doesn’t know this information, and who can be harmed by this?
Finally, we can already sell revealed mythics. Due to the immense dependence on their identifications, it’s pretty much a gamble. Buying an unknown, unidentified mythic would just be a greater gamble, nothing more than that.

 

You can tell based on id cost. The only boxes you can't tell what they are are ones that have items that are the same level. And it's possible to tell what the item in a box is with illegal features in mods.

 

Yea, I was referring to the items of the same level. Didn't know, however, that you can tell what it is using a mod.
Funny how that exploit is basically a bootleg item reveal

 

Adding on to this, you easy scam people with something like this. I've had people come up to me with an unided 96-100 wand. So the possibilities could've been Warp, Fatal, and Singularity (these are the only wands with the 1872 cost since they are all level 99). If they had used one of these mods and determined it's Fatal, that's a 1stx mythic given to me for 5stx (which is how much they were trying to sell it for).

Easy money right there

 

That’s right, I wasn’t aware of the reveal mod thing, so there really is room for unfair advantage. Selling unidentified mythics would be a no go, but I would argue the false advertising rule still requires clarification.
Since it is only possible to determine what the unidentified item is using a forbidden mod (considering there are multiple items of the same level), advertising unided items as certain ones should be prohibited entirely.

 

But isn’t there a thing in the trade market to tell u what it is for emeralds without actually Identifying it?

 

Just saying, if you get scammed in game, that’s fully on you. I can’t think of a way where a scam is unavoidable. If you are dumb enough to loan money to someone who is not in a trustworthy status, why should that person be punished for taking advantage of your own naïveness?

It literally says loans are not recommended, and if you go ahead and give one to someone, it should be pre-assumes you know whether or not that person is trustworthy or not.

In the real world, that’s called credit score.

 

this reasoning makes 0 sense, because selling revealed unidentified mythics is perfectly legal and also not a scam

then why can't you sell apoc boxes?

 

Thanks for the clarifying!

I still do wonder what other way there is to determine an unidentified item. It's either the item is singular in terms of it rarity or level (stardust, as you proposed) or a mod has to be used to find out what the box hides.

As for the loans, to me it seems the current official opinion is to separate real-life law and logic from the minecraft server we are playing on. As you have stated, the concept of debt feels strange within a server like Wynncraft. Which it does, however, it's wrong to assume Wynncraft's economy is not yet ripe enough for this kind of business. Services like ambrosia loans already operate much like real-life companies; the trademarket hosts hundreds of buyers and sellers who are immersed in commerce. The structure as a whole genuinely feels like real-life action. The prevention of "law enforcement" may slow down the growth of its complexity, however, it's hard to assume whether that's a bad or a good thing.
Generally, the existence of tricky financial instruments may be damaging to the playerbase of a game server. A new player who got in serious debt, for example, would likely feel unpleasant and lose the interest to play. This doesn't match with the common purpose of videogames, to relieve stress and bring joy. That seems to be the reasoning behind the attitude towards the loans regulation, but at this point we're touching at philosophy.

 

So, I'm just talking out of my ass here, but I'm pretty sure the rule about un-id'd mythics is just there as sort of a way to prevent people from getting "scammed". Hypothetically, someone sells me an un-id'd toxo for say 9 stx, and I get lucky and roll perfect poison on it, suddenly it's got much greater value, then say the guy who sold it to me hears that I rolled perfect poison, he gets mad and demands that I sell it back to him for 9 stx or he'll report me for "scamming" him, which although blatantly wrong, would just turn into a pointless argument. In the opposite situation where I buy a mythic for the average cost, and roll the worst stats, I'd feel like I was scammed even though it was a fair trade. So I think the rule is basically to avoid people from potentially losing out on a lot of money.

EDIT: So I just thought of the trade market and honestly, lol

Also isn't it a forum rule? Since it's not categorised under game rules?

In regards to

So, I'm not exactly sure how Wynn loans work (lol), but say someone makes a loan of say 3stx, and offer their Collapse as collateral. What's stopping the person who's made the loan from calling it "fair trade" and never repaying the loan? Sure then you lose trust among the people who give out loans, but that's still a lot if you're considering the target demographic who loan emeralds, is it not?

 

Not really, otherwise selling revealed mythics would be banned too, or any rrable mythics tbh

The reason why it's not allowed is say someone has a 92-96 dagger with an id cost of 1818. this means that the dagger is level 96. The seller advertises it as a Cataclysm, and sells it as a Cataclysm, but it turns out to be a Grimtrap. The price difference between Cataclysm and Grimtrap is huge, so the seller scammed them by selling them the wrong item willingly or unwillingly

Or worse is if someone has a 96-100 wand. They check the id cost to find out that it's level 97 (Gaia). They then advertises it as something along the lines of "If you pay me 5 stx, I'll give you a 96-100 wand. It can be something like gaia, which never sells, or a warp, which sells for a lot if it's good.". So the seller knew that it was a Gaia inside the box, which is worth like 48le, and sells it for 5 stx by telling people that unsuspecting people that it could be any of the items

But I still think that single item boxes should be allowed

 

I'd guess it's just for consistency. Imagine if the rule was "you can't sell unidentified mythics except for apoc, disco, abso, collapse..." It'd lose it's simplicity in nuance which lets face it is irrelevant to 99.99% of players and only serves to confuse. Then it come to enforcement and suddenly people are saying "Oh I thought warp was allowed to be sold as a box, I saw it on the list" and suddenly plausible deniability sneaks in.

Many players would also not know enough about mythics to realise which ones are guaranteed by their box level and type since not everyone uses wynntils

 

i understand this - my post was specifically referring to the reasoning laid out by naraka, which was incomplete and did not do a good job of justifying the current rules

additionally, your logic isn't entirely sound either, since there's no list of non-mythic items you're allowed to advertise and sell as boxes. the real reason is just that mythics are way more valuable than any other item and getting scammed by a box trade would be significantly more impactful than on a 32eb legendary box

(my personal position is that this doesn't make sense because it's a hard scam to fall for and scamming is already not allowed, but whatever)

 

Every change sugested make sense, if the game change, rules must to follow

 

Did someone say loans