Except they haven't worded that in the EULA and the Executive Producer has said that the EULA effectively trumps what they have said on the forums.
The EULA and Data Farming
- Thread starter ggpwnkthx
- Start date
Except they haven't worded that in the EULA and the Executive Producer has said that the EULA effectively trumps what they have said on the forums.
But we know why they pursue reading data directly from the game and why they don't pursue OCRing screenshots, so while I agree they should technically clarify it, it's pretty clear to me how they choose to attack the issues. Cheating doesn't seem to be a part of the picture as I see it, because there is no direct correlation between having more data and earning more, you still need to do the trips. And sharing info is something commanders would do anyway.
Ah, I didn't know that. I knew "he said it was ok", but I didn't know "but then he changed his stance".
If I understand Michael Brookes, it doesn't seem like he (specifically just him) has changed his mind. I sent him a PM to alert him of this discussion and his response was that he believes the EULA takes precedence. He alone is not FD, so it's a reasonable response.
To me that means, that unless they have specifically told a developer they may continue with their app, if that app is using any data from the game it is (at the very least) a violation of the EULA.
that is a bogus arguement. In the schools I went to it was up to you to provide the calculator. Whether or not it was allowed was a separate issue altogether.
Now Reshas/BD-22 3573 is hot and the gold/gallite run is tanking hard. The way the game operates makes everyone run from gold rush to gold rush. Slopeys only helps you spot where the gold rush is happening or about to happen.
Everyone, stop playing the game immediately!
EULA section 3e says
We experience our surroundings by copying them into our conscience through various organs (our eyes and ears, as far as games are concerned). This is in clear violation of the EULA.
Warning, this posting may contain traces of irony. Or does it?
The EULA does seem unrealistically broad. I've been messaging Michael Brookes back and forth and he is currently addressing some issues. We should have some definitive answers soon.
Companies always err on the side of caution and start out by forbidding everything, and then carefully pulling back and allowing things. That's a much safer stance than allowing things that you then later have to forbid, which is what really makes enemies. Michael saying that OCR was OK, and then someone implicitly banning it in the EULA, was one example of this mistake.
Quite right. Or it could have been a mistake that Michael said it was OK.
There's confusion and it's being appropriately addressed right now.
I can imagine that it's been pretty hectic out there being right after the new years break and there being other (clearly higher priority) issues. I have to say, I've been pleasantly surprised at how quickly Micheal has been getting back to me.
EULA if presented to you after purchase is not legal contract in EU. And even if you see and sign EULA before buy it's still EU consumer protection law > EULA. So if you are from EU country you can mine all u want and if they reach for banhammer u can sue them and force them to either unban you or give you refund. You don't even have to spend money because there is lot of NGO that will be more then happy to do it in your name. LONG LIVE EU 
Last edited:
EULA if presented to you after purchase is not legal contract in EU. And even if you see and sign EULA before buy it's still EU consumer protection law > EULA. So if you are from EU country you can mine all u want and if they reach for banhammer u can sue them and force them to either unban you or give you refund. You don't even have to spend money because there is lot of NGO that will be more then happy to do it in your name. LONG LIVE EU
Although there is merit to what you are saying, I don't think there is a court on this planet that would take the consumer's claims seriously over a 50USD issue unless it was a class action suit. It would be a waste of the court's time.
But that's beyond the point. The point is that the EULA's wording does not match with the Executive Producer's wordings. Not many, if any, have an intent on cheating the system. They just want to know where the line is actually drawn because there are conflicting understandings and it is leading to speculation.
To me it would seem that it's not a matter of collecting the data so much as the method in which it is collected. The EULA basically says "just don't bother trying" as a catch-all to prevent people from breaking the game client - which is understandable.
The issue stems from the seemingly contradictory posts by officials and the wording of the official EULA. Clarity on the matter is required.
You underestimate EU bureaucracy
But beside that I don't agree with breaking EULA just because you can.This was a PM I have been given permission to share.
We should know soon enough whether its a matter of protecting the content, or the game client process itself. But it seems like it's the process that they want to protect and the content is less so an issue - which seems most reasonable since they plan on releasing an API anyways.
Michael Brookes said:
We should know soon enough whether its a matter of protecting the content, or the game client process itself. But it seems like it's the process that they want to protect and the content is less so an issue - which seems most reasonable since they plan on releasing an API anyways.
How to respond without being insulting... Its just not possible... So I'll say nothing at all.
Currently I dont mind these tools as they not really giving an advantage because everyone with 3 working braincells should have worked out that behind all high value trade routes is the same very easy pattern.
Identify this pattern and you dont need such tools. It would be something totally different if there would be no pattern and trade routes would be absolutly random with huge spikes. People feeding these tools dont realise that they cut themself in the leg as 80% of the users ( I estimate ) just leech along without feeding data themself.
Identify this pattern and you dont need such tools. It would be something totally different if there would be no pattern and trade routes would be absolutly random with huge spikes. People feeding these tools dont realise that they cut themself in the leg as 80% of the users ( I estimate ) just leech along without feeding data themself.
So? As long as there's enough data, I don't mind whether it's 50% or 1% of users feeding it.