Nani? You mean I told you. The very first post on this thread mentions two different mythics. Lemon was wrong about that I know. I noticed this issue a long time ago. Others noticed it even longer.
It was simply easier to prove with Mythics and those screenshots.
Ah, so you have decided to approach me.
I think I was just saying that between the two mythics I was using, only the monkey was. Didnât mean imply that on the others 
hopefully it gets fixed soon!
A few minutes ago I threw âEjecuteâ with Nulltron to the monkey and only took 23 of life, being able to kill him clearly xD
Lol âcheaterâ 
@Saitama please do not call these people cheaters as itâs a very negative term and the definition of cheating isnât accurate here. Itâs a flawed in game mechanic that is exploited by people. But since itâs in the game everybody is free to use it.
I disagree. Itâs a flawed mechanic? Itâs flawed coding. Itâs not working as intended. That comes under the category of a bug. Taking advantage of
a bug/glitch IS cheating. Low level cheating but cheating nonetheless.
As an example, if there was a bug that allowed an opponent to use level 1000 UC monsters against our regular monsters and people started taking advantage of it you wouldnât call that cheating?
This is the same thing but to a lesser degree.
Please note I support people that use it and as Mentioned before I myself will âcheatâ if I had an unevolved mythic. So Iâm actually calling myself a cheater. Cheating is having an unfair advantage,
Plain and simple.
Donât get me wrong if the devs intended these monsters to be stronger than the evolved form than that would be classified as a âflawed mechanicâ itâs not designed this way on purpose thoughâŚ
Well crap. I evolved mine day 1. Now i regrer it.
This is entirely innacurate. We do not have the ability to âde-evolveâ our monsters. Not everybody is free to use it.
You canât make it out that we all have access to this. Itâs a complete unfair advantage.
That mythic is stronger than the gorilla unevolved. He wipes out two legends like nothing. I wish I didnât evolve my 4 mythics as well.
Its a flawed mechanic because of flawed coding. But its built in the game. It doesnt involve any modifying of the game code or whatever. Its abusing a bug but that doesnt make you a cheater.
Simply because:
You are indeed free to use it. Of course free to use it is limited to being lucky and hatching it but that restriction can be applied to every monster of the game. There are always restrcitions but that doesnt mean youre not free to do so. Youre also free to drive your car into the wall around the next corner although you might want to add that common sense tells you thats a bad idea. Being free to do so does not imply there are no restrictions to do so. Otherwise I could claim that I am not free to use Scorpiogeist because I dont own it. Or AP Spam was cheating because I wasnt free to attack the monster I wanted to attack? I agree you have a point here but it depends on where you draw the line. I have always been a fan of âits in the game therefore I can use itâ.
But I agree that if you have a more purist view on cheating you could have good reason to call these players cheaters. This being said, other players who have a different definition of cheating could feel offended by being called out as cheaters. In the end its a conflict of interests. In another thread you could see that other players already felt offended by the term cheater. I can understand both sidea and As a moderator I would kindly ask you not to use the term âcheaterâ for the greater good of forum peace and harmony.
Abusing a known bug in order to get advantage is considered cheating.
As I said it depends on the definition of cheating you want to apply
âCheating in video games involves a video game player using unfair methods to create an advantage or disadvantage beyond normal gameplay, in order to make the game easier or harder.â wiki
Might not be a bug . Might be intended cos devs know everyone canât awaken mythics so they might want us to use them in first form . And evolve after collecting 3 shards .
Itâs a hidden mechanic of the game guys !
we⌠we are talking about the baby formsâŚ
I like this academic approach more because it looks at the topic from multiple perspectives. Choose the one you like.
so are you telling me that if there was a bug that let you kill your opponentâs last 8 monsters by just activating âknock back nextâ and the devs promise to fix it, yet everyoneâs still using it and wasting so many players time and energy (because news flash, not everyone is like me, mr.x or whoever has so much time, canât afford to lose time).
doesnât sound so fair, does it now?
First of all, theres a part missing in your sentence. I assume you wanted to express or ask If I still wouldnt consider your described scenario cheating. Answer: I wouldnt. Take a look at the definitions I brought up. I am a fan of the âcode is lawâ perspective and in your scenario, there was no active modifying of the games code. It surely wouldnt be fun and it would be better if nobody would exploit such a bug but in the end, everybody would have access to it and could use it. It would destroy the game but its not a single person or a group of people gaining an advantage because they hack or cheat. They would still simply exploit a bug.
2.) There once was the case of the player Necrom who won a UC (Autumn 2016) and beat the unbeatable Hidan. He was accused of hacking and cheating but it turned out there was a bug which made it possible for him to face the same team over and over again. Devs released the following statement:
As you can see: Making use of a bug is not considered to be hacking or cheating. At least in Neo Monsters up to this day.
3.) Making an extreme example as you did isnt always the best way to bring across your point. For example when you study law you will sooner or later encounter the trolley problem. Its bascially the question if it is okay to kill one person if you can save the live of five other people by doing so (You can also approach this question in an ethical way but thats not the point here. To make it short: If you prefer deontoligical ethics like Kant then the answer is NO, if you prefer Utilitarianism like Bentham for John Stuart Mill then the answer is YES).
But the juridical point here is -as the german constitutional court confirmed- : According to the UN Charta all human beings are born free and equal so it is impossible to value one life more than another life. Therefore you cant reduce humans to objects and simply say: âWell, save one or save five, I will definitely save oneâ because in that very moment you reduce human lifes to objects and act like you could weigh the pros and cons for one decission or another like you would do with a car or whatever. So the juristic answer is: One life is never worth more than another and since you cant reduce them to objects its never legal for the government to kill an innocent person in order to save five or whatever number of lifes.
Then there are people who make an extrem example like: What if you could save 1 Million lifes by killing one person.
But this extreme example changes absolutely NOTHING!!! about the core argument that was brought up and that is still valid even if its 1 against 1 Million.
Same situation here: You could describe the worst possible bug, it wouldnt change any of the points I brought up because making use of a bug isnt cheating if youre definition of cheating is that somebody has to actively modify or hack the gamecode to gain a significant advantage over the rest of the playerbase.
I bet @LemonSqueezy was using wallhack
