Curse

TheRaven · Feb 20, 2011, 09:29 PM // 21:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Cusfreak

I wouldn't play poker with someone I knew had stacked the deck, would you? I also don't want to race people that sneak head-starts, or play hide and seek with someone who placed a tracking device in my hat, or roulette with magnets in the wheel. Now, those examples are all things that would make me lose the game I was playing, and this isn't. I get that. But If I was in a casino, and MY table was playing a fair game, but the people at the table next to me had their game stacked, and I sat watching them winning cash all night, it's still not a fun experience to be in that casino. I have a hard time believing you can't understand that.
You act like there shouldn't be "moral BS" in games, but the foundation of ALL games is fairness, and I'm sorry you have no honor and believe that morals are BS. It's very sad. But the fact is, I don't want to play any game with cheaters. Finding and removing cheats and exploits is the ONLY thing I honestly expect out of game moderators and developers, just like we expect it out of referees in a sporting event, or the bulls in a casino. I love it when we get updates and new content, but I'd rather they fix exploits and remove cheats (and cheaters!) first. And whether you agree or not, or look at your idea of "e-peeniness" with disdain or not, someone who plays a game plays it to win. And they have every right to enjoy the trophy they are presented, and if one plays a baseball game and earns a trophy at it, and then the refs hand out that same trophy to every spectator in the stands on the way out, guess what? it loses value. And before you start arguing that there's no value in this title or reward, keep in mind that I dont value the things you care about in your life either, but that doesn't make them lose value to you.
Everyone who plays this game plays it for a reason, and expects a foundation of fairness, just like every other game in the world.

I agree with some of this. I hate to play with cheaters as well. I left a guild that had botters in the Alliance because the guild leaders didn't see a problem with it and said "no big deal. They're my friends so I'm not kicking them". I don't want to be associated with an Alliance like that and I don't want to play a game where the game company tolerates botters and cheaters. And please don't say it doesn't affect my gameplay. That's just ignorant. It does. It affects the economy, big time!

However, I don't really have a problem with lame ways to earn survivor. So what? I don't consider that cheating. Lame, yes. Cheating, no. I have a friend that earned 500k experience on her survivor just by playing thru the quests and missions and the last 800k in the boxing dungeon. I tease her about it, but she also managed to make a 2nd LS char just with missions and quests.

Kathandrax hammers is totally lame. If your playing skills are that poor that this is the only way to get the title then you'll get no respect and have no sense of accomplishment from that title, but again, I don't think it's cheating. Cheating would be getting a flawless bot to earn exp somehow non-stop until you have the title.

I'm going for survivor on my main character when it becomes available. I'm not sure yet how I'll earn it. I've done all missions and quests and capped every skill so most options are closed. I won't be buying any hammers. I may simply make 12 FoW clears (fighting alongside my team, not hanging out in the forge). If you think that's cheating because I've died before well then that's your opinion. It's not mine.

Amy Awien · Feb 20, 2011, 10:04 PM // 22:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by da mahius

... BuH is useless in my eyes unless you get party-wiped. How are you supposed to abuse it again?

Dunno if it would work - and it could hardly be called abuse - but two PC with it might feed a MM nicely and have a party at +damage

I suppose BuH rezzed chars do not get DP when they get killed by mobs?

*lemming* · Feb 20, 2011, 10:30 PM // 22:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by ensoriki

It's killing my flow. You can't slap rending aura, then drop whirling charge right after to combo with your next strip attack immedietly, lame. Worse yet is when I forget the thing disabled and assumed I pressed it and it loaded.
Then go realizing rending aura didn't que up after whirling charge.

Is not queueing your skills really that hard to do?

dancing gnome · Feb 21, 2011, 03:09 AM // 03:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRaven

I agree with some of this. I hate to play with cheaters as well. I left a guild that had botters in the Alliance because the guild leaders didn't see a problem with it and said "no big deal. They're my friends so I'm not kicking them". I don't want to be associated with an Alliance like that and I don't want to play a game where the game company tolerates botters and cheaters. And please don't say it doesn't affect my gameplay. That's just ignorant. It does. It affects the economy, big time!

My biggest issues with the economy have never been around botters, it's been around the poor design on ArenaNet's side of things. Guild Wars has always favoured farmers (aka grinders) for loot. You don't get nice things by playing the game and completing content, you get it by finding the most efficient way to farm the exact same area as much as possibly in as little time as possible so you have a greater chance of that 0.22% Dryad Bow will drop. You want a relatively common Woe Spreader? Either farm it yourself (using unintended gameplay which many people can't do) or spend hours looking for a seller because ArenaNet didn't put in place an auction house.

IGN nailed it on the head when they reported on the mass bot bannings earlier last year. Instead of applauding ArenaNet for taking action against the cheaters, they asked why players were resorting to a computer program to run through the "boring and tedious" parts of the game. Why does the game have boring repetitive and tedious parts to it that players feel a desire to complete if they aren't fun? The number of players banned (and the spectrum from which they came from - most of us know at least one person) should show you this was a wide spread problem kept in check only by the vague threat of banning. I'm not saying making getting rewards insanely easy, I'm just pointing out the grind to get rewards (polar bear, dyad bow, FoW armour) is too high that people will have to grind to get it instead of enjoying content and completing it while receiving a worthwhile reward. Binding dungeon drops to players is the classic fix for this but ArenaNet would rather give grinders something to do a throw the people who like to earn their loot under the bus instead.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRaven

However, I don't really have a problem with lame ways to earn survivor. So what? I don't consider that cheating. Lame, yes. Cheating, no. I have a friend that earned 500k experience on her survivor just by playing thru the quests and missions and the last 800k in the boxing dungeon. I tease her about it, but she also managed to make a 2nd LS char just with missions and quests.

Survivor can be done many ways, but it's become a personal achievement as opposed to something you show off to others. Why? Because boxing is as close to cheating you can get for that title. It's also a convenient little grind. Survivor is about surviving risk. Dwarven boxing entirely removes the risk (unless you're stupid) making achieving the title meaningless.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRaven

Kathandrax hammers is totally lame. If your playing skills are that poor that this is the only way to get the title then you'll get no respect and have no sense of accomplishment from that title, but again, I don't think it's cheating. Cheating would be getting a flawless bot to earn exp somehow non-stop until you have the title.

Honestly, it's not different from boxing aside from the actual survivor toon not being present. Personally I think it takes more skill to run Kathandrax than it does to complete dwarven boxing.

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheRaven

I'm going for survivor on my main character when it becomes available. I'm not sure yet how I'll earn it. I've done all missions and quests and capped every skill so most options are closed. I won't be buying any hammers. I may simply make 12 FoW clears (fighting alongside my team, not hanging out in the forge). If you think that's cheating because I've died before well then that's your opinion. It's not mine.

I'd be more interested in GWAMM becoming an account wide title. As a a big user of alts ot frustrates me that ArenaNet has made the biggest achievement in the game exclusive to players who favour a single character as opposed to those of us who achieve many titles across all of our characters which is significantly more work because it requires completion of campaign content for each time yet it actually cripples your advancement towards GWAMM and there is not equivalent title for players with lots of alts. I just hope someone at ArenaNet stops ignoring the reality that many players will complete the same content across multiple toons and find it frustrating that there is no reward for them. The alt discrimination needs to be fixed, just how long before someone fixes it?

Hells Fury · Feb 21, 2011, 09:04 AM // 09:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by AmbientMelody

Ah, not really.

Vamp mod: scythe attacks faster, but native Dervish IAS skills boost only by 25%, not 33% (plus, using non-Dervish IAS skills is more of a hassle than notable gain). 5 is still fine.

Hammer attack speed: No. Their dmg is not weaker ... hammers are slower but they have better multiplier for critical hits (scythe got nerfed in this regard), and their average damage not accounting for attack speed is about the same if not better. Warriors have a ton of skills boosting their adrenaline gain and their adrenal-based skills dish out far more damage to a single target.

Anet themselves have said, that Dervish's DPS with scythe is about-the-same now as before the update, because they toned down critical hits to make up for faster attack speed (and that was done to make Dervish more about pressure than spike and tone down the Assassin crit scythe builds).

So, no, really, it's just pointless whining about hammers from your side. They got buffed some time ago and remain very viable in all PvP formats, in PvE less so but blame that on unable-to-knockdown monsters and PvE skills. Warrior is durable enough without a shield, hammer provides very decent ground control for all it's worth.

Just because in average Joe's mentality hammers suck in PvE, doesn't mean they do, by a long shot.

They do suck compared to scythes. (in pve , i'm not interested in pvp at all, too much QQ/randomness). I can dish out more dps hitting 3 targets then hitting one despite popular belief that hitting 3 targets is hard to achieve (body block ftw). Of course while having shitton of dmg buffs on me (SaH,splinter, Judges insigght etc).
Out off hammer elites Earth shaker is only one i can use since it's aoe. I'm not spending all that hard earned adrenaline on BB just to 4 sec KD random hm foe (i'm talking about general usage).

Lady Tristan · Feb 21, 2011, 09:07 AM // 09:07

Survivor:
n
1. a person or thing that survives

Survive:
1. To remain alive or in existence.
2. To carry on despite hardships or trauma; persevere
3. To remain functional or usable

Your wondering why quote a definition that most people with a grasp of the english language ought to know. Well its simple, everyone in the game is a survivor. Just think about it for a second. I mean you get res'd but you go through hardships and places that no ordinary person would ordinarily "survive" through.

Changing a title to one that closer matches the ideology of the game is sound in argument. Sure there are ways to be "cheap" about it but essentially it just boils down to a bit of text and a good feeling.

It's easy to think that because you come from a country that has amazing internet, that people using lag outs as an excuse is a joke. Think of this for instance (my country - South Africa) we have really bad internet, I mean our best internet is a 4mb line! Most Americans run at (I think) 100mb line?

And thats the best, I run on a 348kb line which at times is seriously choppy.
I am not gonna pretend I don't title hunt because its what I do and sure you can argue for or against it till the cows come home. It wont change anything, I will still do it and have fun doing it and try to do the best I can for my chars.

I begun gws with no knowledge made a whole bunch of chars AND THEN found out about titles (including LS) Obviously they all died and I only got interested in titles a month in. I am sure you have felt the regret of getting rid of one of your chars to make space for a survivor char (if you are that way inclined). I played through, serious about doing survivor the legit (Legit = ordinary playing means) way and I got really far but guess what. Internet fun. Death. Ok stop. Remake (aawww). Try again. This time something quicker, Kilroy. Internet. Death. Remake (dammit!). Again Kilroy with scrolls etc...boom internet. Death (Goes hulk!). Eventually I got legendary survivor through skill cap bonus week and kilroy. It was both frustrating and personally rewarding. Its for a similar reason that I can't do rollerbeetle racing (rubberband ftw).

I don't care how people get their titles. Its personal.
But don't default Anet for trying to bring a title in line with the game. Also we are also all speculating here haha but, *Holds thumbs* I can get the title on my main (the only one I refused to remake regardless of survivor, she is also my main title hunter), if this changes happens I get 30/30 and gwamm. If not, I will get it another way.

Regardless its about fun.
My 2cents.
Good work Anet.

Sir Cusfreak · Feb 21, 2011, 11:42 PM // 23:42

Quote:

Kathandrax hammers is totally lame...but again, I don't think it's cheating. Cheating would be getting a flawless bot to earn exp somehow non-stop until you have the title.

I'm glad you have honor and morals, I was begining to wonder if anyone else did too. But this is collecting a reward for a quest a character didn't complete. I'm having trouble seeing what is so unclear about that to so many people. They try to justify it with things like:

Quote:

Originally Posted by FoxBat
I can't believe people are this upset about Kathandrax hammers while Boxing exists. Or vaettirs. Or the next hundred stupid XP farms.

But they are not anywhere close to the same thing - buying Kath hammers is pure, cut and dry cheating - every bit as against the rules as botting or gold-buying is. Boxing is lame, but at least you hit something and make kills within the rules. (It's really just a side note that I don't think it should count toward the title because of the absence of death-risk, but it is at least legitimate XP gain. There's a huge difference there.) Farming mobs, vaettirs or otherwise, is completely legitimate in any circumstance. I don't expect everyone to play the storyline through to get the title, but doing it without cheating/exploiting isn't really that much to ask.

and since I'm such a huge fan of analogies:

What if there was a way to collect the quest reward for, say, Mallyx, without ever stepping foot in DoA? Would that be cheating? I bet some armbrace holders might think so, since that particular reward includes a gemset instead of just XP and a little gold, and they might even raise a stink about it, and claim it affects thier gameplay. Exact same thing only Kath gives a smaller amount. Its cheating, plain and simple. If you didnt do that dungeon, why would it be ok to collect a reward from it? If Anet would enforce their own EULA on a less than arbitrary basis, it would be perma-bannable (and damn sure should be, if we we're all gonna play by the rules. That's the part that isn't supposed to be subjective, after all.)

I made a mistake in my earlier post when I grouped the lame-ness of Kilroy in with the exploit of Kath Hammers. I did say a few times I don't see them as the same thing, though. They aren't. Again, for those with difficulties who still havent let that go: My problem is with Kath Hammers, and I believe that unless that exploit is removed from the game, the Survivor title should remain unchanged, because they should not knowingly open the door for a ton of new cheaters to collect on it. If that is removed, then the idea that post-death characters can obtain it really isn't that bad, whether thier method is "lame" or purely epic as long as it is legitimate XP gain, then at least we know they earned it one way or the other, and everyone's opinion of that particular method would be just that, a subjective opinion.

oh and:

Quote:

Originally posted by Kaleban:
Well, you failed.

All your analogies were terribly flawed because of the simple fact that they represented gameplay advantages

Which the Survivor title does not provide.

Reading comprehension really is FTW, especially if you can follow it up with applied reasoning. I said very plainly that I know that the cheats in my analogies were things that caused me to lose the games I was playing and this isn't - and that the point was it affects overall gameplay experience, not gameplay mechanics. There is a difference between game mechanics and game rewards and another difference between tangible reward and sentimental reward, and we've already discussed those differences. I never stated there was a detraction from gameplay mechanics, but there is from the overall gaming experience, which encompasses more than just simple mechanics. And your idea that the only thing that could mean is about bragging right or "epeen" excellently shows the limited scope of your thinking ability. Once again, I'm not looking for any bragging rights to the survivor title, I'm not trying to limit the number of those who have it so I can be amongst some "few elite", (a laughable notion already, though thats not an excuse to make it worse) I'm asking to keep everyone playing by what are supposed to be the rules.

Kaleban · Feb 22, 2011, 02:14 AM // 02:14

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Cusfreak

I'm glad you have honor and morals, I was begining to wonder if anyone else did too. But this is collecting a reward for a quest a character didn't complete. I'm having trouble seeing what is so unclear about that to so many people. They try to justify it with things like:

I'm surprised you still haven't realized this is a game, and the nature of said game. And its even more amusing that in an argument like this you EXPECT others to justify their rationale to you, which smacks of hubris.

Quote:

But they are not anywhere close to the same thing - buying Kath hammers is pure, cut and dry cheating - every bit as against the rules as botting or gold-buying is. Boxing is lame, but at least you hit something and make kills within the rules. (It's really just a side note that I don't think it should count toward the title because of the absence of death-risk, but it is at least legitimate XP gain. There's a huge difference there.) Farming mobs, vaettirs or otherwise, is completely legitimate in any circumstance. I don't expect everyone to play the storyline through to get the title, but doing it without cheating/exploiting isn't really that much to ask.

There's an old saying in golf, "the best wood in the bag is the pencil." Technically it can be considered cheating, especially if the game you're playing is competitive, however, when playing a round of golf by oneself, the only one who's cheated out of the experience or the game itself is the player, and no one else.

Regardless of your convoluted and contradictory reasoning, there is no way to "cheat" in Guild Wars, since all players are bound by the same rules. Your problem in reconciling that with Survivor is that there is more than one way to get it, doesn't fit with your narrow view of how it should be, and for some reason feel the need to impose your style of play on others. And ALL for a title that has absolutely no gameplay effect.

If we used your logic, buying costumes is cheating, because it skips the customization process of acquiring money and mats through gameplay for armor, and instead allows players to look different without playing.

Quote:

and since I'm such a huge fan of analogies:

Should probably get some better ones then...

Quote:

What if there was a way to collect the quest reward for, say, Mallyx, without ever stepping foot in DoA? Would that be cheating?

Not if everyone is bound by the same rules. Also, rules to change over time as the game expands and evolves, and players have to adjust. Lots of people didn't like the Shadowform nerf, but the playerbase has adjusted just fine for example.

Quote:

I bet some armbrace holders might think so, since that particular reward includes a gemset instead of just XP and a little gold, and they might even raise a stink about it, and claim it affects thier gameplay.

Of course they would, but not due to gameplay, it would be due to economic devaluing of the armbrace itself, assuming its not one of the dupes still. Again, if the gameplay is the same for everyone, or they have the same options, then its not cheating. Using your logic one could claim playing a SoS Ritualist is cheating because it ignores armor, whereas Elementalists don't. Sounds silly right? That's your argument in a nutshell.

Quote:

Exact same thing only Kath gives a smaller amount. Its cheating, plain and simple.

If it was plain and simple, people wouldn't be arguing with you. It isn't cheating, its utilizing an exploit. However, even given this, running Kilroy requires the player to play, as does farming Vaettir or any other XP farm. Buying Hammers may seem like its "less" but it still required someone to play it, who did not collect the reward, and transferred the reward to another character.

The same amount of gameplay is going on, either way, hence not cheating.

Quote:

If you didnt do that dungeon, why would it be ok to collect a reward from it? If Anet would enforce their own EULA on a less than arbitrary basis, it would be perma-bannable (and damn sure should be, if we we're all gonna play by the rules. That's the part that isn't supposed to be subjective, after all.)

Ban people for selling Hammers? Then you might as well ban people for selling ectos. Its the exact same concept, a character can acquire FoW armor without ever stepping foot into the Underworld. AND the armor is a trophy in the HoM. So according to your logic, any trade for something is now a bannable offense.

Quote:

I made a mistake in my earlier post when I grouped the lame-ness of Kilroy in with the exploit of Kath Hammers. I did say a few times I don't see them as the same thing, though. They aren't.

They are. Its a repeatable quest turn in for XP and gold. Whether you run it on an alt or run it yourself, the gameplay is exactly the same. Your problem is you identify the "lame-ness" of the end result and dismiss the fact that someone is playing the game as intended, just putting the rewars on a different character, which is their right to do so.

Quote:

Again, for those with difficulties who still havent let that go: My problem is with Kath Hammers, and I believe that unless that exploit is removed from the game, the Survivor title should remain unchanged, because they should not knowingly open the door for a ton of new cheaters to collect on it.

So because a few people exploit a silly quest turn in, you're against opening up the Survivor title to all those players whose characters were created before it was even available? Sounds to me like curing a cold by killing the patient.

Quote:

If that is removed, then the idea that post-death characters can obtain it really isn't that bad, whether thier method is "lame" or purely epic as long as it is legitimate XP gain, then at least we know they earned it one way or the other, and everyone's opinion of that particular method would be just that, a subjective opinion.

Again, you contradict yourself. You've obviously missed the concept of the slippery slope, and whose job it is to judge what is and isn't right. As you said, whatever method is used is up to subjective opinion, whether by the player or those around him. What does it matter then how it is obtained? I have a Survivor that earned it through normal gameplay, another a double xp elite cap weekend, and another through Kilroy. Is one less valid than the other? Nope, as it was MY decision how to go about it, and MY experience is all that matters to me when it comes to MY characters. If every single other person in the game did it with Kath Hammers, I couldn't care less, and neither should anyone else, its so silly.

Quote:

Reading comprehension really is FTW, especially if you can follow it up with applied reasoning. I said very plainly that I know that the cheats in my analogies were things that caused me to lose the games I was playing and this isn't

You're right, Kath and Kilroy aren't cheats, good of you to acknowledge that.

Quote:

- and that the point was it affects overall gameplay experience, not gameplay mechanics.

How, exactly? It affects your experience surely, since you're the one who chose how to go about it, but it affects NO ONE ELSE, making yourself the only one accountable for the method used. Whether you have some moral anguish or guilt over it is irrelevant, none of the rest of us care.

Quote:

There is a difference between game mechanics and game rewards and another difference between tangible reward and sentimental reward, and we've already discussed those differences.

But you've missed the point, that Survivor and its methods for attainment are solely up to the player, and have no bearing or affect on the rest of the game, period. Same with the reward, tangible or otherwise, it has no far reaching consequences or effects.

Quote:

I never stated there was a detraction from gameplay mechanics, but there is from the overall gaming experience, which encompasses more than just simple mechanics.

You're making a giant baseless assumption that you're right, which you aren't. You haven't given one concrete example of how "lame-way"ing the Survivor title detracts from the gameplay experience, not ONE. As its a title of personal achievement, its worth whatever importance the player places on it. If they just want it ASAP for the HoM, they can buy Hammers. If they want to roleplay it and get it only after an epic time and quest and slaughter investment, they can do that too. Each players method and its subjective value are only truly important to the player, as it should be.

Quote:

And your idea that the only thing that could mean is about bragging right or "epeen" excellently shows the limited scope of your thinking ability.

Its a title, with no gameplay value. Apart from having it just to have it, for the HoM or whatever, it boils down to distinction which is of course what a title is in the first place. The more difficult the attainment of said title (such as being Knighted by the Queen of England) the more prestige is attached to it.

With the ability to easily acquire the Survivor title, very little prestige is attached to it, so your argument against allowing other to have it is stupid in the extreme.

Quote:

Once again, I'm not looking for any bragging rights to the survivor title, I'm not trying to limit the number of those who have it so I can be amongst some "few elite", (a laughable notion already, though thats not an excuse to make it worse) I'm asking to keep everyone playing by what are supposed to be the rules.

Then you shouldn't have any problems with it NOW. Everyone does play by the same rules. As I mentioned above, I used three different strategies to get Survivor, that are accessible to anyone. Had I the cash for Hammers, I might have done that too. The methods used are irrelevant, as long as all players have the same access, which they DO. Hence, your entire argument on the basis of fairness and rules lawyering is invalidated.

Good day sir.

Horus Moonlight · Feb 22, 2011, 03:06 AM // 03:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Cusfreak

But they are not anywhere close to the same thing - buying Kath hammers is pure, cut and dry cheating - every bit as against the rules as botting or gold-buying is. Boxing is lame, but at least you hit something and make kills within the rules. (It's really just a side note that I don't think it should count toward the title because of the absence of death-risk, but it is at least legitimate XP gain. There's a huge difference there.) Farming mobs, vaettirs or otherwise, is completely legitimate in any circumstance. I don't expect everyone to play the storyline through to get the title, but doing it without cheating/exploiting isn't really that much to ask.

and since I'm such a huge fan of analogies:

What if there was a way to collect the quest reward for, say, Mallyx, without ever stepping foot in DoA? Would that be cheating? I bet some armbrace holders might think so, since that particular reward includes a gemset instead of just XP and a little gold, and they might even raise a stink about it, and claim it affects thier gameplay. Exact same thing only Kath gives a smaller amount. Its cheating, plain and simple. If you didnt do that dungeon, why would it be ok to collect a reward from it? If Anet would enforce their own EULA on a less than arbitrary basis, it would be perma-bannable (and damn sure should be, if we we're all gonna play by the rules. That's the part that isn't supposed to be subjective, after all.)

Please stop using analogies. They're awful (and I don't mean analogies in general; I mean yours). Using Kath hammers requires having someone finishing the dungeon x amount of times equal to x amount of hammers used. It's just another form of buying a title. Are you against buying zkeys to obtain the zaishen title? It's the same thing. Are you against buying party points to obtain Life of the Party? It's the same thing. Are you against buying alcohol to obtain Incorrigible Ale-Hound? It's the same thing. Are you against buying sweets to obtain Connoisseur of Confectioneries? It's the same thing. Are you against buying unidentified golds to obtain wisdom title? It's the same thing (seeing as you didn't obtain the unidentified golds yourself). Why is it that survivor is put on this pedestal?

And specifically towards your Mallyx analogy. If there was some proxy item to obtain the rewards of the quest without doing it, there would be NO problem that farmers would have with it. No additional gemsets would be produced than what is now. The price of the proxy item would be in line with the rewards that it produces (just like the hammers).

And since you seem to be harping about the EULA, please quote the lines that lead to the conclusion that buying hammers is cheating and thus bannable. If there is, I could say there are A LOT of people that need to be banned for their illegitimate sweet tooth, drunkard, party animal, zaishen, and/or wisdom titles.

Sir Cusfreak · Feb 22, 2011, 05:05 AM // 05:05

Quote:

Originally posted by Kaleban:
its utilizing an exploit

which is against the rules. You can try to justify breaking the rules and the agreement you made not to do so all day long, but it doesn't change the fact.

Quote:

Technically it can be considered cheating

We finally agree.

Quote:

Again, if the gameplay is the same for everyone, or they have the same options, then its not cheating.

So...as long as the honest join the dishonest, since they can, its all fine, right? Your logic is based in the fact that I could use the exploit as well, and just choose not to, but that doesn't make it ok. If an ATM is dispensing cash that it shouldn't be, it's the bank's job to stop it. (which is what I am asking Anet to do, and I don't really see it as that much to expect)
But taking that money just because its available isn't any less stealing, whether everyone has the chance to grab it or not, and the idea that "since the bank hasn't fixed their faulty machine, that makes it ok" is also wrong.

Quote:

there is no way to "cheat" in Guild Wars

You were right the first time:

Quote:

Technically, it could be considered cheating

See, "cheating", and "breaking the rules" are the same thing.

And since my analogies are so bad, then by all means, let's use yours. I like it very much. It's pretty accurate.
But, in all fairness, you forgot the part where that golfer, who is "technically cheating" by pencil-whipping a score he didn't earn, then goes into the clubhouse and posts his hole-in-one scorecard up on the wall. Thats wearing the title, and its dishonest. It also changes the overall golfing experience for the day for other players. Thats your e-peen theory again, and just because your subjective opinion of that is derisive, it doesn't change that this experience has an affect on the honest Golfers on the course. And, just because your opinion is that their experience being lessened is their own fault for "liking something as stupid as golf", that doesn't mean their experience wasn't affected. Perhaps they're competing. They do have that right, after all, and in my own subjective opinion, it's a shame that the dishonest get to interfere with that. Whether they are right or wrong to feel that way is irrelevant, the part that is fact instead of opinion is that the golfer did not play by the rules.

But now, when this cheating golfer goes and collects the free round of golf the establishment offers to Hole-in-one achievers on their next visit, he isn't only cheating himself anymore. See, he agreed when he entered this public golf course to only write down the scores he actually earned. This game is that clubhouse, the points they earn towards the rewards in the next installment are that free round. And the other golfers who played the same course that day have been treated unfairly. Of course they could pencil-whip their scores too, but the fact that they don't doesn't make it any more fair to them.

No matter how minor your opinion of the value of that free round of golf is, the action was still dishonest, unfair, and against the rules; and no amount of justification you try to assert will ever change that. And being barred from playing on that particular course in the future is not an extreme reaction on the part of the owners of the clubhouse, and many people may find it completely appropriate.

As for your opinion that he was playing alone so only cheated himself...if the man had his own course on his own property and really was playing alone, it would be a completely different story, I would agree with you there. But he chose to play on a public course, and agreed to do so by the rules of that course, and is a part of the collective players of that course. It wasn't his private living room wall he posted that scorecard on for only himself to see, after all, and the free round wasn't really his to collect. If he had put that card in his pocket and went home, then he could have written any score on it he wanted, or written the first act of Hamlet on it - it wouldn't matter. But thats not the case, and nothing can justify hanging it on the public scoreboard.
As for the methods used by the other golfers to get their scores, they really don't matter, if they wrote down the scores they actually shot. But collecting the rewards for Kath Hammers while not doing the dungeon is adding a hole-in-one to your scorecard (XP Bar, xunlai chest, HoM, GW2) that you didn't shoot.
(on a side note, getting the title by boxing is just using a space-age titanium club and having walls that run along both sides of the strip between you and the hole that limit how far you can slice and don't let the ball go in the sandtrap. Its still technically golfing, and if the course manager allows those scores, then it's fine for them to be allowed, I guess. But at least you're hitting the ball and counting real strokes you actually took and not just making up shit scores on your card and posting those and collecting your free round for it. There is a difference.)

Martin Alvito · Feb 22, 2011, 05:58 AM // 05:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Cusfreak

But, in all fairness, you forgot the part where that golfer, who is "technically cheating" by pencil-whipping a score he didn't earn, then goes into the clubhouse and posts his hole-in-one scorecard up on the wall. Thats wearing the title, and its dishonest. It also changes the overall golfing experience for the day for other players.

a) All that is not forbidden is permissible.
b) All that is forbidden but not policed is not forbidden.

Unless you can persuade the devs to buy into your sense of honor, that honor won't buy you a cup of coffee. You're absolutely correct that there's a negative externality, and that this is why rules are made and enforced. But if the devs choose to let it slide, then it's legal and that's that.

Morality may have a place in your life, but it has no place in competitive processes. Since the quantity of ultra-rare shinies is limited/fixed, the acquisition of those shinies in an MMO is a competitive process.

Hells Fury · Feb 22, 2011, 07:33 PM // 19:33

Small update - feb 22
What is it?
Wiki is down.

ensoriki · Feb 22, 2011, 07:41 PM // 19:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Is not queueing your skills really that hard to do?

Q_Q you have to wait to que them. Impatience and waiting don't go together.

asb · Feb 22, 2011, 07:54 PM // 19:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hell Darkblight

Small update - feb 22
What is it?
Wiki is down.

Here, my good chum.

Hells Fury · Feb 22, 2011, 08:01 PM // 20:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by asb

Here, my good chum.

Chum is a slang term for a (usually male) friend.

I learned a new word.

Update - Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Bug Fixes
Fixed a bug that prevented Nicholas the Traveler from appearing for certain players.

Najade · Feb 22, 2011, 08:33 PM // 20:33

Quote:

Update - Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Bug Fixes
Fixed a bug that prevented Nicholas the Traveler from appearing for certain players.

Maybe it's just me but he seems to be completely gone now, tried with a character who has completed WiK and tried with a character who hasn't completed eye of the north or prophecies, zoned in and out multiple times and can't seem to see him

Quantum Duck · Feb 22, 2011, 09:08 PM // 21:08

It looks like Nick got moved across the zone when they fixed him.

Kaleban · Feb 22, 2011, 09:09 PM // 21:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sir Cusfreak

which is against the rules. You can try to justify breaking the rules and the agreement you made not to do so all day long, but it doesn't change the fact.

Again your logic is flawed. Never mind that most of what you quoted from my post was completely out of context (to be expected I suppose given that your position isn't really defensible), but unless a player is duping items, BREAKING the game and then taking advantage, etc., etc. there is no way to cheat.

Everything in game right now is a product of ANet. The only way to cheat would be to use third party programs to modify the client and then send the modded info to the server. In fact, one could consider the Texmod program a cheat, when using, say, the Cartographer assist overlays, because they enable the player help that is not intended.

THAT is more cheating than any example you've given.

Quote:

We finally agree.

Nope, not really. See above.

Quote:

So...as long as the honest join the dishonest, since they can, its all fine, right? Your logic is based in the fact that I could use the exploit as well, and just choose not to, but that doesn't make it ok.

Honesty or lack thereof isn't entering the issue, you need to get past the idea that people who use the Kath Hammers turn in are somehow godless, soulless heathens sacrificing babies or something. Its not an exploit, and if you stop quoting out of context and actually read you'd possibly understand that, given sufficient reading comprehension. And my logic is sound, what isn't is your judgement and holier than thou attitude.

If it exists in game, then it isn't an exploit or cheating. Using your logic, any given 8 skill build that is more efficient than another is cheating. In fact, taking your argument to its ultimate conclusion would see every player restricted to one build, and one class, since any differentiation is exploitation of the system.

Silly right? I know.

Quote:

If an ATM is dispensing cash that it shouldn't be, it's the bank's job to stop it. (which is what I am asking Anet to do, and I don't really see it as that much to expect)
But taking that money just because its available isn't any less stealing, whether everyone has the chance to grab it or not, and the idea that "since the bank hasn't fixed their faulty machine, that makes it ok" is also wrong.

Terrible analogy as usual, because what you're describing isn't taking place. The only way what you describe could be the case is if people were getting free Kath Hammers, or free quest rewards with no effort on behalf of the playerbase.

But its not, is it? And you have to see that before you'll understand the reality. A player, whether you want to admit it or not, is acquiring Kath Hammers through gameplay, and then either uses it himself, OR trades it as a commodity to someone else, JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER TRADE IN THE GAME. The buying player also has to play to come up with the cash or tradeable items to pay for the transaction, so on BOTH ends of the trade, there is legitimate gameplay.

Again, no one is CHEATING the system, they're playing as intended, simply using the reward differently than you might like, but its not your place to mandate how players play.

Quote:

You were right the first time:

I've been right the whole time, unfortunately for you.

Quote:

See, "cheating", and "breaking the rules" are the same thing.

Not always, because one can break the rules without necessarily cheating in most game systems. But please, explain something to me, and that is HOW can a player in GW cheat or break the rules? All the characters exist in the game system, and are subject to its rules. Its impossible to cheat unless a flaw in the system exists, such as the Armbrace duping incident, which ANet quashed relatively quickly.

But doing a item required quest turn in is neither breaking the rules or cheating, you seem terribly confused on these points.

Quote:

And since my analogies are so bad, then by all means, let's use yours. I like it very much. It's pretty accurate.

Thank you.

Quote:

But, in all fairness, you forgot the part where that golfer, who is "technically cheating" by pencil-whipping a score he didn't earn, then goes into the clubhouse and posts his hole-in-one scorecard up on the wall. Thats wearing the title, and its dishonest.

Technically speaking, the golfer could also be adding his handicap to his score, which many sports do, and its an old joke more than anything else. Also, I don't know many golfers who post a faked scorecard, because eventually they'll get found out and scoffed at when they can't repeat the process. And really, the only person it affects is the golfer, especially since the golf community doesn't normally take scores at face value without verification and/or witnesses.

It may be dishonest, but it has no effect on the game itself, golf still marches on.

Quote:

It also changes the overall golfing experience for the day for other players. Thats your e-peen theory again, and just because your subjective opinion of that is derisive, it doesn't change that this experience has an affect on the honest Golfers on the course.

You must have never played golf. No such thing as an honest golfer lol. You said yourself that the e-peen theory is wrong or innaccurate, yet here you are quoting it as the prime motivator. Silly.

Quote:

And, just because your opinion is that their experience being lessened is their own fault for "liking something as stupid as golf", that doesn't mean their experience wasn't affected.

You assume their experience is being lessened, and I ask you how you make such a wild and baseless statement. A faked scorecard at a clubhouse isn't going to dissuade people from playing the game, nor will it change the rules, and I can't see how my experience of golf, which is generally considered a very personal game anyways is lessened in any way?

Assuming your statements have any basis in fact, the GW community has already deemed the Survivor title worthless because it is easy to obtain through multiple venues. So opening it up to others who were unable to attain it for any reason has no deleterious effects on the game.

Quote:

Perhaps they're competing. They do have that right, after all, and in my own subjective opinion, it's a shame that the dishonest get to interfere with that. Whether they are right or wrong to feel that way is irrelevant, the part that is fact instead of opinion is that the golfer did not play by the rules.

And it has no effect on the game. No one stopped the other golfers from competing, in any way. They can choose to play or not. You're acting as if one dishonest act has invalidated the entire game. All it invalidates is the player's reputation.

And I say again, hoping that it gets through, that a GW player cannot help BUT play by the rules, as the game is its own universe. There are the occasional incidents, but by and large there is no way to actually cheat. Again, your logic is demanding that all are forced to play a specific and narrow way, which is the exact antithesis of what GW is about.

Quote:

But now, when this cheating golfer goes and collects the free round of golf the establishment offers to Hole-in-one achievers on their next visit, he isn't only cheating himself anymore. See, he agreed when he entered this public golf course to only write down the scores he actually earned. This game is that clubhouse, the points they earn towards the rewards in the next installment are that free round. And the other golfers who played the same course that day have been treated unfairly. Of course they could pencil-whip their scores too, but the fact that they don't doesn't make it any more fair to them.

You're taking my analogy a bit far, but explain to me how achieving the Survivor title via Kath Hammers is ANYTHING like you just described? In point of fact, if ANet changes the Survivor title such that at any time a character acquires 1,337,500 xp without dieing regardless of prior death count, the exact OPPOSITE of what you describe is happening, which is that rather than one player getting a title advantage over others, the title now becomes a non-issue.

Quote:

No matter how minor your opinion of the value of that free round of golf is, the action was still dishonest, unfair, and against the rules; and no amount of justification you try to assert will ever change that. And being barred from playing on that particular course in the future is not an extreme reaction on the part of the owners of the clubhouse, and many people may find it completely appropriate.

Banning for cheating is fine. Turning in a quest reward is not cheating. Acquiring the item for said quest reward through gameplay or trading is not cheating. Therefore gaining Survivor via Kathandrax Hammers is not cheating.

Unless of course you contend that any repeatable quest is cheating, but that would be silly.

Quote:

As for your opinion that he was playing alone so only cheated himself...if the man had his own course on his own property and really was playing alone, it would be a completely different story, I would agree with you there. But he chose to play on a public course, and agreed to do so by the rules of that course, and is a part of the collective players of that course. It wasn't his private living room wall he posted that scorecard on for only himself to see, after all, and the free round wasn't really his to collect. If he had put that card in his pocket and went home, then he could have written any score on it he wanted, or written the first act of Hamlet on it - it wouldn't matter. But thats not the case, and nothing can justify hanging it on the public scoreboard.

First off you're making a bunch of baseless presumption on a simple analogy and taking it way too far. You're assuming that every cheating golfer ALWAYS posts his scorecard, which is an incredible fallacy.

Let me ask you this, do you really want your idea pushed into reality? Do you want only one way to get Survivor? You must realize the foolishness of such an idea. Gaining Survivor is based off of collected XP. If you say one method is valid and others aren't, then you're forcing other people to adhere to your playstyle. Not rules, not EULAs, but your specific idea of how the game should be played.

If you get rid of Kath Hammers, where is the line drawn, and why? Should we then eliminate Kilroy? How about double xp skill cap weekends? Why not skill cap XP entirely? Nerf every single build that allows farming, since XP is gained that way too? Get rid of the XP system entirely?

Where does it stop?

Quote:

As for the methods used by the other golfers to get their scores, they really don't matter, if they wrote down the scores they actually shot. But collecting the rewards for Kath Hammers while not doing the dungeon is adding a hole-in-one to your scorecard (XP Bar, xunlai chest, HoM, GW2) that you didn't shoot.

Please explain to me how players that have never been in the Underworld can have FoW armor? And why isn't that cheating?

Quote:

(on a side note, getting the title by boxing is just using a space-age titanium club and having walls that run along both sides of the strip between you and the hole that limit how far you can slice and don't let the ball go in the sandtrap. Its still technically golfing, and if the course manager allows those scores, then it's fine for them to be allowed, I guess. But at least you're hitting the ball and counting real strokes you actually took and not just making up shit scores on your card and posting those and collecting your free round for it. There is a difference.)

But, according to your logic, both methods must have the same end result, the same prestige. Someone posts Survivor on their character, it should have the same impact regardless of the method used.

So you're saying that the experience of screen golfing and its attendant prestige should equate the same as a full round of golf? I can't imagine Tiger Woods being given the PGA cup for playing indoor video golf, can you?

See, the danger of analogies is that if you don't understand them, it possible to get them all out of context and misrepresent them, which you pretty much did to the letter.

If you read nothing else, make sure you get this: what we've been discussing isn't cheating, you're just pissy because you don't agree with a certain playstyle.

ogre_jd · Feb 22, 2011, 09:16 PM // 21:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hell Darkblight

Chum is a slang term for a (usually male) friend.

I learned a new word.

It's also the bloody fish bits and guts you toss into the water to attract sharks.

Malganis · Feb 22, 2011, 09:30 PM // 21:30

One can have FoW armor without going into the Underworld because the armor crafter is in the FoW, and you can buy the needed ectos from other players or the Rare Material Trader.

And why are certain quest rewards like Hammers and Prismatic Gelatinous Material able to be turned in by anyone, but other rewards like the Spectral Crystal and the Exquisite Surmia Carving are only able to be turned in by the person who did the quest? Sounds like a bug or an unintended feature to me.