Curse

Gill Halendt · Jun 14, 2010, 08:50 AM // 08:50

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

If its not possible to solve sync problem, do not promote it, or create loophole by replying with stupid stupid email that says "hitting the enter button same time as your friend isn't a violation"

Well, what did you expect?

It's simple as that: hitting the enter button at the same time as your friend isn't a violation indeed. Elementary, my dear Watson. Is there a glitch you're exploiting? No. Is there a fault in a game mechanic you're exploiting? Neither: randomness also implies the accidental chance of teaming up with friends/guildies/partners. You can't force it, you hit a button and hope it works.

Get over it: as long as players can't find a reliable way to assure 100% synching - which would lead to massive abuses and need a fix ASAP - , they won't react, as random assignment of some people hitting the button at the same time is a non-existent issue in their books. It's just one of the multiple possibilities of any random environments: synching is allowed by the faulty design of RA itself.

They can't prevent it, they can just make synching harder. That's pretty much their stance, as requested by OP: as it is now, synching is possible indeed, but pretty much unavoidable whatever fix they try to implement. Since the odds of synching are rather slim, they won't be doing anything more than what they did last year to solve this issue tough.

Again, I'll ask: how would people here fix synching without redesignin/removing RA?

If you can find a reasonable solution, I'll pay you a drink.

*lemming* · Jun 14, 2010, 09:38 AM // 09:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

Again, I'll ask: how would people here fix synching without redesignin/removing RA?

If you can find a reasonable solution, I'll pay you a drink.

Select teams randomly from everyone in the queue, instead of in order.

I'll be expecting my drink tomorrow.

AmbientMelody · Jun 14, 2010, 10:07 AM // 10:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by pumpkin pie

If you, ArenaNet aren't or won't do anything about the sync problem, I kindly ask you to please remove the Gladiator title track and Random Arena.

Thank you.

I have a better idea - simply remove all the titles altogether. Oh, and emotes, too. Let's play for the ultimate bragging rights of reaching the top, rather than farming noobs on the way to the top. I believe it will benefit both ends.

fenix · Jun 14, 2010, 11:22 AM // 11:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Select teams randomly from everyone in the queue, instead of in order.

I'll be expecting my drink tomorrow.

This. Solved.

Anyway, ANet already explained their stance. They don't like it but can't be bothered using any resources to fix it. Either deal with it or stop playing RA.

Gill Halendt · Jun 14, 2010, 12:25 PM // 12:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Select teams randomly from everyone in the queue, instead of in order.

I'll be expecting my drink tomorrow.

I believe that's how it works now, otherwise two players clicking at the very same time will have pretty much 100% chances of synching, which is not the case.

Killed u man · Jun 14, 2010, 01:07 PM // 13:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

Well, what did you expect?

It's simple as that: hitting the enter button at the same time as your friend isn't a violation indeed. Elementary, my dear Watson. Is there a glitch you're exploiting? No. (1) Is there a fault in a game mechanic you're exploiting? Neither: randomness also implies the accidental chance of teaming up with friends/guildies/partners. You can't force it, you hit a button and hope it works.

It depends what you define as a fault in a game mechanic. According to the name, aswell as the random description you get (I think by talking to the priest of balthasar in Isle of Nameless) it states you get randomly teamed up with other people.

The second you, as a player, have any control of that "random chance" it's not random anymore, and can therefore be concidered unexpected/intended behaviour, and falls in the exploit category.

No, syncers shouldn't be banned, and maybe not even stripped off their titles (I wouldn't mind it, but be honest, the glad title has no meaning whatsoever -It's worse than the HA title), but syncing should be fixed.

Lemming won the thread by the way.

fireflyry · Jun 14, 2010, 02:18 PM // 14:18

It's getting kinda silly on Guru now.

No offence OP but people here seem to be pointing out every fault in the game and QQing over it.

No game has ever been or ever will be perfect.

I agree you might have a point but it's easily ignored and to me it's just picking at straws for the heck of it.

Edit:

Forgot about Pacman.

Gill Halendt · Jun 14, 2010, 02:34 PM // 14:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Killed u man

The second you, as a player, have any control of that "random chance" it's not random anymore, and can therefore be concidered unexpected/intended behaviour, and falls in the exploit category.

Off course.

Problem is, synchers have effectively no "control" over team composition, they have no secret combination to ensure ending up in the same team, they just attempt to increase their chances of getting what they want and sometimes succeed at that.

Isn't that purely random as well?

Quote:

Originally Posted by fireflyry

It's getting kinda silly on Guru now.

No offence OP but people here seem to be pointing out every fault in the game and QQing over it.

This.

Exploitophobia spreading after the mass ban.

snaek · Jun 14, 2010, 03:49 PM // 15:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Select teams randomly from everyone in the queue, instead of in order.

I believe that's how it works now, otherwise two players clicking at the very same time will have pretty much 100% chances of synching, which is not the case.

have you even tried syncing? it doesn't sound like your familiar with how it works at all.

lemming is 100% correct; players are formed on teams in order.

the old queue system grouped players from the same district with each other, so if you found an empty district, you had an extremely high success rate. this has been "fixed".

the new queue system still selects teams in order, however there is no influence on district as it draws from every single district without bias. syncing is still possible, albeit at a lower success rate.

Quote:

...otherwise two players clicking at the very same time will have pretty much 100% chances of synching, which is not the case.

i'll tell you the real reason why syncing isn't that easy as it sounds: a lot of people play ra. do you know why its so easy to sync codex with a near 100% success rate? oh right, because no one else is playing. to emphasize a point made earlier, i highly doubt that ra will die if the title is removed or modified; ra is the most casual form of pvp (casual meaning 'who gives a flip about titles').

Gill Halendt · Jun 14, 2010, 04:36 PM // 16:36

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

syncing isn't that easy as it sounds

So why do you expect ANet to fix a non-existent issue?

If it's not that easy and the raw number of active players is enough to mix the cards up, why "fixing" it? They've already implemented a "solution" (unbiased district selection), even if they went for the lazy one.

Sure, random formation is probably better than selection in order, assuming this is actually how teams are formed.

Now, ever thought that they either:

- Don't have the workforce to implement such a change? People assume it's simple and easy to do, while it probably isn't.
- Don't have the resources to implement such a change? People assume it's something that can be done overnight and doesn't require accurate testing.
- Don't think it's necessary? It's a significant change that doesn't really fix anything and still allows syncing, even if at an even lower success rate.

So I don't blame them for abiding by the "If it ain't broken don't fix it" rule.

To Chicken To Die · Jun 14, 2010, 04:41 PM // 16:41

http://www.guildwars.com/support/leg...sofconduct.php

Rule 24 first sentence.

It is sad GuildWars can't work with there own rules. They can't and simply put it away with the words "We don't see it as". While it is well known that syncing is very easy, and gives your team a adventage on a balanced group that can take most randoms group with only 3 out of the 4 people succeed the sync attempt. While there are easy solutions to make it atleast harder to sync. Like stated by lemmings wich does NOT need a 2 min wait since the amount of people joining a battle in all district is big enough to form more then 2 teams.

And this has been since the start of RA. And the only problem is that Anet simply refuses to take action. (as for the past 5 years and no response for changes for now)

Edit: A wild try to detect syncers for Anet (Besides guildes formed on it) Is to first investigate an average amount of people get joined together in RA. With that number you can make a system that keep track of every players averge of teaming up with any player. When a % of that spikes xx% above average wich means the player gets in the same team with the same person a lot more then average they will get "Flagged" followed by a GM that reviews the chat log to see if any countdown may have happend and if there is conection between the players (guild/friend list/same IP address/ Lot of trades between or conversation) Offcourse this excludes 3th party prgrams (vent/ts) Since there hard to track. But atleast it is a way in the right direction.

To bad it will cost work and manpower wich Anet both lack.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fenix

Anyway, ANet already explained their stance. They don't like it but can't be bothered using any resources to fix it. Either deal with it or stop playing RA.

And this is the cause of the lost in the player numbers and increase in third party programs. There lack to do there job and no motivation.

It almost says We know and We feel with you. But we don't care deal with it or gtfo.

axe · Jun 14, 2010, 05:38 PM // 17:38

I dont think it matters at this point anymore (unfortunately)

because if there are 100 tards waiting to join a team and you try to sync you will get on a team of 3, regardless if you know them or not.

Martin Alvito · Jun 14, 2010, 06:39 PM // 18:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by To Chicken To Die

And this is the cause of the lost in the player numbers and increase in third party programs. There lack to do there job and no motivation.

No, that would be because this is a five year old game that has had minimal new content for the last three years.

Even the best games don't keep a sizable community forever.

Lemming has it right on what to do about the problem. That won't resolve the issue during low traffic hours, but it's the best feasible solution without dedicating a lot of manpower to enforcement.

snaek · Jun 14, 2010, 06:40 PM // 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by gill halendt

So why do you expect ANet to fix a non-existent issue?

the issue may not be a big one, but it still exists. and no, i don't expect anet to do anything about it (don't recall ever saying that i did); i do agree with parts of the op that it is a problem and i do agree with some of the solutions brought up by other people in this thread.

my beef with anet's stance and the stance of other people is that they're confusing:

"syncing is against the rules, but we can not or will not fix it." - yes
"we can not or will not fix syncing, so syncing is perfectly okay to do." - no

a lot of people seem to think the latter.

Gill Halendt · Jun 14, 2010, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

my beef with anet's stance and the stance of other people is that they're confusing:

"syncing is against the rules, but we can not or will not fix it." - yes
"we can not or will not fix syncing, so syncing is perfectly okay to do." - no

a lot of people seem to think the latter.

You also assume that I think the latter, which isn't true. If they can fix it, I'm all for it. I doubt they'll ever bother implementing a solution such as the one suggested by lemming, as Anet seems to think they got it fixed enough and it's fine with them. So we agree on this point. Yay.

It's just... annoying to find new topics like this pretty much every day after the mass ban. Most of these are actually lamenting serious issues, no doubt. Problem is they all take this turn on their way, issues are often blown out of proportions... and these topics usually become some sort of a witch hunt for "exploits".

Sure, Anet stepped in and displayed a show of force with the mass ban inflicted to botters. Now I get the impression that people are asking for more, they want more "blood", they want the game to be magically fixed, to turn perfect overnight and all the offenders (even the minor ones) on the block.

Right now, with Anet unable to even go live with updates not containing bugs and absurd oversights, I'm just glad if they can keep the boat afloat. This game has too many serious issues they've been neglecting for ages to expect proper fixes now.

snaek · Jun 14, 2010, 07:54 PM // 19:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by gill halendt

You also assume that I think the latter, which isn't true.

nah, your on a whole different level of bad. your earlier posts imply that syncing isn't a problem or that it doesn't even exist at all (which is borderline ignorance btw).

Mustache Mayhem · Jun 14, 2010, 10:15 PM // 22:15

yeah they could probably stop syncing.. just make everyone who entered the que within a certain time split teams and the rest go into the next que.. might not be that simple but it sounds like it might work

Gill Halendt · Jun 14, 2010, 11:04 PM // 23:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by snaek

nah, your on a whole different level of bad. your earlier posts imply that syncing isn't a problem or that it doesn't even exist at all (which is borderline ignorance btw).

Nah, absolutely not. That's what you wanted to read in my posts. I'm just against oversimplifications so common on the Internet, but that is a lost cause.

I never, ever negated the existence of syncing, nor I've ever stated that it's not a problem. I just think problems are being often blown out of proportions and turned into matters of mere principle: just to quote yourself, you said in an earlier post that syncing is "not as easy as it sounds" after the district fix. So the fix was somehow effective. Half-baked, not perfect maybe, but it worked. Now, quite frankly, syncing is either easy and a serious nuisance for other players, or "not as easy as it sounds" and hence not so widespread and disturbing. Again, if the raw number of players alone is enough to slim down the possibilities of syncing as you said before, the problem is much less serious and urgent than described. Anet is probably happy with the fix they've implemented and won't bother introducing more changes for an issue they seem to perceive as non-existent.

Anet's stance? To me, it's clear enough: for them, the problem is pretty much solved, GMs claim that clicking the Enter button in sync is not a problem - as synchronized clicks are no way a guarantee of successful syncing - so it's not me who's implying that the problem doesn't exist.

Amy Awien · Jun 15, 2010, 06:16 AM // 06:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Select teams randomly from everyone in the queue, instead of in order.

This will have (or has?) some people waiting extraordinarily long before they get into a team.

*lemming* · Jun 15, 2010, 09:08 AM // 09:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amy Awien

This will have (or has?) some people waiting extraordinarily long before they get into a team.

Not really, the number of teams being formed every 30 second interval will still be the same.