Curse

FeroxC · Sep 12, 2006, 02:36 PM // 14:36

Theres a fine line between trick and exploit imo; the book trick for instance id classify as a trick as its an original game mechanic and was working as intended(monsters trys to kill the book carrier first), using this was a minor abuse.

The 55hp glitch is also a original game mechanic but its being horribly abused it was designed to reduce massive damage spikes but its been abused to the state of stopping nearly all damage resulting in 55hp monks being far too overpowered in the under world, in comparison to other classes, the game mechanic itself is flawed.

I think the reason anet hasnt patched the 55hp is because of its tremendouse popularity, and they themselves cant decide whether is a trick or a glitch.

Klenn · Sep 12, 2006, 02:36 PM // 14:36

IMHO, if you go to your Task Manager (assuming you are running windows), and there is only 1 item on the list in the 'Applications' tab: Guild Wars, then chances are you are probably not cheating. As long as you don't break the EULA, you cannot be cheating. If someone checkmates you in 30 seconds in a game of chess, are they cheating because they are more aware of and experienced with the mechanics of the game? In GW, there are patches for a reason, and if something is overpowered then often the rules change (via a.net changing the code of the program).

Omega X · Sep 12, 2006, 07:39 PM // 19:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Klenn

IMHO, if you go to your Task Manager (assuming you are running windows), and there is only 1 item on the list in the 'Applications' tab: Guild Wars, then chances are you are probably not cheating. As long as you don't break the EULA, you cannot be cheating. If someone checkmates you in 30 seconds in a game of chess, are they cheating because they are more aware of and experienced with the mechanics of the game? In GW, there are patches for a reason, and if something is overpowered then often the rules change (via a.net changing the code of the program).

Exploits are cheats. Plain and Simple.

That means the person or persons could not play the game normally and rely preying on programming mistakes to get ahead.

It doesn't have to be in the EULA.

Monk Mystic · Sep 13, 2006, 12:44 AM // 00:44

in response to build nerfing, A-Net seems to give(im not saying this literally)a "score"to each build and lets it live depending on that score. I have a feeling that they will eventually nerf the 55builds.and i think nerfing builds is an awesome way of keeping the game from growing static.sure these nerfs piss people off(guilty) HOWEVER we get over it and move on (ie create new builds with "tricks").if youre going to stick around ToA in 4 months after they nerf 55 builds and be the old drunken guy that complains that they nerfed 55 builds LOOONG after theve actually been forgotten to all but you who still has the build set on your skillbar and the atts still set up hopeing they "unnerf" it one day before you die.well if thats you...GET A LIFE!learn some diversity.nerfing is annoying but useful.

sorry this was slightly off topic but SOMEONE said something about nerfs...

MMSDome · Sep 13, 2006, 01:31 AM // 01:31

55ing is probably the most intelligent build thought up in guild wars yet. Many people hate it because others overfarm and are richer then them. I give an insane amount of kudo's to whoever came up with this idea. I know that the dev's that put the -50hp item came up with it first otherwise why would they put in an item that gives minus health if they didnt intend for 55ing to be discovered? Anyway to think up the build piecing together these skills and the weapons took a great mind. The 55 is the most hated build in Guild Wars (close to IWAY). People refer to 55ing maybe as an exploit? No 55ing is simply skill the skill that the founder of 55ing had. It may not be hard to use and that is thanks to the skill of the creater of 55ing, he made it easy to use and now a great percentage of players use it.

55ing is a skill build!

Also!! I would also like to add IWAY, I myself hate the idea of IWAY as it is a way to get fame easily in HA. IWAY however is another brilliant build thought up by its maker. Instead of crying about it beat it, IWAY is a good filter to filter out the teams that dont deserve to win the HoH. IWAY is another build that involved skill to create and was made simple to repeat.

I used to protest against IWAY but now I hope it stays. I a person who rarely pvp's and am always looking for favor wuld appreciate if IWAY would stay because it filters out the teams that had no chance of winning HoH in the first place and it lets me know only the skilled teams can represent America. The fame IWAYers get is just payment for their kind acts.

Rera · Sep 13, 2006, 02:23 AM // 02:23

I honestly don't think there's any point in debating this. We have the (mis?)fortune of playing a game that can be patched at will. If you're wondering whether something is just a trick or a dastardly exploit, the only reasonable criteria is whether Anet patches it.

55ing has been going on for a long time, and while solo farming builds have been nerfed repeatedly over the game's history, the development team has thus far allowed this particular trick to stay. Clearly, the devs intend this sort of thing to be possible, so claiming that it's a glitch or exploit is simply incorrect.

Ron vo · Sep 13, 2006, 02:33 AM // 02:33

Yeah you gotta switch your build for every situation.When i got hit by thunder clap for the 1st time...I was thinking it was a trick or something.To me...one scary elite o_O

Ken Dei · Sep 13, 2006, 03:28 AM // 03:28

My Method:

Is what's going on a NIGF?
-Yes: Proceed.
-No: No problem.

Is the NIGF giving a significant advantage to others, at the expense of others?
-Yes: Exploit.
-No: Proceed.

Is the NIGF causing significant harm to the economy?
-Yes: Exploit.
-No: Proceed.

Is the NIGF circumventing the style of play or spirit in which a partcular area should be played:
-Yes: Exploit.
-No: No problem, assuming it past the other criteria.

draxynnic · Sep 13, 2006, 03:46 AM // 03:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by MelechRic

I'm wondering what you thing about getting monsters into narrow areas where you can focus fire/AoE them to death. In the ToPK at the end you basically do that to all the popups/grasping monsters. Pulling one group at a time of course. So is that an exploit? By your standards it is because even the dumbest players eventually realize that tight grouping = AoE death.

I think your analogy is a bit vague because there are plenty of places where they AI is dumber than dumbest human and it's not considered an exploit. Just for example, is the case when you've got 10hp and you're running from a monster. No human (even the dumbest player) would let you get away to heal and come back for another go. However, if you run far enough from the AI it will turn around and stop its chase. Is that an exploit?

The problem is that what is an exploit is very subjective. A lot of people don't like to see people get things "the easy way." So they complain about exploits. Like I said above, the game gets played a lot of different ways. If you play through your way and have fun then I don't see why it would bother you if someone else plays through differently and has fun too.

Ultimately I think the only place where exploits can occur in this game is the PvP portion. Exploits there have a direct detrimental effect on other players. Things like the "infinite energy" exploit are bad because they are an unfair advantage in a competitive environment.

Let me alter my definition somewhat, then. "If Guild Wars was converted to an adventure for the tabletop RPG system of your choice and you were the Games Master, would you allow it?" (This immediately brings up the question of why you can engage one group in full view of another without the second (generally) responding. Since this is a staple of computer RPGs in general, we'll assume that in our fictional tabletop version there is an explanation and move on.)

Referring to the post before yours: The AOE question is an interesting one - in truth, there are some situations where you should stay in the AOE, and some where you shouldn't. What I would probably suggest is for monsters subject to an AOE to have a chance of running, depending on the damage they take from the AOE compared to other sources, their current health, the health of their current target, whether they need to be in melee to attack, and a certain 'aggressiveness factor' of the monster. Come to think of it, a similar code could be used for determining whether monsters under the effect of SS and similar effects stop attacking or ignore it. (One advantage of this system would be to introduce some randomness. The current AI is just as exploitable as the old, as even the smallest amounts of damage can provoke scattering, potentially saving someone's life - having monsters always run can be exploited as easily as having monsters never run)

On luring the enemy into a bottleneck: That is a viable military tactic. If you keep using the same bottleneck over and over again without cleaning up the evidence of previous 'use', however, future groups may be less willing to throw themselves into the gauntlet. We can assume, however, that the characters have the means to do said cleaning up

. Yes, once the rain of fireballs starts they might realise their mistake and try to back out, but that is already partially taken into account by the AOE fear code.

On running away from monsters: Would you give up the chase if not doing so would lead you into another mob? Would you give up the chase if you were protecting something (which, from the point of view of the mobs, could simply be their territory) and continuing the chase could let something else get in? I'd certainly consider it. After all, you might know you're alone out there (unless you are running towards the guards of a shrine or something like that, of course...) but the mobs don't.

Meanwhile, I consider the book trick to be a clear exploit, especially when it involves something relatively unimportant like a gear in Sorrow's Furnace. Yes, human players do sometimes get tunnel vision on the objective, but unless the Stone Summit really are mindless automatons (okay, maybe the golems...) would they really continue hurling themselves at one character who is the focus of an entire party's defensive efforts and therefor virtually invulnerable while the rest of the party blasts away in complete safety, just because their target happens to be carrying a fancy widget? Of course not.

That said, there are differences between an exploit that actually hurts someone and one that is relatively harmless, of which PvP exploits fall into the first category, and PvE exploits, as a general rule, fall into the second (although they can make life difficult for people who wanted to do things properly to get parties...). In fact, I'll admit that at times I'll use a 'trick' that I know full well to be an exploit of the kind that doesn't hurt anyone else - but when I laugh with glee at the monsters being stuck on a piece of terrain any player should be able to circumnavigate and blast the living daylights out of them, I don't try to tell myself that's how the monsters are supposed to behave

.

Elbereth_Tiniquetil · Sep 13, 2006, 04:41 AM // 04:41

I have a question; I have a Character in Pre Searing that I am on most days. Last week while dancing a discussion was started about if it was cheating to have a pet bear in pre. I said I believed it was ok after all I had one. As soon as I said that the player said reported.

I asked the player if they had been joking or being serious. The reply they are sick of players abusing the game…

My opinion is not all things in the game that take skill to get is cheating after all the game mods can make the spiders so that they can’t be charmed. So is it cheating to have a pet bear?

Samuel Dravis · Sep 13, 2006, 05:02 AM // 05:02

I don't think so, and why would it matter in pre anyway? It's not like it would help you that much - there's no pvp and there's also no farming (cept dyes I guess, but that can be done without a pet).

Eviance · Sep 13, 2006, 06:09 AM // 06:09

Whether the gear/book trick was intended or not doesn't matter for the following reasons:
A mob could easily wipe the tank with a simple shatter of the right enchantment.
AND the book trick didn't always hold agro.... If you got to close you became target enemy #1.

So at least for the most part it took some bit of skill to hold the agro just right with or without the book, the book/gear made it easier yes but total exploit/cheat no. I assume that this is why Anet left it in. To me it seemed more like a tool to help tanks learn to better control agro... Once you learn the mechanics of it anyways the book/gear just becomes an accessory imo.

55 if not an exploit either, I mean for pitties sake yes it would get rid of the bots sorta kinda till they found a new build, but heck I can barely run mine lol. If its an exploit or a cheat it should be easy to handle and I know a bunch of people that suck at being 55's. And it can so easily be shut down. You just need to strip off one enchantment and its all over. If a 55 gets hit for too much damage they are dead nothing gained. Even a master 55er can be killed and without any real skill. I can solo farm with my warrior but nothing I use is an exploit or cheat, I just set it up to be efficient which to me is exactly what a 55 is.

Former Ruling · Sep 13, 2006, 08:15 AM // 08:15

There doesn't need to be any difference.

There are only two classifications.

Is something going to get you suspended, or is it fine.

And that goes down to how much it effects the other person. Anet has to date only suspended for "exploiting" when it really effected people or broke the game. Also - Only if its on the small scale. They get rid of the real bannable stuff before the masses can even touch it.

Simple thing is, atleast to this point in time, Anet doesn't slap the wrists of "Griefers" (people that use things in the game [both intended or unintended] inorder to ruin the experience of others for their own laugher)

Mr_T_bot · Sep 13, 2006, 12:41 PM // 12:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by MMSDome

I know that the dev's that put the -50hp item came up with it first otherwise why would they put in an item that gives minus health if they didnt intend for 55ing to be discovered?

In the land of Oz, the wizard knows everything! Too bad this isn't Oz and Arena Net isn't a wizard. Arena Net probably never though anyone would decrease their hp by the much, especially since only two classes can get to 55hp without exploiting rune bugs, neither of which is the monk or necromancer primary.