Curse

scrinner · Jul 08, 2006, 03:37 AM // 03:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by ilovecp

Perhaps I should've said, people going AFK isn't DUE to bugs.

Seriously YOU are the one who doesn't know what you're rambling on about. What does this whole AFK issue have to do with bugs at all? And while we're on it, HOW do you propose to ""solve"" this ""bug"" of yours then? You CAN'T fix people going AFK, you can only deter AGAINST it.

They already said they're looking into it, but all you're doing here is whine about your silly little opinion. WHo cares if it is a """bug""", the fact is they are aware of the issue.

That is not flame baiting. However ilovecps 2nd post was

and Samuel, even if it was available after missions, It still means one whole slot was wasted during that time.

Also to the OP. There is no bug, no matter how you put it, a Bug is something wrong with the system, to make it do something unattended. There is no bug in the way teh SYSTEM rewards the player. They were on the team, they gain the award. However, it is not completely favored for the afker. They do not gain any exp unless in the aggro bubble, And im sure money count is lowered for them (Un-sure). There is no clear way to stop afking-ness. And to the whole idea of More ranks.... No more discrimination! But a bad rank... im all up for. Afking for the whole mission? How about a negative point to that player?

- After X Negative points, player cannot enter PVP areas without getting back to 0 , removing the negative points.
- After X Negative points, please cannot enter live teams and is restricted to Hench men.

I believe the op is reffering to the Rewards system as being bugged, not the afking ness itself. Though however his WORDING does make one think that AFKING is a bug itself.

Quote:

1) Software bug.
There is not doubt that the bug exists. You can call it poor design or fundamental issue, it doesn't matter. It is a vulnerability allowing unsportsmanlike players to gain unfair advantage. Therefore it is a bug.

Im sure you might be onto something, However your own source of proof, the wIki STATES that there is no clear solution to this problem, So please stop bashing the Design of the game.

This here problem, is not an Exploit of a BUG. It is a problem with the person itself. Thus it is not a support issue. They said they would look into it, and im sure they will come up with something

- Just my Two cents. Hope im not bashing you or anything.

Ira Blinks · Jul 08, 2006, 04:11 AM // 04:11

i can only suggest you to read this again

Quote:

You can call it poor design or fundamental issue, it doesn't matter. It is a vulnerability allowing unsportsmanlike players to gain unfair advantage. Therefore it is a bug.

And wiki is only a source of definition for word "leecher", nothing more.

Quote:

This here problem, is not an Exploit of a BUG. It is a problem with the person itself

I fail to see a contradiction you trying to show me.
Is there a problem with people mentality? Yes.
Does it mean software is less broken? No.

What is so hard to understand here? Fine... i'll make up an easier example:
Imagine modern society w/o cops. People would be committing crimes left and right. By you logic society doesn't need cops in the first place, because it is a problem with people. And since there is no enforcement, nothing is prohibited. And everything that is not prohibited is allowed. Thus crimes are not really crimes, just a bad behavior on peoples' part.
Sure it would be nice if people wouldn’t try to commit crimes in the first place, but it is a luxury that might never happen. Enforcement and clear distinction between allowed and not allowed is a necessity.

Lasareth · Jul 08, 2006, 05:08 AM // 05:08

Reminder to keep discussion civil. Sharing opinions is fine, but personal attacks are not.

Thanks.

arcanemacabre · Jul 08, 2006, 05:53 AM // 05:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ira Blinks

Imagine modern society w/o cops. People would be committing crimes left and right. By you logic society doesn't need cops in the first place, because it is a problem with people. And since there is no enforcement, nothing is prohibited. And everything that is not prohibited is allowed. Thus crimes are not really crimes, just a bad behavior on peoples' part.
Sure it would be nice if people wouldn’t try to commit crimes in the first place, but it is a luxury that might never happen. Enforcement and clear distinction between allowed and not allowed is a necessity.

Let me chime in here. The problem with an analogy like this, is that the "cops" in GW is represented by game code. In real life, an individual could break into your house, and steal whatever they want. The hypothetical cop in this situation is in place to catch said individual and eventually have them thrown in jail (of course after a long process, but you get the point).

In GW, we have game code that prevents you from breaking into someone's storage and stealing whatever. Because of this, we don't need a cop to throw anyone anywhere, because the crime can't even happen.

Thing is, we're not talking theft, here. We're talking an abuse of 'the system'. Unfortunately, in real life, people abuse the system all the time. It's not illegal, and there's nothing cops can do about it. The whole point of abusing the system, is to find out where the laws that govern people and keep them from stealing and what-not are not entirely solid, and make it work in your favor.

So, we pretty much know that going AFK is not a 'crime' as said by Gaile. So no amount of cops on the beat is going to solve this. What we need is new laws, or rather, new CODE. You can't, however, just make AFKing 'illegal'. That would be equivalent to making standing on the sidewalk illegal just because there are people who stand on a sidewalk to peddle wares.

So what can they do? I really don't know, personally. Coming up with ideas of how to fix this issue is more important than complaining about it, I can say that much.

Does-it-Matter · Jul 08, 2006, 01:33 PM // 13:33

Going AFK in a mission is no different than 55-ing, playing out the mission normally, or hell, delivering quest item A to person B. It's part of the game, it's a strategy, and for some people, it pays off.

The benefit is you gain faction without having to physically be there.

The cost is it takes a lot longer, can be against EULA (read: botting), and the pay off isn't as big (usually).

There is nothing wrong with it, it's not an exploit. Nothing says that "You can't hinder your team to possibly get a smaller reward than you would have attained."

At best its a loophole, a legal, EULA-compliant part of the game.

And for the record, I've never afk'd for faction once.

Renegade ++RIP++ · Jul 08, 2006, 02:01 PM // 14:01

1) While playing Guild Wars, you must respect the rights of others and their rights to play and enjoy the game. To this end, you may not defraud, harass, threaten, or cause distress and/or unwanted attention to other players.

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

knowing this Gaile, can you epxlain to me how in the nine rings it is possible to still state that afk-ers aren't distressing nor ruining their gameplayexperience and therefore not subject to support issue. Although bots were a support issue since they breach the same rules and regulations...

Seems a tad strange and dual standarded to me...

WasAGuest · Jul 08, 2006, 02:13 PM // 14:13

I know Ira's frustration; I've even given up on those missions due to standing around for what feels like forever then get stuck with afkers.

Bad thing is the afk thinking has even pushed onward towards other missions and quest/areas in Tyria now. I've had so many people just go afk in the last few weeks that I've gotten to the point, if I can train a ton of things on them, I do so. Worst case was some jefk who just stood there. After ten minutes we returned to where he still stood and descided via whispers to sit around him till he came back. After literally 45 minutes, he came back and had the nerve to say "Why haven't you all finished the mission yet?"

Problem is funnier now though; Anet put in the "ring" games during the festival and encouraged afking. So they obviously have no issues with people afking. I would imagine this is a lost cause at this point.

This behavior has made PuGs the worst possible situation to play in, and as such I find myself logging into play, trying a mission or bonus with henchies once then logging out in frustration. - I'm stuck with henchies at this point because majority of my guild has quit playing due to lack of content.

Does-it-Matter · Jul 09, 2006, 06:27 AM // 06:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Renegade ++RIP++

1) While playing Guild Wars, you must respect the rights of others and their rights to play and enjoy the game. To this end, you may not defraud, harass, threaten, or cause distress and/or unwanted attention to other players.

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

knowing this Gaile, can you epxlain to me how in the nine rings it is possible to still state that afk-ers aren't distressing nor ruining their gameplayexperience and therefore not subject to support issue. Although bots were a support issue since they breach the same rules and regulations...

Seems a tad strange and dual standarded to me...

Because if you want to read something liberally, you can make it say whatever you want.

Under your logic, someone beating me in PvP violates that rule.

Or Rage Quiters.

Or Monks that won't join groups.

Or Whammos.

Or Assassins not being taken into groups.

Or a monster killing the group in PvE.

Or an idiot causing a party whipe in PvE.

Or everyone getting drops but one person, in PvE.

Or the reminder of how long you played the game. (Remember people complained about that too).

Etc.

---

Don't take the rule out of context. You're using the "or cause distress and/or unwanted attention to other players." as a wide-armed end all to rule out AFKers.

Look at the words before it, harrass and threaten. They don't want you to sit here and "cyber-bully" or make racial remarks, or death threats and all those other things that might get them law suits from overzealous mothers. Not the fact that an AFKer has very slightly dampened your fun in the game.

Gli · Jul 09, 2006, 07:22 AM // 07:22

It is a support issue, no doubt about it. Forget about all the is-it-a-bug-or-isn't-it-a-bug. It's a support issue because ANet themselves tell us it's a support issue, no matter what Gaile says. Here's a quote from GuildWars.com. (The bold text for emphasis is my work, not theirs.)

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://www.guildwars.com/support/

Home > Support

Support
If you have a support question of any kind, please consult our Knowledge Base to find out what you want to know. Whether it's a technical issue, an account question, or a query about the upcoming title, you can search the Knowledge Base for answers. If you find that you have a more specific request, or if you wish to report unacceptable in-game behavior, simply click the "Ask a Question" tab to fill out a "ticket" and submit it directly to our Support Team. We have folks online 24/7 to help you! Please click the appropriate link for support in your region:

There you have it.

It is a support issue.

Does-it-Matter · Jul 09, 2006, 07:31 AM // 07:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

It is a support issue, no doubt about it. Forget about all the is-it-a-bug-or-isn't-it-a-bug. It's a support issue because ANet themselves tell us it's a support issue, no matter what Gaile says. Here's a quote from GuildWars.com. (The bold text for emphasis is my work, not theirs.)

There you have it.

It is a support issue.

I see where you're coming with that, but I still think that's a stretch. Personally, I think that's speaking to more of harrassing and inappropriate comments and the such, not a play style.

While we are more than free to report it to them, I don't think it would have any reaction different than reporting greifers or rage quitters.

arcanemacabre · Jul 09, 2006, 07:38 AM // 07:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

It is a support issue, no doubt about it. Forget about all the is-it-a-bug-or-isn't-it-a-bug. It's a support issue because ANet themselves tell us it's a support issue, no matter what Gaile says. Here's a quote from GuildWars.com. (The bold text for emphasis is my work, not theirs.)

There you have it.

It is a support issue.

That is a good point you brought up. Thing is, "unacceptable in-game behaviour" is a very subjective term. Is it "unacceptable" to Anet to AFK? Apparently not according to Gaile, and that is where the proverbial line is drawn. Not terribly clear on the website, though, I'll give you that.

Point is, you could still report this all day long to support. Hell, you could report that So-and-so called you a noob, or you just got beat in GvG by a bunch of Touch Rangers, but none of it will be considered a 'support issue' by Anet and will likely be closed. This is all completely at their discretion.

Amity and Truth · Jul 09, 2006, 07:40 AM // 07:40

An anti AFK mechanism in Missions sure would help a lot more than wasting time on re-wording the EULA. What in all honesty would an EULA Rewording do? More people throwing Ban threats at each other. It's allready ridiculous enough, we don't want to emphasize this behavior, do we?

"Omg, gimme item or me will reportz you!"
"Lol, you meh called Noob, lol report u - censored - censored - censored - censored"
"I know a dev, you will get banned. Say bye to your account."

Gli · Jul 09, 2006, 08:02 AM // 08:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

That is a good point you brought up. Thing is, "unacceptable in-game behaviour" is a very subjective term. Is it "unacceptable" to Anet to AFK? Apparently not according to Gaile, and that is where the proverbial line is drawn. Not terribly clear on the website, though, I'll give you that.

Point is, you could still report this all day long to support. Hell, you could report that So-and-so called you a noob, or you just got beat in GvG by a bunch of Touch Rangers, but none of it will be considered a 'support issue' by Anet and will likely be closed. This is all completely at their discretion.

There's not a shred of doubt in my minb that AFK-ing on purpose in certain places would fall under 'unacceptable behaviour'. It absolutely ruins gameplay during missions like Fort Aspenwood. The AFKer's teammembers are in a real way hampered in their enjoyment of the game, not in a "I've been called a noob" kind of way.

Competitive missions are my chosen way to gain Faction, and believe me, playing for a few hours with the same people showing up AFK every few games, that's... annyoing. (Keeping it civil.)

ShadowStorm · Jul 09, 2006, 08:17 AM // 08:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by Samuel Dravis

Yeah, it's not a bug. I think it should be addressed somehow, but it's not a bug.

You're right. It's not a bug. But the OP is right too. It IS an exploit. By the definition, this is an exploit that allows a player to get unlimited gain (faction) without having to do anything at all. (except press a mouse button once every few minutes.)

It does need to be addressed. Either by removing the exploit: making it so that players get no reward unless they actually do something, or by banning those that take advantage of the exploit (It's not like A-Net hasn't banned exploiters before.)

arcanemacabre · Jul 09, 2006, 08:19 AM // 08:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gli

There's not a shred of doubt in my minb that AFK-ing on purpose in certain places would fall under 'unacceptable behaviour'. It absolutely ruins gameplay during missions like Fort Aspenwood. The AFKer's teammembers are in a real way hampered in their enjoyment of the game, not in a "I've been called a noob" kind of way.

Competitive missions are my chosen way to gain Faction, and believe me, playing for a few hours with the same people showing up AFK every few games, that's... annyoing. (Keeping it civil.)

I'm not disagreeing with you in the least. I'm just saying that on their site it says you can report 'unacceptable behaviour'. If they want to persue it, they will, and it will be considered a 'support issue' as support will be handling it. If they want to close the ticket and have nothing more to do with it, then it's not a support issue to them. I was merely giving examples of other things they would immediately close, not comparing the severity of the issues at hand.

And yes, it is really annoying.

Gli · Jul 09, 2006, 09:17 AM // 09:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by arcanemacabre

I'm not disagreeing with you in the least. I'm just saying that on their site it says you can report 'unacceptable behaviour'. If they want to persue it, they will, and it will be considered a 'support issue' as support will be handling it. If they want to close the ticket and have nothing more to do with it, then it's not a support issue to them. I was merely giving examples of other things they would immediately close, not comparing the severity of the issues at hand.

And yes, it is really annoying.

Regardless, it's a support issue, despite Gaile claiming it isn't. That's the only point I wanted to make.

Thom Bangalter · Jul 09, 2006, 09:43 AM // 09:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sarah Pyers

sorry but vote to kick is not a good idea in anyway at all.

oh, sweet, a green dropped for me!
vote kicked...

well you get the idea, if Anet went this route theyd have to do something with item drops and assigning as well.

how about, and I think this is what they meant, /kick character name only works for alliance battles, when you see someone clearly afk for the whole game.

there are far, far more important things for the support team to handle than 1 or 2 people going afk during aspenwood. getting stuck in terrain, for one. z-axis, for another.

Gli · Jul 09, 2006, 10:41 AM // 10:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thom Bangalter

there are far, far more important things for the support team to handle than 1 or 2 people going afk during aspenwood. getting stuck in terrain, for one. z-axis, for another.

No, the AFK issue is infinitely more important. Not dealing with it, heck, even coming out with a statement that it's not a support issue, that's silent consent, that's sending a message that it's OK to ruin other people's enjoyment. That's not a message you want to send.

And actually, if that IS their stance, I'll be doing some AFK faction farming of my own soon.

Spoony · Jul 09, 2006, 10:58 AM // 10:58

I think that, vote /kick should be able when the person has done or undone something that everyone else did, some sort of conditions of kicking. Dunno what sort of conditions, though. Not moving for 10 minutes would do, but true leechers would have a hack for moving each minute, or something. Those could be banned, however, as there are few that would do so.

Renegade ++RIP++ · Jul 09, 2006, 01:15 PM // 13:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Does-it-Matter

Because if you want to read something liberally, you can make it say whatever you want.

Under your logic, someone beating me in PvP violates that rule.

Or Rage Quiters.

Or Monks that won't join groups.

Or Whammos.

Or Assassins not being taken into groups.

Or a monster killing the group in PvE.

Or an idiot causing a party whipe in PvE.

Or everyone getting drops but one person, in PvE.

Or the reminder of how long you played the game. (Remember people complained about that too).

Etc.

---

Don't take the rule out of context. You're using the "or cause distress and/or unwanted attention to other players." as a wide-armed end all to rule out AFKers.

Look at the words before it, harrass and threaten. They don't want you to sit here and "cyber-bully" or make racial remarks, or death threats and all those other things that might get them law suits from overzealous mothers. Not the fact that an AFKer has very slightly dampened your fun in the game.

It isn't out of context... people going afk is hurting my enjoyment of the game. Therefore it is ruining my gameplayexperience in the same way as bots are ruining the gaemplayexperience if they are on my team. And last i checked they do denounce botting, therefore the previous one should be denounced as well and be bannable/fixeable but sure as hell be worthy of a supportticket...

Now to come back to the points you highlight, i would say that someone beating me during pvp is not bannable since its part of their competetive focus and i had fun during the fight.

Next rage quitters: sure are annoying and should be fixed / punished, not banned. Fixed by substituting with a simple hench and not letting the person play the game untill his previous group finished the mission either by failing it or completing it.

monks, whammos, assasins, monsters, idiots is all to bad but in a way have some fixes, ergo availability of henchies not to mention that it is part of gamePLAY and not gameAFK.

Drops is part of gameplaymechanics but meh it has been changed partly during the last year, so some peple might consider it a possibility for improvement. Even though for me its simply part of any rpg game.

Remainder of the game, i would have no problem with if people found it annoying, in the end its an option that people should be able to customize as being non shown. Default is on though. But in the end it would be the persons choice not anets...