Curse

SirJackassIII · Jan 11, 2008, 10:05 PM // 22:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by leprekan

I ask the community to put the situation in perspective. There was no hacking involved so please consider the fact that it could have been you that was banned for doing something that has been done on every other boss in the game.

You keep refering to your own post. Let me ask you somethings. I'll leave the hack/exploit issue out.

Did you or did you not exploit this?
Did you or did you not keep this a secret from the community?
Did you or did you not send a ticket to ANet reporting this?
Is or is not the impact of this exploit economically greater than any of the others you mentioned?

Hack = ban
Exploit = banworthy
Assuming it's all originated from an exploit and there was never an hacking done:
You exploited it.
You kept it a secret.
You did not report it.
The personal gain is a lot more than beating the game faster than normal or getting max armor.
The way of accessing it is a lot less straightforward and obvious than the SE ferry.

The ban is deserved IMO.

evilseabass · Jan 11, 2008, 10:05 PM // 22:05

I've read every post up to this point, yes, all 50 pages....

Lets get some facts straight:

1. This was not a hack of the .DAT file.

2. This was not a client-side hack of any sort.

3. This used the exact same mechanics as the "map-anywhere" exploit that was widely known a few weeks ago.

4. This used the exact same mechanics as ferrying someone from guildhall to Urgoz/Deep (meaning that you had to have progressed through to Mallyx naturally at least once in order to use this exploit - same thing with Urgoz/Deep, you must visit that town once using a scroll or by owning the town entrance, before a ferry will work).

5. This by-passed certain pre-requisite quests, the same way the Duncan exploit did.

So the real questions here are:
Why does ANet have a double standard in dealing with this issue?
Why did it take ANet 3 tries to actually patch this problem?
Is the issue really fixed?

There are 2 ethical choices to deal with this issue:
1. Ban everyone who ever exploited items 3,4, and 5 posted above.
2. Reverse the bans of these 117 players, and take steps to reduce these types of exploits in the future.

Obviously, if there is evidence that someone actually hacked, then they should remain banned. But everything I have read in these 50 pages seems to indicate that no actual hacking took place.

I would really love it if someone at ANet could pop in here, or PM me, and explain why they have this double standard.

truzo 117 · Jan 11, 2008, 10:06 PM // 22:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clait

Those people breath guild wars. What other reason can you find to play so many hours? If they didn't entirely love the game, why devote so much time?

Again, Anet doesn't have a standard of what makes A an exploit, and B not. To ban these kinds of players, when Anet can't define the standard is absurd.

yeh i think you are right, Anet seem to have no policy on banning, it seems to be random

leprekan · Jan 11, 2008, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clait

Those people breath guild wars. What other reason can you find to play so many hours? If they didn't entirely love the game, why devote so much time?

Again, Anet doesn't have a standard of what makes A an exploit, and B not. To ban these kinds of players, when Anet can't define the standard is absurd.

You sir hit the nail on the head.

If any of us thought it was a bannable exploit we wouldn't have been doing it. Duncan showed that a ferry to end boss did not result in a ban. There was no reason for us to think this would either. If they had banned for Duncan ferry then only the mentally challenged would have used the Mallyx ferry. It isn't asking too much for a game company to take the same stance on all related issues.

SolidShadow · Jan 11, 2008, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Quote:

If I had manipulated the obvious truth, then there wouldn't be 117 people with banned accounts bitching about being banned, now would there?

easy line there. wich i respond with, if anet is claiming what they are saying wouldnt there be 1 person banned who hacked anet its made game cause all 117 ppl of the ppl who got caught ( prolly where more) would have a program on there computer and all at once would be hacking the game like an organized attempt.

get real.

IamNotBanned · Jan 11, 2008, 10:08 PM // 22:08

Gratz people are getting it! no one hacked, A net screwed up and they're playing the blame game

pablo24 · Jan 11, 2008, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilseabass

Is the issue really fixed?

No, as said I still know at least 2 ways to kill Mallyx without doing the quest.

pochoWICKED · Jan 11, 2008, 10:09 PM // 22:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilseabass

I've read every post up to this point, yes, all 50 pages....

Lets get some facts straight:

1. This was not a hack of the .DAT file.

2. This was not a client-side hack of any sort.

3. This used the exact same mechanics as the "map-anywhere" exploit that was widely known a few weeks ago.

4. This used the exact same mechanics as ferrying someone from guildhall to Urgoz/Deep (meaning that you had to have progressed through to Mallyx naturally at least once in order to use this exploit - same thing with Urgoz/Deep, you must visit that town once using a scroll or by owning the town entrance, before a ferry will work).

5. This by-passed certain pre-requisite quests, the same way the Duncan exploit did.

So the real questions here are:
Why does ANet have a double standard in dealing with this issue?
Why did it take ANet 3 tries to actually patch this problem?
Is the issue really fixed?

There are 2 ethical choices to deal with this issue:
1. Ban everyone who ever exploited items 3,4, and 5 posted above.
2. Reverse the bans of these 117 players, and take steps to reduce these types of exploits in the future.

Obviously, if there is evidence that someone actually hacked, then they should remain banned. But everything I have read in these 50 pages seems to indicate that no actual hacking took place.

I would really love it if someone at ANet could pop in here, or PM me, and explain why they have this double standard.

\
I agree with you.....

IamNotBanned · Jan 11, 2008, 10:10 PM // 22:10

evilseabass is making lotsa sense

Clait · Jan 11, 2008, 10:11 PM // 22:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Drop of Fear

so the exploiters made a good job keeping their exploit hidden for months knowing that a.net would close it the minute they found out about it?

cmon be serious. i'm sorry ppl have been banned but they DESERVED IT.
THEY CALLED FOR THIS BAN.

learn the lesson and play honestly next time

Perhaps, but you cant honestly say the consequences fit the actions. Temporary ban yes, permanent banned no.

No judge in this country would rule that the penalty for trespassing to be death. Anet has been the judge, and that is their ruling.

truzo 117 · Jan 11, 2008, 10:12 PM // 22:12

Ive been trying to tell people exactly what evilseabass says for the last 50 pages 2. i even posted how its done and yet you people think its a hack ><

Clait · Jan 11, 2008, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by I pwnd U

Exactly, that is why each situation is unique. The amount of people and the severity of the exploit. If all of the GW players had used the exploit there would of been maybe 1 or 2 bannings if that. And those banned would of been the ones who had started the problem. But since there was so few they banned all those who used the exploit explicitly. Just like with the exploit with ferrying people to places they haven't been before. They didn't ban too many people for it because so many people used it. That and it was near as severe as this one.

Isn't that the point though? They are willing to sacrifice a small amount of players to make a point. However, if its above a certain amount.. they are unwilling to ban anybody. Thats being impartial.

rath no more · Jan 11, 2008, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orange Milk

Wow, this is getting idiotic.

Pablo, your so fullof BS, IF, and I mean HUGE IF, Gaile Gray HERSELF asked YOU, YOU PERSONALY, in game to search for exploits, don't ya think when you send her a report shes gonna do something about it? Yeah, if I hand pick a man to do a little recon, when he reports back Im going to heed what he says, not ignor it for 3-5 months. Your PURE BS. Stop living in a game and go outside and play.

Like its been stated, the town is used by the Devs for support work, stop acting niave like you thought "it was part of just ferries"

117 bans all stay thats how it needs to be.

For the Record, before the outpost ferry was nerfed, ya know when someone could take you to any outpost in the game even if you had never been, I was offered and declined. It was not right, therefore I didnt do it.

what game have you been playin for the last few years? are you pvp? cuz you sure dunno a heck of alot about pve. exploits run rampant and anet has let them slip by forever.. and so the hell what you decline woot. i didnt woot it was the shit.

Arwen Granger · Jan 11, 2008, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Well, I see this episode having both up and downside.
Down - after 30 months, 6000 hours of game play and made lots of friends in game, it's sad to leave them.
Up - I now have extra several hours a day to work on things I should really be doing - better therapy than AA.

Yes Honey, I'll mow the lawn today, fix the gutter next week

SirJackassIII · Jan 11, 2008, 10:15 PM // 22:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by evilseabass

5. This by-passed certain pre-requisite quests, the same way the Duncan exploit did.

Technically... no.

The description for "The Last Hierophant" reads (when obtained):

1. Defeat Justiciar Thommis
2. Defeat Rand Stormweaver
3. Defeat Selvetarm
4. Defeat Forgewight
5. Destroy Duncan the Black

All 5 objectives are given at the same time. However, when the game was released, only 1 person in the party needed to have beaten the first 4 areas to get the door to Duncan opened. The actual "bug" in this issue was that the 4 previous areas were also counted as "completed" once Duncan was beaten.

This was actually similar to "The Final Assault", where if one person had it, everyone could do it. The problem was that Duncan's chest was worth a lot more than the others.

Mallyx however does require you to beat the first 4 areas in it's description.

IsoArt · Jan 11, 2008, 10:15 PM // 22:15

There seems to be diffrent speculations as why 117 people were banned. From my understanding of the posts thus far, it would appear that 117 people had zoned (through an exploit in the client side program) into an unauthorize hidden server (outposts) reserved for Development and Testing. Furthemore, there are most likely more hidden outposts throughout the program that are not meant to be accessed by users. These hidden outposts probably serve the purpose of performing quick updates by ANET Developers and Testers such as those seen on Wedesday/Thursday. So it seems to be clear that being in an unauthrorized server constitutes a ban.

Yichi · Jan 11, 2008, 10:16 PM // 22:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by SolidShadow

easy line there. wich i respond with, if anet is claiming what they are saying wouldnt there be 1 person banned who hacked anet its made game cause all 117 ppl of the ppl who got caught ( prolly where more) would have a program on there computer and all at once would be hacking the game like an organized attempt.

get real.

learn2read plz.

I never said all 117 people hacked the client. I said that 117 people abused an exploit, which is true. Mind telling me what part of it is false?

IamNotBanned · Jan 11, 2008, 10:17 PM // 22:17

Quote:

For the Record, before the outpost ferry was nerfed, ya know when someone could take you to any outpost in the game even if you had never been, I was offered and declined. It was not right, therefore I didn't do it.

I did and i'm not banned why should these people get banned? look at the numbers 117 * 90 = 10,530 if they spent $120 120*117=14,040 big numbers to me....

Creeping Carl · Jan 11, 2008, 10:17 PM // 22:17

Quote:

Originally Posted by leprekan

The posts here seem more like the Salem witch trials than common sense. Since my post was flooded away by the masses so eager to fan the flames I will repost it again.

Blah blah blah.

You did wrong and you deserved the ban.

I've read your posts and you admit to doing this multiple times. But your justification is that you didnt hack anything. It doesnt matter though. Just because you werent the one to 'break in the door' doesnt make the fact that you went into that 'door' multiple times a non banneable offense.

You as a veteran player knew damn well that this was wrong. Or are you really that ignorant to think that this was going to be okay? You took a chance to get greedy and it bit you in the ass. At least be a man and accept the consequences.

pochoWICKED · Jan 11, 2008, 10:18 PM // 22:18

i never knew i would get banned.
I thought Anet would Just nerf it Like every other exploit there was.
So that's why people kept it quiet.
not because they knew they would get banned..........
they didnt want it to get nerfed......