Curse

AirOnG · Jun 23, 2005, 03:57 PM // 15:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Myodato

Lets face it, anybody who has played the game for more than 5 minutes knows roughly how much gold/xp their lvl x character can hope to earn in a typical period. If they suddenly find a way, through a very specific set of actions, that allows them to significantly increase that, then they should be surprised if they are punished for doing so.

Myodato, the problem is that in the past people were not banned for abusing exploits, and Arena.net has created ambiguity by not defining what isn't and what is a bannable exploit. For example, the Arid Sea loot rezoning exploit that they fixed is a very good example. There was a loot drop that could drop weapon mods and you could rezone over and over to get it. They didn't ban anyone abusing that over and over to unlock many weapon mods when they easily could have.

Once again, I will repeat that the only thing one can draw as a precedent from A.net's bannings is that everything is fair game except for exploits involving interrupting the normal flow of execution in the game or third party hacks/hooks. Banning for another loot drop exploit or xp farm exploit working within the game mechanics itself would seem whimsical and almost hypocritical now.

Myodato · Jun 23, 2005, 04:07 PM // 16:07

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

Myodato, the problem is that in the past people were not banned for abusing exploits, and Arena.net has created ambiguity by not defining what isn't and what is a bannable exploit. For example, the Arid Sea loot rezoning exploit that they fixed is a very good example. There was a loot drop that could drop weapon mods and you could rezone over and over to get it. They didn't ban anyone abusing that over and over to unlock many weapon mods when they easily could have.

It's hard to draw a definite line, so somebody has to make a judgement call. The important thing is that people know that they can be punished. If one person 'gets away with it', because Anet didn't feel a ban was appropriate, then that doesn't mean that everybody can do what they please.

I can't comment on the Arid Sea thing, because I don't know the details. Honestly though, I don't care whether Anet got it right or not, because the important thing is that they maintain the right to act if and when people use game ruining exploits in future.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

Once again, I will repeat that the only thing one can draw as a precedent from A.net's bannings is that everything is fair game except for exploits involving interrupting the normal flow of execution in the game or third party hacks/hooks. Banning for another loot drop exploit or xp farm exploit working within the game mechanics itself would seem whimsical and almost hypocritical now.

The only thing that you can draw from Anets bannings is that they can and they will.

I have no sympathy for those who either willingly use exploits or are too stupid to recognise them. If that's too harsh, then just string me up next to Anet when you send out the lynch mob.

Dreamsmith · Jun 23, 2005, 05:12 PM // 17:12

Oh for crying out loud, it's not that complicated, people.

Monsters in an area dropping a lot of loot is not a bug. It may be poor balancing, but it's not a bug.

Being able to receive the quest reward for a quest you've already done is clearly a bug. Once you've done a quest, you can't do it again.

If monsters leading to a boss drop good loot, so you go kill them a lot, that's not exploiting a bug. There's no bug here. Might be a balance issue, but it ain't a bug.

If you kill that boss, return to Firstwatch Sergio or whoever and get your quest reward, then notice he's still got an exclamation point over his head and see you can get the quest reward again and again and again, that is clearly a bug.

It's not that complicated. Why people want to pretend it is, and post examples most of which it's plainly obvious whether it's a "bannable offense" or not, but for some reason the author likes to pretend otherwise, I know not.

Kill monsters and get loot all you want. The same group defending the same boss each time you fail to complete a mission is clearly not a bug. That the original author even thought that might be a bannable offense would prove he was a moron, if it weren't for the fact that I'm sure he knows damn well it's not, he's just trying to rehash an old issue.

The people who exploited the Augury Rock bug was not confused as to whether this was a real bug or just a great farming spot. They violated the EULA and were banned for it.

There's no huge ambiguous gray area that's been created here, either. Their past actions with regards to what they did or didn't ban for do not create a gray area. Knowingly exploiting what is clearly a bug is a bannable offense, period. The fact that there are bugs that were exploited in the past and no one was banned doesn't make this a gray area. It means they've been merciful in the past, it means that sometimes they don't ban, even when it was a bannable offense, but it in no way creates any ambiguity at all over what is a bannable offense. That is perfectly clear.

toastgodsupreme · Jun 23, 2005, 05:15 PM // 17:15

Should you care?

Does it affect your gameplay?

Does your fun meter go down when you hear about people who farm it?

Do you not have anything better to do than make a thread bitching?

I bet you were also that kid in grade school who, on Friday afternoon, 10 minutes before class let out, you asked the teacher if we could get any homework. Just leave shit alone, k?

Dreamsmith · Jun 23, 2005, 05:34 PM // 17:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Granamyr

1. Inconsistency: Whether someone did it 1 time or 100 times, the infraction was still the same and thus the punishment should be the same. ANet doesn't have a window into anyone's soul so intentional abuse cannot be established.

Baloney. You can't establish for sure that someone who only did it once or twice wasn't simply testing, but you know damn well that someone who did it a hundred times was intentionally abusing it. It's perfectly consistent to punish in cases where intentional abuse is clear, and not in cases where it is not.

Quote:

2. Ill-defined Rules: None of us have a window into ANet's soul and thus are unable to play the game exactly how it was intended to be played. ...

Oh come on, that's just ridiculous. You don't need a "window into ArenaNet's soul" to know getting the same huge quest reward after having already done the quest is a bug.

Quote:

3. Cruel and Unusual Punishment: Let the punishment fit the crime. ... Why didn't they just take away the skill points that were ill-gotten? This could have been done to everyone that took advantage of the exploit so it would have been fair across the board.

That's not punishment at all. That's simply undoing the action. That's like saying a thief that steals a car should have to return the car, but nothing else should be done. Again, ridiculous. There needs to actually be some punishment for the crime, or there is absolutely no deterrent at all. If you merely end up exactly where you would have been if you hadn't taken advantage of the bug, there's no reason not to do it -- you don't lose anything for being caught at all, and you gain if you aren't caught. If we want bugs reported and fixed rather than exploited, there needs to be actual punishment for exploiting them, not merely a rollback to pre-exploit status.

Quote:

4. It was ANet's error: It was a flaw in their coding that allowed all of these exploits. I failed to read in the EULA that said we have all been hired to the Quality Assurance staff. It is not our job to test their software for them and if it is, I'm still waiting on my check.

Irrelevant. That someone else makes a mistake does not excuse your own actions. "Because that person did something wrong, I should be allowed to as well." Even more ridiculous. That someone else makes an error does not excuse your crime. The people who were banned were not punished for ArenaNet's error, they were punished for their own actions.

Also irrelevant is whether you want to provide free QA or not. No one was banned for not reporting the bug. They were banned for exploiting it.

JoDiamonds · Jun 23, 2005, 06:15 PM // 18:15

I largely agree with Dreamsmith on this one. I think most of the people who have cheated the system did so with the knowledge that they were cheating.

Quite obviously, you can't ban people just for using skills (i.e. Vengeance), because many people probably don't really understand what's going on anyway, or people who get great loot somewhere.

Here's the short answer: Any time you are doing something that you even slightly suspect might be an issue, ask Arena Net directly, and stop doing it until they answer.

If you find an exploit, test it once or twice, and then bring it to ArenaNet's attention, I'd bet a large amount that they are not going to ban you. Go to http://support.guildwars.com and let them know what's up.

uigrad · Jun 23, 2005, 07:01 PM // 19:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamsmith

Being able to receive the quest reward for a quest you've already done is clearly a bug. Once you've done a quest, you can't do it again.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamsmith

There's no huge ambiguous gray area that's been created here, either. Their past actions with regards to what they did or didn't ban for do not create a gray area. Knowingly exploiting what is clearly a bug is a bannable offense, period. The fact that there are bugs that were exploited in the past and no one was banned doesn't make this a gray area. It means they've been merciful in the past, it means that sometimes they don't ban, even when it was a bannable offense, but it in no way creates any ambiguity at all over what is a bannable offense. That is perfectly clear.

I see where you are coming from, and, ironically, I actually saw this the same way that you did, until I read your statements. Weird huh?

The quests in fissure/UW can be done repeatedly. You can go in, complete the first mission, jump back to the temple, and repeat. XP is unlimited, or, uh, only limited by your time. Is that an exploit?

Fissure/UW is obviously not an exploit, but I don't know how I would prove that. I can easily see how some people may think that Augury Rock was working as intended, based on the way FoW/UW work. Well, they may have some doubts about it, since it seems a little too good to be true, but I'm sure that those who did it probably justified the situation as a "balancing issue".

In these situations, you look around you, and notice that everyone else is doing this repeatedly. They're questioning whether it's legal, but no one can get ahold of A-Net. Finally, you just decide that since everyone else seems to be doing it, you're going to be left in the dust if you don't.

I still think that people who abused the doppleganger exploit should be punished, but I don't think that it's quite as black and white as you state. That's probably why ANet only banned the biggest abusers.

Personally, I think that they should have just given the exploiters a "correction factor". If they earned 75 skill points this way, and used to buy skills, then 75 random skills should be removed from that account. It's harsh, but a lot more friendly then banning.

Rajamic · Jun 23, 2005, 07:10 PM // 19:10

I did that little trick about 5 times with a group. Items drops were bland and spaced widely apart. EXP wasn't very good. Seemed like a waste of time to me.

Yamat · Jun 23, 2005, 07:34 PM // 19:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirOnG

There's an easy beetletun quest where you can quickly gain XP and some loot since it has a high density of mobs when you're being run through to ascension. You just have to make sure you don't kill the last mob so the quest doesn't end. Would not turning the quest in in order to do the quest over and over be considered a bannable offense by Arena.net? We must have answers to questions like this since what is and is not an exploit is so ambiguous. When vengeance was bugged, it was clearly an exploit but no one was banned for that. Where is the line drawn honestly?

All you have to do for this "exploit" is to simply obey the mechanics of the game. It does not require any third party programs or alteration of the normal execution of the game. You simply use mechanics within the game to achieve your result.

I'm asking this because Arena.net has deemed certain exploits banworthy and others not banworthy. So far, the types of exploits Arena.net has banned are those that alter the normal execution of the game or those that use third party hooks/programs. Arena.net has yet to draw a clear distinction on what is bannable and what is not.

Not an exploit. I can do every single co-op mission again and again, and get all the xp for killing the mobs, get all the drops...

Granamyr · Jun 23, 2005, 10:20 PM // 22:20

Quote:

It's perfectly consistent to punish in cases where intentional abuse is clear, and not in cases where it is not.

So what is the threshold for intentional vs non-intentional. Better yet, where is this threshold posted? If someone killed the mirror 19 times, he's ok but the 20th, BAN? Seems rather inconsistent, subjective and all-around bad policy to me.

Quote:

You don't need a "window into ArenaNet's soul" to know getting the same huge quest reward after having already done the quest is a bug.

Just like abandoning the Undead Hordes quest and redoing it is a bug. Just like the Vengeance bug. Just like the Arid Sea bug. Just like any bug......there's so many bugs that it's impossible not to exploit them. I doubt many people think what they're doing is wrong, rather just making the most of an opportunity. The only way to know what is "wrong" and what isn't is that unattainable window I mentioned.......or find out after the fact.

Quote:

That's not punishment at all. That's simply undoing the action.

Well they probably didn't do anything they considered wrong. Yes, they exploited a situation like everyone else did and numerous instances of exploited bugs happen every day. The only punishment needed is to have your time and effort wasted when the skill points get rolled back. Again, how is the crime so offensive as to warrant a banning? Massive skill point acquisition is so mild an offense it's laughable. Let the punishment fit the crime!

Quote:

If you merely end up exactly where you would have been if you hadn't taken advantage of the bug, there's no reason not to do it

Well the current message is exploit all you want, but do so in moderation. They didn't deter anyone with that banning. They made a lot of people mad and encouraged people to be more sneaky about their exploits.

Quote:

"Because that person did something wrong, I should be allowed to as well."

That wasn't my argument at all. Those quotes definitely don't pertain to anything I said. Nevertheless, that's basically what ANet did by only punishing some people. Some people were allowed to get off free without any consequences and some were not. Exploit, but do so in moderation!

The situation is that ANet encourages people (intentionally or not) to get as much xp as possible as quickly as possible. Through a flaw in their game they allowed a situation to occur where people could do just that. It's a bit hypocritical to then punish people for doing exactly what they've been encouraged to do especially when ANet created the situation to do it.

AirOnG · Jun 24, 2005, 02:48 AM // 02:48

Yamat, this isn't a co-op mission. This is a quest that isn't intended to be repeated over and over.

Here's a better example. Arid Sea example. You could rezone over and over and loot chests in easily obtained spots to gain weapon mods and loot. You could unlock perfect weapon mods for PvP in a short amount of time. No one was banned for that. If there was another rezone exploit like this in the future, should people be banned for it? That is the question. Where is arena.net drawing the line for a bannable offense and not? Is it valid to use the gameplay mechanics to rezone or not finish a quest to obtain a large amount of loot/exp and not be banned for it?

PieXags · Jun 24, 2005, 02:53 AM // 02:53

Hell no you shouldn't ban for doing the beetletun quest over and over killing the mobs in it.

I mean hell, isn't that what you do when you farm? Just kill things over and over again?

If this is a bannable offense...then why isn't killing the entire charr army a bannable offense? It's just entering a quest/mission over and over and killing the big group of mobs over and over again.

No harm, no foul.

DrSLUGFly · Jun 24, 2005, 03:08 AM // 03:08

when they banned a bunch of accounts for the Augury Rock bug, they probably had banned only about 5%, maybe less, of the users who were exploiting the bug. They gave a statement that said they had only banned the most extreme users, the ones who had done it so repetitively that they had to have obviously known they were exploiting a bug.

I really don't think that anyone who doesn't consciously break the rules has anything to worry about. If I find a loophole that allows me to gain gold fast, I'll use it. But I won't behave like a bot and exploit it for hours on end... that would be boring... I play the game cuz it's fun...

When it comes to exploits, here's a good maxim: If you're not sure if you're exploiting or not, you probably aren't.

=HT=Ingram · Jun 24, 2005, 05:40 AM // 05:40

what about the poor sob that can't kill the last boss? if it takes him 12 times to finish the quest successfully is he cheating? No he just sucks, and needs to level up before being strong enough to stumble their way through the quest. In other words. I don't give a flying fig what anyone does when its them playing with themselves, and neither should anyone else.

Magus · Jun 24, 2005, 05:56 AM // 05:56

I don't think it should be illegal because it's not really exploiting a bug or anything. The guy still has to actually kill those monsters for reasonable exp/loot. While farming may be lame, I don't think it should ever be illegal (unless it includes bots, etc) as it doesn't exploit a bug or anything unexpected.

Quote:

Originally Posted by =HT=Ingram

I don't give a flying fig what anyone does when its them playing with themselves, and neither should anyone else.

I agree, but the problem is that while that player may not do the mission or whatever with others, the moment he participates in the economy by buying or selling something to a trader or other player, he is no longer really playing with himself, as it affects everyone.

Saerden · Jun 24, 2005, 07:01 AM // 07:01

Its funny how some people claim that there are no problems with bannings because there are "easy to see", obvious moral values and guidlines in the game that EVERYONE (who is WORTHY) can see and understand while they fail to mention that these are only THEIR moral values and guidelines. Sorry, but for someone coming from a singleplayer game, redoing missions you just finished is a bug. Period. Same with changing secondary professions if your used to the 1000h grind of other MMORPGS. Its not about bugs being obvious either: Lets say team A abuses an exploit that is so obvious you will want to cry. How can you be sure that AN bans them? maybe they let it slide like they did in the past, and you fall behind in the competitive game... There needs to be NO doubt of wether you should do something or not. If it does not work as intended, fix it. But until the fix, it MUST be considered working as intended.

You try to either intentionally or unintentionally, force your way to play and interpret the game on others, creating an uneasy atmosphere of uncertainity. If you have to ask yourself wether your allowed to do it ingame or not, then its the GAMES fault. Laws are there for a reason. The reason is that such "smart" people dont bend the rules when they see fit, twisting abstract moral guidelines that were not clear in the first place, according to their needs.

Stop this stupid mind police. Make rules that cannot be broken. Your GOD, Arenanet. You create the laws of the world. You can choose to go the way of dictatorships, and make everyone guilty, then punish those you dont like. Fine with me.