Page 3 of 12 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    If you think they deserve a ban, ... you're probably just butthurt you didn't think of that strategy first. It's legitimate, smart, and is not cheating anything - it's an actual game mechanic. The goal of any boss puzzle is to outsmart the boss. Checkmate.
    Quote Originally Posted by Endus View Post
    There is absolutely nothing about having lots and lots of sex that means you're going to have a kid.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by cutterx2202 View Post
    If you dont't think they deserve a ban, ... you're probably just butthurt you couldn't use a real strategy. It's illegitimate, dumb, and is Exploiting - it's an unintended game mechanic. The goal of any boss puzzle is to kill the boss without using unintended tactics. Checkmate.
    Fixed that for you
    Rift - Lathais@Deepwood - 60 Rogue / Arrieleah@Deepwood - 60 Mage
    Check out this guide Guide for fresh 60's: The One Level 60 Guide - Updated for 2.5
    Check these out:Gaming/Computer Glasses
    My Multi-Touch Table Project

  3. #43
    Titan Kelimbror's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bear Taco, Left Hand of Death
    Posts
    13,707
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    There you go being all confrontational again. Yes, the point is to beat encounters and get loot, however, the design and philosophy behind that are different. Look at WoW where you can just skip tier easily where in Rift it takes a lot of time. Look at how the different difficulties are set-up in that 10m is totally separate from 20m, yet the rewards are the same with a few exceptions(weapons). It is a different game with different designers, what the developers consider intended is what matters, not what another game with different designs intends.
    I don't know why you think because someone disagrees with your opinion it has to be a confrontation. That's all on you stranger. Not to mention your response to the guy referencing Blizzard ideology is somehow...not confrontational?

    My point is that I don't see what gear has to do with exploits. I also don't see why having different raid sizes for different encounters is related either. It's complete unrelated. Your statements tried to paint Rift as some in the clouds, better than WoW raiding and thus anything that makes an encounter easier is an exploit. That's just silly. Sure it's up to the developers...that much is a given. But we're all here speculating, so each side is allowed their own evidence and opinions.

    The more information I get on Rift raiding from the horses' mouths, the more I'm beginning to think it's actually regressive raiding and not better at all, which is unfortunate. No one wants there to be innovation or people with creative thinking. Just draconian, by the books (or one youtube video from betas) or else you are a lazy, talentless cheater who deserves to be banned. Definitely not standing up for these guys, who seem to have cheated in bugging a boss out before that, but anytime this is mentioned the same vitriol is unleashed regardless of the issue.

    Also, your information is outdated. You can't skip tiers in WoW in Mists.
    BAD WOLF

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by SamR View Post
    Blizzard recently posted a discussion on what they consider exploits and what they consider creative use of game mechanics in raids. The Regulos thing doesn't sound like it would fall under an exploit in their definition.
    Trion is not blizzard.

    To everyone else saying it's clever use of game mechanics. Sure, it's a clever use of an unintended game mechanic that breaks and trivializes an entire fight. It's an exploit, there's really no argument to be had. No one is butthurt over this either, it's the fact that they exploit time and time again with no consequence. It has already been stated as well that this has been reported and anyone found doing it would be banned...except no one has been banned or even suspended. That automatically invalidates your entire argument right there. To add to that as well, anyone saying it's bad game design and it's not an exploit, read the paragraph below. If you take advantage of poor game design, that is considered an exploit.

    I don't give a shit about my status on this forum so I'll speak my mind, and that's that anyone who says this is NOT an exploit is a complete fucking moron and has no idea how raids in an MMO work, should work, or has any concept of high level raiding or honor whatsoever and should probably go jump off a cliff.

    Thanks for reading before this is probably removed/I'm banned!
    Last edited by RoughRaptors; 2013-01-31 at 07:10 PM.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Kittyvicious View Post
    I don't know why you think because someone disagrees with your opinion it has to be a confrontation. That's all on you stranger. Not to mention your response to the guy referencing Blizzard ideology is somehow...not confrontational?

    My point is that I don't see what gear has to do with exploits. I also don't see why having different raid sizes for different encounters is related either. It's complete unrelated. Your statements tried to paint Rift as some in the clouds, better than WoW raiding and thus anything that makes an encounter easier is an exploit. That's just silly. Sure it's up to the devlopers

    The more information I get on Rift raiding from the horses' mouths, the more I'm beginning to think it's actually regressive raiding and not better at all, which is unfortunate. No one wants there to be innovation or people with creative thinking. Just draconian, by the books (or one youtube video from betas) or else you are a lazy, talentless cheater who deserves to be banned. Definitely not standing up for these guys, who seem to have cheated in bugging a boss out before that, but anytime this is mentioned the same vitriol is unleashed regardless of the issue.

    Also, your information is outdated. You can't skip tiers in WoW in Mists.
    I never said better, I said different. Either way, it is obvious that they are different developers and have different views on how things should work. Since an exploit is defined as what was intended by the developers, what developers of a different(not better or worse) game say or do has no bearing on the discussion. It was not intended to be confrontational, simply dismissive as it has nothing to do with anything.
    Rift - Lathais@Deepwood - 60 Rogue / Arrieleah@Deepwood - 60 Mage
    Check out this guide Guide for fresh 60's: The One Level 60 Guide - Updated for 2.5
    Check these out:Gaming/Computer Glasses
    My Multi-Touch Table Project

  6. #46
    Pandaren Monk Slummish's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,780
    Using only the OP's explanation of the circumstances, I'm not sure how any of these events were exploits. In fight 1, the game let the players stack consumables? In fight 2, the game let pets tank bosses? In fight 3, the game let people stand in one spot without collision and dps?

    Doesn't sound like exploiting to me. Just sounds like bad game design.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post

    Thay cn and more than likely will since it was intended to have a certain amount of heals or tanks required and this negates that intention allowing you to bring more DPS to beat the DPS check. Can you tell me you actually think they intended for a pet to tank? No, it is an unintended result of a design for other purposes. The reason pets take reduced/no AoE damage is so that a pet classes DPS does not suffer on fights with AoE. When I go Ranger, I do not get a shield on my portrait, nor does my pet. Therefore, it is not intended for me or my pet to tank in a group setting.
    Well, generally in raiding you don't use a pet to tank not because there's some unwritten rule that it's wrong, but because it's just much harder than a tank class or impossible. Just like you wouldn't think to throw your Pyro in to tank a boss. Unless you discovered that the boss abilities meant it was easier for the Pyro to tank than your normal tank specced player.

  8. #48
    Titan Kelimbror's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Bear Taco, Left Hand of Death
    Posts
    13,707
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    I never said better, I said different.
    Fair enough.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    Either way, it is obvious that they are different developers and have different views on how things should work. Since an exploit is defined as what was intended by the developers, what developers of a different(not better or worse) game say or do has no bearing on the discussion. It was not intended to be confrontational, simply dismissive as it has nothing to do with anything.
    Maybe, but I think his point was more that we already have industry standards for this type of thing. It's pretty rational to use that as a basis for an opinion since it has a long history and prevalence. If that's not how he was saying it, but instead was saying it *should* be the same just because, then I agree with you that they are different.

    But like you hinted at before, the problem is that all of us forum jockeys will keep talking about it, when ultimately it's just going to be whatever they decide. I just don't know how much they act on individual responses to things. I would hate to see knee jerk reactions to creativity (in other situations) just because a group of other pissed raiders said so.
    BAD WOLF

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by RoughRaptors View Post
    It's an exploit, there's really no argument to be had.
    But the word exploit is subjective. Trion has not given a clear statement on what exactly constitutes an exploit nor is there any consensus amongst the playerbase on where the line for an exploit gets drawn.

    If anyone wants to check my post history, I've been pretty harsh on guilds in WoW using things I consider exploits in raids. Like Paragon exploiting LFR loot in late Cata. I just don't happen to think letting your pet tank is an exploit.
    Last edited by SamR; 2013-01-31 at 07:18 PM.

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by SamR View Post
    But the word exploit is subjective. Trion has not given a clear statement on what exactly constitutes an exploit nor is there any consensus amongst the playerbase on where the line for an exploit gets drawn.
    Read the rest of my post where this was reported and players were told specifically by the developers that if they used their pet to tank Regulos they would be banned. Still not an exploit?

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by SamR View Post
    But the word exploit is subjective.
    It is only subjective to the developers. It is not up to the players at all to decide. The definition, as related to video games, clearly stated that it is up to the intent of the developer whether or not it is considered an exploit. That is not subjective at all, if they intended it, it is not, if they did not intend it, it is.

    Quote Originally Posted by SamR View Post
    nor is there any consensus amongst the playerbase on where the line for an exploit gets drawn.
    because by the definition, as related to video games, it is not up to the playerbase at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by SamR View Post
    I just don't happen to think letting your pet tank is an exploit.
    and what you think does not matter because you are not a developer of RIFT. All that matters is what they intended. You can agree or disagree with their decision, but it is still an exploit. Whether or not you agree with them calling it an exploit is an entirely different matter, as is whether or not you agree/disagree with how they handle the exploiters. However, if it is or is not an exploit is entirely up to their intent.


    All this said, it is fairly clear if you raid at all that this was not intended. NQ even knew this, hence their hiding it at first. They then released it, and probably did it in the first place just to cause exactly this type of argument because that is how they get their jollies. By watching the community divide and fight amongst themselves.
    Last edited by Lathais; 2013-01-31 at 07:22 PM.
    Rift - Lathais@Deepwood - 60 Rogue / Arrieleah@Deepwood - 60 Mage
    Check out this guide Guide for fresh 60's: The One Level 60 Guide - Updated for 2.5
    Check these out:Gaming/Computer Glasses
    My Multi-Touch Table Project

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by RoughRaptors View Post
    Trion is not blizzard.

    To everyone else saying it's clever use of game mechanics. Sure, it's a clever use of an unintended game mechanic that breaks and trivializes an entire fight. It's an exploit, there's really no argument to be had. No one is butthurt over this either, it's the fact that they exploit time and time again with no consequence. It has already been stated as well that this has been reported and anyone found doing it would be banned...except no one has been banned or even suspended. That automatically invalidates your entire argument right there. To add to that as well, anyone saying it's bad game design and it's not an exploit, read the paragraph below. If you take advantage of poor game design, that is considered an exploit.

    I don't give a shit about my status on this forum so I'll speak my mind, and that's that anyone who says this is NOT an exploit is a complete fucking moron and has no idea how raids in an MMO work, should work, or has any concept of high level raiding or honor whatsoever and should probably go jump off a cliff.

    Thanks for reading before this is probably removed/I'm banned!
    Trion is not Blizzard you're correct.
    Unless you have some .PDF of "Trion's intended use of SL Mechanics" you simply cant call it an unintended mechanic. There could be an unintended mechanic of not having more than 'x' amount of players on platform a/b/c ect. In that case every other guild that has been herded by the Game Over strat of zerging platform 1,3 with a 9/10 split and then having all 20 run toward the bridge would be 'exploiting'.

    Unless Trion releases some PDF giving the raid community a linearpathstratonewaybor-athon than your argument is invalid.

    Also to your before post about 'your guild' and standards of honor bull.
    They accused ONE player of stacking for their World First when the total time for their kill and the World Second(NQ) we're within 10~ seconds. World Second was thrown under the bus for Exploiting.
    If your guild is so honorable than there should be at least 4-5 OTHER players attached to Shaels. Sorry to disappoint you bud.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Moonfirespamm View Post
    Unless Trion releases some PDF giving the raid community a linearpathstratonewaybor-athon than your argument is invalid.
    K, I know that reading can be hard at times, it's understandable that stupid people have trouble with reading comprehension. But for the third time, read my previous posts where I say that it was directly stated as an exploit by a developer.

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Kittyvicious View Post
    Fair enough.

    Maybe, but I think his point was more that we already have industry standards for this type of thing. It's pretty rational to use that as a basis for an opinion since it has a long history and prevalence. If that's not how he was saying it, but instead was saying it *should* be the same just because, then I agree with you that they are different.

    But like you hinted at before, the problem is that all of us forum jockeys will keep talking about it, when ultimately it's just going to be whatever they decide. I just don't know how much they act on individual responses to things. I would hate to see knee jerk reactions to creativity (in other situations) just because a group of other pissed raiders said so.

    We do not have industry standards, we have Blizzard standards. Show me one other game that uses the exact same standards as Blizzard and I'll show you a game that failed by not being different. The point is they are different games and what applies to one cannot apply to the other. I pointed out 2 other differences not to include them as part of the reasoning, just to point out that there are differences and it is not the same game so therefore the same rules cannot apply. You are the one who continually puts words in my mouth like "better" or "I want no innovation." I never said that. I think a Volan type encounter is very innovative and would love to see something like that included in a raid as well. I think the upgrade system was fairly innovative, at least their implementation of it, and love it. I think that there is a lot of innovation in their raids and prefer what I saw in Chocolate to what I saw in Cata.(please note: I am not saying Rift is better and WoW is worse, simply that I prefer Rift). However, cheesing an encounter to bring 5-6 more DPS that was intended is not innovative, it's just plain stupid. It reduces the challenge that the encounter was supposed to provide and makes it no challenge at all. Removing challenge is not innovative, it's regressive.
    Rift - Lathais@Deepwood - 60 Rogue / Arrieleah@Deepwood - 60 Mage
    Check out this guide Guide for fresh 60's: The One Level 60 Guide - Updated for 2.5
    Check these out:Gaming/Computer Glasses
    My Multi-Touch Table Project

  15. #55
    Mechagnome fooliuscaesar13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    517
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    In other words, the simple fact that Trion did not intend it makes it an exploit, by definition of the word as used when talking about video games.

    The definition of an exploit is something not intended by the developers. "Clever use of game mechanics" when not intended by devs is an exploit. Only the devs can say if it was intended or not, however, this is clearly not intended.

    Pet's were designed to be able to tank for solo play and take AoE DPS so they are not completely worthless on boss fights when they are DPSing because a tank is presumably present. An unintended side effect of this is that when a boss deals only AoE damage, a pet can tank it.

    It is an exploit and they should have their Achieves and Gear stripped for using it. Other than that, stop giving them attention, arguing one way or the other, getting mad at them. This is just the reaction they want. Ignore them, let Trion strip them, then ignore their bitching. They do it just to get you mad. They say things just to piss you off. Either defending them or bashing them, it splits the community. If you ignore it, let Trion handle it and move on, the game will be a much better place.
    Unintended side effect or not, something like that should have been picked up by the devs and/or seen in testing. An existing game mechanic should not break a boss fight because the devs simply didn't think about it. Pets taking little to no damage while tanking a boss is more about the design philosophy of the pet mechanic. A simple bit field in the pet's class code could be used to switch on or off that 99% AoE/cleave reduction. Are you really going to say that "zoning in repeatedly to gain multiple stacks from consumables" is on the same level as "my pet doesn't take cleave damage so I'll have it tank the boss"? C'mon.

    So what should be done, then, to better communicate "what is intended by devs"? Should they put, in black and white, an explanation on how they want players to do a boss encounter? Maybe they can add a dungeon journal that says "Use of pets to tank Regulous so that you can bring extra dps will result in permaban and stripping of achievements". You seriously don't see how that's a bit...silly?

    A possible fix for this would be to have the boss do normal damage in to pets as well as players. Or another fix could be that pets do not hold threat in certain boss fights (or all?). This is something that could be hot-fixed and then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.

    Regardless, I couldn't care less if NQ has their achieves/WFs stripped. As a developer, I personally would see this as an error on the part of the dev team and not necessarily on the part of the players. The consumable stacking bug? Different story. But whatever. We will all have our own opinions and reasons why we think we're right. Happy arguing.
    /popcorn.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by fooliuscaesar13 View Post
    I personally would see this as an error on the part of the dev team and not necessarily on the part of the players.
    It is an error on both parties, but that does not make either party innocent, both are just as guilty as the other.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by RoughRaptors View Post
    K, I know that reading can be hard at times, it's understandable that stupid people have trouble with reading comprehension. But for the third time, read my previous posts where I say that it was directly stated as an exploit by a developer.
    Was this posted as a public announcement for everyone to see or just in some dark corner? If so, please post dates before NQ's kill.

    *Edit* or was this directed to a beta testing guild with a convo to a GM that was also not made public. Either way if known in Beta, TRION WHY U NO FIX?
    Last edited by Moonfirespamm; 2013-01-31 at 07:41 PM.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Moonfirespamm View Post
    Was this posted as a public announcement for everyone to see or just in some dark corner? If so, please post dates before NQ's kill.

    *Edit* or was this directed to a beta testing guild with a convo to a GM that was also not made public. Either way if known in Beta, TRION WHY U NO FIX?
    Correct, they knew about this via a beta guild and decided to do nothing. Hence the error is on both parties.

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by fooliuscaesar13 View Post
    Are you really going to say that "zoning in repeatedly to gain multiple stacks from consumables" is on the same level as "my pet doesn't take cleave damage so I'll have it tank the boss"? C'mon.
    That is not what I am saying at all. There are different levels of exploitation. If I stand on a street corner and con some guy out of $5 that is not the same thing as if I go work for a company and con them out of millions. They are both con jobs, but not the same level. Why do people insist on putting words in my mouth.

    So what should be done, then, to better communicate "what is intended by devs"? Should they put, in black and white, an explanation on how they want players to do a boss encounter? Maybe they can add a dungeon journal that says "Use of pets to tank Regulous so that you can bring extra dps will result in permaban and stripping of achievements". You seriously don't see how that's a bit...silly?
    That is not what I am saying either, more words put in my mouth. However, it was designed to make use of the roles in game, not to have a DPS act as a tank and have no healers on the tank. I also never said ban them. I said banning is probably what they want for the attention it will get them. I said strip them of gear and achieves and then ignore it.

    A possible fix for this would be to have the boss do normal damage in to pets as well as players. Or another fix could be that pets do not hold threat in certain boss fights (or all?). This is something that could be hot-fixed and then we wouldn't even be having this conversation.
    Another possible fix is to simply add another damaging ST attack to the boss that is enough to one shot a pet but something a tank healer wouldn't blink at. We are not discussing fixes though.

    Regardless, I couldn't care less if NQ has their achieves/WFs stripped. As a developer, I personally would see this as an error on the part of the dev team and not necessarily on the part of the players. The consumable stacking bug? Different story. But whatever. We will all have our own opinions and reasons why we think we're right. Happy arguing.
    /popcorn.
    I also never said it was not an error on the devs part, however, noone is perfect, people make mistakes and look over things. It was quite obviously not intended as nowhere am I ever led to believe that I or my pet should be able to tank in a group environment nor is a boss supposed to deal no damage and leave healers twiddling their thumbs or DPSing. It is clear that encounters are designed to bring multiple tanks, healers for those tanks, healers for the raid, support classes and DPS.
    Rift - Lathais@Deepwood - 60 Rogue / Arrieleah@Deepwood - 60 Mage
    Check out this guide Guide for fresh 60's: The One Level 60 Guide - Updated for 2.5
    Check these out:Gaming/Computer Glasses
    My Multi-Touch Table Project

  20. #60
    Brewmaster Banzhe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Glasgow
    Posts
    1,352
    Quote Originally Posted by Fencers View Post
    I really didn't think that was an "exploit" when I heard of it. Seems like interesting use of mechanics 101. And also... sorta Trion's fault, no?
    You can virtually apply that to any mmo, where developers might not have been able to foresee everything 100%, I mean they could keep a game in closed beta for 2-3 years, and still have a form of exploit when it's released.., and players can then still go: Kinda their own fault no?

    No, if something negates 80-90%, or even completely removes a mechanic from an encounter, then clearly it's not intended and is exploiting.., call it creative use of mechanics all you will, it's still not changing the fact, so if they get perm-banned, I hope it sets an example.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •