While I will disagree with you that the pet thing is an exploit as it was explained by the OP, now knowing that it was a known bug in beta that NQ most likely knew about and abused...I'll agree it was an exploit. See? Like devs, forum posters make mistakes :P
Btw...which end game raiding guild are you in? You post in this thread like you have a greyhound in the race.
---------- Post added 2013-01-31 at 08:02 PM ----------
So, unless Shael did about 20k dps on Laethys there were other people in your raid hiding it.
What I am doing, is trying to keep people on a real discussion. The discussion is not whether or not it is or should be considered an exploit. It clearly is as it was not intended. However, people are using different definitions of the word exploit so there are several misunderstandings going on throughout the thread which fosters negativity and arguments. By the definition of the word, and the words of the devs, it is, in fact, an exploit. That's un-debateable. Let's discuss and debate other things, like how exploiting affects the community, how they should be dealt with, things of that nature. Instead people are sitting here arguing something that they have no say in.
Last edited by Lathais; 2013-01-31 at 08:09 PM.
You do not know what you are talking about but I will gladly educate you further if required. By the way, his handle was Shaeyl, not Shael. You're doing it wrong.
Well unfortunately many of us don't buy that so we are having a discussion debunking that this so called exposure of a scandal is nothing more than sour grapes. Creative use of game mechanics is creative. What more do you want?
It's used in many games. Blizzard covered it recently in their Watercooler article. EQ experienced it during the Avatar of War fight and Kerafym. They banned one guild, fixed it for another. Daoc did the same and by god there were many creative uses of game mechanics. Hell Rift does it in nearly every dungeon. There's a way to avoid damage or skip trash, etc and I don't see people being banned for it.
So until Trion comes out and states it's an exploit, it's not.
If it is in the game it should be fair game. It is not the player's fault the things existed. Its like any game, strategy. I remember in wow, we use only tauren taanks on Lady Vashj because taruens had a 9 yard hit box vs 9 yards. This allowed them to tank striders that had an aoe 8 yard fear around them, and took the need away for someone to kite them. We were the number one guild on our server, because we tried this not main stream strats.
Should they be banned? no.
Exploiting players-> Kill boss.
Didn't say anything about it to anyone or "did not advertise"
Gets outed-> Public rage. *Minor or not people still "lost respect" either for the guild or the player.
Difference being World first removed from NQ and not Addiction. Anyone who really progressed in ID knew that Laethys was the progression and really was the only boss that should have mattered. Maelforge was a joke per the 4-5 reoccurring threads/posts from top guilds about how broken it was.
Which is brought to the other point of blind leading the blind. People are mad about the Druid thing being dragged out for weeks and not focusing on Matriarch. Trion can simply fix it and watch NQ kill the bosses legit. If they can cool. If they can't it will just fuel the fire for the community to feel superior. I for one do not like linear progression one strat games. Grats to NQ for a different strat on Regulos, to me what seems to be the closest to intended based on the 5s boss achievement.
Also MFS is an old WoW Arena team. I don't follow the who's who game in any community. Guilds sure, players not so much.
Using a pet that can tank to tank and taking advantage of an AoE immunity that Trion gave to the pet is not. Was it supposed to work that way? No. Why did Trion let something like this go through when it seems so obvious? Your guess is as good as mine. It's like the whole Voidwalker tanking Sartharion 3 Drakes discussion all over again.
Nothing surprising here. Just another guild (and I guess a whole forum of defenders of them) of people who claim they want difficulty, but the first thing they do is try to find a way to exploit their way around the difficulty.
More proof that a lot of raiders don't want a hard game. They just want their shinies as fast as possible.
And yes, obvious exploit. To say it's not because the pet 'can' do it is just trying to justify exploiting. Just because you can doesn't mean you should.
Another thing many raiders lack: ethics.
Last edited by mavfin; 2013-01-31 at 08:44 PM.
OK, if Trion said before the boss was released that pet tanking the boss was an exploit, then I guess it's an exploit.
I'm going to file this one next to the GW2 "making too much profit by vendoring crafted items that sell for more than the cost of the mats" exploit.
Is pet tanking considered an exploit in rift? While not desired in WoW, it's been used successfully for several bosses over the years and is in no way a new thing.
I've just got a couple things to say:
First, it sounds like this guild regularly uses exploits to kill bosses and should be banned.
Second, allowing pets to tank bosses like this is nothing more than poor, lazy design -- not an exploit. Consider that the encounter designers could give the boss' melee attack an additional property that causes it to deal massive extra damage to any non-player character. They could then add this flag to any boss that they do not want to be pet tanked. Bam, pet tanking becomes impossible except on fights where the devs are okay with it. So, again, lazy design.
Some people might suggest that such a "flag" or additional property might not be easy to implement. Consider this: What is a cleave, if not a regular attack with an additional property causing it to deal damage to nearby players, defined with preset requirements as to where the cleave will hit? It's just another flag and I can't imagine I'd have any trouble finding bosses with such abilities. A cleave, by comparison, would be more complicated to implement since you have to define the distance that the cleave "travels" and the arc of its effect. I'm sure some of you won't like me making a WoW comparison, but consider Amber Shaper in HoF: His melee attack is flagged to remove a resource (discipline?) from any constructs that he melees. This effectively causes a raid to wipe quickly if they lose their tank and that is pretty much the only design purpose of this flag. The boss' melee ability simply checks whether the target is a construct or not and, if so, depletes their resources. This is pretty basic programming and I imagine that the Rift encounter designers and programmers implement funadmentally similar flags on a regular basis for the various encounters. It's standard fare for games of this type. The only legitimate reason that such a flag hasn't been implemented is because it never occurred to encounter designers. This brings us back to what I said earlier: Lazy design.
Last edited by Belloc; 2013-01-31 at 09:05 PM.