Page 4 of 12 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
6
... LastLast
  1. #61
    Stood in the Fire fooliuscaesar13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    499
    Quote Originally Posted by RoughRaptors View Post
    Correct, they knew about this via a beta guild and decided to do nothing. Hence the error is on both parties.
    If NQ knew about this as well, then I would definitely change my tune to "exploit". I still stand by my thought that Trion could have and should have fixed this.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Moonfirespamm View Post
    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.
    We shared our parses and video, why then were they not found out as Shaeyl was? The answer is that you do not know what you are talking about. You are trolling using an account name that is very similar to what one of our officers uses because you lack credibility otherwise.

  3. #63
    Stood in the Fire fooliuscaesar13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Pittsburgh, PA
    Posts
    499
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    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.
    Apples and oranges, as you are comparing a small amount of money in a con to a large amount of money in a con. You are focusing on the "what" and not the "how" or "why".


    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    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.
    Stop putting words in my mouth. I asked you a few questions, nothing more, nothing less. And agreed on the attention part.


    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    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.
    I was discussing fixes, since we were discussing bugs and/or exploits. A bug / exploit needs a fix, and I was offering one for the sake of the discussion.


    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    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.
    I wholeheartedly agree with most of this. Nobody is perfect. Devs make mistakes. I fix bugs in my own code every day, so trust me when I say "I get it".
    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.

  4. #64
    Quote Originally Posted by fooliuscaesar13 View Post
    If NQ knew about this as well, then I would definitely change my tune to "exploit". I still stand by my thought that Trion could have and should have fixed this.
    From what I've gathered, Trion knew about it in Beta from a guild(Not NQ) and didn't fix it or seem to plan on fixing it.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-31 at 08:02 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by AddictVioarr View Post
    We shared our parses and video, why then were they not found out as Shaeyl was? The answer is that you do not know what you are talking about. You are trolling using an account name that is very similar to what one of our officers uses because you lack credibility otherwise.
    Shael was outed for an Ituz parse in the mage forums where he/she was mathematically outed by members of the Rift Community based on combust damage not being possible unless affected by some outside source.

    So, unless Shael did about 20k dps on Laethys there were other people in your raid hiding it.

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by fooliuscaesar13 View Post
    Btw...which end game raiding guild are you in? You post in this thread like you have a greyhound in the race.
    Actually, no, I am not in the race. Sometimes I wish I was, I wish I had the time to dedicate to raiding that I used to. However, I am in a small raiding guild that was not even able to put together a 20m group last week and is only 2/4 FT, nothing in EE. However, I like the people I play with, the core of the team are good players and if we could just get a few more dedicated consistent raiders, we would be downing stuff, though not world or server first or anything of the like, just plain doing it for the fun of doing it with people we enjoy BSing with.

    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.
    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. #66
    Quote Originally Posted by Moonfirespamm View Post
    From what I've gathered, Trion knew about it in Beta from a guild(Not NQ) and didn't fix it or seem to plan on fixing it.

    ---------- Post added 2013-01-31 at 08:02 PM ----------



    Shael was outed for an Ituz parse in the mage forums where he/she was mathematically outed by members of the Rift Community based on combust damage not being possible unless affected by some outside source.

    So, unless Shael did about 20k dps on Laethys there were other people in your raid hiding it.
    It was not in the mage forums, I posted the parse in question in the dungeons and raids section of the official forums. I say again, you do not know what you are talking about. The parse total was not the issue, it was the distribution of the damage that showed he was using multiple synergy crystals. We then went back to past logs and determined that it was possible but not definite he was also stacking powerstones until he admitted to it when confronted. We removed him from the guild and did not advertise that we had done it. The only reason anyone outside of the guild even knew he was removed was because he posted a couple of weeks with a halfhearted apology in the mage forums. We don't have anything to prove, because we do not condone exploiting. No Quarter publicly condones exploiting and that is the difference that matters, not your idle speculation about events you have demonstrated you know little about.

    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.

  7. #67
    Titan Kelimbror's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Tír na nÓg
    Posts
    13,158
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    We do not have industry standards, we have Blizzard standards.
    Other games exist besides Rift and WoW. Just a riendly FYI.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    You are the one who continually puts words in my mouth like "better" or "I want no innovation." I never said that.
    Please show me where I said you said that you didn't want innovation. Please do. I'll go get popcorn. For someone complaining about being confrontational, I presented you with a concession to your explanation and then carried on in a rational and level conversation. You continue to present hostility and claim I'm putting words in your mouth when I'm not.
    BAD WOLF

  8. #68
    The Lightbringer Tharkkun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Minnesnowta
    Posts
    3,095
    Quote Originally Posted by Lathais View Post
    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.
    So based on your opinion you are saying it's an exploit. 100%, no way around it?

    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.

  9. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Kittyvicious View Post
    Other games exist besides Rift and WoW. Just a riendly FYI.
    I realize other games exist, however, it was WoWs standards that were quoted, then words like industry standards start flying around. The "industry standard" is the definition I posted on the first page, not what WoW says. "Industry Standard" dictates that if the developers did not intend it, it is considered an exploit. That definition holds true to the entire gaming industry. If you look at it, it actually references games outside of the MMORPG genre. If anything, not being the one who originally brought up WoW or Blizz, I am applying it to video games as a whole. Why do you keep bringing up WoW? Are you trying to make this a game vs game. I simply stated the two games a different, provided examples, and said what goes in one does not necessarily go in the other and dismissed WoW/Blizzard from the conversation entirely. Why do YOU insist on continually bringing it back in.
    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

  10. #70
    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.

  11. #71
    Quote Originally Posted by Kittyvicious View Post
    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.
    Information you get from the horses' mouths. I am posting in this thread and have provided you with some of that information, so therefore I am included in that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kittyvicious View Post
    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.
    I do want innovation and you said noone does. By saying no one does, you say I don't. I do.
    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. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by AddictVioarr View Post
    It was not in the mage forums, I posted the parse in question in the dungeons and raids section of the official forums. I say again, you do not know what you are talking about. The parse total was not the issue, it was the distribution of the damage that showed he was using multiple synergy crystals. We then went back to past logs and determined that it was possible but not definite he was also stacking powerstones until he admitted to it when confronted. We removed him from the guild and did not advertise that we had done it. The only reason anyone outside of the guild even knew he was removed was because he posted a couple of weeks with a halfhearted apology in the mage forums. We don't have anything to prove, because we do not condone exploiting. No Quarter publicly condones exploiting and that is the difference that matters, not your idle speculation about events you have demonstrated you know little about.

    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.
    So it was pretty much identical to NQ on some level.
    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.

  13. #73
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Out and about
    Posts
    415
    Quote Originally Posted by RoughRaptors View Post
    Consumables aren't meant to be stacked, 40,000 damage dealt to a player isn't supposed to deal 0 damage to a pet.

    When you stack consumables, you effectively increase the size of your raid by giving you extra heals and extra dps.

    When you have a pet tank Regulos, you effectively increase the size of your raid by giving you extra slots for dps since you don't need tank heals.

    Logic, people....logic
    Stacking consumables that aren't meant to be stacked is an obvious exploit.

    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.

  14. #74
    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.

  15. #75
    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.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Tharkkun View Post
    So based on your opinion you are saying it's an exploit. 100%, no way around it?

    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.
    Resing faster than a death touch triggers on an encounter from a previous tier that was not intended to be killed at all is completely different from stacking LoS and causing the boss from the most current tier to not do tank or raid damage outside of the "stop hitting buttons" on a random person mechanic. A better comparison would be Conquest LoSing one of the dragons in Sleeper's Tomb for the same result. If you want to talk examples from previous games that's the best and most appropriate to my knowledge. Plus it's interesting considering one of the devs for Rift was in Conquest.

  17. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by RoughRaptors View Post
    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?
    That alone makes me lose a lot of respect for Trion. The encounter, as created, could be "cheesed" by using a pet that doesn't take cleave damage. Is that all Regulos does? I mean, in other games with pets, they usually create encounters where using a pet isn't the best method possible. In this case, they created an encounter where using a pet IS the best method possible. That doesn't make it an exploit, it makes it a poor design. EXTREMELY poor. I still don't find this to be an exploit. It's not using Saronite bombs to prevent a platform from falling. It's not using 3rd party mods to drop floors and knock down walls. This is the way the encounter was created. It's not using a bug to your advantage. It's merely using what you have been given to your advantage legitimately. And, no matter what Trion says, it's legitimate.

  18. #78
    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.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by notorious98 View Post
    And, no matter what Trion says, it's legitimate.
    It's their game, they have the final say as to what is and isn't legitimate.

  20. #80
    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.

Posting Permissions

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