The Ethics of Raiding: Exploiting - Page 2

Argyuile · 02-27-2008, 09:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Talonis

Just be prepared to face the music if you choose the dark path of the exploiterer. While some have gotten better at exploiting, others have gotten better at identifying people using those exploits.

So what? SoE clearly doesn't give a fuck if anyone exploits. All I have to do is log into KC and see some level 3 running around warping to know that. If they wont stop exploiting in a fucking contested zone where its common knowledge what the hells going on and who the fuck is doing it what makes you think they give even the slightest whats going on in VP or anywhere else for that matter?

THERE IS NO CONSEQUENCE TO CHEATING IN EQ2.

Pinski · 02-27-2008, 10:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slippery

There is no progression. Some of the Avatar kills may mean something, but that is yet to be seen (and even then, not a lot due to spawns). Trak and Tangrin may mean something, but that is probably going to be another example of everyone kills it in short order after a change.

I bet if Trak's heal bullshit was removed, it'd die in 1 day to a fair amount of guilds. Thus making Trak meaningless.

Of course, that's only if you have a clear instance when the patch goes live :0

Caswydian · 02-27-2008, 12:10 PM

Do players want the devs to design encounters with a clear and intended strategy?

One thing people seem to want it more sophisticated AI, and with that will come a greater degree of outcome variance and a dilution of what is means to exploit an encounter. A broken script is fairly simple to figure out, while an error in AI logic may be far less obvious to a casual observer. If the encounter AI allows for true outcome variance, it will mean one attempt at the same encounter may be considerably different than another due to the mob making different decisions or the players attempting a different strategy. Is that something players want? Is it something players conditioned to look for intended strategies, and who see anything diverging from that strategy as an exploit could handle?

Argyuile · 02-27-2008, 02:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

Do players want the devs to design encounters with a clear and intended strategy?

One thing people seem to want it more sophisticated AI, and with that will come a greater degree of outcome variance and a dilution of what is means to exploit an encounter. A broken script is fairly simple to figure out, while an error in AI logic may be far less obvious to a casual observer. If the encounter AI allows for true outcome variance, it will mean one attempt at the same encounter may be considerably different than another due to the mob making different decisions or the players attempting a different strategy. Is that something players want? Is it something players conditioned to look for intended strategies, and who see anything diverging from that strategy as an exploit could handle?

Yes, it would beat the hell out of broken encounters thats for sure.

Odalia · 02-27-2008, 03:40 PM

Ok my guild is FAR from an ubar top end raiding guild we are very casual, but I can tell you without a doubt that we fight hard for every named we take down; I know that I can speak for them that we would rather be like we are and not getting server/ww 1st and taking down a named the right way then exploting it.

Just my 2 cents take it for what it is worth.

Caswydian · 02-27-2008, 04:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Argyuile

Yes, it would beat the hell out of broken encounters thats for sure.

It's much easier to tell if a script is broken than if AI is broken. Would people tolerate an AI that could sometimes make mistakes? Would they tolerate an AI that would behave differently if you have certain races or classes in your raid? Worshiped certain deities?

ErgotJones · 02-27-2008, 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

It's much easier to tell if a script is broken than if AI is broken. Would people tolerate an AI that could sometimes make mistakes? Would they tolerate an AI that would behave differently if you have certain races or classes in your raid? Worshiped certain deities?

Initially, I don't think players would tolerate that. How much bitching and moaning did we hear back in the Darathar days? Certain healers requiring certain spell choices just to have a legit shot at him?

Certainly not the more hardcore players - it cuts way too close to designers "forcing" my decisions. I want to worship Bristlebane but a designer's AI shows me that worshipping Bertox makes <raid mob x> much easier? Screw that. As a designer, give me the choices that fit in line with your design, don't give me only YOUR choices.

EJ

Argyuile · 02-27-2008, 07:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

It's much easier to tell if a script is broken than if AI is broken. Would people tolerate an AI that could sometimes make mistakes? Would they tolerate an AI that would behave differently if you have certain races or classes in your raid? Worshiped certain deities?

I agree I wouldnt want decisions forced on me but if the AI changed its behavior based on what I did or what classes I brought that would be awesome.

Conky · 02-27-2008, 07:29 PM

I still remember the video of the WW first on Mutagenic Outcast. It was just the MO standing there, no little buddies. Guilds also exploited the fact that the adds would drop master chests and they would got all the discos in about one night without ever killing MO. Exploit? Yeah. Messed up game mechanics? Yeah. If the programmers do it right and QA'd it on test, then that shit wouldn't happen.

I think most people will be 50/50 on this issue, depending on what type of guild they are in. Those that exploit it will be known as exploiters and they probably do it all the time anyway. Those who kill it legit are also known to do most other mobs that way. Generally speaking.

Pinski · 02-27-2008, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Conky

I still remember the video of the WW first on Mutagenic Outcast. It was just the MO standing there, no little buddies. Guilds also exploited the fact that the adds would drop master chests and they would got all the discos in about one night without ever killing MO. Exploit? Yeah. Messed up game mechanics? Yeah. If the programmers do it right and QA'd it on test, then that shit wouldn't happen.

Obviously you have no idea how the exploit work, and just think they killed the adds. It took an ability in game to break it. One that nobody expected to use that way, because it was brand new. But hey, not everybody can figure it out exactly how people will use new abilities to break shit.