Back at you, SOE - Page 21

Pinski · 03-21-2008, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

No Aerilik did not state it was an exploit. Perhaps one could infer from the quote that it may be considered by some to be an exploit but that is an inference and open to interpretation.

Second, Aerilik does not set these policies exclusively. Aerilik could think this is an exploit, while the official SOE policy may be that this is an acceptable strategy. The reverse may be true as well - Aerilik things it's fine, but SOE disagrees with him.

Thus, SOE as an organization is the only competent authority to say if this is an exploit or not. If they do not consider it an exploit, it's not, regardless of what any individual developer or community member may think.

You do not say "look the other way," unless you know that it is a blatant cheat/exploit/whatever. Aeralik doesn't think it's fine, he thinks it's bad, but he's willing to do it anyway just because "we must get our epicz!!!!!!!" Please, learn how to read between the lines. h, and it's Aeralik, not Aerilik. You try to act smart, but you can't even spell a name right.

Darammer · 03-21-2008, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

No Aerilik did not state it was an exploit. Perhaps one could infer from the quote that it may be considered by some to be an exploit but that is an inference and open to interpretation.

Second, Aerilik does not set these policies exclusively. Aerilik could think this is an exploit, while the official SOE policy may be that this is an acceptable strategy. The reverse may be true as well - Aerilik things it's fine, but SOE disagrees with him.

Thus, SOE as an organization is the only competent authority to say if this is an exploit or not. If they do not consider it an exploit, it's not, regardless of what any individual developer or community member may think.

Cas, the issue in this case is actually NOT whether or not SOE considers this an exploit. The issue is whether AERELIK considers it an exploit. Which... from reading that PM I don't know how you can read it any other way.

If a developer believes a tactic to be an exploit, and does not report it to his superiors (regardless of whether the end result of this report would be "It is not an exploit"), and instead uses it for personal gain, this is an ethics breech by that developer, who should then be disciplined by SOE.

quasigenx · 03-21-2008, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

Thus, SOE as an organization is the only competent authority to say if this is an exploit or not. If they do not consider it an exploit, it's not, regardless of what any individual developer or community member may think.

You are a fucking idiot. No, the community team never released and official statement that this was an exploit. BUT they did hotfix the issue and roll back guilds who were using the exploit, including taking away their mythicals.

Stop arguing semantics.

Caswydian · 03-21-2008, 02:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fidelus

For this exact mob in the same way at the same time. If you want to be the smartest guy in the room, keep up.

However, there is no proof that the guild did this.

There is just proof that Aerilik tried to influence them to do it. So while they may not be guilty, he is.

Fire his ass and get someone who cheats less and designs better loot.

Which guild? How do you know it was for using this specific strategy on this specific mob?

What Aeralik's response indicate to me is that in this case, SOE is not going to let a broken encounter get in the way of epic progression, so while this strategy may be considered an exploit under other circumstances, content progression is more important for now. Thus, SOE is willing to look the other way, at least until the encounter is fixed.

Fidelus · 03-21-2008, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

No Aerilik did not state it was an exploit. Perhaps one could infer from the quote that it may be considered by some to be an exploit but that is an inference and open to interpretation.

Second, Aerilik does not set these policies exclusively. Aerilik could think this is an exploit, while the official SOE policy may be that this is an acceptable strategy. The reverse may be true as well - Aerilik things it's fine, but SOE disagrees with him.

Thus, SOE as an organization is the only competent authority to say if this is an exploit or not. If they do not consider it an exploit, it's not, regardless of what any individual developer or community member may think.

The title of his post was "If we try this I can look the other way in the name of epics." How thick are you?

Gtwo · 03-21-2008, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LFG

People, please do not spam the official forums with this.

Grimwell has already posted it in the NGD thread.

I'm actually pleasantly surprised by that and will give him credit for it.

So please, do not spam the official forums.

Thank you

/agree I was ready to spam till they banned 3 more accounts, but I stopped all spamming when Grimell posted that, he surprised the shit out of me with it. Probably the most effective spam prevention I have ever seen from SOE....Fairness, where did he come up with that idea.

Caswydian · 03-21-2008, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quasigenx

You are a fucking idiot. No, the community team never released and official statement that this was an exploit. BUT they did hotfix the issue and roll back guilds who were using the exploit, including taking away their mythicals.

Stop arguing semantics.

Which guilds, when? If you're going to make this claim, be prepared to back it up with some sort of proof.

Caswydian · 03-21-2008, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fidelus

The title of his post was "If we try this I can look the other way in the name of epics." How thick are you?

Thick enough to keep out the bias and bullshit that dominates, and stick to a discussion of the facts.

Flaming Homo · 03-21-2008, 03:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caswydian

If you violated the trust implied by a private message, then yes. While it's certainly a minor offense in the big scheme of things, it does undermine your position, doubly so if it turns out there is no wrong-doing.

Further, one must question your motives here - why not communicate this information privately with SOE instead of making it public? Is the intent here to really see the problem resolved or is it to fire up your followers and try to embarrass SOE

A) This is a private forum, just as SOE's turd boards are a private forum. No user has any implied privacy here. (So fuck off, moron.)

B) SOE chose to sever all connections with EQ2Flames, so LFG is under no pretense of obligation to communicate anything to SOE unless he chooses to do so. (So fuck off, moron.)

Pinski · 03-21-2008, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by quasigenx

You are a fucking idiot. No, the community team never released and official statement that this was an exploit. BUT they did hotfix the issue and roll back guilds who were using the exploit, including taking away their mythicals.

This is untrue, just FYI. The guild that got rolled back, got rolled back due to exploiting their way beyond the North Wing door, which is(prior to the clearing of the West Wing) closed. They did not kill Druushk, they skipped it entirely.