Guest Shibboleet Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 If you don't want people calling you out for not thinking, then don't come on the forums and complain about an event exploit being treated like an exploit :| It wasn't an exploit. It is an intended mechanic in the code to stop spawns after hitting the level cap. It was on DEs end, not ours. Where else am I suppose to call upon the other grinders? Form an alliance with them? Oh yea, that already happened and fell apart (Eclipse). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggh Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 It wasn't an exploit. It is an intended mechanic in the code to stop spawns after hitting the level cap. It was on DEs end, not ours. Where else am I suppose to call upon the other grinders? Form an alliance with them? Oh yea, that already happened and fell apart (Eclipse). As far as the event was concerned it was an exploit. Not sure why you still don't understand this. Context is everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anzo-Drakon Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 It wasn't an exploit. It is an intended mechanic in the code to stop spawns after hitting the level cap. It was on DEs end, not ours. Where else am I suppose to call upon the other grinders? Form an alliance with them? Oh yea, that already happened and fell apart (Eclipse). So if you are acknowledging that it was in the code to stop spawns at 9999, then my question to you is why did you not report it? It comes down to right and wrong and clearly those who used this unintended game design feature abused it for personal and clan gain. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Halser Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 So if you are acknowledging that it was in the code to stop spawns at 9999, then my question to you is why did you not report it? It comes down to right and wrong and clearly those who used this unintended game design feature abused it for personal and clan gain. the thing was reported several times, DE just didn't care enough to correct it in any way. Again, this is a bug as old as Warframe, it is not something new to this event. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-TSA-voodoo Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 What I don't get is why people who weren't even competing, or planning on competing, calling out the grinders for grinding. There should be a requirement to have had more than 20k stink to even say anything about the change. qft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FishNeedles Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) Yea, stop doing what you enjoy. In fact, work all of your life. When the hell did I say "work"? Though if you enjoy grinding hour after hour on the same level I guess you enjoy work. Except regular work gets you a paycheck and warframe gives you points toward some goal that I can't see. What do you achieve after the vandal? Bragging rights? That definitely sounds like a huge waste to me. Edited June 24, 2014 by FishNeedles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shibboleet Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 When the hell did I say "work"? Though if you enjoy grinding hour after hour on the same level I guess you enjoy work. Except regular work gets you a paycheck and warframe gives you pointless points toward some goal that I can't see. What do you achieve after the vandal? That definitely sounds like a huge waste to me. Fun is relative. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)Pengu_Imperialus Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 the thing was reported several times, DE just didn't care enough to correct it in any way. Again, this is a bug as old as Warframe, it is not something new to this event. But still a bug, thus if used for your advantage still an exploit. A bank knows there front door doesn't look, yes its odd they didn't fix it, but if you take money out your stealing. Same principle. If something is against the rules it's always against the rules regardless of availability to still perform the action.Personally I don't think DE didn't fix it because they assumed there was an upward limit to obsessive play. That having been proven wrong after 60 minutes they should just crank the spawn rate of shock and parasitic eximus to 50%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vunie Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 ohmaigod DE i cant keep exploiting a mission with no enemies around at all it was so much fun to just do an empty mission over and over i had no idea it was an exploit cuz it wasn't obvious at all i though it was normal to do missions with no enemies so i didn't reported it and i just kept going now i want my time back please DE make me a time machine Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FishNeedles Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Fun is relative. Yeah, it is, and I understand that. Don't understand complaining about it if you enjoyed the process though. You didn't waste your time, you got fun out of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grillv20 Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 If there was an exploit.....then DE should just let it go for this time. Because some exploited to get high score, some didn't. If the records are erased, those that didn't exploit become victim. The good become victim in order to punish the bad. How is that justice? lol no, they should fix their game and ban exploiters plain and simple Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
es.iiden Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 Im sorry, if there is a bug, you squash it before it becomes a problem. plain and simple. you can blame the people but the DEVS are at fault because they let something like this persist. This is almost the equivalent of a bank not having proper security simply because they think no one is gonna walk into their vault and steal their money. you deal with the problem when it is presented. Its like honey on a fly trap... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shibboleet Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) But still a bug, thus if used for your advantage still an exploit. A bank knows there front door doesn't look, yes its odd they didn't fix it, but if you take money out your stealing. Same principle. If something is against the rules it's always against the rules regardless of availability to still perform the action. Personally I don't think DE didn't fix it because they assumed there was an upward limit to obsessive play. That having been proven wrong after 60 minutes they should just crank the spawn rate of shock and parasitic eximus to 50%. That analogy doesn't work. This one does: A imaginable bank lets you gain 100% interest after gaining $1,000,000, but only 10% before $1,000,000. People who were gaining the 100% all of the sudden lost their 100% and had their money reset to $1,000,000. And nowhere did it state that it was against the rules to keep grinding. Edited June 24, 2014 by Shibboleet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggh Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) That analogy doesn't work. This one does: A imaginable bank lets you gain 100% interest after gaining $1,000,000, but only 10% before $1,000,000. People who were gaining the 100% all of the sudden lost their 100% and had their money reset to $1,000,000. And nowhere did it state that it was against the rules to keep grinding. You're talking about the event itself. His analogy was addressing how exploits in general are treated by most developers. The fact that he was talking about how availability does not change whether something is against the rules or not should have clued you in. Edited June 24, 2014 by Aggh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zaresin Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 To be honest, the bug was DE's fault for lack of planning. Their coding is horrendous as well as their ability to address bugs. Punishing any clans or players due to the lack of planning on DE's part is not only rude but pushes players away from the game. These players did their job as EVERYONE had the same ability to reach that point where enemies stopped spawning. Saying they exploited a known and heavily reported bug that has been known for months when these players were only doing what the event was designed for (even when it was coded so poorly) is not their fault. They did their jobs by grinding it. One thing is for sure, with each event we have, the more glaringly obvious the bugs become till they are utterly broken as the current event was. It really is getting to be a little pathetic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggh Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) To be honest, the bug was DE's fault for lack of planning. Their coding is horrendous as well as their ability to address bugs. Punishing any clans or players due to the lack of planning on DE's part is not only rude but pushes players away from the game. These players did their job as EVERYONE had the same ability to reach that point where enemies stopped spawning. Saying they exploited a known and heavily reported bug that has been known for months when these players were only doing what the event was designed for (even when it was coded so poorly) is not their fault. They did their jobs by grinding it. One thing is for sure, with each event we have, the more glaringly obvious the bugs become till they are utterly broken as the current event was. It really is getting to be a little pathetic. Please explain how it is in no way a players fault that they took advantage of a bug that they've known about for six months? Edited June 24, 2014 by Aggh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mokkania Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 What I don't get is why people who weren't even competing, or planning on competing, calling out the grinders for grinding. There should be a requirement to have had more than 20k stink to even say anything about the change. I'm not paying too much attention so I don't know if people are plainly defending DE or supporting the change but pointing out that people's logic is flawed is free for all I think. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
(PSN)Pengu_Imperialus Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 That analogy doesn't work. This one does: A imaginable bank lets you gain 100% interest after gaining $1,000,000, but only 10% before $1,000,000. People who were gaining the 100% all of the sudden lost their 100% and had their money reset to $1,000,000. And nowhere did it state that it was against the rules to keep grinding. No but as Aggh (by the way my phone auto corrected your name to Afghanistan) stated I was speaking directly to the idea of breaking a rule and expecting not to have a penalty associated with it because the Devs didn't fix it.To follow your interest analogy it would be as if the 100% interest were a bank error. You have a responsibility to report it because it's not your money. The bank may have been the one to give it to you but when they figure out the error they will come for it. If you spent the money you are the one on the hook for it not the bank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Shibboleet Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 No but as Aggh (by the way my phone auto corrected your name to Afghanistan) stated I was speaking directly to the idea of breaking a rule and expecting not to have a penalty associated with it because the Devs didn't fix it. To follow your interest analogy it would be as if the 100% interest were a bank error. You have a responsibility to report it because it's not your money. The bank may have been the one to give it to you but when they figure out the error they will come for it. If you spent the money you are the one on the hook for it not the bank. But you also reported this issue to the bank 6 months beforehand, and they never changed it. So it seems then that is intended to be this way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggh Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 (edited) But you also reported this issue to the bank 6 months beforehand, and they never changed it. So it seems then that is intended to be this way. Regardless of whether the bank follow up on it properly, It's still not your money. Edited June 24, 2014 by Aggh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-XeqtR Posted June 24, 2014 Author Share Posted June 24, 2014 Please. Imagine if all competitions worked like this. Lets take swimming for example. Two people are running the 50 free and when someone hits 25 meters they are suddenly, for no reason at all, able to go twice as fast. Can you see how that breaks competition? No. That would only work if the tailing person would never get a speed boost. If two players are at a gap of their times(looking at it from a rate of 1:2) then one gets faster, the gap is widened temporarily. As the 2nd person reaches the boost point, the new gap is created, but in a ratio their distance is the same. This is because they're at the same speed once again. The only advantage is that one gets there before the other which justly so once their speeds even out again the leader will remain in the lead as long as he continues. Imagine if it was a time trial for this competition, where going first had no advantage. lets say both swimmers are identical in speed. Player a swims 25 meters, gets boosted till the finish and it takes 2 minutes. Player b swims the exact same race to 25 meters, gets a boost and completes it in the exact same 2 minutes because nothing changed. Only if the speeds were different would an advantage be present. The only thing you're arguing for are the people who gave up before the 25m mark because they aren't as good of swimmer and thought they wouldn't make it because they didn't know about the boost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aggh Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 No. That would only work if the tailing person would never get a speed boost. If two players are at a gap of their times(looking at it from a rate of 1:2) then one gets faster, the gap is widened temporarily. As the 2nd person reaches the boost point, the new gap is created, but in a ratio their distance is the same. This is because they're at the same speed once again. The only advantage is that one gets there before the other which justly so once their speeds even out again the leader will remain in the lead as long as he continues. Imagine if it was a time trial for this competition, where going first had no advantage. lets say both swimmers are identical in speed. Player a swims 25 meters, gets boosted till the finish and it takes 2 minutes. Player b swims the exact same race to 25 meters, gets a boost and completes it in the exact same 2 minutes because nothing changed. Only if the speeds were different would an advantage be present. The only thing you're arguing for are the people who gave up before the 25m mark because they aren't as good of swimmer and thought they wouldn't make it because they didn't know about the boost. No, it would still work since the first person would get their boost earlier on and thus be able get to the end of the 50m faster. The person in second would have to put in a lot more effort early on to be able to catch up rather than be able to pace themselves and gradually catch up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InhumaneSlayer Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 "ninja space shooter" more leik, "grind forever against your will or your souls will be punished, got a high score in an event? too bad, we'll just screw with it." Holeh S#&$. Your back? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zendeath Posted June 24, 2014 Share Posted June 24, 2014 No, it would still work since the first person would get their boost earlier on and thus be able get to the end of the 50m faster. The person in second would have to put in a lot more effort early on to be able to catch up rather than be able to pace themselves and gradually catch up. So where does being faster/better depending on what scenario we go with make it an exploit. In your messed up logic I should probably be banned because I can level a frame faster than you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-XeqtR Posted June 24, 2014 Author Share Posted June 24, 2014 No, it would still work since the first person would get their boost earlier on and thus be able get to the end of the 50m faster. The person in second would have to put in a lot more effort early on to be able to catch up rather than be able to pace themselves and gradually catch up. He got the boost earlier because he was faster in the first place! Are you saying that since people grinded the enemy missions faster they deserve to be punished? The effort of the enemy levels is the same for everyone. Some just did more of them faster and got the boost first. Just because someone is slow at the game doesn't mean they get to cry. Everyone had the same opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts