Guild Wars 2

As a jeweler and salvager, it was nice to see so many of my competitors banned. Thank you!

Actually, they were suspended. Very few people were banned.

There were no suspensions. Permanent bans.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/account/Bans-for-Snowflake-Jewelry-are-unfair/first#post1132023

Read response for info.

PowerCat.5738:

There were no suspensions. Permanent bans.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/account/Bans-for-Snowflake-Jewelry-are-unfair/first#post1132023

Read response for info.

Reviewing Gaile’s post proved that my post was correct in it’s entirety.

Esplen.3940:

Actually, they were suspended. Very few people were banned.

If you read between the lines, I wrote: The majority of people were suspended, very few were banned.

If you read between Gaile’s lines: The worst were banned.

If you want the actual quote, it would be:

People whose accounts were terminated were the worst offenders.

And

Exploit closed.
Worst offenders terminated.

I got the impression it was something like 3,000 bans, 500 suspensions. any idea what actual numbers are?

John Smith.4610:

Less than 200 Total Bans

So,John Smith, being an economist, would you mind expanding on why this flake salvaging was an economic exploit, leading up to the terminated accounts?

I just want to know why this was an economic exploit to understand and avoid what constitute as a exploit in the future.

Thank you

If you read other threads pertaining to it, you’d get the answer you’re looking for.

Basically, you would put in 1 ecto and GUARANTEE get more than 1 ecto back.

Making stacks of ectos with only 1 ecto with no drawback is what made this an exploit.

Sky.7610:

John Smith.4610:

Less than 200 Total Bans

So,John Smith, being an economist, would you mind expanding on why this flake salvaging was an economic exploit, leading up to the terminated accounts?

I just want to know why this was an economic exploit to understand and avoid what constitute as a exploit in the future.

Thank you

A recipe that took 1 ecto-based material to craft, instead of 5 that all other similar recipes require. A recipe that was profitable not to use/sell the crafted item, but to salvage it because the salvaged components were more valuable than the material used for crafting.

Exploit.

John Smith.4610:

Less than 200 Total Bans

needs more bans imo.

Ursan.7846:

Sky.7610:

John Smith.4610:

Less than 200 Total Bans

So,John Smith, being an economist, would you mind expanding on why this flake salvaging was an economic exploit, leading up to the terminated accounts?

I just want to know why this was an economic exploit to understand and avoid what constitute as a exploit in the future.

Thank you

A recipe that took 1 ecto-based material to craft, instead of 5 that all other similar recipes require. A recipe that was profitable not to use/sell the crafted item, but to salvage it because the salvaged components were more valuable than the material used for crafting.

Exploit.

Might have been an exploit but who made the recipe that way to begin with certainly wasn’t the people whom discovered that it yielded 1-3 ecto’s and the snowflake, now was it?

Arreyanne.2683:

Ursan.7846:

Sky.7610:

John Smith.4610:

Less than 200 Total Bans

So,John Smith, being an economist, would you mind expanding on why this flake salvaging was an economic exploit, leading up to the terminated accounts?

I just want to know why this was an economic exploit to understand and avoid what constitute as a exploit in the future.

Thank you

A recipe that took 1 ecto-based material to craft, instead of 5 that all other similar recipes require. A recipe that was profitable not to use/sell the crafted item, but to salvage it because the salvaged components were more valuable than the material used for crafting.

Exploit.

Might have been an exploit but who made the recipe that way to begin with certainly wasn’t the people whom discovered that it yielded 1-3 ecto’s and the snowflake, now was it?

Hence why it was an exploit and not an intended feature.

developers mistake players pay the price, and question about the recipe still not answered and topic is closed. 4 days cant answer a simple question.

Fook.3914:

developers mistake players pay the price, and question about the recipe still not answered and topic is closed. 4 days cant answer a simple question.

200 players banned in a game where the playerbase is > 1 million. Yarr, we sure paid the price.

Fook.3914:

developers mistake players pay the price, and question about the recipe still not answered and topic is closed. 4 days cant answer a simple question.

An exploit is always a mistake from the developers, it’s never an intended feature so if a player use an exploit you are sure to be suspended or banned concidering the “harm” done.

In real life; if a money transport guard leaves the doors open to the money and goes an releaves himself, does this mean you can come and take the money? No, even though the guard made a mistake you are still stealing money.

Back to the game; if you notice that something gives you very easy profit, you should report it and not repeat it.
Also, why would you wan’t to know wich recipe? You will know when you exploit, do it alot and you are realy aware of what you are doing and you apperenty will be banned.

Esplen.3940:

If you read other threads pertaining to it, you’d get the answer you’re looking for.

Basically, you would put in 1 ecto and GUARANTEE get more than 1 ecto back.

Making stacks of ectos with only 1 ecto with no drawback is what made this an exploit.

Wrong. You created 0 to 3 ecto (average estimated to 0.9) + 1 to 3 mithril (average estimated to 1.5) from 8 mithril + 20% chance of losing 4 mithril, 1 ecto and 1 pristine snowflake.
(I am only talking about the most rentable recipe, using orichalcum or using black lion kits make it much less interesting in terms of benefits)

So on average (if you are not unlucky with RNG) the recipe is
7.3 mithril + 0.2 pristine snowflake + the price of recycling = 0.7 ecto

So yes please John, how is that an obvious exploit ? And how is it destroying the economy ?
Or did I miss something ? Are my RNG estimations wrong on the recycling ? Or was this not the best recipe to use ?

And what is really hilarious, is that the guys who made the most gold out of this recipe, are the ones who bought all the mithril and snowflake early, and simply sold them back to the “exploiters” at a higher price. Those guys are still in the game, “Cuz you know, playing the market is not an exploit compared to this”, yet they are rich thanks to this “exploit”

(I am not even talking about the lack of communication, we only learned it was an exploit the day the recipe was removed. Also http://i.imgur.com/0SICA.jpg etc…)

[disclaimer] I didn’t used this recipe, because by the time I learned about it it was already not interesting. Talk about destroying the economy.

Edit: note that if I seem upset, it’s beacause I would have used this recipe whithout thinking twice. At least the 21 Karma weapon was obvious, even though the comunication part was still bad imho

Esplen.3940:

PowerCat.5738:

There were no suspensions. Permanent bans.

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/account/Bans-for-Snowflake-Jewelry-are-unfair/first#post1132023

Read response for info.

Reviewing Gaile’s post proved that my post was correct in it’s entirety.

Esplen.3940:

Actually, they were suspended. Very few people were banned.

If you read between the lines, I wrote: The majority of people were suspended, very few were banned.

If you read between Gaile’s lines: The worst were banned.

If you want the actual quote, it would be:

People whose accounts were terminated were the worst offenders.

And

Exploit closed.
Worst offenders terminated.

There’s no line to read between.

There 2 outcome out of this exploit.

1. Nothing happened to you.

2. You got permaban.

There was no temporary ban to come from this exploit. It was either none, or permanent.

See also: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/The-Tale-of-Two-Jewellry-Recipes/first#post1138130

Great job Anet!! (no sarcasm). We need to set a good example and ground for future exploiters to think twice. As the chinese say, kill 1, warn a hundred

What about other recipes that make ectos? Are they ok? Seems like lots of yellow recipies could be subject to this. The recipes I saw never returned more materials, they just returned materials of higher value. Isn’t that what many other recipes do as well? So how specifically was this an exploit in terms of returning more materials than went in?

nitrob.6930:

What about other recipes that make ectos? Are they ok? Seems like lots of yellow recipies could be subject to this. The recipes I saw never returned more materials, they just returned materials of higher value. Isn’t that what many other recipes do as well? So how specifically was this an exploit in terms of returning more materials than went in?

The other recipies are ok, the issue with this one was that once you made the snowflake you got it back plus ectos when you salvaged it. That would be like making a weapon and getting the inscription back plus ecto when it is salvaged. If this was repeated 1000 times you could convert 1 ecto into 0-3000 ecto.

John Smith.4610:

Less than 200 Total Bans

And 0 of them were right.

If it is as low as 200, then either the playerbase is low or they were some of the most active people.

Anet had handled the situation poorly, it wasn’t a clear cut exploit, and it didn’t deserve a perma ban.

There are many other people who weren’t banned who now have a bad view of Anet for their terrible decision, because many were friends and guildmates who were extremely active.

Strifey.7215:

John Smith.4610:

Less than 200 Total Bans

And 0 of them were right.

If it is as low as 200, then either the playerbase is low or they were some of the most active people.

Anet had handled the situation poorly, it wasn’t a clear cut exploit, and it didn’t deserve a perma ban.

There are many other people who weren’t banned who now have a bad view of Anet for their terrible decision, because many were friends and guildmates who were extremely active.

And were actively exploiting it.

This is a case of someone screwing up and allowing something in the game and then not taking responsibility for it and instead blaming the people who thought it was intentional.
There are plenty of things in plenty of games which allow profit in the line of this which are not exploits so there was no way for people to know this was someone’s screw up instead of just another in the long list of ways to make a profit.
Min-maxers are always going to find the easiest/quickest ways to make profits. It’s the job of the dev team to make sure unwanted things don’t make it into the market. This happened because the market analyst either didn’t understand the game and/or market or because there is no (qualified) market analyst. Either is unacceptable.
ANet needs lessons from CCP on how to handle the market. CCP isn’t perfect, things which allow unintended profit make it into EVE Online all the time and the people who get in trouble for it are the people who didn’t find it before releasing it, NOT the people who PAY CCP to develop things for them to play with.
Long and the short of this whole thing is someone at ANet dropped the ball and instead of fessing up and rolling back accounts and letting the market later stabilize on it’s own, ANet decided to pretend it was the player’s who screwed up…..
NOT handled well

NOTE: I’m certainly not one of the ones who benefited from this as I’m far too new, but I am very familiar with public relations, market handling, and how to run a company. This upsets me because it shows very poor understanding of these things and that bodes very poorly for the future of a game in which I see great potential.

The reason why players went that road was because the salvage rate and cost for ectos is beyond a joke. Make these two more appropriate and it will remove the incentive for players to try and “rip off” the economy. IMO, ANet should be perma banned as well.

Death Reincarnated.3570:

The reason why players went that road was because the salvage rate and cost for ectos is beyond a joke. Make these two more appropriate and it will remove the incentive for players to try and “rip off” the economy. IMO, ANet should be perma banned as well.

It’s a joke for a 25% chance to not get an ecto off a rare?

As for the price of ectos, that’s dictated by the market, which means that the more bots you ban, the higher the price of things. We can’t have a utopia where ectos cost 1c and we have no bots, nor require a large amount of ecto to get/make anything useful, that wouldn’t be a fun game.

Zanaraxtarus.3954:

ANet needs lessons from CCP on how to handle the market. CCP isn’t perfect, things which allow unintended profit make it into EVE Online all the time and the people who get in trouble for it are the people who didn’t find it before releasing it, NOT the people who PAY CCP to develop things for them to play with.
Long and the short of this whole thing is someone at ANet dropped the ball and instead of fessing up and rolling back accounts and letting the market later stabilize on it’s own, ANet decided to pretend it was the player’s who screwed up…..
NOT handled well

ArenaNet certainly does not need lessons from CCP in this particular area. CCP botched horribly last year, way way worse than ANet did, and had to violate the long standing policy you describe to somewhat fix the tremendous damage to the economy; all the time despite the warnings of some of the most experienced players as early as the test server phase.

That being said, ANet shouldn’t introduce items that shortcut the traditional recipe ratios or the traditional tier availability as easily. There was nothing added in gameplay value in making snowflake jewelry require just one filigree jewel, and unsurprisingly there was a lot to exploit.

Esplen.3940:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

The reason why players went that road was because the salvage rate and cost for ectos is beyond a joke. Make these two more appropriate and it will remove the incentive for players to try and “rip off” the economy. IMO, ANet should be perma banned as well.

It’s a joke for a 25% chance to not get an ecto off a rare?

As for the price of ectos, that’s dictated by the market, which means that the more bots you ban, the higher the price of things. We can’t have a utopia where ectos cost 1c and we have no bots, nor require a large amount of ecto to get/make anything useful, that wouldn’t be a fun game.

The gap betweeen ecto price and chance of getting them is too far appart. If it were not as large, people would NOT be inclined as much to use this exploit.

Reduce the gap and you reduce the number of people willing to cheat. Simple.

Furthermore, you pay 300 gems (roughly 4-5G) for a BL salvage kit with only 25 uses. This should be enough leverage to have a 100% for ecto.

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Esplen.3940:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

The reason why players went that road was because the salvage rate and cost for ectos is beyond a joke. Make these two more appropriate and it will remove the incentive for players to try and “rip off” the economy. IMO, ANet should be perma banned as well.

It’s a joke for a 25% chance to not get an ecto off a rare?

As for the price of ectos, that’s dictated by the market, which means that the more bots you ban, the higher the price of things. We can’t have a utopia where ectos cost 1c and we have no bots, nor require a large amount of ecto to get/make anything useful, that wouldn’t be a fun game.

The gap betweeen ecto price and chance of getting them is too far appart. If it were not as large, people would NOT be inclined as much to use this exploit.

Reduce the gap and you reduce the number of people willing to cheat. Simple.

Furthermore, you pay 300 gems (roughly 4-5G) for a BL salvage kit with only 25 uses. This should be enough leverage to have a 100% for ecto.

BLSK is not 100% chance for ecto, it’s actually 75%. Master Salvage kit is approximately 60%.

Remember, these percentages are to GAIN ecto, not how many ecto you’re getting. It’s ridiculously easy and fast if you’re willing to put in effort, not if you want to sit LA and get everything handed to you.

Esplen.3940:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Esplen.3940:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

The reason why players went that road was because the salvage rate and cost for ectos is beyond a joke. Make these two more appropriate and it will remove the incentive for players to try and “rip off” the economy. IMO, ANet should be perma banned as well.

It’s a joke for a 25% chance to not get an ecto off a rare?

As for the price of ectos, that’s dictated by the market, which means that the more bots you ban, the higher the price of things. We can’t have a utopia where ectos cost 1c and we have no bots, nor require a large amount of ecto to get/make anything useful, that wouldn’t be a fun game.

The gap betweeen ecto price and chance of getting them is too far appart. If it were not as large, people would NOT be inclined as much to use this exploit.

Reduce the gap and you reduce the number of people willing to cheat. Simple.

Furthermore, you pay 300 gems (roughly 4-5G) for a BL salvage kit with only 25 uses. This should be enough leverage to have a 100% for ecto.

BLSK is not 100% chance for ecto, it’s actually 75%. Master Salvage kit is approximately 60%.

Remember, these percentages are to GAIN ecto, not how many ecto you’re getting. It’s ridiculously easy and fast if you’re willing to put in effort, not if you want to sit LA and get everything handed to you.

Firstly, I never said it was 100%. I suggest you re-read my previous post more carefully.

Now secondly. I’m sorry but how is getting ectos, especially 250, an easy task? There are two ways, salvage or buy, but both are tedious to say the least – the latter would seem the more prefered choice seeing as the prices are quite high. Those who have high number of ectos already are controling a large portion of the market because many of the “end game” achievements require ectos. Hence why the “gap” is currently, IMO, too large.

It would seem that players prefer to get gold and trade for ectos – while others make a bucket load of $$$. If the process of getting ectos were less tedious, then players, generally speaking, would be less inclined to use the TP and CHEAT.

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Firstly, I never said it was 100%. I suggest you re-read my previous post more carefully.

Woah, woah, woah, let me stop you right there…

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Furthermore, you pay 300 gems (roughly 4-5G) for a BL salvage kit with only 25 uses. This should be enough leverage to have a 100% for ecto.

And then let’s continue….

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Now secondly. I’m sorry but how is getting ectos, especially 250, an easy task? There are two ways, salvage or buy, but both are tedious to say the least – the latter would seem the more prefered choice seeing as the prices are quite high. Those who have high number of ectos already are controling a large portion of the market because many of the “end game” achievements require ectos. Hence why the “gap” is currently, IMO, too large.

So then it’s not hard to see why it would be a bannable offense to be able to get 250 ecto’s with 1 ecto and not having to spend anything (relatively).

It would seem that players prefer to get gold and trade for ectos – while others make a bucket load of $$$. If the process of getting ectos were less tedious, then players, generally speaking, would be less inclined to use the TP and CHEAT.

Except people CHEATED [the ecto method] and DID NOT USE THE TP with this offense, which is WHY they were banned.

Esplen.3940:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Firstly, I never said it was 100%. I suggest you re-read my previous post more carefully.

Woah, woah, woah, let me stop you right there…

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Furthermore, you pay 300 gems (roughly 4-5G) for a BL salvage kit with only 25 uses. This should be enough leverage to have a 100% for ecto.

And then let’s continue….

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Now secondly. I’m sorry but how is getting ectos, especially 250, an easy task? There are two ways, salvage or buy, but both are tedious to say the least – the latter would seem the more prefered choice seeing as the prices are quite high. Those who have high number of ectos already are controling a large portion of the market because many of the “end game” achievements require ectos. Hence why the “gap” is currently, IMO, too large.

So then it’s not hard to see why it would be a bannable offense to be able to get 250 ecto’s with 1 ecto and not having to spend anything (relatively).

It would seem that players prefer to get gold and trade for ectos – while others make a bucket load of $$$. If the process of getting ectos were less tedious, then players, generally speaking, would be less inclined to use the TP and CHEAT.

Except people CHEATED [the ecto method] and DID NOT USE THE TP with this offense, which is WHY they were banned.

EXACTLY this.

When people are BREAKING DOWN HIGH-END RECIPES rather than selling them, because BREAKING DOWN THE GOOD IS MORE PROFITABLE, the recipe is clearly broken.

That they continued to do it was cheating.

The reason for cheating (“Oh, it just takes so long to get ectos”) DOES. NOT. MATTER.

Cheating is bannable. There’s nothing in the TOS which says “If you have a good reason for cheating, we might reconsider.”

Finally someone who understands logic.

[quote=1157623;Esplen.3940:]

Esplen.3940:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Firstly, I never said it was 100%. I suggest you re-read my previous post more carefully.

Woah, woah, woah, let me stop you right there…

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Furthermore, you pay 300 gems (roughly 4-5G) for a BL salvage kit with only 25 uses. This should be enough leverage to have a 100% for ecto.

When I wrote “This should be enough leverage to have a 100% for ecto.”, I meant that “theoretically” speaking it should be 100% rate – not the current 75%. Does that makes sense now?

Esplen.3940:

And then let’s continue….

Death Reincarnated.3570:

Now secondly. I’m sorry but how is getting ectos, especially 250, an easy task? There are two ways, salvage or buy, but both are tedious to say the least – the latter would seem the more prefered choice seeing as the prices are quite high. Those who have high number of ectos already are controling a large portion of the market because many of the “end game” achievements require ectos. Hence why the “gap” is currently, IMO, too large.

So then it’s not hard to see why it would be a bannable offense to be able to get 250 ecto’s with 1 ecto and not having to spend anything (relatively).

Exactly my point. You need to spend either too much money or time (or both) with regards to this, and players found a shortcut. Aleviate this and you will have less incetive for players to cheat.

Esplen.3940:

Except people CHEATED [the ecto method] and DID NOT USE THE TP with this offense, which is WHY they were banned.

Hold on, how can you be sure they would not use the TP at some point? Perhaps they were stacking ectos for their use (i.e. 250) and sell the rest? You cannot be certain of this. The reason why people salvage ectos is to either; a) make legendary, b) make profit or c) both. The whole reason why people got banned for this exploit is because it has the potential to manipulate the ECONOMY (i.e. TP).

RvLeshrac.2673:

EXACTLY this.

When people are BREAKING DOWN HIGH-END RECIPES rather than selling them, because BREAKING DOWN THE GOOD IS MORE PROFITABLE, the recipe is clearly broken.

That they continued to do it was cheating.

The reason for cheating (“Oh, it just takes so long to get ectos”) DOES. NOT. MATTER.

Cheating is bannable. There’s nothing in the TOS which says “If you have a good reason for cheating, we might reconsider.”

Afcourse cheating is bad overall and it is (usually) manifested from greed. There can, however, be other reasons why people chose to cheat in this instance. It all goes back to the point I was making – the gap between salvaging ectos and cost of them is too high. Both methods are horendous and it is not suprising that certain players chose to cheat to obtain ectos.

The same could happen with silver doublons – just wait and see.

RvLeshrac.2673:

You’re missing the point. ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHATSOEVER FOR CHEATING EXCUSES THE CHEATER, NOR DOES IT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD BE BANNED.

There are NO VALID REASONS EVER FOR CHEATING IN ANY GAME’S ONLINE MULTIPLAYER COMPONENT.

I beg to differ. There is always a reason why players are enticed to cheat. I agree that cheating is cheating however the reasons are not always the usuall ones. You are forgetting that the higher the incentive the more likely a player will be willing to risk it to gain the reward quicker. Remove or lower the incentive and less likely will players tread the path of cheating.

Also, it would seem that you a person who believes in a black and white world with regards to decisions and results. If that is the case then any player found exploiting/cheating in any aspect of the game should be banned because cheating/hacking/glitching/etc is not condoned and a ban hammer is the resolve.

Also, not every player was banned in this case – yet by your presumed definition they should have.

Death Reincarnated.3570:

RvLeshrac.2673:

You’re missing the point. ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHATSOEVER FOR CHEATING EXCUSES THE CHEATER, NOR DOES IT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD BE BANNED.

There are NO VALID REASONS EVER FOR CHEATING IN ANY GAME’S ONLINE MULTIPLAYER COMPONENT.

I beg to differ. There is always a reason why players are enticed to cheat. I agree that cheating is cheating however the reasons are not always the usuall ones. You are forgetting that the higher the incentive the more likely a player will be willing to risk it to gain the reward quicker. Remove or lower the incentive and less likely will players tread the path of cheating.

Also, it would seem that you a person who believes in a black and white world with regards to decisions and results. If that is the case then any player found exploiting/cheating in any aspect of the game should be banned because cheating/hacking/glitching/etc is not condoned and a ban hammer is the resolve.

Also, not every player was banned in this case – yet by your presumed definition they should have.

The sole reason players who were not banned were simply suspended is that they did not appear to be intentionally exploiting. The punishment fit the crime – there was no indication they knew what they were doing was exploiting, but they WERE exploiting and hence were punished for it.

The people who were banned clearly KNEW they were exploiting, hence their rush to exploit as much as possible.

We use precisely the same standard in the real world – crimes which are committed with intent are punished much more harshly than those without.

RvLeshrac.2673:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

RvLeshrac.2673:

You’re missing the point. ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHATSOEVER FOR CHEATING EXCUSES THE CHEATER, NOR DOES IT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD BE BANNED.

There are NO VALID REASONS EVER FOR CHEATING IN ANY GAME’S ONLINE MULTIPLAYER COMPONENT.

I beg to differ. There is always a reason why players are enticed to cheat. I agree that cheating is cheating however the reasons are not always the usuall ones. You are forgetting that the higher the incentive the more likely a player will be willing to risk it to gain the reward quicker. Remove or lower the incentive and less likely will players tread the path of cheating.

Also, it would seem that you a person who believes in a black and white world with regards to decisions and results. If that is the case then any player found exploiting/cheating in any aspect of the game should be banned because cheating/hacking/glitching/etc is not condoned and a ban hammer is the resolve.

Also, not every player was banned in this case – yet by your presumed definition they should have.

The sole reason players who were not banned were simply suspended is that they did not appear to be intentionally exploiting. The punishment fit the crime – there was no indication they knew what they were doing was exploiting, but they WERE exploiting and hence were punished for it.

The people who were banned clearly KNEW they were exploiting, hence their rush to exploit as much as possible.

We use precisely the same standard in the real world – crimes which are committed with intent are punished much more harshly than those without.

And doing something that isn’t a crime isn’t punished, because it’s legal.

There wasn’t any way to tell that this recipe was wrong. ANet made a serious mistake, and then compounded that mistake by blaming an punishing players for it. I didn’t use this recipe at all (too busy trying for an endless bell ) , but this has really irritated and worried me. It’s a terrible precedent for ANet to retroactively declare a working-as-intended recipe an ‘exploit’ and ban people for it.

This wasn’t a coding problem or an actual exploit, this was just stupidity on ANet’s part that let players make money. They should own up and un-ban people. It is wrong to punish other people for your mistakes.

Gilosean.3805:

RvLeshrac.2673:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

RvLeshrac.2673:

You’re missing the point. ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHATSOEVER FOR CHEATING EXCUSES THE CHEATER, NOR DOES IT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD BE BANNED.

There are NO VALID REASONS EVER FOR CHEATING IN ANY GAME’S ONLINE MULTIPLAYER COMPONENT.

I beg to differ. There is always a reason why players are enticed to cheat. I agree that cheating is cheating however the reasons are not always the usuall ones. You are forgetting that the higher the incentive the more likely a player will be willing to risk it to gain the reward quicker. Remove or lower the incentive and less likely will players tread the path of cheating.

Also, it would seem that you a person who believes in a black and white world with regards to decisions and results. If that is the case then any player found exploiting/cheating in any aspect of the game should be banned because cheating/hacking/glitching/etc is not condoned and a ban hammer is the resolve.

Also, not every player was banned in this case – yet by your presumed definition they should have.

The sole reason players who were not banned were simply suspended is that they did not appear to be intentionally exploiting. The punishment fit the crime – there was no indication they knew what they were doing was exploiting, but they WERE exploiting and hence were punished for it.

The people who were banned clearly KNEW they were exploiting, hence their rush to exploit as much as possible.

We use precisely the same standard in the real world – crimes which are committed with intent are punished much more harshly than those without.

And doing something that isn’t a crime isn’t punished, because it’s legal.

There wasn’t any way to tell that this recipe was wrong. ANet made a serious mistake, and then compounded that mistake by blaming an punishing players for it. I didn’t use this recipe at all (too busy trying for an endless bell ) , but this has really irritated and worried me. It’s a terrible precedent for ANet to retroactively declare a working-as-intended recipe an ‘exploit’ and ban people for it.

This wasn’t a coding problem or an actual exploit, this was just stupidity on ANet’s part that let players make money. They should own up and un-ban people. It is wrong to punish other people for your mistakes.

They haven’t “retroactively declared a working-as-intended recipe an ‘explot.’” They declared a newly-introduced recipe, which had an issue, an exploit – WHEN EXPLOITED IN A CERTAIN WAY.

When the recipe was used as-designed, there was no exploit. Materials went in, a crafted item came out, and that item could then be sold on the TP.

Gilosean.3805:

There wasn’t any way to tell that this recipe was wrong.

Guh. Seriously?

This recipe takes only ONE ecto-based upgrade material to craft, as compared to FIVE every single other similar recipes take.

How people still insist that “there’s nothing wrong with the recipe” is beyond me…

Ursan.7846:

Gilosean.3805:

There wasn’t any way to tell that this recipe was wrong.

Guh. Seriously?

This recipe takes only ONE ecto-based upgrade material to craft, as compared to FIVE every single other similar recipes take.

How people still insist that “there’s nothing wrong with the recipe” is beyond me…

That led to the exploit being possible, but that’s not really the exploit, of course.

If people had simply been crafting and selling the items, ANet wouldn’t care.

idk how people even made large amount of money doing this.

the price of the ori and snowflakes were enough to offset most of the profit.

with a master salvage kit( the only economically viable option since there is no way to get large numbers of better kits), you get an average of 1.5 ecto per salvage iirc. Which barely offset the money you need to sink in to make the darn thing.

I find it hilarious that people are supporting this act of ANet without fully comprehending the consequences and precedent set by this. I suppose, when the same people supporting Anet get retroactively permanently ban from an unobvious “exploit”(if you would even call it that), they will start to understand how their tolerance/support to this unprofessional act of Anet, directly led to their ban in the future.

Sky.7610:

I find it hilarious that people are supporting this act of ANet without fully comprehending the consequences and precedent set by this. I suppose, when the same people supporting Anet get retroactively permanently ban from an unobvious “exploit”(if you would even call it that), they will start to understand how their tolerance/support to this unprofessional act of Anet, directly led to their ban in the future.

When I see an exploit, like people intentionally hanging a boss mob where it can’t attack or skipping half of a dungeon, I leave.

Problem solved.

RvLeshrac.2673:

When people are BREAKING DOWN HIGH-END RECIPES rather than selling them, because BREAKING DOWN THE GOOD IS MORE PROFITABLE, the recipe is clearly broken.

Funny, have you ever tried crafting any rare silk shoulders for instance?
Here is one recipe: http://www.gw2db.com/recipes/7722-rampagers-masquerade-mantle
People have been crafting those thouthand of times, and created ectos out of 0 initial ectos. Not an exploit.
I think you forgot a detail, what makes a recipe profitable to recycle is the price of the material SET BY PLAYERS ON THE TP.

Ursan.7846:

Gilosean.3805:

There wasn’t any way to tell that this recipe was wrong.

Guh. Seriously?

This recipe takes only ONE ecto-based upgrade material to craft, as compared to FIVE every single other similar recipes take.

How people still insist that “there’s nothing wrong with the recipe” is beyond me…

The recipe that was used is the rare one, requiring “usually” 3 ectos, not 5. And you do realise that on halloween they introduced exotic recipes requiring 3 ectos instead of 5. So requiring 1 ecto instead of 3 for the rare one is not that wierd (And was done on purpose to make those recipes attracting. But they probably forgot that rares can be recycled for ectos…)

RvLeshrac.2673:

You’re missing the point. ABSOLUTELY NO REASON WHATSOEVER FOR CHEATING EXCUSES THE CHEATER, NOR DOES IT HAVE ANY IMPACT ON WHETHER OR NOT THEY SHOULD BE BANNED.

There are NO VALID REASONS EVER FOR CHEATING IN ANY GAME’S ONLINE MULTIPLAYER COMPONENT.

RvLeshrac.2673:

Death Reincarnated.3570:

I beg to differ. There is always a reason why players are enticed to cheat. I agree that cheating is cheating however the reasons are not always the usuall ones. You are forgetting that the higher the incentive the more likely a player will be willing to risk it to gain the reward quicker. Remove or lower the incentive and less likely will players tread the path of cheating.

Also, it would seem that you a person who believes in a black and white world with regards to decisions and results. If that is the case then any player found exploiting/cheating in any aspect of the game should be banned because cheating/hacking/glitching/etc is not condoned and a ban hammer is the resolve.

Also, not every player was banned in this case – yet by your presumed definition they should have.

The sole reason players who were not banned were simply suspended is that they did not appear to be intentionally exploiting. The punishment fit the crime – there was no indication they knew what they were doing was exploiting, but they WERE exploiting and hence were punished for it.

The people who were banned clearly KNEW they were exploiting, hence their rush to exploit as much as possible.

We use precisely the same standard in the real world – crimes which are committed with intent are punished much more harshly than those without.

Ummmm, didn’t you say that a cheater is a cheater and should be banned for it? (see bolded part from your first quote at the top). This definitely sounds like a contradiction to me (compare bolded part with italics).

This brings me back to my point. There were players who thought this was normal and took advantage of it and others who probably knew it was a glitch and took the opportunity. If ectos were more easily accesible then, in the gernal sense, players would not be as inclined to try and use this method for their own benefit.

Furthermore, within any game there is always a feeling of being the best. This was just another feasible method to get ahead. ANet made the mistake and players got the ugly end of the stick.

Remember: A stick always has two ends.

Frankly, how can ANet which has numerous recipes of the same level, grade, division whatever word one wishes to use, be either too lazy to do the Quality Control of a recipes they are adding, or so code illiterate as not to be able to copy paste from a working recipe?

Then because they failed to do their own job, holler FOUL! FOUL! we didn’t want you to do that!

If the recipe wasn’t tested before release or doubled checked by QC then shame on Anet. Funny it was fixed, so someone there knows how to code apparently. Why not release it in that state to begin with?

I was on the fence until I saw the # of bans (less than 200). It means they were serious about the “worst offenders” statement. The market upheaval in mithril alone points to people, collectively, making tens of thousands of these trinkets.

On spidy you can see that there was a supply of 100,000 mithril at one point and a day or two later, supply was 30,000. Two days after the ban, supply was at 150k. That tells you how fast mithril can be farmed.

The criteria for ‘knowing’ it was wrong was only the amount of salvages you do. As a player who does 100+ rare salvages a day as a way to make money it seems like this is one of the worst ways to suggest a player is knowingly taking advantage of an exploit.

I am pretty sad that it seems like the prevailing sentiment on these forums is that since only 200 players were banned they were justified. That is something that doesn’t even speak to the justice of what happened at all, and is instead a statement to try and turn members against the banned players by marginalizing them. So far there has been no real discussion on the situation, only a comment now and then about how they deserved it, or how many people you decided deserved it.

If they are suggesting that salvaging returns were unnatural (returning the materials 80% of the time) then they failed to see that when snowflakes were at 30 silver, and you failed to recover the materials you lost about 55 silver. To a lot of players who got banned this was not much more profitable than normal rare crafting, and for that reason they could have easily crafted 100’s of them without for a second expecting their returns were ‘unnatural’ which is Anets definition of an exploit.

I’m glad I didn’t see the recipe, because I would be 100% banned right now if I had. I still have no idea how they justify calling this an exploit. If they didn’t want the recipe in the game and changing the markets that’s fine take it out. If you are going to condemn any player who was salvaging them in bulk to a permanent ban, players who are actually concerned about how you are treating the community, don’t just assume someone if guilty because you decree it, and who fully understand the situation are going to lose a lot of respect for you guys.

…this is a bunch of malarkey….with ppl trying to figure out cool ways to make gold it becomes hard to discern this as an exploit, or that the ppl who got banned knew some may some may not…i can say if i knew of this recipe i would most prob be banned for sure.