If you’ve seen it for yourself, why make this thread?
The boxes were removed some time ago, having ‘collapsed from all the weight of the players that used to stand on them’.
And I wouldn’t necessarily call it an exploit. The boxes were there inside the max range. It just promoted lazy afk gameplay. Not that it’s much better now with all the people dying to the electrocution and refusing to waypoint.
It definitely wasn’t an exploit. It was just convenient for the lazy side of us all. And yes, the stack of boxes were removed. But you can still stand in a “safe spot” to attack it if you have far enough range.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
If you’ve seen it for yourself, why make this thread?
The boxes were removed some time ago, having ‘collapsed from all the weight of the players that used to stand on them’.
.
I am not referring to the boxes, I am well aware that they were removed a while ago.
I am talking about the tower that is on the opposite corner from where the boxes used to be. Some players figured out how to get up there to avoid damage while still being able to attack the boss.
You mean the control tower. It does work but:
1200 range max required you to stand on the edge where you might get hit (though rarely), below 1200 range was useless, a long time ago when warriors still had 1000 range LB’s you was to trait longbow if you wanted to stand there… for auto…
It was a decent spot for LB rangers/druids and mortar engi’s/scrappers and has been since launch. at first only a few rangers used it…
I do not understand the prolems with this spot anyways, getting there was a pain, using it was utter boredom, when on autoattacking with a 1500 range weapon I used my time to chat with the other ppl on autoattack tbh if they were there I’ve beeen there alone so often….
It’s not like the whole world and it’s pets were there all the time….
23 lvl 80’s, 9 times map, 4ele, 4ncr, 3war, 3grd, 3rgr, 2thf, 2msm, 1eng, 1 rev.
Been There, Done That & Will do it again…except maybe world completion.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
The fight usually goes faster now, since people aren’t relying on the low-DPS ranged autoattacks. I don’t think it was an exploit; it was just boring.
Doesn’t seem any faster to me and that could just be the result of power creep from elite specs.
Yeah, I didn’t think about power creep; you could well be correct — I just participated in a sub-optimal Silverwastes meta and yet we got 5/5 on breaches and 3/3 (no siege lost) for Vinewrath.
Anyhow, regardless I never thought standing on the boxes was an exploit, just made it easy to leech the event.
John Smith: “you should kill monsters, because killing monsters is awesome.”
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
Yes. The players should be allowed to do anything the game allows them to do. If the developers don’t like something, it’s their fault for having made it that way in the first place and their responsibility to change it to match their intentions.
LB rangers dont even need to stand on the edge of the tower they can hit the golem from the back of the tower xD (in fact LB rangers dont even need the tower!)
really all the professions that use the tower dont even need it
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
You’re right, my opinion is exactly that. However, given the quote from a dev the very thing being complained about in this thread is not an exploit. You can be struck by the Boss which invalidates the claim of an exploit.
As per intent and design, this still falls on the designer. If they really wanted to prevent exploiting (skipping) in this case how hard is it to have a simple script check the state of the first boss and not spawn the next set of adds/bosses until its dead ? It’s almost like dungeons could have benefited greatly from being instanced dynamic events.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
You’re right, my opinion is exactly that. However, given the quote from a dev the very thing being complained about in this thread is not an exploit. You can be struck by the Boss which invalidates the claim of an exploit.
As per intent and design, this still falls on the designer. If they really wanted to prevent exploiting (skipping) in this case how hard is it to have a simple script check the state of the first boss and not spawn the next set of adds/bosses until its dead ? It’s almost like dungeons could have benefited greatly from being instanced dynamic events.
You can twist is however you want. You’d still be wrong as it would be considered an exploit. Would action be taken against you for the one at golem? Probably not.
I assume you would think that Anet was completely at fault in the following link below and the players involved were innocent. After all, it was Anet that messed up.
Anyone else find it hilarious that anything someone doesn’t like is now an “exploit”?
These players are exploiting the forums by posting things I don’t like! BAN THEM!
There should probably be a difference between “soft” and “hard” exploits explained somewhere, or invented if the terms don’t already exist; this is indeed equivalent to a “soft exploit” in which a person attains victory without risk by utilizing terrain. It’s sort of like stacking as a soft exploit to make the dumb AI do what you want it to do.
Obviously few hard exploits exist and they are bannable. Soft ones are just quirks people know and typically get ignored or just quickfixed and patched up.
On one hand I understand why game developers don’t want players getting easy kills on mobs by standing somewhere the mob can’t reach.
On the other hand that’s what ranged weapons are all about. It’s like screaming a fight is unfair when you give one guy a knife and another guy a gun, if you want a fair fight, give them both the same weapon.
Maybe it’s just the limitations of MMO AIs, but ideally when a mob gets attacked by a player from an unreachable location, they should respond by switching to ranged weapons or running away if they don’t have a ranged weapon. They shouldn’t just go invulnerable and the terrain shouldn’t be nerfed, that’s not fixing a problem, that’s simply accommodating it (because the real problem isn’t players exploiting terrain, the problem is mob AI is dumb).
Similarly if the Mk. II Golem is being attacked from atop the control tower, it should smash the tower (accompanied by a surprised yell from the Inquest inside), but if nobody’s there it shouldn’t. It would still be scripted, but at least it’ll feel like we’re fighting a mob and not an overly enthusiastic wall.
On one hand I understand why game developers don’t want players getting easy kills on mobs by standing somewhere the mob can’t reach.
On the other hand that’s what ranged weapons are all about. It’s like screaming a fight is unfair when you give one guy a knife and another guy a gun, if you want a fair fight, give them both the same weapon.
Maybe it’s just the limitations of MMO AIs, but ideally when a mob gets attacked by a player from an unreachable location, they should respond by switching to ranged weapons or running away if they don’t have a ranged weapon. They shouldn’t just go invulnerable and the terrain shouldn’t be nerfed, that’s not fixing a problem, that’s simply accommodating it (because the real problem isn’t players exploiting terrain, the problem is mob AI is dumb).
Similarly if the Mk. II Golem is being attacked from atop the control tower, it should smash the tower (accompanied by a surprised yell from the Inquest inside), but if nobody’s there it shouldn’t. It would still be scripted, but at least it’ll feel like we’re fighting a mob and not an overly enthusiastic wall.
In a perfect world the MK2 would just be able to move or launch missiles from it’s back every second at the players with the furthest range. Something like that. But this is GW2 and Zhaitain’s world ain’t perfect.
On one hand I understand why game developers don’t want players getting easy kills on mobs by standing somewhere the mob can’t reach.
On the other hand that’s what ranged weapons are all about. It’s like screaming a fight is unfair when you give one guy a knife and another guy a gun, if you want a fair fight, give them both the same weapon.
Maybe it’s just the limitations of MMO AIs, but ideally when a mob gets attacked by a player from an unreachable location, they should respond by switching to ranged weapons or running away if they don’t have a ranged weapon. They shouldn’t just go invulnerable and the terrain shouldn’t be nerfed, that’s not fixing a problem, that’s simply accommodating it (because the real problem isn’t players exploiting terrain, the problem is mob AI is dumb).
Similarly if the Mk. II Golem is being attacked from atop the control tower, it should smash the tower (accompanied by a surprised yell from the Inquest inside), but if nobody’s there it shouldn’t. It would still be scripted, but at least it’ll feel like we’re fighting a mob and not an overly enthusiastic wall.
when a mob gets attacked by a player from an unreachable location, they should respond by switching to ranged weapons or running away if they don’t have a ranged weapon. They shouldn’t just go invulnerable
Also, when flying mobs like wyverns or bats take off they become invulnerable, but ground-based mobs like snipers can still shoot players out of the air. A bit of a double-standard there, one might think.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
You’re right, my opinion is exactly that. However, given the quote from a dev the very thing being complained about in this thread is not an exploit. You can be struck by the Boss which invalidates the claim of an exploit.
As per intent and design, this still falls on the designer. If they really wanted to prevent exploiting (skipping) in this case how hard is it to have a simple script check the state of the first boss and not spawn the next set of adds/bosses until its dead ? It’s almost like dungeons could have benefited greatly from being instanced dynamic events.
You can twist is however you want. You’d still be wrong as it would be considered an exploit. Would action be taken against you for the one at golem? Probably not.
I assume you would think that Anet was completely at fault in the following link below and the players involved were innocent. After all, it was Anet that messed up.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
You’re right, my opinion is exactly that. However, given the quote from a dev the very thing being complained about in this thread is not an exploit. You can be struck by the Boss which invalidates the claim of an exploit.
As per intent and design, this still falls on the designer. If they really wanted to prevent exploiting (skipping) in this case how hard is it to have a simple script check the state of the first boss and not spawn the next set of adds/bosses until its dead ? It’s almost like dungeons could have benefited greatly from being instanced dynamic events.
You can twist is however you want. You’d still be wrong as it would be considered an exploit. Would action be taken against you for the one at golem? Probably not.
I assume you would think that Anet was completely at fault in the following link below and the players involved were innocent. After all, it was Anet that messed up.
You know after that very incident they actually came out and said it was their mistake and they shouldn’t have been that harsh on players right ?
I mean i get it you want to defend anet tooth and nail here, but sometimes the buck really does stop with the content producers.
It was the first widespread exploiting and they decided to give people a second chance. Those that were banned had to contact customer support and also delete all items/currency they got as a result of that exploiting.
Just because it was not a permanent ban doesn’t mean that it was not an exploit. So I really have no idea why you brought up that they gave the option to revert it to a 72-hour ban. This has nothing to do with whether it was an exploit or not.
I also do not know why you brought up me defending Anet in your post. Nothing has been about defending Anet.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
You’re right, my opinion is exactly that. However, given the quote from a dev the very thing being complained about in this thread is not an exploit. You can be struck by the Boss which invalidates the claim of an exploit.
As per intent and design, this still falls on the designer. If they really wanted to prevent exploiting (skipping) in this case how hard is it to have a simple script check the state of the first boss and not spawn the next set of adds/bosses until its dead ? It’s almost like dungeons could have benefited greatly from being instanced dynamic events.
You can twist is however you want. You’d still be wrong as it would be considered an exploit. Would action be taken against you for the one at golem? Probably not.
I assume you would think that Anet was completely at fault in the following link below and the players involved were innocent. After all, it was Anet that messed up.
You know after that very incident they actually came out and said it was their mistake and they shouldn’t have been that harsh on players right ?
I mean i get it you want to defend anet tooth and nail here, but sometimes the buck really does stop with the content producers.
It was the first widespread exploiting and they decided to give people a second chance. Those that were banned had to contact customer support and also delete all items/currency they got as a result of that exploiting.
Just because it was not a permanent ban doesn’t mean that it was not an exploit. So I really have no idea why you brought up that they gave the option to revert it to a 72-hour ban. This has nothing to do with whether it was an exploit or not.
I also do not know why you brought up me defending Anet in your post. Nothing has been about defending Anet.
Pretty sure that was second widespread incident. First was some wrongly price karma items. The biggest differences between those incidents and the golem thing is probably the impact to the game ecnonomy and scale. Handing out bans for the golem would probably hit too many people. Something that more closely resembling the golem boxes would be people who were fighting some dungeon bosses from under the terrain. Not sure what if anything happened to those people though.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
You’re right, my opinion is exactly that. However, given the quote from a dev the very thing being complained about in this thread is not an exploit. You can be struck by the Boss which invalidates the claim of an exploit.
As per intent and design, this still falls on the designer. If they really wanted to prevent exploiting (skipping) in this case how hard is it to have a simple script check the state of the first boss and not spawn the next set of adds/bosses until its dead ? It’s almost like dungeons could have benefited greatly from being instanced dynamic events.
You can twist is however you want. You’d still be wrong as it would be considered an exploit. Would action be taken against you for the one at golem? Probably not.
I assume you would think that Anet was completely at fault in the following link below and the players involved were innocent. After all, it was Anet that messed up.
You know after that very incident they actually came out and said it was their mistake and they shouldn’t have been that harsh on players right ?
I mean i get it you want to defend anet tooth and nail here, but sometimes the buck really does stop with the content producers.
It was the first widespread exploiting and they decided to give people a second chance. Those that were banned had to contact customer support and also delete all items/currency they got as a result of that exploiting.
Just because it was not a permanent ban doesn’t mean that it was not an exploit. So I really have no idea why you brought up that they gave the option to revert it to a 72-hour ban. This has nothing to do with whether it was an exploit or not.
I also do not know why you brought up me defending Anet in your post. Nothing has been about defending Anet.
You honestly believe that they changed the policy on a whim because it was wide scale and not because in hindsight they realized they made an egregious mistake ?
I’m sorry, but not only does your comparison not fly, but it’s about as relevant as my pointing out how much you love to flock to defend anet and not actually question the policies in place.
I’ve shown that the policy, as stated by Robert as applied to this case doesn’t constitute exploiting. You can still be struck and take damage.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
You’re right, my opinion is exactly that. However, given the quote from a dev the very thing being complained about in this thread is not an exploit. You can be struck by the Boss which invalidates the claim of an exploit.
As per intent and design, this still falls on the designer. If they really wanted to prevent exploiting (skipping) in this case how hard is it to have a simple script check the state of the first boss and not spawn the next set of adds/bosses until its dead ? It’s almost like dungeons could have benefited greatly from being instanced dynamic events.
You can twist is however you want. You’d still be wrong as it would be considered an exploit. Would action be taken against you for the one at golem? Probably not.
I assume you would think that Anet was completely at fault in the following link below and the players involved were innocent. After all, it was Anet that messed up.
You know after that very incident they actually came out and said it was their mistake and they shouldn’t have been that harsh on players right ?
I mean i get it you want to defend anet tooth and nail here, but sometimes the buck really does stop with the content producers.
It was the first widespread exploiting and they decided to give people a second chance. Those that were banned had to contact customer support and also delete all items/currency they got as a result of that exploiting.
Just because it was not a permanent ban doesn’t mean that it was not an exploit. So I really have no idea why you brought up that they gave the option to revert it to a 72-hour ban. This has nothing to do with whether it was an exploit or not.
I also do not know why you brought up me defending Anet in your post. Nothing has been about defending Anet.
You honestly believe that they changed the policy on a whim because it was wide scale and not because in hindsight they realized they made an egregious mistake ?
I’m sorry, but not only does your comparison not fly, but it’s about as relevant as my pointing out how much you love to flock to defend anet and not actually question the policies in place.
I’ve shown that the policy, as stated by Robert as applied to this case doesn’t constitute exploiting. You can still be struck and take damage.
Your move.
Perhaps you should do a little reading into what happened. They decided to give players a second chance if they emailed support and also removed the gains that they received from this exploit. If they did not remove those gains, the perma-ban would be reinstated.
And as I said before, this as nothing, that’s right, nothing to do with whether something is an exploit or not.
The point of the examples were to show exploits that occurred within game that were directly called exploits by Anet. You claimed that anything that a player could do in-game would never be considered an exploit and it was just poor programming. Obviously you were wrong. Golem Mk II is no different although it’s something they will likely not take action against on players.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Just for the record, standing in a place where you can hurt the boss but the boss can’t hurt you back / can’t fight back is considered an exploit, and we are working on a solution for that problem. As is exploiting terrain like teleporting through walls/closed doors, and getting under/above the map to skip content and get to a place where you can take advantage of bugs or events not requiring previous completion in the order of events (skipping directly to Giganticus lupicus from the start of the arah explore chain for instance).
These are things we patch and fix as we discover them and figure out solutions for. As I have said before, if you see something say something by emailing this alias: Exploits@arena.net
Because using that very definition, it wasn’t. You could be knocked back and still take damage.
Very little and rarely. Just because you can take some damage, doesn’t exclude it from being an exploit.
Let’s say it were possible to get onto the wall’s in Lupe’s room by a simple jumping puzzle. You can damage him but only one of his attacks reaches you. That attack poses minimal risk to you. Would that be an exploit? According to your post above, it would not.
What if for VG you could damage it while stacked on one of the pillars (or some other safe spot) but able to mitigate the damage from the green circles. Since you still could take damage, had you not mitigated it from the green circles, would it be an exploit or not? You’re able to avoid damage from all of its other attacks.
Would i personally consider anything you listed an exploit ? No.
It would be poor map design. Why would you design boss encounter area’s with jumping puzzles or area’s of immunity to begin with ?
Players using LoS or Height to their advantage, is not exploiting its smart gameplay.
I wasn’t referring to an intentional jumping puzzle. It’s one that pkayers did (a sequence of actions) to get to a safe spot.
Poor map design or unintended areas of immunity are not an excuse to exploit.
LoS and using height is not the same.
Using terrain to your advantage has been an integral part of games since they started making them. Only recent gamers see this as an exploit. I’m sorry but if the games geometry allows for such actions to exist, then it’s not on the players but on the designers ultimately.
So if the terrain allowed them to skip an entire boss then it’s not the players’ fault for taking advantage of it but the developers for not preventing that from happening in the first place?
In three characters.
YES.
Well there’s no point is continuing this with you further. It has been stated by Anet that this is an exploit and we have seen plenty of evidence of people banned for doing things like this. Whether you agree with it or not doesn’t matter.
You’re right, my opinion is exactly that. However, given the quote from a dev the very thing being complained about in this thread is not an exploit. You can be struck by the Boss which invalidates the claim of an exploit.
As per intent and design, this still falls on the designer. If they really wanted to prevent exploiting (skipping) in this case how hard is it to have a simple script check the state of the first boss and not spawn the next set of adds/bosses until its dead ? It’s almost like dungeons could have benefited greatly from being instanced dynamic events.
You can twist is however you want. You’d still be wrong as it would be considered an exploit. Would action be taken against you for the one at golem? Probably not.
I assume you would think that Anet was completely at fault in the following link below and the players involved were innocent. After all, it was Anet that messed up.
You know after that very incident they actually came out and said it was their mistake and they shouldn’t have been that harsh on players right ?
I mean i get it you want to defend anet tooth and nail here, but sometimes the buck really does stop with the content producers.
It was the first widespread exploiting and they decided to give people a second chance. Those that were banned had to contact customer support and also delete all items/currency they got as a result of that exploiting.
Just because it was not a permanent ban doesn’t mean that it was not an exploit. So I really have no idea why you brought up that they gave the option to revert it to a 72-hour ban. This has nothing to do with whether it was an exploit or not.
I also do not know why you brought up me defending Anet in your post. Nothing has been about defending Anet.
You honestly believe that they changed the policy on a whim because it was wide scale and not because in hindsight they realized they made an egregious mistake ?
I’m sorry, but not only does your comparison not fly, but it’s about as relevant as my pointing out how much you love to flock to defend anet and not actually question the policies in place.
I’ve shown that the policy, as stated by Robert as applied to this case doesn’t constitute exploiting. You can still be struck and take damage.
Your move.
Perhaps you should do a little reading into what happened. They decided to give players a second chance if they emailed support and also removed the gains that they received from this exploit. If they did not remove those gains, the perma-ban would be reinstated.
And as I said before, this as nothing, that’s right, nothing to do with whether something is an exploit or not.
The point of the examples were to show exploits that occurred within game that were directly called exploits by Anet. You claimed that anything that a player could do in-game would never be considered an exploit and it was just poor programming. Obviously you were wrong. Golem Mk II is no different although it’s something they will likely not take action against on players.
That is actually not what i claimed. What i said is if people use terrain to their advantage in combat, it’s not an exploit. It’s using the designed combat area, as intended.
This was clearly taken to heart by the raid design team as you can see the boss fights in the raids are all Arena’s that are flat, and have no terrain that can be used to their advantage.
Yeah, now then you want to talk actual exploits, things that actually give players an unfair advantage or ill-gotten gains then i’m more than willing to discuss what merits that.
Anyone else find it hilarious that anything someone doesn’t like is now an “exploit”?
Well, not everything. Depending on context, some things are labelled “pay-to-win” and others “grind.” Humans are generally quick to latch onto buzz words that have negative connotations and throw them at anything they don’t like in order to try to generate agreement. It’s one way we build our consensual perceived reality. And yes, it is hilarious.
If I was in a warzone, I would seek high ground, mostly cause shooting down you have gravity as a friend and you are more difficult to reach as well as enemies having to shoot up they will have to combat gravity both with projectiles when firing or when moving there.
I’d try to conceal myself by camouflage and teraain features and I’d make use of terrain for any or all other value I could think of (impassables/ water so i have an edge when being attacked)
This game already makes enemies invulnrable if they cannot hit/target you which is dumb. It’s not like in a war when I cannot hit something I can say well now I’m invulnerable. No you are in the wrong place, so: Move!! Or stay put if moving will get you killed.
If I’m ingame I woudl seek the highground (some games give STILL give range advantages for ppl using highground (as did gw1) and I’d make sure I would be out of range of enemies trying to hit me, when ranging an enemy, preferably while not beibng in any fear of being overrun or swamped.
This seems basic tactics.
I also do not think players are in error or exploiting. Only the ppl who made the local scenery usable in a fashion you deem not okay might have been in error, but in all honesty , the people using the roof are just smart. as opposed to the ppl styanding in huge AOE-fields rerunning time after time or being so tankyt they cannot do any dmg at all.
/2 cents
23 lvl 80’s, 9 times map, 4ele, 4ncr, 3war, 3grd, 3rgr, 2thf, 2msm, 1eng, 1 rev.
Been There, Done That & Will do it again…except maybe world completion.
It’s hard to see that as exploit, ANet just build a start-ramp that let you glide to the platform-masters roof. So maybe it’s an exploit for non-HoT player, for HoT-masters of gliding it’s just comfort
Btw. what’s more exploit: contributin to the kill at a place where the damage is low or dying after a hit and waiting for the reward in dead-state?
That seemed pretty poorly handled, imo. Hell, in real life if I walk into a store and an item is wrongly priced they have to sell it to me at the displayed cost (at least in my country).
Either way, everything I’ve seen in the game over the last couple years suggests that action against players is fairly unlikely unless the ‘exploit’ has a significant economic impact. I can live with that.
How’s it not an exploit when you can stand on the boxes (and tower) to avoid nearly all damage but still be able to damage the golem? It’s really no different to the exploits people used to use in AC with the stairs, and then that ledge, to beat the bosses.
Tactically speaking, if I can choose a point where if the enemy chooses to aim its big guns at me as well as their own assets aka the Tower, darn skippy I’m going to make the enemy make that hard choice. Me and their stuff, or a bunch of other folks while I dent the living heck out of their gun.
Btw. what’s more exploit: contributin to the kill at a place where the damage is low or dying after a hit and waiting for the reward in dead-state?
The former. At least when you die you die you died because you engaged the enemy. When you continuously are allowed to contribute, and thus further the overall agenda, you’re definitely double-capitalizing on the situation.
1. You still get the reward without the intended risk due to an oversight.
2. You get to call yourself competent when really you’re just standing there auto-attacking and using your second screen for less … fortuitous activities.
The point is, for me exploit means I gain an unfair advantage.
There is simply no advantage in staying there and in staying alive.
I’m relatively sure “I cannot die during this encounter due to the placement of my character and regardless of my build, tactics, or skill while other players who are playing the encounter correctly can.” would be an unfair advantage.
Normally I am fine with this kind of thing because it’s just an exploit that people use; there’s no shame in it because the developers allow it, so what? That’s not the point. The point is that it is indeed not playing the event as intended by purposefully setting yourself outside or on the outer ring of the bounds. That’s all there is to it.
It would take a miracle for you to die from the sole hit that the MK2G can get on you. Like you’d need negative toughness or something.
