Action For The Ravager's Exploit

[ivanhedgehog]

Cheating isn't good for gaming. Doesn't matter if it's checkers or the most complicated game in the world.

 

When it comes to online gaming, no game needs a cheater much less anyone who wants to break the rules just for personal gain.

 

 

 

Clearly you just cant read. Cheating hurts the gaming in a sense of fair play that all games need to carry. Everyone needs to have a sense of that and especially so in online MMO's. Thats why every MMo has rules against gaming. They you have teh business stand point. You cannot have games that continue to let cheaters run rampant as this exploit did. Games that were so self-important they went so far as to throw it back in BW's face in a, "I dare you do stop me from cheating" That doesn't do the game any good.

 

Then you have cheating just being generally unfair to others. Way to many do the content and do it as it was intended but then see some dummy cheat the system for the same reward and do nothing to get them. Thats a cancer no game needs.

 

Cheating in and of itself is wrong in gaming. There is no place for it.

 

 

 

To answer your second question, if you're cheating to get those tools, then you do not deserve to have them much less play. I don't care to tolerate cheating in any form. If they can be banned so be it. As I said, not a single online game ever made needs a cheater.

 

It seems to be working well for the NE Patriots. win or lose they will be making millions today.

[TravelersWay]

Sports are contests in which the players are either as teams or individually pitted against one another. The player who is cheating gains an edge over the other player. the team with cheating players games an edge over the other teams. That's what makes it unfair -- it damages the integrity of the competition.

 

Part of the reason I keep coming back to "what sort of harm, and how much?" when it comes to this exploit is that I'm trying to find the tangible competitive advantage -- indeed, I'm not even finding a competition for it to grant an advantage in.

 

Well first of all harm doesn't need to be inflicted in order for it to be wrong - and I mean wrong in sense of what the established rules are. Do we really need to go into a philosophical argument about the need of having established and agreed upon rules in a society in order for that society to exist in a civilized manner?

 

If one breaks the rules, regardless of what those rules are, then one deserves (and should expect) to be punished accordingly. In your single-player example, yes you would be cheating according to the letter of the law - hence why the term "cheat codes" came about. You are circumventing the established rules and mechanics of the "normal" gameplay environment. Whether that bothers you or not is simply a matter of personal moral outlook. I used to play the original Doom game in God Mode constantly. Did that bother me - not really because I was playing the game to have fun, and doing it in God Mode was fun for me. But I most certainly was cheating. Now if Doom was a multi-player game, would I be playing it in God Mode? Absolutely not because ^^^^^^^^^.

 

Now, when you get into the realm of multi-player games, whether there is a perceived competition or not, those rules and resultant punishments become all the more important for the reasons I stated. If we do not abide by the rules, regardless of our individual moral feelings, then we deserve to be punished whether we are in direct competition with other people or not.

 

It seems that I've seen too many instances in which "the rules" utterly failed to have anything to do with actual morality or ethics, or were even counter to them, to attach my sense of "wrong" directly to "broke the rule".

 

Because some people feel that when someone breaks the rules, they deserve to be punished. There is nothing wrong with that - again getting back to our needs as a society.

 

Do I agree with the laws that make having and smoking marijuana illegal? Not necessarily, and if it was legal, I wouldn't partake of the substance, but being legal would have no problem with those who would (unless in so doing they break other laws that I do agree with). Regardless of my personal feelings on the matter, however, it is an accepted law in our society, and I will therefore obey said law, and when there are those who do not obey said law, I expect them to be punished accordingly.

Edited February 1, 2015 by TravelersWay

[Tsillah]

That's a shame that it's come to that, because I'd like to understand the other point of view here and get some reasoning beyond "it's wrong because it's wrong".

 

It's even more of a shame, because, evidently, wanting to actually understand what makes something wrong and figure out the thinking involved, has lead to being singled out for juvenile personal commentary from multiple posters I've ended up putting on ignore to avoid the shrill, petty nonsense.

 

As an important piece of background, understand that I view gear as a tool to be acquired, nothing more and nothing less. It's very hard for me to get the mindset that sees gear as a reward and the reason why someone would run content. To me, it's a tool that's used to run content, or make a character appear a certain way, or... and content is run because you enjoy running it for some reason, not simply because you'll "get stuff".

 

Well I am not someone who likes to yell it's wrong because it's wrong. My view on this is different than most here in that respect. So I will have a little faith here and see where it takes us.

 

Exploits have great potential to harm the game. It doesn't mean every exploit is as serious as another. But as a consequence, to avoid great damage to the balance of the game, there need to be rules governing this.

 

Now all morality aside, it's bad form to set rules and not enforce them. Especially when it's about a topic that can potentially have far reaching problems for the economy of a game for example. So I expect BW to enforce the rules and give approppriate punishments where possible and move on. I think we are not so different in that.

 

Another side is the faith or confidence the player base has in the game. Now this is a bit more abstract but it's a real issue. If Anet just lets people do whatever they want (and I reject these shouters here that BW does that all the time), then more and more people will have apathy towards the game and this is detrimental to the game.

 

Also a lot of people see it as challenging to get gear together from ops, even when others feel it's dead easy. An exploit like this simple goes against the sense of accomplishment or fairness that a lot of people have. It also creates apathy towards the game when this is allowed.

 

A company would want to maintain an atmosphere in the game where the vast majority of players is having a good experience. Lettting exploiters do their things completely unpunished is detrimental to that atmosphere. The exploiters laugh at BW and the game and don't care about and the people who are doing their best to beat content they actually find hard are discouraged and feel abandoned by BW.

 

Again, all morality aside, that's just bad for the game and the community in the game and can cause more players to stop enjoying SWTOR and therefore stop playing altogether.

 

There are 2 main reasons why people do not see this. It's because they can't think ahead very far and foresee possible consequences and a lack of empathy or understanding towards other people. These two elements also greatly reinforce each other.

 

So if we say that the current situation is A, meaning there is no exploit currently. Then we say B is an exploit that is not so bad and C is problematic and D is just down right destructive to the game experience /economy /whatever.... well, then it should be clear that if you don't make problem about going from A to B, that C is not so far away anymore in what's acceptable if B is basically made acceptable by inaction. So what's to stop going to C and then D?

 

This is the train of consequences and the further down the line you go, the harder it is to stop it. That's why it is imperative that action is taken. I am not talking about handing out life time bans all around, but it should be clear that breaking this rule is a serious matter.

 

Is it fair that some people have schems and purple mats for free that others have to pay millions for to get? I don't think so. And then of course action needs to be taken because otherwise the players who didn't participate in this exploit are at a disadvantage.

 

It's all about fair play, equal opportunity and not breaking rules that could potentially ruin the game economy or other elements. That's why the slot machine had to be nerfed bad because it had the potential to ruin the crafting side of things.

 

People can argue all they want, but just because people don't see or don't want to see the consequences, doesn't mean they aren't lurking around the corner. It takes a bit of insight to realise these things are out there and any step in that direction should not be taken lightly.

 

I agree however that this "it's bad cause it's morally wrong" doesn't hold much water with me either.

[Pagy]

Additionally, all he said was that he didn't get in because of someone with better gear -- unless he's leaving something out, it stands that he's ASSUMING that the other person had better gear because of the exploit.

 

So again, no established instances of tangible harm.

that's a good point. if I was to do the exploit today I wouldn't have more 198s than I have right now...just the stats on the chest because I already have my 6ps I guess.

In either case no one is entitled to a spot in a pug and players can freely start their own group at any time.

seeing harm in being left out of someone else's group is a red flag for me that this person desires to be carried.

Edited February 1, 2015 by Pagy

[LordArtemis]

I'm not sure that most want fair play. I think most don't care either way as long as it doesn't effect their play in any way.

 

The next biggest group after that would probably be folks that believe in fair play.

[Khevar]

It seems that I've seen too many instances in which "the rules" utterly failed to have anything to do with actual morality or ethics, or were even counter to them, to attach my sense of "wrong" directly to "broke the rule".

It sounds like you are you trying to ask the question "why is it against the rules"?

 

Let me go back to my "game torrent" analogy.

 

Using the Ravagers exploit to gain gear is not dissimilar to software piracy. When you download a game, you made a copy of it. You didn't remove it from the game company's inventory. You didn't prevent someone else from having it. You could say "I wouldn't have bought the game anyway so the company didn't lose money"

 

Do you see the parallel? What's the harm, exactly? Why is software piracy against the rules?

Edited February 1, 2015 by Khevar

[Tsillah]

I'm not sure that most want fair play. I think most don't care either way as long as it doesn't effect their play in any way.

 

The next biggest group after that would probably be folks that believe in fair play.

 

The thing is though it's never just two groups of people. The biggest group of players might just be a quarter of the total for example. People seem to think that the biggest group means more than 50%. The biggest group of players with a certain attitude or opinion can be a minority in the total still.

 

BW always have to take multiple groups of players into account. And to be honest, the ones we saw here that just blatantly called out BW and defended breaking the rules are not the type of people that make a community great and fun to be around.

 

It's a lack of empathy that allows people to behave like that. Communities are about mutual understanding, not about proving why someone else is wrong or more wrong.

[Khevar]

It seems that I've seen too many instances in which "the rules" utterly failed to have anything to do with actual morality or ethics, or were even counter to them, to attach my sense of "wrong" directly to "broke the rule".

While I feel my last post still stands, I'm 95% sure you won't reply to it.

 

So let me take another stab at it.

 

Did you know that there was once the possibility that using Legacy gear to move mods between alts was an exploit? It wasn't the intended use for the gear. Then we got a yellow post saying, "it's okay"

 

Did you know that the "learn other player's schematics" was once considered an exploit? (Buy mod, put it in gear, take it out, RE)? Then we got a yellow post saying, "it's okay"

 

"It's against the rules" should be enough. If Bioware came in and said "getting gear from the Ravagers lockout is okay", then it's okay. If they say it isn't, then it isn't.

 

What's the big deal?

Edited February 1, 2015 by Khevar

[LordArtemis]

The thing is though it's never just two groups of people. The biggest group of players might just be a quarter of the total for example. People seem to think that the biggest group means more than 50%. The biggest group of players with a certain attitude or opinion can be a minority in the total still.

 

BW always have to take multiple groups of players into account. And to be honest, the ones we saw here that just blatantly called out BW and defended breaking the rules are not the type of people that make a community great and fun to be around.

 

It's a lack of empathy that allows people to behave like that. Communities are about mutual understanding, not about proving why someone else is wrong or more wrong.

 

Well, I am not trying to set a precedent with the statement, or take a stand...I was only commenting that the largest group of folks most likely do not care either way. It was just a point to counter the statement that most want fair play, which I do not agree with.

 

And again, as I have indicated in the past, I do not think that the idea that someone does not care either way is approval of the behavior....it is a lack of caring. Nothing more.

[Raphael_diSanto]

It sounds like you are you trying to ask the question "why is it against the rules"?

 

Let me go back to my "game torrent" analogy.

 

Using the Ravagers exploit to gain gear is not dissimilar to software piracy. When you download a game, you made a copy of it. You didn't remove it from the game company's inventory. You didn't prevent someone else from having it. You could say "I wouldn't have bought the game anyway so the company didn't lose money"

 

Do you see the parallel? What's the harm, exactly? Why is software piracy against the rules?

 

I don't think Max is specifically asking why it's against the rules. He seems to be more saying "it doesn't matter if it's against "the rules" or not as long as no one gets hurt. If no one gets hurt, then whether it's against the rules or not is irrelevant."

Edited February 1, 2015 by Raphael_diSanto

[Tsillah]

Well, I am not trying to set a precedent with the statement, or take a stand...I was only commenting that the largest group of folks most likely do not care either way. It was just a point to counter the statement that most want fair play, which I do not agree with.

 

And again, as I have indicated in the past, I do not think that the idea that someone does not care either way is approval of the behavior....it is a lack of caring. Nothing more.

 

It seems we are in agreement then

[Khevar]

I don't think Max is specifically asking why it's against the rules. He seems to be more saying "it doesn't matter if it's against "the rules" or not as long as no one gets hurt. If no one gets hurt, then whether it's against the rules or not is irrelevant."

Yeah, I get what you're saying.

 

Which is why I drew the software piracy analogy. I've seen the same argument there "no one gets hurt", etc.

[Max_Killjoy]

While I feel my last post still stands, I'm 95% sure you won't reply to it.

 

So let me take another stab at it.

 

Did you know that there was once the possibility that using Legacy gear to move mods between alts was an exploit? It wasn't the intended use for the gear. Then we got a yellow post saying, "it's okay"

 

Did you know that the "learn other player's schematics" was once considered an exploit? (Buy mod, put it in gear, take it out, RE)? Then we got a yellow post saying, "it's okay"

 

"It's against the rules" should be enough. If Bioware came in and said "getting gear from the Ravagers lockout is okay", then it's okay. If they say it isn't, then it isn't.

 

What's the big deal?

 

I don't want to answer off the cuff, and I'm heading out for the day.

[LordArtemis]

I think it's cheating.

 

I think it was wise for Bioware to act.

 

I am not sure I should judge what is appropriate or not...I will leave that to Bioware.

 

I do think those flaunting their disregard for the rules of the game publicly should receive substantial sanction. They deserve to be knocked down a few pegs and reminded that this is BIoware's house.

 

However, I would not agree that this was as widespread as some contend, that most care either way (I think it is the opposite) or that a majority were harmed (speculative at best). I also think some of the more draconian punishments suggested are probably too much.

 

As far as the impact, it was likely minimal and involved a small portion of the playerbase....but that does not mean no action should be taken. It also does not mean action NEEDS to be taken.

Edited February 1, 2015 by LordArtemis

[Infernixx]

I think the whole thing is dead and done and people need to stop beating the dead horse and find something new to be outraged over.

[Frybert]

I think the whole thing is dead and done and people need to stop beating the dead horse and find something new to be outraged over.

Oh, this isn't going away for a while, I imagine. Some people have the perception that the punishments were too light, so they're going to rage until someone makes them stop or they find something new to rage about.

 

[LordArtemis]

I am outraged at the use of the rolleyes emote.

 

Actually that isn't true, but it is irritating none the less. Kind of a silly pet peeve I suppose.

 

"I HATE TRAINS......"

Edited February 1, 2015 by LordArtemis

[Frybert]

I am outraged at the use of the rolleyes emote.

 

Actually that isn't true, but it is irritating none the less. Kind of a silly pet peeve I suppose.

 

"I HATE TRAINS......"

 

[GadgetDon]

Cheating isn't good for gaming. Doesn't matter if it's checkers or the most complicated game in the world.

 

When it comes to online gaming, no game needs a cheater much less anyone who wants to break the rules just for personal gain.

 

The issue is that, for the most part, the code of the game determines what is and isn't cheating, and if you can do something really clever with the mechanisms set up by the code of the game, that's a big part of where the skill comes from. OK, in this case the mechanism was really unlike the rest of the game so one should've assumed it wasn't as intended, but there are a myriad other lesser oddities of mechanisms that it's unclear if it's a quirk put in by the developers to be discovered by players, a "hunh didn't think about how those mechanisms could come together for that effect, neat" or "oops, didn't expect that, it needs fixing". When it's in place for a long time, we as players assume that it's the first or the second - but this quirk was in place through several patches.

 

Was this extremely blatant? Sure, and I'm not really bothered that some people got reasonable punishments for it. I question the wisdom of allocating assets to find those people instead of things like making sure that the Revenge of the Revanites achievement wasn't granted, and think that permabans are unfair after three years of "yeah yeah exploits are against the rules but it's really on us so we won't do anything about it", but that's not why I keep harping on it.

 

Right now, if you see a very clever way to use in game mechanisms to do things that weren't obvious, the only way you'll know if it's a punishable exploit that makes you an evil cheater if you did it and you deserve to be kicked out of the game vs. something really smart you figured out congrats cleverness should be rewarded is when the hammer falls. And that's not good.

[GadgetDon]

While I feel my last post still stands, I'm 95% sure you won't reply to it.

 

So let me take another stab at it.

 

Did you know that there was once the possibility that using Legacy gear to move mods between alts was an exploit? It wasn't the intended use for the gear. Then we got a yellow post saying, "it's okay"

 

Did you know that the "learn other player's schematics" was once considered an exploit? (Buy mod, put it in gear, take it out, RE)? Then we got a yellow post saying, "it's okay"

 

"It's against the rules" should be enough. If Bioware came in and said "getting gear from the Ravagers lockout is okay", then it's okay. If they say it isn't, then it isn't.

 

What's the big deal?

 

The problem is that we'd never get a yellow post before people start doing it, and if they'd decided it wasn't OK, the first ruling would be when the bans fall.

[LordArtemis]

 

You have used the dreaded "rolleyes" emote. You are therefore fired from the internet.

 

Actually, I think with some of my most recent flailing about I probably should have been fired from the internet.

Edited February 1, 2015 by LordArtemis

[LordArtemis]

I would say it was likely cheating before the announcement....like it was likely cheating with the CSM before the announcement. Plenty of folks asked because they could recognize when something didn't seem right.

 

After the announcement the ravager exploit was DEFINITELY cheating, and using the CSM as designed was DEFINITELY NOT cheating, as per the announcements.

 

Bioware defined what they considered cheating and not cheating in this respect. And I think that is the only definition that counts.

[Khevar]

The problem is that we'd never get a yellow post before people start doing it, and if they'd decided it wasn't OK, the first ruling would be when the bans fall.

I think you're trying to make a point here, but I don't follow it.

 

Could you clarify what you mean by this?

[GadgetDon]

I would say it was likely cheating before the announcement....like it was likely cheating with the CSM before the announcement. Plenty of folks asked because they could recognize when something didn't seem right.

 

After the announcement the ravager exploit was DEFINITELY cheating, and using the CSM as designed was DEFINITELY NOT cheating, as per the announcements.

 

Bioware defined what they considered cheating and not cheating in this respect. And I think that is the only definition that counts.

 

No argument that those who continued the exploit after the announcement deserved punishment. If Bioware says it's cheating, it's cheating, and those who do it after that explicit statement deserve large amounts of karma to be applied to their characters and their accounts. Clear issue, and if the result is "do this after we say don't do that and you will suffer consequences", I'll approve completely and cheer them along.

 

My issue is those who do something before they make a "is/is not an exploit" statement. Listening to those in this and other threads, we are expected to read the minds of Bioware's developers and others about whether this is an exploit and be punished severely if we we guess wrongly. (And yes, in this particular case, it was blatant and any attempt at telepathy would send a telepathic shout "don't do this!") I think that's lousy policy.

[GadgetDon]

I think you're trying to make a point here, but I don't follow it.

 

Could you clarify what you mean by this?

 

Let's take one specific thing - On my main, a sith Juggernaut, I use my excess elite commendations to buy an Aim healer chest piece. This piece is bound to me, by the design of the game, I can put it on one of my alts but not send it to an alt. Instead, I rip out the mods, put them in a "bound to legacy" chest piece, and shazam I have an equivalent chest piece, same stats, same bonuses, that is bound to legacy that I can mail to my trooper alt that just hit 60.

 

This clearly is not as the game was originally designed, but it was really neat, and good for those whose mains had no more use of the comms they collect. (Not that there are many alts that can't use elites - but my main is certainly at that position with basics.) Word of this really cool really useful thing spread when it was discovered, and there were lynch mobs declaring it to be an exploit and those who did it should be punished with bans and the transferred gear removed. Because people were doing it, there were people posting about it, and because there was sufficient noise on the forums, the Bioware people had to say "Is this an exploit or isn't it". They decided it's not an exploit, posted that it's not an exploit, and it's now an accepted thing you can do with excess commendations.

 

Let's assume they decided, reasonably, bound is bound, the players who did this found a bug and took advantage of it, and so it was an exploit. By their normal pattern, they would say nothing until the patch goes through making this not work, and then perhaps punish those who had done it.

 

Player activity would've been the same, and the decision that it's "cheating" and so should be punished takes place AFTER people do it (a lot of people or the noise wouldn't have been made).