Update - Thursday, March 11, 2010

We're not just talking about one exploit. I'll admit, the Mallyx exploit was kept small. Same with the Duncan exploit. Banning people who did that would not make the landscape barren, but I wasn't talking about banning for just one exploit. You stated "Ban them all" - Every person who's ever used an exploit. You'd be banning WELL over half the population.

Think about it. The GW population is rather small, somewhere in the lower thousands in average online. If there is say, 100 exploits, and 100 people used each exploit (Even by accident, as your post seems to imply, but I could be wrong there), you're banning 10,000 people.

There's a lot more exploits, and there's a lot more people who have used each. That portal jumping exploit? Almost everyone I know who has their carto title used it in one form or another.

Oh, and please don't pull out the "By Cheating" clause in there - Cheating is so damned vague, you could apply it to seeping wound, even (Omfg, seeping wound is cheating because it does a lot of damage with a 50% IMS) (Omfg, Ursan is cheating because it lets you do hardcore areas easy!) (Omfg, shadowform is cheating ... You get the idea)

Oh, and don't forget: There's an entire title based around cheating. It's called the Legendary Defender of Ascalon - That's right. Originally, it was not meant for people to be able to get past level 16 in pre, but people did it anyways, and they even gave them a title for it. Originally, monsters were not meant to level up. Do these people deserve banning?

Carpet banning is not the answer, it never is.

Didn't they had to make a script so monsters could lvl up? Or were the creators like... Look at that they can lvl

Wouldn't it be meant to lvl them up then

I had noticed it too, but my random guild group (with only 1 monk left due to DCs by the time we got to urgoz) managed to take him down alright.

You just gotta take him down to 90% health and let EoE do all the work

I didn't say ban everyone who has ever used an exploit. Exploits happen. You ban those who ABUSE exploits.

Anyone who has done an exploit over and over because you GAIN something (Another word in that quote you used but ignored) from doing so, is exploiting. If you do it on accident, it's an accident.

I also never stated that all bans need to be permanent bans. However sure. Ban half the population if they need to.

I also have carto, and not once used an exploit. Granted it was after they added some extra locations to Tyria like the "End" area with droknar items. (Sorry, I started later)

That's not cheating and you know it. You are being deliberately obtuse. Cheating is "Injecting code so that you always run at 50%." or "Finding out that if you have full obsidian armor but wear all of it except the pants, you are invulnerable."

THAT is cheating. Using skills as they are in game is not cheating. That's just stupidspeak.

Cheating? No. Game mechanic? Yes. Exploit? Not since they vindicated it as valid.

/thread win

The real and only difference between exploit and valid - what Anet says.

Very reliable considering they usually say nothing.

This is the part that irks me the most. You say that it hasn't been an exploit since...

So we do what, ban the pioneers who had the initiative to do this thing, which aNet took notice of and implemented into the game thus bettering it? I thought people who took advantage of exploits were all bad and game breakers.

You would make a terrible DM. In cases of what can be seen as a bannable exploit, or alternately is an overall good idea in a situation with limits emplaced before a full understanding was gained of the scope of the game, i.e. Pre, judgement must be made on a case by case basis, not just a big fat whack for all with the ole ban stick.

I don't know the origins of death leveling. My personal guess is that someone figured it out on accident by falling asleep at the keyboard and waking up to the enemies being level 20 and connecting the dots.

That is not an exploit. That is an accident and the discovery of a game mechanic.

Monsters level up if they kill things enough to do so.

They COULD have said that death leveling critters is an exploit and from that point started banning everyone that did it from then on.

The difference between this stupid scenario and Duncan the black is that in order to get to Duncan in this case you have to abuse a game mechanic to get to a location that is otherwise inaccessible to bypass something that prevents you from doing it normally.

Awesome anet Thanks!

-Pleik

You'll get no arguments from me on this whole Duncan debacle, it's something that I'd bring the hammer down on as a DM in a big bad way. My point is just that your "bans for all" stance is not the best way in all exploit-type situations.

I'm not blind at all to what you are saying, the fact still remains that the people who were initially using the obvious exploit of death leveling should, by your protocols be banned for it. In direct opposite to your stance, aNet themselves noticed the people making use of this bug, this exploit, to get beyond the aforementioned level in Pre, and made a title of it, banning no-one in the process.

You have to see that there are more than just shades of grey there, rather, you might say that there are gaping holes in the eula, and therefore in the minds of those who adhere to it more stricly than aNet themselves do, which need to be addressed.

*Edit* Thinking about the death level thing I can't help but wonder you know.. At the time that it was first found and started being done, was anyone in any forum posting thing like; "There's guys here in Pre that are like level 18, and they're cheating by leveling monsters for more xp, they should be banned!!!"

I got a feeling they're there you know, archived in some dusty GW forum vault..

give creative, ingenuitive, and (sometimes) intelligent people a sandbox that you havent updated in over 1.5 yrs and they will find marvelous things.

Look, all I freaking asked was if those who exploited Duncan for obvious tangible gain by getting to a location obviously denied without abusing an exploit were banned.

All the rest of this is from someone defending exploiters with obtuse logic.

Personally? Ban each and every exploiter. The first death leveler should have submitted a report about the occurrence, getting permission to continue or denied permission. Should he continue past permission, then BAN HIM.

Since I was here well after it was turned into a title, then it's a freaking moot point that was added to this discussion as a tangential "Defense" to exploitation.

Screw that. Ban the exploiters.

But are you sure you never took advantage of any bugs in the game even if you didn't know about it, but your team did and took advantage of it, you're guilty.

Officer: I didn't know he robbed the bank. I was just driving him and doing what I was told. I'm a follower, not a leader officer.

LOL!!!!

No one innocent. Sooner or later, you will take advantage of a bug with or without knowing. Therefore, you should be banned.

"I didn't know the portal jumping was a bug. I thought it was common knowledge until I saw the fix today ANET. Honestly." LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Your opinion is invalid, and this is why:

Only NC Interactive has the right to terminate accounts.

See? This is the obtuse logic that I have been talking about.

It's like trying to explain Shakespeare to a sponge.

0 or 1 when binary is not the system I was speaking of.

I hold that since my "opinion" didn't include myself causing any bans and in fact simply asked a question that my "opinion" was indeed quite valid.

Are you mad that you didn't get to take advantage of the bug and lost a chance to make a few millions?

Here..have a sucker(lollipop ). Feel better?

If it makes you feel any better, I didn't get a chance to make a bazillion either.

WTS: Deldrimor Armor Remnant 50K Each - 1000 left only.

No. You are interpreting the rules set forth by ANet and enforced by NCSoft and advocating that a specific action is taken for a supposed rule violation. You are not asking a question, you are making a statement. Only NCSoft can have the authority to determine if their rules have been violated, and any action taken is their sole right and responsibility. You are free to express your opinion on perceived rule violations, but ultimately NCSoft and ANet decide the rules.

No. I asked a followup question to Anet's response on the situation. Whether or not they found that they should ban those who exploited.

Followed by my personal opinion of what should( have) occur(red).

Followed by defense of my position on exploiters against obtuse logic in defense of exploiting...

Incorrect: http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...0&postcount=30

I asked a question. The rest is tangential crap.

I prefer to profit indirectly from exploits. I just bought a good number of deldrimor armor remnants dirt cheap.