Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Banned for not going linear?

145679

Comments

  • bobfishbobfish Member UncommonPosts: 1,679

    They were exploiting to get rewards from Ilum, the best items in the game outside of Operations. They deserve the ban, it is a shame it is only a temporary ban though.

     

    If you want the rewards from Ilum, go up against real other players, not your alt.

  • nyxiumnyxium Member UncommonPosts: 1,345

    My main concern is that people are paying and get banned. They are not going to pay for a game to be banned especially if further violations occur which wouldn't happen perhaps in other MMOs, not knowing what freedom they have and not and having to pay for that uncertainty, ironically. The customers will do something called 'cancelling a sub'. Bioware are walking the tightrope wire on the razors edge here, especially since we are in a free month still.

    I want the game to succeed but I question EA / BW's judgment which may result in cancelled subscriptions due to players not having the freedom they thought they had paid for in a sub which is subsequently cancelled in anger and will affect the games real world economy, not just its in-game economy and hence chances of long-term survival due to the games business model and cashflow relying on subscriptions for income.

  • bobfishbobfish Member UncommonPosts: 1,679

    Originally posted by nyxium

    My main concern is that people are paying and get banned. They are not going to pay for a game to be banned especially if further violations occur which wouldn't happen perhaps in other MMOs, not knowing what freedom they have and not and having to pay for that uncertainty, ironically. The customers will do something called 'cancelling a sub'. Bioware are walking the tightrope wire on the razors edge here, especially since we are in a free month still.

    I want the game to succeed but I question EA / BW's judgment which may result in cancelled subscriptions due to players not having the freedom they thought they had paid for in a sub which is subsequently cancelled in anger and will affect the games real world economy, not just its in-game economy and hence chances of long-term survival due to the games business model and cashflow relying on subscriptions for income.

     This particular expoit won't be an issue once more people reach 50. The current problem is that there are so few people at cap that Ilum is pretty desolate and there is no real competition there.

    This lack of competition enables players to create an alt on the other side, go to Ilum and capture points. Then log onto their main and re-capture those points to get rewards. If the population at 50 was bigger, then they wouldn't be able to use their alts to capture the points.

    There are exploits that companies ban for in all games, WoW recently banned a bunch of high end guilds for exploiting the latest raid, it isn't new or scary or anything else. Just those who get banned like to cry about it.

  • NaucanoNaucano Member UncommonPosts: 80

    Rated M for Mature - May contain content inappropriate for children

  • nyxiumnyxium Member UncommonPosts: 1,345

    Originally posted by bobfish

    Originally posted by nyxium

    My main concern is that people are paying and get banned. They are not going to pay for a game to be banned especially if further violations occur which wouldn't happen perhaps in other MMOs, not knowing what freedom they have and not and having to pay for that uncertainty, ironically. The customers will do something called 'cancelling a sub'. Bioware are walking the tightrope wire on the razors edge here, especially since we are in a free month still.

    I want the game to succeed but I question EA / BW's judgment which may result in cancelled subscriptions due to players not having the freedom they thought they had paid for in a sub which is subsequently cancelled in anger and will affect the games real world economy, not just its in-game economy and hence chances of long-term survival due to the games business model and cashflow relying on subscriptions for income.

     This particular expoit won't be an issue once more people reach 50. The current problem is that there are so few people at cap that Ilum is pretty desolate and there is no real competition there.

    This lack of competition enables players to create an alt on the other side, go to Ilum and capture points. Then log onto their main and re-capture those points to get rewards. If the population at 50 was bigger, then they wouldn't be able to use their alts to capture the points.

    There are exploits that companies ban for in all games, WoW recently banned a bunch of high end guilds for exploiting the latest raid, it isn't new or scary or anything else. Just those who get banned like to cry about it.

    What Blizzard did with the raiders was right. They cheated in a raid, Alts that exploit Ilum in SWTOR are arguably cheats but camping resources in other games might not be seen as that. but that is not my concern. My main concern is the shaky free month resulting in cancelled subs due to anger which may backfire on Bioware. The dark side of the force is strong today.

  • moosecatlolmoosecatlol Member RarePosts: 1,531

    Duplicate IP checks wouldn't be too difficult add.

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342


    Originally posted by nyxium

    My main concern is the shaky free month resulting in cancelled subs due to anger which may backfire on Bioware. The dark side of the force is strong today.

    What other repercussion do you propose?

  • nyxiumnyxium Member UncommonPosts: 1,345

    Originally posted by Gdemami

     




    Originally posted by nyxium



    My main concern is the shaky free month resulting in cancelled subs due to anger which may backfire on Bioware. The dark side of the force is strong today.




     

    What other repercussion do you propose?

    I'm just going to watch and see what happens. But look at MMO players in general, they aren't known for patience or understanding or being pleasant. They like to fight. PVP, yeah! Gank! Sword in the Face! They will not take this matter lightly if they feel unjustifiably in receipt of a certain email suspending / banning their account as their subscription is due to kick in after  the free month, if history teaches us how players have responded to authority in the past: The dreaded sub cancellation threat, the 'nuke option.'

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342


    Originally posted by nyxium

    I'm just going to watch and see what happens. But look at MMO players in general, they aren't known for patience or understanding or being pleasant. They like to fight. PVP, yeah! Gank! Sword in the Face! They will not take this matter lightly if they feel unjustiably in receipt of a certain email suspending / banning their account as their subscription is due to kick in after  the free month, if history teaches us how players have responded to authority in the past: The dreaded sub cancellation threat, the 'nuke option.'

    You did not answer a question.

    What other repercussion if account suspension isn't supposedly feasible do you propose?


    What BioWare should do? Sit back and watch what happens?

  • nyxiumnyxium Member UncommonPosts: 1,345

    Originally posted by Gdemami

     




    Originally posted by nyxium



    I'm just going to watch and see what happens. But look at MMO players in general, they aren't known for patience or understanding or being pleasant. They like to fight. PVP, yeah! Gank! Sword in the Face! They will not take this matter lightly if they feel unjustiably in receipt of a certain email suspending / banning their account as their subscription is due to kick in after  the free month, if history teaches us how players have responded to authority in the past: The dreaded sub cancellation threat, the 'nuke option.'




     

    You did not answer a question.

    What other repercussion if account suspension isn't supposedly feasible do you propose?



    What BioWare should do? Sit back and watch what happens?

    I answered in my way which appears to be incompatible with yours. But look at it this way, please, if it's not too much trouble?

    Sub based games rely on attachment. Emotional attachment to mains and alts which is built up over months and years until parting with them becomes painful (to some) and hence sub cancellation will _probably_ not happen. That isn't the case here. Players are still building attachments emotionally to their alts and mains in TOR during a first free month. They don't have that long term attachment yet which increases the chances of sub cancellation if they are annoyed with an early ban or suspension.

    Yes, perhaps it would have been smarter for Bioware to sit back for a month or two until the subs start rolling in and they get the most important thing in a business: The money. Real money. But that is now uncertain due to the unknown repercussions of BWs banning / suspesnion decision during a 30 day free play period and that is why their judgment is called into question.

  • bobfishbobfish Member UncommonPosts: 1,679

    Originally posted by nyxium

    Originally posted by Gdemami

     




    Originally posted by nyxium



    I'm just going to watch and see what happens. But look at MMO players in general, they aren't known for patience or understanding or being pleasant. They like to fight. PVP, yeah! Gank! Sword in the Face! They will not take this matter lightly if they feel unjustiably in receipt of a certain email suspending / banning their account as their subscription is due to kick in after  the free month, if history teaches us how players have responded to authority in the past: The dreaded sub cancellation threat, the 'nuke option.'




     

    You did not answer a question.

    What other repercussion if account suspension isn't supposedly feasible do you propose?



    What BioWare should do? Sit back and watch what happens?

    I answered in my way which appears to be incompatible with yours. But look at it this way, please, if it's not too much trouble?

    Sub based games rely on attachment. Emotional attachment to mains and alts which is built up over months and years until parting with them becomes painful (to some) and hence sub cancellation will _probably_ not happen. That isn't the case here. Players are still building attachments emotionally to their alts and mains in TOR during a first free month. They don't have that long term attachment yet which increases the chances of sub cancellation if they are annoyed with an early ban or suspension.

    Yes, perhaps it would have been smarter for Bioware to sit back for a month or two until the subs start rolling in and they get the most important thing in a business: The money. Real money. But that is now uncertain due to the unknown repercussions of BWs banning / suspesnion decision during a 30 day free play period and that is why their judgment is called into question.

     We're talking about a few dozen players, it isn't going to be an issue.

  • nyxiumnyxium Member UncommonPosts: 1,345

    Originally posted by bobfish

    Originally posted by nyxium


    Originally posted by Gdemami

     




    Originally posted by nyxium



    I'm just going to watch and see what happens. But look at MMO players in general, they aren't known for patience or understanding or being pleasant. They like to fight. PVP, yeah! Gank! Sword in the Face! They will not take this matter lightly if they feel unjustiably in receipt of a certain email suspending / banning their account as their subscription is due to kick in after  the free month, if history teaches us how players have responded to authority in the past: The dreaded sub cancellation threat, the 'nuke option.'





     

    You did not answer a question.

    What other repercussion if account suspension isn't supposedly feasible do you propose?



    What BioWare should do? Sit back and watch what happens?

    I answered in my way which appears to be incompatible with yours. But look at it this way, please, if it's not too much trouble?

    Sub based games rely on attachment. Emotional attachment to mains and alts which is built up over months and years until parting with them becomes painful (to some) and hence sub cancellation will _probably_ not happen. That isn't the case here. Players are still building attachments emotionally to their alts and mains in TOR during a first free month. They don't have that long term attachment yet which increases the chances of sub cancellation if they are annoyed with an early ban or suspension.

    Yes, perhaps it would have been smarter for Bioware to sit back for a month or two until the subs start rolling in and they get the most important thing in a business: The money. Real money. But that is now uncertain due to the unknown repercussions of BWs banning / suspesnion decision during a 30 day free play period and that is why their judgment is called into question.

     We're talking about a few dozen players, it isn't going to be an issue.

    Watching what happens, you are probably very right despite concerns.

  • drbaltazardrbaltazar Member UncommonPosts: 7,856

    in the cas that concern us they were warned and temporarly suspended!like it should a low level case like this!(the dude ^rpbab;y fprgpt tp mention this or didnt see the warning popup if he disabled the system warning.(not sure if those two are linked)

    it is good that bio and ea clarified what happened.so there is a limit to how many credit or item you can get in ilum?doesnt help anything in stabilising the economy of swtor!probably is worst lol!

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342


    Originally posted by nyxium

    I answered in my way which appears to be incompatible with yours.

    You mean like my simple, relevant question not being compatible with your irrelevant reply?


    What you are completely missing is that just a handful of exploiters can ruin the experience of very large number of players - including the bad rep for not taking steps against said handful of players.


    Your point is moot.

  • nyxiumnyxium Member UncommonPosts: 1,345

    Originally posted by Gdemami

     




    Originally posted by nyxium



    I answered in my way which appears to be incompatible with yours.




     

    You mean like my simple, relevant question not being compatible with your irrelevant reply?



    What you are completely missing is that just a handful of exploiters can ruin the experience of very large number of players - including the bad rep for not taking steps against said handful of players.



    Your point is moot.

    Yeah and you proved my point about unpleasantness. I'm rubber you're glue, etc. Whatever.

  • dubyahitedubyahite Member UncommonPosts: 2,483

    I can't believe the lengths people are going to just to defend cheaters and gold farmers.



    Is this the new low you guys have sunk to? Usually companies get a lot of hate, and even collapse, by not dealing with cheaters (APB ring any bells?) Now you're saying that Bioware is being to harsh on them?



    Are you freaking serious? Get these cheaters the hell out of my games. Props to Bioware for quick and decisive action.



    Every time a cheater gets the banhammer, I get a little spring in my step.



    Saying that banning cheaters is going to hurt the games sub rate is so backwards. Look at all thegames that were destroyed by cheaters. I've seen many games that have rampant exploiting, and it destroys populations.





    And people around here say the fans have blinders on, sheesh.

    Shadow's Hand Guild
    Open recruitment for

    The Secret World - Dragons

    Planetside 2 - Terran Republic

    Tera - Dragonfall Server

    http://www.shadowshand.com

  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342


    Originally posted by dubyahite
    I can't believe the lengths people are going to just to defend cheaters and gold farmers.Is this the new low you guys have sunk to? Usually companies get a lot of hate, and even collapse, by not dealing with cheaters (APB ring any bells?) Now you're saying that Bioware is being to harsh on them?Are you freaking serious? Get these cheaters the hell out of my games. Props to Bioware for quick and decisive action.Every time a cheater gets the banhammer, I get a little spring in my step.Saying that banning cheaters is going to hurt the games sub rate is so backwards. Look at all thegames that were destroyed by cheaters. I've seen many games that have rampant exploiting, and it destroys populations.
    And people around here say the fans have blinders on, sheesh.

    You sir, have proved the point of unpleasantness!


  • iCehiCeh Member UncommonPosts: 884

    Originally posted by nyxium

    My main concern is that people are paying and get banned. They are not going to pay for a game to be banned especially if further violations occur which wouldn't happen perhaps in other MMOs, not knowing what freedom they have and not and having to pay for that uncertainty, ironically. The customers will do something called 'cancelling a sub'. Bioware are walking the tightrope wire on the razors edge here, especially since we are in a free month still.

    I want the game to succeed but I question EA / BW's judgment which may result in cancelled subscriptions due to players not having the freedom they thought they had paid for in a sub which is subsequently cancelled in anger and will affect the games real world economy, not just its in-game economy and hence chances of long-term survival due to the games business model and cashflow relying on subscriptions for income.

    In which MMO can a player get away with exploiting the game mechanics? I'm sure that game is very popular.

    Exploiters and cheaters get banned in every game. No one will play a game where cheaters can run around freely - wtf is the point of playing any game that does? An MMO that allows cheaters would lose a lot more subscribers than one that bans the cheaters.

    Players from opposite factions communicating with each other to repeatedly respawn a loot container is obviously an exploit, everyone involved knows it's an exploit and everyone involved deserved the ban/warning.

    And I'll ask again in-case you forgot; which MMO allows cheaters and exploiters?

    -iCeh

  • WraithoneWraithone Member RarePosts: 3,806

    Originally posted by MadnessRealm

    Originally posted by dubyahite



    First, action was taken against a number of accounts for what's commonly known as 'gold farming' - or in our case, credit farming. These accounts were found to be exploiting the game in a variety of ways to maximize their credits in order to sell them to other players. Our Terms of Service team took action against these accounts and removed them permanently from the game.



    Second, a smaller number of accounts were warned or temporarily suspended for exploiting loot containers on Ilum. To be completely clear, while players may choose to travel to Ilum earlier than the recommended level (40+) and may loot containers if they can get to them, in the cases of those customers that were warned or temporarily suspended, they were systematically and repeatedly looting containers in very high numbers resulting in the game economy becoming unbalanced.



    None of these accounts were banned for their actions and no accounts have been banned for travelling to Ilum while still relatively low level. By comparison, the number of accounts that were warned or temporarily suspended was considerably lower than the number of accounts banned for 'credit farming'.


     

    Parts in red is what bothers me a little. How exactly do they tell the difference between "credit farmers" and customers who were "repeatedly looting containers in very high numbers"? Couldn't the latter also be interpreted as "credit farmers"? If so, it wouldn't be surprising that some non-credit farmers COULD have gotten banned, despite what's being stated in this "press release" or whatever it's called. Wish they had release a bit more details on this.

     

    Farming credits is fine. *Selling* those credits to other players is NOT.  As for the chests, I'd say the Dev's messed up, as they didn't level lock the chests, or have L50 mobs spawn when they open.  But also notice that no one was perma banned for the chests. 

    "If you can't kill it, don't make it mad."
  • GdemamiGdemami Member EpicPosts: 12,342


    Originally posted by Wraithone
     
    Farming credits is fine. *Selling* those credits to other players is NOT.  As for the chests, I'd say the Dev's messed up, as they didn't level lock the chests, or have L50 mobs spawn when they open.  But also notice that no one was perma banned for the chests. 

    It has nothing to do with levels.

    The containers are supposed to be PVP rewrads but certain people were rampantly swapping the objectives with opposing faction or alts to loot them over and over.

  • Creslin321Creslin321 Member Posts: 5,359

    Originally posted by dubyahite

    From what I've heard, the exploit had to do with characters from both factions repeatedly flipping bases back and forth to spawn loot containers.



    I am not too familiar with Illum's mechanics, but if that's the case then yeah that is clearly exploiting.



    That is 100% exploiting game mechanics over and over for personal gain.

     Okay so...I don't know every detail about the situation.  But from what I've read, I'm siding against BW on this issue.

    From their letter, it basically sounds like they sent folks a warning for going to Illum and looting containers "excessively."  But well, if I went to Illum and I saw tons of containers there with good money in them, I would loot them too.  How is this exploiting?  BW is basically saying that "yeah you can go to Illum, and you can loot stuff, but if you do it too much, you will be warned/banned!" 

    I'll be honest, from the player's perspective, I don't see how this is any different than farming MOBs over and over again.  They just found a resource that is spawning repeatedly in the game world, and they are taking advantage of it.  Yeah that's really cheating.  How would people react if Blizzard starting banning mages for AoE farming?

    Another thing that annoys me is that the line between "exploit" and "normal play" seems to be entirely determined by the developer's intent...which is completely unknown to the player.  This same crap happened in Everquest.  In EQ, you could get banned for shooting a monster across a river to "exploit" its pathing...I guess they thought you could get exp too fast.  But then, they add Paludal Caverns which is a zone that let players level at a CRAZY rate, and yet it wasn't an exploit because it was intentional.  There is absolutely no way for the players to know that shooting a monster across a river is "exploiting," but the insane exp gain from Paludal is not.

    All that said, I'm sure there is a real problem here that needs to be fixed, but the problem is with SWTOR, NOT with the players.  The problem is that folks from either faction are just playing merry-go-round on Illum and just taking forts without ever fighting because Illum was POORLY DESIGNED.  This is what is causing the containers to spawn too much, this is the real problem.  Instead of blaming players who are just looting containers (i.e. playing the game), BW needs to freaking fix Illum.  It's absolutely ridiculous that both factions can just run around and take empty forts without ever fighting each other.

     

    Developers need to stop blaming players for their mistakes.  If you F up a game mechanic that is allowing players to get more resources than you want, then fix the game mechanic.  Don't act as if players are doing something from for playing the game.

    Are you team Azeroth, team Tyria, or team Jacob?

  • GruugGruug Member RarePosts: 1,794

    I have come across individuals macroing chests. I consider that not only an exploit but a manner of "griefing" players. In the case of one person that I found macroing, they were standing there repeatedly looting the chest. Yes, some of those chests are randomly placed in a area but they all respawn in the same spot eventually. The person in question was repeatly attempting to loot even when the chest was not there. I went back 24 hours later and that person was still there still repeatedly looting the same chest (when there). I reported him/her.

    Now, it was up to Bioware to investigate my "report". My "opinion" of what the player was actually doing is only what caused me to report. It is Bioware's game to make sure that the player in question was in fact exploiting. Based upon this issue as detailed in this thread, I would say that Bioware did the right thing. Exploiting the enviroment is still exploiting IF Bioware does the proper due process investigation. In this case, it appears that Bioware did just that:

    http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=1060894

    The OP suggests that the forums were in some form of uproar about this issue. No, actually, the SWTOR community forums where this thread was found are not. This thread in particular is not even on the front several pages. Also, Bioware responded to the issue (did not close the thread) with the response as posted in my provided link.

    Bioware, in the response, did say that players CAN go to the higher level areas. However, Bioware says that they took action based upon player actions once they got there.

     

     

    Let's party like it is 1863!

  • WraithoneWraithone Member RarePosts: 3,806

    Originally posted by Gdemami

     




    Originally posted by Royalkin

     

    Once again, it seems a little disingenous to penalize players for actions that are considered normal gameplay in every other MMO.




     

    Exploiting design flaws is not normal in any game.

     

    This is where we get into the gray area. Dev's (and certain others...) tend to be mono focus when it comes to design flaws. They WILL exist. The code base is WAY too extensive and complex to catch all of these in beta (but proper practices will catch most).  These days, there is NO excuse for not having extensive logs (and parsers) of *everything* thats going on in a game. 

    It should be a daily routine, that someone looks at the logs for rewards (chests/token rewards etc...) with an eye to seeing if something needs to be examined in more detail.  If some design flaw is discovered, analyze the problem, inactivate the reward (which is driving the behavior) until a hot fix or patch can be applied.  

    Make a note in the files of those accounts that have been involved (flag them for future observation). But keep in mind that those who find "exploits" are actually doing the Dev's job for them (in other words, they (the exploiters) are *paying* to do the Dev's "exploit" discovery...^^).  Given the *daily* review (or even an automated alarm that pops up when something exceeds a preset value during a given day), its doubtful that much harm could be done before its inactivated. 

    Over time, one would have a much better idea of what accounts are being used for what, and thus any action that needs to be taken, could be.  

    "If you can't kill it, don't make it mad."
  • WhySoShortWhySoShort Member Posts: 315

    Originally posted by Creslin321

    I'll be honest, from the player's perspective, I don't see how this is any different than farming MOBs over and over again.  They just found a resource that is spawning repeatedly in the game world, and they are taking advantage of it.  Yeah that's really cheating.  How would people react if Blizzard starting banning mages for AoE farming?

    Like you, I don't know all the details, but I would say the difference between farming and exploiting here is whether actual "work" was involved. If you're gathering loot over and over again by killing enemies, that's farming. If you're just picking up loot that's spawning without have to push anything other than the loot button... that's different.

    image

  • TheLizardbonesTheLizardbones Member CommonPosts: 10,910


    Originally posted by Gruug
    I have come across individuals macroing chests. I consider that not only an exploit but a manner of "griefing" players. In the case of one person that I found macroing, they were standing there repeatedly looting the chest. Yes, some of those chests are randomly placed in a area but they all respawn in the same spot eventually. The person in question was repeatly attempting to loot even when the chest was not there. I went back 24 hours later and that person was still there still repeatedly looting the same chest (when there). I reported him/her.
    Now, it was up to Bioware to investigate my "report". My "opinion" of what the player was actually doing is only what caused me to report. It is Bioware's game to make sure that the player in question was in fact exploiting. Based upon this issue as detailed in this thread, I would say that Bioware did the right thing. Exploiting the enviroment is still exploiting IF Bioware does the proper due process investigation. In this case, it appears that Bioware did just that:
    http://www.swtor.com/community/showthread.php?p=1060894
    The OP suggests that the forums were in some form of uproar about this issue. No, actually, the SWTOR community forums where this thread was found are not. This thread in particular is not even on the front several pages. Also, Bioware responded to the issue (did not close the thread) with the response as posted in my provided link.
    Bioware, in the response, did say that players CAN go to the higher level areas. However, Bioware says that they took action based upon player actions once they got there.
     
     


    They also stated that the only players who were banned were engaged in behavior that was consistent with gold farming (i.e. macroing a chest to repeatedly open it whether it was there or not for 24 hours or more). I don't know if it was in that thread you posted, but it was in the forums for anyone to read.

    I can not remember winning or losing a single debate on the internet.

Sign In or Register to comment.