Is this an exploit?
Mark Asher
spawn. There was a mummy in the top of the tower and I killed it by casting
offensive spells on it. It couldn't pathfind to get to me I guess. Would
this be considered an exploit? I was tired of hearing it groan, so I put it
out of its misery.
There's always a bunch of damn alligators and snakes stuck in that tower
too.
Mark Asher
Gresh
> spawn. There was a mummy in the top of the tower and I killed it by casting
> offensive spells on it. It couldn't pathfind to get to me I guess. Would
> this be considered an exploit? I was tired of hearing it groan, so I put it
> out of its misery.
Yes, in my opinion that's an exploit, of the same nature as all the other "I
can hit the monster but because of pathing or impassable walls or whatever they
can't hit me at all".
Gresh
Qualm, Barbarian Shaman, E'ci
Tristram Lyonesse
makes me salivate. I've heard that they carry at least 50pp.
Tristram - Veeshan
Mark Asher <ma...@cdmnet.com> wrote in message
news:37640...@news.primary.net...
> In Innothule there's a tower in the middle of the swamp where some undead
> spawn. There was a mummy in the top of the tower and I killed it by
casting
> offensive spells on it. It couldn't pathfind to get to me I guess. Would
> this be considered an exploit? I was tired of hearing it groan, so I put
it
> out of its misery.
>
Rusty
> Yes, in my opinion that's an exploit, of the same nature as all the other
"I
> can hit the monster but because of pathing or impassable walls or whatever
they
> can't hit me at all".
So what about the monsters being able to walk/attack right through walls?
That's not right, but yet I have read/heard of people getting warned or even
banned for attacking monsters through walls. Verant needs to fix these
problems if they want people not to exploit them.
Alanon
Adam Connor
>So what about the monsters being able to walk/attack right through walls?
>That's not right, but yet I have read/heard of people getting warned or even
>banned for attacking monsters through walls. Verant needs to fix these
>problems if they want people not to exploit them.
Verant's current solution is that mobs can see and hit you thru walls,
but you can't normally see them. It isn't particularly fair, but is
the best they could come up with without actually solving the problem.
It prevents exploits where spellcasters blast mobs from positions of
safety. Verant is very fixated on preventing exploits.
I gather it would eat serious CPU cycles to do something better. Given
that, I wish I didn't have to go into the huts to buy things from
innkeepers... but no doubt redesigning that aspect would also take
work, so we're stuck with the current crummy solution.
There are so many more serious problems in EQ that I can't really see
getting bugged by this. It's cheesy, but so are lots of things in
games.
--
adam connor / remove "_nospam" and "spamlite." to email
Jason Maskell
news:37657fba....@news.io.com...
> "Rusty" <rusman.s...@texas.net> wrote:
> I gather it would eat serious CPU cycles to do something better. Given
> that, I wish I didn't have to go into the huts to buy things from
> innkeepers... but no doubt redesigning that aspect would also take
> work, so we're stuck with the current crummy solution.
Not really, no.
> There are so many more serious problems in EQ that I can't really see
> getting bugged by this. It's cheesy, but so are lots of things in
> games.
It's cheezy and not hard to fix, they just have to get around to it. Maybe
they will one day.
Jason
Sam Schlansky
>In Innothule there's a tower in the middle of the swamp where some
>undead spawn. There was a mummy in the top of the tower and I killed it
>by casting offensive spells on it. It couldn't pathfind to get to me I
>guess. Would this be considered an exploit? I was tired of hearing it
>groan, so I put it out of its misery.
>
>There's always a bunch of damn alligators and snakes stuck in that tower
>too.
The simple rule is; if you can attack a monster but it can't attack you,
it's an exploit.
This sometimes happens in Cazic-Thule with a Lizard Judiciator stuck up in
one of the trees. The Judiciator is a _high_ level healer, and he heals
everybody's pulls... a serious pain in the ass. In that case, I'd say
exploit away... but not for the XP, to fix a bug.
Sam
--
/| Sam Schlansky <sam[at]operation3d[dot]com>
/| PGP Key ID: 0x63A9D707
/| 3DNews.net: News With Perspective!
/| 3DHardware.net: Taking Your Machine To The Third Dimension!
/| Remove "deletethis" to email.
Roadkill[PCR]
>it's an exploit.
You just stated that rooting monsters is an exploit hehehehe... Sorry, but
I just don't believe some of the exploit issues that I hear. In the case of
someone plugging away at a monster that's SUPPOSE to be smart enough to run
you down I would say that this is an exploit. But Verant considers sitting
on top of a tower shooting arrows at snake below an exploit, because the
snake can't attack you back. I do not agree. Snakes are not smart enough
to figure out that going up the stairs leads to you. The guy in my example
was using to world around him to avoid harm to himself. Why is it that if
you attack a monster it HAS to get it's licks in on you? If this is the
case why do we even have graphics in a game like this at all? "You see a
snake ahead of you, attack? Yes or No" YES, "You hit snake, snake hits you,
you hit snake, etc". If battle is consisted souly of the random "you try to
hit monster, monster tries to hit you" stats running off from your AGI, STA,
etc. why do we need buildings, towers, mountains, etc. to be drawn at all?
They're just there for us to get a sense of the world we're in? Because if
the monsters can just run right through them to get us they serve no purpose
and are just a waste of polygons being drawn. There's also no need for a
stamina bar since you're suppose to let the stats role and have no right
running from the monster, because he HAS to be able to hit you back. No
eluding, to ducking behind anything, no smart play what-so-ever... looks
pretty one sided to me. I'd rather PLAY a game, not use it as a random
statistical analyser that runs some numbers and then reports back to me
whether I won or lost based on my AGI, STA, STR, WIS, INT, etc.
Roadkill[PCR]
If you've ever been inside a cabin talking to a merchant or whatever, and a
grizzly (or something else) sees you THROUGH the wall and decides to walk
right through it and start pummling you after NOT BEING PROVOKED, I wouldn't
feel bad at all about exploiting right back. After all, Varent wants this
game to be fair right? If they can do it I don't see why they should be
pissed about us doing it back.
They did that purposely (monsters through walls) because of magic users
casting spells on monsters then ducking into cabins and waiting until the
monsters died. Exploit yes. But the solution didn't solve the problem, it
only took the exploit away from us and gave it to the monsters. And the
monsters are FAR WORSE of exploiters than any player character could ever
have been. We have to decide whether to exploit, and a lot of people agree
that it's wrong and don't do it. So that leaves you with about maybe 10% of
the people deciding that they'll do it and exploit. But the computer
doesn't think or have any remorse for it's actions, it just does what it was
programmed to do. That leaves us with 100% of the monsters that will decide
to attack you through the wall if they are of an agressive nature. So the
problem now goes from a hand full of people exploiting to get the kills to a
large number of players unfairly getting killed. Which one sounds more fair
to you?
Mark Asher wrote in message <37640...@news.primary.net>...
>In Innothule there's a tower in the middle of the swamp where some undead
>spawn. There was a mummy in the top of the tower and I killed it by casting
>offensive spells on it. It couldn't pathfind to get to me I guess. Would
>this be considered an exploit? I was tired of hearing it groan, so I put it
>out of its misery.
>
>There's always a bunch of damn alligators and snakes stuck in that tower
>too.
>
>Mark Asher
>
>
UbuRex9
>Why is it that if
>you attack a monster it HAS to get it's licks in on you? If this is the
>case why do we even have graphics in a game like this at all? "You see a
>snake ahead of you, attack? Yes or No" YES, "You hit snake, snake hits you,
>you hit snake, etc". If battle is consisted souly of the random "you try to
>hit monster, monster tries to hit you" stats running off from your AGI, STA,
>etc. why do we need buildings, towers, mountains, etc. to be drawn at all?
Very good point. I've thought about this myself. Verant's concern over the
use of exploits to kill monsters (while legitimate) has been translated into a
very poor prevention system, in my opinion. By not allowing players to use, in
any way, the beautifully crafted 3D environment that is EverQuest, the design
team has thrown the baby out with the bathwater.
Sure, no one likes to reward exploiters perched up in a tree or behind a wall
blasting away at a dumb monster. Taking advantage of a game's limited AI
should be discouraged. But removing the importance of an integral part of the
gameworld (e.g. the 3D terrain) just seems too short-sighted to me.
Here are some suggestions which are not exclusive and might actually work
better in unison:
1) If a monster cannot engage a player in combat due to the player's "creative
use of terrain," then the mob will immediately disengage and begin to run away
(either after a set time-limit or after a certain amount of damage less than
it's normal "runaway" threshold). The monster will only resume attacking if
the player continues attacking it (which means the player may have to come down
from the tower or whatever and chase after the mob, thus allowing the mob at
least a moments opportunity to attack the player).
2) Make all DD spells line-of-sight.
3) If a player is behind a wall or in a structure and uses DOT spells on a
mob, then the mob can hit through the wall or through the structure. This
would represent the mob bashing down the wall or climbing through a window or
opening the door.
4) If a mob is not attacked by a player who is inside a structure or behind a
wall, then that mob will not be aggressive towards players in structures or
behind walls.
Maybe by trying these four suggestions (which I don't take credit for - they've
already been floated in one form or another in this newsgroup), the design team
may find a less drastic method of reigning in exploiters.
- Rexroth
Roadkill[PCR]
"creative
>use of terrain," then the mob will immediately disengage and begin to run
away
>(either after a set time-limit or after a certain amount of damage less
than
>it's normal "runaway" threshold). The monster will only resume attacking
if
>the player continues attacking it (which means the player may have to come
down
>from the tower or whatever and chase after the mob, thus allowing the mob
at
>least a moments opportunity to attack the player).
Oooo... I like this one a lot. This in itself though would most likely be a
total rewrite of the AI system all together. It would be cool to have, but
won't happen in this game.
Dundee
wrote:
>In Innothule there's a tower in the middle of the swamp where some undead
>spawn. There was a mummy in the top of the tower and I killed it by casting
>offensive spells on it. It couldn't pathfind to get to me I guess. Would
>this be considered an exploit? I was tired of hearing it groan, so I put it
>out of its misery.
IMO, it's an exploit if you camp there and kill it over and over as it
respawns.
--
Dundee - http://dundee.uong.com/ - last updated 6/11/99
Philip R. Spagnolli
<92936497...@news.remarQ.com>:
It should be easy,
if mob at x,y,z plus movespeed(x, y, or z), is not at next pos or near it
and keeping to increase by movespeed then turn around to the 45 degree
point and run a bit. If attacked while not moving run a bit faster or
even better run through object if attacked and not making movespeed and
not rooted... Then allow inside to be safer so if a spellcaster attakced
from in a bldg the mob would be able to attack through the wall. If the
spell caster is already in attack mode then keep attacking if anything is
in the way. If a aperson is not attacking and in a room, he is safe...
Philip R. Spagnolli
Doens't seem that hard to me. You could stil have pathing problems but
this would help with exploits...
Goonboy
wrote:
Just a point of curosity...
In South Karana at teh aviak village, whenever I arrive there, I can
usually find one or two of the "treehouse" spots with lions stuck at
the top.
there are no stairs, no ladders, nothing.
Are these just there for decoration? The endangered lions in a
habitat? They exit, they are there and yet anyone caught killing one
would be suspended?
Hmmm...
Curiouser and curiouser...
-G
DG
rewrite the entire AI to make some very minor changes?
Roadkill[PCR] <road...@aroma.com.REMOVEME> wrote in message
news:92936497...@news.remarQ.com...
DG
problem." I take it there is no soloution to this problem then?
Adam Connor <ajconno...@spamlite.io.com> wrote in message
news:37657fba....@news.io.com...
> "Rusty" <rusman.s...@texas.net> wrote:
> >So what about the monsters being able to walk/attack right through walls?
> >That's not right, but yet I have read/heard of people getting warned or
even
> >banned for attacking monsters through walls. Verant needs to fix these
> >problems if they want people not to exploit them.
>
> Verant's current solution is that mobs can see and hit you thru walls,
> but you can't normally see them. It isn't particularly fair, but is
> the best they could come up with without actually solving the problem.
> It prevents exploits where spellcasters blast mobs from positions of
> safety. Verant is very fixated on preventing exploits.
>
> I gather it would eat serious CPU cycles to do something better. Given
> that, I wish I didn't have to go into the huts to buy things from
> innkeepers... but no doubt redesigning that aspect would also take
> work, so we're stuck with the current crummy solution.
>
> There are so many more serious problems in EQ that I can't really see
> getting bugged by this. It's cheesy, but so are lots of things in
> games.
>
DG
maybe 5 seconds prior and you know for a certain fact the damn thing was no
where near the vicinity.
Look all around... nothing... walk in building, walk up to Inn Keeper, right
click, you have been slain by Griffon.
Random death is a sorry a$$ fix to any problem. Is this a Graphic Adventure
Game or a Graphic Random Instadeath Game.
Roadkill[PCR] <road...@aroma.com.REMOVEME> wrote in message
news:92936208...@news.remarQ.com...
> >In Innothule there's a tower in the middle of the swamp where some undead
> >spawn. There was a mummy in the top of the tower and I killed it by
casting
> >offensive spells on it. It couldn't pathfind to get to me I guess. Would
> >this be considered an exploit? I was tired of hearing it groan, so I put
it
> >out of its misery.
> >
Alan
Steamfont. He will cast charm on you through walls which will cause you to
wander into his lair which is guarded by two very high level minoguards. I
lost over half a level trying to get my corpse back from this guy. I think
Meldrath the NPC should be banned. The GM's are aware of his behavior and
use of unfair tactics, yet he is never punished. Heh heh.
Roadkill[PCR] wrote in message <92936208...@news.remarQ.com>...
Adam Russell
JeffS <je...@spam.sux.pobox.com> wrote in message
news:376e2fbc...@207.69.128.130...
> On Mon, 14 Jun 1999 07:58:17 -0400, "Roadkill[PCR]"
> <road...@aroma.com.REMOVEME> wrote:
>
> >You just stated that rooting monsters is an exploit hehehehe... Sorry,
but
> >I just don't believe some of the exploit issues that I hear. In the case
of
> >someone plugging away at a monster that's SUPPOSE to be smart enough to
run
> >you down I would say that this is an exploit.
>
> I agree entirely. Nailing a snake from a tower without fear should
> be fair. A snake could hardly be expected to be able to open a door to
> get at you. Then again, Verant considers it fair that a player
> conducting a trade with an npc in a closed cottage is fair game to a
> passing bear who has the amazing ability to slash through solid walls.
> It is also fair for a player to have a mob one hack away from death and
> have it flee/warp completely out of sight. I'll agree that if you enter
> a hut with a griffin in sight (who can realistically rip the roof off
> after spotting you), you are probably fair game.
>
> Jeff
> ----
> Note: To send an email response, please remove 'spam.sux.'
> from the address in the 'From:' field.
Right. They should have it so that if the mob chases you into the house
then he can get you, but if the mob doesn't already have you on the hit list
then he should just ignore you. Unless attacked of course.
Guardian23
--
Dorian Brytestar
25th lvl. High Elf Cleric
Povar
Tristram Lyonesse <tris...@tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message
news:0vW83.3076$dP.3...@newse2.tampabay.rr.com...
> Boy, I wish I could do that to a Hill Giant! Thinking of the loot and exp
> makes me salivate. I've heard that they carry at least 50pp.
>
> Tristram - Veeshan
>
>
> Mark Asher <ma...@cdmnet.com> wrote in message
> news:37640...@news.primary.net...
Charles Lembke
guards, and gelatinous cubes. I've gotten trapped a couple time
myself. I've /bugged this several time, so I have no
problem/doubt/regret in killing those trapped creatures. Note that
I'm playing a warrior with no decent ranged attack, they can and do
hit me.
If that mummy does have a path, but can't find it, then to me that is
a failure of the AI and thus Verants problem, not yours. If there is
truly no way down, then again, this is a bug in either the spawn
location or travel path that gets it stuck up there. Again, this is a
bug.
As far as I'm concerned, if you /bug the problem frequently, its
Verants problem
Charles Lembke
c-le...@uiuc.edu
On Sun, 13 Jun 1999 14:25:35 -0500, "Mark Asher" <ma...@cdmnet.com>
wrote:
>In Innothule there's a tower in the middle of the swamp where some undead