Rubber Banding / Speed Hacking - A Special (Unplanned) DevChat - 10/14/09 2am EST - Page 10

Colt-556 · #1 10-26-2009, 09:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lobreeze

And I quote Cilraaz

Which you respond with

You spamming afk macros standing in one spot hardly constitutes playing let alone testing.

That response hardly says I don't report bugs, it just points out the flaw of saying a debugger doesn't detect bugs. And afk grinding DOES constitutes as testing, why? Because I'm doing it ingame. ANYTHING done ingame is testing. Every. Single. Little. Thing. is testing, simply because it's done on the server. My afk-grinding could potentially reveal a serious flaw of some sort that'd be picked up by the debugger (or reported by me when I noticed it) which would lead to it getting fixed. The point is, you don't know what bugs are out there waiting to be found, so any action, no matter what, is testing.

Lobreeze · #2 10-26-2009, 09:52 PM

Quote from policy;

Quote:

3.11. You will not perform AFK camping of a spawn, NPC or cave. Camping is defined as repeatedly hunting a lair, spawn or NPC in succession. TC allows multiple accounts and connections, therefore using multiple toon instances to create the effect to "out damage" other players is considered AFK camping. There is only one toon actually operated by a single player and all successive toons are considered AFK camping. All toons in such instances are subject to disciplinary actions. Obviously, this camping rule does not restrict all multiple game instances. For example, it is acceptable for two game instances to be operated by one player where one instance is an AFK crafter sampling ground resources and the other is a character that is being played At The Keyboard.

http://www.swgemu.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16670

Colt-556 · #3 10-26-2009, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lobreeze

Quote from policy;

http://www.swgemu.com/forums/showthread.php?t=16670

And yet I read in several threads that aslong as your afk-grinding didn't harm others, you were free to do it. And infact, the rules you quoted do not prohibit afk-grinding, they prohibit afk camping. So yeah, I'm done arguing this with you here, this is about the retardation of keeping a broken anti-hack that's unnecessary and does nothing but harm the community and testing.

Lobreeze · #4 10-26-2009, 09:57 PM

Wasn't much of an argument but,

Cool story bro... I guess you know better than all of us. Maybe you could come up with a better algorithm seeing as how you have such a strong grip on things here?

Colt-556 · #5 10-26-2009, 10:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lobreeze

Wasn't much of an argument but,

Cool story bro... I guess you know better than all of us. Maybe you could come up with a better algorithm seeing as how you have such a strong grip on things here?

Never said I could do better, nor that I have any control over anything. Does that mean I should just sit quietly as this code wreaks havoc for hundreds of players, including myself? Naw. It's quite clear that this code NEEDS to be removed, and that majority of people want it gone. And as I have said so many times, the servers going to be wiped in the end anyways, so anything obtained by hackers is null and void, as it will all be erased. So removing the broken code, and letting people play and test efficiently is far superior to making us all suffer with this bull**** for god knows how much longer.

Labyrinth · #6 10-26-2009, 10:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colt-556

Never said I could do better, nor that I have any control over anything. Does that mean I should just sit quietly as this code wreaks havoc for hundreds of players, including myself? Naw. It's quite clear that this code NEEDS to be removed, and that majority of people want it gone. And as I have said so many times, the servers going to be wiped in the end anyways, so anything obtained by hackers is null and void, as it will all be erased. So removing the broken code, and letting people play and test efficiently is far superior to making us all suffer with this bull**** for god knows how much longer.

What part of "they're working on a better algorithm and are going to try it out, once they finish testing it" don't you understand?

Lobreeze · #7 10-26-2009, 10:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Labyrinth

What part of "they're working on a better algorithm and are going to try it out, once they finish testing it" don't you understand?

The "they're working on a better algorithm and are going to try it out, once they finish testing it" part is what hes missing LOL

Colt-556 · #8 10-26-2009, 10:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Labyrinth

What part of "they're working on a better algorithm and are going to try it out, once they finish testing it" don't you understand?

The part where they leave the broken, unnecessary one in place and make us suffer with it until it's done. As I've said oh so many times, I have no problem with an anti-hack being in place, as long as it works. The current one doesn't, and unless they magically finish the new one in the next second, that doesn't help. Which is why I want them to remove the broken one, and let us move without being thrown around like a rag-doll. And then once the new one is complete they implement it, test it, if it doesn't work they rinse and repeat. There's just no reason to keep the broken one in though. Unless somehow having this broken one ingame helps them create the new one, but other then that it serves no other purpose but to piss everyone off and limit testing capabilities.

Labyrinth · #9 10-26-2009, 10:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lobreeze

The "they're working on a better algorithm and are going to try it out, once they finish testing it" part is what hes missing LOL

Clearly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Colt-556

The part where they leave the broken, unnecessary one in place and make us suffer with it until it's done. As I've said oh so many times, I have no problem with an anti-hack being in place, as long as it works. The current one doesn't, and unless they magically finish the new one in the next second, that doesn't help. Which is why I want them to remove the broken one, and let us move without being thrown around like a rag-doll. And then once the new one is complete they implement it, test it, if it doesn't work they rinse and repeat. There's just no reason to keep the broken one in though. Unless somehow having this broken one ingame helps them create the new one, but other then that it serves no other purpose but to piss everyone off and limit testing capabilities.

Ok, let's pretend that line of logic makes sense.

Now let's see, how about we shut down this project till it's perfect? If some of the code is broken, then clearly it should be removed poste-haste.

Lobreeze · #10 10-26-2009, 10:04 PM

See now here's there problem, there are many who see the need for it. So who's right? The developers or the people who know nothing of development or coding.

Not really a tough call there.

And as I said before, if you truly are suffering come back after the OR. There will still be plenty of testing to be done. You not playing for a few months won't hinder anything at all I'm sure.

Lobreeze · #11 10-26-2009, 10:16 PM

This isn't about what YOU want. If you are truly so hard done by, I'll say it again, the OR should be done in a few months with all new things to test. I think it may suit you better then.

It's only a minority of the community up in arms over this. It can be frustrating at time, yes. But hardly QQ worthy. Seriously, if it bothers you so much just log out. It only a big deal because you make it a big deal.

What would you be doing if this project didn't exist? Be happy with what you have. Seriously.

Lobreeze · #12 10-26-2009, 10:20 PM

Logic be damned. He knows whats best clearly.

Lobreeze · #13 10-26-2009, 10:23 PM

A whole 50 people?!?!?!?!?!!?

This website gets 2000 people a day. You have yet to provide anything helping your case. You just keep making wild, omnipotent-like and anecdotal statements.

Colt-556 · #14 10-26-2009, 10:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lobreeze

A whole 50 people?!?!?!?!?!!?

This website gets 2000 people a day.

It's called statistics, friend. If 3 people say "love it", and 50 say "hate it", I wonder which is more preferred?

I mean ****, if you wanna know how hated it is just go ingame and watch people go "****ing rubberbanding" in chat. I mean jesus, I know you're just arguing this point to troll me, but sometimes it scares me knowing that some people actually think it's the minority that hates this.

Lobreeze · #15 10-26-2009, 10:27 PM

Quote:

it's called statistics, friend.

Maybe because the vast majority don't care thus don't post. No one likes rubberbanding, not everyone thinks it should be removed. Most people certainly don't think its even worth posting about at all.

Lol, you should look up the definition of anecdotal and hearsay. You pulling two numbers out of your a** doesn't constitute statistics.

Most people I know don't clamor for it to be removed. I say 50 people want it and only 3 people hate it. Who's right?