View Single Post
Lt. Commander
Join Date: Nov 2012
Posts: 197
# 38
11-30-2012, 05:14 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by borticuscryptic View Post
This whole argument, and several prior, seem to stem from a difference of opinion on the definition of the term "exploit." And, it appears that I have a different definition than most. Perhaps we can put this whole semantic debate behind us, if I offer some clarification.

In my opinion, as a Dev, somebody that is Exploiting is deserving of punishment. By extension, an action should be called an Exploit only if it is an action that the player should be held accountable for, and face punitive measures for.

If a player is utilizing a coding error, potentially without their knowledge, they should not be held accountable for it, in my opinion. And therefore, by my personal definition, that action is not Exploiting. To call it Exploiting would imply that disciplinary actions would be warranted.

My opinion on this may be quite bias, however.

For example, it was my responsibility that the Jem'Hadar Shield was benefiting from Brace-for-Impact Doffs in error at the time they rolled out to the public. It would have been improper - unfair, illogical - to punish players for utilizing that combination of items/powers, when it was MY responsibility that they were malfunctioning. Therefore, doing so was not what I would define as an Exploit.

Lol...by your definition nothing is an exploit then unless someone actually goes in and hacks your programming.

Exactly how was this new version of voldemort different than the last one according to your definition? You guys called it an exploit last time and banned people for even talking about it. Even if this one was much easier to produce, it was still made possible by an error in your coding that allowed it.

Is it safe to assume this is also why you don't punish people that logout in combat and bot/farm? Since your programming allows it, theyre not responsible for their actions?