Bio Engineer Archive

Was it wrong to dupe credits before the Devs said credit duping was not allowed? I mean it worked within the current game mechanics, does that make it right?

What most of us are saying is that considering the last CH changes which removed tanking Pets from non-CH control, why would allowing non-CH to have them again be right? Unless of course the CH nerf was done to give the BE a little slack. But why intentionally nerf a profession to give something to another?

Personally I think it's a oversight on the BE developers part in some formula. As we are seeling with Sumo's GREAT works on figuring out how BE works, the system is quite complex. That means that the programming behind it is that much more complex. I could see even a laureate Mathmatician overlooking something in the formulas.

But like I have said before, there are way to many of these "Is it right?" posts flying around here, we NEED some sort of responce from the DEVs about what's going on.

Rooks, we HAVE had a response from our corrispondant....

Talth has said several times that Keld knows of the bug/exploit/bad programming/whatever you want to call it.

yeah there are TWO bugs currently, which do they mean? heh

therei s one were non-ch's can call actual higher level pets, then there is the ability for BE's to make super low level pets that RULE AND ROCK AND I WANT FOREVER!!!!!!!!

Yes.

There were a few Weaponsmith exploits that made certain weapons stronger than they should have been, but the Weaponsmith community avoided using it. It was frowned upon, and some CSRs took action on exploit crafters and their customers.

Rooks, we HAVE had a response from our corrispondant....

Talth has said several times that Keld knows of the bug/exploit/bad programming/whatever you want to call it.

We need this responce stickied to the top of the forum, authored by Talth so everyone can see it. Otherwise a link to the particular thread where Talth made this responce would be acceptable for the time being. There are people in my own server forum who are asking about this, but without proof (A link) there is no evidence, thus people say it's still ok.

---

Scorus wrote:
Of course it is wrong. It is wrong on SO many levels. Using a bug to your advantage is the definition of an exploit, and I don't think there has ever been any ambiguity on the devs part about whether using an exploit is wrong (unless you count their relative lack of enforcement, of course).

It is also exceptionally bad business! I have a large cadre of regular customers who often pay me MORE than I ask for (which is above market price) simply because I always treat them fairly, educate them on the pros AND cons of everything that I make and sell, and always produce a quality product. Because of this strategy, I don't have to waste time hawking my goods, people come to me as repeat customers and through word of mouth. They know what to expect as far as ethics and quality and they don't mind paying top credits for it.

Try being a fair and ethical merchant, you'll be pleased with the results. It has meant that I've had to get out of the cl10 pet business because I can't compete with the exploiters, but there are plenty of other products that I can make my millions on, so that sacrifice is more than worth it.

---

The problem with the existence of this bug is that it makes it a guessing game to figure out what the devs actually intended for BE's to be able to do.

I refuse to sell the monster mutants (8k+ HAM, CL10). However, I do make an honest effort to sell what I anticipate to be "allowed pets", 3.5k health, 2k action, 1.5k mind, 20% kinetic. These aren't hard to make, and I *hope* they don't get nerfed, but that may happen too.

We need a fix, but before we get the fix, we need some guideance from the devs about what we should be shooting for.

First off, who said these pets were bugged?
Was their name red?
Was their name brown?
Was their name light blue [correspondent]?

No?
Then it was a no body. As such theyre opinions are as good as yours or mine. Theyre not special and have no inside information whatsoever.

Its just 2-3 attention starved people who posted an opinion "X dna is bugged" and started up a agree/disagree debate. Thats all.

Anyone couldve done the same.

If it was as big a deal to the Devs as it is to people like Siyja, it'd be hotfixed by now.

If it doesn't bother you to sell them, you advisebuyers that may well get nuked at any time and the _Devs_haven't fixed it or posted a warning about it yet, go for it...

If, however, you continue to sell them after a warning _is_ posted from a Dev or TH (sorry toTalth, but correspondents don't count as devs in my book, just better informed players), then you are being an exploiter. Kel saying he'd look at it (actually, I believe he said Kimurath specificallyfrom the report) when he got back means exactly that, that he'll look at it when he gets back.

Personally, I haven't bothered making any of them, as I don't subscribe to the view that high HAM/mid Kin resists is "the all and end all" of a pet and would much rather make well rounded high damage pets. If you PvE NPC's (specifically Stormies that love kiting) Kin doesn't matter as much anyway. Pets are near useless in PvP (and can even be a liability) as well. If all you do is fight critters,then yeah, they're great. But then, so is a good DoT and a speederbike...

It is not a bug until SOE comes out and says it is a bug.

This isn't a big secret that they aren't aware of. They havehad ample time to comment on it. There lack of comment is the green light to go ahead and do it. That doesn't mean they won't be nerfed next month though. But you're warning the customers, so there's nothing wrong with what you are doing in my opinion.

"Was it wrong to dupe credits before the Devs said credit duping was not allowed? I mean it worked within the current game mechanics, does that make it right?"

There's a HUGE difference there. With duping the best thing the devs could do was keep their mouths shut before they fixed it. Coming out and saying it's an exploit, while it was still out there only would of gotten thousands of people hunting down how to do it, and then the problem is worse.

Duping is a much more serious problem, and it wasn't nearly as publicized as these new CL 10 pets. This CL 10 pet issue is plastered all over these boards, and it's not a secret to anybody who reads the message boards. Unlike duping, the developers would have nothing to lose by commenting on this, that is of course if they have a problem with it.

Even though I think these pets are the results of bugs and are game breaking in terms of balance between teh game and players and between player professions, at this point the Devs have not lived up to their responsibility to keep us informed of whether it is a bug and if it is considered an exploit to knowingly use it. Even assuming they didn't know about it before the 5th, they should be well aware now, enough to come on and say a few words about it.

At this point, I say go ahead and make them. I probably won't because I do believe they are just going to get nerfed, but the devs have the responsibility to let us know where the boundaries are. If nothing else, maybe having to deal with the backlash of tens of thousands of players who have their tanks nerfed again will make the devs begin to live up to their responsibilities before problems get out of hand.