Exploits can be tricky to define and can be as subtle and unintentional as switching a gun with a flashlight, or building from under a cupboard(?)
Some exploits are per definition intentional yet are rather harmless, like double walls or roof cupboard houses, and some are both intentional and gamebreaking(?), like stairloot or rooframps.
But there is also the type that I would really like to try, yet can't even begin to claim was unintentional, or that I was unaware that it's an exploit.. but it seems so funny to me.. and I have to much metal frags to spare :P
So my question is, would making a house like this get me banned on a Facepunch server? I would put it next to some road, and I know everyone would call "Hackz":P
[video=youtube;pop62E5elFc]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pop62E5elFc[/video]
It's pretty much a given in alpha/beta testing in general that if you find an exploit and report it you're fine, but if you don't report it and abuse it, you can expect punishment of some level. If you're able to do something that you know isn't intended, it should be obvious that you've discovered an exploitable bug, and how you should proceed is common sense.
You mean "is it acceptable to use mistaken mechanics to ruin the experience for other users of the game around here?"
No it's generally frowned upon.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49619785]It's pretty much a given in alpha/beta testing in general that if you find an exploit and report it you're fine, but if you don't report it and abuse it, you can expect punishment of some level. If you're able to do something that you know isn't intended, it should be obvious that you've discovered an exploitable bug, and how you should proceed is common sense.[/QUOTE]
If I find it on Youtube, then I expect it to have been found by the devs and my fellow players as well. The people on my server will use it and if I dont as well, I would be at a disadvantage, and the whole game is to seek advantages, use them and hide them. Like placing a cupboard on the ground instead of on a foundation in order to prevent people to place from below the line, or like being able to place cupboards above eachother by starting from the top. I don't think that self policing that aspect of the game, that is a primary goal of the game, is a correct expectation, and contrary to what you think is common sense, my common sense dictates that the amount of people that would use such tricks or fall victim to them, is a propper indication of the priority a devteam should give that specific issue (I expect double walling to stay here for a while).
[QUOTE=yodafart9;49619795]You mean "is it acceptable to use mistaken mechanics to ruin the experience for other users of the game around here?"No it's generally frowned upon.[/QUOTE]
Is it not just using the imperfect mechanics of that build and is that not just precisely what alpha is though?
[QUOTE=buttslap;49619876]If I find it on Youtube, then I expect it to have been found by the devs and my fellow players as well.[/quote]
Well, the devs definitely will know now that you've posted it here, but I don't know if they found it independently, and if they hadn't, do you think they have nothing better to do than browse YouTube all day looking for videos of people showing off exploits (without even describing them as exploits)? :v:
[QUOTE=buttslap;49619876]The people on my server will use it and if I dont as well, I would be at a disadvantage[/QUOTE]
People justified hacking this way and got VAC/EAC'd just the same as the hackers they were fighting against. It's not a winning argument in any context.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49619997]Well, the devs definitely will know now that you've posted it here, but I don't know if they found it independently, and if they hadn't, do you think they have nothing better to do than browse YouTube all day looking for videos of people showing off exploits (without even describing them as exploits)? :v:[/QUOTE]
Even major exploits only become gamebreaking after they increase in popularity, and this increase is what will trigger the devs to be aware of, and prioritize the issue. But yea, I also fully expect them to follow sources dedicated to debuting 0-day exploits.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49619997]
People justified hacking this way and got VAC/EAC'd just the same as the hackers they were fighting against. It's not a winning argument in any context.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, but hacking and exploiting are really not the same thing..and the line where exploiting begins is extremely blurred in a game like Rust, at least at this stage.
Knowing that it is possible to cornerpick or to stack cupboards or that your house can have double walled honeycombing etc, or how to identify that it does, is something I truly expect good players to know and to use, just like hiding stuff under rotating stairs was a few months ago, or like raiding by rooframp last week. I also don't expect people to get banned for it, neither have I seen that happen. These snaptraps though..such a shame that the endless stream of reports would cause my demise on that server :P I'm all for 100% tollerance for exploits. They demonstrate the large scale impacts of those unintended features and that (c)/(sh)ould be very insightful to alpha development.
People get banned for rock bases (an exploit) all the fucking time. The point of reporting exploits to the devs is so that they get fixed. If you don't report them and just use them, you're being useless at best and griefing at worst, and there could be consequences eventually.
How is this even a question?
[url]https://playrust.com/tos/[/url]
[QUOTE]
[B]What you can’t do[/B]
Please don’t do any of these things unless we tell you in writing that you can:
Distribute, hack or modify Rust (any of it, client, server, art, code).
Use third party programs to gain an advantage in the game. (cheats)
[B]Do anything we or you might consider naughty or illegal[/B]
[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49620803]People get banned for rock bases (an exploit) all the fucking time. The point of reporting exploits to the devs is so that they get fixed. If you don't report them and just use them, you're being useless at best and griefing at worst, and there could be consequences eventually.[/QUOTE]
I'm not against reporting exploits, I'm all for it and once I find one myself, I totally will. Like I have reported several bugs in the past.
However, I won't post exploits that I find on those nexusses of eploit debuting because there is no doubt in my mind that devs know (and if u don't, dev, then .. :speechless:).
I am against not using them once they have been or can be assumed to have been reported.
There is an exeption of course, and thats the example you managed to find and that is totally, absolutely and maximally gamebreaking.
It is quite literally (one of?) the most extreme example(s) there is to find aside maybe from duping.
But would you feel the same about people that cornorpick?, use double walls?, stack cupboards?, use a hole in the cupboard defense to build a raiding tower?, put a ladder against a wall?, switch their flashlight or laser?
Where is that line.
Like I said, In a game like Rust at it's present state, the line where strategy ends, and exploiting begins gets really blurry.
The game is unfinished, so you are per definition using strategies that are not yet as intended and the feedback devs get aside from what gets reported, is how this impacts the gameplay.
Besides from that occasional totally gamebreaking God-mode exploit like rock bases, most exploits are harmless enough to not go on a banningspree for, like most of the examples I gave.
This snaptrap exploit is not totally gamebreaking either, but it will generate a lot of hack-reports.
It would have been awesome for as long as it lasts, to lure leet players in by creating some "defenseflaws" and then to loot them one by one untill the next group>:)
Sure, they would be sour and some would report, but mostly, people would adapt, as they have done with ladders and building rights, or with those rooframps and such.
I find this exploit harmless enough and it would make for some funny moments untill they get to fix it.
The possible problem for me and advantage for devs, is the amount of people that would be sour and complain,
even if I would be the type of person that would not report new found exploits, I would have definately triggered others to do so on mass.
Therefore I think that having a 99.99% tollerance to exploits, is the most productive way to go.
It would reveal them and their impact much faster then would otherwise be the case.
Especially the impact is something that could otherwise only be speculated about and to utilize this feedback seems to me like one of the main reasons pre-release even exists.
everyone has their own moral codes; i personally wouldn't and don't use exploits. but to answer if you can "exploit safely", the answer depends on the culture of the server. for example, rock bases are bannable on the official servers (and before anyone says otherwise, it just takes time), but other servers may feel it is just fair game. find out what the server you are on accepts, and abide by those rules.
This would fix roof raids.
This just points out that builders want to use traps (I sure do!) so lets have some legit ones! I know they're coming
[QUOTE=buttslap;49623774]In a game like Rust at it's present state, the line where strategy ends, and exploiting begins gets really blurry.[/QUOTE]
Let's unblur the lines. Your question was are you allowed to use exploits without getting banned.
The answer is no. Plain and simple. It is against their TOS.
[QUOTE=buttslap;49619769]... So my question is, would making a house like this get me banned on a Facepunch server?[/QUOTE]
Regardless of what you consider to be an exploit, or clever use of ingame tools/buildings, the answer to your question is yes, you would get banned. This particular video showcases how to make something [B]float and clip through a floor[/B]. That something should in no way ever be floating, nor should it ever be clipping through a floor.
[QUOTE=utilitron;49624791]Let's unblur the lines. Your question was are you allowed to use exploits without getting banned.
The answer is no. Plain and simple. It is against their TOS.[/QUOTE]
The point I'm trying to make is that it is just not that black and white.
Exploiting is the use of unplanned game mechanics
Alpha games have unfinished game mechanics resulting in largely unplanned consequences.
And aside from this blurred line, I think it's a bad thing to have a game where the skill progression goes from bad -> good -> better -> exploit and to demand self policing, It's like putting the capitalist in jail once he makes to much profit, he should have known.
And the final point I made was that massive 'abuse' results in better impact en priority feedback then would otherwise be the case, enlarging the value of a pre-release population and making Rust a better game.
[QUOTE=ubersoldier;49625379]Regardless of what you consider to be an exploit, or clever use of ingame tools/buildings, the answer to your question is yes, you would get banned. This particular video showcases how to make something [B]float and clip through a floor[/B]. That something should in no way ever be floating, nor should it ever be clipping through a floor.[/QUOTE]
Sounds reasonable, untill you stand still at the fact that just about everything clips through just about everything in Rust. Is the fact that my door opens through a chest or through stairs an exploit? By your criteria it should be obvious that it is, and in most games it would be, but not in Rust, not at this stage. But you make a good point, invisible floating traps might be a bridge to far :P
I used to use half blocks to make nice looking bases until it was basically announced that using them in any way was an exploit.
[QUOTE=buttslap;49625739]The point I'm trying to make is that it is just not that black and white.
Exploiting is the use of unplanned game mechanics
Alpha games have unfinished game mechanics resulting in largely unplanned consequences.[/QUOTE]
It is black and white. It is in the TOS.
[QUOTE=buttslap;49625739]And aside from this blurred line, I think it's a bad thing to have a game where the skill progression goes from bad -> good -> better -> exploit and to demand self policing, It's like putting the capitalist in jail once he makes to much profit, he should have known.[/QUOTE]
That analogy makes no sense. Unless the capitalist is exploiting a loophole in the law, it is not the same at all. If he is exploiting loopholes in a law, then there is a case to put the him in jail if it is deemed against the law.
It is the same for exploits in the game. if you realize there is an issue and you choose to exploit that issue, you may be banned for it.
[QUOTE=buttslap;49625739]And the final point I made was that massive 'abuse' results in better impact en priority feedback then would otherwise be the case, enlarging the value of a pre-release population and making Rust a better game.[/QUOTE]
That is something you have just pulled out of your ass and have no actual empirical evidence to support it.
Your assumption is that the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_squeaky_wheel_gets_the_grease"]squeaky wheel gets the grease[/URL]. However there are many legitimate reasons why an exploit may not be fixed regardless of massive abuse. Like if there is an issue with the Unity build and they need to wait for the next patch.
It is also a logical fallacy. Take the case of the snaptraps under the floor. If people don't know what the exploit is, no matter how many times they get killed by a snaptrap under the floor, they won't complain about the exploit.
There is also the issue of assuming most people report encounters with exploits. I think the vast majority of people don't report being victim to an exploit. If true, than massive abuse only hurts the game.
[QUOTE=utilitron;49626165]It is black and white. It is in the TOS.[/quote]
If that where the case, then most people would get banned because as joejoe sais, even the use of halfblocks could be considered to be an exploit. Every raider cornerpicks, used stairs and roofs. Every clan double walls and cupboard stacks and everyone did things that where not intended if at some point in time it gets changed.
[QUOTE=utilitron;49626165]
That analogy makes no sense. Unless the capitalist is exploiting a loophole in the law, it is not the same at all. If he is exploiting loopholes in a law, then there is a case to put the him in jail if it is deemed against the law.[/quote]
If there is a loophole, then there is a case to close that loophole and not to punish him for using it, because at the time he used it, it was totally legal.
[QUOTE=utilitron;49626165]
It is the same for exploits in the game. if you realize there is an issue and you choose to exploit that issue, you may be banned for it.[/quote]
I cornerpick, double stack cupboards, shoot arrows at wooden doors and hit boneclubs at metal plated doors.. can you seriously say that you don't use any of those? I use what I can, and when thats undesired, then devs can change it, thats pre-release.
[QUOTE=utilitron;49626165]
That is something you have just pulled out of your ass and have no actual empirical evidence to support it.[/quote]
Can't logic dictate?
Everyone cornerpicks and devs have picked up, because they found it undesirable. It's still possible, but a lot harder. Would they have picked up this issue when only a few did it and kept it hidden? What would be the consequence of that once it hits release?
Lots of people double wall as well, but it's totally defensive and aside from the basebuilder, only potential raiders would notice.. I predict that that possibility will thus remain for a while, noone would complain, noone would fall victim. Take a hack.. flyhacking.. damn.. did we hated that.. didn't that massive hate translate into a quick fix?
[QUOTE=utilitron;49626165]
Your assumption is that the [URL="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_squeaky_wheel_gets_the_grease"]squeaky wheel gets the grease[/URL]. However there are many legitimate reasons why an exploit may not be fixed regardless of massive abuse. Like if there is an issue with the Unity build and they need to wait for the next patch.[/quote] Nice saying, didn't know it, can be interpreted in at least two different ways though. 1: the whiny one gets attention, 2: The one that needs attention, gets attention.
And yes, I do assume the latter and in case of a snaptraphouse fear this first, and also, yes you are correct, there can be cases of force majeure, but only in extreme game breaking cases is there a need for this to be policed.
[QUOTE=utilitron;49626165]
It is also a logical fallacy. Take the case of the snaptraps under the floor. If people don't know what the exploit is, no matter how many times they get killed by a snaptrap under the floor, they won't complain about the exploit. [/quote]
I know, they will call "HACKS", which I find totally unfair.
[QUOTE=utilitron;49626165]
There is also the issue of assuming most people report encounters with exploits. I think the vast majority of people don't report being victim to an exploit. If true, than massive abuse only hurts the game.[/QUOTE]If most people don't report exploits, then those chances grow with every person that falls victim to them.
Just grow up and report exploits ffs. This really isn't difficult to understand.
[QUOTE=elixwhitetail;49626516]Just grow up and report exploits ffs. This really isn't difficult to understand.[/QUOTE]
Why are you assuming that I would not report exploits after I specifically told that I would.
Also, telling me to grow up while not being able to see the nuance yourself seems kind of contradictionary.
I realise that it is easy to see it differently then I do, "There are rules, follow the rules, how difficult can that be, ugh". I just think that thats a totally wrong and counterproductive reasoning.
The morevalue of prerelease to development is greatly enhanced when people are stimulated to find and use exploits in contrary to self policing their own effectiveness.
Once a dev creates a new feature, he will have to test if the possiblities are within the intended boundries, and to do this, he will have to "try exploits".
A pre-release population can stresstest his assumed watertightness if allowed and it makes no sense to me to not allow this, except for those absolute game breaking ones.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
