gunnersmate31 wrote:
"Exploited" routers are acceptable as long as they are placed in/near VS Gens. A Planetside "feature", much like the Lasher's noobiness.
"Exploited" routers are acceptable as long as they are placed in/near VS Gens.
A Planetside "feature", much like the Lasher's noobiness.
agreed... first chance i get i kill a gen if it's a VS base. as long as the VS still has the Lasher, my main target is the gen
ceryne wrote:
MightyMouser wrote:No one is saying that an indestructible pad is not an exploit. In fact everyone seems to be in perfect agreement on that point. We are instead talking about pads which are deployed in-between boxes which are easily destroyed. The reason RL analogies are being brought into the discussion is to further derive the intent of the developers regarding where a pad should be able to be placed. Since you apparently do not understand the very point of the discussion, I think you could certainly do with a little less condescension...Where in this post does it say inbetween boxes?JollyTraveller-"To put your router pad inside a group of boxes? Cause I'm getting pretty sick of cheap cloakers using this trick.It is much harder to locate and kill this way and is quite frankly skilless in terms of cloaking.I'd like to add that it's nearly always the TR I see pulling this stunt."After reading back through, I see your point. I assumed by reading this original post, he meant when a router pad is placed(as he said) INSIDE a box, where its indestructable!I guess I would have to see Jolly clarify what he mean. Did he mean, inbetween boxes where you just might not notice them, but be able to kill them. Or is he talking about inside a box where you can see them and not kill them.
MightyMouser wrote:
No one is saying that an indestructible pad is not an exploit. In fact everyone seems to be in perfect agreement on that point. We are instead talking about pads which are deployed in-between boxes which are easily destroyed. The reason RL analogies are being brought into the discussion is to further derive the intent of the developers regarding where a pad should be able to be placed. Since you apparently do not understand the very point of the discussion, I think you could certainly do with a little less condescension...
No one is saying that an indestructible pad is not an exploit. In fact everyone seems to be in perfect agreement on that point. We are instead talking about pads which are deployed in-between boxes which are easily destroyed.
The reason RL analogies are being brought into the discussion is to further derive the intent of the developers regarding where a pad should be able to be placed.
Since you apparently do not understand the very point of the discussion, I think you could certainly do with a little less condescension...
Where in this post does it say inbetween boxes?JollyTraveller-"To put your router pad inside a group of boxes? Cause I'm getting pretty sick of cheap cloakers using this trick.It is much harder to locate and kill this way and is quite frankly skilless in terms of cloaking.I'd like to add that it's nearly always the TR I see pulling this stunt."After reading back through, I see your point. I assumed by reading this original post, he meant when a router pad is placed(as he said) INSIDE a box, where its indestructable!I guess I would have to see Jolly clarify what he mean. Did he mean, inbetween boxes where you just might not notice them, but be able to kill them. Or is he talking about inside a box where you can see them and not kill them.
Where in this post does it say inbetween boxes?
JollyTraveller-
"To put your router pad inside a group of boxes? Cause I'm getting pretty sick of cheap cloakers using this trick.
It is much harder to locate and kill this way and is quite frankly skilless in terms of cloaking.
I'd like to add that it's nearly always the TR I see pulling this stunt."
After reading back through, I see your point.
I assumed by reading this original post, he meant when a router pad is placed(as he said) INSIDE a box, where its indestructable!
I guess I would have to see Jolly clarify what he mean. Did he mean, inbetween boxes where you just might not notice them, but be able to kill them. Or is he talking about inside a box where you can see them and not kill them.
I was just clarifying for the rest of the people in the thread that we are NOT talking about the "between the boxes" trick. That was the entire point of me spending time taking those screenshots. Anyone can see that's not an exploit. But, as I'm sure we all know, when we talk about things on a forum, something is lost in the translation. I was just clearing the smoke so we were all on the same page.
Router pads placed in boxes, that are indestructable, are an exploit.
A Planetside "feature",just like a burster camping a pad.
Yeah its an exploit and wow I wouldnt even be comparing this exploit to changing the camera when bailing from a vehicle. As this stupid exploit actually ruins and ends fights. If you catch someone using this exploit you should comall the name and report them and mass tk. Its just as bad as hacking. I've seen more than a few fights get ruined because the telepad wasn't destroyable.
0noyjitat0 wrote:
This shouldnt happen at all because there is a small (Very small addmitedly) chance something like this could be done accidently unlike hacking.
So the person should be /appealed and the router killed and then further action be left at the moderators discretion as obviously if this ISNT the first time this person has done it then maybee stronger action should be taken but thats not down to use to decide.
Hacking is a totally differnt issue really as you dont "accidently" download and activate a hack and while the intentions and outcome may actually be little differnt to the router exploit its not so clear cut or black and white as someone blatently hacking is, as then they have no rights and are fair game for whatever people dish up to them (Or at least in my view they are).
One of the things which seperates humans from animals is the fact they can excercise a high degree of "self control" so a thought or impulsemay pop into a persons head but can be dismissed as inapropriate and not acted upon so its no argument to say "Untill this is coded out its ok" because it isnt and the people doin it know that.
robo wrote:
This is a picture of the router pad deployed between, but not "in" the boxes. Look how obvious it is.Is this router telepad placement an "exploit"? I dont think so, personally.
This is a picture of the router pad deployed between, but not "in" the boxes. Look how obvious it is.
Is this router telepad placement an "exploit"? I dont think so, personally.
Can you go through it?
If not, then the answer is yes, it's an exploit, because routers are meant to be 2-way.
Espion wrote:
Tatranka wrote:Ale wrote:Technically the router pad isn't made of metal. It has energy or radiation or just a light beam, whatever you want to call it. And therefore, putting it in such places would be viable in real life. If it was made of metal then yeah, it shouldn't be able to go through a solid object (like the guns can go through walls). So like Robo said, when you put it IN boxes then yes thats a exploit because it isn't physically possible. However, if you put in inbetween where the metal part of the top isn't in boxes then i honestly don't see the problem because it can be killed. My view on it anyways.-Lynxit's a solid object, so no, in real world you can't put solid objects into other solid objects unless they have an opening...Did you actually read his post?
Tatranka wrote:
Ale wrote:Technically the router pad isn't made of metal. It has energy or radiation or just a light beam, whatever you want to call it. And therefore, putting it in such places would be viable in real life. If it was made of metal then yeah, it shouldn't be able to go through a solid object (like the guns can go through walls). So like Robo said, when you put it IN boxes then yes thats a exploit because it isn't physically possible. However, if you put in inbetween where the metal part of the top isn't in boxes then i honestly don't see the problem because it can be killed. My view on it anyways.-Lynxit's a solid object, so no, in real world you can't put solid objects into other solid objects unless they have an opening...
Ale wrote:
Technically the router pad isn't made of metal. It has energy or radiation or just a light beam, whatever you want to call it. And therefore, putting it in such places would be viable in real life. If it was made of metal then yeah, it shouldn't be able to go through a solid object (like the guns can go through walls). So like Robo said, when you put it IN boxes then yes thats a exploit because it isn't physically possible. However, if you put in inbetween where the metal part of the top isn't in boxes then i honestly don't see the problem because it can be killed. My view on it anyways.-Lynx
Technically the router pad isn't made of metal. It has energy or radiation or just a light beam, whatever you want to call it. And therefore, putting it in such places would be viable in real life. If it was made of metal then yeah, it shouldn't be able to go through a solid object (like the guns can go through walls). So like Robo said, when you put it IN boxes then yes thats a exploit because it isn't physically possible. However, if you put in inbetween where the metal part of the top isn't in boxes then i honestly don't see the problem because it can be killed. My view on it anyways.
-Lynx
it's a solid object, so no, in real world you can't put solid objects into other solid objects unless they have an opening...
Did you actually read his post?
Yes I did read it.
now robo made this easier for me... Look at the SS I quoted above. 3 of the 5 solid parts of the routerpad are inside the boxes.
Need I say more?
robo wrote: This is a picture of the router pad deployed between, but not "in" the boxes. Look how obvious it is.Is this router telepad placement an "exploit"? I dont think so, personally.Can you go through it?If not, then the answer is yes, it's an exploit, because routers are meant to be 2-way.
I dont think thats an exploit as such because the pad can easily be killed.
If the pad cannot be killed then its an exploit and if it can then it isnt.
This router pad just seems quite well hidden and nothing more really.
SabreTooth wrote:
I dont think thats an exploit as such because the pad can easily be killed.If the pad cannot be killed then its an exploit and if it can then it isnt. This router pad just seems quite well hidden and nothing more really.
what part of "routers are meant to be 2-way" didn't you understand?
No its not an exploit. I dont see anything wrong with being creative.
bzak wrote:
Then what IS?
This argument seems pretty void to me. Even if it is termed an exploit, it's not as if Sony would do anything about it
Darth_Wraak wrote:
The same can be said about 100% of any other posts in the last 3 months.
And 95% of anything in the years before.
So what.
Rook wrote:
bzak wrote:No its not an exploit. I dont see anything wrong with being creative.Then what IS?
exactly!
0noyjitat0 wrote:Yeah its an exploit and wow I wouldnt even be comparing this exploit to changing the camera when bailing from a vehicle. As this stupid exploit actually ruins and ends fights. If you catch someone using this exploit you should comall the name and report them and mass tk. Its just as bad as hacking. I've seen more than a few fights get ruined because the telepad wasn't destroyable.This shouldnt happen at all because there is a small (Very small addmitedly) chance something like this could be done accidently unlike hacking.So the person should be /appealed and the router killed and then further action be left at the moderators discretion as obviously if this ISNT the first time this person has done it then maybee stronger action should be taken but thats not down to use to decide.Hacking is a totally differnt issue really as you dont "accidently" download and activate a hack and while the intentions and outcome may actually be little differnt to the router exploit its not so clear cut or black and white as someone blatently hacking is, as then they have no rights and are fair game for whatever people dish up to them (Or at least in my view they are).One of the things which seperates humans from animals is the fact they can excercise a high degree of "self control" so a thought or impulsemay pop into a persons head but can be dismissed as inapropriate and not acted upon so its no argument to say "Untill this is coded out its ok" because it isnt and the people doin it know that.
@Onoy: Both are exploiting the games' code. No one has any action taken against their account for the 3rd person bypass during bailing. Therefore, since this, and PLENTY OF OTHER EXPLOITS are in constant use in the game, no punitive action should be taken against players doing them.
@Sabre & Onoy: Self control only takes it just so far. If you don't want ANYONE doing it, CODE it out. Stop arguing the same incorrect point over and over. As this is the ONLY way you will stop it from continuing. TKing placements you don't like are only short-term solutions.
Kudos to Robo for taking time to screenshot that pad placement. However, it seems that some are saying that THAT placement wasn't an exploit. I believe it still is. Just not as heinous as placing them in indestructable locations. I do think it shows the odd and creative place(s) you can put them. And, as with many of the plethora of other exploits still in the game, Robos' example is ACCEPTABLE to me as a valid placement.
Next, I'll ask - some players have gotten creative and either killed all but one spawn location (tower/base) and placed a pad in the remaining tube OR the only spawn location in a cave mod/redoubt. This leads to a bushwhack location or tosses you into the lava. On the one hand, sure the pad can be killed but, you can't do it as you spawn in since you get teleported out immediately.
So, my question here is ... exploit? Or novel use of the Router?
