Jump to content

joaocordeiro

Alpha Tester
  • Content Count

    868
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by joaocordeiro

  1. But why are you trying to create a set reset switch when we already have counters?
  2. I am assuming you want a xor gate to make a double switch door or something similar. Use a 2counter and replace switches with buttons. Use the impulses of buttons to change the counter status. Use or gates to aggregate buttons. Button->or->2C->door Button-> For a delayed door button->relay->delay->or->2C->door ->--------->
  3. If you reduce the self-awareness of players to goats, you are not expected to retaliate when they get slaughtered. Either we have the good sense to understand what is and is not acceptable as beta testers or we are treated and punished like children.
  4. Im assuming everyone is legally accepting the service terms. Meaning they have to be over aged.
  5. We are all adults here. NQ is not our mother and does not have to hide every "knife" away from us like we are 3 years old. I strongly belive that NQ only banned ppl that really abused the exploit. And probably even with previous record of exploits. Let thia be a warning so no one says "i did not think i would be banned" next time.
  6. We all have to take a step back. Many argue that NQ is taking allot of time to fix bugs and reply to tickets(this is a near fact IMO) But how does that justify the actions on the banned players? How does exploiting every bug they saw, creating database holes all over the place, help the developers have more time to fix stuff? Im all into experimenting and reporting bugs, thats our function as beta testers. But do it once and report it. Dont do it 1000 times...
  7. We dont know the full context. In how many previous explois have those same players participated? Have all of them been banned? If not, what was the criteria? All we have seen was NQ saying they have seen 100% intention againt rules and reacted, and some ppl saying "poor me, im banned" But does that count as context?
  8. They are not "just banning ppl for it" They banned ppl and programmers are looking for away to fix it.
  9. Here are my 2 cents: We can all find excuses and exceptions to try to justify this, but at the end, the abusers knew they were destroying an important admin construct. They knew. We have seen ppl testing the limits of NQ for months now. We have seen NQ giving a final warning to those ppl testing the limits. Should it be a perma ban? Maybe not. But someone had to be the example for players to understand that this is beta. Bugs and exploits are still common and beta testers need to know the boundaries of what they can and should be doing. Want to be on the safe side? Dont overexploit a bug.... Capture a recording of a small use of the exploit, upload it to YouTube, set it as "not listed" and open a support ticket with it.
  10. Its not up to us to convince you to play the game. If you cant find a reason on your own, dont play.
  11. Quite sad that after the report 3 weeks ago about the org that lost several ships, materials and industry to a spy, some big org leaders still haven't put into their heads that they need to restrict access. Trust is gained with actions, not with time or friendly talk. The robbers: pure pirates. But 100% legal. And its not griefing as they are not continually after the same target our using any exploit. But should face some ingame social consequences. The victims:, 99% responsible for what happened. Specially the leader of the org. Blame him has he failed to act and prevent this. A org capable of so many KL is not made out of noobs. So lack of information is not to blame. NQ: 1% responsible. As the RDMS is still kind of hard to undertand and lacks a lot of functionality.
  12. The "Stealing" word includes many forms of action. I know you guys want to try to blur this by creating huge bundles of subjective actions.. But this is a specific case of griefing that is not subjective at all. The actions of this griefers caused major grief to a very large number of players, while exploiting a game feature not intended to that end. Its the definition of griefing on every website, including wikipedia.
  13. Nothing odd about it. It does not matter if its a exploit, a bug, a legal gameplay. It was 100% griefing. And it was not some accidental griefing. Ppl were actively going out of their way to grief others. That should be punished.
  14. Yes. But not forcibly at same time or with the same punishment. Case by case. And now it's time to judge this case and not others.
  15. If only there was a "exploit" in the past to serve as an example on how NQ can punish ppl retroactively................
  16. This is 100% BS. Here and in real life. Justice is applied against a crime, one case at each time. And you definitely do not need to be 100% just to apply justice at one case. Sure we want all exploiters to have some sort of consequence for exploiting. But punishing one exploit has nothing to do with another exploit. It only has to do with the consequences his exploiting caused to others. One case at each time we must evaluate and apply justice.
  17. Can you link this? Also, what is your opinion of JC saying the opposite in the linked video?
  18. Damn, just figured that out. I can just open a incognito tab on the browser and vote again................. They do track the email of registered ppl. so it is possible to filter out actual players. But knowing NQ as i do, they probably never thought about it yet. But i would say that having a proper tool for feedback is much better then just watching discord fights on general. PS: The tool also needs a "DownVote" button
  19. Who are you and what have you done to Mordgier???
  20. So he clearly says: If you want to have 2 accounts connected in 2 computers, its perfectly fine. As long as you don't automate stuff.
  21. FFS.... its a 1h and 32m video... You have any idea if its near the start or the end? And can we agree that this is not the way to clear official doubts? If some official forum statement is confusing, fix it. Don't go clear it out in the middle of a 1:32 video.....
  22. 1st we need to understand the rules.
  23. all points on that list are about the functionality of the anti-cheat. Modifying the game files is forbidden, (except for the "Game/data/lua" folder (this is the only location where you can add or modify files). Modifying the game cache is forbidden (by default it is located in the directory C:\Users\<user>\AppData\Local\NQ\DualUniverse\) ; Reading or modifying the game memory is forbidden. Disabling, modifying, or attempting to evade the anti-cheat in any way is forbidden. Playing at the same time with two or more accounts is forbidden (having several accounts is fine as long as you only play with only one at a time). Its all about the anti-cheat every single point. It also makes no sense to allow for multiple accounts but then do not allow them to be played at the same time. And its also impossible to detect and enforce this rule with that interpertation. To me, the wording used needs a official rectification. To clearly include "(even in separate computers)" Or "(having several accounts is fine as long as you only play with only one at a time on the same computer)"
  24. again, that was on the context of presenting a anti-cheat program........
×
×
  • Create New...