randomactsofgaming

Player: Some jerk stole my ship by using an exploit!
NQ: qq more pleb. This is part of the game.
Also NQ: Some jerk stole our market by using an exploit!
(PERMA BAN)

The devs are continually under estimating players, this time they did not even expect them to hit 'B' .

The other people exploited something, not simply walked up and pressed B on their keyboard. The OP tried to report it, albeit through the wrong channels, an attempt was made.  My point was the fact the other guy reported it quite a while back and nothing has been done about it. Yet this is met with a permaban in less than 24 hours. The market deconstruction at best should have been met with a temp ban honestly. It was NQ's screwup and they didn't verify things before they called the job completed. If anything, it exposed another issue of market orders being tied to constructs apparently.
 
Just to be clear, I mostly agree with you that exploits that are taken advantage of need to be addressed with a ban hammer. But going from no previous consequences to a perma-ban over something that NQ screwed up is too extreme. Given the laziness of NQ to not anticipate as well as fully test something before executing is bad practice and shows a grim outlook on this game when the players are the ones that get the short end of the stick.

This is the worst case scenario. Where the official response to an issue that has been plaguing the general community for the longest time is "It's not our problem" until the devs get hit by it.

Can you see what kind of precedence you are placing by putting yourselves ABOVE the players this way? SPECIALLY since there was NOTHING in the rules stating that this would be a violation.

Simply assuming that people will work by your own definition of "common sense" is folly. Specially when your view excludes the "common sense" of other people in the first place.

My own interpretation of "common sense" here, is that if you allow one person to exploit the system in unintended ways against another player, you should expect this kind of behavior to apply to EVERYONE. you included. If you fail to protect yourselves properly against this, then it falls strictly to YOU for failing to do so. If you do not like this, then you need to apply and enforce stricter rules protecting EVERYONE from these unlawful exploits.

Heed my warning: If you are going to play favorites, this project will end in bankrupcy.

The proper way to handle this, would be a slap on the wrist of the people responsible, and working on fixing the issue for everyone.

I would advise NQ  take the time to get to know and understand the system and be cautious when making a construct or element usable by unknown players.
 
That way when their stuff gets jacked they don't need to whine on the forums about it.

So basically - what you're saying if players screw up RDMS, it's on them, if NQ screws up RDMS, it's a violation of the EULA?
 
Really guys? It's pretty clear when players are able to get access to other peoples constructs that they were 'not intended' to have access by the owner. Yet when it's players, that's fine.
 
But when YOU screw up - you ban the players?
 
Absurd.

So steal a ship using exploits - no problem. Steal a base using exploits - no problem. Take everything using RDMS? No problem - unless ts market. Not like.
 

If that was the result on the back end then NQ has _far_ bigger problems than this. That is just plain bad coding. We already learned form this that the market system is not actually physical in game and entirely "in the cloud". If cutting the link by removing the terminals means you destroy the data then that is just .. bad on their side and o, saying they'd not expect this to happen is not an excuse.
 

So its fine for players endure this happening to their bases but the ban hammer drops when it means extra work for the devs?  As far as I can tell the players robbing bases only did it to fill their pockets and didn't report anything.  

Can we get a dislike button?