Jump to content

NQ: Could you please clearly clarify what is allowed and what is not?


Recommended Posts

Considering the recent event with Elias Villd and the discussion in discord, NQ could you please clarify where exploiting starts? Could you please reply in details on each of the issues listed below?

Could you please clearly clarify what is allowed from specified activity and what is not?

 

Thank you a lot!

 

 

All described issues below don't use any additional tools (like maneuver tool or any other tool) or constructs. All of them involve only player movement in atmo and/or space with only standard game physics involved.

 

 

1) Is it allowed for someone to jump on a ship (Dynamic Construct) while ship has no its pilot nearby? Is it considered exploit or not?

 

Let's assume pilot of the ship logged out while moving or not being docked to some static construct. This resulted in speed "stored" in the ship. So, when someone will jump on such ship he will restore (with curent game mechanics) the ship's speed instantly.

 

2) Is such action - restoring the ship's speed after jumping on the ship - allowed? Is it considered exploit or not?

 

Let's assume after restoring the speed ship is moving towards nearest planet. So, if someone will continue to stay on the ship the ship will eventually fall into the planet and explode.

 

3.1) Is such action - staying on the ship while it is falling on the planet - allowed? Is it considered exploit or not?

 

Let's assume after restoring the speed ship is moving in some random direction that finally ends in PvP zone. So, if someone will continue to stay on the ship the ship will eventually be moved BY ITSELF into PvP zone.

 

3.2) Is such action - staying on the ship while it is travelling without the pilot towards PvP zone - allowed? Is it considered exploit or not?

 

 

In all above issues ship is moving by itself, only general game physics is involved. Not a single tool/exploiting technic is used.

 

 

Could you please clarify about spying issues. No any exploit is involved, only standard game physics:

 

4) Is it allowed to jump to the ship and go to log off? So it will be possible to be a spy on the ship. Is having spy on the enemy ship allowed or not? Is it considered exploit or not?

 

4.1) If after log in into the game the spy finds itself on the ship in space and that ship is moving by itself into PvP zone without pilot - is it allowed to be on such ship? Is it allowed to wait in such case while the ship will reach PvP zone?

 

4.2) The same as above, but ship is falling on the planet. Is it allowed or not to continue to stay on the ship?

 

 

What about if spy will bring with him some additional weight in inventory that will pull down the flying ship or will not allow the ship to lift off?

 

 

 

5) Is it allowed to jump to the someone's ship with some weight in the inventory? Is it exploit or not?

 

5.1) The same as 5) but do log out after jumping on the ship. So, ship could have additional weight. Is this allowed or not? Is it considered exploit or not?

 

 

6) During normal fly in atmo: can pilot of one ship disturb the flight of another ship? I mean can one ship be controlled in such a way that it will end in collision with another ship? Is it considered exploit or not? I am speaking about flying in atmo/safe zone here.

 

 

7) There is some bug in game while parenting bigger dynamic core to the smaller one. The resulted couple could gain some free speed in some situations. Is it allowed to use this parenting issue for cheaper transportation of your own constructs?

 

7.1) If someone jumps on such couple of dynamic constructs in space (the case when such couple of constructs doesn't below to the jumper), and it will result in this couple moving towards PvP zone - is it allowed action or not? Can player continue to sit on the construction or should it jump out from it immediately? Is it considered exploit or not? 

 

 

Some normal PvP related issues:

 

 

While normal PvP session with guns and pew pew - if pilot of one ship will log out his ship will lose it's speed resulting in brake from 30k kmh (or any other value) to 0 kmh instantly. When pilot will log in, the ship will restore its speed - 5%. Is it allowed to use such mechanic to interfere PvP atacker pursuit of the target? Is it considered exploit or not?

 

8.1) Is it considered exploit or not to stop killed ship (the one which has gray marker) with maneuver tool even if the attacked ship has "stored" speed?

 

9) Finally, could you please clarify what is "Parenting Ships" from your article here: https://support.dualthegame.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016890940-Clarification-Regarding-Bug-Exploits-and-Griefing 

By parenting, is it considered parenting between constructs only OR between construct and player (Can player be parented to construct?) is also considered parenting? Is construct transferring to PvP zone with one of the methods described above considered "Parenting" and is also forbidden? Is it, finally, exploit or not?

 

Last issues I would like to clarify:

 

10) What is official position about burying other people dynamic constructs on unclaimed tiles?  Is it acceptable action or is it also exploit?

 

10.1) And if the tile is claimed by me, can I bury (cover with earth) alien ship? Is it acceptable action or exploit?

 

10.2) Let's assume I found some ship staying on unclaimed territory. If I will claim the territory and bury the ship immediately after claiming the tile - is it acceptable action or is it exploit?

 

I will be very thankful for clearly answers on all of these 1) - 9) issues, just to clarify the rules of the game and of what is allowed and what is not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 63
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This will allow for easy ban bait when I offer free taxi and log out 500m before the safe zone with passengers on board and they "transport" my ship by regular game mechanics outside of the safezone a

Considering the recent event with Elias Villd and the discussion in discord, NQ could you please clarify where exploiting starts? Could you please reply in details on each of the issues listed below?

IMO the bigger issue here is what sort of game do you want?  Do you want to have a game where people log on and have space adventures in a risky environment where  unexpected things happen, people do

Posted Images

"Parenting ships" is NQ speak for what he rest of the world calls docking.. Probably some verbatim FR > EN Google translate copy/paste that stuck around. There is a lot of those in and around the game.

 

But good luck getting a solid answer from NQ.. This issue has been around for a long time now and has never really been addressed.  No doubt though, the answer will be "we plan to make sweeping changes to the parenting mechanic in the next phase of 0.24" or something like that. NQ doe snot really discuss anything unless they can bake it into a cookie cutter devblog.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unless the situation affects NQ directly, due to, (say, off the top of my head) incompetent RDMS settings getting used against them without exploiting any bugs whatseover,  just after shouting that they would absolutely NOT assist players who fucked up their own RDMS settings, then I wouldn't hold my breath for an NQ response of any consequence.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ya, I haven't seen a single person get punitive action besides the market 15 guys. Possible it happened in alpha since I only caught the tail end of alpha. Maybe some players had some duped items removed early beta if I remember correctly. I don't think there's manpower available to hunt people down. Add to that the fine line on most of this stuff. It would only be fair to have a list of exploits available before they start taking action and we don't even get complete patch notes that list all changes.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sawafa said:

9) Finally, could you please clarify what is "Parenting Ships" from your article here: https://support.dualthegame.com/hc/en-us/articles/360016890940-Clarification-Regarding-Bug-Exploits-and-Griefing 

By parenting, is it considered parenting between constructs only OR between construct and player (Can player be parented to construct?) is also considered parenting? Is construct transferring to PvP zone with one of the methods described above considered "Parenting" and is also forbidden? Is it, finally, exploit or not?

Based on your last statement, you seem to not know how the game works. Parenting is both between constructs and between a construct and a player. Have you noticed how you also move along with the ship when the ship begins to move, and when you go too far out, you no longer move with the ship? That's because you're parented to the construct. Just like how a construct is parented to another construct. The world parenting probably comes from the fact that any object attached to another is described as a "child" and "parent" object, respectively.

On your other points, common sense says that, if it is in the safe zone to begin with, it should be considered untouchable. If you do anything to make it no longer safe, or steal it, then it's exploiting a mechanic unfairly. If that mechanic is bugged, or working as intended, using it to get a ship outside the safe zone or crash, without the permissions to fly it, is a no-no.
But if it is in PVP space to begin with, you can do whatever you want.

Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Sawafa said:

 Parenting is both between constructs and between a construct and a player

 

I want to hear this from official NQ representative, not from any other player.

But that's how it works. You don't need someone from NQ to say that. And you have like a 0.01% chance they will say anything on that.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, EasternGamer said:

But that's how it works. You don't need someone from NQ to say that. And you have like a 0.01% chance they will say anything on that.

In my opinion - no. By parenting always was meant parenting between two constructs, not a construct vs player. You had enough arguments on this side in discord conversation, RDMS rights. I am also sure, more than 50% of players think the same - parenting is the issue involving constructs only, not players.

 

You see, you and me (and other players too!) have different understanding what parenting is. And both of us are 100% sure that his opinion is correct one. Who will be the оudge? That is why we need exact clarifications from NQ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

common sense says that, if it is in the safe zone to begin with, it should be considered untouchable.

 

My (and others) common sense says, that NQ wants to implement somekind of realistic physics which doesn't allow constructs to stop in space when pilot exits the game. In that case the construct should continue to float/move where it was moving. If NQ would had enough server power the movement of such constructions would be calculated serverside and all constructions left in such state in space would be in moving state forever or while they hit some obstacle or will be hit by some player in PvP zone, as they would eventually ended there. I see this is the main intention - let the ordinary classical dynamics work as it is expected. In this case your statement is meaningless. So, I do not see what is bad to help game physics do it's work by NOT USING any exploit.

 

The other case - steal constructs by using some bugs like some manipulation with maneuver tool. This is completely different thing, and I am against it and never used it!

 

You see, your common sense and my common sense are different. And these are not only between me and you. Many other people from both sides are involved. So, NQ, please make a decision to stop all these talks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Last issues I would like to clarify:

 

What is official position about burying other people dynamic constructs on unclaimed tiles?  Is it acceptable action or is it also exploit?

 

And if the tile is claimed by me, can I bury (cover with earth) alien ship? Is it acceptable action or exploit?

 

Let's assume I found some ship staying on unclaimed territory. If I will claim the territory and bury the ship immediately after claiming the tile - is it acceptable action or is it exploit?

 

I will add all these questions to the initial message.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your question is only necessary if you want to be in the limit of the rules. 

 

For most of us its simple:

 

If you are being "hostile" to a player on a pvp-free zone, you are breaking the rules. 

 

Trasporting any player or construct without that player/owner permission, is being hostile. 

 

If you have a issue with some ship on your plot, you can parent it and move it outside of the plot. That is OK. But moving it to a PVP zone is 100% hostile. 

 

 

Also, its not easy to make a comprehensive set of rules specifying all cases..... 

Laws say "killing is a crime" but according to your request, they should say "killing with a knife, on a swimming pool is a crime". 

 

It is fairly simple to understand what is a bug and a exploit. In doubt, dont use it.... 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

From the rules:

Parenting Ships - Dragged to PVP Space: This is a hot topic and one we wish to be very clear on. Intentionally parenting any construct without permission of the owner is not intended for game play.

 

Why does NQ speak about specific issue - parenting -, and not general intentional moving/transferring the other player's construction to the pvp zone without braking the game physics lows or using some other bug(s)?

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

Laws say "killing is a crime" but according to your request, they should say "killing with a knife, on a swimming pool is a crime". 

No, not a right statement. I will be happy with the rule something like "killing ships left in safe zone is crime/exploit including any possible way even allowed by normal game mechanics/physics" but they say only about parenting. Also, this rule doesn't cover other cases, like burying constructs/crashing ships on the planet... This also could be included in more general easy rule. But this should be clearly stated by NQ, while for now there is no such statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Sawafa said:

From the rules:

Parenting Ships - Dragged to PVP Space: This is a hot topic and one we wish to be very clear on. Intentionally parenting any construct without permission of the owner is not intended for game play.

 

Why does NQ speak about specific issue - parenting -, and not general intentional moving/transferring the other player's construction to the pvp zone without braking the game physics lows?

image.png.1c7be1c515f766a3f2d85d2c6c32dc98.png
I don't think anything more needs to be said when Deckard clearly says "transporting of third party ships out of safe zones for the purposes of pvp and claiming them is not allowed."

This is someone from NQ stating on/off the record that what was done is essentially not okay. It doesn't matter the method of transport, be it gravity, the ship's original velocity.
If you say it's too broad and not official enough, no one can help you there.

Also, you're defending this, why? Is it because your source of income is this and you're afraid now that the technicalities of the rules may no longer hold true? I would urge you to just stop.

However, I'm 100% with you that NQ should handle the motion of an object server-side once no one's on it, until it just gets really far away. It's not computationally excessive. You don't need to render an entire construct, just a point in space with x,y,z coordinates and a velocity vector. Hell, even slow down the simulation time, it wouldn't matter until you actually saw the construct anyway. Things like orbiting ships can be a thing. I'd estimate they could even locally run it on maybe ten modern desktops, if they had to. They're just points in space that need to be simulated. And, to reduce load, just simulate ships which move more than one block a second. That should eliminate static ships.

Edit: The only downside might be dev time, depending on how messy or complicated they made simulated motion be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, EasternGamer said:

image.png.1c7be1c515f766a3f2d85d2c6c32dc98.png
I don't think anything more needs to be said when Deckard clearly says "transporting of third party ships out of safe zones for the purposes of pvp and claiming them is not allowed."

I agree what Deckard says is good enough. But this is written in Discord, not in official rules. Just update the official rules, and than it will be OK. More over, this was said AFTER the action was done.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, you're defending this, why? 

 

No, piracy in any of it's kind is not the source of my income. Even not close to 1% of it :)

 

The only my reason is having strong definitely rules, that doesn't allow different interpretation by other players like what is "parenting constructs". I like to do some piracy-like things, I like to benefit normal game mechanics in doing more piracy/salvaging. But if it is officially forbidden by rules - I will not do it. If it is not - than I will not understand if NQ will take any action against the one, who did something that is not forbidden. That is why rules should be clearly enough.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, EasternGamer said:

image.png.1c7be1c515f766a3f2d85d2c6c32dc98.png
I don't think anything more needs to be said when Deckard clearly says "transporting of third party ships out of safe zones for the purposes of pvp and claiming them is not allowed."

There is no such rule in the linked article about exploits clarification. The only rule there is not to get other constructs "parented" to yours. There is nothing about "transporting". Therefore I find it hard to understand what Deckard is talking about.

 

WTF is "transporting" ? If you fly to PVP and I follow you do I transport you ?

If you are flying to pvp space and I my avatar is aboard your ship, do I transport you ? Do you transport me ? Should you stop flying and adjust your course because you can transport me to PVP space ?

 

Writing rules and using loose language is worse than not writing them at all. Sawafa gives a clear examples of what can be done and asks if those are allowed or not.

 

Their rules say:

Don't try to make a ship docked to yours so you can drag it to PVP space and shoot it.

Ok I get it.

 

They said use common sense for other things, my common sense says:

if a ship, without any external influence and for whatever reason flies to PVP space on it's own - I can shoot at it and claim it.

 

This game is SANDBOX with EMERGENT GAMEPLAY. Finding ways to make it EMERGENT is what all this game is about. If the only PVP that NQ allows is that "Event" type consensual PVP, NQ please state it so I know to unsub.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Deckard somewhat not said full truth in this statement, also. Because Elias issue was obviously super prioritized, up to involving not only GM, but actual developers.


Not something "per usual" ticket can expect in several hours from support that always "overhelmed".

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/3/2021 at 1:07 AM, blazemonger said:

"Parenting ships" is NQ speak for what he rest of the world calls docking.

If I understand correctly, docking and parenting are the same process looked from two different perspectives.

If you fly your ship to station, you "dock" your ship to a station.
If someone else's station flies towards your ship and your ship magically attaches to station (without you wanting to dock there), that means station "parented" your ship.

I know station can't move, you can change "station" to a bigger dynamic core, logic won't change.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference between docking and parenting is that a player can also be parented to a construct.

 

It just means one thing is on the other thing.

 

For example, a player might spend hours wandering the safe zone jumping on every ship they can find, hoping to find one left in a state where, if another player is parented to it, it resumes moving.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Sawafa said:

Also, this rule doesn't cover other cases, like burying constructs/crashing ships on the planet

The Parenting topic was created as an unnecessary explanation of a rule that long existed.

 

There was a rule, long before beta started, saying that because the game did not offer mechanisms for players to defend themselves from other players abuses in the PVP free zone, all actions against another player or its constructs in the PVP free zone were considered against the rules and bannable.

Based on this, NQ should have started to distribute bans when the parenting issue started. Instead, they went with a "warning" and created that topic.

 

Now, ppl are asking for another topic to explain something really simple to understand.

 

"Any action against another player or its constructs in a PVP-free zone is against the rules".

Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO the bigger issue here is what sort of game do you want?  Do you want to have a game where people log on and have space adventures in a risky environment where  unexpected things happen, people do good and bad things, create interesting stories which you can tell people about, people lie, scam, steal, you need to be careful and earning trust really actually means something real.  Or do you want a game where everything is guaranteed.  Your stuff is 100% safe if someone says its safe, nobody can ever scam you, everything takes place in walled gardens you control and if someone pushes the boundaries of the game mechanics a bunch of space-lawyers pop up with 10-point questionnaires (with sub-points!) trying to work out exactly where the walls should be and anyone who gets creative runs the risk of getting banned.

 

I'm not involved with either side here, but personally when I read stories like the Elias VIlld one I think that sort of thing is fantastic and I want to play in the sort of world where stuff like that can happen.  But then again I thought it was a fantastic story when that person stole a whole market but the GMs don't seem to have agreed ...

Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, joaocordeiro said:

"Any action against another player or its constructs in a PVP-free zone is against the rules".

Okay, NQ released 1.23 patch to block the ability for someone to stop their ship via going log off.
Let's assume I am flying towards pvp zone at 30k and I see someone at radar, probably pirates. I will log off while still in safe zone to stop my ship there.
If pirates then step on my ship so it will restore it's speed and will fly out to pvp zone, will this be an exploit? And if it will, who's exploit it will be, mine for stopping my ship via log out, or pirates for dragging my ship to pvp zone?

IMHO this is not an exploit from either side, It's a game INTENDED mechanics.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...