Jump to content
Game-Labs Forum
Callaghan92

Russians exploit Hostility Missions...at day 6 from wipe

Recommended Posts

Russians are Using pirate Hostility missions to grind up hostility for Santiago De Cuba. this is a clear exploit and use of a loophole to break and get around the Frontline system. 

 

This needs fixed ASAP, and the hostility/port battle on Santiago De Cuba needs cancelled or reverted.

 

P.s im not a Brit player

Edited by Callaghan92
  • Like 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

as you can see, Russian are doing Hostility at Santiago de Cuba using a Pirate Hostility Mission instead a Russian Mission, so they can exploit all frontlines mechanic.

they ask a pirate to take a hostility mission then they join to raise hostility for Russian not Pirates  - pirates are WTF

 

Reverse streaming, BF with pirate flag  and Global Hostility Levels  - BF 43.1% for Santiago the Cuba.

 

day 6 from wipe...already exploit

 

image.thumb.png.1470f00ca584238c71c693ba4f9bf627.png

Santiago Hostility.png

  • Like 11

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd rather see that as a complete failure of Frontlines limitations, not the "exploit".

Wouldn't call that an exploit, because they actually are using a valid mechanics that we all know.
Especially that "alts are completely fine" and all this "espionage" justification of alts beeing a thing in NA.

 

The Frontline limitations are so artificial, and so illogical, that they should be lifted.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, OjK said:

I'd rather see that as a complete failure of Frontlines limitations, not the "exploit".

Wouldn't call that an exploit, because they actually are using a valid mechanics that we all know.
Especially that "alts are completely fine" and all this "espionage" justification of alts beeing a thing in NA.

 

The Frontline limitations are so artificial, and so illogical, that they should be lifted.

Adding a feature of "frontline", based on the fact than an invading fleet (so cargo ships overcrowded with soldiers) could be fine.

But this BS trick of making a friendly getting the hostility and then fighting it and have set the PB of the joiners is simply an exploit. As many others.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Licinio Chiavari said:

But this BS trick of making a friendly getting the hostility and then fighting it and have set the PB of the joiners is simply an exploit. As many others.

Will we consider that a trick?
Hostility was always damaged based and clan based.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nobody from our clan (RUBLI) didn't ask  Zz1M to join this battle or left from it, so you should aks him, why he did it

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Socialism said:

Back when SORRY was caught exploiting (not really though) and streamed it live, most of the clan was down ranked and punished in public.  Will the same happen to the streaming golden boy?  Seems knowingly gaming the system is worse than showing up with no cannons.  

Sorry did exploit - they arranged a battle where the opponent had no guns onboard - i.e. farming. Only sad thing about that battle was the fact that not all players were permabanned from the game.

 

As for the WTF taking a hostility mission for the russians - it's a work in progress, but we all know that it's not the intended function of frontlines so it should basically be a cancelled PB untill a fix can be implemented.

  • Like 6

Share this post


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

Will we consider that a trick?
Hostility was always damaged based and clan based.

But with frontlines it is far more relevant... making them skippable with any alt around.

Arent secondary towns uncapturable without owning capitol? use the Alt in Capitol owner nation. Problem solved.

 

With this system, that surely needs a lot of refining, is plainly an exploit.

  • Like 3

Share this post


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

Will we consider that a trick?
Hostility was always damaged based and clan based.

And nation based?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
57 minutes ago, Gamover said:

Nobody from our clan (RUBLI) didn't ask  Zz1M to join this battle or left from it, so you should aks him, why he did it

Thank You for the information, however I believe that now it's up to tribunal to ask that question to that player. This happens way too often to be just a "missclick".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

using a a bug for your own personal gains = exploit

Testing = evaulating the unintended use of game mechanics and reporting them without using to your advantage

  • Like 8

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Licinio Chiavari said:

Technically: <<BS>>.

We already lost one full day on our timetable due to Nassau bugged. We had another PB... not the day back. Fine. That was a bug.
You found a bug (or loophole) and you dont reported it. You used it against other players, directly or not. That's the fact.

If you find that there's a bug that pressing a combo of keystrokes you get infinite reals/stuff etc... you should REPORT it not use it. If you do without reporting... you're exploiting.

But I know. It's a mindset you lack.

 

Reserve F11 it. So that isnt an exploit. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, El Patron said:

Reserve F11 it. So that isnt an exploit. 

even worse .. he knew it's a broken mechanic/bug but continued to use it for his advantage is that what you're saying?

boy where have we  heard that defence before?

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not speak for the accused as I was not personally present, but in my view this is just how new mechanics are tested. The tribunal might come to the conclusion that this (trading hostility missions with allied players) should not be allowed (or possible by mechanics) in the future. It is not, however, obvious by default that this should be deemed an exploit. 

First of all, it should be noted the ridiculous situation deriving from the current implementation of the Frontlines mechanic, that from Cap Francais neither Ciudad de Cuba nor Port-au-Prince can be attacked, even though both regions are by every definition directly neighbouring Cap-Francais. I am sure it was not an intended mechanic that Brits should be in the unique position to be protected from attack from neighbouring regions. What's more, Cap Francais can be attacked currently from Port-au-Prince, but Port-au-Prince still cannot be attacked in return the other way around from Cap Francais. As such this case could be considered as a workaround to a bugged frontline mechanic preventing attacks on neighbouring regions which was not how the frontlines mechanic was clearly meant to work.

Secondly, there is reason to consider it as a potential feature that allies should be able to share a frontline and for a nation to be able to sponsor an ally to attack a neighbouring enemy's territory through their own. Instead of trading ports, which leads to empty PBs, needless PvE and potential Victory Marks-farming, this could be bypassed completely by allowing nations in this way to use each other's frontlines as staging grounds for attacks on an enemy's frontline. With properly implemented frontlines this would still not take anything away from Frontlines as a defensive device. It would still only be a nation's frontline counties that could be attacked, but other nations than the immediate neighbour could perpetrate the attack if facilitated by the nation holding the opposing frontline.

The only alternative way for Russia in the current mechanics to progress east and push the frontline from Cap Francais county would be to temporarily trade regional capitals with Pirates for Puerto Plata, Grand Turk, and/or Baracoa in order to be able to attack Brits. And then trade the other ports back to Pirates afterwards. I am sure Brits would have been no happier with this workaround than the current one.

3 hours ago, Teutonic said:

#flagsystem

Flags could be traded between nations...

Edited by Anolytic
  • Like 7

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Testing possible exploits is good. I am somewhat thankful that this was discovered so it could be dealt with. Of course, if testing is the only intention then this won't be abused any more. If the Russians don't show to the PB or at least drop the port on the first day if it's captured, then that's fine. If that isn't the case, then they're just abusing the system and should be punished however the devs see fit, which is fair. Exploiting the game is bad no matter how flawed the system may be.

Edited by Latron
  • Like 3

Share this post


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

I do not speak for the accused as I was not personally present, but in my view this is just how new mechanics are tested. The tribunal might come to the conclusion that this (trading hostility missions with allied players) should not be allowed (or possible by mechanics) in the future. It is not, however, obvious by default that this should be deemed an exploit. 

 

 

 It's an exploit lol, but if a port can be attacked A to B then also B to A should be possible in my opinion.

 Perhaps a "mesh" system would work better that shows all port to port attack routes, that can be actioned both ways.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it at all possible that he joined your battle thinking he would get a decent fight but then more Rubli joined and he ran away? Did anything else happen in battle like the Pirates not shooting at the BF player?

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nothing should be done apart from fixing the issue in the hostility system unless the party in question failed to report the bug/loophole properly themselves to the developers. If they failed to report such an issue in a reasonable fashion then this tribunal is worthy to being looked into. Such people that fail to report an issue and exploit the bug/loophole for personal gain should be found accountable for their actions since if they mean to exploit parts of the game, bug, loophole, or otherwise, now, then they will most likely look to continue such actions onward past release. A good act does not wash out the bad, nor a bad act the good. Each should have its own reward.

Edited by Davos Seasworth
  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some months ago dev's wrote a forum post what has to be done if someone detects a possibility to exploit the game. The rule was very simple.

"Report the possiblity to exploit and don't use it"

So Russia and Pirates offended against this rule. The result of the exploit should be reseted.

Any other action in this case has to be decided by the devs - I personaly don't like the daily crying to send someone to the gallows.

6 hours ago, Captain Reverse said:

Girls, why did you cry? Say thank you, that I do it live and show the benefits or disadvantages of the system.
Of course, instead of going out and fighting 10 NPC + 10 players vs 9 players, it is better to go to the forum and cry. We all know for a long time about players like you.
Instead of crying, you'd better build forts and we would see a new port battle tomorrow. with new forts and new BR system.
But you are whiny girls who can only do one thing.

As always. Good luck, cry further. And I will go to enjoy the game.

:D

If you are as fair as you pretend you will not fight the port battle tonight.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There should be no permabans for this. You that call for bans should calm down a bit. They are using normal game mechanics. (The same thing with the current cases in the tribunal about battle BR). You cant ban people that use allowed game mechanics.

It is up to the developers top create a game with mechanics you cant use this way.

If I had done this PB I would have exploited current allowed game mechanics too but I would have filed a bug report via F11 afterwards. I hope the russians did so. It is clearly existing game mechanics but still something that has to be changed.

Edited by Ligatorswe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As i said elsewhere. It is GOOD that this faulty game mechanics has been tested. Now the devs know about it and can change it.

There is a LOT of problems and holes in the current version of frontlines and I am sure that the developers are happy about all the reports about "exploits". Like the pirates that kept old hostility missions, like the "misuse" of battle BR with alts, and like this.  or like the reports that the system with raising hostility in the 3 nearest enemy ports, is broken. The reports that only the regional capitals are developed is important too. Now the devs can change this.

Edited by Ligatorswe
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Ligatorswe said:

 

yes, but it is normal game mechanics as the game funbctions today. One can do this and therefore people do it. We might get gentlemens agreements between clans about these kind of actions, but we will never stop it if it still can be done. Therefore: it is up to the devs to change game mechanics.

 

Russians found exploit/bug so could be excused as "testing",  what happened this morning is just griefing and doesn't help testing in any way.

Only 1 clan went on to do again afaik,  just to be dicks.

Is always same group of people also, every time.

 

 

Edited by Dibbler
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Anolytic said:

I do not speak for the accused as I was not personally present, but in my view this is just how new mechanics are tested. The tribunal might come to the conclusion that this (trading hostility missions with allied players) should not be allowed (or possible by mechanics) in the future. It is not, however, obvious by default that this should be deemed an exploit. 

It would be a disaster if the tribunal punishes this kind of action or bans players that are using normal game mechanics. Using normal game mechanics should not be punished. Change game mechanics instead.
 

Edited by Ligatorswe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...