Runes of Magic US / AU

Questionable

questionable

also questionable

outright NOT possible in any way or form without using hacks (unless you're talking about placing towers of your own on top of your own castle, that's perfectly fine.)

not technically an exploit according to what the gm's have said thus far but certainly not something you want your guild to be known for

same as above ^

It has been some time since exploits were clarified.gms have gone so i think this is a ligitimate question and would be nice if a gm would make it clear.

yes, i want to know about using electrics to make the rebuild point disappear too... since RoM has known about it since july of 2011! seen several posts that they cant reproduce it, or that its 'fixed'... its not fixed!!! and if another guild uses it, is screenshots enough to get them in trouble? is it the guild? or the player who gets warned? do the screenshot/video just need to show the gate broke or the player actually placing the electric

The fastest and most reliable method of obtaining such information can be done by contacting customer support.

-TunaShake

Whether exploit or not, they are certainly considered bad form. People who do these things should be considered the same as those that hit you below the belt when the ref can't see what they are doing. But they consider it justified because the "game" allows for it. In the end, it is up to you, do you fall into this trap, or do you keep yourself honest in your own mind. You cannot do anything about what others choose to do beyond your ability to voice your concern and hope they come around to seeing things your way. This is a virtual world after all.

Personally, our biggest victories are the ones we win against those who do these things. When we lose, well, no big deal really, as it was not a "fair" contest that we lost.

how about appearing on "A tower" and occupying it with 20 seconds left in the game so no one can retake it. These people somehow make it across bridges and floaters that are blocked completely and are not even geared to kill a guard? They also seem to be using fearless/immune for longer than it takes to occupy a tower.

Quoted from "TunaShake;585296"

The fastest and most reliable method of obtaining such information can be done by contacting customer support.

-TunaShake

Funny story!

The fastest and the most reliable method of dealing with this, is dealing with it yourself.
There is no help coming.

Invis cristal buildings in your castle - will take care of 3 and 6.

Put eyes and FoTs on your gates - will diminish the effect of 5.

Take the fight to the opponents castle - will take care of the rest.

Offense is the best defense.

Quoted from "TunaShake;585296"

The fastest and most reliable method of obtaining such information can be done by contacting customer support.

-TunaShake

This is a joke right? Do you not see people talking about no response from support? Just so you know its day 4 of a suspension with no reply from support.and i am but 1 case of this. This game was awsome but poor support and no gms will kill it.

Quoted from "xtina66;585321"

Also thank you for the responses with how to counter some of these. To clarify the towers on top of the castle I was referring to them having it above thier crystal to scatter you all over the place making it virtually impossible to get the crystal and with no way to reach them is why I was asking the question

Thunderstorm under their towers, it has like no height limit. Also there are skills that make you immune to fear.

Quoted from "engelixe;585300"

how about appearing on "A tower" and occupying it with 20 seconds left in the game so no one can retake it. These people somehow make it across bridges and floaters that are blocked completely and are not even geared to kill a guard? They also seem to be using fearless/immune for longer than it takes to occupy a tower.

Being butthurt over a loss doesnt mean the other team has exploited.

A combination of planning ahead (possibly before you put up any of your defense), some stealth-like skills/items, some consumable immunes, timing/coordination with herald, and possibly utilization of own class skills can make *any* last second cap possible.

I've sieged for awhile now. Let me say this: there is always a way to cap a tower at the last second, no matter how defended you have it. More defense is just that - defense. Sure it'll make it harder to cap it, but never makes it impossible. There are way too many ways to bypass defenses (all of them are legit tactics using consumables/skills, I am NOT speaking about outside programs). http://www.twitch.tv/i1own0u/b/352935071 skip to about 23:20 and watch.

To the OP: All of those questions have been answered before. Use the search function.

Quoted from "TunaShake;585296"

The fastest and most reliable method of obtaining such information can be done by contacting customer support.

-TunaShake

I know referring people to support is the only assistance you can provide on such matters... but to suggest this game's support is either fast or reliable is an absurdity.

Quoted from "xtina66;585274"

1. Placing electric towers by gate hammers to make them disappear?
2. Entering when gates glitch sideways?
3. Flame towers placed in the walls behind the opponents throne?
4. Placing flame towers/electric towers on the top of the castle where you rez?
5. Using FoT's on the gates (lately seawash stones have not been working even with several placed)?
6. Sending pets through walls to take out buildings or throne?

Disclaimer Note: The following are opinions based in common sense, and may not be understood by those with tiny brains.

1 & 2. These have never had any sort of frogster confirmation or denial. However, if we want to apply common sense to these... the destruction of guild castle rebuild points & the crooked gate rebuilding are known bugs. So, if a player is intentionally using said bugs to gain advantage over other players, then that is technically an exploit subject to part 3 section A of the terms of service:

From the Terms of service, part 3 section A:

"You may not use in Game play macros or other stored rapid keystrokes, "dupes," "cheats" or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play."

Siege rewards are items, honor points are rank, your guild's siege score is status. By exploiting bugs to win or give yourself advantage to win in siege, you're using a "pattern of play that facilitates acquisition" of these. The primary problem with this applying to points 1 & 2? Proving it to a support staff who takes almost a month to even review whatever evidence you bring them.

3 & 4. These are as the items you describe are unfortunately (and poorly) designed. This is more in the "dirty gameplay neighborhood" as a flame tower shooting down through a ceiling or in through a wall does not facilitate the acquisition of items as points #1 and #2 do. If you're playing siege correctly, the moment a throne, gate, or building begin to take damage alarms should start sounding in your voice chat or guild chat alerting the entire guild to take action. Flame towers & electric towers are not going to destroy your guild throne in 1 hit, nor are they going to destroy it in 20 or 30. The placement of these towers at those locations only serves as a distract/delay in siege, and does not generally change the outcome.

5 was stated by the GM's somewhat recently to be acceptable as part of the standard gameplay of ROM. It is a common consensus among most players it is a dirty tactic, but it is not unacceptable gameplay.

6 can also be rephrased as "exploitation of line of sight." I can get into detail about how these are exploits, but instead of typing it all out again, check out my post history and see where I've chimed in about the exploitation of the line of sight dynamic time and time again.

Quoted from "flyingltj;585366"

6 can also be rephrased as "exploitation of line of sight." I can get into detail about how these are exploits, but instead of typing it all out again, check out my post history and see where I've chimed in about the exploitation of the line of sight dynamic time and time again.

Wl/Rs are getting a bit ridiculous when it comes to that. There are some that repeatedly take advantage of the fact that their Shadowstab ignores walls. I'd call that and using warden pets to take down people or buildings inside a castle exploits, but Gameforge probably doesn't care.

As for the OP, glitching the hammer and walking in through glitched gates are exploits, IMO, but who knows if Gameforge considers them punishable or not. I've always refused to walk through a glitched gate whenever it happens. Just feels too cheap. Most people hate the FoT-on-gates trend, but since they gave the green light and said it's perfectly fine for people to use that tactic, so many more guilds have started doing it.

The only GMs that ever commented on what Gameforge's stance on certain siege ethics was are now gone. We don't have anyone official watching these forums now, so I really don't think we can expect many clarifications anymore.

The overall theme i am getting from these strings and replies is that we players will just have to police ourselves. if you have someone who is known to use the exploits and questionable tactics, simply remember who they are and fight fire with fire or choose not to compete with them.

Quoted from "Darianos;585489"

The overall theme i am getting from these strings and replies is that we players will just have to police ourselves. if you have someone who is known to use the exploits and questionable tactics, simply remember who they are and fight fire with fire or choose not to compete with them.

Police ourselves you say?

Wee woo wee wooo time to start making some citizen's arrests.

Quoted from "xtina66;585274"

Can you please clarify the following as to whether they are or are not exploits. We fought a guild recently who used all of these and swore they were legal. So some clarification would be awesome.

1. Placing electric towers by gate hammers to make them disappear?

2. Entering when gates glitch sideways?

3. Flame towers placed in the walls behind the opponents throne?

4. Placing flame towers/electric towers on the top of the castle where you rez?

5. Using FoT's on the gates (lately seawash stones have not been working even with several placed)?

6. Sending pets through walls to take out buildings or throne?


Clarification on at least these would be great as I know there are so many more out there.

Also can you please clarify the best way to report players that use these exploits as our guild leader frapped one case and was told that it couldnt be verified so nothing was done.

Asking to have these verified when there's currently no one on the US forums that's capable of making those pronouncements is... silly. And we've never really liked it when they did tell us what was and wasn't an exploit, cause it's so much more fun to call each other cheaters.

1. Put in a support ticket on that one- I didn't even hear about it til last week, and I actually play the game, so how else will Runewaker find out?

2. I think it's objectionable, but is it actionable? Probably not.

3. Obnoxious but almost certainly legal.

4. Reallllly obnoxious, completely legal.

5. Verified legal by GM Nytefall. (which is why asking stuff like this is a bad idea)

6. Super-obnoxious, low, evil and probably perfectly legal.


Threads like these do more harm then they fix. The fewer people know about exploits the better. How often did we all see fotted gates before the huge forum thread about it? And now we see it every other siege.

I know it's frustrating and coming and venting on the forums makes us all feel better, but the fewer people who get the idea to do stuff like intentionally bug gates or wardens taking out procs with Chiron the better.

People might also remember that with Runewaker sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. Remember before LoS? When we all had skills that could fire through walls? And it wasn't just a select few of us with broken skills? And the playing field was, like, level? And boss fights didn't involve endless unnecessary frustration?

Just to be perfectly clear, I don't support the use of any of the tactics listed above except for fotting, which we didn't do til it was ruled legal by Nytefall. But "I don't like this" =/= "bannable exploit."

Quoted from "mnkmurphy885;585491"

Asking to have these verified when there's currently no one on the US forums that's capable of making those pronouncements is... silly. And we've never really liked it when they did tell us what was and wasn't an exploit, cause it's so much more fun to call each other cheaters.

1. Put in a support ticket on that one- I didn't even hear about it til last week, and I actually play the game, so how else will Runewaker find out?

2. I think it's objectionable, but is it actionable? Probably not.

3. Obnoxious but almost certainly legal.

4. Reallllly obnoxious, completely legal.

5. Verified legal by GM Nytefall. (which is why asking stuff like this is a bad idea)

6. Super-obnoxious, low, evil and probably perfectly legal.


Threads like these do more harm then they fix. The fewer people know about exploits the better. How often did we all see fotted gates before the huge forum thread about it? And now we see it every other siege.

I know it's frustrating and coming and venting on the forums makes us all feel better, but the fewer people who get the idea to do stuff like intentionally bug gates or wardens taking out procs with Chiron the better.

People might also remember that with Runewaker sometimes the cure is worse than the disease. Remember before LoS? When we all had skills that could fire through walls? And it wasn't just a select few of us with broken skills? And the playing field was, like, level? And boss fights didn't involve endless unnecessary frustration?

Just to be perfectly clear, I don't support the use of any of the tactics listed above except for fotting, which we didn't do til it was ruled legal by Nytefall. But "I don't like this" =/= "bannable exploit."

It wasn't that long after bleeds were taken out that the fots became relevant, which you know makes sense since everyone could take out gates extremely fast with how things were before.

As far as the lightning tower thing I made a topic months ago about that and I think it was closed or something and I reported it to Dio, so it's not like they don't know. Mainly since I got sorta annoyed by a guild who was purposely using it so that the entire fight just revolved around keeping them out of our castle. I remember, they weren't even an OP guild or anything and we successfully kept them from killing our Processing factories for 20+ minutes, it was just annoying that they'd stoop to that level.

I'm sure other people have reported the lightning tower bug anyhow, but I sorta don't expect anything to be done given RW's track record.

Quoted from "Kefkai;585492"

It wasn't that long after bleeds were taken out that the fots became relevant, which you know makes sense since everyone could take out gates extremely fast with how things were before.

As far as the lightning tower thing I made a topic months ago about that and I think it was closed or something and I reported it to Dio, so it's not like they don't know. Mainly since I got sorta annoyed by a guild who was purposely using it so that the entire fight just revolved around keeping them out of our castle. I remember, they weren't even an OP guild or anything and we successfully kept them from killing our Processing factories for 20+ minutes, it was just annoying that they'd stoop to that level.

I'm sure other people have reported the lightning tower bug anyhow, but I sorta don't expect anything to be done given RW's track record.

Well, if it was that widely known Kef, I apologize mightily to whoever it was we had last week who's gate bugged. And we did have a lightning tower right outside that gate. Not cause we wanted to bug their gate, just cause we wanted to bug their rogues

Sooooo... no more lightning towers at the other one's castle for us for a while. Sigh.