Legal Exploit?

[Vorxian]

So instead of waiting 10 or 15 minutes (I forget how long it is for it to auto-refresh) you can just switch game mode and it auto-refreshes the bulletin board with different missions?

If so, NICE!

It's not strictly true.

What happens is that on load, you're allocated a server. Try it. On the main log in screen (main menu) look at the bottom. First time you log in it'll say server unknown.. or something similar. Log into the game, and log out back to the main menu. It'll tell you what server you're about to log in to. I.e. server 448. If you log in to server 448, you'll have missions. If you go to open and suck out your 'power generator' missions, and log out, you'll either be connected back to server 448 or another one. If you're now connected to server 549, and go back to open mode, you'll have new missions. If you're back on 448, open will have no new missions. The most I noted was 4 servers online at any time. maybe 5 at a push. It's random what one you connect to. If you bounce between solo and open, and log out, you're just jumping between one server and another making it appear that solo and open bouncing are giving you new missions. what happens is that before the servers refresh every 5 mins, you'll dry up the missions. After 5 mins the missions will trickle back. The best bet is to leave it and come back.

I have been grinding Empire for the last week, and you start to notice these things!

TLDR : mode switching doesn't refresh the boards. Changing servers upon log to menu does.

 

[biohazard15]

I would happily stop using it as soon as FD makes the rank progress WAY faster and interesting. Unless they implement it... well... Open-Solo-Open-Solo-Open-Solo...

 

[vlaskov1tz]

The problem is that many of us like to 'be the best we can be'. And that isnt very much fun if the best you can do is log in/out. Its the same with 'balance'. One can say 'who cares if Weapon X is overpowered, if you dont like it dont use it.' Sure, but it means I have to intentionally handicap myself and make 'dumb' choices. Having multiple equally viable options is way more fun than one Super Option and a whole bunch of vastly inferior ones.

Exactly, that's the point. I feel so addicted to do at least few mode swaps every time I dock somewhere just to earn more/be better/rank up faster that I just cannot refuse to not play like this.

 

[Ian Skippy]

1st it takes me ages to switch modes. (My PC therefore my problem)

Like it or not; it is taking advantage, of the current system, to gain an advantage. Therefore: It is an exploit. Yes everyone can do it, but it does not make it right.

Installing a shield on my ship is also taking advantage of the current system. Its only an exploit when the devs say it is untended. They explicitly said it is allowed. So it is not an exploit. Something does not become an exploit simply because you dont personally approve of it.

 

[Arry]

Installing a shield on my ship is also taking advantage of the current system. Its only an exploit when the devs say it is untended. They explicitly said it is allowed. So it is not an exploit. Something does not become an exploit simply because you dont personally approve of it.

Shields: A possible exploit? OK. Time to raise eyebrows and leave quietly.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Shields: A possible exploit? OK. Time to raise eyebrows and leave quietly.

*Sigh*

You defined exploit as 'using the system to your advantage'. My example shows that is obviously nonsensical, by your definition shields would also be an exploit. The correct definition is 'using the system to your advantage in a way the devs didn't forsee and dont approve of'. The devs do not dissaprove of mode switching, so it isnt an exploit.

 

[Zeta Legion]

"Legal" exploit?

Should I hire a lawyer then?

 

[Boomer Kay]

I would assume that the idea of missions was never "to be at your disadvantage". I love doing missions, but with the RNG hammer on every board, they pretty much are (and it did get worse after 1.5 and as new, completely rankless player you do indeed get like 1 mission you can accept in total?)

I like to have a good "flow" of missions and follow-ups. I don't mind flying to some outpost 400kls from the drop-in to deliver toilet paper, but being stuck there without any sort of follow-up is more than I'm willing to accept. I like stacking missions (different ones to the same system or similar ones across a radius), since it increases the difficulty a bit. All that is hammered by the RNG. Plus there's some still rather hard to or completely uncompleatable missions (NPCs not spawning, objects not counting) that I just don't accept at all.

Until that is fixed with the new mission system, I consider mode switching cheesy, but required and adding to my gameplay, as long as it's not overdone.
I have no idea f.ex. how someone can sit in a station and switch modes 1000x to get exclusively donation charity missions - I do charity for ranking, too, but I do mix all kinds of missions in there to leave the station - which give more progress than the measly 0.x% for the donation ones and the board is usually refreshed by the time I'm back.
I also have no idea why someone has to stack dozens of Shadow Delivery missions that are nearly incompletable if done "correctly" and pretty much a joke, if you cheese all you can cheese. I take 1-3 of them (or regular smuggling or data smuggling), play them "the right way" and it's pretty enjoyable.

Plus FD should be well aware of it (latest since the meta alloy CG), but have never officially issued a statement that cosiders it "against the game rules" or quickfixed it, so I do consider it "condoned cheese until the fix is in place".

 

[Ian Skippy]

Plus FD should be well aware of it (latest since the meta alloy CG), but have never officially issued a statement that cosiders it "against the game rules" or quickfixed it, so I do consider it "condoned cheese until the fix is in place".

Actually, some time ago one of the devs explicitly mentioned it was *not* against the rules or an exploit.

 

[Arry]

Actually, some time ago one of the devs explicitly mentioned it was *not* against the rules or an exploit.

So by that reckoning, FD have no intentions to change it then?

 

[Boomer Kay]

So by that reckoning, FD have no intentions to change it then?

Did you read the 2.1 announcements?
They're going to redo the entire mission system.
They have no intention to apply quick fixes that break more than they fix.

 

[Khalhin]

Yes, mode switching can be called an exploit.


When an exploit is used to gain an unfair advantage over other players, for example; auto-head-shots, see-thru-walls, god-mode, then it should be shut down. As far as I can tell (and I may be wrong as I have not yet discovered everything about this game) the mode switching exploit is really about personal gain to get through the grind.


You can take away the exploits to make players endure the grind but that can be counter-productive; they leave the game due to boredom; they buy ready-baked accounts. I have played enough MMO games to see how heavy grind can encourage eastern gold farming businesses.

 

[Boomer Kay]

When an exploit is used to gain an unfair advantage over other players, for example; auto-head-shots, see-thru-walls, god-mode, then it should be shut down. As far as I can tell (and I may be wrong as I have not yet discovered everything about this game) the mode switching exploit is really about personal gain to get through the grind.

Yea, but the only unfair advantage you gain is over the RNG.
You can have 10 completely awesome boards in a row. Or you can have 10 completely rubbish boards where you wonder why that was rolled up in the first place. Purely depending on luck and the RNG - not your skill, not your dedication, not your involvement.
Back one page: I don't think the board was supposed to be utter rubish.

 

[[DOOK] Droogie]

Mission cycling is the only way to get decent missions right now, unfortunately. If missions were like the outfitting screen and commodities market, we wouldn't have to do it. All possible missions would be there. The mission board should be organized by type and rank. You shouldn't have to cycle to get good missions, and that is the problem.

 

[Ian Skippy]

Yes, mode switching can be called an exploit.


When an exploit is used to gain an unfair advantage over other players, for example; auto-head-shots, see-thru-walls, god-mode, then it should be shut down.

Define 'unfair'. All the things you mention are cheats, which are not allowed by definition. Exploits are like cheats, but without using hacks/external programs etc (like putting an extra ace up your sleeve=cheating). Exploits are using what is already there in an unintended way that negatively influences the game according to the devs/GM/dealer etc. For example, using reflections in a window to see another person's cards can be an exploit if the dealer says you're not allowed to do it. Fairness has little to do with it. Me putting five rails on my FDL is totally unfair to that trade conda I'm about to murder for no reason whatsoever. But it is also totally allowed, so no exploit. Mode switching allows you to get the mission you want faster, but it is allowed so its not an exploit. Pulling the cable out of the computer when under attack is not allowed, so it is an exploit: you're exploiting the limitations of the P2P network in a way that is not allowed by FD.

Many people instinctively consider exploits to be 'gaining an advantage in a way I dont approve of myself'. While understandable, its not a very constructive way to look at it when there are over 1 million players; the entire concept of 'exploit' becomes totally meaningless. Like 'griefer'.

 

[Zeta Legion]

Mission cycling is the only way to get decent missions right now, unfortunately. If missions were like the outfitting screen and commodities market, we wouldn't have to do it. All possible missions would be there. The mission board should be organized by type and rank. You shouldn't have to cycle to get good missions, and that is the problem.

To expand on this, the dreadful reward structure is another malady the game suffers from that mode-switching puts an RNG-based band-aid over. If I could do one challenging mission for 20-40 mil rather than trying to stack 30 'kill X number of pirates!" missions I could spend more time EARNING money by PLAYING the game instead of watching YouTube while the BB refreshes.

 

[Boomer Kay]

To expand on this, the dreadful reward structure is another malady the game suffers from that mode-switching puts an RNG-based band-aid over. If I could do one challenging mission for 20-40 mil rather than trying to stack 30 'kill X number of pirates!" missions I could spend more time EARNING money by PLAYING the game instead of watching YouTube while the BB refreshes.

No, you* wouldn't
If there was that one challenging mission for that high a reward, it means you'd be able to fail it. Maybe 10-20 times in a row, if it's actually challenging, which brings your hourly gains down to nothing again, so you resort to trading, which is more financially rewarding and complain mission payout is a joke.

(*well, maybe not you, but considering the amount of cheese used on top of the somewhat cheesy switching mechanic to make stuff easier and faster, my cholesterol level increases at >1c speed)

The rework might "fix" that one too, since rewards will be more tied to factions and crafting and ship upgrades and engineers (if I remember that correctly) instead of being purely monetary.

 

[Zeta Legion]

No, you wouldn't
If there was that one challenging mission for that high a reward, it means you'd be able to fail it. Maybe 10-20 times in a row, if it's actually challenging, which brings your hourly gains down to nothing again, so you resort to trading, which is more financially rewarding and complain mission payout is a joke.

I hope this is sarcasm

I hate A-B trading. So much so that I haven't bothered since I had a T-6 and only a handful of shekels to my name. I haven't even done Robigo runs either. I'm a combat pilot who occasionally moonlights as an explorer.

Unfortunately there is nothing particularly rewarding about combat missions, nor is there anything challenging about them either. Killing pilots at RES sites is fun but not especially difficult and unless you are signed up to one of the OP PP factions it isn't even in the same ballpark as bulk trading or shadow deliveries.

 

[Sole Hunter]

if missions weren't so poorly designed, we wouldn't need to do the whole mode switching.

 

[Daffan]

It's a gimmicky trick. But then again open solo and private swapping is gimmicky at a base level and poor design for an Multiplayer game.