Any compensation incoming for non-exploiters?

smiths121

S
galahad2069 said:
No, not really.

At least if you think fdev are professionals, not a bunch of amateurs who don't even know how their own game works and throwing in a lazy cooldown timer in the wrong position was the best they could come up with.
Click to expand...

Clearly you think FDev are a bunch of professionals, otherwise your argument lacks logic and does not follow.
Lok forward ot seeing you white knight after next release :)

Simon
 

galahad2069

G
smiths121 said:
Clearly you think FDev are a bunch of professionals, otherwise your argument lacks logic and does not follow.
Lok forward ot seeing you white knight after next release :)

Simon
Click to expand...

What I think or don't think is irrelevant in this context, and I wasn't whiteknighting.

It's pretty hard to tell sometimes what is a bug in this game and what is working as intended. For instance, a while ago ships started to disappear from the radar in supercruise, depending on your speed. It wasn't how it used to work and a change of that game mechanism wasn't at all necessary, nor was it mentioned as a new "feature" in any of the patch notes (afaik), so players even filed a bug report. After some time fdev confirmed that it was "working as intended".

The lack of communication on fdev's part surely does not help. The specifically mentioned the SLF method of making the SSD's respawn as a bug. They didn't mention the other way though (retreating 25+ kms from the rock then going back). Is that not a bug then? And eventually they added a cooldown which only starts once you've left the instance. Go figure.
 

galahad2069

G
smiths121 said:
The distance one is confirmed as a bug.
https://issues.frontierstore.net/issue-detail/17027 (form June 15)

The status of bugs is unsurprisingly on the bug tracker and not in the discussion forum! So its worth checking before talking if something is intended or not intended behaviour.

Cheers
Simon
Click to expand...

Sorry, but even if that disaster of a bug tracker was even a little bit user friendly, this bug report is about deep core mining, so it has little to do with the topic of this thread (respawning of subsurface deposits).
 

[VR] Orodruin

[VR] Orodruin
galahad2069 said:
No, not really.

At least if you think fdev are professionals, not a bunch of amateurs who don't even know how their own game works and throwing in a lazy cooldown timer in the wrong position was the best they could come up with.
Click to expand...
Oh yes. It is either that or a fundamental misunderstanding of how program development works. Or you are simply trolling, cannot determine which.
 

galahad2069

G
[VR] Orodruin said:
Oh yes. It is either that or a fundamental misunderstanding of how program development works. Or you are simply trolling, cannot determine which.
Click to expand...

I was under the impression that the key steps of bugfixing are understanding what the problem is, making changes to the code, making sure that the changes have the desired effect, and then and only then celebrating and declaring that "yay we fixed it".

I'm terribly sorry if that's a "fundamental misunderstanding".
 

smiths121

S
galahad2069 said:
Sorry, but even if that disaster of a bug tracker was even a little bit user friendly, this bug report is about deep core mining, so it has little to do with the topic of this thread (respawning of subsurface deposits).
Click to expand...

Its to do with instance reset, so effects all objects in the instance was my reading.

Cheers
Simon
 

[VR] Orodruin

[VR] Orodruin
galahad2069 said:
I was under the impression that the key steps of bugfixing are understanding what the problem is, making changes to the code, making sure that the changes have the desired effect, and then and only then celebrating and declaring that "yay we fixed it".
Click to expand...
Because everybody "competent" gets everything correct all the time ... In particular when in a rush to fix a bug within a fixed time frame. Seriously?
 

galahad2069

G
smiths121 said:
Its to do with instance reset, so effects all objects in the instance was my reading.

Cheers
Simon
Click to expand...

Depends on what you call an "instance reset". Reinstancing by going to SC and back? Or just retreating 25+ kms? The latter certainly does only affects SSD's (and the cores according to that bug report). Neither of those affect normal (laser-mineable) mineral content.
 

Kenneth McGrew

Kenneth McGrew
Denneb said:
Hello fellow commanders. The instantly replenishing LTD subsurface deposits mining frenzy is just the cherry on top of the general mining rewards fiasco (compared to other activities).
FDev trying hard to patch it, is a clear testament that its is NOT intended gameplay, and taking advantage of non-intended gameplay for personal benefit is the DEFINITION of exploiting.

So, as a loyal player with over 5500 hrs of non-exploitative gameplay and with hundreds of game extras purchased, I think I am entitled to ask a simple question to the developers:
Is there any compensation incoming to the people who chose to forfeit a tremendous in-game advantage and didn't exploit?
Or even, is there any penalty incoming to the ones who did exploit, and for example, earned themselves in a few days the luxury of buying and sustaining an FC for life?

I would really like to see FDev here not following the real life example that rewards exploiting and penalizes good ethos.
Thanks for your time.
Click to expand...

rumor has it those who didnt exploit will have access to C1 seismic charges available at jameson memorial
 

Moriarte

Moriarte
Clearly FD doesn’t care all that much, can’t blame them! It’s only an exploit allowing 1bn cr per hour profits. More importantly, it is an exploit, which enables thousands of people buy FC’s prematurely, then go to Frontier online shop to buy ARX for a new shiny toy they craved for so so long. For FD This is a serious income stream, which stems from an exploit.

Now tell me, why would FD slay the holy cow and stop the stream of donations feeding from an exploit? It would be like shooting themselves in the foot. No, no, this exploit will be left to live for as long as deemed necessary.

Sorry OP, no compensation
 

galahad2069

G
[VR] Orodruin said:
Because everybody "competent" gets everything correct all the time ... In particular when in a rush to fix a bug within a fixed time frame. Seriously?
Click to expand...

Nice whiteknighting attempt, lol.

If the bug they wanted to fix was that jumping into an SLF and back made the SSD's respawn, shouldn't they have checked whether or not the damned things actually respawn before they announced that the bug had successfully been fixed?

And what "rush" and "timeframe" are you talking about? The average life expentancy of bugs in this game is months, if not years...
 

gooddoc

gooddoc
Moriarte said:
Clearly FD doesn’t care all that much, can’t blame them! It’s only an exploit allowing 1bn cr per hour profits. More importantly, it is an exploit, which enables thousands of people buy FC’s prematurely, then go to Frontier online shop to buy ARX for a new shiny toy they craved for so so long. For FD This is a serious income stream, which stems from an exploit.

Now tell me, why would FD slay the holy cow and stop the stream of donations feeding from an exploit? It would be like shooting themselves in the foot. No, no, this exploit will be left to live for as long as deemed necessary.

Sorry OP, no compensation
Click to expand...
I agree with this poster..........apart from the continual use of the word 'exploit'. I prefer to call it 'gameplay (bugged or not) that can be used within the mechanics of the gamecode at a particular time';)
 

[VR] Orodruin

[VR] Orodruin
galahad2069 said:
If the bug they wanted to fix was that jumping into an SLF and back made the SSD's respawn, shouldn't they have checked whether or not the damned things actually respawn before they announced that the bug had successfully been fixed?

And what "rush" and "timeframe" are you talking about? The average life expentancy of bugs in this game is months, if not years...
Click to expand...
They should have tested it more in depth, obviously. I am not defending that decision, just saying that in some situations you do not have the time to test things properly.

All bugs are not equal. Some are more urgent to fix than others. They clearly wanted this particular bug squashed sooner rather than later, placing it in patch 2 and that patch had a release date.
 

gooddoc

gooddoc
[VR] Orodruin said:
They should have tested it more in depth, obviously. I am not defending that decision, just saying that in some situations you do not have the time to test things properly.

All bugs are not equal. Some are more urgent to fix than others. They clearly wanted this particular bug squashed sooner rather than later, placing it in patch 2 and that patch had a release date.
Click to expand...
If they really wanted this bug squashed sooner, it would have been squashed by now. Obviously FD are happy to allow this to continue......for the time being:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom