Confession of a shameless Mode Switcher...

[Jockey79]

Yeah, didn't mean you specifically Jockey, should have clarified that bit.

Onto your 'definitions' yet again, Jockey, if you increase your chances of success you are putting yourself in a favourable or superior position, if you put yourself in a favourable or superior position you are increasing your chances of success.

You cannot be in a superior position if everyone else can join you there.
It just means you were early to the party, not that you have an advantage over others.

Whilst they are obviously different words they have sometimes the same and/or sometimes similar meanings, they are also interchangeable to mean virtually identical things, examples :-

'It was advantageous for the football team to play at home'

'The football team had an advantage playing at home'

Neither of those is an absolute, you can still lose from an advantageous position just as you can lose when you have the 'home' advantage. They are of the same family Jockey, I have many more examples like this if you insist but I'd rather not spam the thread with them.

Yay, getting somewhere - you at least admit they are 2 different words now

So your argument rests on an incorrect use of a word from sports?
Because the first one is right, playing "at home" should increase your chances of winning.
But for being in a superior position - unless it's Man U Vs Cov City, I highly doubt it.

From all the reading I've done there is quite the common theme for the word "exploit". It contains 2 conditions;

Unfair / Unintended / Underhanded (delete as applicible) + advantage = exploit.

If you don't meet both conditions, then it's not an exploit.

Unfair, we can all do it.
Unintended, most certainly.
Underhanded, nope as it's talked about all the time.

advantage, nope - because again, we can all do it. No one ends up in a superior position over others (or the game).

3 Anacondas Vs 1 Sidewinder is an advantage (for them)
720T hold Vs 120T hold is an advantage for the bigger ship

But the random nature of the job board, it may throw 1 or 2 100k missions at you each refresh while I'm making 5 million in 2 minutes trading in my Cutter doing A-B-A.
It may be advantageous if you get it to drop some sweet paying missions - but there is just as much chance it will throw up rubbish ones as well.


References;

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/exploit
(in a video game) the use of a bug or flaw in game design to a player’s advantage or to the disadvantage of other players.


http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/exploit
to use someone or something unfairly for your own advantage:


https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/exploit
If you say that someone is exploiting a situation, you disapprove of them because they are using it to gain an advantage for themselves


https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/exploit
Make use of (a situation) in a way considered unfair or underhand.
‘the company was exploiting a legal loophole’


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_exploits
In video games, an exploit is the use of a bug or glitches, game system, rates, hit boxes, or speed, etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers

 

[Jockey79]

That definition of advantageous is not correct. Sounds more like the definition of cheating or 'taking' advantage, doesn't it? Here's a good definition for advantageous.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/advantageous

Erm, you know that very link - the first line reads: "If something is advantageous to you, it is likely to benefit you"

"Likely" - as in not guaranteed.

And all 4 of the main dictonaries still include some random chance, "likely", "chances", "helping", "opportunity". I see no "superior position" mentioned anywhere in the list.
Though I do like how Dictionary.com just tries to link us back to "advantage" - almost like it cannot be bothered to help you.

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/dictionary/english/advantageous
If something is advantageous to you, it is likely to benefit you


https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/advantageous
Involving or creating favourable circumstances that increase the chances of success or effectiveness; beneficial.


http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/advantageous
giving advantages or helping to make you more successful:


http://www.dictionary.com/browse/advantageous?s=t
providing an advantage; furnishing convenience or opportunity; favorable; profitable; useful; beneficial:

 

[Theodrid]

snip

There was nothing 'incorrect' in my example sentences Jockey, both use the words we are debating, are correctly constructed and mean the same thing - unless you'd like to explain to me how they are different?

However, placing your apparent lack of knowledge regarding football aside Jockey....

An exploit does not have to be inherently 'unfair' for it to still be an exploit, as pointed out to you by the fact that exploits exist in single player games too.
An exploit is always an unintended outcome/result from flawed game mechanics and/or bugs.

Context is king here Jockey, the general use of the word exploit, 'to exploit natural resources on Earth' etc etc has little to no bearing when the term is used in relation to gaming. Your definitions listed above that state 'unfair' and the like are for the general term as opposed very specific context of the term we are referring to. That is not to say that gaming exploits cannot be 'unfair' - of course they can on occasion, but it is not a definite requirement.

So no, an exploit does not have to tick two of your boxes, only one, that being 'the unintended' part.

 

[Jockey79]

There was nothing 'incorrect' in my example sentences Jockey, both use the words we are debating, are correctly constructed and mean the same thing - unless you'd like to explain to me how they are different?

However, placing your apparent lack of knowledge regarding football aside Jockey....

An exploit does not have to be inherently 'unfair' for it to still be an exploit, as pointed out to you by the fact that exploits exist in single player games too.
An exploit is always an unintended outcome/result from flawed game mechanics and/or bugs.

Context is king here Jockey, the general use of the word exploit, 'to exploit natural resources on Earth' etc etc has little to no bearing when the term is used in relation to gaming. Your definitions listed above that state 'unfair' and the like are for the general term as opposed very specific context of the term we are referring to. That is not to say that gaming exploits cannot be 'unfair' - of course they can on occasion, but it is not a definite requirement.

So no, an exploit does not have to tick two of your boxes, only one, that being 'the unintended' part.

So what you're saying is that you're going to cherry pick parts of a definition (despite them being laid out how they are for a reason) and ignore the rest, to change the meaning of a word to suit your argument and that's the end of it.

So yes, context is the key - and the context is an unfair advantage, which is not the case here. As per your own link;
"In video games, an exploit is the use of a bug or glitches, game system, rates, hit boxes, or speed, etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers"

As an advantage gives the person a superior position - and the job board is usable by all, as is mode switching - there is no superior position.

Is it unintended, yes.
Is it moral, nope.
Is it an exploit, nope.

Not when you use the full definition, anyway.

 

[Theodrid]

So what you're saying is that you're going to cherry pick parts of a definition (despite them being laid out how they are for a reason) and ignore the rest, to change the meaning of a word to suit your argument and that's the end of it.

So yes, context is the key - and the context is an unfair advantage, which is not the case here. As per your own link;
"In video games, an exploit is the use of a bug or glitches, game system, rates, hit boxes, or speed, etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers"

As an advantage gives the person a superior position - and the job board is usable by all, as is mode switching - there is no superior position.

Is it unintended, yes.
Is it moral, nope.
Is it an exploit, nope.

Not when you use the full definition, anyway.

You just won't stop will you Jockey, I'm not cherry picking, I'm not calling dictionary compilers and lexicographers 'lazy' or implying they are wrong, you are the one doing that and frankly it's making you look ridiculous at this point. And by the way an advantage to oneself does not have to disadvantage others, so it doesn't have to be unfair or to someone else's detriment, thus, (yet again), exploits exist in single player games.

Answer this simple question Jockey, can exploits exist in single player games, yes or no?

If your answer to that very simple question is 'no, exploits can't exist in single player games' that is clearly false.
If your answer is 'yes they can' then that blows your advantage nonsense clean out of the water.

 

[Heavenly-Hammer]

I will switch modes all day and all night to improve the efficiency of my time spent.

Sorry, I don't have 8 hours a day to play Elite Dangerous nor the inclination to spend a lot of time waiting for decent missions to populate in a given mode on their own. With respect, we do enough waiting in Elite Dangerous. My lifetime is more valuable than Frontier's slow mission board refreshing. Yours is too.

 

[Gully Foyle]

Don't be sorry Hammer. I have very little time as well and have always done it to refresh rares mainly.
o7

 

[Jockey79]

You just won't stop will you Jockey, I'm not cherry picking, I'm not calling dictionary compilers and lexicographers 'lazy' or implying they are wrong, you are the one doing that and frankly it's making you look ridiculous at this point.

Says the person being intellectually dishonest by providing no proof of why your definition is correct (the only thing you linked thus far, agreed with me - despite it being a user-edited website) and also ignoring 90% of the established definitions, because they are inconvenient to your argument.

However, I've brought more than enough information for anyone to read to understand what you're doing. So I'm happy that I've made my case and shown your underhanded tactics for what they are.

And by the way an advantage to oneself does not have to disadvantage others, so it doesn't have to be unfair or to someone else's detriment, thus, (yet again), exploits exist in single player games.

Answer this simple question Jockey, can exploits exist in single player games, yes or no?

If your answer to that very simple question is 'no, exploits can't exist in single player games' that is clearly false.
If your answer is 'yes they can' then that blows your advantage nonsense clean out of the water.

Already answered this, it's down to Frontier to decide if the mode switching for jobs gives a player an unfair advantage over the game mechanics.
So far they have acknowledged it can be done and not shown much of an interest either way since.

And as you're not an employee at Frontier, nor a public spokesperson for them. You don't get to decide what is fair or unfair from their point of view.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

[video=youtube_share;3fSlCGjGLcI]https://youtu.be/3fSlCGjGLcI?t=2259[/video]
From 37:43, "will you fix the exploit" bit (can't get it to start at the right time )

Technically difficult to change (goes to the heart of the code), applied restrictions to limit it, not something they can do a lot about at the moment, it's an ongoing thing.

 

[kofeyh]

They won't fix it, so it doesn't really matter if it's "intended" use of the game mechanics, or not; it exists regardless of intent. In much the same was as the developer could suggest combat logging isn't in the spirit, yet refuse to address that because of the apparent impact on legitimate network disconnections (which are apparently so prolific, that the few genuine instances must be preserved over the many that almost assuredly are not).

They are not going to "fix". Because there's been a conscious decision not to. So you can all go insane shouting past each other, or maybe understand that the developer has elected to essentially ignore the consequences, because at this time, that's lower friction than actually making some hard decisions. So whatever you personally believe? irrelevant.

It is what it is. Complain. Or don't. Either way; developer may not have intended for various outcomes, but they are, ultimately, the arbiters of change and those ultimately responsible. If they can't or won't fix, that's their call. End of.

 

[DukeIronHand]

Little update...or perhaps a warning to the time limited non-grinding Cmdr's.

Just got done with my first flight time all week.
Being a filthy exploiter I had the opportunity (for the first time being kind of new to this) to accrue a maximum load of 20 Planetary Scan Missions. Oh boy. Have to admit I was a little excited in a cheating kind of way at my expected rank progress.
Figure the load up, flight time, doing the missions, and turn in took about an hour.

The result? I am at Baron and all these "high grade" missions netted me a whopping 11% to 39% Baron.
Have to admit I was quite disappointed - especially as I still have to finish Baron and plow thru the exponentially (and hugely so!) more difficult ranks of Viscount, Count, Earl, and Marquis before finally reach my goal of Duke!

And I was supposed to do this one, two, or (a dream) three missions at a time the "legitimate way"? Buwahahaha. Yea no.
Hell, there is no way I am going to sit thru this straight now so it looks like another multi-month project that I may finish...or not. I like the T9 and Anaconda just fine.

 

[Theodrid]

Says the person being intellectually dishonest by providing no proof of why your definition is correct (the only thing you linked thus far, agreed with me - despite it being a user-edited website) and also ignoring 90% of the established definitions, because they are inconvenient to your argument.

However, I've brought more than enough information for anyone to read to understand what you're doing. So I'm happy that I've made my case and shown your underhanded tactics for what they are.




Already answered this, it's down to Frontier to decide if the mode switching for jobs gives a player an unfair advantage over the game mechanics.
So far they have acknowledged it can be done and not shown much of an interest either way since.

And as you're not an employee at Frontier, nor a public spokesperson for them. You don't get to decide what is fair or unfair from their point of view.

Neither do you.

And intellectually dishonest hey?, Coming from the guy that thinks he knows better than dictionary compilers and lexicographers, coming from the guy that pretends there are no links between the words advantage and advantageous, coming from the guy who can't answer a simple question that blows his 'argument' out of the water. And half of your 'proof' backs up my position far more than yours, I've brought no proof you say, well, single player games exist, a respected dictionary group links constantly to the word advantage in the definition of advantageous and a modicum of common sense is the only proof I need.

Nah, nothing dishonest in what I'm saying, those same experts you call lazy back me up, single player game exploits back me up and interchangeable words like advantage and advantageous back me up. If you look back through it all the only thing that would stop you seeing that is your own arrogance, but tell you what, carry on with your petty insults if that's all you have left.

There are none so blind as those who will not see Jockey.

 

[Jockey79]

https://youtu.be/3fSlCGjGLcI?t=2259
From 37:43, "will you fix the exploit" bit (can't get it to start at the right time )
Technically difficult to change (goes to the heart of the code), applied restrictions to limit it, not something they can do a lot about at the moment, it's an ongoing thing.

The person asking the question incorrectly calls it an "exploit". At no point in the answer does Sandy refer to it as one or confirm it is one. He just ignores that and answers the question. regarding refreshing the missions.

Just like my 5-year-old will incorrectly use a word in a sentence, I still know what she means and what she is asking of me. So I answer her, after explaining, of course, the word she was supposed to use

They won't fix it, so it doesn't really matter if it's "intended" use of the game mechanics, or not; it exists regardless of intent. In much the same was as the developer could suggest combat logging isn't in the spirit, yet refuse to address that because of the apparent impact on legitimate network disconnections (which are apparently so prolific, that the few genuine instances must be preserved over the many that almost assuredly are not).

They are not going to "fix". Because there's been a conscious decision not to. So you can all go insane shouting past each other, or maybe understand that the developer has elected to essentially ignore the consequences, because at this time, that's lower friction than actually making some hard decisions. So whatever you personally believe? irrelevant.

It is what it is. Complain. Or don't. Either way; developer may not have intended for various outcomes, but they are, ultimately, the arbiters of change and those ultimately responsible. If they can't or won't fix, that's their call. End of.

Well said. +1

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

He just ignores that and answers the question. regarding refreshing the missions.

Indeed, and what does he say about it? There are technical reasons not to address it. It's an ongoing thing, he doesn't want to say never.

Strange reaction when they're fine with it isn't it?

 

[Schlack]

meh, play the game however you want. Its your dime and your time.

 

[Jockey79]

Indeed, and what does he say about it? There are technical reasons not to address it. It's an ongoing thing, he doesn't want to say never.

Strange reaction when they're fine with it isn't it?

Well, I'll type up the response in a sec, will also grab you the link for it to start at the right time.
But for the most part, he waffles on, says missions are metered and rep capped (which is nothing to do with log out and in) and calls it an ongoing thing.
Heck, he even said a sentence about removing mode switching, though he didn't give it context, so that clip alone could bite him in the backside. (I may grab that as a singular clip for a giggle)

To me, it looks and sounds like he is doing his best not to answer the question at all.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Well, I'll type up the response in a sec, will also grab you the link for it to start at the right time.
But for the most part, he waffles on, says missions are metered and rep capped (which is nothing to do with log out and in) and calls it an ongoing thing.
Heck, he even said a sentence about removing mode switching, though he didn't give it context, so that clip alone could bite him in the backside. (I may grab that as a singular clip for a giggle)

To me, it looks and sounds like he is doing his best not to answer the question at all.

No need for additional response. It's clear he is skirting around the issue, probably because there's no easy solution. It just didn't grab me as a response one would give if this was an intended consequence of mode switching. But as with all things, clarity isn't the most prevalent characteristic of these live streams.

But I remarked yesterday about a live stream and I found it so I posted it. From now anyone can think whatever they like about this as far as I'm concerned.

edit: By the way, if you click the youtube link as you quoted it, it does start at the right time, so the link is good.

 

[GreyAreaUK]

To me, it looks and sounds like he is doing his best not to answer the question at all.

More likely he's trying to avoid making promises that he doesn't know he can keep at this stage.

 

[Stealthie]

So what you're saying is that you're going to cherry pick parts of a definition (despite them being laid out how they are for a reason) and ignore the rest, to change the meaning of a word to suit your argument and that's the end of it.

So yes, context is the key - and the context is an unfair advantage, which is not the case here. As per your own link;
"In video games, an exploit is the use of a bug or glitches, game system, rates, hit boxes, or speed, etc. by a player to their advantage in a manner not intended by the game's designers"

As an advantage gives the person a superior position - and the job board is usable by all, as is mode switching - there is no superior position.

Unless I'm mistaken, you're the one adding the own interpretation of what purpose an "exploit" serves.

If we follow your logic to it's conclusion there there can be NO cheats or exploits in any multiplayer game since all players can make use of the same game-mechanic.
The fact that things DO get classified as cheats and exploits, despite the fact that "everybody can use them", demonstrates the fallacy of the original assertion.

I'd suggest that a better definition of a game exploit would be "an unintended game mechanic which grants the player some advantage compared to their situation had they not used it"

For example, Bethesda games have a common "exploit" where you can tell an NPC to pick up an item, grab it at the same time they do and you both end up with the item.
So, you find one "Sword of Doom", tell your sidekick to pick it up, grab it at the same time, and you both end up with a "sword of doom".
There was one sword but now there's two.
You have gained an advantage that you wouldn't have if you hadn't made use of an exploit.

 

[Jockey79]

No need for additional response. It's clear he is skirting around the issue, probably because there's no easy solution. It just didn't grab me as a response one would give if this was an intended consequence of mode switching. But as with all things, clarity isn't the most prevalent characteristic of these live streams.

But I remarked yesterday about a live stream and I found it so I posted it. From now anyone can think whatever they like about this as far as I'm concerned.

edit: By the way, if you click the youtube link as you quoted it, it does start at the right time, so the link is good.

I've written it up anyway. Though I'll be honest, trying to type out his stuttering erm, ahs and uhms got boring half way through, so I stopped typing those out and just kept the actual sentences in tact.

https://youtu.be/3fSlCGjGLcI?t=37m43s
Transcript;


Q: Will you be fixing the mode swapping exploit for missions?
A:
Well, er, says, uhm [player name] I believe that's [player name].
It's actually quite a difficult one.
T-to completely get rid of mode swapping would be a, I think a pretty significant change.
Er, we have made changes to the, we have overhauled the mission system, quite a lot.
But there are levels of, of change and that's, that one goes quite to the heart of the code I believe.
It's all very, it's all rather technical. We have metered missions more, there are caps for missions and you need to get more reputation with, er, minor factions to get more missions now. It is metered.It's not something we can do an awful lot more about at the moment.
It's an ongoing thing.

[end of what I cba to type up]

I believe Sandro has decided not to give direct answers either way since the backlash from saying content should be mode locked to open last year and all the problems that statement caused regarding "Play Your Own Way" tag line.
So his dancing about the question doesn't really come as a surprise. Once bitten, twice as shy.

Cheers for finding it out though. It was interesting to watch.
Did try to rep you for it, but it will not let me at this time (darn forums, hate that rep lockout).