Seeking Redemption

"

Pyrokar wrote:

The real problem is that poe flask gameplay is brain dead. You can constantly refill flasks, which last for 4-7sec max, leading to a gameplay of constant 12345 (if ci) or 2345 (if not ci) spam. Utterly pointless gameplay that requires no thought process.

Their vision of having flasks as situational power boosts to our characters has become a nightmare due to powercreep and how fast we kill mobs.

OP was right to use a flask macro and should not be banned for it. The fault lies with the developers.

+1

[Removed by Support]

The only difference is that in the above examples people often cant choose not to live in that society. You can choose not to play PoE at all if you don't think you should get RSI because of bad game design.

That said, i can imagine there are a lot of people who will do much worse things than using a flask macro but dont talk about those things when they got banned. In fact i think that is much more likely than GGG banning people only for using a flask macro because if they did that, they would ban half their players.

Whether they ban people for using a flask macro or not, they should change the flask situation so people wont be so inclined to use that macro. Next time powercreep entices them to increase hitpoints on monsters, they should instead, make all flasks draw from a common resource instead of having them all recharge at the same time from the same monster kills. So either you have a common pool of flask charges that goes up to 200 or so, or when you kill a monster instead of granting every flask a charge, it should choose and give a charge to a random one of the flasks that is not at full charge.

Again, I do not understand this whole flask macro thing. And never will.

Are our servers really THAT BAD that they can't handle a very simple macro, while the Chinese servers allow it?

"

Ydoum wrote:

Again, I do not understand this whole flask macro thing. And never will.

Are our servers really THAT BAD that they can't handle a very simple macro, while the Chinese servers allow it?

Obviously the server has nothing to do with it.
If we hit the 4-5 buttons at once by slamming them using all our fingers, its exactly the same.

The server argument as about some trade macro that apparently was banned but not really as far as i read this tread. (and now im confused.)

"

NonExistingName wrote:

And those that say "rules are rules, you are willingly taking a risk" are probably the ones who would in history have said "rules are rules, you are a slave and have no rights", "rules are rules, you are a jew and will go to a camp" or "rules are rules, you know you cant express your gay sexuality so you get 100 whippings".

OR they're the ones that would rather see actual cheaters and people who abuse the system get perma banned and lose their progress. JFC

"

Shovelcut wrote:

"

NonExistingName wrote:

And those that say "rules are rules, you are willingly taking a risk" are probably the ones who would in history have said "rules are rules, you are a slave and have no rights", "rules are rules, you are a jew and will go to a camp" or "rules are rules, you know you cant express your gay sexuality so you get 100 whippings".

OR they're the ones that would rather see actual cheaters and people who abuse the system get perma banned and lose their progress. JFC

You're rethoric sounds like it fits the example cases i gave. The point is that you should be able to discuss the merits of the system and rules in contrast to just say "thats how it is". Bad rules and systems should be challenged instead of defended blindly. Sure breaking the rules is different from discussing and challenging them, but this (a thread about someone being banned) is where this sort of discussion takes place.

So why do you like the current flask system ?
Would you not prefer a system that either requires thought, like i suggested where you have limited resources so you have to choose what flask to use, or like they apparently have in china where one button does the same job as 4 with the same mental strain but less physical strain.

"

Shovelcut wrote:

OR they're the ones that would rather see actual cheaters and people who abuse the system get perma banned and lose their progress. JFC

What is "cheater" is debatable.
Using thinks like maphack/autoaim/bot/exploiting bugs is one thing. More if that's being used in a race (aka actual competitive environment).
Using Trade Companion for kick + say thank you in chat is completely different. Most people could not even think that's considered a cheat. Streamers using it not helping either.

But both is permanent ban without warning.

"

Ydoum wrote:

Again, I do not understand this whole flask macro thing. And never will.

Are our servers really THAT BAD that they can't handle a very simple macro, while the Chinese servers allow it?

GGG should make their own version of price check tool (like they did official Trade Site, which is better than poe.trade by a margin), allow to bind single chat message to any key (like F5 = /hideout, which is already allowed, but would be nice to see it within game itself) and allow to bind all flasks to single key in game itself (since right now it could be straight bad for health, depends on the person, i.e. with carpal tunnel syndrome).

Then just ban every third party macros, because everything would be available in the game itself.

"

NonExistingName wrote:

And those that say "rules are rules, you are willingly taking a risk" are probably the ones who would in history have said "rules are rules, you are a slave and have no rights", "rules are rules, you are a jew and will go to a camp" or "rules are rules, you know you cant express your gay sexuality so you get 100 whippings".

Nice stretch, you don't happen to be one of those who claim that cheating is their way of expressing themselves and that suppressing cheaters is a violation of their civil rights? Or EA claiming that lootboxes are a form of artistic expression. Or Tim Sweeney comparing his spat with apple to the Civil Rights movement.
Now, I won't say that apple aren't a bunch of greedy twats, but if you don't like their terms don't sell on their platform, instead of pulling a "we want their customer base and development space but we don't want to pay them for it".

There was something recently in another game where they banned a bunch of cheaters at once and the backlash went from "muh freedom" to "but we're actually making the game better for everyone and doing you a favor". Won't say it wasn't funny, but that's as far as the value of such takes goes.

"

raics wrote:

"

NonExistingName wrote:

And those that say "rules are rules, you are willingly taking a risk" are probably the ones who would in history have said "rules are rules, you are a slave and have no rights", "rules are rules, you are a jew and will go to a camp" or "rules are rules, you know you cant express your gay sexuality so you get 100 whippings".

Nice stretch, you don't happen to be one of those who claim that cheating is their way of expressing themselves and that suppressing cheaters is a violation of their civil rights? Or EA claiming that lootboxes are a form of artistic expression. Or Tim Sweeney comparing his spat with apple to the Civil Rights movement.
Now, I won't say that apple aren't a bunch of greedy twats, but if you don't like their terms don't sell on their platform, instead of pulling a "we want their customer base and development space but we don't want to pay them for it".

There was something recently in another game where they banned a bunch of cheaters at once and the backlash went from "muh freedom" to "but we're actually making the game better for everyone and doing you a favor". Won't say it wasn't funny, but that's as far as the value of such takes goes.

Its a bit of stretch to compare a silly game issue (or a silly apply/ae issue) to serious human right issues that affect the world. It is however about the principle. It always annoys me when people are defending rules simply because they are the rules seemingly unable or unwilling to consider the merits of the rules. The comparison with smoking joints would be more fitting probably, although still stretched because being banned from a game is in no way comparable to being jailed. Besides that it is kind of similar to me though. I live in the netherlands and noone is in jail here because of smoking a joint, but i do hear the argument about the US and legalizing weed. I keep wondering, are there really people in jail there for just smoking a joint ? That cant be real right ? 10-20% of the population smokes, they arent all in jail. Must be some out of context argument, probably some people cought trafficing 50kg of weed now saying they were just smoking a joint ? Thats how i look at this situation. I dont know if anyone ever got banned only for using a flask script. But if that is the case, it is unfair that a few are banned for something many do and rather than banning all of them, i would prefer to have it legalized. And if they never ban anyone for just using a flask macro, then they should surely legalize it. Or indeed better yet, include it in the game itself or change the flask system so that there is no incentive to use a script.

"

NonExistingName wrote:

Or indeed better yet, include it in the game itself.

+1. It's even already in the Chinese client for free (so not a pay2win).
Right now playing for long period of time is equal to murdering your own fingers on left hand.

They also should implement "apply 20 of currency to item", since recently I tried leveling gems and it's quite harmful to apply 540 GCPs on gems manually. And you cannot automatise it since it's bannable.

Regarding this, Harvest had great crafting option "apply 20 fusing on item and choose best outcome".

"

NonExistingName wrote:

Its a bit of stretch to compare a silly game issue (or a silly apply/ae issue) to serious human right issues that affect the world. It is however about the principle. It always annoys me when people are defending rules simply because they are the rules seemingly unable or unwilling to consider the merits of the rules.

Unfortunately, we can't apply morality and principles to entertainment business that easily. There's a part from the Jurassic Park books that comes to mind, where Hammond explains why they aren't using genetic engineering to develop miracle drugs. It says something along the lines that even if you cured cancer it isn't easy to charge as much as you want for the cure, but if they used it to develop a tourist attraction who's going to prevent them from charging $10k a day, or $20k, or $50k? Nobody is forcing you to pay, except maybe the kids but that's on you for raising a bunch of little dudleys :)

This is a similar situation, the whole gaming field is so poorly regulated because it doesn't have to be, nobody recognizes the right to entertainment. You are there of your own free will under the conditions you yourself agreed upon. Of course, that doesn't mean you are entirely without rights, if the product harmed you by, dunno, helping you to develop a gambling habit, that isn't something you agreed upon so there's some legal ground to stand on.

However, you agreed that your account is forfeit if you cheat and nothing protects your account, so there are no grounds to complain.