Abusing game mechanics to complete EE

[fco-karatekid]

If after the casters died and you had no dangr because mobs just stood there and let you kill them with no danger to yourself or them not moving out of your damage then it is a exploit. Bad AI yes but you are exploiting at that point.

So if a boss "hangs" in his AI and cannot "remember" what to do, the entire raid party MUST stop immediately taking any actions, defensive OR offensive and attempt to revive said boss rather than continuing to block, attack, cast, or anything else. Got it.

[Yazston_the_Invoker]

Wrong.

Since you could be in danger from the casters it is not an exploit. That you choose to kill them first and then are out of range of the attacks of the others is simply good strategy.

The key is that the players WERE in danger -- until the casters died. The presence of danger is enough.

Hey, you can try to justify it all you want...I'll take Tolero's word. Again, PM her, since you obviously don't believe me.

[Yazston_the_Invoker]

So if a boss "hangs" in his AI and cannot "remember" what to do, the entire raid party MUST stop immediately taking any actions, defensive OR offensive and attempt to revive said boss rather than continuing to block, attack, cast, or anything else. Got it.

That is actually a slightly different beast. If the AI hangs, and nobody specifically tried to do it, or knows what happened, then it may be an exploit (if recreatable), but I doubt Turbine would fault anyone that kills him. If, however, there is a reproducible way to glitch a boss, and the party knows and does this, then it is an exploit and people can and will be banned for it...

There are many examples, of which we can speak of none, of course, but if you know of some way to make a mob unresponsive or unable to harm you and the rest of your party in any way, then you're best off not doing it, or putting in a help ticket thatt the mobe was glitched. Bug reports are good too.

[Bilger]

So if a boss "hangs" in his AI and cannot "remember" what to do, the entire raid party MUST stop immediately taking any actions, defensive OR offensive and attempt to revive said boss rather than continuing to block, attack, cast, or anything else. Got it.

Read what you want into my post. If a boss bugs out unintentionally then it isn't your fault or a exploit that is bad programming or AI. Now if you do it intentionally and make it bug out on purpose or if keep making it bug out on purpose then you are exploiting it's very easy to understand.

[fco-karatekid]

Read what you want into my post. If a boss bugs out unintentionally then it isn't your fault or a exploit that is bad programming or AI. Now if you do it intentionally and make it bug out on purpose or if keep making it bug out on purpose then you are exploiting it's very easy to understand.

Given the parameters you said here^ I agree - if _I_ make it bug out, then I'd agree. If I do _nothing_ but the AI glitches, then I cannot see that being considered an exploit.

But you can see incidents of recurrence that have been here for years - certain bosses won't go outside a given perimeter, for example, and players adapt to that because they assume it's WAI.

I'm not going to purposefully hose the AI; but I'm also not going to walk around on eggshells and avoid perching, etc; just because it's not consistent with someone's sense of ethics - if the perch exists, I am using it.

EDIT: OHHHH, NOW I know which perch it is to which OP is referring! THAT one, yes, is lame.

[GermanicusMaximus]

This is incorrect. The Tolero quote I posted above is in reference to a perch spot, which Turbine considers to be an exploit, that has been around for 7 years. (I believe...I did not know of it until about 3 years ago) Some exploits, like that one, are simply not game-breaking enough to fix immediately.

It would be nice if Turbine actually took the game seriously enough to fix the exploits that they know exist.

As a player, refusing to exploit is a mark of integrity. As a game provider, fixing the exploits in your game is a mark of integrity.

A known exploit, that has existed for at least 3 years? I'd try to shame Turbine, but at this point it is clearly impossible to do so.

[Vanshilar]

The official word on what is or is not an exploit was given here:

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=172475

I have no idea what's the exploit referenced by the OP, but as long as the monster continues to function (i.e. be responsive), typically perch spots are fine. I assume it's something about perch spots. If the player causes the monster to become nonresponsive, breaking the AI, then it's an exploit. Using the environment to prevent damage though is not considered an exploit.

Example: Archer grabs aggro of monster and then runs off to some safe (perch) spot. Now if archer runs back to monster and monster will start attacking archer again, not an exploit. If archer does something and monster ends up just standing there even when archer is standing next to monster, then exploit (monster has become unresponsive and does not change actions when the archer changes location)

Now say archer's melee friends start beating up on the monster. If the monster switches target to the melees after they do enough damage to grab aggro, not an exploit (monster is still being responsive). If the monster simply stands still even though melees would normally have aggro, exploit (monster is not being responsive).

I think a lot of the confusion though is about this exploit condition:

"Using a game bug to remove any or all danger to yourself and/or party."

Using regular game mechanics (which may include geometry) to remove danger is not an exploit. Note that it says "Using a game bug"; removing danger in and of itself is not what constitutes an exploit. For example, kiting, where a player range attacks a monster while continually moving to maintain a distance from the monster and keep it from meleeing the player, is not an exploit. Monster is still responding to what the player does. Using your guild's 30 resist shrine so that you can laugh off that kobold shaman's lightning is not an exploit. Moving behind a rock in the Plane of Night raid when Velah does her fire breath is not an exploit. Similarly, jumping on a rock or a ledge and ranging a monster, if that monster continues to act and try to get to you (even if it's futile), is not an exploit. The monster is still being responsive to its environment -- just that it lacks the proper arsenal (i.e. a ranged weapon) to deal with the situation. Its AI is still active and functioning, however.

If the player does something that causes the monster's AI to "break" and simply stand there (not because the monster is still trying to reach a player but can't, but that its AI no longer functions and is no longer trying at all), then it's an exploit.

Originally Posted by Tolero
In perching (considered simply cheesy rather than something TOS violating in our book), you must still be in some type of danger - if a ranged creature threw something at you or cast an AOE spell on the area you're at, you would get hit by it.

The particular subject of the PM above was in reference to a perch spot in an older quest where some giants could not reach you, and their ranged attacks could not hit you, making you effectively immune to damage once you killed the casters...that is an exploit, as nobody in the party is in danger or can be harmed.

I don't know the contents of that PM but if casters could hit you where you're at, it would seem like that perch spot isn't an exploit.

[Yazston_the_Invoker]

It would be nice if Turbine actually took the game seriously enough to fix the exploits that they know exist.

As a player, refusing to exploit is a mark of integrity. As a game provider, fixing the exploits in your game is a mark of integrity.

A known exploit, that has existed for at least 3 years? I'd try to shame Turbine, but at this point it is clearly impossible to do so.

See, but it's also a judgement call on their part...do we assign developers/qa to find and fix a 3-7 year old exploit from a quest where it is unnecessary nowadays, and creates no real in-game issues (not a raid, nor does the quest drop any loot that would hurry long the power creep), or do we work on bugs that affect many people in the game, or hurt our bottom line in some way? I'm sure they would love to be able to fix it and many other minor issues, but new, bigger bugs keep popping up every update. I'm sure there's someone somewhere who regrets every one of these bugs/exploits that finds its way to live...

[Yazston_the_Invoker]

The official word on what is or is not an exploit was given here:

http://forums.ddo.com/showthread.php?t=172475

I have no idea what's the exploit referenced by the OP, but as long as the monster continues to function (i.e. be responsive), typically perch spots are fine. I assume it's something about perch spots. If the player causes the monster to become nonresponsive, breaking the AI, then it's an exploit. Using the environment to prevent damage though is not considered an exploit.

Example: Archer grabs aggro of monster and then runs off to some safe (perch) spot. Now if archer runs back to monster and monster will start attacking archer again, not an exploit. If archer does something and monster ends up just standing there even when archer is standing next to monster, then exploit (monster has become unresponsive and does not change actions when the archer changes location)

Now say archer's melee friends start beating up on the monster. If the monster switches target to the melees after they do enough damage to grab aggro, not an exploit (monster is still being responsive). If the monster simply stands still even though melees would normally have aggro, exploit (monster is not being responsive).

I think a lot of the confusion though is about this exploit condition:

"Using a game bug to remove any or all danger to yourself and/or party."

Using regular game mechanics (which may include geometry) to remove danger is not an exploit. For example, kiting, where a player range attacks a monster while continually moving to maintain a distance from the monster and keep it from meleeing the player, is not an exploit. Monster is still responding to what the player does. Using your guild's 30 resist shrine so that you can laugh off that kobold shaman's lightning is not an exploit. Moving behind a rock in the Plane of Night raid when Velah does her fire breath is not an exploit. Similarly, jumping on a rock or a ledge and ranging a monster, if that monster continues to act and try to get to you (even if it's futile), is not an exploit. The monster is still being responsive to its environment -- just that it lacks the proper arsenal (i.e. a ranged weapon) to deal with the situation. Its AI is still active and functioning, however.

If the player does something that causes the monster's AI to "break" and simply stand there (not because the monster is still trying to reach a player but can't, but that its AI no longer functions and is no longer trying at all), then it's an exploit.



I don't know the contents of that PM but if casters could hit you where you're at, it would seem like that perch spot isn't an exploit.

Trying not to get too descriptive here, but the spot in question has mobs and casters nearby. The original discussion, which Tolero referenced in her PM, was simply in regards to the non-casters. Basically, it is a spot, where the creatures still respond to you, and you are still in line of sight, where you can range the monsters, yet they cannot hit you with their ranged attacks. I have personally never used this exploit, so I cannot explain whether or not the casters can hit you, only that according to Tolero, it is a known perch spot that is considered an exploit because mobs, who can normally range you, cannot hit you in this spot.

In the examples you give, there are mobs who do not have ranged attacks, which is a development choice, kiting, which requires you to pay attention, and you are still in danger, resist shrines, which are spell effects that are specifically intended to protect you from a particular type of damage, and the rocks in VON6, which cannot be considered an exploit, since you cannot sit behind them and kill Velah without either running out to damage her, or being in danger from the reavers and other trash. Basically, you have the right idea, but are reading too far into it. The "exploit" spots are where a mob SHOULD be able to get to you, but cannot, and where you can kill the mob without putting yourself in danger at all.

Perching is fine, assuming you are simply temporarily mitigating damage(IE: the mob's ranged attack does next to nothing, while the melee hits for a ton)...perching is not fine when you can stick on autoattack and walk away from the keyboard, then come back 20 minutes later and the mob is dead, but you are still unharmed. If you have a specific quest in mind that you think is legal, but falls into the above definition of exploit, then post it, and we can ask Tolero to comment.

[Vanshilar]

Basically, it is a spot, where the creatures still respond to you, and you are still in line of sight, where you can range the monsters, yet they cannot hit you with their ranged attacks. I have personally never used this exploit, so I cannot explain whether or not the casters can hit you, only that according to Tolero, it is a known perch spot that is considered an exploit because mobs, who can normally range you, cannot hit you in this spot.

It would seem like it's because there's something funky with the geometry that causes it to be an exploit, not because it's a perch spot.

Perching is fine, assuming you are simply temporarily mitigating damage(IE: the mob's ranged attack does next to nothing, while the melee hits for a ton)...perching is not fine when you can stick on autoattack and walk away from the keyboard, then come back 20 minutes later and the mob is dead, but you are still unharmed. If you have a specific quest in mind that you think is legal, but falls into the above definition of exploit, then post it, and we can ask Tolero to comment.

I don't think that's an operational definition, because it leads to the absurd situation that taking some ranged damage at a perch spot is fine, but it's an exploit as soon as you put on some DR or actively block (and thus the incoming damage goes from "little" to "zero"). That's why I go with "responsive"; note that in the exploit list, the 3 points that have to do with geometry all have a clause about "as long as the monster remains responsive" or something similar. That's something that is operational because it can easily be checked: if you move within melee range, does the monster attack you? If another party member attacks the monster enough that it would normally switch aggro to him, does the monster do so?

A few examples off the top of my head (although I haven't checked them personally recently so they may not apply now or I may be wrong about them): Snitch, incinerator, you are standing on a ledge with a valve that activates fire jets on the oozes below. The oozes can't reach you (I think), but you can use the valve to kill them or just take out a ranged weapon. You could go afk doing this and not get harmed by them. Similarly, Snitch also has sleeping dogs, which (I think) you can range them with impunity from the rooftops without taking any damage since they don't have bows on them.

According to your definition (not being harmed while ranging) these would be considered exploits, yet seeing as how they were coded I find it difficult to believe that Turbine did not intend for ranging them without taking damage to be a legitimate way to complete those aspects of the quest. Yet these monsters are still being responsive to their environment.

Also, the way ledges work in DDO, you can typically find locations where you will be able to range a target but when they range you they hit the ledge instead. A simple example is Sacrifices, where some sahuagin spawn near the shrine (near where the skeletal mage spawns). You can stay up on the ledge and range them, but when they try to range you, their spears will hit the ledge instead. I certainly hope that isn't an exploit, because that was how I got through that part sometimes when I first started playing (only to die on the traps moments later). But again, the monsters are still perfectly responsive.

Now if there were some strange one-way wall where you can shoot from it and damage monsters but they can't hit you, then that would be an exploit. But I typically wouldn't consider dodging stuff behind rocks and the like to be exploits; I don't think taking 0 damage is a good measure of what constitutes an exploit.

The problem with players defining exploits is not that they become defined too narrowly, but that they get defined too broadly, so people then start shouting "exploit!" as a means to browbeat anyone who doesn't match their pre-conceived notions of how to play the game. You can see that in this thread, where people use ad hominem (attacking the person) remarks on others who disagree, without addressing the substance of what they actually say. I don't think that's conducive to discussion on what is or isn't allowed by Turbine.

[Yazston_the_Invoker]

It would seem like it's because there's something funky with the geometry that causes it to be an exploit, not because it's a perch spot.



I don't think that's an operational definition, because it leads to the absurd situation that taking some ranged damage at a perch spot is fine, but it's an exploit as soon as you put on some DR or actively block (and thus the incoming damage goes from "little" to "zero"). That's why I go with "responsive"; note that in the exploit list, the 3 points that have to do with geometry all have a clause about "as long as the monster remains responsive" or something similar. That's something that is operational because it can easily be checked: if you move within melee range, does the monster attack you? If another party member attacks the monster enough that it would normally switch aggro to him, does the monster do so?

A few examples off the top of my head (although I haven't checked them personally recently so they may not apply now or I may be wrong about them): Snitch, incinerator, you are standing on a ledge with a valve that activates fire jets on the oozes below. The oozes can't reach you (I think), but you can use the valve to kill them or just take out a ranged weapon. You could go afk doing this and not get harmed by them. Similarly, Snitch also has sleeping dogs, which (I think) you can range them with impunity from the rooftops without taking any damage since they don't have bows on them.

According to your definition (not being harmed while ranging) these would be considered exploits, yet seeing as how they were coded I find it difficult to believe that Turbine did not intend for ranging them without taking damage to be a legitimate way to complete those aspects of the quest. Yet these monsters are still being responsive to their environment.

Also, the way ledges work in DDO, you can typically find locations where you will be able to range a target but when they range you they hit the ledge instead. A simple example is Sacrifices, where some sahuagin spawn near the shrine (near where the skeletal mage spawns). You can stay up on the ledge and range them, but when they try to range you, their spears will hit the ledge instead. I certainly hope that isn't an exploit, because that was how I got through that part sometimes when I first started playing (only to die on the traps moments later). But again, the monsters are still perfectly responsive.

Now if there were some strange one-way wall where you can shoot from it and damage monsters but they can't hit you, then that would be an exploit. But I typically wouldn't consider dodging stuff behind rocks and the like to be exploits; I don't think taking 0 damage is a good measure of what constitutes an exploit.

The problem with players defining exploits is not that they become defined too narrowly, but that they get defined too broadly, so people then start shouting "exploit!" as a means to browbeat anyone who doesn't match their pre-conceived notions of how to play the game. You can see that in this thread, where people use ad hominem (attacking the person) remarks on others who disagree, without addressing the substance of what they actually say. I don't think that's conducive to discussion on what is or isn't allowed by Turbine.

Again, you are reading too far into it. In your examples from the snitch, you are referring to creatures that have no ranged attacks, so of course it is fine to range them from a perch, even though you are not being harmed...they do not have ranged attacks.

In your example from Sacrifices, that might be something to ask Tolero about, since if you can range them, but their ranged attacks CANNOT hit you, then it can be considered an exploit. Think about it another way...if they move to different spots to get a better angle on you because they can't hit you, and you have to move again to be protected again, then it is not an exploit, since you need to react. If they do not react, even though there may be a better spot to range you from, then that is what I would consider unresponsive. (yes, they attack, but they do not RESPOND and move to a different position where they can hit you from)

And your example with the blocking and PRR is just silly...c'mon, once again, you are referring to a specific game mechanic that was put in to mitigate damage, like AC, Blur, Displacement, etc. Please stop bringing these up, since we both know that bad geometry and/or coding has nothing to do with spells or effects that are specifically in the game to achieve damage mitigation. (in other words, there is a difference between not being able to be attacked, and taking 0 damage on an attack) This is hyperbole at it's best.

Also, I agree with you about people using the term "exploit" too broadly, but that is where you are taking this...it's quite clear to many people what is an exploit and what is not...bringing spells, PRR, Blocking, etc. up at all is a perfect example of trying to define "exploit" with waaaay too broad a stroke. Yes, there are some grey areas, but if you take a moment to think it through, it's not tough to see that the grey areas make up less than 1% of what most people refer to as tactics. Unfortunately, people who glitch mobs knowingly and use stuck spots and perches like the ones that used to be in Eye of the Titan, refer to them as tactics as well, simply to try to justify the fact that they are "winning" by cheating and not really trying. I'm not going to go through this all day, since I know exactly what the meaning is...Tolero was quite clear, no matter how you want to try to break it down, and if you are genuinely curious about something, and not just trying to argue, then she is there and DOES respond to exploit questions through PM...I would imagine Cordovan does as well.

[Jasparion]

They are not doing it because they can feel cool.
They are doing this, so they can ransack EE chests fast and sell EE loot for a lot of plat/reds/whatever or TP codes.

This.

They will publicly say nothing while privately cheer at how much plat they have made from the game. Best $2 ever spent.

[GermanicusMaximus]

See, but it's also a judgement call on their part...do we assign developers/qa to find and fix a 3-7 year old exploit from a quest where it is unnecessary nowadays, and creates no real in-game issues (not a raid, nor does the quest drop any loot that would hurry long the power creep), or do we work on bugs that affect many people in the game, or hurt our bottom line in some way?

As a software engineer, I am well acquainted with those trade offs.

This situation did not evolve overnight. The game is in the state that it is in today because of a long term policy of failing to adequately address flaws in the game. The situation cited IS an exploit, and according to DDO's ToS/CoC, players can be banned for using it.

As with most things, some balance is key. Waving the "exploit ban stick" while failing to address the flaws in the game sends a mixed message. Eventually, some players believe they can/should/must exploit, based upon Turbine's own inaction.

In the new exploit making the rounds, some players are making the case that Turbine intentionally sold a product that it knew was exploitable, simply to obtain the revenue. As much as I would like to disbelieve that idea, based upon Turbine's own history I find the idea to be at least somewhat credible.

I'm sure they would love to be able to fix it and many other minor issues, but new, bigger bugs keep popping up every update. I'm sure there's someone somewhere who regrets every one of these bugs/exploits that finds its way to live...

I believed the same thing at one time. As I've watched Turbine slam out increasingly bug riddled updates, I've had to change my perception of how they do business.

[Yazston_the_Invoker]

As a software engineer, I am well acquainted with those trade offs.

This situation did not evolve overnight. The game is in the state that it is in today because of a long term policy of failing to adequately address flaws in the game. The situation cited IS an exploit, and according to DDO's ToS/CoC, players can be banned for using it.

As with most things, some balance is key. Waving the "exploit ban stick" while failing to address the flaws in the game sends a mixed message. Eventually, some players believe they can/should/must exploit, based upon Turbine's own inaction.

In the new exploit making the rounds, some players are making the case that Turbine intentionally sold a product that it knew was exploitable, simply to obtain the revenue. As much as I would like to disbelieve that idea, based upon Turbine's own history I find the idea to be at least somewhat credible.



I believed the same thing at one time. As I've watched Turbine slam out increasingly bug riddled updates, I've had to change my perception of how they do business.

I definitely see your point, and it does kind of prove your point that some people use the old "Well, it's been here forever and everybody does it, yet they don't fix it, so it must not be an exploit" excuse. I just blame the bugs and such on management...it's tough to take care of those bugs when you have someone pushing to get a specific product out the door on a specific date. I try not to blame the devs, simply because at this point, they are working with a 7-year-old beast. It would be nice to have a bug free product, but I will be the first to admit that it's the new stuff that keeps me around.

[Talon_Moonshadow]

It would seem like it's because there's something funky with the geometry that causes it to be an exploit, not because it's a perch spot.



I don't think that's an operational definition, because it leads to the absurd situation that taking some ranged damage at a perch spot is fine, but it's an exploit as soon as you put on some DR or actively block (and thus the incoming damage goes from "little" to "zero"). That's why I go with "responsive"; note that in the exploit list, the 3 points that have to do with geometry all have a clause about "as long as the monster remains responsive" or something similar. That's something that is operational because it can easily be checked: if you move within melee range, does the monster attack you? If another party member attacks the monster enough that it would normally switch aggro to him, does the monster do so?

A few examples off the top of my head (although I haven't checked them personally recently so they may not apply now or I may be wrong about them): Snitch, incinerator, you are standing on a ledge with a valve that activates fire jets on the oozes below. The oozes can't reach you (I think), but you can use the valve to kill them or just take out a ranged weapon. You could go afk doing this and not get harmed by them. Similarly, Snitch also has sleeping dogs, which (I think) you can range them with impunity from the rooftops without taking any damage since they don't have bows on them.

According to your definition (not being harmed while ranging) these would be considered exploits, yet seeing as how they were coded I find it difficult to believe that Turbine did not intend for ranging them without taking damage to be a legitimate way to complete those aspects of the quest. Yet these monsters are still being responsive to their environment.

Also, the way ledges work in DDO, you can typically find locations where you will be able to range a target but when they range you they hit the ledge instead. A simple example is Sacrifices, where some sahuagin spawn near the shrine (near where the skeletal mage spawns). You can stay up on the ledge and range them, but when they try to range you, their spears will hit the ledge instead. I certainly hope that isn't an exploit, because that was how I got through that part sometimes when I first started playing (only to die on the traps moments later). But again, the monsters are still perfectly responsive.

Now if there were some strange one-way wall where you can shoot from it and damage monsters but they can't hit you, then that would be an exploit. But I typically wouldn't consider dodging stuff behind rocks and the like to be exploits; I don't think taking 0 damage is a good measure of what constitutes an exploit.

The problem with players defining exploits is not that they become defined too narrowly, but that they get defined too broadly, so people then start shouting "exploit!" as a means to browbeat anyone who doesn't match their pre-conceived notions of how to play the game. You can see that in this thread, where people use ad hominem (attacking the person) remarks on others who disagree, without addressing the substance of what they actually say. I don't think that's conducive to discussion on what is or isn't allowed by Turbine.

You are right.
There are tons and tons of spots that allow you to range a monster and be protected from the monster's ranged attacks.

Not all of them perches. In fact, any terrain anywhere can be used like this.

The one factor that prevents you from being damaged in return, in most cases, is simply that the monsters are to stupid to realise that they are not hurtin gyou, and do not simply move to a new place to get a better shot.


On the other side of the coin, there are also several spots in th egame where the monsters use perches that are safe from us ranging them back. Crucible maze for instance has a few spots that we can not use arrows to hit them, yet they can hit us.

In both cases it is rare that these spots are also safe from some kinds of spells.
We can usually target them with Finger of Death for instance.
They can usually target us with Inflict Wounds. (some day Monsters will start giving us the Finger.)

Anyway, some times the monsters do move, but even then it is slow.
And we can be smart enough to move to a different spot and start the process over.

I have been using terrain in almost every quest to limit the amount of damage I take for years now.

For example, the small side entrance in Kobold Assault can be used to raneg Shamen and be protected from their Lightning Bolts.
They eventually move through to get a better shot, but I simply move back through and find another angle to shoot at them from.

This is not perfect protection, but works very well.

True perches are not needed. Doors work very well for casters and archer.
Melee monsters probably require a perch though. But there are tons of valid perches in the game.

Boxes, giant mushrooms..... things obviously put there on purpose.
To make our game more interesting.

It would be a very boring game if they expected us to melee everything and let ourselves get beat on.



But again... anything that gets overused should be changed IMO.
Too many players using a certain mushroom..... the Hobgoblins should cut it down.

One guy doing it all the time isn't a problem, but every single group forcing every player to get on the same mushroom is not fun.... whether it is an exploit or not, it needs to be changed when people abuse it.

[Ravelock]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru

Without "exploits," James T. Kirk might never have been Captain...

...then where would we be? Who would've brought back the humpback whales to speak with the alien probe?

Boom.

[Kmnh]

I remember the little bump in Into The Big Top that was definitely put there on purpose so people could do the sneaky spy quest in a sneaky way instead of fighting everything. So many people complaned about it that the devs put invisible walls all over the place.

The most annoying "exploit fix" was The House of Death Undone. They turned that quest from "coolest quest in the Expansion" to "dull hack'n'slash quest #129"

[Gkar]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kobayashi_Maru

Without "exploits," James T. Kirk might never have been Captain...

...then where would we be? Who would've brought back the humpback whales to speak with the alien probe?

Boom.

Naw, that wasn't an exploit, that was outright hacking, way more serious.

And yeah, Kirk never thought any "rule" applied to him, not even the "Prime Suggestion"

[fco-karatekid]

...On the other side of the coin, there are also several spots in th egame where the monsters use perches that are safe from us ranging them back. Crucible maze for instance has a few spots that we can not use arrows to hit them, yet they can hit us....

This is an outstanding example of what I was trying to say - if the tables are turned on positioning from your example above, my point was just that THAT is not an exploit - it's leveraging terrain.

[fco-karatekid]

Naw, that wasn't an exploit, that was outright hacking, way more serious.

And yeah, Kirk never thought any "rule" applied to him, not even the "Prime Suggestion"

Good man... good pirate.