[New Users] Please note that all new users need to be approved before posting. This process can take up to 24 hours. Thank you for your patience.
Check out the v.217 Sengoku Returns: Asura War Patch Notes here!
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the Forums Code of Conduct: https://forums.maplestory.nexon.net/discussion/29556/code-of-conducts

Community Topic Regarding Suicide Kanna

Comments

  • pepepepe
    Reactions: 1,995
    Posts: 152
    Member
    edited November 2019
    0tree wrote: »
    Some people think this new ban policy is right.
    This isn't new, repeated dying always had a chance to trigger an autoban ever since this game's inception. Nexon is simply re-affirming this policy due to the latest meta.
    thekenturah
  • FuhreakFuhreak
    Reactions: 6,550
    Posts: 1,252
    Member, Private Tester
    edited November 2019
    Long post wanted to reply to multiple people, sorry in advance. Original post in spoilers.
    Joyjason wrote: »
    Fuhreak wrote: »
    It's my personal opinion that she needs to be nerfed into the ground. No meta should ever revolve entirely around one character in a game with 40+.
    You couldn't have spoken truer words--I completely agree with this opinion. Heck I actually kinda want GMS to completely remove her from the game exclusively or redo some revamps to make her less desirable as a class. The problem with that is it'll piss off a lot of people, and even while I share your opinion I know as a fact (quite disdainfully) a Kanna nerf/removal will cause detrimental effects on GMS Reboot as a whole. The only reason why I may not be AS vehemently against Kanna such as yourself is because it's a class that's readily accessible for everyone--not a time limited class or a class that you need to pay for/significantly work towards
    I don't want Kanna gone entirely, Just Kishin really. The skill should have never even made it past quality assurance.
    To go off topic a bit and discuss your opinion of Maplestory being really a Solo-only game nowadays it's important to note way back in Pre-BB PQs were the objective best way to level while getting "leeched" was also more effective than solo-grinding. These are all party-based features that players "utilized" but if you asked Nexon said "leeching" would probably have been considered a similar offense to Suicide Kannas. However, with the revamps of classes to be given additional mobility and faster map clearing skills and overall power inflation, along with nerfs on party play (inability to gain EXP while not in Combat Stance) and decreasing population due to some bad patches (i.e. Unlimited) AND the aforementioned abuse of getting six times the amount of mesos for running multiple clients during bosses, Maplestory really had no choice but to resort to making everything solo-oriented regardless of whether it was a good choice or not. The other option to leave it be would cause absolute chaos and probably killed off the game much quicker (such as for the multiple client bosses exploit).

    I have utmost respect for you as a veteran of this game and a knowledgeable debater, but it's definitely not fair to critique any game fully aware of its history and why it needed to turn out to be this solo-oriented game (Most MMOs end up becoming generally solo-oriented anyways too, from the power inflation or simply the fact that it's just not worth to party play). I guess if you wanted to point fingers it can be towards Nexon for its bad patches and the players who "abused party systems", but if I may be so impudent to make a suggestion that if you want party-play or co-op in your games you should be playing something like the FPS genre and not an RPG in this day and age where people are so lazy they're willing to buy progress in games with money and KMS already implemented a way to skip Arcane Dailies by using Maple Points... so asking them to gather party members for a task might as well be asking them to kill themselves
    Fair enough. But I think Nexon is a big enough company that they should at least be able to see giant warning flags like this and nerf them before they become so ingrained into the meta that players get pissed when you give it the nerf it deserves.
    Players have the right to be pissed, too. Because Nexon is the one who let it go on for far too long.
    I think its an easy thing to say if you've already progressed to the point where farming on your main is more productive than Bye Bye farming.

    Referencing the fact that you play on reboot, the most affected server, means nothing if you are already strong enough to farm on your main. because you got over the hump back when the hump was considerably smaller.

    In which case, it doesn't matter to you because it doesn't effect you.
    It never would have affected me as I never used these means. It would be the same for me progression wise if I had made my account today or back when reboot was first introduced. I don't use a lot of GMS content, it's not just Kanna that I avoid. I have a much harder time than these players.
    If I can do it without things like Gollux, Commerci, Kanna/Kishin, etc... So can they.
    Nothing to really hate there, its comes of as a bit apatheitic towards the community and mildly self-centered, but not really worthy of hate.
    Fair. Just because I took the hard road doesn't mean other players should be forced to do so as well. Part of why I did is simply because I wanted the challenge.
    I still think it's silly to let a meta revolve around one character, though.
    Besides, why would you be mad when all it does is make it more difficult for newer players to reach the point you've reached, a point you just so happened to reach before all the major changes that impacted meso farming occurred, things like the meso level penalty, kishin nerf, and now the official stance on suicide farming.

    I can farm on my main as well, and I make just about the same amount of meso as I made bye bye farming (~550m per hour), however bye bye is more relaxing. allowing me to pay attention to movies or shows while farming, which is nice to pass the time. Farming on my main requires more focus, making distracted playing less of an option. which means that this change really only increases the monotony of farming for me, not the output.

    Not that you would care about how monotonous other people find farming, but knowing what it took for me to get to this point, I do care, and so I feel bad for new players and weaker players, who will now be forced to farm on their main, for lower meso rates, under circumstances that demand more focus, for considerably longer hours, all for the *possibility*, not guarantee, of progressing.
    I dislike the Kishin/Suicide Meta for reasons I think I've made obvious.
    But lets be honest, this move will more likely just motivate people to risk actual hacking, since legitimate farming on bye bye now carries the same risk of being perma-banned as using actual third party programs.
    That's on them. If a player decides to actively break ToS (That has been stated as such, Nexon.) I have no sympathy for them.
    0tree wrote: »
    Some people think this new ban policy is right, and some do NOT think this is right.
    1. KMS allows this "suicide" method to farm "droplets." ( now if you are new player or do not know what the droplets are for, you SHOULD NOT be part of this argument and saying the new ban policy is totally acceptable.)
    -> you simply cannot meet the end game boss requirement WITHOUT farming droplets. and it is INPOSSIBLE to farm enough droplets without suiciding to stay in certain lv. range to farm them. w/o earning exp/meso penalty Thus, KMS allows it
    Something they should stop allowing imo and just make droplets drop in the 245+ areas. People shouldn't have to rely on abuse of game design.
    2. GMS(reboot) already has a higher 'star force' ing fee.
    -> Yes, we have familiar system and farming kanna. With this new policy, they will have to gear up even further to efficiently farm(or even just be able to kill monsters), but how are the new players supposed to make meso to gear up to kill monsters if their leveling/monsters getting stronger ratio simply exceeds getting meso to gear up?
    By playing the game properly. Build up legion/link skills, save money on these characters, use party play to clear content that is too hard to solo.
    3. Regular server players simply do not have right to talk about this new policy. You guys can trade end game gears and even pay money to "gacha" them.
    despite the "bye bye suicide kanna" method, end game players are affected by the new policy. Go back to #1 and read about the droplets.
    If you are happy about this new policy banning more potential/possible/actual hackers, then you should ask for better hack detection.
    Despite Wonderguy's statement, I am a reboot player. I've stated this several times in the past.
    there is no right or answer however you play the game. you can do quests or just hunt monsters. nothing a wrong answer. People just decide to do something more efficient than others and farming is one of them. Adding "no suicide" policy simply disable anyone to reach the end game in reboot and removing malaysia region would not solve the suiciding farming method because players WILL find another efficient farming map.
    Then what do we suggest Nexon to do? A better hack detection.

    This new policy seems like "Oh, because we cannot
    differentiate between hackers and innocent players, YOU deal with it." what a simple way to solve the problem.
    it is like we pay for our food (buy nx, and play the game) in a resturant and get scared while eating the food because that resturant has a policy of how you are suppoed to eat (this new policy of banning).
    The new policy to me is saying "Stop abusing things and go level up like a normal player."
    That said, given the supposed double standard for droplets, GMS better start banning people for that too, or be called out for it.
    I don't think it's an excuse to catch hackers. But this does change the way the game is handled a little bit and Nexon should at least adapt droplets for this.
    Besides talking about ToS and backing up nexon by saying "they have the absolute power to rule us by banning for whatever reason."
    Can we at least have a clear guide-line? like suiciding 3 times within 10min time frame is not allowed or dying to challenge a strong monster while you do not have potions is not allowed (are kannas not allowed to fight strong monsters now? because they are suppoed to die...talking about reboot sized ellite boss, monsters)
    I agree. The only reason I bring that stuff up is because people ask where in the ToS they broke. The way I see it is these people are looking for a "gotcha!" moment. Suicide Kanna reaks of abuse. Anyone who used it extensively, especially after all the ban waves probably knew their account/character was at risk.
    This is why I agree with Agraphine's statement of unbanning anyone banned for this sole reason. to give them a second chance.
    According to this new policy you can't use Iframe skills to save yourself from 1 hit at bosses fight.
    Using Iframe to avoiding death it's meaning you are taking advantage of an exploit in the game that not intended to be used.

    Why on earth would using a skill that's designed to save your life, to save your life, be bannable? That's what it was designed to do.
    EXP lose on death wasn't designed as a reward. It was designed as a punishment. Players turning it into a reward is abuse.

  • VoiceInAVoidVoiceInAVoid
    Reactions: 370
    Posts: 27
    Member
    edited November 2019
    Aggraphine wrote: »
    A skill that grants a period of invincibility as its intended function or dying over and over to prevent leveling up so you can sit in one map forever. Yeah that's totally a fair comparison.

    Y'all need to stop with the "lol dying's illegal now" memes too if you want anyone to take you and your complaints seriously. Because right now, they're probably paying attention to the community response and just figure "oh they'll meme about it for a couple weeks and then forget all about it".

    and yet dying give you the lost of exp like iframe give invincibility, so why I can't use both of them to my advantage. Nexon doesn't like the outcome of one of them change it instead of telling us don't use it. the nature of humankind is working with the tools we have, take those tools and we can't use them anymore. cut the bullshit don't tell me I have the option for an easy life and I can't use it, remove the option end of discussion. I don't want it to be legal the suicide thing just remove the fking option if u don't like how ppl take advantage of this remove it!!!
  • HHG1HHG1
    Reactions: 5,966
    Posts: 780
    Member, Private Tester
    edited November 2019
    What's this guy on about. Does he not understand that invincibility frame skills are designed to give you... invincibility? When you decide to pop them during a fight is up to you. There are even invincibility potential lines. There are cooldowns and trade-offs.
    It's not even a comparison.

    The only thing that you can reasonably make a case for is the hat-status disappearing when dying in Pierre. But feel free to make a suggestion/bug report on that if you want.
    Fuhreak
  • JoyjasonJoyjason
    Reactions: 285
    Posts: 3
    Member
    edited November 2019
    HHG1 wrote: »
    Based on replies here and on reddit, it seems people absolutely do think the problem is the ban of suicide kannas.
    HHG1 wrote: »
    I would say they addressed it quite late

    Now you do have a point here and quite frankly I'm still more of a newbie who's only played this game for about 4 months. It still brings up the question why "Suicide Kanna = An Exploit" discussion wasn't brought up for that period of a MINIMUM of 4 months even when a complete newbie like me could learn about it from the community. It really implies that Nexon as a company do not understand the functions of their own game and needs to always act retroactively when something like the false ban waves occurred and the community is outraged. Heck your words even suggest that if these false ban waves wasn't there Nexon would still have no official statement on Suicide Kannas.

    This is how it is KMS, anyway, with the Wind Archer's Howling Gale bug not fixed for nearly 3 years vs Pathfinder's Raven Tempest, the aforementioned "bug" of Shield Chasing for Demon Avengers, and even the Night Lord's Spread Throw controversy where KMS buffed the skill in question without testing it and only listening to community then realizing they done goofed--It's definitely not proper that the developer/publisher of the game knows less than players or consumers.
    HHG1 wrote: »
    You mentioned how they killed leeching in another post, and while there are other solutions that could effectively gut the suicide method and make it non-viable in similar ways, the difference is that there is already an autoban in place to catch hackers that abuse the same method for the same purpose; to make maximum profit off of low-level outdated content, forever.
    Simply stating "you gon b banned" might actually be the better solution in this case.

    The argument I have against this is what if they're not actually using hacks or macros, but actually playing the game? Even with the initial ban waves I still farmed at Byebye, and I personally thought that the reason why I wasn't blocked from the game was because I actually controlled my character continuously and never used a macro/bot/hacks like other plays may have or used suspicious dying mechanics (and subsequently it was these players who were banned). It also brings the question why it was at this certain point the autoban system decided to arbitrarily kick in and start banning people who "abused" suicide Kannas, instead of when it was a thing 4 months ago. That is of course, if that autoban was put in place to specifically combat against Suicide Kannas, which is obviously not the case as seen with Nexon admitting to "false bans".

    I guess my point here is that the autoban was there to combat hackers--that's fine, but now that it's hit some others who may or may not have been guilty Nexon makes this a problem for the entire server which includes innocent players by restricting the practice altogether

    I feel like I should reinforce my previous posts--people are pissed about the ban of suicide kannas. This is a fact. However, I think there would have been far less outrage or backlash if the following traits weren't present:
    1) Nexon seemingly had no comment on this practice for at the minimum of 4 months
    2) This was a retroactive statement following a series of autoban features they might have implemented that didn't kick in until now
    3) There's really no proper logic for this to be considered an exploit, noting it as "unintended behavior" which can be extrapolated into other arguments
    4) There are still other serious bugs or detrimental factors (e.g. hackers) that Nexon does not (or cannot) resolve

    (I guess a good analogy here is if someone you hate did something to offend you vs if someone you liked did the same thing--you'd probably react a lot differently just because of your previous viewpoint with them and it's kinda the same thing here)
    Aggraphine wrote: »
    A skill that grants a period of invincibility as its intended function or dying over and over to prevent leveling up so you can sit in one map forever. Yeah that's totally a fair comparison.

    It kinda is. A lot of these skills have a large delay. I have a Pathfinder sub-main so Nova Blast for example, but how about a Marksman's True Sniping (oh my god imagine this skill not having iframes I'm legit lol'ing right now at the imagination), and many of the bosses have one-shot mechanics that if you got hit with during the usage of the skill, would cancel it altogether. Sure--if you git gud and know when to use these high-delay skills (e.g. with binds) that might work but not only do most classes not have a class-bind there's still the risk of bugs that might happen with canceled skills that can all be alleviated with just a short iframe. Thus these iframes aren't really meant for you to cheese or tank boss mechanics (and there's absolutely no boss mechanic all the way up to the Black Mage that MANDATES an iframe so this kinda supports that claim as well)

    If you're not satisfied with this analogy, how about the common practice of using mules for significantly more advantageous benefits, such as Wild Hunter for the superior Sharp Eyes (30% Crit Damage vs 15% for other archers or 8% for DSE) and Call of the Wild (+10% attack) and Bishops for Heaven's Door which was utilized for ages in content such as Mu Lung Dojo and bossing? Though it's patched for both Dojo and the newly revamped Ghost Park it's still utilized for bossing as you can see in various KMS clips. These players receive significant advantages such as not needing to use their DSE and empty a slot in the V-Matrix for another node or blatant buffs and additional death count

    How about Kishin mules and a 2 PC meta if you feel like the analogy should be GMS-tailored? I feel as if Nexon is fully aware of this issue since they did release Fury Totems (though it's limited and quite frankly a bit expensive), but this gives a significant advantage for people who have 2 machines (whether physical or virtual) and can be considered unintended behavior since you're getting the advantage of Kishin without actually playing on the Kanna, not to mention the people who use a Kishin mule often do so with a macro to refresh the Kishin which is explicitly against Nexon's Terms of Service.

    These are just examples of "strategies" that players developed, implemented, and utilized over the years within the boundaries of the game system. Suicide Kanna just happens to be another one in that list along with many others I'm too dumb to think of right now.

    It might not be a good practice to interpret everything you see on the internet as memes especially when there's effort for a serious debate. You contribute nothing even towards the argument supporting this ban announcement and it only makes you look bad
    VoiceInAVoidStarryKnightWONDERGUY
  • pepepepe
    Reactions: 1,995
    Posts: 152
    Member
    edited November 2019
    Joyjason wrote: »
    2) This was a retroactive statement following a series of autoban features they might have implemented that didn't kick in until now

    They might have changed the logic of the autoban to hit more people. Before this most people spaced out their death times to avoid an autoban, some died consecutively until 0% and the autoban didn't even trigger. There is obviously some kind of condition that would've triggered it in the past but I feel like nexon changed it recently and broadened it under the pretence that it was always illegal to suicide anyway. If this is true it would mean that nexon specifically targeted the suicide kanna meta in order to bring it to an end.
    Fuhreak
  • HHG1HHG1
    Reactions: 5,966
    Posts: 780
    Member, Private Tester
    edited November 2019
    Joyjason wrote: »
    Heck your words even suggest that if these false ban waves wasn't there Nexon would still have no official statement on Suicide Kannas.
    Not necessarily. The topic has been brought up before when discussing healthy and unhealthy meta regarding kanna as a class. It was just more urgent now with the ban wave being intense and the ticket responses being confusing, I suppose.
    I don't disagree that Nexon tends to be more reactive than proactive though.
    What if they're not actually using hacks or macros, but actually playing the game? [...] It also brings the question why it was at this certain point the autoban system decided to arbitrarily kick in and start banning people who "abused" suicide Kannas, instead of when it was a thing 4 months ago. That is of course, if that autoban was put in place to specifically combat against Suicide Kannas, which is obviously not the case as seen with Nexon admitting to "false bans".

    I guess my point here is that the autoban was there to combat hackers--that's fine, but now that it's hit some others who may or may not have been guilty Nexon makes this a problem for the entire server which includes innocent players by restricting the practice altogether
    [...]
    3) There's really no proper logic for this to be considered an exploit, noting it as "unintended behavior" which can be extrapolated into other arguments
    Again, it was not intended to be used this way, manually or not, which Nexon now has publicly stated as it became a larger topic of discussion. I went into detail of why I think it was more or less obvious in the thread I linked on page 1.
    The autoban is still there to combat hackers, and now also to deter people from staying the same level, at the same map, forever to profit off of outdated and unbalanced content, just like the hackers do. That behavior has been discouraged time after time, if you pay attention.
    In addition, Malaysia is probably the next piece of content to get removed anyway, especially since it overlaps with KMS content (Fantasy Theme Park).
    Thus these iframes aren't really meant for you to cheese or tank boss mechanics (and there's absolutely no boss mechanic all the way up to the Black Mage that MANDATES an iframe so this kinda supports that claim as well)
    There is a huge difference between strategically timed skills that offer iframes either as a trade-off or specifically to allow you to cheat death in a situation where life count is crucial, and the man-made meta of suicide kanna.
    There is no mandatory use of iframes, unless you want to solo. But there are lots of reasons why they've been made available to you, unlike suiciding.
    What I would argue might not be intended with iframes is the use of them in jump quests. Unsure if they've made any effort to combat that or not. Perhaps just locking skill-use in some.
    If you're not satisfied with this analogy, how about the common practice of using mules for significantly more advantageous benefits, such as Wild Hunter for the superior Sharp Eyes (30% Crit Damage vs 15% for other archers or 8% for DSE) and Call of the Wild (+10% attack) and Bishops for Heaven's Door which was utilized for ages in content such as Mu Lung Dojo and bossing? Though it's patched for both Dojo and the newly revamped Ghost Park it's still utilized for bossing as you can see in various KMS clips. These players receive significant advantages such as not needing to use their DSE and empty a slot in the V-Matrix for another node or blatant buffs and additional death count
    Again, it's clearly something they've been cracking down as you mentioned with nerfs, etc. It's getting the "leeching treatment" while the suicide method largely benefits hackers specifically so they need to keep the autoban in place as a hacker-trap, for now at least.
    If they implement better ways to catch and manage hackers in the future they might revisit the idea of limiting or removing exp loss to make the meta impossible instead, but for now it's enough to say "hey don't do this because it's not allowed and you will get banned".
    How about Kishin mules and a 2 PC meta if you feel like the analogy should be GMS-tailored? I feel as if Nexon is fully aware of this issue since they did release Fury Totems (though it's limited and quite frankly a bit expensive), but this gives a significant advantage for people who have 2 machines (whether physical or virtual) and can be considered unintended behavior since you're getting the advantage of Kishin without actually playing on the Kanna, not to mention the people who use a Kishin mule often do so with a macro to refresh the Kishin which is explicitly against Nexon's Terms of Service.
    Again, that's something that's still a topic and they've made some progress with, as small as it may be. I imagine they're still looking at the situation. You're not wrong that it's an equally unhealthy meta though. I don't think many people disagree.

    Suicide kanna being addressed now, as it was a big and somewhat urgent topic (because of the bans), does not mean that other issues will never get addressed. I hope you understand that.
    There's a bug-report section on the forum as well as suggestions if you feel inclined to bring something up. Making a fuss on reddit is also an option.
    Fuhreak
  • HHG1HHG1
    Reactions: 5,966
    Posts: 780
    Member, Private Tester
    edited November 2019
    (oopsie double post instead of edit)
  • StarryKnightStarryKnight
    Reactions: 1,625
    Posts: 116
    Member
    edited November 2019
    Why on earth would using a skill that's designed to save your life, to save your life, be bannable? That's what it was designed to do.
    If that were the case that the intention of the skill is to save your life, why are so many of them part of some attack animation? Surely if their intention was to save your life, they would be separate defensive skills with their own cool down, with the intention written in the skill description, like final pact.

    So, assuming that the intention of attack skills is to attack, which is logical, then its also reasonable to say that using iframes from attacking skills should be considered abuse in the same way dying to lose exp is. Thus, its actually an acceptable argument here, because it simply applies the same logic used to condemn suicide farming and applies it to another situation. This type of argument is called a reductio ad absurdum, and it's goal is to demonstrate that if we apply the same logic equally to other situations, it results in absurdity. Whether you believe it is a compelling argument doesn't mean it isn't a fair argument to make.

    EXP lose on death wasn't designed as a reward. It was designed as a punishment. Players turning it into a reward is abuse.
    I disagree. It was never a punishment, it is an inevitable consequence of simply playing the game. To claim that it is a punishment is to imply that players who die have committed some offence. In games, certain actions have certain consequences, that's all there is to it. Whether you view those consequences as beneficial or detrimental depends almost entirely on the use of the consequence in game. You could argue that the loss of exp was intended to be detrimental, but you can't say it was intended to be a punishment, and just because it was intended to be a detriment, does not mean that it *must* be a detriment.

    To bring it full circle, a consequence of certain skill animations is frames of the animation where the player is invulnerable, using those frames to avoid a ohko instead of using an attacking skill to, you know, attack... is not an intention that that the skill is designed to be used for, hence why the reductio argument works. You may not find it compelling, but it still applies. I've not made the argument in this thread because I think there are better arguments, but It has more merit than you seem willing to grant.

    If I can do it without things like Gollux, Commerci, Kanna/Kishin, etc... So can they.
    So you've never had a map kished while training? You don't have Gollux gear, or commerci gear, and don't use a Kanna? Surely you can understand how that sounds suspicious, right? Did you also not level a Kanna for legion, and never used a kanna link skill?

    Not doing these things for the sake of not doing these things is not really a challenge, in fact, NOT doing content is easy. What it is, is a voluntary boat anchor chained to your ankle. Worse, it makes you nearly un-party-able for end game content, save someone pitying you enough to give you a carry. I would assume, if the above is true, you've not done much current end game content.

    Weren't you the one that claimed party play is the aspect of the game you miss most and wish it played a more prominent role throughout maple? Yet you refuse to do the very content that makes you an equally contributing member of party play....

    Honestly, it sounds a bit closer to virtue signaling than playing the game on challenge mode. You might as well be wearing a purity ring...
  • HHG1HHG1
    Reactions: 5,966
    Posts: 780
    Member, Private Tester
    edited November 2019
    Why on earth would using a skill that's designed to save your life, to save your life, be bannable? That's what it was designed to do.
    If that were the case that the intention of the skill is to save your life, why are so many of them part of some attack animation? Surely if their intention was to save your life, they would be separate defensive skills with their own cool down, with the intention written in the skill description, like final pact.

    So, assuming that the intention of attack skills is to attack, which is logical, then its also reasonable to say that using iframes from attacking skills should be considered abuse in the same way dying to lose exp is. Thus, its actually an acceptable argument here, because it simply applies the same logic used to condemn suicide farming and applies it to another situation. This type of argument is called a reductio ad absurdum, and it's goal is to demonstrate that if we apply the same logic equally to other situations, it results in absurdity. Whether you believe it is a compelling argument doesn't mean it isn't a fair argument to make.
    While I'm not familiar with every iframe skill in this game. There are those that are purely for invincibility, there are also those that grant an extra life while then also making you invincible after death. There are link skills that grant invincibility after death as well.
    Now, you're gonna say that dying intentionally to receive that time of invincibility after death might be abuse, and while it technically could be, there is also a trade-off in most situations where you'll lose a life that you might need. An example of this is inexperienced players intentionally dying before the test-phase in Will to not cause the test to fail, or dying to be invincible while putting on drop gear. (I quote this later too, but the resurrection timer was added to prevent and limit some other profits of staying dead in a boss fight.)
    Those are things that Nexon could potentially prevent if they want to. But again, it's not directly associated with hackers like suiciding is, which is why that's bannable and not just prevented.
    I also imagine it would be much harder to create an autoban for that type of thing (instead of adjusting skills and boss mechanics as usual), than it is to detect multiple deaths that result in excessive exp loss.
    If it's not intended or acceptable behavior, that is.

    The ones that are part of an attack are usually there to ensure your survival during that attack, to make up for the attack costing HP or potentially putting you in a more dangerous spot after the attack, if you use it with any other intention than to do damage, you lose the burst/DoT/debuff and still have to wait out the cooldown or charge it up again. That's the trade-off.
    The amount of iframe skills a class has and how the skill itself works is a matter of balancing. And BoD is just generally broken, but that's a different discussion.
    If anything it just further proves that it's Nexon's intention to give you every chance to stay alive, not reward you for dying. Not that it needs proving, since they've said it themselves now.

    EXP lose on death wasn't designed as a reward. It was designed as a punishment. Players turning it into a reward is abuse.
    I disagree. It was never a punishment, it is an inevitable consequence of simply playing the game. To claim that it is a punishment is to imply that players who die have committed some offence. In games, certain actions have certain consequences, that's all there is to it. Whether you view those consequences as beneficial or detrimental depends almost entirely on the use of the consequence in game. You could argue that the loss of exp was intended to be detrimental, but you can't say it was intended to be a punishment, and just because it was intended to be a detriment, does not mean that it *must* be a detriment.

    To bring it full circle, a consequence of certain skill animations is frames of the animation where the player is invulnerable, using those frames to avoid a ohko instead of using an attacking skill to, you know, attack... is not an intention that that the skill is designed to be used for, hence why the reductio argument works. You may not find it compelling, but it still applies. I've not made the argument in this thread because I think there are better arguments, but It has more merit than you seem willing to grant.
    If something is designed and intended to be a detriment, then using it for large profit is abuse and exploitation. That's why it's labelled as unintended behavior.

    I know you've replied to this before but I'll quote myself from the older thread (prior to this announcement) for context;
    You're ported to town to avoid multiple instant deaths. Everything in the game encourages you to gain more exp. They already adjusted several lower level areas' meso drops because "hey guys you shouldn't stay here forever", they also added burning areas and cursed rune effect, making extra exp nearly unavoidable. [...] Dying repeatedly to actively undo progress is not an intended or encouraged use of the system, and it is mainly used to break ToS, hence the auto-ban being in place. I think that's a clear enough stance.
    I believe it's entirely fair to assume that losing exp when dying was never intended to be used in this way, bots or not. Yes, losing exp is the intended function after dying, but we're talking about intended use of the function. Not the function itself.
    The core goal of the game is to gain exp, level up, move on and get stronger as a result. You are rewarded for this at every turn. There are skills and items to prevent death and exp loss, there are attributes to decrease exp loss upon death. Everything in the game encourages you to gain exp and try not to die. Exp loss is there to make you stay on your toes (and for Nexon to sell charms).
    Yes, there are other instances where dying can give you an advantage, which isn't penalized with exp loss. Such as bosses and certain story content. You then lose a life or fail the mission as a trade-off, well within how a boss fight or mission should work. It's no different from preserving lives or waiting out cooldowns by not resurrecting immediately, they've even added a timer to make sure you can't just get carried straight through. Further proving that abusing deaths is not intended.
    If Pierre is an issue then there's a suggestion to be made for keeping the hat after resurrecting. I don't particularly disagree with that.

    So once again, it's very clearly intended to be a detriment, while iframes are not.
    Could iframes be balanced and limited further? Sure.
    Are they equal to intentionally taking advantage of a mechanic that was designed as a detriment, to then eternally stay in one area of the game for profit, legit players and hackers alike? No.
  • StarryKnightStarryKnight
    Reactions: 1,625
    Posts: 116
    Member
    edited November 2019
    So once again, it's very clearly intended to be a detriment, while iframes are not.
    I wasn't referring to invincibility frames that are clearly marked and intended to be used for defense, hence my reference towards Final Pact, which is obviously intended to be used to avoid death.

    My point was *specifically* with respect to *attacks* that happen to contain iframes due to the way the animations work, for those I would say are clearly not "intended" to be used for defense (or rather, are not clearly described in game as permitted to be used for defense). Using an *attacking* skill, to defend against death, because it has iframes, is clearly counter to the "intended" purpose of "attacking".

    If it were intended to be used in this way, then why do some characters not have iframes? For example: Night Lord. You might say Dark Sight, but both Shadower and Night Walker have iframes AND dark sight, so clearly one cant say Dark Sight is the reason, and clearly this puts both of these classes at an advantage over Night Lord in boss fights. So IF you're claiming that using attacking skills to avoid enemy attacks that would otherwise kill the player is legitimate gameplay, it would seem to say that Nexon has intentionally advantaged certain classes and disadvantaged others.

    SO I think it fair to say using attacking skills to avoid boss mechanics is not intended gameplay. Ergo, I would say you've not satisfied the warrant of your claim that iframes on attacking skills are intended to be used in that manner. Thus yes, these both fall under the same category of "not intended gameplay", whether you feel one is more or less egregious is besides the point, a reductio argument still applies, you just don't find it compelling.

    So while I mostly agree with you, the clear delineation between which of these is a violation and which of these is not, is still not so obvious as one might assume at first glance. I'm not saying its a good argument, Im just saying that the situation is more similar than most seem willing to admit.

    If anything it just further proves that it's Nexon's intention to give you every chance to stay alive, not reward you for dying.
    Prior to the recent clarification, one could have turned that on its head and said that losing exp when dying "proves that it's nexon's intention" that you have the ability to prevent yourself from leveling. So it might be preemptive to assume that Nexon has iframes in attacking skills intentionally to provide you the opportunity to avoid boss mechanics. More than likely they are an unintended and difficult to eliminate consequence of the way the skills are animated.
  • FuhreakFuhreak
    Reactions: 6,550
    Posts: 1,252
    Member, Private Tester
    edited November 2019
    My point was *specifically* with respect to *attacks* that happen to contain iframes due to the way the animations work, for those I would say are clearly not "intended" to be used for defense (or rather, are not clearly described in game as permitted to be used for defense). Using an *attacking* skill, to defend against death, because it has iframes, is clearly counter to the "intended" purpose of "attacking".

    Remember that Nexon had to design/program that attack to specifically make you gain iframes.
    Either the skill is supposed to help you survive during the attack or make sure you absolutely survive during the attack.
    It would be pretty hard to accidentally design/program iframes into an attack.
    I don't think it's a good comparison, but I understand the reasoning behind it.

    EXP Loss on death is a universal thing that is only removed in key situations.
    I think this more than enough proves that you aren't supposed to die in the field if you can help it.
    They remove the EXP loss on death in certain spots of the game because they except you to die.
    In these areas where they expect you to die, EXP loss is removed. Why in these areas would they remove EXP loss?
    There's plenty of subjectivity to dying in the field to lose EXP on purpose in a way. However, Nexon has stated now that this is objectively bannable.
    I don't want it to be legal the suicide thing just remove the fking option if u don't like how ppl take advantage of this remove it!!!
    I suppose humanity can't be trusted to not abuse things.
    Beyond a certain point the punishment aspect of an unexpected death becomes a bit too strong imo.
    Plenty of other MMOs have EXP loss on death, but those more often don't have anything easily abused like MS does.
    Removing the EXP penalty on death just might be a valid final nail in the coffin for this issue.

    However if Nexon does do this, they need to be sure to add droplets to 245+ areas in Arcane River.
  • HHG1HHG1
    Reactions: 5,966
    Posts: 780
    Member, Private Tester
    edited November 2019
    So once again, it's very clearly intended to be a detriment, while iframes are not.
    I wasn't referring to invincibility frames that are clearly marked and intended to be used for defense, hence my reference towards Final Pact, which is obviously intended to be used to avoid death. [...]
    My point was *specifically* with respect to *attacks* that happen to contain iframes due to the way the animations work, for those I would say are clearly not "intended" to be used for defense (or rather, are not clearly described in game as permitted to be used for defense). Using an *attacking* skill, to defend against death, because it has iframes, is clearly counter to the "intended" purpose of "attacking".
    Still not a detriment. It can then be argued that all skills that offer invincibility frames are partly, if not entirely, intended to be used for defense since they specify that you will be invincible for a period of time upon using it.
    Are you also going to say that an attack skill that also adds a debuff or DoT to the target is not used as intended if you're just using the skill to apply the debuff or DoT without caring about the immediate damage the attack itself does? What about an attack that is also a mobility skill?
    Skills can have multiple intended uses, especially those that carry multiple functions.
    If it were intended to be used in this way, then why do some characters not have iframes? For example: Night Lord. You might say Dark Sight, but both Shadower and Night Walker have iframes AND dark sight, so clearly one cant say Dark Sight is the reason, and clearly this puts both of these classes at an advantage over Night Lord in boss fights.
    So IF you're claiming that using attacking skills to avoid enemy attacks that would otherwise kill the player is legitimate gameplay, it would seem to say that Nexon has intentionally advantaged certain classes and disadvantaged others.
    No, I would not say that, because Dark Sight is not an iframe and doesn't protect you against anything and everything.
    And yes, some classes have more utility than others. Some have more mobility. Some have harder hitting attacks. Some have more iframes than they need. Again, that's a balancing issue completely unrelated to suicide bans.
    SO I think it fair to say using attacking skills to avoid boss mechanics is not intended gameplay. Ergo, I would say you've not satisfied the warrant of your claim that iframes on attacking skills are intended to be used in that manner. Thus yes, these both fall under the same category of "not intended gameplay", whether you feel one is more or less egregious is besides the point, a reductio argument still applies, you just don't find it compelling.

    So while I mostly agree with you, the clear delineation between which of these is a violation and which of these is not, is still not so obvious as one might assume at first glance. I'm not saying its a good argument, Im just saying that the situation is more similar than most seem willing to admit.
    I did admit some similarities within specific situations and those are things that can be improved upon if Nexon sees fit. But it still doesn't draw the conclusion that using skills that offer invincibility frames to become invincible is not intended gameplay.
    Theoretical arguments that lead to absurd levels are fun and all, but practice and context is ultimately what's going to matter here. It's also my personal preference to not engage in endless hyperbolic examples since they're rarely grounded in reality. Much like this "iframe = suicide kanna" side-track.
    If anything it just further proves that it's Nexon's intention to give you every chance to stay alive, not reward you for dying.
    Prior to the recent clarification, one could have turned that on its head and said that losing exp when dying "proves that it's nexon's intention" that you have the ability to prevent yourself from leveling. So it might be preemptive to assume that Nexon has iframes in attacking skills intentionally to provide you the opportunity to avoid boss mechanics. More than likely they are an unintended and difficult to eliminate consequence of the way the skills are animated.
    It's a good thing they've clarified it then. All we're doing here is make assumptions after all, mine just happened to be aligned with Nexon on this one.
    I'll await word on the iframes, your theory about the animation is interesting but even if that were the case, Nexon has clearly embraced the iframes as an intended function of the skills that are affected. Some bosses also have iframes.
    Either way it still has no impact on whether suicide kanna is abuse or not, since that has already been established for various reasons.
    Fuhreak
  • AggraphineAggraphine
    Reactions: 19,320
    Posts: 3,540
    Member
    edited November 2019
    Invincibility frames have been a thing since quite literally the SNES console or earlier. They were a necessity of design so that you didn't touch an enemy once and take numerous hits of damage until you were no longer touching the enemy. They are in no way some kind of newfangled or an oversight of design.
    Fuhreak
  • nidhddVnidhddV
    Reactions: 370
    Posts: 23
    Member
    edited November 2019

    Have you forgotten this account's access was confirmed to be engaging in character skill cooldown manipulation activity directly, the reason for this permanent ban on normal gamers?
  • StarryKnightStarryKnight
    Reactions: 1,625
    Posts: 116
    Member
    edited November 2019
    HHG1 wrote:
    Nexon has clearly embraced the iframes as an intended function of the skills that are affected. Some bosses also have iframes.
    Accepted. Condoned. Maybe...
    I mostly agree.

    Either way it still has no impact on whether suicide kanna is abuse or not, since that has already been established for various reasons.
    Also agreed.

    Aggraphine wrote:
    They were a necessity of design so that you didn't touch an enemy once and take numerous hits of damage until you were no longer touching the enemy.
    Thats what I said... So, also agreed. :D
  • PyroPyro
    Reactions: 725
    Posts: 3
    Member
    edited November 2019
    lmao, 'suicide kanna bans' are just now coming to light? Nexon has been banning dead players for yearsssss. I posted a bug report and ban appeal back in 2015 and got jack **** back from GMs. Nexon doesn't care about fixing stuff that needs fixing. Those posts I made have been deleted rather than solved.

    Any 12 year old developer can add an integer to a player and say "You can only lose exp 3 times per level", then reset the counter on level-up. Boom, no more false bans. Or they can take the difficult route and finally fix their system that was probably intended for all the vac hackers, but which also triggers on legit players too often. They'll probably take the "Do Nothing" route though.
    WONDERGUYnidhddV
  • WONDERGUYWONDERGUY
    Reactions: 2,960
    Posts: 493
    Member
    edited November 2019
    Pyro wrote: »
    lmao, 'suicide kanna bans' are just now coming to light? Nexon has been banning dead players for yearsssss. I posted a bug report and ban appeal back in 2015 and got jack **** back from GMs. Nexon doesn't care about fixing stuff that needs fixing. Those posts I made have been deleted rather than solved.

    Any 12 year old developer can add an integer to a player and say "You can only lose exp 3 times per level", then reset the counter on level-up. Boom, no more false bans. Or they can take the difficult route and finally fix their system that was probably intended for all the vac hackers, but which also triggers on legit players too often. They'll probably take the "Do Nothing" route though.

    there is huge miscommunication in nexonNA team and nexonKorea Team with what things to do
    (neither of them play GMS or chek-know the issue )
    just a week before they MEMoE their statements was
    possibility of it being a bannable offense

    they can meso farm nerf as they want and force players for longer play time
    but baning-hurt their legit players more instead of illegitimate players, just adds more wood on fire so players cant cope with but leave the game
    nidhddV
  • ApocalyptianApocalyptian
    Reactions: 1,900
    Posts: 140
    Member
    edited November 2019
    Why play in Reboot anyways? It's not like its a real "maplestory" experience, more on the lines of controlled private server really....I tried it once and was bored as heck.
    I semi apologize but I'm reading this and giggling knowing that in a real maplestory world (aka: not Reboot) you get a few mil just for training in archana maps for an hour or more. Merching is also beneficial yet. The notion of suicide kanna is just too funny I cant quite understand what the big deal is but shouldn't this mean more people will go to real servers so we have a bigger population? Honestly maybe that could be a good thing, right?
  • AggraphineAggraphine
    Reactions: 19,320
    Posts: 3,540
    Member
    edited November 2019
    Why play in Reboot anyways? It's not like its a real "maplestory" experience, more on the lines of controlled private server really....I tried it once and was bored as heck.
    I semi apologize but I'm reading this and giggling knowing that in a real maplestory world (aka: not Reboot) you get a few mil just for training in archana maps for an hour or more. Merching is also beneficial yet. The notion of suicide kanna is just too funny I cant quite understand what the big deal is but shouldn't this mean more people will go to real servers so we have a bigger population? Honestly maybe that could be a good thing, right?

    This might be the most ignorant, self-serving thing I've seen you post so far. I don't know where to even begin with you. "Not a real experience"? "Real servers"? Wanting an entire server to die so "your" server can have a larger population? What is actually wrong with you?