Flying Hovercrafts

[-bZ-LongTrang1]

I understand that, and you guys are in charge so you're free to do whatever you wish.

Right now you're cutting off the hands and feet of people who have eaten a loaf of bread. If that's how you want to run your nation that's your prerogative.

There are many reasons why BZ doesn't have problems raising money to keep the lights on. This is one of them.

Seriously, more than enough people PAY to play on the BZ fleet of free servers.

I'm sorry your stunt got you banned. Really. But thems the rules and on occasion I've been the recipient of the rules and have had points assessed against me. Going forward I've been careful not to violate those rules again and I've been fine.

Plus I get to enjoy the best Battlefield community in existence. Bonus!

 

[-bZ-LongTrang1]

It is still considered a surface target thus the only thing that can lock it is a Javelin/HVM-II (or anything that can lock any target). Problem is, it’s so high up that nothing can lock it or shoot it down. It’s unkillable once it reaches a certain point.

Not even the guns from a jet can reach it?

Not being obtuse here but I've never had occasion to try to kill one of these before. It'd be nice to know if there's a way to ruin or mitigate someone's exploit.

 

[Temporary2Temp]

Okay, odd question here:

So there's a hovercraft flying in the air. Will AA missiles lock on to it or do you have to kill it with guns?

Absolutely, all AA weapons lock onto the hovercraft once it's airborne.
So if you're an enemy on the ground you just pull out the AA rocket launchers. Jets also lock onto it and you can FLIR it for non AA rockets.

It's basically an extremely slow moving helicopter with 1 extra seat.

 

[Mobius.jpeg]

Not even the guns from a jet can reach it?

Not being obtuse here but I've never had occasion to try to kill one of these before. It'd be nice to know if there's a way to ruin or mitigate someone's exploit.

Nope! Nothing at all. Jets can’t get high enough and ALL projectiles lack the range to hit it. Even if you could lock it, the missles won’t reach.

 

[BigBadBagOfSwag]

Absolutely, all AA weapons lock onto the hovercraft once it's airborne.
So if you're an enemy on the ground you just pull out the AA rocket launchers. Jets also lock onto it and you can FLIR it for non AA rockets.

It's basically an extremely slow moving helicopter with 1 extra seat.

You're a clown.

 

[BigBadBagOfSwag]

Not even the guns from a jet can reach it?

Not being obtuse here but I've never had occasion to try to kill one of these before. It'd be nice to know if there's a way to ruin or mitigate someone's exploit.

The only two practical counters would be to:
1. Shoot it down before it exits the playable area.
2. Ban those who abuse the glitch.

 

[Temporary2Temp]

And out of curiosity: did not one person across all these events say "hey man that's not allowed here"?

Nope! Nothing at all. Jets can’t get high enough and ALL projectiles lack the range to hit it. Even if you could lock it, the missles won’t reach.

That's strange, I always thought they did because lockons from the ground are extremely common. That must be from people using laser designators like the PLD.

 

[Temporary2Temp]

And out of curiosity: did not one person across all these events say "hey man that's not allowed here"?

Simple answer, people love spawning on it because it's a 20+ second freefall. It's extremely fun if you've never experienced it before.

It doesn't affect the map balancing either, especially if your team is losing badly.

 

[BigBadBagOfSwag]

False.

 

[Mobius.jpeg]

Simple answer, people love spawning on it because it's a 20+ second freefall. It's extremely fun if you've never experienced it before.

So is falling into the infinite void under Locker but that’s not allowed either. Using an aimbot is probably fun as well for the people that do it, but that’s not allowed either.

 

[Temporary2Temp]

But thems the rules and on occasion I've been the recipient of the rules and have had points assessed against me. Going forward I've been careful not to violate those rules again and I've been fine.

Plus I get to enjoy the best Battlefield community in existence. Bonus!

I absolutely agree, but that doesn't apply to this situation because it's a 1st strike perm ban.
My only other reprimand was one incident for politics.

Which is fine, I get it, the behavior wants to be discouraged.
The main problem is it doesn't appear when you type "!rules" in server. If it's a 1st violation perm ban it should absolutely appear there so it's clear there's absolutely zero tolerance for it.

 

[Silent_Killa613]

I remember accidently spawning on someone doing this up in the sky, little did I know and let me tell you.. don't make the mistake I did.. I pulled the chute right away and took like 10 min(no lie) to finally make it down to the ground..

 

[Howiemandel01]

I remember accidently spawning on someone doing this up in the sky, little did I know and let me tell you.. don't make the mistake I did.. I pulled the chute right away and took like 10 min(no lie) to finally make it down to the ground..

lol. i remember the first time I did this. man i was pissed. lol on the map , when you you go to respawn, you cant tell its 2000 miles up. lol

 

[MerkelValkyria]

Hi

This is common sense, but it wouldn't cost much to add a fifth rule when we type !rules on the server that would say: No hacking, cheating or glitching. This would put glitching in the same category as hacking and cheating.

This will have two positive effects:

1. Players will be informed from the start that glitching is against the rules, thus preventing them from finding out the hard way.
2. Players who glitch will no longer be able to claim they didn't know the rules.

For my part, I try as much as possible to warn and explain the rules to players who do not respect them. I was able to save a few this way because they were legitimately unaware they were breaking the rules (e.g. When it come to baserape). This allows us to keep as many players as possible. For the others who don't care despite the warnings and explanations, I have no problem reporting them.

 

[MerkelValkyria]

Bulk examples:

• Players on my team attacking the enemy uncap without justification
• Enemies shooting into our uncap without provocation
• Pilots who arrive from another server and believe that they can choose their gunner. Either they don't move, or they burn their gunner
• Players who, for fun, shoot rockets at friendly helicopters to make them tip to one side.

When I take the time to explain the rules and risks to them, they usually stop.

What I notice is that some people are very quick to report players and get them banned. I find it important to inform the players as much as possible before punishing them. And to punish them only if they obviously do not want to respect the rules.

 

[Sabretooth-Ninja]

Hi

This is common sense, but it wouldn't cost much to add a fifth rule when we type !rules on the server that would say: No hacking, cheating or glitching. This would put glitching in the same category as hacking and cheating.

This will have two positive effects:

1. Players will be informed from the start that glitching is against the rules, thus preventing them from finding out the hard way.
2. Players who glitch will no longer be able to claim they didn't know the rules.

For my part, I try as much as possible to warn and explain the rules to players who do not respect them. I was able to save a few this way because they were legitimately unaware they were breaking the rules (e.g. When it come to baserape). This allows us to keep as many players as possible. For the others who don't care despite the warnings and explanations, I have no problem reporting them.

I've been playing video games since 1988, and not once cared to employ or exploit a glitch in single-player or multi-player games. I don't see the fun in playing the game the way it wasn't meant to be played. Is a rule really necessary stating "don't glitch"? What next, a written rule telling people not to eat Tide Pods? Oh, wait. Is this some sort of Generation Z, not-enough-sunshine, been-on-social-media-since-I-was-four, parents-didn't-raise-me-right, I'm-an-only-child behavioural thing?

In my day we would we go out of our way to limit exploits because it was simply the sensible thing to do, like no Odd Job allowed on Goldeneye and dividing splitscreen multiplayer on TVs with sheets of cardboard taped to the screen with players positioned below, above, and to either side of the cardboard dividers so that we each had our own view separated from the others. We went out of our way not to be shitheads, and we governed ourselves. Strange time that was.

On BZ1 we usually inform people when they're fucking up. Not sure how this guy glitched the hovercraft on like seven different days with not one server-mate telling him it's not allowed, but there's a diagram on here somewhere outlining the tiered mental states of the BZ servers.

Derision of shittery aside, there have been a couple other returning players that have been banned for glitches. If pardons begin being granted now, then pardons must be applied to past rulings if fair implementation is to be adhered and trust of admins be established. I don't think they want to unban previous offenders.

I've lived and worked with all manner and degree of rule-breakers, exploiters, circumventers, and never-heard-no-ers. They're all trash. I have no sympathy.

 

[Mobius.jpeg]

If pardons begin being granted now, then pardons must be applied to past rulings if fair implementation is to be adhered and trust of admins be established.

Ding ding ding!

 

[ShotgunCamping]

Hi

This is common sense, but it wouldn't cost much to add a fifth rule when we type !rules on the server that would say: No hacking, cheating or glitching. This would put glitching in the same category as hacking and cheating.

This will have two positive effects:

1. Players will be informed from the start that glitching is against the rules, thus preventing them from finding out the hard way.
2. Players who glitch will no longer be able to claim they didn't know the rules.

For my part, I try as much as possible to warn and explain the rules to players who do not respect them. I was able to save a few this way because they were legitimately unaware they were breaking the rules (e.g. When it come to baserape). This allows us to keep as many players as possible. For the others who don't care despite the warnings and explanations, I have no problem reporting them.

"No glitching" is pretty broad and open to way too much interpretation. Technically, vouzou, zouzou, etc are glitches, but they aren't something you'd get banned for by BZ, BA, or BF4DB. And people tend to misunderstand what a true glitch is. Also, eventhough it is the responsibility of the player to understand the rules expected of them, not everyone is going to read them and you can only handhold so much.

I'm all for a warning if someone is doing something they shouldn't out of genuine ignorance. Like flying the hovercraft way too high, getting it stuck, and then bailing. Sure, you wasted a resource and had a giggle, but don't do it again. But repeatedly using it as a spawn beacon that can't be destroyed should be a perma.

I will generally warn someone if they're doing something they shouldn't. I mainly play 24/7 Locker so the big things are firing in to uncap (Which 99% of the players do anyways so it tends to be tolerated by the players there) and glitching in to E ceiling. I'll warn someone before I resort to reporting if they're running around, but not shooting or dropping a beacon and they actually get out. But if I see someone shooting out and truly abusing the spot, I'll report.

If someone truly doesn't know if something is bannable or not, they need to check with the admins. If I'm feeling like a dickhead, I'll climb the mountains on Locker and spam frag rounds. Before I started doing that, I checked which spots are okay and which ones aren't. If you're doing something that could be "questionable" I think one should have the common sense to check with admins first before risking a perma, but that's just my opinion.

TL;DR: A no glitching rule seems too broad and open to interpretation and, in my opinion, there comes a point where there's too much hand-holding. Genuinely retarded behavior should be met with a perma.

 

[MerkelValkyria]

I've been playing video games since 1988, and not once cared to employ or exploit a glitch in single-player or multi-player games.

Same for me.

Is a rule really necessary stating "don't glitch"? What next, a written rule telling people not to eat Tide Pods? Oh, wait. Is this some sort of Generation Z, not-enough-sunshine, been-on-social-media-since-I-was-four, parents-didn't-raise-me-right, I'm-an-only-child behavioural thing?

It's okay to indicate what is against the rules and what is tolerated. For example, Battlefield Agency states in its policies that they ban certain types of glitches, while they tolerate others like the movement glitchs. This is to make it clear to everyone. One could argue that it is not necessary to state this. That it's common sense. But not everyone perceives things the same way.

My point is not to indicate to players not to cheat, that's obvious, like not eating Tide Pods, but to indicate that glitching is prohibited by categorizing it with cheats. But as there are subtleties in terms of what is tolerated or not for glitching, I admit that we cannot just say Do not glitch, because there are exceptions.

Some people believe that using a glitch for fun (e.g. sneaking into a wall without shooting anyone, flying away with a vehicle that isn't supposed to fly, etc.) is not as punishable as using a cheat/hack. Not everyone agrees on this. We can see this by the number of regular players who have been banned for using this type of glitch and these players were not used to breaking the rules. At least for the ones I saw.

By stating this clearly from the start, it achieves the two advantages that I mentioned earlier.

 

[MerkelValkyria]

"No glitching" is pretty broad and open to way too much interpretation. Technically, vouzou, zouzou, etc are glitches, but they aren't something you'd get banned for by BZ, BA, or BF4DB. And people tend to misunderstand what a true glitch is.

I completely agree with you. Our posts crossed.

Difficult to indicate "No glitching" without giving more details.

Maybe it's better to leave it as is then.