I did that months before I ever posted it since I wanted to see what a few other members thought about it. None of them responded back to me so I ended up forgetting about it.
finally a weird glitch I might have discovered. While messing around with a Backyard Ripper upgrade I was able to do this. For about 20 seconds I was able to put anything in anything.
(https://gametechmods.com/uploads/images/57903aaa.png)
Well, I did. After about an hour of fooling around with the glitch, I got it to work whenever I wanted it to. That resulted in some crazy never before seen stacking.
not really much to say until I find a surefire way for it to work 100% of the time.
It is the Zero Glitch and as such has already been included in the rules with that name or under the category of text file editing.
it\'s just stacking?The Zero glitch involves editing a snapper motor and making a custom component, whereas this glitch is done completely in game.
and yes, the zero glitch was very good. but it isn\'t STOCK. it needs additional parts from outside the game (it\'s what i called text raping, he discovered it, i just perfected it, and made it smaller) i used to use it when testing concepts, to check if they work, it\'s not so good for much else.
Well scrap and sage, you just invented RA3. congratulations.No they didn't, as you can see, it is plainly RA2
How do you do it?*facepalm*
From what I understand, this is the zero glitch (or the glitch that allows for stacking to be done without limit), its just that no one ever discovered how to activate it reliably.
Zero Glitch and ZeroG glitch are different.
It says up there it's not the Zero glitch, as that needs a custom component, this one doesn't.Nah, that's the Zero-G glitch.
We just might have an Ra3!
We just might have an Ra3!
What, a game where people can stack anything anytime? Doesn't sound all that fun to me (especially if you plan to call it RA3, as that name carries some series expectations of physics and AI improvement, as well as far superior component design).
We just might have an Ra3!
What, a game where people can stack anything anytime? Doesn't sound all that fun to me (especially if you plan to call it RA3, as that name carries some series expectations of physics and AI improvement, as well as far superior component design).
Holy heck Sage, that thing's a beaut, I am a sucker for geometry. Good luck entering stock tourneys in the future though, I can just see a whole bunch of people going "HAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAXX!"I'm pretty sure that Sage is decent enough to not enter it
Totally called it. :gawe:Well Said now that I think about it.
Good decision not to release it, though. It would pretty much be the end of Stock building if everyone could stack anything into anything and there was no need to learn Snapper Loading, Axle Loading, extender setups or anything like that. But well done on making it work. =]
Good choice not releasing it to the public. Neat find!I agree with this, but I think if whomever figures it out next tells everybody, or if sage or scrap daddy do a 360 and decide to tell everybody, it'll probably just end up becoming another thing that tourney hosts will say is banned from their tourneys.
The big question to me is... Is the glitch allowed in tournaments by default because technically others may discover it later?
If it is done in game and pretty much legal... Does that mean that Sage and Scrap can legally use it for tournament bots even if they are the only ones that know?
I, personally, am totally cool with that. It is only a matter of time before someone else discovers it and lets the cat out of the bag. Stocks collapse might follow, or maybe... just maybe... there will be more stock tourneys that simply have the "realistic rule" inserted.
It could be regulated to an extent if its ever released, like "no superstacking" where a situation like Sage's bot that he shows would be illegal because it is clearly Hax Mode.Yeah, it must go alongside BFE, AAM and ZeroG in tournaments
It could be regulated to an extent if its ever released, like "no superstacking" where a situation like Sage's bot that he shows would be illegal because it is clearly Hax Mode.Then that would defeat the purpose of it. :P
Yes, it's a ton of fun to mess around with :DYou're a meany...
Yes, it's a ton of fun to mess around with :DSo cruel :P
Yes, it's a ton of fun to mess around with :DThis is definitively fake.
Detective RR, on the case.Yes, it's a ton of fun to mess around with :DThis is definitively fake.
No it isn't, there have been many others find this glitch, just not figure out how to use it over and over againYes, it's a ton of fun to mess around with :DThis is definitively fake.
Sorry, I am just very skeptical with how they worded it saying "No out of game Modifications needed" and how they are almost teasing everyone else out of it.No it isn't, there have been many others find this glitch, just not figure out how to use it over and over againYes, it's a ton of fun to mess around with :DThis is definitively fake.
I think their main concern is that it would cause the death of Stock Building by allowing stuff like this. One way around this would be to treat it like the Realistic Rule in DSL. You CAN build undealistic designs in DSL, stuff like Stacking and eFFe glitching, but it's banned in tournaments and competitive building and things. In the same sense, you COULD build using superstacking in Stock, but it would probably be banned in tournaments. Because most people work on legal tournament building concepts, I don't think they'd focus on the superstacking glitch too much, given that they wouldn't actually be able to utilise it very much. I think it's up to Scrap and Sage, though, it's really their call on whether to disclose their secrets or not.
Problem is, we cannot have it both ways
.I think their main concern is that it would cause the death of Stock Building by allowing stuff like this. One way around this would be to treat it like the Realistic Rule in DSL. You CAN build undealistic designs in DSL, stuff like Stacking and eFFe glitching, but it's banned in tournaments and competitive building and things. In the same sense, you COULD build using superstacking in Stock, but it would probably be banned in tournaments. Because most people work on legal tournament building concepts, I don't think they'd focus on the superstacking glitch too much, given that they wouldn't actually be able to utilise it very much. I think it's up to Scrap and Sage, though, it's really their call on whether to disclose their secrets or not.
another reason would be that people who can't stack or use glitches to save their lives can make lets say a regular 36HS with the glitch, and no one would notice because the bot could be built without it. definitely want to know how to do it tho
we will probably end up showing Click and Trovaner but I can't see us ever fully revealing how to do it.
and yes Russian Roulette, this is a hoax 3 years in the making.I loled, I can see potential talking to click about this to create awesome Replicas fro DSL 3
we will probably end up showing Click and Trovaner but I can't see us ever fully revealing how to do it.
OMG you SOOO not old enough to be 1337.we will probably end up showing Click and Trovaner but I can't see us ever fully revealing how to do it.
To what end? How are Click and Trovaner any more deserving of it than any other experimenter? It is completely up to you guys who you tell, I'm just saying creating an upper elite who know of it seems a tad bit unfair (I personally don't care, but I'm not sure everybody shares my indifference).
1) Mad props to you two for working it out (you guys have always been ahead in stock building)Well we can just ban this specific glitch. Which states that this glitch cannot be legally used as the reason to justify the location of a component.
2) You didnt share any of your development with me (thus you do not get an invite to my pool party)
3) I think stock just died.. here are some more numbers points why
Dont get me wrong I think its great work but you would either have to release it (open a huge can of worms)
Make internal component stacking illegal (MOAR WORMS)
OMG you SOOO not old enough to be 1337.
It's a "I sound like a n00b" joke that is not suppose to make sense.OMG you SOOO not old enough to be 1337.
I have read and reread this line, and still can't figure out what its actual meaning is...
@JoeBlo- If we use this glitch, you can tell. It's not like theres another way to stack a HPZ into a black without a burst/servo.
No.. if we release it BFE will become untraceable.
True, but if we can't use it why release it in the first place.
Cuz, like, I don't play stock?
Stacking is illegal in DSL to begin with. So what difference would that make?Cuz, like, I don't play stock?Assuming the glitch is unique to stock...
Stacking is illegal in DSL to begin with. So what difference would that make?
Unless it also allow no collision externally, but even then nobody is going to allow this as a justification in DSL anyway.
^ I do this.Stacking is illegal in DSL to begin with. So what difference would that make?
Unless it also allow no collision externally, but even then nobody is going to allow this as a justification in DSL anyway.
In case someone wanted to make a for-fun DSL bot that didn't follow the realistic rule.
BFE is faster, and it can even break rule of 7 and connect at funky angles.Stacking is illegal in DSL to begin with. So what difference would that make?In case someone wanted to make a for-fun DSL bot that didn't follow the realistic rule.
Unless it also allow no collision externally, but even then nobody is going to allow this as a justification in DSL anyway.
@JoeBlo- If we use this glitch, you can tell. It's not like theres another way to stack a HPZ into a black without a burst/servo.
That is already true with BFE or AAF, so nothing new really.@JoeBlo- If we use this glitch, you can tell. It's not like theres another way to stack a HPZ into a black without a burst/servo.
Now if someone manages to stack something nobody saw before they would get accused of using the glitch.
I could use technically this glitch for August BOTM! Too bad no one would vote for me xD
I could use technically this glitch for August BOTM! Too bad no one would vote for me xD
No, because I would call it AAM/BFE and kick your butt for not showing me the little trick!
So what?I could use technically this glitch for August BOTM! Too bad no one would vote for me xD
No, because I would call it AAM/BFE and kick your butt for not showing me the little trick!
But it's not either!
But it's not either!
Too over dramatic?Yes, although some parts aren't far off.
The Trov glitch came and went... But it was resurface pretty recently and now quite a few bots are using it.That would be me :approve:
That would be me :approve:
You should see the number of bots I've made using the Trov glitch.That would be me :approve:
Actually, that would be Sage. :P
And, why can't we outlaw it exactly?
We could put it to a poll and see what we could do.That's the thing though, there is no way to tell what is hax glitched and what has just been normally stacked!
I still don't see why it shouldn't be released and regulated, in the same way as the Realistic rule in DSL is. If we treat the Superstacking glitch the same way as we treat BFE and AAM, then people will still build in the same way as they have been, with Snapper Loading, eFFeing, things like that. It won't kill off Stock, unless people actually TRY to kill it off.
Don't release it otherwise stock popularity would decline within probably about a year. And to be honest it would effect everyone by a good bit and the robot building will become so easy even for beginners. Then probably a good amount of people would leave such as me and this forum would become DSL only forum for about two years and then it would be dead forever. RA2 will become a fully pledged `thing of the past`so release it and RA2 will be in its grave in about two years.Honestly, I think that this would HELP stock. If you'd look at BBEANS 5, if Click pitted a n00b robot against a 36 Mace HS or Siesm 16 (and many others) then the battle would last only one of two seconds. Whats the fun in that? Imagine stock where matches actually end with WBP and a bunch of debates and harder predictions like DSL, Stock tournaments would become insanely popular and they would also become alot harder to win (thus, one small little thing can cost you a victory). Also if everyone is just going to make 36 Mace HS's you can just allow only the first person who turned one in or just ban the glitch all together.
So if this forum wants to live for another 5 years then don't say anything about that glitch.
Too over dramatic?
Gets rid of creativity pretty much.And it means anyone can build anything without trying really...
I don't necessarily agree with this. If you were given the choice to build something with no collision, you'd have more possibilities to create non generic robots and still be effective in combat. With there being more possibilities, there are more chances of you most likely not liking the way your bot turned out.Gets rid of creativity pretty much.And it means anyone can build anything without trying really...
So long as it's kept to custom showcases I don't really care.Why? It doesn't have custom components, and it is specific for stock. That is just like saying Effe glitched robots or robots that stack belong in the custom components section. If this glitch is kept at a limit, Stock tournament would become ALOT more popular.
You should see the number of bots I've made using the Trov glitch.That would be me :approve:
Actually, that would be Sage. :P
@Joe
Yes I get that, but it is still stock but just a patched version. Stock showcase should be split in 2 sections if this would happen to go into effect though. Perhaps "RA2:Developer Release" and "RA2 Stock: GTM Release"
c) Put up with it and use your common sense to decide whether they have used this glitch or done it properly.
c) Put up with it and use your common sense to decide whether they have used this glitch or done it properly.
If we do anything besides this, we are essentially killing what we all know as stock RA2... Adding extra restrictions is not going to solve anything and is nothing short of an overreaction to something we've basically been dealing with since the advent of BFE and AAM.
Just don't release it and don't cause all the debate and trouble
Just don't release it and don't cause all the debate and trouble
Exactly
we haven't released the glitch yet, so obviously people know you're cheating.
No they dont.. its not impossible for someone else to figure it out..
Its just the same as claiming a BFE job to be legit... only 6 Stacked Z-Teks doesn't look suspect anymore..
Or it people do something legit (like the 3 Servos on the last page) and we try to ban it becasue its suspect to a glitch we dont even know.
Without the "common sense limit" Stacking just isnt balanced ground now.. My thoughts is that it should go...
But Please head back to the actual topic now, I have shown what I wish to show in my showcase..
Just don't release it and don't cause all the debate and trouble
Exactly
Assuming that others aren't capable of figuring it out.
If you don't release it, though, people will always have their suspicions about you whenever you post a new bot or enter a tourney.
Assuming that others aren't capable of figuring it out.
At that time, THEN let us have this discussion.
I wouldn't. Other people might. I'm just throwing out possibilities.If you don't release it, though, people will always have their suspicions about you whenever you post a new bot or enter a tourney.
Go for it. I mean seriously what could I enter into a tourney that LOOKS legit but is superstacked? You think I'd use hax mode for stacking blacks or something? Honestly.
If you don't release it, though, people will always have their suspicions about you whenever you post a new bot or enter a tourney.I believe that Sage and Scrap are good enough members to be trusted
Just don't release it and don't cause all the debate and troubleLike this whole thread? Half the trouble is caused by not releasing it anyway.
didn't you say that this was both difficult and had limits on exostacking?
R0B0 brings up an excellent point. Sage and Scrap already said there are limitations with this glitch, and it'll still require some degree of skill to actually apply it to an effective design.
Most chassis' will just be a box with not much thought behind it IMO.So are most DSL robots (Specifically of the SNS type and VS type)
Ah, they have to be the right size for everything needed to fit in so they do have thought behind them :PMost chassis' will just be a box with not much thought behind it IMO.So are most DSL robots (Specifically of the SNS type and VS type)
EH?Ah, they have to be the right size for everything needed to fit in so they do have thought behind them :PMost chassis' will just be a box with not much thought behind it IMO.So are most DSL robots (Specifically of the SNS type and VS type)
But in stock they would just have to be a certain size and you could put nearly anything you wanted in there without re-sizing or whatever.
...no :PEH?Ah, they have to be the right size for everything needed to fit in so they do have thought behind them :PMost chassis' will just be a box with not much thought behind it IMO.So are most DSL robots (Specifically of the SNS type and VS type)
But in stock they would just have to be a certain size and you could put nearly anything you wanted in there without re-sizing or whatever.
Have you even played stock!
Nothing kills faster than ignorance and secrecy.
Then don't post here. I don't argue details on Fetus in fetu. Why? I know jack sh**. I havent learned it or studied it. You haven't touched stock. Get out of this thread. It is something affecting stock only....no :PEH?Ah, they have to be the right size for everything needed to fit in so they do have thought behind them :PMost chassis' will just be a box with not much thought behind it IMO.So are most DSL robots (Specifically of the SNS type and VS type)
But in stock they would just have to be a certain size and you could put nearly anything you wanted in there without re-sizing or whatever.
Have you even played stock!
how would apanx bot exporter detect BFE? I mean all it really cis rather or not things are properly "connected".
I just don't see how it can tell the difference between super-stacking or not.
If it has 3 black batteries in one spot, then BFE, AAM or superstacking was used.
This is new? I assumed that stacking that many components in one spot had been being done for ages ._.
vid coming soonShowing us how to do it or just proof that it can be done?
There was a vid Scrap posted just before that partially showed how it was done and partially showed proof it worked
Then it disappeared from this thread..
hehehe now im one step ahead of everyone to figuring it out :PWheres the vid?
He obviously has found the vid, as I said, he can see deleted posts
This is new? I assumed that stacking that many components in one spot had been being done for ages ._.*facepalm*
there's the vid.
there's the vid.
What happened to the first part? :P
As said in the pm, F12 would have looked more impressive..
Whats the point making a vid to never show anyone? :Pthere's the vid.
What happened to the first part? :P
As said in the pm, F12 would have looked more impressive..
First part gives away secrets.
Why does the control board have to be there?
As said in the pm, F12 would have looked more impressive..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39sdEddFsIM# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39sdEddFsIM#)
He's also got custom smart zones in his components section, you might be right about the idea that smartzones are needed.Why does the control board have to be there?
Clue number 1
You need a control board
Smartzones are weird components, messing about yesterday after seeing this glitch, I found Smartzone Leverage, something I had never seen before, they also detect the presence of another bot when under AI.He's also got custom smart zones in his components section, you might be right about the idea that smartzones are needed.Why does the control board have to be there?
Clue number 1
You need a control board
Why does the control board have to be there?
Clue Number 1
You need a control boardAs said in the pm, F12 would have looked more impressive..
Clue Number 2
F12 can be used to make the glitch workhttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39sdEddFsIM# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39sdEddFsIM#)
Clue Number 3
Components other than a Control Board do not have to bee mounted to make the glitch work
I reckon it's something to do with pausing.
confirmed 100%
hahah vertigo is trying so hard to figure it outSo what?
Maybe.....he axle loaded......THE CHASSIS!Good point there, maybe it is a super glitch that involves other known glitches
Aha, he didn't show us making the chassis, meaning that he did something in-between building the chassis and the part shownJesus you're getting these noted fast. But it'll probably end up being Garvin or someone who discovers it.
Clue Number 7
Something must be done in-between making the chassis and attaching the final components
What?Aha, he didn't show us making the chassis, meaning that he did something in-between building the chassis and the part shownJesus you're getting these noted fast. But it'll probably end up being Garvin or someone who discovers it.
Clue Number 7
Something must be done in-between making the chassis and attaching the final components
I was just saying how you're finding clues and backing up your theories pretty fast, and good pointWhat?Aha, he didn't show us making the chassis, meaning that he did something in-between building the chassis and the part shownJesus you're getting these noted fast. But it'll probably end up being Garvin or someone who discovers it.
Clue Number 7
Something must be done in-between making the chassis and attaching the final components
Garvin doesn't appear to have the intellectual capacity required
Sorry Sage. Acams has spoken.
So it does not matter if they tell or not, but ifsomebody(not the foul language guy) ANYBODY else discovers it and tells....they will get the credit!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39sdEddFsIM# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=39sdEddFsIM#)
there's the vid. i hope it's proof enough.
The only difference (or at least the only one I recall) between this video and the one removed (I saw it before if was removed) is that in the first one scrap (or whoever was doing) alternated between tabs, as if snapper loading. Is that part of the secret?I imagine, if that's the only real difference, that WILL be why, and well noticed on the chassis thing as well, I thought it looked to heavy to me.
EDIT: And another thing. I tried replicating the same size chassis they had (largest possible baseplate, height around that of an HP Z-tech), and got around 170 kg with aluminum armor. This is 33 kg less than what the video shows (with titanium armor the weight goes over 207 kg). This leads me to believe that there are other components somewhere that we don't see.
Or maybe I am just over-complicating this and my observations are irrelevant. Ah well, can't hurt to try.
This might be the only way that we find out, though.I imagine it's just a case of when somebody comes across this, possibly by accident, then we should be able to figure things out.
Any particular reason as to why you were using titanium? :mrgreen:
Any particular reason as to why you were using titanium? :mrgreen:
uhhhhhh
Clue Number 5Well I'm out.
It is harder to pull off than Snapper Loading
This thread reminds me of the game Clue :\You mean working as wired as well?
Also I learned how how to make motors spin after you remove the control board.
Sorta, you have no control over it as it constantly spins. You can still attach stuff though. Sorry for offtopic.This thread reminds me of the game Clue :\You mean working as wired as well?
Also I learned how how to make motors spin after you remove the control board.
If do then voila, another very handy glitch!
If it works in DSL, not so useless...Sorta, it's completely useless though.This thread reminds me of the game Clue :\You mean working as wired as well?
Also I learned how how to make motors spin after you remove the control board.
If do then voila, another very handy glitch!
I have thought up loads of awesome designs that could be possible with this glitch.
I just discovered this as well! Are you tapping into my mind in some way? If you are, I advise you get out now.Sorta, you have no control over it as it constantly spins. You can still attach stuff though. Sorry for offtopic.This thread reminds me of the game Clue :\You mean working as wired as well?
Also I learned how how to make motors spin after you remove the control board.
If do then voila, another very handy glitch!
My verdict:I like to say "I told you so"? He is clearly a short green wild bearded sage with the staff of inner growth.
Sage = American Harry Potter
I love how all the arguments for keeping this glitch away from the public are poorly hidden elitist remarks or versions of "because I said so".
I love how all the arguments for keeping this glitch away from the public are poorly hidden elitist remarks or versions of "because I said so".I thought they were blatantly obvious elitist remarks. Actually elitism, or a very selected few people are significantly more responsible than everyone else, is the whole basis of their argument.
Yes, and I didn't even try to hide that fact. Obviously if I don't want to know then I could of care less.I love how all the arguments for keeping this glitch away from the public are poorly hidden elitist remarks or versions of "because I said so".most of the arguments for showing it are "i wanna know!"
Not really. It's a major underlying reason sure, but the arguments I've seen are thus follows:I love how all the arguments for keeping this glitch away from the public are poorly hidden elitist remarks or versions of "because I said so".most of the arguments for showing it are "i wanna know!"
Good decision not to release it, though. It would pretty much be the end of Stock building if everyone could stack anything into anything and there was no need to learn Snapper Loading, Axle Loading, extender setups or anything like that. But well done on making it work. =]Elitism argument.
I think their main concern is that it would cause the death of Stock Building by allowing stuff like this. One way around this would be to treat it like the Realistic Rule in DSL. You CAN build undealistic designs in DSL, stuff like Stacking and eFFe glitching, but it's banned in tournaments and competitive building and things. In the same sense, you COULD build using superstacking in Stock, but it would probably be banned in tournaments. Because most people work on legal tournament building concepts, I don't think they'd focus on the superstacking glitch too much, given that they wouldn't actually be able to utilise it very much. I think it's up to Scrap and Sage, though, it's really their call on whether to disclose their secrets or not.This is a doom and gloom argument.
another reason would be that people who can't stack or use glitches to save their lives can make lets say a regular 36HS with the glitch, and no one would notice because the bot could be built without it. definitely want to know how to do it thoElitism.
True, but if we can't use it why release it in the first place.Why not? This is basically a "I'm not realeasing it because I said so" argument.
Don't release it otherwise stock popularity would decline within probably about a year. And to be honest it would effect everyone by a good bit and the robot building will become so easy even for beginners. Then probably a good amount of people would leave such as me and this forum would become DSL only forum for about two years and then it would be dead forever. RA2 will become a fully pledged `thing of the past`so release it and RA2 will be in its grave in about two years.Doomsaying and a nice elitism start off. Don't want those newbies learing how to play, they might get better than me!
So if this forum wants to live for another 5 years then don't say anything about that glitch.
Gets rid of creativity pretty much.First statement is historically wrong. Second statement is elitist.
And it means that noobs can create bots that are equal to vets and such :o
Why heck, I have been able to do that for years......but it is cheating because you have to edit the files.
That is the goose hax.
123STW is aboslutely right, there is no good reason to keep secret. If I ever discover how to do Hax Mode I would release it in a heartbeat. If stock crumbles as a result then so be it, at least we don't have a bunch of "elite" deciding what is and isn't good for the rest of the stock builders.
The key here is that only when the glitch is released will we have any idea what the effects will be. Glitches that have more potential than Hax, such as BFE and AAM, haven't ruined stock and yet they are not all that hard to learn (someone even posted a BFE guide a while back). Thus there is no reason to believe that revealing how Hax Mode works will harm or even change Stock in any way.
@ S32:
OR you could have mentioned ACAMS's arguments that releasing this glitch would make BFE/AAM absolutely impossible to check for. Hence, it would be possible for people to blatantly cheat, and we'd never know the difference between hax mode and what we have long considered illegaly built robots.
Well, I won't go that far. I will say that if his reason is solely to keep it to himself and his close group, he may do so because he did discover it.
People have the right to be selfish with the things they discover, which is fine if the person is willing to admit to that. It's just all the other stuff about ruining the community or for the better of us all that I have problems with.
I don't know, judging by the video Sage just voice command the part to no collision, it almost seem easier than BFE.@ S32:
OR you could have mentioned ACAMS's arguments that releasing this glitch would make BFE/AAM absolutely impossible to check for. Hence, it would be possible for people to blatantly cheat, and we'd never know the difference between hax mode and what we have long considered illegaly built robots.
This makes zero sense. Unless there is a tournament that allows BFE and not Hax Mode, or Hax Mode and not BFE, then there is no complication. We use common sense to screen out BFE, and we can do the same for Hax mode. If there was a tournament where one was legal and not the other (namely Hax mode allowed, BFE not), then all you have to do is look out for bots that have traits that can't be achieved via Hax Mode (such as an incredibly small chassis or random floating components).
So then nobody will bother using BFE if you can do that.
While that is a legitimate question, it does however hold no truth whatsoever on GTM. Vast majority of the GTM population does show that they can "not cheat". Take DSL for example, the only people who ever try to push through the realistic rules are first time n00bs or the "respectable" competitive players (ex. Naryar with Narmour, me trying to push for hollow motor). Nobody else has any problem building non questionable things.By the way, why is elitism so bad?Foul language removed
Elitism is a bad thing like baby raping and racism is a bad thing.I for one think baby raping is a lot worst than both elitism and racism combine.
Click, it's not the same thing as BFE because it's done in-game.True, but the final result is (almost) the same as BFE, and I think we should judge these kinds of things on what they do rather than how to do them. I'm really just seeing this as a branch off of BFE, a bit less potent and done in a different way. Anything having to do with it pretty much also has to do with BFE...if it's legalized in tourneys, so is BFE bar components outside the chassis and whatnot, because no one can tell the difference between the two methods. If BFE is banned right now, then so should Hax Mode if released, at least in regular tourneys.
@ S32:
OR you could have mentioned ACAMS's arguments that releasing this glitch would make BFE/AAM absolutely impossible to check for. Hence, it would be possible for people to blatantly cheat, and we'd never know the difference between hax mode and what we have long considered illegaly built robots.
This makes zero sense. Unless there is a tournament that allows BFE and not Hax Mode, or Hax Mode and not BFE, then there is no complication. We use common sense to screen out BFE, and we can do the same for Hax mode. If there was a tournament where one was legal and not the other (namely Hax mode allowed, BFE not), then all you have to do is look out for bots that have traits that can't be achieved via Hax Mode (such as an incredibly small chassis or random floating components).
The whole point is to keep things away from people to spite them.
I'm in a class where by default all forms of elitism used at large are there to put me and everyone I know personally down.
But it's entirely possible that someone could make a bot with a normal sized chassis and not-floating components that looks like they used hax mode, but they used BFE to do it. Hell, that's what I'd do if I were so inclined (and knew how to BFE). So, common sense should consequently tell you "I have no idea whether this bot was built using BFE of Hax mode." This point should make a lot of sense if you're understanding what I'm writing. But hey, we're on the internet. Misunderstandings are easy :3
I vote that LiNck is the only person that made complete sense here at this point.Because we all know Sage would try and ninja his way into "sneaking" a few hax-glitches into bots he entered in tournaments and junk.
We could call it the Garv Glitch, Sparkle Stacking and FAP mode respectively.Methinks that was on purpose.
I vote that LiNck is the only person that made complete sense here at this point.
Of course it was. Just who the heck do you think I am?We could call it the Garv Glitch, Sparkle Stacking and FAP mode respectively.Methinks that was on purpose.
But it's entirely possible that someone could make a bot with a normal sized chassis and not-floating components that looks like they used hax mode, but they used BFE to do it. Hell, that's what I'd do if I were so inclined (and knew how to BFE). So, common sense should consequently tell you "I have no idea whether this bot was built using BFE of Hax mode." This point should make a lot of sense if you're understanding what I'm writing. But hey, we're on the internet. Misunderstandings are easy :3
I am not saying they are easy to tell apart, I am saying that all we have to do is outlaw both Hax Mode and BFE and the whole problem goes away. I can't think of a situation where being able to tell the difference between the two of them would be of much importance.
Ahh, but once they realized it was possible, how long did it actually take them to figure out how to replicate it? I don't think any of the people I mentioned will discover it though. My money's on Vertigo or Joe Blo.
But it's entirely possible that someone could make a bot with a normal sized chassis and not-floating components that looks like they used hax mode, but they used BFE to do it. Hell, that's what I'd do if I were so inclined (and knew how to BFE). So, common sense should consequently tell you "I have no idea whether this bot was built using BFE of Hax mode." This point should make a lot of sense if you're understanding what I'm writing. But hey, we're on the internet. Misunderstandings are easy :3
I am not saying they are easy to tell apart, I am saying that all we have to do is outlaw both Hax Mode and BFE and the whole problem goes away. I can't think of a situation where being able to tell the difference between the two of them would be of much importance.
Funny, I've been saying the same thing too. Although the dialogue between you and I has never been what should happen, but the consequences of a or b happening. Oh well.
@MNB: It took two guys who have logged unholy amounts of hours in the stock game eight years to finally figure it out and release that it's possible. It's entirely possible that it takes years for others to figure it out too, and somebody else may not figure it out at all. For the whole community knowing how to enter hax mode, it may be now or never. We just don't know.
Well it does, it's just he put it in a very compact and complete way. You don't have to read through 5 or 6 pages to get the whole thing.I vote that LiNck is the only person that made complete sense here at this point.Sense making I'm complete!
Stupid N00bish joke aside, what LiNck just posted sums up my viewpoint (and probably several other members').
Highly doubt it. This is not something a trial and error test can verify. You can't find it through rational systematic testing, it almost requires an accident.Ahh, but once they realized it was possible, how long did it actually take them to figure out how to replicate it? I don't think any of the people I mentioned will discover it though. My money's on Vertigo or Joe Blo.
But it's entirely possible that someone could make a bot with a normal sized chassis and not-floating components that looks like they used hax mode, but they used BFE to do it. Hell, that's what I'd do if I were so inclined (and knew how to BFE). So, common sense should consequently tell you "I have no idea whether this bot was built using BFE of Hax mode." This point should make a lot of sense if you're understanding what I'm writing. But hey, we're on the internet. Misunderstandings are easy :3
I am not saying they are easy to tell apart, I am saying that all we have to do is outlaw both Hax Mode and BFE and the whole problem goes away. I can't think of a situation where being able to tell the difference between the two of them would be of much importance.
Funny, I've been saying the same thing too. Although the dialogue between you and I has never been what should happen, but the consequences of a or b happening. Oh well.
@MNB: It took two guys who have logged unholy amounts of hours in the stock game eight years to finally figure it out and release that it's possible. It's entirely possible that it takes years for others to figure it out too, and somebody else may not figure it out at all. For the whole community knowing how to enter hax mode, it may be now or never. We just don't know.
@MNB: Once they realized it was possible, it took them three years. Not months or weeks or days. Years.
@MNB: Once they realized it was possible, it took them three years. Not months or weeks or days. Years.
Accidents doesn't happen just because you are actively trying to test for it. You won't find it even if you try. After all, what can you try besides play more and hope to bump into it?@MNB: Once they realized it was possible, it took them three years. Not months or weeks or days. Years.This is the sad part. In keeping it secret, they are forcing other members to go back and do possibly months (or even years apparently) to get to the same level of progress that would be achieved if Sage and Scrap shared their knowledge. That is how progress happens, people put time and effort into something and then share the fruits of their labor so that other members can build off of it instead of working from the ground up.
@MNB: Once they realized it was possible, it took them three years. Not months or weeks or days. Years.
I thought you didn't think it was true?
Accidents doesn't happen just because you are actively trying to test for it. You won't find it even if you try. After all, what can you try besides play more and hope to bump into it?
I still can't get over the fact that your voice sounds JUST LIKE someone I know.
...What videos were you watching?The ones Sage put up showing us the glitch...?
Also, I don't believe this is the doom of stock.
Stockocalypse? :gawe:Also, I don't believe this is the doom of stock.
Many of you are looking at the wrong side of the "Stock Apocalypse"..
As I explained to Sage its this half baked messy situation we have now that could drive players away..
Once you have a clean simple cut rules we can go on peacefully with our lives again.. we basically have to come together as a community and make a simple agreement about it.
As it stands now Sage and Scrap can technically use it in existing rule sets as its not listed as an outlawed glitch and fits within the "All building to be done in the botlab"
Now obviously tournaments can make up their own personal rulesets around it but general building standards/ rules and the case if nothing is specified (or forgotten to add) its all up in the air.. Same with the 140cm extender.. tournaments make specific comments about it (becasue we never came to a yes or no agreement)
Why I mention this is remember Sage and I slipped in the 140cm extender in our winning BOTM? no rules prevented it as it fitted within the ruleset of AI / Hidden parts unless specified otherwise.. now its not a big deal but something like limitless stacking is.
If this is what you believe is happening right now, than you're far more cynical then I've ever given you credit for. The "social circle" you're currently referring to consists of the two people who figured the glitch out, no more.You are right, but as someone pointed out, Scrap discovered it. Not only that, Click, JoeBlo and Trov have a possibility of being included, making it a "social pentagon". Finally, you are asking for info on how to do it to curb your skepticism, making it a "social hexagon".
And as far as I can tell, Sage and Scrap are spiting no one, especially not you.If preventing newer members and other members from utilizing a glitch that allows them to be as good as (and later, possibly better) themselves isn't spiteful, It's at least hypocritical considering all the advice they've given with other glitches and building techniques.
"What's happening right now" isn't keeping Hax mode a secret to spite members, "what's happening right now" isn't "purely disgusting,"Yes it is, by proxy. Apart from ACAMS, (Who is just adding random info for people to think about) and some other guy who is derping, all of the people telling scrap and Sage to keep Hax Mode locked away from the public are using variants of this sentence: "Good job Sage and scrap! Keep it away from the newbs!"
"what's happening right now" is a bunch of guys trying to decide where we go from here, and ultimately, Scrap and Sage are entitled to do as they please with their discovery. They can release it to the public, or they can lock it away and make sure it never sees the light of day again.Do you know how insane this sounds to me? If we weren't talking about elitism I'd think we were having an argument over anti-intellectualism.
It doesn't effect either of us or anyone on this forum.21 pages in two days say something else.
Stockocalypse? :gawe:
I prefer aStockalypse.
aStockalypse Now?Stockocalypse? :gawe:
I prefer aStockalypse.
aStockalypse Now?Stockocalypse? :gawe:
I prefer aStockalypse.
UI mod based off Motorstorm Apocalypse please!I prefer aStockalypse.
Awesome name is awesome
Makes me want to make up a new mod solely to use that name :P
Well, if it gives me time to reference old war movies, so be it :DaStockalypse Now?Stockocalypse? :gawe:
I prefer aStockalypse.
Not yet. When its released. :gawe:
I prefer aStockalypse.^WINNAR^
If this is what you believe is happening right now, than you're far more cynical then I've ever given you credit for. The "social circle" you're currently referring to consists of the two people who figured the glitch out, no more.You are right, but as someone pointed out, Scrap discovered it. Not only that, Click, JoeBlo and Trov have a possibility of being included, making it a "social pentagon". Finally, you are asking for info on how to do it to curb your skepticism, making it a "social hexagon".
FIXEDIf this is what you believe is happening right now, than you're far more cynical then I've ever given you credit for. The "social circle" you're currently referring to consists of the two people who figured the glitch out, no more.You are right, but as someone pointed out, Scrap discovered it. Not only that, Click, JoeBlo and Trov have a possibility of being included (Not excluding kill), making it a "social hexagon". Finally, you are asking for info on how to do it to curb your skepticism, making it a "social heptagon".
Work on your geometry, because I know it too.
I saw what you did there.Of course it was. Just who the heck do you think I am?We could call it the Garv Glitch, Sparkle Stacking and FAP mode respectively.Methinks that was on purpose.
If Jonzu discovers it, we'll call it the Super Furry Dawn Glitch. If I discover it, I'll release it as Pinkie Pie Oatmeal Mode.
I want it to be called the 'shut the heck up about it; it is illegal glitch'It isn't illegal, so that'd be a fairly stupid name for it...
I want it to be called the 'shut the heck up about it; it is illegal glitch'It isn't illegal, so that'd be a fairly stupid name for it...
It's impossible to class the glitch itself as "illegal" anyway, it could be used just to stack two blacks together, and nobody would know the difference anyway.I want it to be called the 'shut the heck up about it; it is illegal glitch'It isn't illegal, so that'd be a fairly stupid name for it...
Yet.
Thinking about it now makes me wanna go back to the botlab & Start building with it :DSage already demonstrated how ridiculous it can get.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6G1dSAB1uw# (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6G1dSAB1uw#)MUST FIGURE OUT WHICH MOTOR MADE THAT NOISE RIGHT BEFORE IT WAS ACTIVATED.
DERPA HERP
So... LiNcK knows this trick? How nice.Thinking about it now makes me wanna go back to the botlab & Start building with it :DSage already demonstrated how ridiculous it can get.
TBH, it seems like fun.
Anyway we're getting off the subject, which is that Scrap and Sage are rotten bastards for telling us about this without revealing how to do it!Basically Sage and Scrap have copies of Base-Set Charazard, and were all trying to trade out Base-Set Poliwhirls for it.
Anyway we're getting off the subject, which is that Scrap and Sage are rotten bastards for telling us about this without revealing how to do it!Basically Sage and Scrap have copies of Base-Set Charazard, and were all trying to trade out Base-Set Poliwhirls for it.
........
YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN.
You still haven't replied.If this is what you believe is happening right now, than you're far more cynical then I've ever given you credit for. The "social circle" you're currently referring to consists of the two people who figured the glitch out, no more.You are right, but as someone pointed out, Scrap discovered it. Not only that, Click, JoeBlo and Trov have a possibility of being included, making it a "social pentagon". Finally, you are asking for info on how to do it to curb your skepticism, making it a "social hexagon".
And as far as I can tell, Sage and Scrap are spiting no one, especially not you.If preventing newer members and other members from utilizing a glitch that allows them to be as good as (and later, possibly better) themselves isn't spiteful, It's at least hypocritical considering all the advice they've given with other glitches and building techniques.
"What's happening right now" isn't keeping Hax mode a secret to spite members, "what's happening right now" isn't "purely disgusting,"Yes it is, by proxy. Apart from ACAMS, (Who is just adding random info for people to think about) and some other guy who is derping, all of the people telling scrap and Sage to keep Hax Mode locked away from the public are using variants of this sentence: "Good job Sage and scrap! Keep it away from the newbs!"
"what's happening right now" is a bunch of guys trying to decide where we go from here, and ultimately, Scrap and Sage are entitled to do as they please with their discovery. They can release it to the public, or they can lock it away and make sure it never sees the light of day again.Do you know how insane this sounds to me? If we weren't talking about elitism I'd think we were having an argument over anti-intellectualism.
It doesn't effect either of us or anyone on this forum.21 pages in two days say something else.
In fact he should be able to use this in building every bot he makes, but he doesn't because he knows people will rage. It's actually unfair to Scrap to have this banned in tournaments just because only a few people know it.
In fact he should be able to use this in building every bot he makes, but he doesn't because he knows people will rage. It's actually unfair to Scrap to have this banned in tournaments just because only a few people know it.
Alright, now this post really got me. You guy's (you and Scrap) had said previously that this glitch would be unreleased because it would "ruin stock building" and now you're saying it is unfair to Scrap to have this glitch banned? Do you know how crazy that sounds? You're tearing down your only argument for keeping this glitch secret. The reason people want it banned is because it is a cheaty way of building (I am not sold on whether this is even true), not because it is unreleased.
lol at sage rage.Am I the only one who thinks that sounds really, really awesome
First I said it would ruin stock, you guys didn't agree. Okay, fine, it won't ruin stock. Thus the secondary argument that it's unfair to us that it be banned just because you guys don't know how to do it. It's not a cheaty way of building. It's done completely in-game, just like any other glitch. Go back 5 years and show someone snapper loading, they'll think you're a witch and burn you at the stake.
Also, that's not the only reason we haven't released it yet, nor is it really even the main one. It's Scrap's to release. Why the heck should he have to divulge his secrets?
First I said it would ruin stock, you guys didn't agree. Okay, fine, it won't ruin stock. Thus the secondary argument that it's unfair to us that it be banned just because you guys don't know how to do it. It's not a cheaty way of building. It's done completely in-game, just like any other glitch. Go back 5 years and show someone snapper loading, they'll think you're a witch and burn you at the stake.
Also, that's not the only reason we haven't released it yet, nor is it really even the main one. It's Scrap's to release. Why the heck should he have to divulge his secrets?
Well alright, as long as you don't hold by the "ruining stock" argument. However, I don't think people here are saying it should be banned because no one knows how to do it, they are saying it should be banned because it allows you to stack practically anything. This is the exact same reason that BFE and AAM are banned, because the allow for building bots that do not fit the communities expectations. We could allow these bots, like the community probably first did when deciding whether stacking should be allowed, or we could forbid them. Either way, I don't think it is secrecy that makes people want the glitch banned.
Uhhhhhh BFE and AAM aren't banned because of what they do, they are banned because they are done outside of the game.
Why the heck should he have to divulge his secrets?Don't you dare try to pin the burden on us.
Why the heck should he have to divulge his secrets?Don't you dare try to pin the burden on us.
Why the heck should he have to divulge his secrets?
Scrap found it. There's no law saying he has to share his secrets. In fact he should be able to use this in building every bot he makes
You are right, but as someone pointed out, Scrap discovered it. Not only that, Click, JoeBlo and Trov have a possibility of being included, making it a "social pentagon". Finally, you are asking for info on how to do it to curb your skepticism, making it a "social hexagon".
If preventing newer members and other members from utilizing a glitch that allows them to be as good as (and later, possibly better) themselves isn't spiteful, It's at least hypocritical considering all the advice they've given with other glitches and building techniques.
Yes it is, by proxy. Apart from ACAMS, (Who is just adding random info for people to think about) and some other guy who is derping, all of the people telling scrap and Sage to keep Hax Mode locked away from the public are using variants of this sentence: "Good job Sage and scrap! Keep it away from the newbs!"
Do you know how insane this sounds to me? If we weren't talking about elitism I'd think we were having an argument over anti-intellectualism.
21 pages in two days say something else.
All of your refutations I mostly agree on exept for this. I urj, you (As you have told me, rendering this argument mostly invalid) and many others demand an open release to the public. You may not be concerned about an "Elite class" forming, but to be honest is one ever did form you'd be invited, being one of the older members here who is well established in GTM.You are right, but as someone pointed out, Scrap discovered it. Not only that, Click, JoeBlo and Trov have a possibility of being included, making it a "social pentagon". Finally, you are asking for info on how to do it to curb your skepticism, making it a "social hexagon".
Did Sage tell me how to do it? No. Do Click and Trov and Joe know? I doubt it. Kill has confirmed his knowledge, so that makes three members. Three. I don't know about you, but that's so far from a circle that I'm not concerned about an "elite class" posessing privileged knowledge emerging. And if asking for info in order to curb skepticism admits you to this group, then you're just as much of a member as I am, and so is everybody else who has posted in this thread.
GO TRACK THEM DOWN, STALK THEM, AND BUG THEM.I'll get sparky on this, pronto!
Uhhhhhh BFE and AAM aren't banned because of what they do, they are banned because they are done outside of the game.Nope, they were banned because they made the game extremely unbalanced and unfair to those who didn't know how to do them (invincible components, components stuck inside of the opponent, landmines, controllable parts that aren't attached to the bot, etc.). That's why most hosts allow their participants to edit the preview pic, chassis appearance/reflective properties, and attach SZs to components.
Many of you are looking at the wrong side of the "Stock Apocalypse"..
As I explained to Sage its this half baked messy situation we have now that could drive players away..
Once you have a clean simple cut rules we can go on peacefully with our lives again.. we basically have to come together as a community and make a simple agreement about it.
As it stands now Sage and Scrap can technically use it in existing rule sets as its not listed as an outlawed glitch and fits within the "All building to be done in the botlab"
Now obviously tournaments can make up their own personal rulesets around it but general building standards/ rules and the case if nothing is specified (or forgotten to add) its all up in the air.. Same with the 140cm extender.. tournaments make specific comments about it (becasue we never came to a yes or no agreement)
Why I mention this is remember Sage and I slipped in the 140cm extender in our winning BOTM? no rules prevented it as it fitted within the ruleset of AI / Hidden parts unless specified otherwise.. now its not a big deal but something like limitless stacking is.
Lets ban all glitches so RFS comes back because only he matters.You just basically said that 30-70% of the community doesn't matter.
I vote for 2.Many of you are looking at the wrong side of the "Stock Apocalypse"..
As I explained to Sage its this half baked messy situation we have now that could drive players away..
Once you have a clean simple cut rules we can go on peacefully with our lives again.. we basically have to come together as a community and make a simple agreement about it.
As it stands now Sage and Scrap can technically use it in existing rule sets as its not listed as an outlawed glitch and fits within the "All building to be done in the botlab"
Now obviously tournaments can make up their own personal rulesets around it but general building standards/ rules and the case if nothing is specified (or forgotten to add) its all up in the air.. Same with the 140cm extender.. tournaments make specific comments about it (becasue we never came to a yes or no agreement)
Why I mention this is remember Sage and I slipped in the 140cm extender in our winning BOTM? no rules prevented it as it fitted within the ruleset of AI / Hidden parts unless specified otherwise.. now its not a big deal but something like limitless stacking is.
We need to just come straight down to it and vote yes or no.. to many opinions and being changed and flying all over the place we really at not quite at the original point.
So lets just keep "ruin" "death" and "the end" out of this thread from no on and look at how we can structure this
1) Release and Allow- The Glitch is shown, Scrap is awarded it as an official glitch (at the moment it cannot be considered such since it cannot be confirmed 100% doable) and we let it loose in stock
2) Hide and Ban - Obviously the opposite, we pretend it didnt happen and use the "common sense approach" to stacks
3) Middle road - The Glitch is shown, Scrap is awarded it as an official glitch and baseplate stacking is banned.
Now I got some rage pm's from someone whom I wont mention about the stacking ban situation... but its basically to balance things out again. I foresee to many conflicts of people using Hax mode and claiming it legit (then we wind up with a tournament thread that turns into this one)... I mean if you dont go overboard with it you could easily pass boundaries without being detected
There is nothing to say this couldnt happen with AAM or BFE yes but I could see such an more accessible thing dramatically increasing the amount of Cheat vs Legit stacking..
So is RFS a majority or minority?Lets ban all glitches so RFS comes back because only he matters.You just basically said that 30-70% of the community doesn't matter.
I meant that the stock people are 30-70% of the community. I don't think that RFS played DSL.So is RFS a majority or minority?Lets ban all glitches so RFS comes back because only he matters.You just basically said that 30-70% of the community doesn't matter.
I meant that the stock people are 30-70% of the community. I don't think that RFS played DSL.So is RFS a majority or minority?Lets ban all glitches so RFS comes back because only he matters.You just basically said that 30-70% of the community doesn't matter.
stay tuned.
Lol the children of GTM include Sparkey, Fotepx, GTG, Hard Bot, Ben Purse, Jonzu, etc. So good luck with that next time you have a conversation with God.stay tuned.
Oh good god save the children.
Lol the children of GTM include Sparkey, Fotepx, GTG, Hard Bot, Ben Purse, Jonzu, etc. So good luck with that next time you have a conversation with God.stay tuned.
Oh good god save the children.
I didn't say anything about bad. I was just making a list of children here from my head.Lol the children of GTM include Sparkey, Fotepx, GTG, Hard Bot, Ben Purse, Jonzu, etc. So good luck with that next time you have a conversation with God.stay tuned.
Oh good god save the children.
Am I really that bad?
fourteen? Besides I'm pretty sure Ben is somewhere in his twenties if he really is as drunk as he says.I didn't say anything about bad. I was just making a list of children here from my head.Lol the children of GTM include Sparkey, Fotepx, GTG, Hard Bot, Ben Purse, Jonzu, etc. So good luck with that next time you have a conversation with God.stay tuned.
Oh good god save the children.
Am I really that bad?
Their age is not an excuse, Me (and Badnik IIRC) are 13, and act properly
Mostly not, but you do still have your outburstsTheir age is not an excuse, Me (and Badnik IIRC) are 13, and act properlyBut do I still act like a nine year old most of the time?
Their age is not an excuse, Me (and Badnik IIRC) are 13, and act properlyet moi
Their age is not an excuse, Me (and Badnik IIRC) are 13, and act properlyAnd then i do 3/4ths of the time :P
I see age isnt a factor when it comes to who goes off topic :PPeople are having way too much hypothetical discussion of what "some people" would do when this gets released anyway. Now you can see first hand.
I mean the moment S32 goes off on elitism, anti-intellectualism, and how not releasing this glitch is like raping babies I knew something must be wrong. Even if a vast majority of the community is responsible, A few bad apples and hiccups should still exist.Way to miss the point. If what I was saying is a location, I could put a peice of bread there and you could put a peice of bread where you think my point is (Assuming it's a location) and we'd make an earth sandwich.
And then we ask, what "good" would it bring if at best it will be banned, and at worst abused to the point of eliminating the last bit of diversity, and we see that releasing this brings nothing good to the community at all. Any negative will out weight the 0 positive that this provides. That's not to say I don't personally want to know anyway.Hey, If you really want to see where my anti-intellectualism comparison comes from, pretend this here quote is about Higgs boson/the fourth chemical in orb-weaving spider silk/cultural habits of Crows/Scientific experiment X.
I see how it is a bad comparison. This is much more like rather we should make modern nuclear and missile technology public. Knowing exactly what it's abilities are and how a few bad apples like North Korea might just build an ICBM with it.And then we ask, what "good" would it bring if at best it will be banned, and at worst abused to the point of eliminating the last bit of diversity, and we see that releasing this brings nothing good to the community at all. Any negative will out weight the 0 positive that this provides. That's not to say I don't personally want to know anyway.Hey, If you really want to see where my anti-intellectualism comparison comes from, pretend this here quote is about Higgs boson/the fourth chemical in orb-weaving spider silk/cultural habits of Crows/Scientific experiment X.
Or alternatively, A miracle drug that can cure all Cardio-vascular diseases.I see how it is a bad comparison. This is much more like rather we should make modern nuclear and missile technology public.And then we ask, what "good" would it bring if at best it will be banned, and at worst abused to the point of eliminating the last bit of diversity, and we see that releasing this brings nothing good to the community at all. Any negative will out weight the 0 positive that this provides. That's not to say I don't personally want to know anyway.Hey, If you really want to see where my anti-intellectualism comparison comes from, pretend this here quote is about Higgs boson/the fourth chemical in orb-weaving spider silk/cultural habits of Crows/Scientific experiment X.
nonetheless, People should have a chance to play and discover by themselves, as you had done. Not refer to a guide.
So there, people should figure out the method themselves.
Apples and oranges. A glitch that took three years to actively hunt down isn't the same as trimming 0.3 KG off a bot.nonetheless, People should have a chance to play and discover by themselves, as you had done. Not refer to a guide.So there, people should figure out the method themselves.
The title says it all really.I think I can find a quote of you defending exactly the opposite of everything you said, and I won't even be quoting out of context.
Jack Daniels has made the following proposal:QuoteI say, release it to the public and future Stock tournaments can be either:
-Stock abiding by the realistic rule (thus negating the need for any hax)
or
-Stock All In-game Glitches Allowed (probably ushering in a new era of leet bots that separate the men from the boys (and women from the girls just to include Scourge))
In the event of Hax Mode being made available to the public, I submit we undergo heavy revisions of the non realistic stock mode.
Please post your proposed revisions for tournaments here. I will make a poll on the 4th of july, 2011.
We are not breaking new grounds, we are not doing anything that isn't possible with BFE. It is simply a new "method" of doing things. This is unlike "higgs boson" where you "don't know" what will come out of it. This is stuff anyone who tap into BFE/game balance know exactly how it will be abused because they already been there and done that.
SnipI'm for the death penalty and drug legalisation. OMG FLIP FLOPPING
Instead of releasing it maybe they could give us some sort of large hint and let us work from that.What difference will it make to the outcome? We have a big search and destroy party for a glitch, then what happens?
Stupid idea I know
Lol the children of GTM include Sparkey, Fotepx, GTG, Hard Bot, Ben Purse, Jonzu, etc. So good luck with that next time you have a conversation with God.stay tuned.
Oh good god save the children.
I dunno, I did say it was a stupid ideaInstead of releasing it maybe they could give us some sort of large hint and let us work from that.What difference will it make to the outcome? We have a big search and destroy party for a glitch, then what happens?
Stupid idea I know
(https://gametechmods.com/uploads/images/22580screenshot_6.jpg)
invincible battery armor anyone?
@Trovaner: Not releasing also brings the chance of someone finding out about it & Not talking about it... Just using it without telling anyone. (Ofcourse, He wont be able to overdo it or peeps will notice)Since they would be limited to the stacking ability of normal stacking (or get DQ for .bot file editing), it wouldn't be any different than it is now. For example, I could easily .bot file edit a bot that is virtually invisible among the other fair entrants. In fact, we've had a few people already admit to doing this.
If I found out about it myself, I would use it in a few Tourneys, Win 2/3 tourneys & Then be like: LOOK WHAT I JUST FOUND 1 DAY AGO! And release it :D
Well you are right about that, at the same time BFE didn't really bring anything good on the table either. No improvement to gaming experience or anything. It was simply banned.We are not breaking new grounds, we are not doing anything that isn't possible with BFE. It is simply a new "method" of doing things. This is unlike "higgs boson" where you "don't know" what will come out of it. This is stuff anyone who tap into BFE/game balance know exactly how it will be abused because they already been there and done that.But clearly BFE hasn't caused the end of stock or DSL. It is possible that stock building may change, but in my opinion it is better to err on the side of openness then to speculate on what could happen, and use said speculation to help ensure this glitch never sees the light of day.
This glitch however I do not know it's level of difficulties. It is quite possible that the few bad apples can pull it off and cause a lot of unnecessary dramas.
Again, as long as some potential harm is present, with no perceivable benefit, the only rational decision is to not release. I mean, what will making things tighter do? Make HS more powerful relative to popups? God Mode with exostack? I just can't see any benefit in it.
When I said benefit, I am specifically talking about the balance of the game. Certain God Mode does something, but you cease to have a playable game with that. After everything that needs to be banned gets banned, you really don't have anything left besides maybe increase the tolerance of stack, which we can agree on.This glitch however I do not know it's level of difficulties. It is quite possible that the few bad apples can pull it off and cause a lot of unnecessary dramas.
Again, as long as some potential harm is present, with no perceivable benefit, the only rational decision is to not release. I mean, what will making things tighter do? Make HS more powerful relative to popups? God Mode with exostack? I just can't see any benefit in it.
If there is no real benefit that can be extracted by using the glitch, then exactly what drama are newcomers going to cause? It would be like someone new coming into DSL and stacking all of their components. People will tell them that they are not following the communities standards and they will either change their ways or be shunned. Likewise, if someone did use Hax Mode, the only thing they would get out of it would be a mega stacked bot that would reek of the glitch. We would tell them that competitive stock bots aren't built with the glitch and they will either abandon it or be shunned. The only thing I see changing is that we might have to take a look at how much stacking we consider tolerable (do we draw the line at 4 blacks or 3?), so that we can regulate those who are using the glitch more covertly. I think basic common sense should be enough, though perhaps not. Like I have said, this is just a part of our communities' evolution, same as when BFE and AAM came around. The community makes a decision on regulation and life goes on.
Now I can see a few benefits to this glitch. Most abstractly, the glitch could better our understanding of game mechanics, and through continued testing of it possible lead to even cooler glitches and/or anomalies. I can also see it being useful (depending on how easy it is) for people to stack batteries and such (within the agreed upon limits). I mean if the glitch saves a lot of time, why not use it? In DSL, I can maybe see it being used against components with dodgy meshes (like that accursed 6-mag gearbox). So there are some possible benefits that could come from Hax Mode, and the possible cons don't seem to be severe enough to force the glitch to remain secret.Like BFE, if you try to make specific things legal with it and other things not, you are going to end up with pages and pages of rulebooks with so much personal opinions that noone would follow them.
It's soo much easier to stack blacks normally than to use this glitch.Not really at all, as far as I can tell. Axle loading? Half a minute for me. Stacking? Only done it twice, after an hour. This might become a placebo for those who find such stacking difficult.
It's soo much easier to stack blacks normally than to use this glitch.
I'm the same way. Snapper loading? eFFe glitch? Axle loading? No problem. Stack two blacks? I've only done it ONCE.It's soo much easier to stack blacks normally than to use this glitch.Not really at all, as far as I can tell. Axle loading? Half a minute for me. Stacking? Only done it twice, after an hour. This might become a placebo for those who find such stacking difficult.
You just need more stacktice :Picwutudidthar
it takes 30 seconds to stack a black average. can do it in 5. it's also taken an hour before. just depends on the bot. but for the most part, ur probably doing it wrong.Nope, not for me atleast, i've watched tutorials on it before to check i'm doin it right, yet it's still VERY hard to stack for me, I have to be pixel precise for stacking a black into a black, and have only ever managed to stack a CB into a nifty once, and that took closer to 30 minutes than 30 secoonds.
as soon as I get home I will make a video showing all the tips and tricks I know for stacking blacksThat could be quite handy
ur probably doing it wrong.
it takes 30 seconds to stack a black average. can do it in 5. it's also taken an hour before. just depends on the bot. but for the most part, ur probably doing it wrong.
it takes 30 seconds to stack a black average. can do it in 5. it's also taken an hour before. just depends on the bot. but for the most part, ur probably doing it wrong.
To highlight how dumb and fallacious what you said is, I've prepared this quote:
"Hey guys, I'm being white! Look at me being white! Why don't black people be white, it's easy! Black people, you can be white too! You were just doing it wrong!"
Good going missing half a dozen factors that have a possibility of affecting stacking, genius[!]
@Trovaner: Not releasing also brings the chance of someone finding out about it & Not talking about it... Just using it without telling anyone. (Ofcourse, He wont be able to overdo it or peeps will notice)
If I found out about it myself, I would use it in a few Tourneys, Win 2/3 tourneys & Then be like: LOOK WHAT I JUST FOUND 1 DAY AGO! And release it :D
Since they would be limited to the stacking ability of normal stacking (or get DQ for .bot file editing), it wouldn't be any different than it is now. For example, I could easily .bot file edit a bot that is virtually invisible among the other fair entrants. In fact, we've had a few people already admit to doing this.
In DSL, I can maybe see it being used against components with dodgy meshes (like that accursed 6-mag gearbox). So there are some possible benefits that could come from Hax Mode, and the possible cons don't seem to be severe enough to force the glitch to remain secret.
What hardware is it being run on? How is it being run? Is it being run quickly? CD or not? Pirate version? Any mods? And damage to the disc? Any corruption to the DL? Ay errors in running? Did you use glitches before? AAM used on the bot? BFE? That's not even touching the things we haven't thought of.it takes 30 seconds to stack a black average. can do it in 5. it's also taken an hour before. just depends on the bot. but for the most part, ur probably doing it wrong.
To highlight how dumb and fallacious what you said is, I've prepared this quote:
"Hey guys, I'm being white! Look at me being white! Why don't black people be white, it's easy! Black people, you can be white too! You were just doing it wrong!"
Good going missing half a dozen factors that have a possibility of affecting stacking, genius[!]
What other factors?
Michael Jackson did it.it takes 30 seconds to stack a black average. can do it in 5. it's also taken an hour before. just depends on the bot. but for the most part, ur probably doing it wrong.
To highlight how dumb and fallacious what you said is, I've prepared this quote:
"Hey guys, I'm being white! Look at me being white! Why don't black people be white, it's easy! Black people, you can be white too! You were just doing it wrong!"
Good going missing half a dozen factors that have a possibility of affecting stacking, genius[!]
Do you have any proof that any of those factors actually effect stacking?Venko
Do you have any proof that any of those factors actually effect stacking?Venko
lol, but, proof?Do you have any proof that any of those factors actually effect stacking?Venko
venko just had a ton of time
Do you have any proof that any of those factors actually effect stacking?
Do you have any proof that any of those factors actually effect stacking?
Prove to me they don't.
LOL everyone in this thread is so mad.
Damn it, you got us ACAMS. Fine... the entire thing was a hoax to draw attention to ourselves.
Damn it, you got us ACAMS. Fine... the entire thing was a hoax to draw attention to ourselves.THIS DOESN'T SEEM LEGIT.
LOL everyone in this thread is so mad.Except us.
Damn it, you got us ACAMS. Fine... the entire thing was a hoax to draw attention to ourselves.THIS DOESN'T SEEM LEGIT.
Any corruption to the DL? Ay errors in running?lol no.
I don't care if is released or notBut we now know it doesn't exist.
Wait...so its fake?
Damn it, you got us ACAMS. Fine... the entire thing was a hoax to draw attention to ourselves.
Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
What would convince you?
Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
What would convince you?
There is nothing else. In a video we can't be certain you didn't tamper with the game before hand, and I'm not sure of any other medium you could demonstrate in. I mean a picture would be even worse...
What would convince you?I'm guessing they'd want you to tell somebody who wouldn't lie to the regular community (and say you/Scrap showed you how to do it when you really didn't), but of course in your defense it has to be someone who also won't spread the secret. You can't find a long-time user here as they are prone to being accused of the former given situation, but also can't tell someone who isn't trustworthy or serious enough to keep it a secret, so it should be a new person (6 months or less is good) who doesn't really stay on the AU and Mods' side of things, and who you think you can trust. I vote Geice. :P He's already tried so hard to find it so that's an added bonus.
Do you mean me? I spent about 2 minutes trying to get it before I got bored.What would convince you?He's already tried so hard to find it so that's an added bonus.
Me and Scrap are people who would lie to the community?
I am on the fence about this, them creating such a useful glitch and not releasing it seems a bit fuzzy. I must say though if this is real, then I happily applaud you. But if this is fake or a joke, then I'll laugh my a** off.
Yes, it's a ton of fun to mess around with :DThis is definitively fake.
Damn it, you got us ACAMS. Fine... the entire thing was a hoax to draw attention to ourselves.THIS DOESN'T SEEM LEGIT.
Umm... I think Sage was joking about it being a hoax.
OR WAS I
Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.Nothing. For all I know you might as well be using a memory hack. If collision is processed with a memory state then it shouldn't even be that hard to freeze it using cheat engine.
What would convince you?
Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
What would convince you?
But more importantly, I don't believe it because "exist but can never enter my reality" is no different from "not exist".
A better analogy is "the person I thought I knew on TV most likely does not exist". Fake personality, makeups, fake names, you name it, they do it. The only thing that is needed to not believe is "not enough evidences". If you have to prove "not exist" to not believe, you would have to believe in invisible pink unicorn.Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
What would convince you?
But more importantly, I don't believe it because "exist but can never enter my reality" is no different from "not exist".
So someone you see on TV doesn't exist, because you have not seen them in real life for yourself?
Easy to prove, it will be a unicorn, thus solid, therefore it must make contact with everything it touches. I have never been touched by a unicorn that I couldn't see. It could not be a liquid, as a unicorn has a certain shape, and an invisible unicorn made of gas? That would be called air.A better analogy is "the person I thought I knew on TV most likely does not exist". Fake personality, makeups, fake names, you name it, they do it. The only thing that is needed to not believe is "not enough evidences". If you have to prove "not exist" to not believe, you would have to believe in invisible pink unicorn.Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
What would convince you?
But more importantly, I don't believe it because "exist but can never enter my reality" is no different from "not exist".
So someone you see on TV doesn't exist, because you have not seen them in real life for yourself?
Hold on a sec, just when the heck did you touch an unicorn? Oh I got it you bought some Twilight Sparkle toys.Easy to prove, it will be a unicorn, thus solid, therefore it must make contact with everything it touches. I have never been touched by a unicorn that I couldn't see. It could not be a liquid, as a unicorn has a certain shape, and an invisible unicorn made of gas? That would be called air.A better analogy is "the person I thought I knew on TV most likely does not exist". Fake personality, makeups, fake names, you name it, they do it. The only thing that is needed to not believe is "not enough evidences". If you have to prove "not exist" to not believe, you would have to believe in invisible pink unicorn.Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
What would convince you?
But more importantly, I don't believe it because "exist but can never enter my reality" is no different from "not exist".
So someone you see on TV doesn't exist, because you have not seen them in real life for yourself?
And if the unicorn is invisible, it cannot have a colour, so it cannot be pink. :trollface
A better analogy is "the person I thought I knew on TV most likely does not exist". Fake personality, makeups, fake names, you name it, they do it.Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
What would convince you?
But more importantly, I don't believe it because "exist but can never enter my reality" is no different from "not exist".
So someone you see on TV doesn't exist, because you have not seen them in real life for yourself?
Fixed!Hold on a sec, just when the heck did you touch an unicorn? Oh I got it you bought some Twilight Sparkle toys.Easy to prove, it will be a unicorn, thus solid, therefore it must make contact with everything it touches. I have never been touched by an invisible unicorn. It could not be a liquid, as a unicorn has a certain shape, and an invisible unicorn made of gas? That would be called air.A better analogy is "the person I thought I knew on TV most likely does not exist". Fake personality, makeups, fake names, you name it, they do it. The only thing that is needed to not believe is "not enough evidences". If you have to prove "not exist" to not believe, you would have to believe in invisible pink unicorn.Honestly people there has to be someway to prove it's legit without telling you how exactly to do it.
What would convince you?
But more importantly, I don't believe it because "exist but can never enter my reality" is no different from "not exist".
So someone you see on TV doesn't exist, because you have not seen them in real life for yourself?
And if the unicorn is invisible, it cannot have a colour, so it cannot be pink. :trollface
It follows that if you take that toy into a dark room, turn off the light, and touch it, you just touched an unicorn that you couldn't see.
Fixed!Because it's not like there are other unicorns out there that you can get your hands on.....
And why do you assume that I would buy an MLP toy?
That's what she said! :trollfaceFixed!Because it's not like there are other unicorns out there that you can get your hands on.....
And why do you assume that I would buy an MLP toy?
So you DO have MLP toys then.That's what she said! :trollfaceFixed!Because it's not like there are other unicorns out there that you can get your hands on.....
And why do you assume that I would buy an MLP toy?
ITS LIKE JERSEY SHORE ALL OVER AGAIN!!!Just because "Sage and SD posted it" isn't good enough. Why might they lie? Attention. After all, what's the point of even telling everyone they found something if they not going to share it? Attention. I guarantee that if no one responded to this thread from the very start they would have been disappointed.
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZZZZ!!!!! D:
Honestly, I dont think we need any more proof, I mean... Why would they lie? What do they get?
Its basically a loss of everyone's time if its fake, Theyll be like: HAHA! You believed us.
So?
Theres no point in lying that you discovered a new glitch really... Atleast for me, Too much works making the vids & To just say that it was a lie & Troll everybody.
Not worth MY time atleast :\