Autohunting vs Autotracking

[Mirandus]

I want to be clear on the rules around Authohunting.

The rule was put in place from two sides. Using a trigger to "cling" to an enemy and parse out their direction to automatically follow them (auto hunting) and conversely, using maps/triggers to run far distances. These are both very difficult to capture, but they are both part of the rule as a means of making PvP more "manual" with respect to movement to hunt/escape.

What is NOT against the rules is creating a trigger to provide a player with a visual cue that indicates the direction you a player has gone, or, even if this is a trigger to automatically track and let you know the direction. This is as long as there is NO automated movement.

It is automated movement (like the old cling) that is not permitted. If I have to manually hit the direction to follow someone, even if assisted by a trigger (telling me the direction I should go) this is fine.

Like I said, the rule is against AUTO hunting. Conversely, people should not be using triggers/maps to run "across the continent in 10 seconds" to escape.

What may be worth exploring is a potential shift in tracking, but that's a different conversation that will be undertaken including AoB.

[Mim]

This is what the rules say:

Code: Select all

 
 Using triggers to hunt another player or using a speedwalking path
 to escape player versus player combat will result in:
  
                        1st offense - Warning
                        2nd offense - Death without recovery            

For this "autotracking" to be an actual benefit in PVP you'd have to set up triggers that do the <track> command and then follow the tracks, which would clearly violate the rule of using triggers to hunt another player.

Cherek and the help rule says:

Using triggers to hunt another player or.... will result in: Warning or Death

Mirandus says:

What is NOT against the rules is creating a trigger to provide a player with....

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Now I am totally confused....

[Kvator]

This is what the rules say:

Code: Select all

 
 Using triggers to hunt another player or using a speedwalking path
 to escape player versus player combat will result in:
  
                        1st offense - Warning
                        2nd offense - Death without recovery            

For this "autotracking" to be an actual benefit in PVP you'd have to set up triggers that do the <track> command and then follow the tracks, which would clearly violate the rule of using triggers to hunt another player.

Cherek and the help rule says:

Using triggers to hunt another player or.... will result in: Warning or Death

Mirandus says:

What is NOT against the rules is creating a trigger to provide a player with....

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Now I am totally confused....

Damn

You even bolded the part that explain the difference xD

funny

[Zhar]

Now I am totally confused....

Trigger 1:
trigger - player A leaves northwest
effect - player B moves northwest

Trigger 2:
trigger - player A leaves northwest
effect - player B tracks OR big arrow pointing NW appears on his screen

Trigger 3:
trigger - player B finds tracks leading northwest
effect - player B moves northwest

Triggers 1 and 3 are in violation of the rules, Trigger 2 is not. Having triggers for visual cues or tracking is fine as no movement happens.

Hope this clears that up a bit

[Cherek]

This is what the rules say:

Code: Select all

 
 Using triggers to hunt another player or using a speedwalking path
 to escape player versus player combat will result in:
  
                        1st offense - Warning
                        2nd offense - Death without recovery            

For this "autotracking" to be an actual benefit in PVP you'd have to set up triggers that do the <track> command and then follow the tracks, which would clearly violate the rule of using triggers to hunt another player.

Cherek and the help rule says:

Using triggers to hunt another player or.... will result in: Warning or Death

Mirandus says:

What is NOT against the rules is creating a trigger to provide a player with....

--- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- --- ---

Now I am totally confused....

Hah, I love that our clarifications just make things more confusing

Actually, MIrandus and I said the same thing. I said it's not okay to set triggers that first track and then move, which is what Mirandus said too. Mirandus just clarified that's it's okay to use a trigger for the <track> command alone when you enter a new room, as long as you type in the move command manually. It's automating the _movement_ that is illegal here.

That's also how I read the rules, but it's possible the rules are unintentionally written in a way that leaves room for interpretation...? I guess we could change the rules to say "Using triggers to automate your movement while hunting another player..." Would that be better perhaps? And leave less room for confusion?

Anyway... we are looking into perhaps adding a delay to the <track> command. I am not sure it's great that it's instant at sup guru. I think there should be at least a tiny delay even at the highest level. Or what do you players think?

[Dan]

So, I setup a trigger that triggers on 'dude went Northeast', the trigger fills my variable followthere i then have my f12 key bound to :

@followthere (will go northeast)
track

Meaning i just sit spamming f12 and i will end up at his location in 2-3 seconds, yet i wasnt using an autohunt, but i didnt use skills either to press the directions manually....

[Mim]

Actually, MIrandus and I said the same thing. I said it's not okay to set triggers that first track and then move, which is what Mirandus said too. Mirandus just clarified that's it's okay to use a trigger for the <track> command alone when you enter a new room, as long as you type in the move command manually. It's automating the _movement_ that is illegal here.

That's also how I read the rules, but it's possible the rules are unintentionally written in a way that leaves room for interpretation...? I guess we could change the rules to say "Using triggers to automate your movement while hunting another player..." Would that be better perhaps? And leave less room for confusion?

Anyway... we are looking into perhaps adding a delay to the <track> command. I am not sure it's great that it's instant at sup guru. I think there should be at least a tiny delay even at the highest level. Or what do you players think?

How can the following highlighted sentence be misinterpretated?

Using triggers to hunt another player
or
something else.

Im an old man. I started school in 1966 and my first english class was in 1969.
Back then 'It is forbidden to walk on the grass lawn' meant just that.
It was not the same as 'It is forbidden to walk on the grass lawn, but only if you wear spiked shoes'.
Those two sentences are not the same thing.
Or should I say were not the same thing back in 1969. Maybe I have something new to learn.

'Using triggers or scripts to instantly hunt someone IS illegal, it's very clear in tyhe rules.'

That sentence and 'Using triggers to hunt another player' both mean the same thing to me.
I would interpretate them to say one can not use triggers to hunt players.

This is not the same as 'using triggers to hunt another player and then move'.
'and then move' changes the meaning.

I can accept, in Genesis, that what the keeper says is how to intrerpretate things.
If he says 'An A is an A' then that is what it is.
If then AoP says 'An A is an A, but only folowed by a B' I think it is the first that counts.
If then the keeper says -:"Both senteces are the same" I guess I have to live with that too. Reluctantly.

[Mim]

So, I setup a trigger that triggers on 'dude went Northeast', the trigger fills my variable followthere i then have my f12 key bound to :

@followthere (will go northeast)
track

Meaning i just sit spamming f12 and i will end up at his location in 2-3 seconds, yet i wasnt using an autohunt, but i didnt use skills either to press the directions manually....

I think this is important.
Why was the 'autohunt' forbidden in the first place?

The game provides us with a client that has the possibility to 'trigger' things.
Back in the days with telnet we played without any triggers.
Every charge and stuff had to be manually typed.
There was a limited number of aliases used to play.
My 'ch' alias meant charge´, and I typed ch many times during a fight.

Then came ZMud and other clients.
And with them triggers.
"You can now charge again" triggered a charge command.

Then with better links and computers the 'autohunter' was born.
Players A typed 'east' and ran into that room.
Player B had a trigger 'Player A moves east' and the trigger moved player B east at a split of a second.
This was not a good thing said the admin.
The autohunter was forbidden.

Why was this a bad thing?

Well, the game should be played manually and not by the computer.
But we all use triggers all the time!!! Why this trigger only, and not all the others?????

The answer is probably because the admin does want players to be able to run away from the bullies.
Now, this ofc, means a dickhead can not easilly be killed as he deserves, as running after is very hard.
But one can assume the reason for the rule is to allow players to run away from a fight is desirable.

So using triggers to fully chase a player is forbidden.
But using triggers to halfway chase is allowed.
Even if the effect is the same. Why? It is hard to come up with a good reason.

Is it not the effect, chasing a player with instant or almost instant output, that is undesirable?
Or is it only 'the computer does the whole package' that is undesirable?
I have a problem with the last sentence. I would think that automatic following, meaning player B chasing player A within a second or a few is what the rule was intended to stop, was it not?

[Kvator]

I think we should add rule that playing via telnet is mandatory

I am still not sure about in-game alias option - but it might be a bit too innovative for my taste as well

[Cherek]

Mim: I think I just made things more confusing here. Usually I tend to just let Mirandus reply to AoP-related things, just so all the admin-info about these things come from one person, and that should be Mirandus. Sometimes I can't help myself... but this thread proves why letting only Mirandus reply to these kind of questions is a good idea

If you think the rules are unclear, or misleading, or that they are applied wrong, I will leave that up to Mirandus to reply to. Or, you can reach out to him using PM/ingame mail if you prefer to discuss it further in a more direct way.