Foiling Scripters

[Pokemonfan13]

Given that the entire point of using the images would be to make it harder for an automatic thing to figure out which dragons are rares and grab them, I'd say it would hurt people using an automatic thing to read the descriptions out loud.

[blockEdragon]

I vote yes on ditching descriptions for incave eggs

 

1. the whole point of a description is to describe what it looks like (or what its doing but that can just show on the scroll)

 

2. almost anyone with a lick of sense goes to the DC wiki and learns all the important descriptions and lets face it "TEH SECRETZ" are spoiled already unless its a new release

 

3.the AP has that already and no ones upset about people not having to read descriptions there

 

4. you have to click the image to grab the egg so the loading argument seems pointless

[Fuzzbucket]

Yeah, but there are those interesting ones that share a description, and the ones where you might get a red dorsal or a tan ridgie. I would not support those becoming instantly spottable in the cave.

Edited May 27, 2016 by fuzzbucket

[danicast]

Actually none of this discussion is necessary. There are anti-scripts tools and softwares that you install in the server and prevents any user to run a script from browsers. It's up to TJ to do that.

[blockEdragon]

Yeah, but there are those interesting ones that share a description, and the ones where you might get a red dorsal or a tan ridgie. I would not support those becoming instantly spottable in the cave.

make those eggs always grey then, or just show them as the non alt

 

and sharing a description is annoying for and most of the people probably would be better off if they didn't have to pick up the wrong breed all the time, maybe theyd even be picked up more because when you want a horse you get a horse, when you want that frill you get it

Edited May 27, 2016 by blockEdragon

[Fuzzbucket]

I really can't see that as a good reason to remove descriptions.

[blockEdragon]

I really can't see that as a good reason to remove descriptions.

well scripts rely on the description so it would stop them for a while

 

and the descriptions shouldn't be removed, they could still be viewed on the view page

Edited May 27, 2016 by blockEdragon

[pinkgothic]

Yeah, but there are those interesting ones that share a description, and the ones where you might get a red dorsal or a tan ridgie. I would not support those becoming instantly spottable in the cave.

It just occurs to me, thanks to this message, mostly, that this discussion is unfortunately moot. Why? Because you can still check view pages - and it would be easier to check the view pages of codes in the cave if you have a script doing that job for you than if you manually need to check. Something something iframes something something, might not even show up as very odd in TJ's logs.

 

So, really, removing the (textual) descriptions would not harm scripters much. :c It would probably make existing scripts moot, since they presumably do the slightly easier thing of checking the descriptions (hence this topic, after all), and for unique descriptions it means loading an extra page per dragon that legitimate users would not have to do, which might slow the scripters down, but probably not nearly enough (since for scripts to read the content of a page, you don't need to wait for the layout of it to finish rendering, and the raw HTML transfers fairly quickly).

 

IDK. I am less convinced this is something worth trying now. I still wouldn't throw the idea out entirely, but I overlooked this possibility when I first posted, so I'm adjusting slightly for the insight.

Edited May 27, 2016 by pinkgothic

[Kovia]

well scripts rely on the description so it would stop them

 

and the descriptions shouldn't be removed, they could still be viewed on the view page

I think you missed what this suggestion actually is. It's talking about changing the description to a picture that humans could still read but scripts could not, not removing the description entirely or making the egg "visible" instead of a question mark.

[Wymsical]

Actually none of this discussion is necessary. There are anti-scripts tools and softwares that you install in the server and prevents any user to run a script from browsers. It's up to TJ to do that.

It really is not that simple. Scripts come in far more forms than things that are just run from a browser.

 

---

 

Also regarding the view page to see a cave dragon's true identity, I doubt it would be that difficult to have the view page throw an error when you're trying to go to the page of an egg that's still sitting unclaimed in the cave. Such a thing would stop that exploit effectively.

Edited May 28, 2016 by Commander Wymsy

[PewterEyes]

Also regarding the view page to see a cave dragon's true identity, I doubt it would be that difficult to have the view page throw an error when you're trying to go to the page of an egg that's still sitting unclaimed in the cave. Such a thing would stop that exploit effectively.

For sure that thing would stop all the users that go View Ridgewings, Dorsals and other eggs that share the same description. Last but not least the Frills.

[Wymsical]

For sure that thing would stop all the users that go View Ridgewings, Dorsals and other eggs that share the same description. Last but not least the Frills.

It'd also stop more advanced scripts. Instead of saying the existence of an exploit invalidates the entire suggestion, one should instead advocate for said exploit to be fixed. It's clearly something that goes against the spirit of the game.

[SullenCat]

It'd also stop more advanced scripts. Instead of saying the existence of an exploit invalidates the entire suggestion, one should instead advocate for said exploit to be fixed. It's clearly something that goes against the spirit of the game.

Interesting opinion. You call it an exploit, in my opinion is not. First of all because people have been posting openly about it, I learned it on the Forum. If was an exploit would have been fixed. Second, does not give anybody an advantage over others. Against the spirit of the game? If we are going with opinions, my opinion is that to have a minority that can get whatsoever they wish, without any effort, just because they own a CB Tinsel or CB Shimmer, that is against the spirit of the game

Edited May 28, 2016 by SullenCat

[Wymsical]

Interesting opinion. You call it an exploit, in my opinion is not. First of all because people have been  posting openly about it, I learned it on the Forum. If was an exploit would have been fixed. Second, does not give anybody an advantage over others. Against the spirit of the game? If we are going with opinions, my opinion is that to have a minority that can get whatsoever they wish, without any effort, just because they own a CB Tinsel or CB Shimmer, that is against the spirit of the game

Teleport was created because of an exploit in the game. An exploit that people openly used and posted about, and it was stated that it was going to be fixed eventually regardless of whether Teleport was going to happen or not.

 

Just because an exploit/glitch/loophole/other unintended behaviour has been around for a while doesn't mean it won't ever get fixed. Anybody who has been on DC for several years can tell you that.

Edited May 28, 2016 by Commander Wymsy

[SullenCat]

Teleport was created because of an exploit in the game. An exploit that people openly used and posted about, and it was stated that it was going to be fixed eventually regardless of whether Teleport was going to happen or not.

 

Just because an exploit/glitch/loophole/other unintended behaviour has been around for a while doesn't mean it won't ever get fixed. Anybody who has been on DC for several years can tell you that.

Thank you, I've been on DC for several years, just not a member of the forum and some days I wonder why I joined it.

Anyway, is there any reason to assume that the exploit you referenced preceded the View feature? Teleport was introduced in 2011. There were 5 years to modify the View feature. Can you point me to a TJ's post stating that the View feature was an exploit and was to be fixed? You know, just to compare oranges with oranges.

[Wymsical]

Thank you, I've been on DC for several years, just not a member of the forum and some days I wonder why I joined it.

Anyway, is there any reason to assume that the exploit you referenced preceded the View feature? Teleport was introduced in 2011. There were 5 years to modify the View feature. Can you point me to a TJ's post stating that the View feature was an exploit and was to be fixed? You know, just to compare oranges with oranges.

Using the view page to view the true identity of unclaimed caves eggs may not be the most dangerous thing one could do, but it absolutely does defeat part of the point of the distinction between cave and AP. I never claimed that TJ said the function of the view page would be changed, I only suggested to OP that they should advocate for the view page to be modified in such a way that that particular exploit could no longer be utilised by scripts to bypass their suggestion and thus render it pointless.

[SullenCat]

Using the view page to view the true identity of unclaimed caves eggs may not be the most dangerous thing one could do, but it absolutely does defeat part of the point of the distinction between cave and AP. I never claimed that TJ said the function of the view page would be changed, I only suggested to OP that they should advocate for the view page to be modified in such a way that that particular exploit could no longer be utilised by scripts to bypass their suggestion and thus render it pointless.

I'm not sure I understand your point about the distinction between cave and AP. Would you also advocate getting rid of using Lineage to determine if it is worth picking up an egg from the AP or not? Because people do that too. And I do not consider that an exploit, either.

Going back to the View page discussion, I think the main difference between our points of view is that I consider that a normal, legit behavior, while I didn't read anybody but you considering that an exploit. Until I read TJ posting that it is an exploit and gotta be fixed, I'll not change my mind.

Frankly, your approach seems to justify the opinion that measures to stop potential scripters will just create problems for the majority of the users.

[Wymsical]

I'm not sure I understand your point about the distinction between cave and AP. Would you also advocate getting rid of using Lineage to determine if it is worth picking up an egg from the AP or not? Because people do that too. And I do not consider that an exploit, either.

Going back to the View page discussion, I think the main difference between our points of view is that I consider that a normal, legit behavior, while I didn't read anybody but you considering that an exploit. Until I read TJ posting that it is an exploit and gotta be fixed, I'll not change my mind.

Frankly, your approach seems to justify the opinion that measures to stop potential scripters will just create problems for the majority of the users.

You're welcome to your own opinion, as is everybody else. The reason why I see the using the view page to see a hidden egg's identity as an exploit stems from my own experience as a site administrator. To me, people viewing info that is intended to be hidden from their view is an exploit. An egg's lineage is not hidden info (unless the owner of the egg fogs it, of course), and thus viewing a bred egg's lineage no matter if it's on a scroll or in the AP is perfectly normal and reasonable behaviour and functionality.

 

The whole distinction between the cave and AP is that in the cave you only have descriptions to go by, and the egg's specific species is not shown to you. You only have the dark egg with the red question mark as an image. In the AP, you can see the species of the egg (or hatchling) as its specific species is shown instead of merely the description and a generic image. Therefore me, as a player on DC, see the cave and can reasonably come to the conclusion that the only way I can know what I'm grabbing from the cave is by knowing descriptions. And in the case of species that share descriptions, it's then up to the luck of the draw (or in some cases, what biome I'm in) as to what I actually end up getting.

 

I myself don't utilise the view link on cave eggs, and I really do have to wonder if changing it so one couldn't use the view (or lineage) link to see the identity of cave eggs would really cause as much of a problem as you're suggesting it would. It's certainly not very dangerous in terms of exploitations in general, but that doesn't mean it isn't an exploit. It's very valid to bring up changing it, because as I explained there's at least some reasoning from basic site functions that can justify doing away with it. It's something that hampers this suggestion, as well as being something that some (I accept my opinion on this view page thing may be in the minority, but that doesn't mean I'm literally the only person ever to hold the viewpoint) feel treads the line of stuff like the whole get page nonsense from before Teleport happened.

 

People didn't really consider the whole get page URL modifying to be an exploit because it was so widespread. But lo and behold, it got fixed despite being around for years and years. The exploit did have the interesting effect of creating trading within the game, although it was completely unofficial and none of those trades could be properly policed by forum/IRC staff. If somebody caught the egg you were trying to refresh for, too bad for you. Thankfully Teleport was brewed up to bring actual, official trading into the game once the get page exploit was finally fixed.

 

Hopefully I've explained my viewpoint well enough, if you'd like further clarification then I'm more than happy to clear up anything. I don't think it's wrong to question the validity of something that exists. Unintentional behaviour from a site is something that often times doesn't get looked at by a site's administrators even if it's something that's been known for a long time. I know that because I've been there myself, and have had to make decisions regarding whether or not some long-standing functionality (unintended or not) should be changed.

[SullenCat]

Unintentional behaviour from a site is something that often times doesn't get looked at by a site's administrators even if it's something that's been known for a long time. I know that because I've been there myself, and have had to make decisions regarding whether or not some long-standing functionality (unintended or not) should be changed.

I think you are underestimating TJ. I think he knows, better than we do, that people can use (and use) View and Lineage from the Cave and from the AP. Personally I do not use that, mostly because I'm too lazy, but, again, the only opinion about exploits that counts is TJ's.

 

If you think that "unintentional behaviour" does not get looked at by TJ, here's Thuban's advice:

If you are noticing that something you are doing is causing an action you know shouldnt be happening, report it. Chances are, if you find a bug, or something wonky, someone else has found a way to exploit it. Have you accidently found a way to breed a dragon multiple times in the same day? Report it, because its the right thing to do. Did someone talk about something they do that gives them an advantage they shouldnt have? Report it. Even if you dont give names and ONLY share the specifics, it gives him a clue for how to stop things from being exploited.

Edited May 28, 2016 by SullenCat

[Wymsical]

I think you are underestimating TJ.  I think he knows, better than we do,  that people can use (and use) View and Lineage from the Cave and from the AP.  Personally I do not use that, mostly because I'm too lazy, but, again, the only opinion about exploits that counts is TJ's.

 

If you think that "unintentional behaviour" does not get looked at by TJ, here's Thuban's advice:

I'm not underestimating TJ. I assume he is aware of it. But after things like the whole get page URL modification and Teleport fiasco, it's clear that something can be deemed an exploit and be modified years after its discovery and widespread usage. Things like that are the type of big decisions I'm talking about having to make, when you have to decide if some form of site behaviour is something that should be done away with. Whether it's a decision made within minutes, weeks, months, or even years. Sometimes those decisions lead to new site functions. Other times, it leads to doing away with something.

 

I consider the viewing cave things to be something similar to the get page URL modification, something not really all that malicious but from a programmer's perspective doesn't make too much sense as to why it's around at all. I personally don't care if it goes away or not, but if the suggestion proposed in this thread were to happen then I would prefer it be done away with.

Edited May 28, 2016 by Commander Wymsy

[SullenCat]

I'm not underestimating TJ. I assume he is aware of it. But after things like the whole get page URL modification and Teleport fiasco, it's clear that something can be deemed an exploit and be modified years after its discovery and widespread usage. Things like that are the type of big decisions I'm talking about having to make, when you have to decide if some form of site behaviour is something that should be done away with. Whether it's a decision made within minutes, weeks, months, or even years.

 

I consider the viewing cave things to be something similar to the get page URL modification, something not really all that malicious but from a programmer's perspective doesn't make too much sense as to why it's around at all. I personally don't care if it goes away or not, but if the suggestion proposed in this thread were to happen then I would prefer it be done away with.

Again, the Teleport happened FIVE years ago, I can't see how it is pertinent. I dissent also on what you consider big decisions, I consider those minimal, ridiculously minimal compared with performance and functionality of the site.

According to you, to use View on an egg that is still in the cave, is an exploit. For the same token to use Lineage on the same egg is also an exploit: both would allow the player to determine which egg they are looking at. So you would disallow View and Lineage. Guess what, I would care more about lag and accessibility.

Let's just agree on disagreeing, our approaches are just too different.

[Wymsical]

Again, the Teleport happened FIVE years ago, I can't see how it is pertinent. I dissent also on what you consider big decisions, I consider those minimal, ridiculously minimal compared with performance and functionality of the site.

According to you, to use View on an egg that is still in the cave, is an exploit. For the same token to use Lineage on the same egg is also an exploit: both would allow the player to determine which egg they are looking at. So you would disallow View and Lineage. Guess what, I would care more about lag and accessibility.

Let's just agree on disagreeing, our approaches are just too different.

I see modifying the URL to use view and lineage on cave eggs as questionable functionality. I do not feel the same way about modifying the URL to use view and lineage on AP eggs. The reason I bring up get URL modification and Teleport is to give an example of something that TJ was passive about for years but eventually decided to do something about it.

 

As for lag, I've said early on in this thread that doing something like turning descriptions into images would barely have an impact. I've seen this exact thing done in a sometime laggy environment like DC's. Accessibility is definitely something to be considered, however. The worst thing one can do in regards to that is bring captchas into the mix, which I'm glad to see has been shut down any time it's been brought up in this thread. Captcha has no place outside of stuff like handling sensitive information (such as logging in or changing details on a profile). DC doesn't even really need it all (except for stuff like account registration, I guess).

[olympe]

The reason why I see the using the view page to see a hidden egg's identity as an exploit stems from my own experience as a site administrator. To me, people viewing info that is intended to be hidden from their view is an exploit. An egg's lineage is not hidden info (unless the owner of the egg fogs it, of course), and thus viewing a bred egg's lineage no matter if it's on a scroll or in the AP is perfectly normal and reasonable behaviour and functionality.

I very much agree with this assessment. True, everybody can use it, since it's known to players throughout the site - but it still feels like an exploit. I also remember a time when it was possible to view the lineage of a fogged egg, but this has been changed sometime prior to teleport. And, regarding the "get/CODE" method to catch eggs from the backlog of the AP - I've been told that even TJ himself used this method for trading purposes back in the day. However, he decided to grant us a safe and intended way to trade (teleport) and do away with the AP loophole at the same time. (I think his decision may have something to do with people being able to "send" all multiclutch eggs to pre-selected people instead of being able to trade just one, but that's mere conjecture on my part.)

[Fuzzbucket]

Actually, as to the viewing biome eggs before grabbing them, there is also the fact that you disadvantage yourself taking the time to do that; someone else can grab it in those few seconds. Swing, meet roundabout - been there, and while I thought yay a tan, it went elsewhere...

 

I still prefer nice black eggs in the biomes. Call me reactionary....

[silver_tiger]

Actually, as to the viewing biome eggs before grabbing them, there is also the fact that you disadvantage yourself taking the time to do that; someone else can grab it in those few seconds. Swing, meet roundabout - been there, and while I thought yay a tan, it went elsewhere...

 

I still prefer nice black eggs in the biomes. Call me reactionary....

Haha, yes. I am sure I've gotten a Tan Ridge or two because people were looking to see what it was. I mean, I've also gotten like 10-15 Purple Ridges because I click the egg as soon as I see the description, but it's worth it to get those 3 or 4 pretty tan eggs.

 

I don't know what to say about this whole debate. I would love to find a way to permanently foil scripters, but I've spent so long memorizing all the egg descriptions... and I still get White and Silver eggs mixed up sometimes, when I look at them, so it would just confuse the heck out of me. And that's not even getting into the concerns that sight-impaired and people with slow internet have about changing things around so that we see the egg sprite and not the description.