Cheating ethics

[Occhidiangela]

I would like to nominate this write-up for a link in Lurker Lounge corporate knowledge. This is eloquent, concise, and well put.

*Tips Chapeau*

May be a few days before I can get my admin stuff set up. Surprised I am on line this AM, Road Runner has been giving me the Beep Beep treatment lately.

Occhi

Personally, I'd draw a distinction between, for lack of better terms, general knowledge and specific knowledge.

The general knowledge is the kind you could find in the MPQs or the code, or that you could test.  It's knowledge about the way the game works.  It's the sort of thing you could you can discover and then post about.  The area levels are an example of this.  You can look it up in the MPQs, you can run tests in a modded environment, or you can look it up in a table that someone has already made of the data.

The specific knowledge is the opposite.  It applies only to a specific instance of an item/character/monster/etc.  No matter how much of the general knowledge you have, you can't use it to find the specific knowledge.  An example of this is the ilvl of, say, a gambled item.  It's random with a range, and while you might sometimes be able to find it from the affixes, it's usually simply unknown.  No amount of MPQ research could help.  No amount of testing could help, unless it involves that specific item.  And if you did post about it ("The item I gambled is ilvl 55."), it wouldn't actually be useful for anyone, since that knowledge applies only to that specific item.

Some further examples:

- You could look into how the game generates maps and perhaps find patterns that'd help you find the stairs quicker.  Since there is a random element involved, this isn't fool-proof, but you might be able to make some more educated guesses.  That's general knowledge, so it's fine.  However, if you had a program that displayed the actual specific map you're in, then that'd be cheating.

- Suppose you're looking at a gamble screen and want to decide which item to pick.  Now, it's possible to use general knowledge to find the probabilities of what each displayed item could be.  You might then make an educated decision on which you want to gamble (e.g. "At my clvl, gambled amulets have a higher chance of being useful than gambled breast plates, so I'll pick the amulets).  That's general knowledge, so it's fine.  However, if you had a program that displayed what each of those specific items actually is (not possible now, I know), then that'd be cheating.

- The same thing with monster drops.  It's possible to use general knowledge to find the drop chances of every item from every monster.  You could then choose to MF in an area where the item you want is likely to drop.  However, if you had a program that displayed which specific monster in the game you'd have to kill to get the item (not possible, since the drops aren't generated until monster death), then that'd be cheating.

- You can find out how different items look on different characters.  You could also learn to identify some items by their effects (e.g. sanctuary on a non-Paladin must come from azurewrath).  Then, when you duel someone, you could make an educated guess about at least some of the items they're wearing.  It's general knowledge, so it's fine.  However, if you had a program that displayed what actual specific items your actual specific opponent is wearing, that'd be cheating.

The list goes on.

So it isn't necessarily contradictory to pursue D2 knowledge while being adamantly opposed to a program that provides knowledge.  MH shows plenty of specific knowledge that the player should have no way of having.  Now, if MH was modified to display only general knowledge (and thus have a lot of uncertainty about some things), it might be a bit more defensible.  I still wouldn't condone its use, though.
[right][snapback]58212[/snapback][/right]