Originally posted by Rob.
I think you missed the entire conversation.
Wouldn't be the first time
I think you missed the entire conversation.
Wouldn't be the first time
Forum > Suggestions > Can the inspect element be block from the game?
yello43
offline
offline
Originally posted by Zaranthuul
So insightful and well prepared. Stop being lazy and actually talk to the user base or just stop being a part of WG.
Thank you Stobie for doing what Corndog is incapable of. Attempting to explain and remain calm. Hmmm customer service....
To be 100% fair the question was "Can the inspect element be block from the game?". He answered that question fully.
So insightful and well prepared. Stop being lazy and actually talk to the user base or just stop being a part of WG.
Thank you Stobie for doing what Corndog is incapable of. Attempting to explain and remain calm. Hmmm customer service....
To be 100% fair the question was "Can the inspect element be block from the game?". He answered that question fully.
Mezirah
offline
offline
Originally posted by Galactic Empire
You can't block inspect element. Implementing server side validation is the way to stop hackers.
Okay, I'd like to officially crush the old claim you are jampy's multi.
You can't block inspect element. Implementing server side validation is the way to stop hackers.
Okay, I'd like to officially crush the old claim you are jampy's multi.
Zaranthuul
offline
offline
Originally posted by yello43
To be 100% fair the question was "Can the inspect element be block from the game?". He answered that question fully.
He was lazy. With all the complaints about communication and customer service of late that response was the ultimate show of being lazy and attempting to placate without trying.
To be 100% fair the question was "Can the inspect element be block from the game?". He answered that question fully.
He was lazy. With all the complaints about communication and customer service of late that response was the ultimate show of being lazy and attempting to placate without trying.
MileHighShoes
offline
offline
Originally posted by Zaranthuul
With all the complaints about communication and customer service of late that response was the ultimate show of being lazy and attempting to placate without trying.
GLB has been like this for years now.
With all the complaints about communication and customer service of late that response was the ultimate show of being lazy and attempting to placate without trying.
GLB has been like this for years now.
Zaranthuul
offline
offline
Originally posted by MileHighShoes
GLB has been like this for years now.
Yep I'm well aware. My original account couldn't be used on glb2 for some reason and had to make a new one. First time around was season 4 in glb1.
GLB has been like this for years now.
Yep I'm well aware. My original account couldn't be used on glb2 for some reason and had to make a new one. First time around was season 4 in glb1.
Stixx
offline
offline
Originally posted by Stobie
Again to my point. Didn't say it was impossible or didn't happen. I said show the evidence. More my point of general society to lazy to find evidence and rather just scream toward the sky yelling.
It has been fixed concerning the depth charts and playbooks so it's a dead topic imo. But I can see joes point in wanting to shore up the rest of them which will be fixed in due time but since they don't provide a game advantage they are not at the top of the list I would suspect.
I think it goes both ways here, Stobie. No one here can prove that it happened because no one has access to another teams playbooks. There is really no way to know, but when you see people like Para using it for his depth chart, then you have to know that he was likely using it in his playbooks as well.
The only real problem I had with it is being able to alter your playbooks with it. It's over now so there is no reason to keep complaining about it, however.
Again to my point. Didn't say it was impossible or didn't happen. I said show the evidence. More my point of general society to lazy to find evidence and rather just scream toward the sky yelling.
It has been fixed concerning the depth charts and playbooks so it's a dead topic imo. But I can see joes point in wanting to shore up the rest of them which will be fixed in due time but since they don't provide a game advantage they are not at the top of the list I would suspect.
I think it goes both ways here, Stobie. No one here can prove that it happened because no one has access to another teams playbooks. There is really no way to know, but when you see people like Para using it for his depth chart, then you have to know that he was likely using it in his playbooks as well.
The only real problem I had with it is being able to alter your playbooks with it. It's over now so there is no reason to keep complaining about it, however.
Edited by Stixx on Dec 31, 2014 13:27:02
Edited by Stixx on Dec 31, 2014 13:25:44
Originally posted by Mezirah
Okay, I'd like to officially crush the old claim you are jampy's multi.
I thought he was Xavori?
Okay, I'd like to officially crush the old claim you are jampy's multi.
I thought he was Xavori?
Galactic Empire
offline
offline
Originally posted by DeeVee8
I thought he was Xavori?
I am neither. I am the Galactic Empire.
I thought he was Xavori?
I am neither. I am the Galactic Empire.
Xars
offline
offline
Originally posted by Stixx
I think it goes both ways here, Stobie. No one here can prove that it happened because no one has access to another teams playbooks. There is really no way to know, but when you see people like Para using it for his depth chart, then you have to know that he was likely using it in his playbooks as well.
The only real problem I had with it is being able to alter your playbooks with it. It's over now so there is no reason to keep complaining about it, however.
All of those plays are still available via replay.
You can scout those teams historical games and "test" the statistics of their play-calling for example. This is what Type I/Type II errors are all about.
So there is a way to know should you choose to investigate.
I think it goes both ways here, Stobie. No one here can prove that it happened because no one has access to another teams playbooks. There is really no way to know, but when you see people like Para using it for his depth chart, then you have to know that he was likely using it in his playbooks as well.
The only real problem I had with it is being able to alter your playbooks with it. It's over now so there is no reason to keep complaining about it, however.
All of those plays are still available via replay.
You can scout those teams historical games and "test" the statistics of their play-calling for example. This is what Type I/Type II errors are all about.
So there is a way to know should you choose to investigate.
Stixx
offline
offline
Originally posted by Xars
All of those plays are still available via replay.
You can scout those teams historical games and "test" the statistics of their play-calling for example. This is what Type I/Type II errors are all about.
So there is a way to know should you choose to investigate.
Honestly, I'm not upset about it either way. If it would have effected me directly then I'm sure I would have a stronger opinion on it but I don't think I ever saw it against teams I've played over the seasons.
All of those plays are still available via replay.
You can scout those teams historical games and "test" the statistics of their play-calling for example. This is what Type I/Type II errors are all about.
So there is a way to know should you choose to investigate.
Honestly, I'm not upset about it either way. If it would have effected me directly then I'm sure I would have a stronger opinion on it but I don't think I ever saw it against teams I've played over the seasons.
You are not logged in. Please log in if you want to post a reply.
