Jump to content
Eternal Lands Official Forums

Adamant

Members
  • Content count

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Adamant

  • Rank
    Newbie
  1. Banned?

    I don't want to deefend anybody or anything like that, but i think he made it pretty clear that he had a blank map in place and the iron coords marked; he walked in (obviously not afk), clicked on the mark (obviously not afk, again) then left the computer. I do that a bunch of times, both on "outside" maps and in caves. It's never happened to me to land on anybody's bag, but I can see how it _can_ happen. And he's got a point, if he didnt start harvesting, how is he a macroer? OTOH I switched my AFK to 0 minutes (i can go afk manually and stay that way even when stopping/starting harvesting; when im reading forums, doing other work while harvesting i prefer to stay afk, helps with the pm's). Will this get me catalogued as a macroer? If it will, why does the client allow for the AFK message to be customized and the timeout to be set to 0? It should be specified in the rulse that messing with the AFK settings is illegal. Just my 2cents.
  2. Wolfmom and Beanmaster get married!

    Hello everybody, I am pleased to announce that Saturday, 29th of July 2006, at 1 o'clock in the afternoon Greenwich Mean Time, the DAO guild will celebrate the marriage of Beanmaster and Wolfmom. The event will take place in the DAO map. Everybody is invited and those that want to attend but don't know the location of the DAO map please contact a guild member 30 minutes or so before the event starts. Cheers to the happiest couple I've ever seen, Wolfmom and Beanmaster Adamant, of the DAO Clan
  3. Thanx Ent&Roja

    umm... google? twice? since google started announcing _real_ releases on april 1st i started paying attention to all news on april 1st... the world is a harder place to live since then
  4. relyt1slayer -scammer-

    Chance, u are right that posting here has an impact on the players, and yes, possibly asking the newb player involved in this to send in the chat log as further proof would have been a nice idea; consolidating the case. But I aslo must add that starting a topic on a player gives the rest of the forum members the chance to add their own encounters with the accused player. Relyt, I'm sorry to have to add to this, but she has a history. It's not the first time she's been accused of scamming or almost-scamming (see e.g. the gm contests incident) or deceipt. She's a former guildmate of mine and she certainly was not very popular here either, she's been accused of lying and not paying up debts. This is just as bad as scamming imho. Also I know she's a very fun person to talk to and she does not transpire as a liar or scammer. She never did _me_ any wrong, but that does not say much. So Chance, I know u may feel bad about posting this without some "solid" proof, but afterall this is what the community is for -- people add up to an initial post on Outlaws to confirm or infirm the behaviour of the accused player in similar situations. So, maybe Relyt will change her ways, I welcome that (maybe she's gonna realise that people know her too well now). I welcome that. But she did not seem to change her ways in the past, and she's had plenty of warning. Cheers!
  5. Release candidate 4

    I had the same problem with PL storage exit; haven't tested tent in Tahraji Desert (i don't pk) or any similar probmems on C2. Yesterday CVS head would exihibit this problem, but today's CVS head works ok. The commit that made the difference has date: 2006/01/11 00:45:06; author: xaphier; Comment: "Ghost bug fix fix". Thx for the fix xaphier!
  6. Guild-wide manufacturing aids

    This brings too many possibilities for abuse; pick any high traffic pathway (e.g. bridge or map entrance), establish a pk area there; bam! u own the passway; u can own resources in this way and it's nowhere near fair. Plus, people engaging in real harv/manu operations will prefer to have one person bagsit a normal bag rather than establish such a pk area and employ guards.
  7. Hello all (fp for me), I was thinking about the benefits of being part of a guild, apart from the intrinsic social interaction. These days there are many war guilds out there, so for the fighters having the necessary backup in pk areas is an obvious benefit. Most peaceful guilds (or sometimes even just groups of players that trust eachother well enough) organize harvesting parties where a group of players do the harvesting and another carry stuff to their storage. More recently i've found it really fun to do group manufacturing (alch, potions, crafting, manu) where the coordination is even more important, as harvesting and production are combined in one effort. This last aspect is what I want to discuss more, especially since I think the intended effect of the cooldown is to lead players towards combining harvesting and production. The following concerns popepd up in my mind so far: collaborating is fun; accounting for all the ingredients and which players brought which elements is not; bagsitting is dangerous because of grues and the danger of hitting teleport nexae; a single player doing harv/manu can manage using mostly only inventory space, but this is practically impossible when collaborating. sharing harvested resources either by bagtrading or by normal trading is disruptive and distracting; usually one of the peers is doing smth and needs to stop the activity. Enter forts; or whatever u wanna call them. I'll just use the term "fort" for simplicity (i like 4 letter words ) A fort is basically a secure bag. A temporary storage point with strict access rules and a different lifetime algorithm and have some form of accounting integrated. They would be specifically designed for such harv/manu parties. What follows is a possible set of properties for such objects that imho would put the least strain on the server, offer least possibilities for abuse and yet offer solutions for all the concerns i've isted above. A fort is tied to a guild. In theory u can have guildless forts but i think that would make them too complex to program and/or to use; If only people in a guild can benefit this only enhances the value of guilds. This also adds more accountability -- if a guild abuses in some way of this facility u can hold the guild masters accountable for it. There should be a limitation on what rank a guild member needs in order to create a fort; for obvious reasons; Forts should be heavily limited in number; e.g. a guild should not be able to have more than n active forts where n is very small number (most guilds would not mind being limited to 1 only). This immediately limits the impact this has on server load. A fort would not occupy space like a player or npc does. This way u dont have the risk of forts blocking pathways. There is even the possiblity that forts are entirely invisible for people outside the guild (there's pros and cons for this). Unlike a bag, u dont have to be directly above the coords of the fort to access the contents. I am thinking rather they would behave like the storage or NPCs, i.e. there's a radius of interaction. Access to the fort should either be available for any member of the guild or can be based on a blacklisting/whitelisting algorithm; maybe have both models available, because im sure the needs of small guilds are different from the needs of larger guilds The fort's lifetime should either be at the discretion of the player that initiated the fort or possibly based on an expiration period; in the latter case, the expiration period should be much higher than for bags (say 1hr or more). One could even devise rules where high ranking guild members can have the power to terminate forts even if created by another members. Accounting -- the fort should keep track of total number of items added/removed by each player; only totals need be remembered. The accounting information would be available to any of the players that have access to the fort. The visual representation of the fort (or the object that, when clicked, opens up the window for accessing the fort) is of small importance; but i have in mind something similar to a very small tent or maybe campfire. The window for accessing the fort's contents would be similar to either the bag window or the storage window. I think the bag window is good enough. Concurrent access to the contents of the fort is quite important, but can be limited if necessary (say, no more than 5 players can open the fort window at the same time). Yes, it would be a huge change that would require quite a lot of coding im sure; but hey, I had the idea, so why not put it on paper, maybe someone else likes it too... imho it would immensly ehnance the value of guilds and make large teamwork projects possible.
×