DogBreath

The idea is interesting but I think it runs into the same problem(s) that rraisa did(does): 1) Where are you going to get the information? (people might not like you polling their bots on a regular basis and will probably ban your bot from talking to theirs unless it's agreed upon first.) 2) How are you going to get 'up-to-date' information unless you have a direct connection to each of the bots? (a connection using pms would result in too much game server i/o probably.) 3) Unless you have a good player/bot base, how are you going to get people to use it? And, how are you going to get that base if you're having issues 1 and 2? Before re-inventing rraisa, I'd suggest talking with her owner about changing what you don't like first. It might be possible for him to change things, feedback is the only way he knows. You might get a better understanding of the reasons for rraisa's format/delay after you talked with him, as well (and how difficult it might be to overcome those.)

OH OH! Sign me up for one of these, lol

I came up with a couple more thoughts on this last night. Hopefully they're not too random... 1) The shop could sell nexus points for $ (think this one over before you flame me too hard on this please) 2) Mother nature could poison plant harvesters randomly (but effectively)... (this might reduce the afk harvesters...)

I voted yes, but won't buy. I really just play to help others and try to help the game in whatever small way I can. I'm on a fixed income and can't really afford to pay for extras and am really not interested in competing with others so the benefits aren't worth it to me. I can see that they would be to others and can also understand that there needs to be some type of steady income to keep the game going. I do worry, as others have stated, that this will take some of the 'spirit of the game' away. One of the reasons I play, and put as many hours into helping others, is the fact that it's free (and why I started playing in the first place.) If it becomes a game for the payer vs. a game for the player I'm not sure I could feel as motivated to help as I do now. I put my time in for free because I realize so many others do, and I've always thought that's what made this game so great, the people investing themselves into it (not necessisarily their money.) I also worry that as soon as a person starts paying, they'll think they have some legal rights to the 'digital wares' they own and it might start some crap that will make it end up costing more than it's worth. I think there might be better ways to supplement income: advertsing, deals with hardware makers, etc.. Perhaps even an annual fund rasier would work. That way the giving is more from the heart and less with the goal of 'getting more for my money.'

LOL, yeah, squash those ebul gc farmers! and let our grandchildren pay for it later!

*shamelessly quotes self* any chance of you adding this option to the voting? Then I'd vote

I think the 'making a bot' issue could be solved with another tag/color name (for a bot in progress...) this would make it pretty clear, people would declare they were leveling up a char to be a bot and get this tag before they could start leveling it. That being said, I personally think this is treating the symptoms instead of curing the problem (like taking an aspirin for a broken foot.) There's only a market for gcs because there's a hole in the market that someone was ingenious enough to fill. If that hole were closed, they'd see no real reward for their effort (even if it seems like no effort...,) or no customers for their product. I realize I'm putting my neck on the chopping block as I say this, but if I were Radu, I'd adjust the shop prices to 'squash' the ebul gc farmers and drive them out of business (maybe I'm looking through rose colored glasses.) I think this rule is a bit too 'strict' as I know several people who have full time alts and play both characters 'always'. I don't see any option to vote for as it's either yes or no, nothing in between. If it's just about 'pure gc harvesters/sellers' why not make a rule that says you can't do that, instead? If someone just harvests and then sells their gcs, it should be fairly obvious in the logs, no? Something like: You may not make/play a character for the sole purpose of harvesting gcs... Ok, you can shoot me now if you want

90k

Congrats you two

OMG, I can afford 80K consider this my bid!

It would be nice to have this button when the phone rings, or someone starts spamming the shield spell next to you. It'd be much more convenient than having to click on options, then audio, then disabling sounds (yet it'd have the same function....) Most games, video players, etc... have a button like this.

Ok, didn't know that, ty. Still, the button would be nice not saying there aren't options.

I don't think anyone's suggesting that you shouldn't be able to ignore them. I also don't think anyone's suggesting that the bot should 'talk to' just anyone walking past them either. I think this is more about the 3rd party standing around hearing the bot talk to the people it's instructed to (but the bot is overdoing it at times...) As well as messages for events and such...

As far as I understand the voting has no meaning other than presenting the community opinion. This and similar decisions are made by Radu and Roja and only by them. I'd insist we'd rather let them decide. It's not democracy. Yes, I understand that, but Radu was the one that suggested the vote in the post linked in Ermabwed's reply above...

And that is exactly the type of spam that could get a bot locked. I've asked people using our service to turn greetings off until I can put some anti-spam protection in. As far as I know that's the only local chat our bots do that is automatic... While I'm not sure I see the harm in the greeting, I can see the issue of the person passing the bot several times in a short time period causing 'spam' and will try to correct this. Have we decided on what a reasonable time between greetings might be? I realize the vote is for no controls but I also understand spam isn't a good idea.

The best way to test a feature like that is point it to a page you created so that you have control of who it thinks is or isn't online for testing purposes. Thanks, hadn't thought of this.

Is there any chance you could set up something like this for the test server? I'm wanting to put some code in that will make the bots not try to pm someone unless they're logged in. I'm also trying to solve the problem where the bot tries to pm someone named "XYZ" and that person isn't logged in, but the person "XYZ*" is, and they're getting the pms. I can read the live data to simulate but then I end up breaking the time limits. I only have one process reading these pages, but due to the lack of a test page, I'm breaking the limits from time to time. If it's too much for some reason, or you have an alternative solution, please let me know. Thanks, DB

I made a suggestion recently, and I went back to check on the post and it was gone. I thought it was a valid suggestion (and I searched before hand to be sure I wasn't re-suggesting.) So, I thought maybe I missed hitting the post button and I posted it again. I went back later to check on it, once again it got deleted (this time I know it was there, because there were replies to it before it got 'gone'.) I understand there are reasons for deleting the posts... But, would it be possible for the person that posted it to be send a PM of why it got deleted? If it's just bad format, they could repost it with corrections. If there's some other reason (and they shouldn't repost) they'd know. This isn't the first time this has happened and it's confusing when you think you've made a valid suggestion and it keeps vanishing with no explanation.

Yes, well that post was old, locked, and had many suggestions wrapped into one, so I didn't know what to do, exactly... but I do appreciate you replying instead of deleting

What if you're invis and the creature doesn't see you sneaking up behind him for a back attack? Seems like you'd get AoO against them then...

I think a teleport to range ring would be quite useful and could also be a pretty good seller. It might work the same as the spell minus the costs (the costs would be in building the ring, of course...) It'd need a reuse timer of course... Users of this item would of course not have the spell yet and would need to get some where that required it (or are trying to get unstuck from a crowd and don't want to have to ask for help.... I could also see bots using this to get unstuck from a crowd without worrying about the rule for not gaining exp...) I've seen several suggestions concerning teleport rings (searched...), but not one that suggests this specifically. Suggestions, thoughts, concerns?

My main reason for the ring was not for hydro runs, or to avoid training magic. My thought was a bit more selfish, I must admit. I was thinking, what if a bot gets surrounded by people on a storage trip (at the storage npc on an automated trip) and wants to get 'unstuck'? It could easily use one of these rings without breaking the rule that the bot must not gain exp and would not require the bot owner to log it on by hand/call a mod to help get it unstuck.

Yes, based on Radu's endorsement of Ron Paul, we've all learned a bit about this. The question is, how do you fix it? The last president that tried ended up dead (who knows if the PEOPLE behind the fed had something to do with that or not...) Yes, the fed is a beast, but how do you walk into the lions cage naked and hope to survive?

Oddly enough, my programming solutions concerning EL come to me in my dreams... Yes, I know, disturbed....

I've seen this type of thing in action before, it can be quite interesting. A plague (of sorts) can have odd results on the population (not saying good or bad...) Sounds neat to me