Kalach

Since there are people begging for bot ideas, and I have a bot idea, but no time to add yet another time consuming interest, here it my idea: The general point of the bot is to keep track of community assigned outlaws. Players can propose that another player or guild be tagged as an outlaw. That player starts out with all of his votes as non-outlaw. The guilds can then change their votes to yes, outlaw. Once a simple majority of guilds have agreed, the player is put on the outlaw list. Other players can ask the bot for the list of outlaws, to keep up to date. All of this is done via PM. Here is the command set: AddOutlaw <playername> This adds the players name to the list of candidates to vote for. If the proposed outlaw is not online or the outlaw is already on the list, the process is aborted and the initiating player is pm'd with a failure. If hte proposed outlaw is online, the initiating player is sent a confirmation, the proposed outlaw is sent a notice, and each guild is sent a #IG notifying them of the addition. Vote <playername> <"Yes"/"No"> If the initiating player does not belong to a guild, the process is aborted and the initiating player is PM'd with a failure. Otherwise the vote for the initiating player's guild is changed to either "Yes" or "No". A confirmation is PM'd to initiating player and a #IG is sent to the initiating players guild. If the number of "yes" votes now totals a simple majority of the guilds, the player is marked internally as an outlaw. If the number of "yes" votes decreases below a simple majority of the guilds, the player is unmarked as an outlaw. OutlawList A list of internally marked outlaws is returned to the initiating player. CandidateList A list of all candidates and marked outlaws is returned to the initiating player. Well, that's the basic idea. If I had time, I would put it together myself, but maybe someone else would enjoy it.

Band: Kingston Trio Song: Merry Minuet

Maybe it's me?

N/M

Since for the most part you aren't really desperate to return a particular piece of information, I would make the code fairly task specific, rather than general. In other words, instead of marking that you are looking for a message, mark that you are looking to complete a particular task. In a simplistic pseudocode I'm thinking of something like While ('exit) { Message = ReadFromSocket(Message,nonBlocking,bytesRcvd) If bytesRcvd>0 { MessageStruct=ConstructStruct(Message) I (MessageStruct.Type="RAW_TEXT")&contains(MessageStruct.Text,"my health") { addToArray(getHealthPlayers,MessageStruct.Speaker) sendMessage(SEND_ME_MY_ACTORS) } I (MessageStruct.Type="ADD_NEW_ENHANCED_ACTOR")&(arrayHas(getHealthPlayers,MessageStruct.NewActorID)) { Actor=getActorDef(MessageStruct) sendMessage(RAW_TEXT,"/"_Actor.Name_" your health is "_Actor.Health) removeFromArray(getHealthPlayers,Actor.Name) } } } Edit: Closed my code tag.

Excellent suggestion, IMO.

My guess is that it's a question of resources. Entropy classed it as a bug, which means that it was having some kind of detrimental affect most likely. I would imagine that every item is kept track of individually, and that having large amounts of vials just sitting around was starting to waste resources that didn't need to be wasted. This is particularly true since the number of vials would always increase rather than flatten out, or decrease. Objects were entering the game which were *never* leaving.

Why do you think the newbee will sell the vials if he can make mana/healt potions himself (no requirements, remember). I would just buy the first batch and then keep on making these potions for myself... since there is no vial loss. You're thinking like an experienced player, not a newbie. Why would a newbie want to sit around making potions? Most newbies aren't going to look through the encyclopedia and realize they can make the potions themselves. Even if they realize the *can*, that doesn't mean they'll want to spend the time and effort making them. Edit: Fixed grammar

I do. As a newbie, one of your best sources of healing can be through these potions. This gives the newbie who uses these potions a chance to sell something back to the potioner whos making FPs for the manufacturer. It sounds like a winner to me. Edit to add: Also, cooldown should have a big effect on whether people move to mana potions vs. Srs. If this is a problem, I'm sure Ent can adjust the cooldown to make SR seem more attractive.

I voted Yes. I think that accidental misclick should be one of the perils of a frey. "Friendly fire" should always be a danger when fighting, IMO.

Because Ent thought it was a good idea at the time. Maybe he wanted to add some variety. Maybe he thought it would give lower level PKers a better chance against higher level PKers. Only he can answer what its purpose is/was.

Now don't start that again! Particularly when you only partially mean it.

And what if they like to destroy items? If they have an option in branch to do so, why wouldn't they use it I wonder... The branch must be here for a purpose, why else would it be here... And why is bagjumping designed into the game, and why is scamming designed into the game... This is the same line of argument that we had in the honorable PK thread. Just because the *game* allows you to accomplish something doesn't mean its not dishonorable and possibly outlaw. I find it ironic that Lorck and I seem to be on the same side of the argument this time. And again to rehash the same idea from that thread, the outlaw forum is also designed to post no-good doers in, which could include branch users, so why wouldn't someone use it to report them.

For quick references sake, he came up here as a potential bag-jumper and second incarnation of solo12. http://www.eternal-lands.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=25301

About 160gc for diss+ring ? Doesn't get you much iron, now does it?

Would you provide protection service in NC at an hourly rate + expenses?

I wonder is this a sort of a bug at the forums??? Probably a database issue or a scripting bug. Not sure which. The little bit of PHP left at the top in some locations suggests a scripting issue. (Not that it eliminates database, entirely)

Still, this seems a reasonable suggestion. From the discussions I've seen, branch tends to fall outside what people would consider "honorable" PK, and so is potentially an outlaw action. Doesn't need removed from the game any more than bagjumping or scamming. But it can be frowned upon by the community.

it can get difficult though if there is like 1 weird item in the ingreds no one would ever try, or let's say 50fe, who in godsname will try 1fe, 2fe, 3f, ... 50fe? 1,2,3,5,10,25,50,100,250,500,1000 is usually a decent starting pattern, if you're sure FE would be involved, and the other person is not trying to be purposefully obtuse.

I'd like to think that this could work in both directions. Post a very strong guildie outside the door. Wait for the kills during PVP goes in, guildie casts invis, heads in and waits for their opportunity. It actually gives the protection racket some viability. (Currently the protector would have to just sit there and be bored, more or less.)

I don't know what the newtorking capabilities of PSP/DS are, but if it's still server-orientated it may not be too bad. The 3D graphics must be the biggest performance drain - a top-down 2D renderer would be a good start. With reduced assets maybe the memory aspect wouldn't be an issue. It would certainly be interesting but still a big job - a team would be required I suspect. I kind of think it's a silly idea, but, a smart implementation would start by ensuring that logic is decoupled from display in the current CVS version. A thumbs up for scalability anyway.

I disagree. #1, I could play a manufacturer who does all the harvesting I want by myself. #2, I could play the game but limit myself to only things I got from drops. But, you are right in that I would be missing a portion of the game if I tried to do things. Just as I am missing a portion of the game by not going into PK maps. Sure... Haven't you seen the flowers/economy thread? More or less an outlaw thread for people who use the money bushes.

The developpers chose not to use a duel system in PK to allow people to play the bad guy. They did limit PK, though, to allow newbs a chance to get started. They also chose not to lock the contents of a drop-bag or death-bag to the owner, to allow people to play the bad guy. Sure... In fact, I would say that the game was purposely designed to allow for unwilling PK victims, bagjumpers and scammers. Scamming has been limited by rule to be only appropriate for non-newbs. PK has been limited by code to be only appropriate in PK maps. The outlaws forum was purposely design to allow for people who are the victims of any such activities to post complaints and warning, and for the accused to defend their cases to the community.

If you scam or bagjump an experienced player that has had the warning that scamming or bagjumping is possible on any map, you still harm that player against their will. That is considered outlawish. If you PK any unwilling player that has had the warning that PK'ing is possible on the current map, you still harm that player against their will. That is no different from the above statement, so why shouldn't it be considered outlawish? Yes, you can avoid it by not going through those maps. You can also avoid bagjumping and scamming. If you don't want scammed, don't trade with other players.

So KILLING PLAYERS on PLAYER KILLING maps is considered outlawish? Why not? Bagjumping on the bagjumping maps is also consider outlawish. (for those who don't follow, *all* maps can be considered bagjumping maps. And scamming maps, too.) Just because you *can* doesn't mean that you *should* whenever you feel like it. And since there isn't a set of community rules, people who think they were done dirty are always going to post about it, whether you or I agree with them or not.