Dancer Archive
Thread: Discussion of constructive modifications to the recursive macroing removal
Tiaga
Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:08 am
#27
JohnMarble wrote:That sig gets cut off, at least on my machine.
Mozilla shows it right, but the font for the rest of it is wrong. IE shows the font right but the last part gets cut off.
Sometimes you just can't win. Making your window wider may help.
Tiaga
Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:09 am
#28
Sigrun wrote:
Tiaga wrote:
That doesn't mean I want to piss players off. I want to see a great game. That's why I made a proposal that takes care of the intended target (Unattended gameplay) with 0 impact on ATK players, excepting of course their source of buffs.Message Edited by Tiaga on 08-05-2004 11:10 AM
Please share that proposal with the rest of us, and please put it up in front of TH on his 100+ page thread. Because that ain't what we're arguing about here or there.
It was already done as my second post in this thread.
People still insist that removing what they like is the only way what the devs propose could ever possibly be done, and therefore this change is the most evil thing in the world.
Tiaga
Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:52 am
#29
Sigrun wrote:
Tiaga wrote:
Alright, a brief overview of the proposal I sent to TH over there.
As far as enforcing it, someone on one of the entertainer forums (Sorry, forgot who and where) had a good idea of giving CSR the ability to force a pop-up on your screen that you have to answer to. This could be used any number of ways from just disconnecting you to flagging your account for further investigation.Sorry, must have missed it.
It's a good suggestion, but it won't work / fly with SOE. It assumes that CSR's are avaiable to take this action and have the authority and the balls to flag / suspend / ban accounts. We all know that the CSR function at SOE is critically, comically understaffed already and that they have zero authority or capability to do anything other than apologize profusely.
Not true. That is the same argument that was used to allow macros in the first place. If anything, removing the in-game macros makes spotting 3rd party macro users easier. The CSR do suspend people, it is just not their policy to discuss any actions they take so you don't always see it.
Tiaga
Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:53 am
#30
And as to claiming it won't fly with them...
....
Ummm... They are looking to end unattended gameplay? No matter how they do that the 3rd party program issue creeps in.
....
Ummm... They are looking to end unattended gameplay? No matter how they do that the 3rd party program issue creeps in.
Sigrun
Fri Aug 06, 2004 12:57 am
#31
There is nothing wrong with macros. There is nothing wrong with looping macros. In fact, macros and looping macros actually enhance and enable gameplay.
There is something wrong with Unattended play.
Yes, some players got banned for duplicating credits.By the *devs*, not by the CSR's.
In my experience, and in the experience of every single person who's shared their experience with me, CSR's are so slow to respond that they will never be able to effectively police the AFK situation with their current staffing levels.
It's a nice thought to believe they could, but it's an equally nice thought to imagine they could actually help with other ingame issues too.
Unless perhaps you can reference a time when you called for a CSR and they actually showed up within a reasonable timeframe, or even before you had to log for the day?
Dreamland
Fri Aug 06, 2004 9:00 am
#32
On the subject of shuttles, the existing autokick feature kicks you after 20 minutes of idling does it not, I'd asume that process is a good indication of how longthe developers intended someone to be able to be unatended in the game.
Shuttle macros are about to be come much less of an issue anyway as im sure a great deal of the people who continue to play will be getting Jump to lightspeed and will no longer use the shuttle. Even so i don't thnk that a maximum of10 minutes unatended at the shuttle would be considered an abuse of unatended play in any circumstance.
kirah_ashlin
Fri Aug 06, 2004 9:22 am
#33
JTL will have no affect on shuttles since, as I understand it,its a separate game not an enhancement to the original SWG.You can't go from planet to planet inJTL- the entire game is "in space", (which is why I am not interested in it) so we will still be required to utilize the shuttle system.
Dreamland wrote:
On the subject of shuttles, the existing autokick feature kicks you after 20 minutes of idling does it not, I'd asume that process is a good indication of how longthe developers intended someone to be able to be unatended in the game.
Shuttle macros are about to be come much less of an issue anyway as im sure a great deal of the people who continue to play will be getting Jump to lightspeed and will no longer use the shuttle. Even so i don't thnk that a maximum of10 minutes unatended at the shuttle would be considered an abuse of unatended play in any circumstance.
Tiaga
Fri Aug 06, 2004 9:25 am
#34
kirah_ashlin wrote:JTL will have no affect on shuttles since, as I understand it, its a separate game not an enhancement to the original SWG. You can't go from planet to planet in JTL - the entire game is "in space", (which is why I am not interested in it) so we will still be required to utilize the shuttle system.
Dreamland wrote:On the subject of shuttles, the existing autokick feature kicks you after 20 minutes of idling does it not, I'd asume that process is a good indication of how long the developers intended someone to be able to be unatended in the game.Shuttle macros are about to be come much less of an issue anyway as im sure a great deal of the people who continue to play will be getting Jump to lightspeed and will no longer use the shuttle. Even so i don't thnk that a maximum of 10 minutes unatended at the shuttle would be considered an abuse of unatended play in any circumstance.
You go to a starport, call your ship from your datapad, and pick where you want to go. You are then taken to that sector. While you can not travel between sectors in space, you can go directly from Naboo to the space around Yavin, then land.
That is my understanding of it.
Sigrun
Fri Aug 06, 2004 9:27 am
#35
kirah_ashlin wrote:
JTL will have no affect on shuttles since, as I understand it,its a separate game not an enhancement to the original SWG.You can't go from planet to planet inJTL- the entire game is "in space", (which is why I am not interested in it) so we will still be required to utilize the shuttle system.
Dreamland wrote:
On the subject of shuttles, the existing autokick feature kicks you after 20 minutes of idling does it not, I'd asume that process is a good indication of how longthe developers intended someone to be able to be unatended in the game.
Shuttle macros are about to be come much less of an issue anyway as im sure a great deal of the people who continue to play will be getting Jump to lightspeed and will no longer use the shuttle. Even so i don't thnk that a maximum of10 minutes unatended at the shuttle would be considered an abuse of unatended play in any circumstance.
Right now, this is all supposition and conjecture. Has anyone seen any definitive answer from SOE regarding using JTL resources for interplanetary travel and the mechanics behind doing so if it will be possible? If so, can you post a link?
I'm with the reply here in thought process. Even if it's possible to jump planet-to-planet with JTL ships, I'm convinced that there will be a time sink equal to or worse than current interplanetary shuttle waits.
Tiaga
Fri Aug 06, 2004 9:30 am
#36
The trade-off for flying your ship is that there could be people waiting in the sector you are flying into to gank your ship. Space is supposed to be a dangerous place.
kirah_ashlin
Fri Aug 06, 2004 9:34 am
#37
Mmmm, that's completely the opposite of what I was led to believe (yes, I WILL blame others for my misunderstanding - LOL!). If interplanetary travel is part of the game then it might be worth looking into again. I had written it off a couple of months ago, thinking that it was strictly a space adventure game.
Tiaga
Fri Aug 06, 2004 9:38 am
#38
It won't be directly a part of it per se.. You won't hop in your ship then fly from Naboo to Talus... What I've heard (Sorry can't site where I heard it, can't remember.. Might have been FF) is that it is how you get into your ship that determines travel. Once you're on your way to Talus you can't suddenly change your mind and fly to Lok instead, you'd have to land on Talus, then get on your ship again in the Lok sector.
I could be totally misremembering though.. I'm not quite sure how that accounts for the deep space sectors that don't have a planet. So I could also be going on only half the information.
I could be totally misremembering though.. I'm not quite sure how that accounts for the deep space sectors that don't have a planet. So I could also be going on only half the information.
Reachwind
Fri Aug 06, 2004 10:12 am
#39
They used a cannon instead of a fly swatter and they completely missed the fly.
If they really wanted to save the game from AFK play they would go after the problems not throw out garbage like this.
A couple of suggestions to eliminate AFK game play areas....
- AFK Loot camping - Get rid of static loot drops. Take those sameitems and make them treasure map loot.
- AFK combat macros for loot or skill gain - Get rid of static spawns of low level NPCs that drop loot and are easy to kill for a low level combat player.
- AFK entertainers - Make buffing and healing an active process (the entertainer has to target the player that needs healing and invite that player to be healed. Then the entertainer would have to execute a series of commands to heal or buff the target).
- AFK spam bots - Take out the option to disable auto-AFK after 15 mins. This way we can use that handy new AFK ignore feature to self police.