Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Brightdance

Zone Caps

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, srathor said:

If Nobles could spin up a downed Ek that would be flippen wonderful.  Or a separate command line toggle. I would love to get my second box freed up from + 1 crowfall 24/7. Too many times I come back in the morning and find the EK down over night.

 

I'll see if we can allow nobles to do it.

Todd

 


J Todd Coleman

ArtCraft Entertainment, Inc.

Follow us on Twitter @CrowfallGame | Like us on Facebook

[Rules of Conduct]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, jtoddcoleman said:

we could, but that doesn't sound very optimal.  I've also toyed with the idea of making uptime per day based on investment / management of the EK -- i.e. tie it to the parcels and buildings you have installed there.  that would be relatively easy and I don't think the folks who really want it (srathor, etc) would have any issue with it.  they are playing that game already. :)

Todd

 

I posted about this a while back.

I don't understand the need to keep empty EKs open at all, or the need to have separate UI steps for online and join.

Permissions exist to prevent people from making alterations they shouldn't.

Why isn't "join EK" a single user interaction that spins up the EK if its offline?

If everyone who had access to an ek could online it you wouldn't need to have timers to keep it online at all. If onlining it was part of the join process people couldn't just go down the list and open a bunch of eks because they couldn't spin up a second ek while inside the first. There wouldn't be any empty eks if they just shut down the moment they emptied since they wouldn't need to be left online when empty.

If nobody had to AFK or click a button to open a literally empty ek just to sit there and be empty  you wouldn't be spending server uptime on eks that are not being used just to sit them there for the possibility of use.

In the current system you have not only a system that actively prevents the use of EKs as a shared space (because why would I place any assets in a position where I may be literally unable to access them) but from ihe outside it seems like you're wasting resources by actively encouraging people to open empty servers with no activity happening in them.

If everyone with access to an ek just onlined it as part of the join process, you wouldn't have to worry about how long empty eks stay online because there wouldn't be any empty eks. From the user perspective the access to eks would be, functionally, as if they were all open all the time, with the only down side being that it would take slightly longer to log in to one that isn't currently in active use by another player.

I'm sure this is something you've thought about so what's the reasoning behind this whole "we need to have empty eks sit there and then be worried about how long they sit there empty"

Is it more expensive to spin them up and run them down again more often or what? It seems to me that the default behavior should be "onlines when joined, offlines when empty" and the owner could optionally choose to lock it from the menu if they wanted to, for instance, secure a pvp ek before logging in to it for changes.

Edited by PopeUrban

PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jtoddcoleman said:

I'll see if we can allow nobles to do it.

Todd

 

If you enact an afk timer, please make sure you don't do that on an EK. If we had 5 minutes in there before it dropped, that would be bad. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, PopeUrban said:

I posted about this a while back.

I don't understand the need to keep empty EKs open at all, or the need to have separate UI steps for online and join.

Permissions exist to prevent people from making alterations they shouldn't.

Why isn't "join EK" a single user interaction that spins up the EK if its offline?

If everyone who had access to an ek could online it you wouldn't need to have timers to keep it online at all. If onlining it was part of the join process people couldn't just go down the list and open a bunch of eks because they couldn't spin up a second ek while inside the first. There wouldn't be any empty eks if they just shut down the moment they emptied since they wouldn't need to be left online when empty.

If nobody had to AFK or click a button to open a literally empty ek just to sit there and be empty  you wouldn't be spending server uptime on eks that are not being used just to sit them there for the possibility of use.

In the current system you have not only a system that actively prevents the use of EKs as a shared space (because why would I place any assets in a position where I may be literally unable to access them) but from ihe outside it seems like you're wasting resources by actively encouraging people to open empty servers with no activity happening in them.

If everyone with access to an ek just onlined it as part of the join process, you wouldn't have to worry about how long empty eks stay online because there wouldn't be any empty eks. From the user perspective the access to eks would be, functionally, as if they were all open all the time, with the only down side being that it would take slightly longer to log in to one that isn't currently in active use by another player.

I'm sure this is something you've thought about so what's the reasoning behind this whole "we need to have empty eks sit there and then be worried about how long they sit there empty"

Is it more expensive to spin them up and run them down again more often or what? It seems to me that the default behavior should be "onlines when joined, offlines when empty" and the owner could optionally choose to lock it from the menu if they wanted to, for instance, secure a pvp ek before logging in to it for changes.

I do like this solution.

I think there are some technical issues, like how long after requesting the server spin up do you wait before failing on the entry attempt, what do you do with players that change their mind in the middle of the spin up process, etc.

It's probably avoiding having to work out those issues that led ACE down the, "just make it two steps, and let the players manually handle to timing" path.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, PopeUrban said:

I posted about this a while back.

I don't understand the need to keep empty EKs open at all, or the need to have separate UI steps for online and join.

Permissions exist to prevent people from making alterations they shouldn't.

Why isn't "join EK" a single user interaction that spins up the EK if its offline?

If everyone who had access to an ek could online it you wouldn't need to have timers to keep it online at all. If onlining it was part of the join process people couldn't just go down the list and open a bunch of eks because they couldn't spin up a second ek while inside the first. There wouldn't be any empty eks if they just shut down the moment they emptied since they wouldn't need to be left online when empty.

If nobody had to AFK or click a button to open a literally empty ek just to sit there and be empty  you wouldn't be spending server uptime on eks that are not being used just to sit them there for the possibility of use.

In the current system you have not only a system that actively prevents the use of EKs as a shared space (because why would I place any assets in a position where I may be literally unable to access them) but from ihe outside it seems like you're wasting resources by actively encouraging people to open empty servers with no activity happening in them.

If everyone with access to an ek just onlined it as part of the join process, you wouldn't have to worry about how long empty eks stay online because there wouldn't be any empty eks. From the user perspective the access to eks would be, functionally, as if they were all open all the time, with the only down side being that it would take slightly longer to log in to one that isn't currently in active use by another player.

I'm sure this is something you've thought about so what's the reasoning behind this whole "we need to have empty eks sit there and then be worried about how long they sit there empty"

Is it more expensive to spin them up and run them down again more often or what? It seems to me that the default behavior should be "onlines when joined, offlines when empty" and the owner could optionally choose to lock it from the menu if they wanted to, for instance, secure a pvp ek before logging in to it for changes.

based

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

I do like this solution.

I think there are some technical issues, like how long after requesting the server spin up do you wait before failing on the entry attempt, what do you do with players that change their mind in the middle of the spin up process, etc. 

It's probably avoiding having to work out those issues that led ACE down the, "just make it two steps, and let the players manually handle to timing" path.

What do you do with players that change their mind in the middle of logging in to a campaign?

Its such an edge case I'm not sure it even needs any fancy UI. Just let people alt f4 out if its taking too long. Letting them cancel it would open up abuse cases like going down the public list and online/cancel. I think its reasonable to assume that when someone clicks "join server" they mean to join a server.

I'm not saying there aren't any hurdles. I don't work for ACE or anything but from an outside perspective I can't understand why this wasn't the first model given the prominence of eks in both the overall design and in the microtransaction store.

I'm wondering why every time we hear about eks its about how to keep them empty rather than how to keep them full when the method I outlined is pretty standard fare for a ton of player housing models.

Edited by PopeUrban

PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, PopeUrban said:

What do you do with players that change their mind in the middle of logging in to a campaign?

Its such an edge case I'm not sure it even needs any fancy UI. Just let people alt f4 out if its taking too long. Letting them cancel it would open up abuse cases like going down the public list and online/cancel. I think its reasonable to assume that when someone clicks "join server" they mean to join a server.

I doubt it's at all a edge case. People hate to wait, and always hammer on buttons when they think things might be stuck.  Your not going to change that behavior.

YOU might be smart enough to wait, but after 10 seconds of spin up, you can be guaranteed a percentage of players will be clicking buttons trying to make "something" work. And what if it is actually broken and won't spin up?  Now the answer is Alt F4?  That's just terrible.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

I doubt it's at all a edge case. People hate to wait, and always hammer on buttons when they think things might be stuck.  Your not going to change that behavior.

YOU might be smart enough to wait, but after 10 seconds of spin up, you can be guaranteed a percentage of players will be clicking buttons trying to make "something" work. And what if it is actually broken and won't spin up?  Now the answer is Alt F4?  That's just terrible.

 

 

It takes fully 20-60 seconds for most of the people I know to log in to a server NOW, with no clear indication of why it is longer until you get there, and with no messaging.

You're really overthinking this. Its a video game. This is a loading screen. You wait at loading screens.


PopeSigGIF.gif

Rub rock on face and say "Yes food is eaten now time for fight"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, PopeUrban said:

It takes fully 20-60 seconds for most of the people I know to log in to a server NOW, with no clear indication of why it is longer until you get there, and with no messaging.

You're really overthinking this. Its a video game. This is a loading screen. You wait at loading screens.

put a zoom in on naked guini. That will buy some time while it loads.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, jtoddcoleman said:

I'll see if we can allow nobles to do it.

Todd

 

I started a dev partner post about it but just to give it more attention most of this alt/spying problem ccan be fixed with removing /who and the ability for people to have nearly instant access to ISR.  If you want intelligencce you should have to earn it, not log in an alt and type /who. 


This post was paid for by "Mandalore for Emulated CF Community Manager 2032™". 

wiDfyPp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mandalore said:

I started a dev partner post about it but just to give it more attention most of this alt/spying problem ccan be fixed with removing /who and the ability for people to have nearly instant access to ISR.  If you want intelligencce you should have to earn it, not log in an alt and type /who. 

This too dad can you fix :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, jtoddcoleman said:

Wow, so I just ran down the hall to ask QA "what happened to our AFK timer?" and apparently only half of the functionality is in and working (the disconnected player zombie state) -- I thought we had this in and working since hunger dome testing (and that it just didn't trigger for me because I was an admin account, which is the correct behavior).  But no, it's not happening for anyone.  that's a HUGE problem, and I can't believe that I missed this.  I'll get it into the system and get it fixed asap.

Todd

 

Keep in mind that unless you're unusually clever in your implementation this will just result in people autorunning into a corner in order to appear active.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Durenthal said:

Keep in mind that unless you're unusually clever in your implementation this will just result in people autorunning into a corner in order to appear active.

and the power of macros.


This post was paid for by "Mandalore for Emulated CF Community Manager 2032™". 

wiDfyPp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Durenthal said:

Keep in mind that unless you're unusually clever in your implementation this will just result in people autorunning into a corner in order to appear active.

How about the game randomly present stoplight/bicycle/storefront/bus image captchas to ensure people are really there?

(This is, of course, humor.)

There's almost no way to avoid people doing odd things to defeat afk prevention systems.

Edited by Ardrea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, coolster50 said:

If we’re getting an afk timer, I support it being 15min as opposed to a 5-10min one. Don’t wanna get kicked cuz I afk circle stand T.T

I want you kicked if you afk circle stand...


This post was paid for by "Mandalore for Emulated CF Community Manager 2032™". 

wiDfyPp.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...