server takeover?

[gs 059]

I am sure that people could not just make other accounts and let their main take it over since if they did that, it would be instaban...

[Crlaozwyn]

What about groups though? Player A makes 50 accounts and each one takes over another account. His friend, player B is told where all these accounts are, and can take them over at his leisure. Now if there's a group with 6 people... you do the math.

[gs 059]

What about groups though? Player A makes 50 accounts and each one takes over another account. His friend, player B is told where all these accounts are, and can take them over at his leisure. Now if there's a group with 6 people... you do the math.

wow, I did not expect you to ever answer with a reason, that was amazing.

[Crlaozwyn]

No need to be insulting - I've given a reason in every post I've made. Even though I may not like your idea doesn't mean I'm going to dismiss it, only argue against it and provide reasons why I think it would be a poor idea to implement it, both when regarding the players and the time it takes Sir Emi to code. Simply put, I think Sir Emi's time would have a much bigger impact elsewhere and I don't think that this would make much difference in gameplay to the people who enjoy this game. That and I still see it as imbalancing - here's my final post for this thread, and it's a scenario.

1) This suggestion is implemented
2) Five friends decide they're going to take advantage of this
3) Two of them research the file. Now it can be distributed to everyone in the group without any multiplaying.
4) Every day, each of them makes 5 new accounts
5) Every week, each of these accounts takes over another account.
6) Within two weeks, each of these players now has 70 accounts controlling 35 others, or 175 total
7) In a month, each player has 155 accounts controlling 270 others, or 1350 total.
8) In two months, you don't want to know what it looks like.

You may say this would take too much time, but it really wouldn't. With saved passwords and autofill, not to mention greasemonkey scripts, this could be done in an hour or so daily.

[Witcher]

can we have a virus that we can install and after say a week or two, you have the option of taking the server over a players server.

Er... urm...

I read the whole discussion carefully and reached one conclusion:

 

Well, I guess it's nice to be able to use these guys now and then.

Aside from the very accurate criticisms made by Crlaozwyn there is one other issue:

Why would you want this? I mean really how would you benefit? I all but control over 100 servers already - no one will ever find (most) of them no one will touch them and they are all quietly generating revenue for me, all without this kind of hassle.

When you take over a server infest it with virii to the point that the server is unusable for anything else, you've taken over. What would be the point of this suggestion? I might be dumb but really I don't get it. Unless you are trying or hoping to circumvent the AP limitations, in which case this will never fly in any case.

[gs 059]

I realize I was wrong to say 10k, maybe something like 40k per take over, because the way I was intending it was for those servers that you see that are pretty large, at least 200kb/s b/w and have a bunch of ram/cpu. I keep seeing people abandon servers like this and just thought it was a waist.

and when you say you were not just going to dismiss it and that you would argue against it.... these two posts from you clearly show that all you wanted to do was just dismiss it.

I can upload a 1 gig file in 2 minutes. Any other questions?

The viruses I install are over 20 gigs and install in less than a day. Any other questions? The fact is, this is a bad idea. Drop it.

[Witcher]

Heh ... here is (another) reason why never to do this -

There are times when *gasp* I am a week away from the computer.

So I would walk away and come back to find someone has taken over my server and there is nothing left for me to do at all? I would not even have a server which I could use as gateway to collect on any eventual revenues I might have. What kind of a daft thing is that??? Enough to have people stop playing altogether is what it is.

Oh and an ancillary thought. How do you measure inactivity on a server *anyhow* I might have several servers and have one which I have not visited in over a week. Does that make it inactive and overtakable?

Honestly I do NOT see this idea contributing anything GOOD to the game and I see a lot of PROBLEMS with it. If you propose an idea you should be ready to accept criticism - dismissing criticism as oh "you guys just want to dismiss my idea" is exquisitely convoluted and eminently counter-productive.

[gs 059]

no, I am ok with criticism, but only if people actually give some, just saying idea sucks drop it is not criticism, that is just dismissing it

[Raistlin]

Well, actually, "Your idea sucks; drop it." can in some cases be a legitimate attack. For example. . . This game doesn't have enough ninjas, maybe we should add some. Maybe, like, when you hack a high level server, there's a chance a ninja attacks you or something.

The above idea would be best replied to with "Your idea sucks. Drop it." 

[virus man]

This has been suggested and turn down by Sir Emi.  It was suggested in the first week or two of the game.

[gs 059]

well, like I said, I was looking through the forums, and I did not see anything like it. if you had maybe said no, it has already been suggested, maybe posted a link or something, that would be nice, but not just your idea sucks, that is definently the wrong thing to say.

[virus man]

well, like I said, I was looking through the forums, and I did not see anything like it. if you had maybe said no, it has already been suggested, maybe posted a link or something, that would be nice, but not just your idea sucks, that is definently the wrong thing to say.

At no time did I say your Idea sucks.

[ZacQuicksilver]

well, like I said, I was looking through the forums, and I did not see anything like it. if you had maybe said no, it has already been suggested, maybe posted a link or something, that would be nice, but not just your idea sucks, that is definently the wrong thing to say.

Just to say it:

Your idea sucks. drop it.


Now, here is why it sucks:

1) I am a mediocre player: I am, and will always be, a second-tier hacker (and I'm happy here). There are 5 servers I all but own, and another few that I might have to fight for. Therefore, the best players must have more (they are better), and instead of seeing people with 1, 2, 5 servers, you'd see 5, 10, 1000 servers. The only limitation is how much time I have (Make a new account, connect, do a few missions, and decide the game sucks. Come in with my main account, "find" the IP, change the logs, and start the process: Untraceable as a ToS violation).

2) Think about balance: do you want to be given 5 extra servers, if it means I get 10, and each member of SGP gets 50, or 100?

3) It would make the ability to destroy servers even more powerful, because by destroying a server just out of newbie protection, you make the player stop playing (Maybe not, but if you do it enough...). Instant decent server. And so you are aware: "Destroy" does not mean delete everything, "Destroy" means hide everything, load virii in the rest of the HDD, and install said virii.

4) It would make inactivity for any vacation longer than a week potentially lethal. The only way to avoid this is to change your IP right before leaving, and pray that nobody purchases your IP.

5) After your only server gets taken over, you get left with nothing: so what do you do.

[gs 059]

thread is already dead, why did you post in here?