The Hacker Project - a free online game

This is the Top 10 winners list:


Rank     Player
1            WolfDoc(#19744)
2            BrokIronfist(#15637)
3            Alpha-9(#11703)
4              GlitchH4xor(#9062)
5            Hatejacket(#1409)
6            mobswisher(#6937)
7            Exousia(#8447)
8            ph(#19767)
9            liberty belle(#19816)     
10            Healven(#19406)     


The winners will receive the following prizes in affiliate credits:
Top     1       2        3         4         5     6      7       8         9         10
Prize    $60    $40    $30    $20    $10    $10    $10    $10    $10    $10

The prizes will be awarded today or the following day.

A new faction mission awaits you in the new round:
http://www.hacker-project.com/forum/index.php?topic=2258.0

Congratulations!

A very er, interesting round! GG  :13:

I'm still in vac mode  :atention:

woot, go brok!

Thanks Bontrose...  Spent the last few days fending off Alpha...

I thought I would have to go into vacation mode to protect myself  :laugh:

When you've got your goons? No need, i'll hide for you!  :5:

Sincere congratulations to everybody though, except WolfDoc as all he did was donate, but thanks for supporting the game so gratuitiously.  :laugh:

If HJ kept at it he could have easily taken me out if he had kept at it, as I was barely doing anything other than collecting and research (and bombing brok) at the end, and would have if I didn't vacate  :14:

I do think malware needs to be significantly toned down however, I (and others) don't think it's right that months and months worth of work can be taken out in 1 hour... But I can't really think of a way to change it without just making it rubbishly weak. Possibly increase AP cost to 20 each, but people can still and do still overclock their AP from faction missions to tens of thousands.

I think AP should be capped at 150% MAX.

   Maybe a way to tone down the malware is to increase the AP cost in proportion to the amount of time it's been charging...maybe after a week or so of charging up start increasing AP cost by 10 AP each day after the set time.  So say you have your silo of malware ready to strike down terror and it's been charging up for 4 months each virii would cost 1200 AP to fire.

I'd agree with something like this, but the cost of the AP would have to be relevant to the attack power of each attack, not the total amount it's been running.

If you've got a malware running for 1200 hours but you only use 5 hours of attack power, it should cost the same amount. Have it cost 0.5 AP per hour of attack usage., with the base at 5 AP and the cap at 100 AP. Even at 200 hours, a 0.5 Overload will only damage a server with 7500 kb/s about 250 kb/s per attack. 1200 AP for 250 kb/s and a power drop of less than 1M? Malware would be useless.

And if it gets higher the more it charges up people will just chargemalware to say 100 hours then launch it every time and not let it go over...

I'll think on it

I dont know exactly what you're getting at, but I'd also be okay with something like "With any attacks in excess of 100 attack power, Malware can become unstable and damage the localhost instead". Then there is something like a 5% chance (That goes up parallel to the amount of attack power you use, max 10%) that the remote attack will hit your malware farm as opposed to the server you are attacking...This will deter people from installing massive bombs on their main servers...

I think that's actually problematical in itself, it seems counter productive that smaller malware are more effecient than big ones, but they are.
My previous post was in reference to the malware change idea "..maybe after a week or so of charging up start increasing AP cost by 10 AP each day after the set time. "
People would simple activate before the AP cost got too high.

I think an active defense would be better (Noone has mentioned Remote Attack Disruptor is practically useless, and NEVER used)
Sort of a countervirus maybe, install it on your server, if its higher version than malware thats trying to attack it would defend against it, so malware would need to be higher version than the installed 'Counter-bomb' or the counter would have to be disinfected.

It would make sense to me after all the malware last round that the Mega-Corps would release something to counter it.

yeah, maybe a sterilization engine, "may put malware on server into a loop(does not accumulate time) until used, then the timer is reset" would have a chance(5-95% depending on size of mal vs. size of engine) on each malware on host selected(when run) so you can target the # of malware for decreased runtime on tasks

first malware takes 5x as many resources than each other added malware(assuming each malware is the same)