Discuss the massively-multiplayer home defense game.
You are not logged in.
Pages: 1
I believe the centre of the whole problem is that as long as a player's house being robbed is tied to the progression of the game for that player (in that they will lose some or all of their hard-earned cash) there will always be a very heavy incentive for players to construct hard or impossible houses rather than ones that are fun to play. Changing the mechanics to negate the current impossible houses may well help things in the short-term, but ultimately players will simply find another way to build an impossible house and the whole cycle will start again. For the issue of impossible houses to be solved in the long-term, the incentive needs to be on creating houses that are fun for robbers rather than creating houses that have a 100% chance of protecting your game progress. Once that happens things would likely start branching out, with players building houses that are different, new and more exciting than existing houses in order to gain the favour of players rather than everybody re-using the same techniques which have been proven to provide as much difficulty and un-crackability as possible.
Such a change would obviously require rather significant mechanic changes, but otherwise I suspect there will ultimately always be players who will try and succeed to create impossible houses regardless of the limitations placed upon them (that, or the game is changed to the point where every house is either incredibly simple and easy to beat or robbers are given the ability to identify the exact solution of a house in every situation).
Yes.
I've been struggling over this issue ever since I started playing, and I've come to two conclusions very similar to your own: Firstly, it is only possible to play the house-building side of the game or the puzzle-solving side of the game, with players being punished if they attempt to do both simultaneously, and secondly that the current player-vs-player mechanic produces a heavy incentive for players to create unsolvable houses rather than houses that are fun to play. Both ultimately lead to stagnation within the game, where either nobody plays or nothing is possible to play.
Your idea solves both issues. I'm not sure about some of the suggestions (a lack of money-based purchases would reduce the sense of progression within the game - once a player has constructed a good house they no longer have much reason to play the house-building side, and allowing a player to equip any selection of all the items means early-game thieves are just as hard as end-game thieves. Additionally, I would include a way for thieves to replay houses that they've already completed and possibly allow players to take inspiration from existing houses provided they make notable additions to it - also, I suspect an auto-detector for this would end up mistakenly identifying some houses as being copies if players end up having the same idea as one another), but ultimately I would be happy playing this type of game.
If Jason doesn't implement this I may have to try and do so myself (assuming I can firstly set up an environment that allows me to both edit and compile the source code - trying to edit UNIX code on Windows isn't fun - then figure out how to modify the code appropriately to accomplish this, and finally provided you are happy to let others implement this or whether you want to keep it personal).
What type of software will the serverside verification require? I've been toying with the server code (exploring the viability of a non-permadeath server) and I might need to switch it to my other host if it goes much beyond just PHP (for example, I suspect I may not be able to execute custom programs uploaded to the server).
It's all in the public domain (not just source code, but everything). No restrictions on use for any purpose.
There will be a "no_copyright.txt" file in v6 that explains this.
Does this extend to commercial works?
Yeah, I've thought about making moderators, but that's just passing the buck.
That also makes the whole thing dependent on THOSE people remaining active (and doing a lot of annoying work.... uggh).
I'm still looking for a better solution.
Right now, the spammers are answering my "really advanced" math problems with 4-digit answers. That means these are all humans, not bots (they were also answering my questions about animal legs just fine).
There's also the idea of requiring new members to be "approved" before they can post new topics.... but again, that requires an admin headache and is harmful to the good users.
I'm about to try adding a question specific to the game itself, something that would take a human spammer a few minutes to find the answer to, making it not worth their time.
Hmm. Perhaps there is a way to sync the game's ticket server to the forum so that people without the game are limited to only posting in a specific board? Wouldn't eliminate the spam entirely, but it would at least contain it - the most meaningful conversation is going to be coming from people who have played the game, so limiting areas to just those users shouldn't impact things too badly.
Being an aspiring programmer, I jumped at the chance to peek through the source code provided with my purchase. However, I can't see anything within the code that indicates what license applies to the code and what people may and may not do with it. Could someone please clarify this for me? Thanks in advance!
Are those posts still there? Have you reported them?
I've been keeping up with the reports every few days, deleting stuff.
Even with the human test, lots of spam accounts are being made. I just made the human test questions harder to guess (4 digit numbers as answers). But the spam might be from human spammers. If that's the case, then obviously some other measure will be needed.
Running a forum is a real pain!
Are there any trustworthy members in the community that you would consider giving Moderator privileges on the forum so that they can help ease the load of banning any bots that get through?
Pages: 1