List AFK checks

[silo32]

Originally Posted by cornisthebest [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

remote desktop is actually bannable ? asking for a friend

Yes 100% staff quoted

I still wanna 2 cents this should be a solo camp not risk your Life or have to share access to your account to make gains


Not classic

60 days Left of this chit

[Smellybuttface]

Originally Posted by silo32 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yes 100% staff quoted

I still wanna 2 cents this should be a solo camp not risk your Life or have to share access to your account to make gains


Not classic

60 days Left of this chit

But then we wouldn’t get the hilarious stories of people doing 4 day’s straight hitting an afk box! Those are some of my favorite threads.

[Videri]

Quick question. Would it work to have the AFK checks only when the mob respawns? Then everyone camping it could just set an alarm to click the AFK check box, and a mob would be there and most people would kill it, then they'd have one respawn period to go about their lives. Why are the AFK checks at randomized intervals again?

[Smellybuttface]

Originally Posted by Videri [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Quick question. Would it work to have the AFK checks only when the mob respawns? Then everyone camping it could just set an alarm to click the AFK check box, and a mob would be there and most people would kill it, then they'd have one respawn period to go about their lives. Why are the AFK checks at randomized intervals again?

The thought seems to be that it controls the length of the list since folks are more likely to drop when having to do afk checks every 5-15 mins. This is probably good for everybody. The /list system should not be built around appeasing the more casual player, since the items themselves are of such high value that the Devs wanted to make acquiring them an effort to match that value. If the /lists become much easier, the item itself gets devalued, and people that desire the item more and are willing to work harder for it aren’t incentivized to do so. It just makes the lists significantly longer by lessening their difficulty, so overall time spent by people could very easily be 100-150 hours.

[Videri]

Originally Posted by Smellybuttface [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The thought seems to be that it controls the length of the list since folks are more likely to drop when having to do afk checks every 5-15 mins. This is probably good for everybody. The /list system should not be built around appeasing the more casual player, since the items themselves are of such high value that the Devs wanted to make acquiring them an effort to match that value. If the /lists become much easier, the item itself gets devalued, and people that desire the item more and are willing to work harder for it aren’t incentivized to do so. It just makes the lists significantly longer by lessening their difficulty, so overall time spent by people could very easily be 100-150 hours.

Good points. However, the frequent random AFK checks are not the only thing making the camp difficult; there's also the overall span of time the character must remain at the camp.

The character that's #1 on the manastone list right now has been there for 77 hours. If the typical manastone camp time is approx 60-80 hours, frequency of AFK checks isn't what's separating the wheat from the chaff...it's whether people have multiple days in a row with virtually no commitments, or a dedicated group that takes turns on one character.

Decreasing frequency of AFK checks would make it more comfortable, so perhaps more people would join the list; but most of those people wouldn't stay on the list long enough because most people have jobs or families. Sure, the list would be 5 people longer, but if all 5 drop out after only 36 hours to go to work, they actually don't slow down the other people on the list from getting to #1. They joined and then left before getting to #1. It's as if they never even joined.

The exception would be squads of multiple people (perhaps with jobs/families) taking turns for only a few hours at a time. One wonders whether frequent AFK checks would slow those folks down. Let's imagine an ideal situation where you had 8 people with different daily schedules, each doing 3 hours every single day...3 hours with 6 AFK checks or 3 hours with 27 AFK checks...it's fine either way. They'll do that ez-pz.

I'm still not convinced the variability and high frequency of AFK checks keeps dedicated manastone campers off the list.

[cd288]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's all but impossible to detect VNC-style software because it takes control at the OS level and "remotely controls" it the same way as an ordinary user. In fact, if I were a betting man I'd put $20 on at least 1/4 of manastone /listers doing exactly this. The only alternative is to drop on/off to switch with another person (risking losing your position) or using a ton of Adderall to do it yourself.

Oh, and for basing it on IP address, that wouldn't help at all. When two people remotely control one computer, that one computer maintains its same IP. All it would hurt is people whose connection goes down (ie. the people /list is trying not to kick off), because they get a fresh IP from their host (or VPN) when they reconnect.

IMHO the problems with /list are NOT technical in nature: they're systemic. The only solution is for the system to change (eg. to short/fixed length lists that you have to win a random to join).

I'm assuming that because of this the .dll file P99 has that scans things wouldn't pick up the VNC software because it doesn't interact directly with the client? If it could pick that up I'm guessing it means it's scanning everything on your comp which would of course not be okay.