Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 24

Thread: Proposed Changes To Clannet Thread

  1. #1

    Proposed Changes To Clannet Thread

    Alright I thought we should start this thread up, it's long overdue. Here we can discuss changes to the Clannet system while avoididng meetings (which don't seem to work very well).

    These were posted by Labrutte in another thread:



    "Ok here is what me and many nemesis want to improve clannet raid in camelot :

    1 - Set up the roll with clannet then roll with helpbot, cause some may say that host can cheat with clannet but we think that it may be harder to cheat with helpbot cause the one who have the sourcecode is not a host.

    2 - Make impossible for someone who roll item X to roll item X the next T, he may be possible to wait a week at least, so more people will get more loot and no always the same cause he is very lucky.

    3 - Nobody must be allowed to roll for a friend, this is too easy to keep loot for a little group of close friends in this way.

    4 - Make prof item availlable to roll only by this profession, unless there is no one of this prof.

    5 - Don't raise lvl limit from 140 to 150. Yes some clannet peeps want to do it many middle level are really happy to reach 140 cause they are a little ubber and they can roll for Dragon item !!!! But some high lvl thought they will win more loot if there is less people in the roll.

    These the point i personnaly want to be in the clannet raid but there is some other points from my guildies.

    So you see we don't ask the impossible"

  2. #2
    This was posted by Marlark in another thread regarding issue number 1:


    "As i told flojojojo erlier today when we had a litle chat regarding the meeting that became a flame war in gigantic propotions. I told him that i had a list fairly long that we never got to talk about on that meeting regarding sugestions people have done on the webboards ..like maybe changing lvl limit or add a verification command to clannet... I have already had that on the table that labrutte asked about and i have informed some people that have brought it up that we cant use helpbot as number roller. The reasons is many mostly instability. The track record on helpbot staying alive or even working is not very impressive.

    And adding parse code to the bot require some detection code in chat lines and disregarding when it is command code. Well todo that we will slow down the bot to such a extent it would be impossible to work good and the bigest problem is that you may not get a reply from helpbot even and what happen then well we have a ****ed up roll without a rollback function due to hosts are not supposed to be able to have commands that is possible to surcomvent the system based on their own interests.

    The disadvantages by using helbot or external bots for number rolling was alot longer then advantages.

    That is why it will never be a external number roller in clannet.

    But as i have said regarding the verification command is that it is a false sense of security. But that sugestion was gonna be talked about on the meeting but never got to that or the rest of the sugestions due to the heavy flame war.

    // Marlark"

  3. #3
    I understand the marlark reply but i don't really think it's true cause we used to use helpbot and it wasn't so worse than that.

  4. #4
    My other thoughts:

    2) There was a change like this proposed (or was going to be proposed) at the meeting. I think it went like this:
    If player X wins a roll, then that player can not roll for the same item a 2nd time until they have reached 30 points. They can then not roll for the same item a third time until they have reached 60 pts. And so on and so on.
    I think that this works beter than a time-based system because if it were a one week penalty one could simply not atend tara for a week and the have access to the roll, while this ensures that the player must 'pay their dues' in order to win the same item twice.

  5. #5
    Originally posted by labrutte
    I understand the marlark reply but i don't really think it's true cause we used to use helpbot and it wasn't so worse than that.
    The way we used to do roll was by typing in the names after every kill and then use helpbot to roll. We didn't keep track of points; so in at least one major respect clannet is very different than the old rolls. Comparing the two isn't without taking the differences into account is not appropriate.

    I've read marlark's reply and because I have no programing skill and I know marlark I believe what he is saying. So there are two alternatives (that I see): (1) clannet could be modified so that it assigned the numbers and then the host simply uses helpbot or curan to roll or (2) someone with some programming skill comes forward and tells us how we could have a more integrated system.

    Alternative #1: Might be sufficient to respond to people who think clannet is rigged (although the list of winners is quite to the contrary); costs us some of the good features of clannet (we are going to have to scroll up to see who had what number, which is not so easy to do when you're lagging and there is a crap load of spam. Personally, I think you give up more than you get (but hell i'm willing to look at the data and determine that clannet is not rigged).

    Alternative #2: Well frankly marlark has done a ton of work on clannet and I don't think he is obligated to do more. If someone knows how it can be done please step forward and enlighten us.
    Johnathgalt Rimor Clanner

    wtb crusader chant

    Succeeding at my job is like winning a pie eating contest where the prize is more pie.

  6. #6
    labrutes suggestions
    1 - Set up the roll with clannet then roll with helpbot, cause some may say that host can cheat with clannet but we think that it may be harder to cheat with helpbot cause the one who have the sourcecode is not a host.

    2 - Make impossible for someone who roll item X to roll item X the next T, he may be possible to wait a week at least, so more people will get more loot and no always the same cause he is very lucky.

    3 - Nobody must be allowed to roll for a friend, this is too easy to keep loot for a little group of close friends in this way.

    4 - Make prof item availlable to roll only by this profession, unless there is no one of this prof.

    5 - Don't raise lvl limit from 140 to 150. Yes some clannet peeps want to do it many middle level are really happy to reach 140 cause they are a little ubber and they can roll for Dragon item !!!! But some high lvl thought they will win more loot if there is less people in the roll.
    taking the liberty of copying some of the more lucid and explict suggestion posts to this thread
    Johnathgalt Rimor Clanner

    wtb crusader chant

    Succeeding at my job is like winning a pie eating contest where the prize is more pie.

  7. #7
    from Thel's
    However, this is not to say that using helpbot to roll means getting rid of Clannet.

    Clannet would still be used to:

    1. track points
    2. register people on rolls
    3. assign numbers to people that want to roll on an item

    For example, if 3 people wanted to roll on a item and person A had 10pts, B 20 pts, and C 50 pts, then Clannet would assign A to 1-10, B to 11-30, and C to 31-80.

    Then, the admin would send helpbot a tell
    /tell helpbot roll 1 80

    This could also be done internally with Clannet, with a public error message when helpbot was not up. If it was internal, then Clannet could send helpbot the message and return helpbot's answer in chat. If Helpbot was down, then the error message should be displayed and Clannet can then proceed to role as it has been.
    *edit*

    Again, as i have no programing expertise, i'm not sure if the last part is possible without jepordizing the integrity of the clannet bot. It seems simple enough, but when I read marlark's reply on the subject I take it to mean that some how the messages back and forth between clannet and helpbot cause some problem.

    dunno if you have programing knowledge Thel, if you do, maybe you can think about whether that is an issue or maybe somebody else can tell us
    Last edited by Johnathgalt; Jan 17th, 2003 at 01:28:32.
    Johnathgalt Rimor Clanner

    wtb crusader chant

    Succeeding at my job is like winning a pie eating contest where the prize is more pie.

  8. #8
    yes, and since using helpbot would result in us having to delete 1 point from everybody that rolled along with having to delete all points from 1 person. It would end up having even more work for marlark, and he worked hard on clannet, many many hours of work. Nobody should have the right to tell him to change it. Like john said, this is his bot, if you want to change it, come up with some options. If you know how to program give these ideas to marl or make your own bot...

  9. #9
    bump.

    CohnKraD 212 MA Nano <First Nanomage GURU>
    CohnCrat 220 Crat Solitus
    Cohn007 216 Agent Solitus
    Goodone 211 Engineer Solitus
    MRCohn 214 Agent ATROX - Mongo rage *nerf*
    + + + many alts
    Killer 93% Achiever 66% Socializer 20% Explorer 20%

  10. #10
    Ok ok ok i see that there is no way to change roll system. But i will try to be fair, forget my point 1 then can you reply something for the 4 others ?

  11. #11
    I don't have any programming knowledge at all hehe, but I generally have a good idea of what bots should be capable of doing.

    Our bot tech, Saeyuk, seems to think that what I have suggested would be rather easy to implement. He is rather new at doing bots, but has done some very creative work so far Stantius from the Alliance, however, would be a great person to talk to regarding bot-bot chat.

    Also, there is a lot that could be done manually if it made things easier. Might just take a lil bit of creativity

  12. #12
    And yet Again!! I know Marl is sick of reading this post by now hehe and I am really not sure how well it could be implemented or just how successful it would be. Might be worth a shot and it does give Clannet a lot more structure than it has now.

    The main problem that this suggestion tries to fix is accountability. Right now, individuals that go to Clannet raids do not really feel like they have any ownership or right to change the system. This is likely to lead to dissention and the only repercussion for individuals that go against Clannet atm is social pressure, which is not that big of a deal for individuals.

    The proposal would make each individual that attended accountable by their guild and each guild would have a voice in what happens with Clannet. The guilds as a whole would be accountable to a council of members from other guilds. Thus, repercussions mean something to the individuals in question and the pressure is not coming from some unknown group of Clannet people, but from people in their own guilds.

    So the proposal is as follows:

    1. A council will be created from one member that is appointed from each active guild at Tara.

    2. An active guild is determined by the sum of all the raid points collected by members of that guild. For example, once a guild reaches 50 points, then they are able to appoint a member to the council.

    3. All members of the council will have admin rights on Clannet. Only one will be assigned per raid and the council will decide how this is assigned.

    4. Council members will be responsible for:
    a. Resolving problems with individuals in their respective guilds
    b. Determining the rules for Clannet
    c. Making split second decisions at raids when a problem comes up
    d. When issues cannot be addressed by individual council members and their guild members, then having meetings to decide what repercussions there would be for individuals that break the rules.

    5. Individuals that are not guilded will be overseen by the council itself.

    6. Banning exists on 2 levels, banning an individual and banning a guild. Both of these options should be treated with the utmost respect and used only as a last resort. The council is accountable to the RK2 clan community. If these options are abused in any respect, then it threatens the stability of the Clannet system.

    7. Leadership of the council itself is an issue and I would recommend that no specific individual be put in that position and instead have all council members have equal ground.

    This is of course open to suggestion, but I think that something along these lines is absolutely required in order for Clannet to retain stability.

  13. #13
    And yet another suggestion hehe. This is a random one to think about. It lends some new interest to the damage team raids tho hehe.

    Make Clannet raids 140-180 or 190. That leaves all the peeps that are 200 to duke it out amongst themselves in damage teams (in T3 of course).

    I still think you would have enough people for PvP, and those that enjoyed the PvP aspect could go just for that.

    It would also have the effect of making the admins a bit more rotating. Admin's have a bit of a curse on them -- once they have the position for too long, everyone starts hating them. This isn't very right and a real pain. This would get more new people in the system and give players that haven't been around so much a real chance to get themselves known in the community.

    And yeah, this is kind of random, but it is worth thinking about

  14. #14
    2 - Make impossible for someone who roll item X to roll item X the next T, he may be possible to wait a week at least, so more people will get more loot and no always the same cause he is very lucky.
    It should be impossible to roll for the same item that you win ever again (except dual wieldable items that you can have two).

    3 - Nobody must be allowed to roll for a friend, this is too easy to keep loot for a little group of close friends in this way.
    Why not? If one person in my guild needs X thing, and I go for 40 odd raids for him/her to get it...why should I not be allowed to roll for it (taking of course in count that I would not have won that item before, as in previous point).

    Make Clannet raids 140-180 or 190. That leaves all the peeps that are 200 to duke it out amongst themselves in damage teams (in T3 of course).
    I still think 170 should be around the level limit for Tarasque raids. If you ain't have the will to play this game that far, you should not be wearing Tarasque loot (unless you purchase it). 140 is ridiclously low level limit.

    Just my 2 cents.

  15. #15
    Clannet would still be used to:

    1. track points
    2. register people on rolls
    3. assign numbers to people that want to roll on an item

    For example, if 3 people wanted to roll on a item and person A had 10pts, B 20 pts, and C 50 pts, then Clannet would assign A to 1-10, B to 11-30, and C to 31-80.

    Then, the admin would send helpbot a tell
    /tell helpbot roll 1 80
    Just a thought.

    Why should getting an item be based on luck? Just track the points. The one with the highest amount of points will get the items and his/her points will get resetted.

    Another way would be to roll it between only those with those that have the three of the highest amounts of points. For example, X has 75 points and is wanting to roll for Robust Backpack, Y has next highest points at 68 while Z has 58 points. This item will be rolled between these three people only and Y happens to win it. Next time the item appears it will again be rolled with those that have the highest points, those that ain't there have to keep coming to more raids to be able to get the item at some point.

    This would encourage people to gather points for those items they really need. Items will lesser value could be rolled between those people that do not have 50 points or more, or are not waiting for anything particular to appear.

    Getting items items such as:

    Gaily Painted Hood, Smelly Butcherer's Gloves, Robust Backpack, Dragon Chest and Glove of Sufferance should not be based on luck but your will and desire to get it.

    Why should someone get Robust Backpack or GPH when he is on his second or third raid...as there are people that have really saved points for those for a long time, just to have someone with 2 points to get lucky on the roll can be really frustrating.

  16. #16
    Originally posted by North


    I still think 170 should be around the level limit for Tarasque raids. If you ain't have the will to play this game that far, you should not be wearing Tarasque loot (unless you purchase it). 140 is ridiclously low level limit.

    Once people are lvl170, they should be out of Tara and killing more interesting mobs such as Ljotur, Ian's friends, the Pest, The One -- all interesting mods that can drop very useful gear. The only piece of dragon armor that is really great at higher levels is the chest, and then only for MA and engie.

  17. #17
    Perhaps 170 was a bit over the top, but 140 definetly in my opinion is too low. 150+ at least.

  18. #18
    I'd like to see a slightly higher limit (say 150 or so), if only to reduce the number of players who show up. Right now there is often overflow into other dungeons and frankly that's getting a bit ridiculous. If raising the limit by a few levels should remove 5-10 ppl from each raid and reduce the competition a bit. The positive side effect of this change would (hopefully) be reduced pressure on admins.

    As for getting an item based on luck, it's a necessary function for those people who can't come to 100 Tara raids due to their real life schedule. The inclusion of chance means that these people have somewhat of a shot at winning something (albeit small given the numbers).

    Personally I'm undecided on the rolling for others idea. Here is the problem: unless the person rolling for the item declares their intentions, you don't really know if they are rolling the item to give it to someone else. So really the only thing that could be done is to ban rolling for NoDrops for another person. In conjunction with rules regarding rolling the same item twice, I think that this would basically eliminate the desire and the possibility of rolling for other people.
    By the way, I should mention that I don't support rolling for other people because it isn't fair to those who have worked hard to accumulate points only to be foiled because a someone had 10 guildmates rolling for them, increasing their chances beyond whatshould happen. Proxy rolling favours those in large guilds and makes it all too easy for people to obtain items without putting in the time and effort to gain them.

  19. #19

    Re: Proposed Changes To Clannet Thread

    [QUOTE]Originally posted by Thatone
    "Ok here is what me and many nemesis want to improve clannet raid in camelot :

    2 - Make impossible for someone who roll item X to roll item X the next T, he may be possible to wait a week at least, so more people will get more loot and no always the same cause he is very lucky.



    I proposed 5 days but to make this a bit more clear we should specify it in the # of raids that can be held with server resets etc the number can change from week to week. 14 raids (7 x 2) isnt bad if T3 stays damage teams.

    3 - Nobody must be allowed to roll for a friend, this is too easy to keep loot for a little group of close friends in this way.


    This is easily doable. We do not want to hear the whiners complaining about a GPH dropping and a guy with 2 points winning this.


    4 - Make prof item availlable to roll only by this profession, unless there is no one of this prof.


    This is as it should be. EoT = Enforcer, There is a MA thingy also. Adv item = Adventurer.

    5 - Don't raise lvl limit from 140 to 150. Yes some clannet peeps want to do it many middle level are really happy to reach 140 cause they are a little ubber and they can roll for Dragon item !!!! But some high lvl thought they will win more loot if there is less people in the roll.


    Raising it from 140-150 will not lower the amount of people that goto Tara. Making Tara unrollable for T1 and T2 above 170 will not make the number of people smaller. It will just have them level a peep up to 169 and with towers and guild advantages they are equal to a lvl 190ish whatever they are. Those who are very active can level a alt in a few weeks to 140 or less.

    Keeping it the same or raising it 150 at a future specified date (say 3 months) should allow enough time for the casual player who is around 100 to reach 150.
    Elbo - LVL 220 Top of the line: Supreme Creator Engineer

    Making 5 Gem Saba Bracers! Give tell in game!
    Crat - LVL 209! Doc - LVL 170,MA - LVL 106,Fixer - LVL 103,Keeper - LVL 140,, MP - LVL 109, Shade - LVL 165
    QFT: 1800+. EE: 2400+. ME: 2400+. Chem: 1800+ WS: 1900+. Psychology: 1800 Pharm: 1800

    Making QL300 AI Armor and Weapons!


  20. #20
    On the subject of rolling multiplte times for an item, a week or 14 raids or whatever seems a bit of a random choice.

    If you look at the list that Marlark put up, there were actually very few (maybe 5) people that actually won anything twice. This is over a time period of about 2-3 months. So changing the rule to you can't re-roll an item for a week doesn't seem to change anything.

    Personally, I don't think anyone should be rolling for the same item twice, nor should they roll for other people. People should be going to Tara, getting what they need, and leaving to make space for the people that actually need items.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •