Limiting Merchants

[mahawirasd]

Landon Wrote:PS: Any experienced p server player knows the population is usually at least?most?half of the total population.

fixed.


-w-

[Former-GM-Circe]

I don't know where this "Forums are dead" idea is coming from.
As someone who is required to read everrryyy single post, I can tell you there is a lot of posts going on, though quite a bunch are in guild areas, as always.

The limiting merchants per IP idea makes me want to pull my hair out.
The time involved in policing that would be horrendous.
We'd need to go through every merchant, manually check their IP, then manually check the IP of every other account on that IP to see if there is any other @aters on the same IP.
Merchant by merchant, account my account.

I don't see anything wrong with merchants myself, other than the stagnant stock.
RO generally only loads what is on the screen at any one time.
So, when you enter Pront, you are not loading every single merchant in Pront. You're loading those in your line of sight.

As for "Getting a true idea of population", you can do that via the CP, if you wish. To basically.. limit the extent of the economy to save a bit of manual counting is eh to me.
.. Not that even counting would give a true idea of population, unless every single player is online at the same time.

Yes, I know most of you are like "But we didn't agree with this idea anyway, Circe", but I like reasons, and this means if it comes up again, you guys can be "Look at this Circe post!". ;D


As for the other idea. I personally like it , but I'm only a single GM. So don't take that as a yay or nay.
(However, I think it'd be fun with a random timer. Say, it randomly assigns a time between say... 72-84 hours when you @at and doesn't tell you what it is. This would fix people spot camping anyway. Cycle of shops as well as cycle of items.)

In a nutshell, we have read it and know the idea/suggestion exists.

[mahawirasd]

+1 Circe. Great idea on the randomizer. Shouldn't be that hard once someone gets most of the coding done....

sadly eA still remains a vast jungle of barely decipherable codes for me as i seem to find that scripts for some particular stuff (especially those related to general functions) seems to be contained in several other files... /spin;


-w-

[Kittie]

Wow i haven't even thought about your randomizer idea Circe, its amazingly good :o

That's the best way to keep prevending people to set time clocks to hold spots (as in if you know it was almost 72 hours ago you set your merch up, you will reput your shop up before the 72 hours ran out so you can still hold your spot)

I personally never disliked the merchies (exept for the lag prontera causes me but i can deal with that) and for the server population, i don't care how big/small it is as long i have fun playing here. Anyone who has played here for a while knows the server population is way smaller then @who shows, but who cares..? Why do we need to know the exact amount of players minues the merchants who are @at? Could be me but as long as i enjoy playing here i couldn't really care if the amount of "real" players is 100 or 400....

[Ngjoko]

+1 to the katz :3

[Matrim Cauthon Jr]

I am with Kittie. I've never needed to know or care about the real population.

[Fabre]

+1 circe for the randomizer.

and yea the ip address would hurt a few folk, since like my self and grim and magi, we all paly using the same router. and that would hinder one of us from @ating. but i really think if this idea was implemented it would be a unique feature for heRO, and like many unique features may attract folks to join us.(i for one joined because i could get wings without donating-ex.). and we could all use shops changing more often it would help spread the money around and there would be a point of waiting for things to be priced right.(as of now if something is way op i give up on the idea of getting it at all, and wait for server reboot thing that happens rareley(unless its holiday seasons).

i have put alot of thought into why i wouldnt like this idea, but sadly for as angry a person i am in real life, and how easy it is for me to hate all of everything, i just cant think of any reason this is not a great idea, especially now with circes' addition to it.

this is probably the first good idea discussion ive seen in such a long time, i hope its one that the GM team finds acceptable as well, and maybe implements it.

luvs all you heROs

[Serenity]

The randomization is not a bad idea, but if I know the minimum time is 72 hours, nothing prevents me from "setting a clock for 72 hours" as someone said. Every 72 hours, I can refresh my merchants (whether or not I still have time on the clock), and I'll be guaranteed at least another 72 hours.

[micer]

Serenity Wrote:The randomization is not a bad idea, but if I know the minimum time is 72 hours, nothing prevents me from "setting a clock for 72 hours" as someone said.??Every 72 hours, I can refresh my merchants (whether or not I still have time on the clock), and I'll be guaranteed at least another 72 hours.

But at least that would force the player to at least refresh his shop with new stock/prices, which would be achieving the timer's main purpose. The spot reshuffling is just an added bonus.

[Aaronock]

micer Wrote:

Serenity Wrote:The randomization is not a bad idea, but if I know the minimum time is 72 hours, nothing prevents me from "setting a clock for 72 hours" as someone said.??Every 72 hours, I can refresh my merchants (whether or not I still have time on the clock), and I'll be guaranteed at least another 72 hours.

But at least that would force the player to at least refresh his shop with new stock/prices, which would be achieving the timer's main purpose. The spot reshuffling is just an added bonus.

Yah pretty much what Fly said. :O