URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Ground Zero Gaming Forum
  HTML https://kamcraft.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: Support
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 6283--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: guest215
       Date: September 2, 2015, 4:16 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       No one can place a land claim within a certain radius of yours.
       Friends can place blocks, just not the land claim block within
       the 41x41. The no-land claim radius extends further.
       As far as land claim protection while offline not working my
       question would be... has anyone tried it recently? "Never has"
       is a bold statement; when I have raided bases it has slowed me
       down and the last base I broke into was 11.x.  Now to be fair, I
       didn't do the math on 5x or 25x (which it was at the time). I
       suppose I'll have to test it one someone's base here soon as I
       have long grown weary of speculation.
       All settings should be visible on the right hand side when you
       select the server once after the main menu of 7DTD.
       #Post#: 6286--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: Pfuath
       Date: September 2, 2015, 4:59 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You're right, saying 'never has' might be a stretch, but I'm not
       basing that on nothing. There was a post by one of the devs
       answering a question a year or so ago that said it wasn't
       working, and no update since then.
  HTML https://7daystodie.com/forums/showthread.php?17980-Land-Claim-Offline-Durability-Setting
       Many others have complained about this problem and often blamed
       hackers for sidestepping the issue, where they set a really high
       offline protection and then were surprised when their bases were
       destroyed offline. I think this has masked the issue a bit
       because whenever someone complains about the offline land claim
       not working people just assume it's hackers, and not a
       not-fully-implemented feature.
       It isn't that there is no protection when offline, but rather
       that the server always uses the 'online' value. Indeed land
       claims slow you down, I can also attest to that as of 12.x (but
       not the most recent patch for sure). Offline values were
       definitely not working when my raid was rudely interrupted a
       wipe or two ago.
       #Post#: 6287--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: guest215
       Date: September 2, 2015, 5:02 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I'll be testing that using my special forensics land-claim
       evaluation tool.
       Thanks for bringing up the questions and thanks to Pfuath for
       illuminating the issue, his information was spot-on.
       Thanks to BarbieGirl for the in-game time.
       I went online, asked BarbieGirl to place stone.
       I used a flawless pickax...took 21 swings.
       I asked her to log off and repaired the pickax.
       It took 21 swings.
       So yes it appears it is still pulling the online modifier, so I
       changed it to 50x online just now.
       Cheers!
       #Post#: 6291--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: Devastation22
       Date: September 3, 2015, 9:31 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: h0tr0d link ---
       >
       > I'll be testing that using my special forensics land-claim
       evaluation tool.
       >
       > Thanks for bringing up the questions and thanks to Pfuath for
       illuminating the issue, his information was spot-on.
       >
       > Thanks to BarbieGirl for the in-game time.
       >
       > I went online, asked BarbieGirl to place stone.
       >
       > I used a flawless pickax...took 21 swings.
       > I asked her to log off and repaired the pickax.
       > It took 21 swings.
       >
       > So yes it appears it is still pulling the online modifier, so
       I changed it to 50x online just now.
       >
       > Cheers!
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       H0tr0d not to say that your tests were not valid, I just have
       one question;
       "How long did you wait for her to be logged off?"
       Please note I don't know if that would be an issue or not
       however I do know that in some games(don't ask me which ones)
       they have a timer that is associated with when a person logges
       off.
       Basically it keeps people from realizing they are being attacked
       / invaded and quick logging off to jack up protection.
       Again this may not be in any of the code for the protection
       blocks, however to be through you may want to test that also.
       #Post#: 6293--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: guest215
       Date: September 3, 2015, 2:00 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       You can appeal the test results to Judge Berman.
       On the matter of transparent investigatory methodology we
       cooperated with various "independent" organizations not limited
       to, but including: R.I.P, O.B.E.-4 (commonly known as O.B.E.Y.),
       and team Vote h0tr0d 2016 -- they put the "invest" in
       "investigation.
       We used the highest-quality, most technologically-advanced tools
       known to virtual humankind in what could arguably be considered
       the most challenging and devastating test this planet has ever
       faced. All of these instruments underwent a rigorous inspection
       by the "Hanes 12" inspector, as well as Mikey from the Life®™
       cereal commercials.
       We would ask that the fairness of the process be considered, and
       that several people placed their lives at risk for the benefit
       of all. We would also ask all life be considered because we
       share this planet with all the other species, and focusing on
       our own wishes in some sense of myopic misanthropy is misguided
       at best.
       With latency as a consideration we would argue that if someone
       "logged off" in a rush to avoid being attacked they are pansies
       and deserve all they get. Additionally we would like to cite
       exhibit A where if you follow this thread you would see that it
       was established that the online protection modifier was applied
       as the offline modifier as well. To wit; if the online modifier
       is 50x it would also be 50x offline, therefore no change in
       protection regardless of a player being online/offline or having
       hastily-logged online/offline would occur.
       We thank you for your cooperation in this matter and cite
       Article 46 whereas h0tr0d has the right to rule arbitrarily in
       any matter concerning the integrity of the game as it relates to
       Ground Zero Gaming.
       Vote h0tr0d 2016 -- we never start a land war in Asia.
       #Post#: 6294--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Question about the rules of this server
   DIR By: KaRnAgE
       Date: September 3, 2015, 3:27 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       i'm confused was this a response to the question or a campaign
       speech Admin h0tr0d from the community of GZ seed 8 CCCP Test
       :) ;)
       
       #Post#: 6295--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: guest215
       Date: September 3, 2015, 7:54 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Yes
  HTML http://www.gannett-cdn.com/experiments/usatoday/Sports/2015-09-03-nfl-brady-decision.pdf
       #Post#: 6299--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: KaRnAgE
       Date: September 4, 2015, 2:00 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       ty Admin for your response this really clears up you previous
       statements and may i add
  HTML http://law2.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/Simpson/cochranclose.html
       #Post#: 6301--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: guest215
       Date: September 4, 2015, 4:57 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote ---
       > New England Patriots quarterback Tom Brady's four-game
       suspension was nullified by federal judge Richard Berman in a
       ruling announced Thursday.
       --- End Quote ---
       --- Quote ---
       > On May II, 2015, Vincent sent a (separate) "disciplinary
       decision" letter to Brady, stating:
       > "The Commissioner has authorized me to inform you of the
       discipline that, pursuant to his
       > authority under Article 46 of the CBA [Collective Bargaining
       Agreement], has been imposed on
       > you for your role in the use of under-inflated footballs by
       the Patriots in this year's AFC
       > Championship Game. This activity represents a violation of
       longstanding playing rules
       --- End Quote ---
       #Post#: 6303--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Questio about the rules of this server
   DIR By: Devastation22
       Date: September 4, 2015, 8:23 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: h0tr0d link ---
       >
       > You can appeal the test results to Judge Berman.
       >
       > On the matter of transparent investigatory methodology we
       cooperated with various "independent" organizations not limited
       to, but including: R.I.P, O.B.E.-4 (commonly known as O.B.E.Y.),
       and team Vote h0tr0d 2016 -- they put the "invest" in
       "investigation.
       >
       > We used the highest-quality, most technologically-advanced
       tools known to virtual humankind in what could arguably be
       considered the most challenging and devastating test this planet
       has ever faced. All of these instruments underwent a rigorous
       inspection by the "Hanes 12" inspector, as well as Mikey from
       the Life®™ cereal commercials.
       >
       > We would ask that the fairness of the process be considered,
       and that several people placed their lives at risk for the
       benefit of all. We would also ask all life be considered because
       we share this planet with all the other species, and focusing on
       our own wishes in some sense of myopic misanthropy is misguided
       at best.
       >
       > With latency as a consideration we would argue that if someone
       "logged off" in a rush to avoid being attacked they are pansies
       and deserve all they get. Additionally we would like to cite
       exhibit A where if you follow this thread you would see that it
       was established that the online protection modifier was applied
       as the offline modifier as well. To wit; if the online modifier
       is 50x it would also be 50x offline, therefore no change in
       protection regardless of a player being online/offline or having
       hastily-logged online/offline would occur.
       >
       > We thank you for your cooperation in this matter and cite
       Article 46 whereas h0tr0d has the right to rule arbitrarily in
       any matter concerning the integrity of the game as it relates to
       Ground Zero Gaming.
       >
       > Vote h0tr0d 2016 -- we never start a land war in Asia.
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       Sir, I applaud your vigorous testing methods and was not
       implying that you were slacking in your efforts.
       I would agree that anyone "War logging" are pansies however I
       was only trying to verify that the possibility of code existed
       to counteract war logging.
       Yes we did note the increase to the protection again my original
       post was more about examining all of the data from your original
       test... If in fact the code of the game takes into account war
       logging and does not apply the "Off line" protection for a
       duration after someone logs then it could be working as intended
       and therefore the increase to the on line setting may not be
       needed.
       Please don't take my inquiries as attacks on your character or
       methodology of testing, I was merely trying to ensure all data
       of the tests were looked at.
       As for voting for H0tr0d in 2015, What is your platform?? Xbow
       plans for all?? if so count my vote!
       *****************************************************
       Page 2 of 3
   DIR Previous Page
   DIR Next Page