Harlequin
Morkin Member
Hey nonny nonny!
Posts: 1,515
|
Post by Harlequin on Mar 20, 2007 21:37:42 GMT
I've wrestled with my conscience for a full 30 seconds and have decided to use it straight away ;D Well done hard-shelled-clawed-one
|
|
n00bs
Public Area Guest
Posts: 202
|
Post by n00bs on Mar 20, 2007 21:55:35 GMT
Raids map doesn't break the rules. The first bolded bit is clear, if it's not in the game it doesn't matter. I have my maps that take no time to update and generate only 1 'hit' per player I want showing up. It's not in-game so it is ok. As for the 'exorbitant number' he really ought to specify that, is 1/sec ok? Hell I click more often than that when I'm online, what about 10/s? That's certainly somewhat automated but if 1000 players are online its nothing. I agree that the first part is clear, but I think we disagree on what is clear about it. I read "in game" as something that has an active component, like something that requires clicking through pages to gather information. As opposed to outside the game, where you can process the data you have gathered. Simply stated I think the rule says "Don't automate clicking." And 1000 players using this tool could produce quite a few hits. If done right, it requires 16 hits to gather information about an ocean (if done wrong, which the 80 second runtime hints is this case, it would take 100 hits, one for each group). I have been told that the numbers at the bottom of each page represent processing time in seconds. To bring up a map takes between .2 and .5 seconds and is one of the most expensive operations you can do. So 1000 players using this tool one time each day could take up an hour or more of processing time. You didn't think you were the only one who was going to use something like this if it was legal, did you?
|
|
|
Post by Rocklobster on Mar 21, 2007 1:12:59 GMT
Though my name is RockLobster, you can call me Canadian Ninja
|
|
eproxy
Luxor Admin
Oceans old & new
Posts: 1,941
|
Post by eproxy on Mar 21, 2007 10:43:53 GMT
You didn't think you were the only one who was going to use something like this if it was legal, did you? No but apart from testing it I have no use for colo-tools on .com, and if only the Triumvirate knows about it thats at most 60 people with access, many of which would be in the same position as me and not use the tool very often.
|
|
|
Post by bishop on Mar 21, 2007 12:47:43 GMT
Raids map doesn't break the rules. The first bolded bit is clear, if it's not in the game it doesn't matter. I have my maps that take no time to update and generate only 1 'hit' per player I want showing up. It's not in-game so it is ok. As for the 'exorbitant number' he really ought to specify that, is 1/sec ok? Hell I click more often than that when I'm online, what about 10/s? That's certainly somewhat automated but if 1000 players are online its nothing. This argument is going around in circles a bit, but for the record I don't agree. I don't think the number of hits is a problem — it's the automated processes, for data extraction, that I believe is not allowed. But in any case my priniciples on this matter aren't so strong that I will turn down a good opportunity that doesn't really do much harm, and I think RAID's map and Rocklobster's colony finder are both very nice programs.
|
|
eproxy
Luxor Admin
Oceans old & new
Posts: 1,941
|
Post by eproxy on Mar 22, 2007 1:35:59 GMT
Just think of all the ones that DIGG have anyway
|
|
|
Post by Rocklobster on Mar 22, 2007 1:45:41 GMT
Yeah. This was slapped together without much effort, to my knowledge. On ik.uk, every single allaince has something like this, or at least the top 20+ all do. Ive no doubt the same applies to .com .
|
|
eproxy
Luxor Admin
Oceans old & new
Posts: 1,941
|
Post by eproxy on Mar 22, 2007 15:19:37 GMT
I quite like the current tool that Nexus is using to claim Nato's isles
|
|
|
Post by coruscation on Mar 22, 2007 20:05:17 GMT
Exaltations ;D
|
|
blazed
Luxor Member
Posts: 606
|
Post by blazed on Mar 22, 2007 22:56:46 GMT
If you find an isle thats unowned and built up, but not going to take it could you post it here or on the 'inactive isle targetting' thread
|
|
Harlequin
Morkin Member
Hey nonny nonny!
Posts: 1,515
|
Post by Harlequin on Apr 2, 2007 20:53:07 GMT
New password system?
|
|
Harlequin
Morkin Member
Hey nonny nonny!
Posts: 1,515
|
Post by Harlequin on Apr 3, 2007 8:49:47 GMT
New password system? It seems to have sorted itself out now.
|
|
|
Post by DrieZ/Cesium on May 27, 2007 8:56:21 GMT
It doesn't work anymore..
|
|
|
Post by Haymaker on May 28, 2007 10:52:50 GMT
Indeed it does not. I lament checking for isles manually, it takes effort and stuff, and as a result I end up with like 5 idle colonisation ships before I think "Huh. . . maybe I ought to use some of these. But. . . I am already in my pyjamas." Anyone know of another simple colotool like this one? And for the record, eproxy, your argument for using this thing sucks, but let's use it anyway
|
|
McGoogus
Luxor Member
McGorgeous
Posts: 548
|
Post by McGoogus on May 28, 2007 15:03:57 GMT
I don't know much about coding but I was able to tweak a map tool that b3s gave us access to when :VI: merged. I'm not sure it's 100% legal but then again those lines aren't very clear. www.sl8r.ch/ik/You'll have to edit the code a bit yourself if you want, or it will work as is. All I did was go through and change where it said 'DIGG' to 'FoM', and 'b3s' to ''. I'm sure some of you know way more than I do and can tweak it how you like. The top code is the better one imo. I never used the FoM one that's currently down so I'm not sure how it compares to it, but hopefully this will suffice for the time being. Any questions feel free to ask me.
|
|