MechHero Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Author Topic: Sitter's Privileges  (Read 4769 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Com Guards

  • Raptor
  • *
  • Posts: 1
Sitter's Privileges
« on: February 02, 2015, 04:47:57 AM »

This idea has been floating around in my head for a while now. This small factor has been driving me crazy, and a few simple solutions could end a lot of potential drama.

Having the ability to set what a sitter may do.

Now i know it would be next to impossible to implement this into the gameplay factors (harvesting, recycling, ect), however I am mainly addressing the use of the account features, mainly the shoutbox and messages. I have come across situations where players are sabotaging other players accounts. From selling items/res that they should not be, to even recycling Res and Mechs. It sucks to have that happen. HOWEVER, this is a team-based game (like it or not) and when it comes to alliances, it can be difficult to call that player out in the alliance. Why? Because these sitters have the ability to delete messages and reports.

Sitters having the ability to talk in the name of your account in shoutboxes can also be hazardous if the person turns out to be a spy or a dick. They have the ability to cause a lot of drama in the chat, leaving other members to question your credibility, and possibly have them turn against you.

I would like to suggest having the ability to either turn on/off some of these features, or we disable them all together.
Logged

meat

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 53
    • Email
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #1 on: February 02, 2015, 01:14:34 PM »

Having the sitter's name show up in chat instead of the player's name would be nice. Or at least it says Player's name(sitter) instead of just player's name.

I don't allow a sitter that I do not know to sit in my account but if I did; I can see how what you are proposing would be nice.

Having the active part determined from the player's login times instead of the sitter's would be nice to know as well.

If I remember correctly; a sitter does not have ability to delete messages btw.
« Last Edit: February 03, 2015, 01:23:29 PM by meat »
Logged

kly

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 68
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #2 on: February 03, 2015, 06:21:42 PM »

Sitter has no ability to delete messages.....


Most important tool in this game, without winning is impossible, is SPYING.....


Logged

Dean

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • Email
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #3 on: February 03, 2015, 07:27:27 PM »

Hate damn spies  >:(
Logged

Neo

  • translations_ro
  • Nemesis
  • *
  • Posts: 479
  • Kill'em with FIRE!
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #4 on: February 03, 2015, 10:59:16 PM »

Hi there Krusty, see you're angry as usual  ;D

Dean

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • Email
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #5 on: February 03, 2015, 11:19:38 PM »

Hi,
 Not always angry..just angry at spy scam...rest is ok...i appreciate strong, active players who play fair.
Spies are lower form of life :)
Logged

Enneagon

  • SpiderTank
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #6 on: February 04, 2015, 07:33:19 PM »

Hate damn spies  >:(
In highly social team strategy game like this spying is a natural part of it, so deal with it.

Most important tool in this game, without winning is impossible, is SPYING.....
You are exaggerating.
As said above it emerges naturally often, and if given certain circumstances may become extremely potent tool - a really good spy may end up as sitter in key positions for example (but one may also end up in *gray* area to exploit those additional powers - like peeking in alive accounts using old or shared passwords).
Other than that almost all information can be obtained in other or indirect ways.
Spying helps, but is not decisive, good alliance can win without spies and even despite being spying on.
(Of course by good alliance I mean one that not end up with 8+ accounts accessible from outside like Dean's Avengers in last server, lol)
« Last Edit: February 04, 2015, 07:41:30 PM by Enneagon »
Logged

Dean

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • Email
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #7 on: February 04, 2015, 08:09:49 PM »

Quote
(Of course by good alliance I mean one that not end up with 8+ accounts accessible from outside like Dean's Avengers in last server, lol)

That is way i will not make any alliance in the future :-\
Logged

Dean

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 59
    • Email
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #8 on: February 04, 2015, 08:11:41 PM »

*why*  not way ....fat fingers ;D
Logged

Enneagon

  • SpiderTank
  • ***
  • Posts: 336
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #9 on: February 05, 2015, 01:05:05 AM »

Back to the topic... :)

This idea has been floating around in my head for a while now. This small factor has been driving me crazy, and a few simple solutions could end a lot of potential drama.

Having the ability to set what a sitter may do.

...

I was almost about to start a topic on this myself...

Ideally, of course, you never assign a sitter you not trust. But in reality you sometimes do, due to various circumstances. And even for those who you nominally trust, you sometimes want to restrict some features or, in contrary, enable some that are by default restricted. Yes, the very few things sitters can not do account for more than half of cases passwords get shared, I believe (and absolute majority of cases it happens for alive and active accounts).

For first, the few things sitter can NOT do (as far I known):
 - keep abandoned account from auto-deletion, and cancel deletion -- this is natural, no discussion here;
 - rename cities -- you normally want it be this way, still there is some (very rare) situations a sitter may only beg gods he could;
 - raze buildings -- you normally want it be this way, still there is some (quite common) situations a sitter may only beg gods he could;
 - delete inbox messages -- but can sitter delete reports? not sure, honestly... normally I would want to allow, but not always;
 - start Anti-Building attacks -- you normally want it be this way (especially when you are target :P)... or, you finally give up *fair play* and share password (hopefully changing it first for this, and back after when it not actual anymore). Chance active player will end up this way in tense endgame is probably even above 50% by my experience and observations. I understand why this is restricted by default, but making it a checkbox may make *common* password sharing way less occurring and hence help paint it as much harder crime... hopefully.

Now, things I might want to restrict sitter from doing:
 - spend experience points of my mechs (on stupid/unwanted choices) -- well, this is indeed my first most priority. Honestly, I don't know why a sitter could ever be able to do it at all, save for few cases when you educate a newbie... but you may as well tell him to do that and this, then. Any scenario a sitter may indeed need to do this is way over in the gray side of sitter abuse in my opinion.
 - start new buildings -- as much as you may want (and often indeed order) sitters to build for you, sometimes them doing it haphazardly may be a GREAT pain... Well, normally you speak with your sitter(s) about, and then again, and again... I can imagine switching this back and forth three times a week or about, and it may even end up to be restricted most of the time. But also it must be allowed by default. For obvious reasons, I think.
- play pranks on shoutbox -- well, it not that bad, normally you don't need to worry about this. And there are some concerns about disclosing sitter names this way, it may have strategic and diplomatic implications - considering spies, in all forms and combinations (one may be sitter in hostile alliance and start talk for any reason (or just by human error) or there is a spy in your alliance and, despite it usually not too hard to guess sitters after a while, giving it out right away is not good). So right solution here might be some anonymous sitter marker what can be removed or made named by host will. But if anything else may be in effect for all sitters at once, at least this option should be possible to be set for each... Else it may undermine the most fair spy option there is, and/or summon unwelcome alliance policies about this.
- read/write my mail -- so, normally you trust it will not happen... or trust sitter(s) to the point you don't care anyway. More, sometimes it is exactly what you want them to do. Still it begs for configuration possibilities. If I don't care, I may want all messages to remain marked as unread until I indeed read them, or, if I do care, but still allow, I may want them to be unable to re-set messages as unread instead.
- use my mechs as reinforcements ...randomly -- well, honestly I rather would kick from alliance anyone caught restricting this... still, did you really never wanted you could, even despite obvious risk of consequences? It easy to say, you could just speak your will beforehand.

I likely must stop here, or this will grow way too big and chaotic... or...



OK, so my full draft dream list of features under "sitter permissions" section... as rich as I can think off ;)
(Category - feature - option_1 | option_2 | default_option | currently_restricted -- *Comment)

Social features
 - shoutbox*** - free* | marked** | named | forbidden -- *current; **line is marked as said by sitter somehow, but sitter name is not revealed; ***If anything else may be in effect for both sitters at once, at least this option should be possible to be set for each... or maybe whole "Social features" block double for each
 - messages, can read* - Yes | No -- *all other messages, something options require "yes" here
 - messages, can write - Yes | Marked* | No -- *messages can be send, but contain unavoidable marker indicating they are send by sitter 
 - messages, set as unread - always | choice* | never -- *current, sitter can read and then choose to set msg as unread
 - messages, delete - Yes | NO
 - reports, set as unread - always | choice | No
 - reports, delete - Yes | No
 - activity indicator - Yes* | No** -- *current, **means, timers for "green" and "yellow" don't reset by sitter activity, "blue" is still shown, but may switch to "red" directly (for example)

City handling
 - rename cities - Free | Name_X* | NO -- *Can change auto-generated city name, once
 - raze Buildings - Yes | NO
 - build* Buildings - Yes | No -- *I mean, ability to start a new building in currently empty slot
 - upgrade Buildings - Yes | No

Production
 - Mech factory - Yes | No
 - Engineering facility - Yes | No
 - MBB vehicle - Yes | No
 - Armory, conventional items - Yes | No
 - Armory, AB guns - Yes | No
 - Artifact enabled items - Yes | No

Recycling center
 - use harvesters - Yes | No -- *I can't think any reasonable cause to set this to "no", but why not...
 - start transform - Yes | No
 - cancel transform - Yes | No
 - recycle items - Yes | No
 - recycle units - Yes | No
 - cancel recycling -Yes | No

Mech handling
 - change mech setups - Yes | No -- *all other options in this category require this
 - create templates - Yes | No
 - delete templates - Yes | No* -- *must allow to create templates to change this
 - spend experience points - Yes* | No -- *current
 - rename mechs - Yes | No* -- *always can change non-unique names. Identical names can happen in auto-naming if some mechs are in recovery (bug)
 - assign groups - Yes | No

Missions
 - move mechs - Free | Self* | No** -- *only to other cities of the same player, can't reinforce; **always can start patrol
 - attack NPC - Yes | No
 - attack players - Yes | No
 - attack AB* - Yes | NO -- *send Anti-Building attacks, require "attack players" to be changed. This restriction is main reason for password sharing besides account abandonment.
 - send scans - Yes | No

Flags
 - set/remove Red flags - Yes | No
 - set/remove Green flags - Yes | No
 - set/remove Blue flags - Yes | No

Trade and transfer
 - create offers - Free | Alliance only | No
 - accept offers - Free | Alliance only | No
 - transfer*** - Free | Alliance only | Self only | No* -- *Yes, this option defeats the common sense of having sitter in most cases :P

***There a longer comment about transfers, I often don't want to restrict it, but want to know what exactly is being transfered and from where exactly. Even if transfer reports are available, they only show what is received and not what is shipped away, and only show player not city as source. And Action history only show a transfer happened, but not what was sent. Both are rather problems with reporting I want to write about too... in whole another topic, perhaps.

Well, here I will end, for now. Almost sure whole another sections can be added, perhaps... ;)

Setting it all for each sitter, so that you can have one plenipotentiary and one heavily restricted (for example) would be even better, but may lead to unwelcome complexity... of user interface... I do realize each option on it self have cost in form of additional code and there may be some that are not easy to implement at all. Nor all really necessary.

Since the restrictions may vary wildly (given this huge list), these settings should be available (read only, of course) for the sitter to see.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2015, 01:28:44 AM by Enneagon »
Logged

meat

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 53
    • Email
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #10 on: February 06, 2015, 01:43:58 PM »

Well, while we all know that password sharing happens; a reminder is in order from the "Users Duties".

"A user may not hold several accounts on one game server at the same time. The account is assigned to one physical player only. The user must ensure that the account's password is kept in secret and must change it regularly for security reasons. Sharing or transferring the account or the password to other persons is forbidden. The player may only share the account using the mechanism of sitters. A violation of above provisions may lead to immediate freeze or deletion of all player's accounts. The player takes an exclusive responsibility for all actions performed by the sitters on his/her account. The user may request to change his/her nickname in the game only once and only during the protection period."

I am not in favor of changing things just because some people won't follow the rules. Honestly, some of the things you would like to see are only asking for more multiple accounts to be opened instead of having less of them!
Logged

meat

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 53
    • Email
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #11 on: February 24, 2015, 02:13:38 PM »

If you really wanted to make a worthwhile change to sitter access; how about sitter access only granted to member of your own or "united" alliance?
Logged

kly

  • Puma
  • *
  • Posts: 68
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #12 on: March 21, 2015, 05:41:36 AM »

I would erase this sitter thing, you are not active? don't play. sharing password? accounts closed. NO exceptions......But this way would be 35-50 players on a server....:(
Logged

bofh999

  • Athlas
  • **
  • Posts: 94
Re: Sitter's Privileges
« Reply #13 on: August 20, 2015, 09:24:27 AM »

Sitter has no ability to delete messages.....


Most important tool in this game, without winning is impossible, is SPYING.....




After a loong time i want to comment this because it was never revealed.
Im sorry but youre wrong. YOu dont need Spies but you need counterintelligence.

Back in My Mechhero Days we had a massive Spy Problem in our Alliance.
So what we did was i setup a private Teamspeak Server, gave only very trusted innercore Members access and used the shoutbox to spread sometimes real (non important) information and when it counted bad intel - very very bad intel. Some of it had some real impact :)

Funny thing was we had i think one spy bevore the endgame and none during the endgame (still noone believed us) but since the other where not really coordinated or organised with each other those where mostly useless at least in a tactical and strategic manner. However we got a lot of intel how other players responded to our action which was very very funny,...

but our new secure channel on teamspeak was priceless.
Logged