The Tool Age of NS

[[violet]]

It is trivial in terms of storage space to provide all players unlimited space, so the scarcity NationStates provides is purely artificial.

This is a wonky way to look at it. We put two years of development into a new telegrams system that more than doubled TG storage space for every nation. Just because we didn't charge everyone $0.25 for it doesn't mean it poofed into existence and costs nothing to run. You're assuming a baseline in which the site is funded by a silent benefactor and people (me?) are guaranteed to work on it for free.

The reality is that almost every web game that was popular in 2002 has ceased to exist, and we're still here, because we neither sold out nor went bankrupt. That's a fine line to tread. But it's what we have to continue to do.

In addition, purchasing site supporter status does not confer that status upon your puppets, which many nations have. I would have to pay hundreds, if not thousands, to obtain unlimited space on all the puppets. I'm sure many players are in a similar situation.

Yes, and this was actually planned, but we don't have a puppet management feature. (In fact that feature slipped down my priority list due to NS++, since at least it's available to players in that form.) Although the idea was to remove the ads on puppet accounts, not expand TG storage. Does anyone actually want to store hundreds of telegrams on hundreds of puppets?

If NationStates were capable of conferring supporter status onto puppets, I could be convinced to drop my plans for that feature. My goal is not to compete with NationStates, but to expand it.

Which is a great sentiment, but I don't think you get there by saying, "Code this or else I'll blow up your revenue stream." And I don't think it's expanding the site when you simply copy something we developed and is already a part of the site. It would attract users to NS++, of course, and be good for them individually, if they don't mind trusting you not to read their mail. But as someone who looks out for the health of this site in the medium to long-term, I don't think it's adding anything, and I don't think it's helpful.

[Shadow Afforess]

It is trivial in terms of storage space to provide all players unlimited space, so the scarcity NationStates provides is purely artificial.

This is a wonky way to look at it. We put two years of development into a new telegrams system that more than doubled TG storage space for every nation. Just because we didn't charge everyone $0.25 for it doesn't mean it poofed into existence and costs nothing to run. You're assuming a baseline in which the site is funded by a silent benefactor and people (me?) are guaranteed to work on it for free.

I understand there was an initial cost to create it. But the fixed operating cost today is nearly zero. That is my point. If you decided to magically give all users unlimited telegram space tomorrow, your costs would not be any higher than they are today. That is the definition of artificial scarcity.

In addition, purchasing site supporter status does not confer that status upon your puppets, which many nations have. I would have to pay hundreds, if not thousands, to obtain unlimited space on all the puppets. I'm sure many players are in a similar situation.

Yes, and this was actually planned, but we don't have a puppet management feature. (In fact that feature slipped down my priority list due to NS++, since at least it's available to players in that form.) Although the idea was to remove the ads on puppet accounts, not expand TG storage. Does anyone actually want to store hundreds of telegrams on hundreds of puppets?

Clearly, people do, or the feature would not be in demand...

But don't take my word for it. Surely you have stats on telegram box utilization. What percentage of them are full?

The other reason I want this is I lost thousands and thousands of telegrams when my previous nation was banned. Historical documents, early player conversations were in there. In my opinion, you burned my personal library of Alexandria. I take great offense at the loss. I am not eager to trust your storage of my content, either!

If NationStates were capable of conferring supporter status onto puppets, I could be convinced to drop my plans for that feature. My goal is not to compete with NationStates, but to expand it.

Which is a great sentiment, but I don't think you get there by saying, "Code this or else I'll blow up your revenue stream." And I don't think it's expanding the site when you simply copy something we developed and is already a part of the site. It would attract users to NS++, of course, and be good for them individually, if they don't mind trusting you not to read their mail. But as someone who looks out for the health of this site in the medium to long-term, I don't think it's adding anything, and I don't think it's helpful.

You can dice it any way you want, but I am technically in the clear here. There is no copyright on ideas, only on implementations. And I'd like to further comment that, your opinions on the feature are inherently biased. You are in no position to judge whether more telegram space is helpful to the NationStates community - you already have unlimited space. You probably never have had to lose a telegram ever. You can't know how it feels. I would bet copious amounts of money the community would be hugely in favor of unlimited space.

Finally, I agree trust is a major problem. I've held off on the feature for so long because it is the major problem. I originally planned on using Dropbox's API to store telegrams in a users Dropbox account. But, 6 months ago, when I was originally researching the feature, I discovered Dropbox requires you to use https pages to use their API (for security reasons). So I shelved the plans. Now, NationStates does support HTTPS. So I can resume work. The goal is to have users optionally choose to connect their Dropbox account, and then NS++ syncs it there, so it never touches my server in the first place. Or they can not use the feature, and keep their regular inbox.

BTW, to be frank, it doesn't feel like you (the staff) are trying to work with me anymore. I feel like I try to meet your suggestions, and I don't get anything in return. I haven't for months. You could have easily suggested, "Hey Afforess, what if you just limit the telegram backups to existing site supporters & their puppets", and I might have agreed to it. But instead I am the bad guy. For what? Suggesting ideas that I haven't even acted on yet?!

Ok, I'm out of here for today, or I'll say something I shouldn't.

[[violet]]

If you decided to magically give all users unlimited telegram space tomorrow, your costs would not be any higher than they are today. That is the definition of artificial scarcity.

But you're still assuming a situation in which the site somehow continues onward, generating new features, while no-one pays for it. I don't think that's practical.

BTW, to be frank, it doesn't feel like you (the staff) are trying to work with me anymore. I feel like I try to meet your suggestions, and I don't get anything in return. I haven't for months. You could have easily suggested, "Hey Afforess, what if you just limit the telegram backups to existing site supporters & their puppets", and I might have agreed to it. But instead I am the bad guy. For what? Suggesting ideas that I haven't even acted on yet?!

I'm not calling you the bad guy. I'm pretty sure I haven't said that anywhere. I'm just saying I personally don't think it's good for the site if you set your sights on simply copying the (very few) parts of NS that we use to generate revenue and offer them for free. That seems pretty obvious to me. It's not a threat to take you down or anything. I just don't think it's correct to call that "expanding" on the site.

Getting a bit NS++-specific now, but I'm not sure what it is that you think I should have given you lately that I haven't. I spend a lot more time on NS++ than any other third-party tool, that's for sure. And what I do for third-party tool authors such as yourself is provide a platform on which they can build. It's not my job to help you plan (or negotiate??) what features you will build. That's up to you. I will certainly give input (like this) if I see you asking for it and I have something to offer. But I'm not sure why you are shirty right now.

[DWAsnia]

In addition, purchasing site supporter status does not confer that status upon your puppets, which many nations have. I would have to pay hundreds, if not thousands, to obtain unlimited space on all the puppets. I'm sure many players are in a similar situation.

Yes, and this was actually planned, but we don't have a puppet management feature. (In fact that feature slipped down my priority list due to NS++, since at least it's available to players in that form.) Although the idea was to remove the ads on puppet accounts, not expand TG storage. Does anyone actually want to store hundreds of telegrams on hundreds of puppets?

I have had several different nations in different regional governments and even for a small ministerial job for one term, 20 telegrams doesn't cut it. I have site supporter on one account, but I wish I could have it on other puppets. I doubt people would store hundreds of TG's on hundreds of puppets, but hundreds of TG's on a half-dozen puppets is realistic.

[Wordy]

I tend to forward important telegrams on puppets to my main nation that is a site supporter. I have postmaster so can create a folder for each puppet.

[[violet]]

I have site supporter on one account, but I wish I could have it on other puppets. I doubt people would store hundreds of TG's on hundreds of puppets, but hundreds of TG's on a half-dozen puppets is realistic.

Okay, good to know.

[All Good People]

It would be handy, yes. I have site supporter on three nations. Two of my own, and one I gifted to the region Founder nation. I was hesitant to purchase a second site supporter account, but it was needed.

Although, perhaps I shouldn't say 'needed'. We certainly managed with a small inbox for years. That's part of what drove the need for offsite forums.

[Shadow Afforess]

But you're still assuming a situation in which the site somehow continues onward, generating new features, while no-one pays for it. I don't think that's practical.

I guess my fundamental problem is that it seems like the expanded telegram inboxes are already "old" features. To you, expanded telegram inboxes are still new, they are barely a year old. To me, NationStates++ is barely a year old, and it's ancient. We have a huge gap in perspective.

I'm not calling you the bad guy. I'm pretty sure I haven't said that anywhere.

It's just the "vibe" I get.

I'm just saying I personally don't think it's good for the site if you set your sights on simply copying the (very few) parts of NS that we use to generate revenue and offer them for free. That seems pretty obvious to me. It's not a threat to take you down or anything. I just don't think it's correct to call that "expanding" on the site.

At the most basic level, it is fulfilling a need for a feature. The demand is there, and the current situation is not good enough.

But to be honest, I don't think NationStates++ can add the feature anywhere as well as a native implementation could. NationStates++ could only sync telegrams when you log in, so if you don't touch a puppet in a while, it could miss telegrams. Plus, Dropbox integration adds new complexity and requirements for users, (and the rule of thumb is for each additional step in the process, 1/2 of people will not do it).

If there was a way to "export" our existing telegram folders in its entirety, I wouldn't see a need for NationStates++ to add any expanded inboxes.

But I'm not sure why you are shirty right now.

Just ignore my attitude. I'm just an unfriendly paranoid person by nature. I think I was nice once, but then I stepped outside.

[Friendlypenguins]

I have site supporter on one account, but I wish I could have it on other puppets. I doubt people would store hundreds of TG's on hundreds of puppets, but hundreds of TG's on a half-dozen puppets is realistic.

Okay, good to know.

If sharing the site supporter status across nations isn't feasible, could we at least transfer it to another nation? I could use the status on another nation rather than this one but I don't want to pay for it again*.

*In my defense I've bought alot of stamps.

[Parhe]

In addition, purchasing site supporter status does not confer that status upon your puppets, which many nations have. I would have to pay hundreds, if not thousands, to obtain unlimited space on all the puppets. I'm sure many players are in a similar situation.

Yes, and this was actually planned, but we don't have a puppet management feature. (In fact that feature slipped down my priority list due to NS++, since at least it's available to players in that form.) Although the idea was to remove the ads on puppet accounts, not expand TG storage. Does anyone actually want to store hundreds of telegrams on hundreds of puppets?

No offense to Afforess, he is pretty talented and it is great for him to share with everyone his tool, but honestly his puppet management feature is sort of a little buggy, with me deciding to get rid of NS+ because of it primarily. Not to say whoever codes for NS and does all those projects are better than Afforess [or the opposite] but I feel one by the team might prove more functional and less laggy.

As for the last, well, I would like it as an individual that did buy site supported, though at the moment it isn't really important; I wish all my past telegrams on all my puppets were saved, in part so I could see past messages or even recruitment telegrams, but I don't think they can be recovered anyhow. Of course, that is just another small plus I would enjoy but don't really see as necessary for myself.

[Mekhet]

Honestly, the best thing would be to have something in the game able to link puppets to a "main" nation. I have had many nations, Zaolat is for all intents and purposes my main account. Despite that, sometimes some other puppets of mine would be priority puppets, such as this one where people also know me as Mekhet.

We could assume, I use Zaolat for my main gameplay identity, one for General, one for WA stuff, etc. Of course during all this time I would use many puppets for various sections, but those priority ones just like Zaolat might get a lot of telegrams. If Zaolat was a site supporter I would wish that I could link those priority puppets to that status.

I haven't been able to even get site supporter due to bank stuff. I guess I could always ask someone to pay online and then hand them cash in person, but I just never bothered.

I can't see many really using more than 5-7 puppets as "main" puppets, but if an nation account could be linked to say a limited amount of puppets (5 total?) that would be neat. They couldn't be changed, only added until it hits the cap and they would share the site supporter badge and benefits in each.

[Sichuan Pepper]

Bumping this as it is relevant under the "tool" subject.
In gameplay forum a log was released of a conversation regarding IP ban avoidance but also containing a conversation of python script to pinpoint update times for use in invasions. Naturally it is not a new thing as most if not all invasions of today take place using some sort of tool / script that calculates exact update times. I am questioning how legal such scripts are and also the use of them.
Natives and Defenders cannot take action when tools such as these are used. Some variation was added to how update flows however it seems the current scripts get around that with no trouble.
I am bringing this to your attention for discussion.
The relevant log that was published is here :http://pastebin.com/VB6tT2Ek
Although I have no proof that was is said in that log is not manufactured so it cannot be taken as proof it still is discussion worthy.

I believe some aspects of the invader / Defender game should be human driven and prone to human error.

[Ballotonia]

Bumping this as it is relevant under the "tool" subject.
In gameplay forum a log was released of a conversation regarding IP ban avoidance but also containing a conversation of python script to pinpoint update times for use in invasions. Naturally it is not a new thing as most if not all invasions of today take place using some sort of tool / script that calculates exact update times. I am questioning how legal such scripts are and also the use of them.
Natives and Defenders cannot take action when tools such as these are used. Some variation was added to how update flows however it seems the current scripts get around that with no trouble.
I am bringing this to your attention for discussion.
The relevant log that was published is here :http://pastebin.com/VB6tT2Ek
Although I have no proof that was is said in that log is not manufactured so it cannot be taken as proof it still is discussion worthy.

I believe some aspects of the invader / Defender game should be human driven and prone to human error.

We know tools are possible that can make an estimate. Just like you can make an estimate yourself by observing NS and making an educated guess. But it's nothing more than an estimate, they're not exact update times. I know they cannot be exact, considering the nature of variance. Confirmation of that is this in the same log:

[7/27/2014 12:35:59 PM] Nevar Getting-Back-Together: also we need to practice with the new triggering tool
[7/27/2014 12:36:05 PM] Nevar Getting-Back-Together: it requires you to get a feel for it

Getting 'a feel' for it should not be necessary if the tool was exact. The log speaks of the tool giving a prediction which changes over time, sometimes going up and sometimes down. And the thing is... even when the time that tool predicts hits zero one could still jump in and be either too late, or several seconds too early. They're just playing the odds, and making an effort like this at most improves ones odds a bit.

Note that none of all that really matters in cases when defenders aren't really trying to compete.

Ballotonia

[Sichuan Pepper]

Defenders do not compete when there is no time to deploy Ballo. A one or two second insertion is not enough time for a native delegate to protect a region let alone a defender that needs to give troop deployment orders.
I bring this up as I do watch at update and I can tell you that there is very little error on the part of invader insertions. You can maintain that they are playing the odds but when the odds are 99% accurate I would say there is a problem.
I have absolutely no problem competing when odds are in favour of everyone. From your reply I take it that insertion times of invasions are noted by admin?

[Mallorea and Riva]

Defenders do not compete when there is no time to deploy Ballo. A one or two second insertion is not enough time for a native delegate to protect a region let alone a defender that needs to give troop deployment orders.
I bring this up as I do watch at update and I can tell you that there is very little error on the part of invader insertions. You can maintain that they are playing the odds but when the odds are 99% accurate I would say there is a problem.
I have absolutely no problem competing when odds are in favour of everyone. From your reply I take it that insertion times of invasions are noted by admin?

Keep in mind that the displayed update time of regions is looking to counteract this issue (which isn't exactly a new problem, artificial variance was created to address it).

[Shizensky]

Defenders do not compete when there is no time to deploy Ballo. A one or two second insertion is not enough time for a native delegate to protect a region let alone a defender that needs to give troop deployment orders.

This might be branching off of the topic just a bit, but we have tried to combat this hurdle by training our people not to need explicit deployment orders. It's taken a lot of work from very dedicated individuals, but we've done a lot to train our usuals to know what types of jumps they should make without command's direction. Usually we'll point out a raider lead and they'll know to jump when the raiders jump. There have been a few times where this has saved those precious seconds and we were able to make a difference.

EDIT: None of this is to say I disagree with your intent, of course. It still creates a situation where one side has a guy that can program some simple math, and only needs one person to set a trigger. The rest of that team doesn't need to put in half of the work and dedication of the other team.

[The Blaatschapen]

Defenders do not compete when there is no time to deploy Ballo.

*deploys Ballo*

[Sichuan Pepper]

Keep in mind that the displayed update time of regions is looking to counteract this issue (which isn't exactly a new problem, artificial variance was created to address it).

That is true....I am probably jumping on a problem that is solved but not in place as yet. Thanks Mall.

[Mallorea and Riva]

Keep in mind that the displayed update time of regions is looking to counteract this issue (which isn't exactly a new problem, artificial variance was created to address it).

That is true....I am probably jumping on a problem that is solved but not in place as yet. Thanks Mall.

Feel free to toss in any further thoughts/worries into the appropriate summit thread if anything in there strikes you as lacking. Always happy to help.

[Joe Bobs]

Honestly, the best thing would be to have something in the game able to link puppets to a "main" nation. I have had many nations, Zaolat is for all intents and purposes my main account. Despite that, sometimes some other puppets of mine would be priority puppets, such as this one where people also know me as Mekhet.

We could assume, I use Zaolat for my main gameplay identity, one for General, one for WA stuff, etc. Of course during all this time I would use many puppets for various sections, but those priority ones just like Zaolat might get a lot of telegrams. If Zaolat was a site supporter I would wish that I could link those priority puppets to that status.

I haven't been able to even get site supporter due to bank stuff. I guess I could always ask someone to pay online and then hand them cash in person, but I just never bothered.

I can't see many really using more than 5-7 puppets as "main" puppets, but if an nation account could be linked to say a limited amount of puppets (5 total?) that would be neat. They couldn't be changed, only added until it hits the cap and they would share the site supporter badge and benefits in each.

Jumping off this suggestion, if you could use the puppet feature now brought in with NS++, and have it so that, if you've bought postmaster, you can set it to auto-forward TGs from puppets to your main nation, perhaps this could solve the situation? You could even make it so that they forwarded into set folders. And then you could have the option to have a 'Reply from' box where you could choose which puppet account you are replying from.

[Shizensky]

The only hurdle I can see with this is the way puppets are currently stored. Right now it's all local, so your puppet list never leaves your computer. I'm not sure how it would work with NS's current storage systems, but the links wouldn't be difficult to create in a database as long as there was something that pointed back to the "puppet master" nation. It might work by linking puppets back to the master when the master provides the credentials for the puppets.

I could see some issues with nation sharing. Maybe a puppet's master can't be changed after it's been entered or something.

[Kshrlmnt]

Naturally it is not a new thing as most if not all invasions of today take place using some sort of tool / script that calculates exact update times. I am questioning how legal such scripts are and also the use of them.
Natives and Defenders cannot take action when tools such as these are used. Some variation was added to how update flows however it seems the current scripts get around that with no trouble.
...
I believe some aspects of the invader / Defender game should be human driven and prone to human error.

For me as a raider (even a very inactive one), the use of these has taken raiding from a cloak and dagger thing with some skilled guessing, to a game of program manipulation. The raiders I'm seeing are more often ill-trained because they don't need to be. Now, that's a plus in that it becomes easier to join in the first place, but it doesn't feel right to me (old fogey).

I would wonder if displaying update time on a region would affect that. The immediate effect for me would that it'd be twice as easy to choose a target and prepare for it--but I'd still check up on more specific update times, and I expect other raiders would as well. If displaying the times was combined with stronger sectional variance, it might be decently effective in forcing the sort of R&D Wordy and I seem to prefer. The problem is, as far as I know the variance hasn't been implemented, and the ways I can think of doing it are either very difficult, or too easy for a talented techie to counter.

[Eluvatar]

The problem is, as far as I know the variance hasn't been implemented, and the ways I can think of doing it are either very difficult, or too easy for a talented techie to counter.

Variance has been implemented. As Ballotonia notes above, it is impossible to predict any update time precisely. You'd have to study it to see exactly how variable it is, but even with a fairly narrow window you simply can't pinpoint the update time to within a second (except perhaps for the first few and last few regions).

[Joe Bobs]

The only hurdle I can see with this is the way puppets are currently stored. Right now it's all local, so your puppet list never leaves your computer. I'm not sure how it would work with NS's current storage systems, but the links wouldn't be difficult to create in a database as long as there was something that pointed back to the "puppet master" nation. It might work by linking puppets back to the master when the master provides the credentials for the puppets.

I could see some issues with nation sharing. Maybe a puppet's master can't be changed after it's been entered or something.

Could one simply not have a field for parent nation in the database? So for a parent nation, it would be NULL, but for others it would have a key linking to the main nation? You could effectively then have layers of parent nations leading to one at the top. Or you could limit it, so if a nation is created as a main nation it gets a '1' on nation type and if created as a puppet it gets a '2', and only '1' nations can have children.

[Bears Armed]

Could one simply not have a field for parent nation in the database? So for a parent nation, it would be NULL, but for others it would have a key linking to the main nation? You could effectively then have layers of parent nations leading to one at the top. Or you could limit it, so if a nation is created as a main nation it gets a '1' on nation type and if created as a puppet it gets a '2', and only '1' nations can have children.

Two of the puppets belonging to one of my "main" nations IC do have a puppet each of their own, established as such.