Script rules?

[Fischistan]

And done: added customleader, customreligion, customcapital, legislation shards. See API documentation for examples.

Thank you [violet]!

[[violet]]

Can we also have a way to get a list of all WA nations in a region? That would save having to pull all the nation list pages when running an endochecker.

Example, TEP (using recent numbers):
Nations: 4267, UN:418
Running through the list of nations to build a list of all WA nations: 4267 / 14 = 305 calls to HTML pages. (using 14 instead of 15 to detect nations leaving/entering)
Then actual endorsement counting: 418 XML shards.

That's not something I can add at the moment, but I'm rewriting the WA server software anyway, so I can build this in to the next iteration. Then you'll be able to query the API for a list of WA member nations in a given region.

Ofcourse, if it would be possible to combine shards of multiple nations into one call, that would be awesome!

That wouldn't be hard to add. I wouldn't be able to allow too many nations to be queried at once, though, because API calls need to be light enough for us to handle 100 per minute per client. Why would this be helpful?

[Ballotonia]

Ofcourse, if it would be possible to combine shards of multiple nations into one call, that would be awesome!

That wouldn't be hard to add. I wouldn't be able to allow too many nations to be queried at once, though, because API calls need to be light enough for us to handle 100 per minute per client. Why would this be helpful?

An endorsement checker is only interested in endorsements, but from many nations. So combining them into fewer calls would make it all faster. Less network trafic, and should be same amount of work for the server in total.

Ballotonia

[New South Hell]

I just wanted to note that I would like to see shards for all the categories of the Analysis tab. Of course I would.

Stop me before I scrape again!

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Any news on SalusaSecondus's thoughts?

No, so we'll just do it. I'll make the change next week.

Soooooooooo....did you change it and not inform us, or did you not change it yet?


Just making sure.

[[violet]]

I just wanted to note that I would like to see shards for all the categories of the Analysis tab. Of course I would.

Stop me before I scrape again!

I will definitely add these in the near future.

[[violet]]

Updated official script rules!

[Coffee and Crack]

This is the happiest day of my NS career. <3 the new rules.

[Chasrabidus]

Do the new rules prohibit the automatic updating of a WFE via a script?

EDIT: I know it says this, I just wanted to verify.

It is illegal to use a tool to automatically cause something in the gameworld to change, other than your own nation. Examples include: moving regions, sending a telegram to another nation, banning a nation from a region, creating a nation, and endorsing another nation.

[Ballotonia]

It doesn't say that when something hasn't been added to the API (yet), the old rate applies. So as the rules are written now, this limits my script to read telegrams / answer issues to 1 call per 6 seconds

Ballotonia

[[violet]]

Do the new rules prohibit the automatic updating of a WFE via a script?

They do, yes. If you feel the rules should not prohibit this, go ahead and make a case for it. I'm happy to revise as need be.

[[violet]]

It doesn't say that when something hasn't been added to the API (yet), the old rate applies. So as the rules are written now, this limits my script to read telegrams / answer issues to 1 call per 6 seconds

The deal is that if you post a thread in Technical requesting a particular API, and I agree that it's a good idea but I haven't coded it yet, I'll grant an exemption. This way, I get to hear exactly what you need, and everything is documented.

What I'm not doing is granting a blanket exemption to every script that wants something not in the API. Because then I would never hear from script authors.

[Unibot II]

Do the new rules prohibit the automatic updating of a WFE via a script?

They do, yes. If you feel the rules should not prohibit this, go ahead and make a case for it. I'm happy to revise as need be.

I'd argue it on the grounds that like issue selection and similar mechanics, the interaction between players that is being automated is sort of one dimensional if you will. Similar things would be a script to automatically change one's flag (although everyone sees it) or motto, or a region's flag. There's not a whole lot of cause there to be alarmed or disgruntled if one finds out a player is automating his flag to change everyday or something like that... it hardly affects another person.

[Region Inc]

Do the new rules prohibit the automatic updating of a WFE via a script?

They do, yes. If you feel the rules should not prohibit this, go ahead and make a case for it. I'm happy to revise as need be.

I can imagine a great use case for this regarding off-site forums. Have the forums update the WFE once an hour with the active topics on the boards, that would be pretty cool.

[[violet]]

Update!

Following a query, I've added a line to the new Script Rules that makes clear that we do not permit people to distribute tools that exist for the primary purpose of rule-breaking.

We won't hold script authors responsible for everything anyone does with their scripts, but you should not disseminate a tool that breaks the rules when used normally.

[Nighton Prime]

Sorry if this is an ignorant question. I'm not script-savvy or generally that technically minded. I like NS for the game not the skillz.

Isn't our post box limited in size anyway? If it is, even if a new nation gets sent 50 or 100 tgs, he or she won't see them all because the post box will "lose" the excess, right? Or is the box unlimited?

[[violet]]

You are correct, and that would be a problem, because recruitment TGs could cause people to lose "real" TGs.

[Crushing Our Enemies]

Perhaps a feature could be coded whereby all telegrams received between login sessions are saved until the next time the user logs in, and then the excess are deleted after he logs out. So, if I logged out now, and received 30 telegrams before I logged in again, I could read all 30 when I next logged in, but after I logged out again, the oldest 10 would be deleted. I'm no developer, so I don't know if that would work or not, but it's something to consider.

[Christian Democrats]

When someone's telegram box is full of new and saved telegrams, I believe that person is unable to receive any additional telegrams. (I may be wrong.)

[Frisbeeteria]

I believe that person is unable to receive any additional telegrams. (I may be wrong.)

You are wrong, actually.

You are correct, and that would be a problem, because recruitment TGs could cause people to lose "real" TGs.

[Christian Democrats]

I believe that person is unable to receive any additional telegrams. (I may be wrong.)

You are wrong, actually.

You are correct, and that would be a problem, because recruitment TGs could cause people to lose "real" TGs.

Then, how is it that someone's telegram box becomes "full"? At times, I've been unable to send some people telegrams for this reason. Is it just that they've saved too many telegrams?

[Sedgistan]

Then, how is it that someone's telegram box becomes "full"? At times, I've been unable to send some people telegrams for this reason. Is it just that they've saved too many telegrams?

Yes.

[Zemnaya Svoboda]

It recently came up that founders using scripts to eject and/or ban nations is no longer legal.

From what I recall of the debate here, this appears to have been an unintended consequence of the rules change. If that is so, I was wondering whether that could please be rolled back with an exemption for founder nations performing actions within the scope of their own regions (just as nation actions within the scope of the nation itself are permitted).

I can envision the possibility however that this change was intentional, and the administrators intend founders to not be 100% bulletproof. It would be good to hear that stated, if that were the case.

[Frattastan]

*wonders too if the change was incidental or intentional*

I suppose it might have been changed because no-one was using it? I'm not sure.

[[violet]]

It recently came up that founders using scripts to eject and/or ban nations is no longer legal.

From what I recall of the debate here, this appears to have been an unintended consequence of the rules change. If that is so, I was wondering whether that could please be rolled back with an exemption for founder nations performing actions within the scope of their own regions (just as nation actions within the scope of the nation itself are permitted).

I can envision the possibility however that this change was intentional, and the administrators intend founders to not be 100% bulletproof. It would be good to hear that stated, if that were the case.

It wasn't discussed beforehand, but I don't believe there should be an exemption for Founders to use auto-eject scripts, no. The exemption was originally granted by Salusa, though, so I probably should have talked about it with him first. He is a little preoccupied with RL at the moment but I'll have a conversations with him when he's next free.