by Crumlark » Tue Oct 07, 2014 8:45 am
by Mousebumples » Tue Oct 07, 2014 9:22 am
by Crumlark » Tue Oct 07, 2014 2:09 pm
by Mousebumples » Tue Oct 07, 2014 9:23 pm
Crumlark wrote:I would like to modify my suggestion in that it would be a completely encompassing replacement of regional passwords.
by Mousebumples » Tue Oct 07, 2014 10:35 pm
Trimer wrote:Mousebumples wrote:Again, why are we making extra work for the techies, if the same concept can be accomplished with the current password system?
How many regions that lack an active founder actually could do what you say? Passwords are very expensive influence-wise to manage, aren't they?.
by Crumlark » Wed Oct 08, 2014 10:25 am
by Crumlark » Fri Nov 07, 2014 1:10 pm
by Cora II » Fri Nov 07, 2014 5:02 pm
by Indian Empire » Fri Nov 07, 2014 5:04 pm
by Crumlark » Sat Nov 08, 2014 9:39 pm
by Naivetry » Sat Nov 08, 2014 10:08 pm
Crumlark wrote:But you must be aware: This does the same thing as regional passwords. A raider dominated region that has a password on it is good as gone regardless of the entry of this method. However, this allows the final measure of security for Foundered/secure WA delegate regions that they have been looking for.
by Crumlark » Sat Nov 08, 2014 10:34 pm
Naivetry wrote:Crumlark wrote:But you must be aware: This does the same thing as regional passwords. A raider dominated region that has a password on it is good as gone regardless of the entry of this method. However, this allows the final measure of security for Foundered/secure WA delegate regions that they have been looking for.
That's not true, actually. For one thing, we have an entire WA resolution category in the Security Council - Liberations - which remove the Delegate's ability to enforce a password. This prevents passwords from automatically being a 'game over' scenario in a region.
If a raider WA Delegate had the ability to prevent anyone from entering at update, on the other hand - or to prevent anyone from entering unless they were specifically approved - defenders could never free any region that raiders had taken over.
by Naivetry » Sat Nov 08, 2014 10:45 pm
Crumlark wrote:Could we not extend the Liberation function to this as well?
by New Babylonia » Sat Nov 08, 2014 11:07 pm
Cora II wrote:Legitime Opt out from R/D gameplay is A) Keeping Founder alive and active, B) and in the region itself for C) Making and keeping Delegate Access Non-Executive. (+ Optionally also Password and Banning Options)
Basic problem with all these suggestions 'improve' or change existing password option and influence levels etc. is that people who suggest such changes almost always forget look those suggestions from view point how they inflict to a regional situation if raiders has already taken control over the delegacy of a region. Usually these 'good' ideas for better security will turn exactly opposite to their intended aim.
If you change peoples' possibilities protect their regions more better, you always change also Raiders' possibilities keep those regions after successful invasion/Raid, making defenses and liberations harder.
...and as aforementioned, Opt out exists already giving fool proof and fire sure protection against all kind malicious coups over a region.
Advertisement
Advertisement