Daniel Koepke wrote: > [XP caps don't] prevent the high level person from going in, > killing everything, taking all the newbie eq and selling it. Or > maybe a real asshole putting a chokehold on all the newbies by > not letting them have any newbie eq? Or going in and charming > a newbie monster, giving it better eq, casting strength on it, and > sitting there invis, casting heal on the monster so that it > eventually kills the newbie and the high level player can get what > the newbie had (gold, etc.) without ever bothering to kill something > themselves. You can't asshole-proof a MUD in software. The whole point of a MUD is player interaction, which means that more powerful players are going to affect weaker players. Of course you can add all kinds of stuff which isolates players from each other, at which point you don't really have a MUD anymore. Just a chat server with "private rooms" which contain mobiles. >>Yeah. If you can't trust certain immortals to not cheat, delete them. >>No amount of software is going to prevent them from cheating. All the >>software is going to do is inconvenience the people who just want to >>build. > >Yes, but not implementing some kind of code to prevent cheating, as >well as specifically stating the rules that say they can't do it, >is just tempting the immortals to try to cheat. Well, I guess this is just a philosophical difference. I'd rather take a few good people and give them the tools they need, than hand out imm-hood promiscuously to anyone offering to create a few rooms. Of course, this is easier to accomplish on an established mud - a newer mud has to take everyone it can get and hope some of them will be good. > You can't catch > every immortal in the act, and I personally do not like going on > third-person recallings, as they are often twisted from the truth > and tainted with personal feelings towards the targetted person(s). Of course not, that's what logs are for. But even though God may log everything, some things have to be brought to His attention. Listen to imm/player complaints and do your own fact-finding... (And if nobody is complaining, something is REALLY wrong. Start investigating!) > Why bother punishing all of your staff and having to go seek new > ones, instead of just making it so they can't do it, and hence you > don't have to punish them, and thus they can continue to contribute > positively towards the MUD, while unable to break the rules...? Again, philosophical difference. I'd rather put as few restraints as possible on the good people. And to be honest, the kind of imms you are talking about (who have to be constrained or else they'll cheat) are a dime a dozen. You'll easily find more if you nuke the cheaters. Probably a good compromise approach (if you have a bunch of bad apples that you can't afford to get rid of just yet) is to add a large number of levels at the top; disempower the lowest levels; and then promote only the good builders. The type of builder who's into cheating won't notice anything because his level is staying the same. :) >Daniel Koepke -----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- Version: 2.6.2 mQCNAzHp4aoAAAEEANXSOayXVPnQYL09AxYtkHjcTC22+URW0eAYrJQuBq30xHQG XOfA/AO36qD0ArPc1YjyX60bXTVgIQuyJzTzixNY7EtuAZ1qzYliZNdzse1mn87d 1EmpFbcnqyHd6HY6K20t7nQpDcgDvR3uPySqZ4tBYkdr44W4wOKr5Ck3PxUhAAUR tCJKYWNrIFdpbHNvbiA8ZGVlamF5QGN1LW9ubGluZS5jb20+ =4AQ9 -----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK----- +-----------------------------------------------------------+ | Ensure that you have read the CircleMUD Mailing List FAQ: | | http://cspo.queensu.ca/~fletcher/Circle/list_faq.html | +-----------------------------------------------------------+
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 12/18/00 PST