The Mana World Forums

Prsm wrote:With all do respect, there is a game ruling we need you to define.

When a player brings multiple alts onto a single map, all the alts stack and fight as one.
If we botcheck them they will respond, since he is watching the screen on one, I believe its circumventing the definition of the rules, and a few others do also, but that's irrelevant! Can you please define if this is against the rules.

Thanks in advance

Prsm

Big Crunch wrote:essentially, after platyna said:

Platyna wrote:I am also dissapointed that some people tries to interfere with the rules I set, behind my back (I have found a topic when someone was already prepared to announce that no devs rule no longer apply). As well as changing the bot rule interpretation. It is my first and final warning - any hand raised behind my back, on the rules I set, will be cut off.

Regards.

we need an interpretation from her. Granted we were only applying what she said here:

Platyna wrote:There is no rule forbidding following other players. There is a rule preventing to annoy players and to use automation to gain advantage over other players which is unfair. If a GM suspects botting, s/he is supposed to execute a standard botcheck on each char.

Also it is not forbidden to attack the same mob as another char, it is even encouraged to play in teams (of living people), this question is completely pointless as there are and there were no rule forbidding it. Common sense is a rule of all rules, appliance of the rules could be some way automated I would get rid of GMs and introduce rules-enforcing bots.


Regards.

We merely clarified the botting rule, which was, up to that point, allowing stacks of characters to autofollow one lead character and all attack the same monster, to disallow the autofollowing of another character through the use of client exploits. The method of botchecking these 'stacks' is laid out in this post: mcp.php?i=main&mode=post_details&f=12&p=126299 .

If we have been doing incorrectly, we need to know.

FYI, this was all laid and stickied in a public post here > viewtopic.php?f=12&t=16077

I may add as I said many times, that there is still an inconsistency in the game rules as they are displayed in game, in this forum, in the wiki (though it was recently updated and a link to some inconsistencies removed).

As I said at the time it was discussed, I disagree with the total interdiction of auto-attack (a server feature) and auto-follow (both are allowed on commercial mmorpgs).
It is now time to take a decision and to publish it.

Nard wrote: I may add as I said many times, that there is still an inconsistency in the game rules as they are displayed in game, in this forum, in the wiki (though it was recently updated and a link to some inconsistencies removed).

The wiki is not an authorative source. On many occasions, it has been filled with redundant, obsolete, or contradictory information, even by administrators on protected pages.
I do remove this when it comes to my attention (Edit: I have now done so with the wiki page called "Game Rules", Edit2: and on the "Walkthrough", is there anything else?), but I don't have a lot of time to watch the wiki.

There are slight wording differences between the rules as presented in the game and the rules in the forum announcement.
It would be beneficial if the forum one was updated to match the in-game one.

Nard wrote:As I said at the time it was discussed, I disagree with the total interdiction of auto-attack (a server feature) and auto-follow (both are allowed on commercial mmorpgs).

We don't care what commercial MMORPGs do.

There is no rule against auto-attacking a single target without moving, as this is a server feature.

Auto-follow, however, is against the rules after it was shown to be game-breaking, and I seriously doubt any of us is going to reopen that debate.

The wiki should be an autoritative source and it is the job of wiki administrators to keep it up to date. It is the job of TMWC members and game administrators to read them and give agreement when they do not wrote themselves. Wiki is a TMW service just as TMW-the -game and TMW fora. It was while I was admin that I noticed the contradiction between the various versions. Clearing the article is just unbelievable! a wiki about a game without the rules !
As you are now accustomed to do it, I suggest that you also remove game and forum rule sticky, so there is no more inconsistency problem: simple and efficient.

Auto-follow has never been declared entirely out of the rules except when it leaded to "take advantage" unfairly to other players. Now Manaplus is the official client and every player is able to have the same advantage.
What was shown to be game breaking and was targeted was stack auto-attacking and intensive and systematic botting, not following. If you were in game a bit more you would have seen it with your eyes. There is no debate, just a decision pending to be official just as it was required to Platyna in http://forums.themanaworld.org/viewtopi ... 12&t=17024 (Mon Feb 11, 2013) and still has no official and clear answer.

It would be beneficial to the game if the forum, wiki and the now least read in game one(*) were updated to match common sense and speak in one voice.


(*) Do not forget that Ian is no more among the first NPCs to be met and read. If you doubt just sit in Tulim and count the number of graduate hats you can see.


Note: You should care of good software whether it is commercial or not. You could learn a lot. Btw there are also free games which have the same rules.

I reserve the right to believe that some people are idiots due to their inability to follow a logical argument, and that it is worth ignoring them.
I reserve the right to speak my beliefs.
Which part of this is against the forum rules?

Hi Nard, I do believe this rule is defined by all GM's now and I will take your word for it that its not defined on the wiki.

Autofollow is illegal (and yes its present in manaplus), and auto attack stacking from the same ip is also deemed illegal if done by the same person (if one can prove that they are indeed separate people than in is indeed legal).

I am not sure who looks after the wiki, but I will endeavor to find out and get this corrected.

Prsm

I wrote the original article which pointed yo the difficulties too. I also asked to GHP, Platyna and TMWC members several time since last year to take a decision but got a single answer: Jenalya's.
Glad to know that you (collective) took a decision even if I do not consider it as the wisest one. Now It would be better to put it on other places than in a forum thread.
look to TheManaWorld:Administrators

Game Rules wrote:
العربية- - Deutsch - English - Español - پارسی - Français - Bahasa Indonesia - Italiano - Polski - Português - Русский - Shqip - Svenska - Türkçe

This article contains information for players or people interested in playing The Mana World

This article is for reference purpose

The features described in this article are already implemented in the game. The article should describe how a certain aspect of the game currently works. You may of course edit this article to improve the description of the circumstances. Your opinions or improvement suggestions about the described aspects themself are of course appreciated, too. But please put these on the discussion page of this article to keep facts and fiction separated.

The wiki is not the place to list game rules. The canonical game rules are the ones shown in-game, as available in the git repository.

Revision history of Game Rules wrote:(cur | prev) 21:05, 10 July 2013‎ O11c (Talk | contribs)‎ m . . (0)‎ . . (Protected "Game Rules": important information should not be editable (‎[edit=sysop] (indefinite) ‎[move=sysop] (indefinite)))
(cur | prev) 21:02, 10 July 2013‎ O11c (Talk | contribs)‎ . . (-5,828)‎ . . (replace with a link to the canonical version of the rules)
(cur | prev) 12:38, 3 May 2013‎ Nard (Talk | contribs)‎ . . (+450)‎ . . (→‎Roles in project)

Probably he thought that I would like to revert his changes. O11c is an administrator and TMWC member.

o11c wrote:The wiki is not an authorative source. On many occasions, it has been filled with redundant, obsolete, or contradictory information, even by administrators on protected pages.
I do remove this when it comes to my attention (Edit: I have now done so with the wiki page called "Game Rules", Edit2: and on the "Walkthrough", is there anything else?), but I don't have a lot of time to watch the wiki.

The new wiki page "Game Rules" sucks.

"The wiki is not the place to list game rules."
This sentence is completely bullshit. The wiki is the place to list the game rules. One of the goals of the wiki is too be a complete guide for the game. And so it does need to include the game rules. Without knowing the rules, you can't play the game.

"The canonical game rules are the ones shown in-game, as available in the git repository."
This is just player unfriendly. Not every player will understand how to read a script.

Whoever updates the game rules must update it on several places:

• Game
• Forum
• Wiki

If you're worried about that the rules might not get updated then define a good process how to update the game rules. But don't remove the rules, and point to player unfriendly script, that just sucks.

The wiki page must list the game rules. If you're really worry about that they are out of date, then add a warning that they are just a copy of the rules, and then point to place where they can find the correct rules. That place is not a script, but the NPC that can be found ingame.

I think a HTML page on themanaworld.org would be a good place for canonical rules.

also in clientdata can be txt file with rules and can be accesed from client by help/rules.

Crush wrote:I think a HTML page on themanaworld.org would be a good place for canonical rules.

agreed, the HTML page should be the wiki one.

4144 wrote:also in client data can be txt file with rules and can be accesed from client by help/rules.

That's a good idea too.

Regardless, this is still a rule. It is part of and an extension, a clarification of an aspect if you will, of the 'No automation' rule. Personally i dont see why this is needed as a separate rule. We've outlined how this will be botchecked as well, so there should be no confusion.

BC

Crush wrote:I think a HTML page on themanaworld.org would be a good place for canonical rules.

Agreed. We can write a script that generates it in the client repo, and add additional output formats such as client help/rules.txt

EJlol wrote:If you're worried about that the rules might not get updated then define a good process how to update the game rules. But don't remove the rules, and point to player unfriendly script, that just sucks.

The point is not so much that we can't update multiple copies of the rules (though this is annoying), but that somemight deliberately accidentally upload an obsolete version of the rules. This is not a theoretical problem, it is real. Although it is ameliorated by the fact that Nard no longer has the privileges to edit protected pages, others may also be fallible.

o11c wrote: The point is not so much that we can't update multiple copies of the rules (though this is annoying), but that somemight deliberately accidentally upload an obsolete version of the rules. This is not a theoretical problem, it is real. Although it is ameliorated by the fact that Nard no longer has the privileges to edit protected pages, others may also be fallible.

When I wrote this page I asked Platyna, GHP, and TMWC, several times, and especially you to decide which version players had to follow, I repeat that the only person who was polite enough to answer was Jenalya. Thus if this page was not up to date you are o11c also responsible of this mess and you failed to your responsibilities. I had no right to decide which interpretation of the rules had to be retained, nor the on to substitute myself to you Mr. Administrator. I respected that, that was the best I could do, that's what I did.

Btw, be fearless; I here promise that I will not write a single char on wiki any more except on my user page. But, if you want If you want to "ameliorate" wiki a bit more, you can also revert my contribs and ban my account for any reason you want, I will not complain.

o11c wrote:

Crush wrote:I think a HTML page on themanaworld.org would be a good place for canonical rules.

Agreed. We can write a script that generates it in the client repo, and add additional output formats such as client help/rules.txt

Who is going to do that and when?

Should be easy to do a system like how the game news is done (but less annoying). Have each language in a separate file (rules.[langauge_code]), a list of language code - language name pairs and a make target to compile them into the various formats, including make the current in game file completely.

Is it really worth the time to create and test such a script? How many times are you planning to change the rules?