A revamp of on players rights

[delete pleasessssss]

If people read, then he suggested accounts UNDER 100k
If your raiding accounts like that then you may be a bit confused.

I raid, I like the idea as long as the 3flags are reasonable.

TZ

[Cole]

It's good idea, we need to get rid of such accounts:

sukarman 74,928 658 Tauri 50,549 Naquadah
ayen 74,929 658 Goa'uld 50,555 Naquadah

IDs below 100k...typical to-delete kind!

[1horseman]

WE REFUSE>... cause then no1 can benefit from raiding..

If your raiding an account that has 100k uu out, thats hardly not worth the at's you have wasted. If your raiding at that level, please set up brokers to me for the equivalent uu to at ratio you get. It will save you some time.

[Dajjal]

To the mods, YES this is a suggestion

but it's for GENERAL infomation. So keep the spam clean, but otherwise please let the people speak, and don't move it please. unless you want to upgrade the attention it gets.

Now everyone has been having this " turn lag"

and i'm sure other have suggested this.

However what i want is for people to explain why the following is a bad idea.

I would like Jason to shut down the game. I would than like him to sort thru the database on a wide range of topics. Frist being, anyone not ascended or an supporter status get's a flag.
Than within that group anyone that has under 100,000 total army size is flaged, than with in that group anyone who has not logged into the game within the past 6 months is flaged. Than i would like the removal of anyone with 3 flags! i e Delete their account.

Now after this is done, i would like to change the start up account mix, to say 2-5k turns, 100k uu and 10mil naq. So that if anyone comes back thay can just start again, but their account will be better than when they left.

This should reduce the number accounts accounts that the system needs to process each turn by 1/2 to 2/3s and thereby reduce the turn lag from 3 mins to 1 min. or less

M8 one thing in all this is wrong.

Those not ascended or having supporter status should not be flagged because of it. I can agree on the rest if we should take this aproach but not that ohh your not ascended flag, or your not having a supporter status Flag thats wrong.

I agree with Nimras, it would end up being like when you make a new account your already deleted because you end up getting 3 flags....

All other points seem reasonable!

[Borek]

No you wouldn't, coz the 3rd flag is inactivity for 6 months, not 10 seconds.

[Dajjal]

No you wouldn't, coz the 3rd flag is inactivity for 6 months, not 10 seconds.

Fine, but the point is it is borderline!


EDIT: What about bugs? Could seriously screw something up!

[Lore]

Personally I like it, and agree with it.

If an account is

1. under 100K in size
2. non ascended, no SS
3. inactive for 6 months or 187 days

Why do we need it? its not even a decent WEEKLY farm.

[1horseman]

Personally I like it, and agree with it.

If an account is

1. under 100K in size
2. non ascended, no SS
3. inactive for 6 months or 187 days

Why do we need it? its not even a decent WEEKLY farm.

yep and not even a raid target unless your AssAsinX

[semper]

Well when I first read the topic title, I thought it was some clever or stupid reference to the general language use of the forums and its need to have more rules to teach people to use correct english. Which did intrigue me as to your suggestion to impliment such an idea...

When I saw your actual topic had absolutely no relevance to your title, I was happier and I do agree, it is an excellent idea.

[KnowLedge]

only bad thing is taht new players gotta work harder to ascend, since there will be removel of thousands of accounts this way.

also i dont think admin has power to just remove accounts as he pleases, based on inactivity or army size limits.

[weilandsmith]

ermm... excellent idea, yes.

1) but this is a business to jason. the more accounts he has in the server, the more prospects of people spending $$ to buy SS or resources.

2) would it be logical for Jason to delete accounts , ergo lessening his prospects to earn $$$?

3) account deletion is totally the administration's discretion. with the two points mentioned above, we should be grateful that turn lag is a lot shorter than it should be.

4) SGW isn't the only game that suffers from turn lag. frankly, i've experienced worse. we've got it good here in SGW. for that, we should be thanking jason.

[semper]

ermm... excellent idea, yes.

1) but this is a business to jason. the more accounts he has in the server, the more prospects of people spending $$ to buy SS or resources.

2) would it be logical for Jason to delete accounts , ergo lessening his prospects to earn $$$?

3) account deletion is totally the administration's discretion. with the two points mentioned above, we should be grateful that turn lag is a lot shorter than it should be.

4) SGW isn't the only game that suffers from turn lag. frankly, i've experienced worse. we've got it good here in SGW. for that, we should be thanking jason.

any other unneeded long winded pile of tosh you want to add? lol..

1. the accounts are inactive. The prospect of a cleaner better looked after game will be more attractive then hoping to necromance dead accounts.
2. ergo NOT logical.
3. Totally pointless comment.
4. Yes...how nice of you....

[delete pleasessssss]

EDIT: What about bugs? Could seriously screw something up!

Yes it could, if a retard was coding it. Wouldnt be hard at all to delete accounts that came under certain "criteria". Bugs shouldnt be a problem.

also i dont think admin has power to just remove accounts as he pleases, based on inactivity or army size limits.

Im sure he does...he can role on up to the database anytime and click "delete". Only obligation he has, is paying people back who spent $ directly to him for SS and in-game goods. But if the accounts being deleted dont have SS then no need to worry. Other games I play delete you after 6weeks without being in vac mode or logging in....

[teesdale]

only bad thing is taht new players gotta work harder to ascend, since there will be removel of thousands of accounts this way.

also i dont think admin has power to just remove accounts as he pleases, based on inactivity or army size limits.

please dont post in this thread...

if an account has 100k or less UU AND no SS AND inactive for 6months +

and if its changed so that a new account gets 100k UU AND 5k ATs

then account gets deleted, someone decides to come back and play, then there is 0 losses to them...

i realy realy like this idea... the lag on this game has gotten alot worse latley..

[ƒëmmë ƒatalë]

I agree with this proposal, its similar to the one DarkAlbino posted earlier.

I think 6 months is plenty of time, for ppl to be active in.

And I'm guessing there is an influx of accounts during school holiday times, which are soon forgotten once school restarts.