StarGateWars Forums

Xeen wrote:There really many inaccurancies in rules and game mechanic.
So hard to answer where cheating starts and where ends.
Some examples:



4. No NAQ Lose - If you are ascended you wil not have any NAQ lose via moving naq into bank. But on bank page is still written "(5% of deposit taken as a transaction cost)".
Cheat, bug or inaccurancy only?
= I think only inacurancy so changing text to (5% of deposit taken as a transaction cost if you are not goauld or ascended being)

Great post quite nicely sums it up where we need an clarification and what matters are clear anyway. Number 4 is clearly misspelled because you gain free banking when you ascend.

And your english was more than good enough for me.

well the overbanking option looks to be something that admin intended to develop but never got round to. When you go to bank it says maximum SAFE Capacity, suggesting you can put more in but then the extra could possibly be lost! (I think Crimson touched on this earlier)

tbh the overbanking is probably going to effect the big players a lot more then anyone else, as they tend to deal in trillions of naq at a time

Just give us a clear way of stealing this extra UNSAFE naq and I think it would make for a much more interesting game

renegadze wrote:well the overbanking option looks to be something that admin intended to develop but never got round to. When you go to bank it says maximum SAFE Capacity, suggesting you can put more in but then the extra could possibly be lost! (I think Crimson touched on this earlier)

tbh the overbanking is probably going to effect the big players a lot more then anyone else, as they tend to deal in trillions of naq at a time

Just give us a clear way of stealing this extra UNSAFE naq and I think it would make for a much more interesting game

or it could just become another planets update, small guy hits big guy, big guy masses them, ig guy hits small guy, small guy cant do anything. bad attitudes arise.

Flavar wrote:

Bad Wolf wrote:I dont do this bank 'trick' but I know MANY people who do, and I belive there is nothing wrong with it. If you can do it in the game [ and trust me Admin knows you can do it ] you should be able to do it without silly threads poping up like this one.

BW

Next time do me the favor and read the topic. It was a good discussion even if it couldnot lead to an changing of views it still made clear how many others see it.

If this is stupid what should one be allowed to post. I could very well do without your constant insults of my behavior

I wasnt ripping you mate, also whats this about Constant Insults ? First of all I didnt insult you then, and I dont remeber insulting you before. But anyway sorry for taking it off topic

BW

I do not consider it cheating. Forum would have had to think about this when he put the code in for it to go into your bank if you start the trade but it does not go into your bank if someone else makes the broker. Forum obviously considered this when he made the code.

In the game ..there was Banks Size ...then came the Broker..Overbank was born...
Rules are built into the code.Eample: I cant buy UUs ..I cant Raid .

I see overbanking as a way to help small players.
The cost of a Market turn keeps rising every day... every week.
Small player are forced to save up more and more Naq to buy
the turns they need to raid.(they get less turns all the time too).Smaller players need help!
For me I dont use over banking ..its of no use to me ...cant remember the last time my bank was full.

Keep overbanking unharmed, stop the tamper data for mercs and other such.

Come_Forth wrote:I do not consider it cheating. Forum would have had to think about this when he put the code in for it to go into your bank if you start the trade but it does not go into your bank if someone else makes the broker. Forum obviously considered this when he made the code.

he didn't think of it with the $50 SS being released giving an extra spy lvl, so, granted that, do you think he'd have enough foresight to see this abuse?

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~

Theorising that he would not, he sure would notice the fact that the majority of people uses this principle. Don't you think?
He'd have dealt with it if it was unwanted. Since he didn't, I'd say it's a feature.



Regards,

right, and that's why we were able to broker in above the caps (turns/uu) for so many months until a thread like this was created and he removed the ability?


it's a loophole in the code. since abusing loopholes in the code is cheating, so's this. *shrugs*

Whoops. Didn't think of that.
You're right, naturally.

<subroutine overbanking.01 disabled>

Good. That should solve it.


A good thing to know that Forum roams these forums then.


It'll be solved in no time.



Regards,

how about we just let forum decide? he has posted in a few thread the last couple of days im sure he has read this thread.

if he changes it, to bad but then we know its not allowed, if he dosnt then he quite obviously dosnt mind/care

Vendetta wrote:how about we just let forum decide? he has posted in a few thread the last couple of days im sure he has read this thread.

if he changes it, to bad but then we know its not allowed, if he dosnt then he quite obviously dosnt mind/care

if you read to it all i asked for during the end of the discussion for me is that somebody with the right to do so (aka Forum) gives clear answers to soem points which are listed on page four.

we can discuss and discuss but none of us can solve it

Psi Kiya Trist wrote:

Come_Forth wrote:I do not consider it cheating. Forum would have had to think about this when he put the code in for it to go into your bank if you start the trade but it does not go into your bank if someone else makes the broker. Forum obviously considered this when he made the code.

he didn't think of it with the $50 SS being released giving an extra spy lvl, so, granted that, do you think he'd have enough foresight to see this abuse?

~_+Psi Kiya Trist+_~

I put faith in forum's intelligence

Come_Forth wrote:I put faith in forum's intelligence

can you create a problem that even you cannot solve? that would be very smart but ultimately create a problem you cannot solve.

it seems i have done this

for now... its a tradeoff between 'leaving naq in the open on a non complete trade' and overbank.

now - all that said - there is an answer. the mods helped me find it. 10+brains are better than one

it'll be in next update.