🚀 go-pugleaf

In message <5c57q5$3...@lendl.cc.emory.edu> - nice...@worldnet.att.net (Ian
Mercado) writes:
:>
:>I just sent this e-mail to sup...@blizzard.com.  This may have
:>already been discussed, in one of these groups, but since my feed
:>isn't the best out there, I figured I'd post it anyway.  Any comments
:>or additions you guys may have are welcome.  I'd hate to see
:>battle.net become a place to avoid because of an abundance of pkillers
:>and cheaters that are beginning to swarm over the place.
:>
:>
:>To sup...@blizzard.com:
:>
:>"Seems like you guys should come up with some kind of game creation
:>options (as is done in Descent I and II) that allow a person to
:>specify parameters for a game, like whether pkilling is allowed, what
:>level range of characters are allowed to play, whether or not
:>characters can bring weapons/armor/spells into the game, whether or
:>not they can leave with them, etc.
:>
:>"This would give multi-player Diablo an entirely new dimension which
:>the game-creator can control.  It would also help to numb the effects
:>of the pkillers/cheaters that are destined to shortly make battle.net
:>a no-fun place to be.  It would also still place no "burden of proof"
:>on the battle.net servers for tracking attributes of characters.
:>
:>"This is a fantastic game, and I hope you guys are willing to put in
:>some extra effort to ensure that its multi-player appeal will last for
:>a long-long time!"
:>
:>Ian
:>(NiceGuy)
:>



One thing that I REALLY hate is the fact that the game creator can be "timed
out" by someone else trying to join.  Why is that?  Also, I would like to see
a message come up to the game creator that says that "so and so is joining the
game", and then give you the option of either Kicking him out or letting him
continue to join.  That was an option that I liked in War2.  If someone came
into the chatroom at the beginning of the game, you could boot his ass if all
he wanted to do was curse everyone.  Having this Kick Out option would allow
players to prevent known pkillers from joining their games.  Also, in war2,
you were given the option of booting (alt-F2 was it?) any players that were
being waited on.  Give the game creator that option in Diablo.  Although, I
don't know what would happen if the game creator just decided to leave the
game.  Who would all of the game creator controls default to?  hmmm...   But,
my primary question was just this, "Why is it that the game creator can be
timed out?"  I have an ISDN connection at 128k.  I feel that I should never be
timed out considering how many people are still using 28k.  Does Battle.net
have support for faster connections like that?  Does it matter what the
connection speed is?  I never timed out on Kali when playing War2 after I got
my ISDN connection.  In fact, I was never told again that I was being waited
on.  That's why I am so confused about Battle.net.  Because I can be timed out
having a faster connection than most, it would seem almost worthless for me to
have a faster connection for multiplayer gaming.  Multiplayer gaming is the
very reason I got an ISDN line in the first place.  

I have noticed that the couple of times that I have played on a Kali server, I
have not been timed out from being the game creator.  Why is that?  Why is
Diablo so much slower on Kali in the first place?  

BigBadBase (Kali and Battle.net)

\\**************************************************************************//

      "We are the music makers, and We are the dreamers of the dreams."     

                                              - Willie Wonka -

//**************************************************************************\\

In article <5c57q5$3...@lendl.cc.emory.edu>, nice...@worldnet.att.net 
says...
>
>I just sent this e-mail to sup...@blizzard.com.  This may have
>already been discussed, in one of these groups, but since my feed
>isn't the best out there, I figured I'd post it anyway.  Any comments
>or additions you guys may have are welcome.  I'd hate to see
>battle.net become a place to avoid because of an abundance of pkillers
>and cheaters that are beginning to swarm over the place.
>
>
>To sup...@blizzard.com:
>
>"Seems like you guys should come up with some kind of game creation
>options (as is done in Descent I and II) that allow a person to
>specify parameters for a game, like whether pkilling is allowed, what
>level range of characters are allowed to play, whether or not
>characters can bring weapons/armor/spells into the game, whether or
>not they can leave with them, etc.
>
>"This would give multi-player Diablo an entirely new dimension which
>the game-creator can control.  It would also help to numb the effects
>of the pkillers/cheaters that are destined to shortly make battle.net
>a no-fun place to be.  It would also still place no "burden of proof"
>on the battle.net servers for tracking attributes of characters.
>
>"This is a fantastic game, and I hope you guys are willing to put in
>some extra effort to ensure that its multi-player appeal will last for
>a long-long time!"
>
>Ian
>(NiceGuy)
>
	I dont see this as being nessecary, while i agree that there are 
plenty off idiots out there, they can be avoided. Here is my solution

A: No matter what you do a person can still ruin the game for you so, 
just be patient and build a repore with people who are serious players. 
this takes little time and is it great to meet people you know to play 
and predetermined times. 

B: Create a new channel to meet on so communication is simple and secure 
from trouble makers. With a group of good players you can all agree on 
some basic rules of conduct and even what tatics and weapons should be 
used.

C: Put a password on your game. Final solution

Anything else would be over kill.

				AV

On Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:20:30 GMT, nice...@worldnet.att.net (Ian
Mercado) wrote:

>I just sent this e-mail to sup...@blizzard.com.  This may have
>already been discussed, in one of these groups, but since my feed
>isn't the best out there, I figured I'd post it anyway.  Any comments
>or additions you guys may have are welcome.  I'd hate to see
>battle.net become a place to avoid because of an abundance of pkillers
>and cheaters that are beginning to swarm over the place.
>
>
>To sup...@blizzard.com:
>
>"Seems like you guys should come up with some kind of game creation
>options (as is done in Descent I and II) that allow a person to
>specify parameters for a game, like whether pkilling is allowed, what
>level range of characters are allowed to play, whether or not
>characters can bring weapons/armor/spells into the game, whether or
>not they can leave with them, etc.
>
>"This would give multi-player Diablo an entirely new dimension which
>the game-creator can control.  It would also help to numb the effects
>of the pkillers/cheaters that are destined to shortly make battle.net
>a no-fun place to be.  It would also still place no "burden of proof"
>on the battle.net servers for tracking attributes of characters.
>
>"This is a fantastic game, and I hope you guys are willing to put in
>some extra effort to ensure that its multi-player appeal will last for
>a long-long time!"
>
>Ian
>(NiceGuy)
>
I agree 100% and would like to see this implemented.  If others don't
like it, then don't use it.  I would like to play public but never
have because I used to be an old mud player.  Pking got out of hand in
mud games.  I sent many emails to Blizzard about the exact same issue
in Oct of 96 when they were beta testing battle.net .  Otherwise I
only play/hold private games.  I don't bother with chat rooms to feel
out other players because there is about a 10:1 ratio of idiots to
descent people.  Hopefully, Bilzzard will write a patch that will
allow these new features.  

Hopefully they will upgrade Battle.net to handle the user load so that it
continues to get used.  As of yesterday, I have switched completely to Kali
to avoid the connection frustration dealing with overloaded servers.

Rod.

Heir Verboten <sy...@internet.net> wrote in article
<32f1ee8b....@library.airnews.net>...
> On Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:20:30 GMT, nice...@worldnet.att.net (Ian
> Mercado) wrote:
> 
> >I just sent this e-mail to sup...@blizzard.com.  This may have
> >already been discussed, in one of these groups, but since my feed
> >isn't the best out there, I figured I'd post it anyway.  Any comments
> >or additions you guys may have are welcome.  I'd hate to see
> >battle.net become a place to avoid because of an abundance of pkillers
> >and cheaters that are beginning to swarm over the place.
> >
> >
> >To sup...@blizzard.com:
> >
> >"Seems like you guys should come up with some kind of game creation
> >options (as is done in Descent I and II) that allow a person to
> >specify parameters for a game, like whether pkilling is allowed, what
> >level range of characters are allowed to play, whether or not
> >characters can bring weapons/armor/spells into the game, whether or
> >not they can leave with them, etc.
> >
> >"This would give multi-player Diablo an entirely new dimension which
> >the game-creator can control.  It would also help to numb the effects
> >of the pkillers/cheaters that are destined to shortly make battle.net
> >a no-fun place to be.  It would also still place no "burden of proof"
> >on the battle.net servers for tracking attributes of characters.
> >
> >"This is a fantastic game, and I hope you guys are willing to put in
> >some extra effort to ensure that its multi-player appeal will last for
> >a long-long time!"
> >
> >Ian
> >(NiceGuy)
> >
> I agree 100% and would like to see this implemented.  If others don't
> like it, then don't use it.  I would like to play public but never
> have because I used to be an old mud player.  Pking got out of hand in
> mud games.  I sent many emails to Blizzard about the exact same issue
> in Oct of 96 when they were beta testing battle.net .  Otherwise I
> only play/hold private games.  I don't bother with chat rooms to feel
> out other players because there is about a 10:1 ratio of idiots to
> descent people.  Hopefully, Bilzzard will write a patch that will
> allow these new features.  
> 

On 22 Jan 1997 14:06:02 -0700, Haplo <2ha...@deathgate.com> wrote:
>On 22 Jan 1997 19:29:04 GMT, ba...@voyageronline.net (Base) wrote:
>>One thing that I REALLY hate is the fact that the game creator can be "timed
>>out" by someone else trying to join.  Why is that?  Also, I would like to see
>>a message come up to the game creator that says that "so and so is joining the
>>game", and then give you the option of either Kicking him out or letting him
>>continue to join.  That was an option that I liked in War2.  If someone came
>>into the chatroom at the beginning of the game, you could boot his ass if all
>>he wanted to do was curse everyone.  Having this Kick Out option would allow
>>players to prevent known pkillers from joining their games.  Also, in war2,
>>you were given the option of booting (alt-F2 was it?) any players that were
>>being waited on.  Give the game creator that option in Diablo.  Although, I
>>don't know what would happen if the game creator just decided to leave the
>>game.  Who would all of the game creator controls default to?  hmmm...   But,
>>my primary question was just this, "Why is it that the game creator can be
>>timed out?"  I have an ISDN connection at 128k.  I feel that I should never be
>>timed out considering how many people are still using 28k.  Does Battle.net
>>have support for faster connections like that?  Does it matter what the
>>connection speed is?  I never timed out on Kali when playing War2 after I got
>>my ISDN connection.  In fact, I was never told again that I was being waited
>>on.  That's why I am so confused about Battle.net.  Because I can be timed out
>>having a faster connection than most, it would seem almost worthless for me to
>>have a faster connection for multiplayer gaming.  Multiplayer gaming is the
>>very reason I got an ISDN line in the first place.  
>>
>>I have noticed that the couple of times that I have played on a Kali server, I
>>have not been timed out from being the game creator.  Why is that?  Why is
>>Diablo so much slower on Kali in the first place?  
>>
>I agree with your suggestions on ownership of a game.  This would be
>great if Blizzard could implement something like this.
>About your connection to battle.net.
>It might be your ISP's routing to battle.net.  Have you tried running
>a traceroute from your ISP to battle.net (or better yet from your
>computer).  If you don't have anything to traceroute with a ping -t at
>the dos prompt will show you the ping times.  Connecting at 28.8 with
>4 hops to battle.net (from primenet.com) I get ping times of ~230ms.
>

I don't think it matters how fast you can ping bottle.neck, once the game is
running it is peer-to-peer.  Bottle.neck just allows players to easily find
other players (thank god, think how slow Diablo would be if bottle.neck had to
process every packet).

Another peeve I have is that you can't just directly enter in someones IP address
and join their game (and avoid the whole bottle.neck issue).

Take it easy,
Ken Jordan

On Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:13:13 GMT, sy...@internet.net (Heir Verboten)
wrote:

>On Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:20:30 GMT, nice...@worldnet.att.net (Ian
>Mercado) wrote:
>
>>I just sent this e-mail to sup...@blizzard.com.  This may have
>>already been discussed, in one of these groups, but since my feed
>>isn't the best out there, I figured I'd post it anyway.  Any comments
>>or additions you guys may have are welcome.  I'd hate to see
>>battle.net become a place to avoid because of an abundance of pkillers
>>and cheaters that are beginning to swarm over the place.
>>
>>
>>To sup...@blizzard.com:
>>
>>"Seems like you guys should come up with some kind of game creation
>>options (as is done in Descent I and II) that allow a person to
>>specify parameters for a game, like whether pkilling is allowed, what
>>level range of characters are allowed to play, whether or not
>>characters can bring weapons/armor/spells into the game, whether or
>>not they can leave with them, etc.
>>
>>"This would give multi-player Diablo an entirely new dimension which
>>the game-creator can control.  It would also help to numb the effects
>>of the pkillers/cheaters that are destined to shortly make battle.net
>>a no-fun place to be.  It would also still place no "burden of proof"
>>on the battle.net servers for tracking attributes of characters.
>>
>>"This is a fantastic game, and I hope you guys are willing to put in
>>some extra effort to ensure that its multi-player appeal will last for
>>a long-long time!"
>>
>>Ian
>>(NiceGuy)
>>
>I agree 100% and would like to see this implemented.  If others don't
>like it, then don't use it.  I would like to play public but never
>have because I used to be an old mud player.  Pking got out of hand in
>mud games.  I sent many emails to Blizzard about the exact same issue
>in Oct of 96 when they were beta testing battle.net .  Otherwise I
>only play/hold private games.  I don't bother with chat rooms to feel
>out other players because there is about a 10:1 ratio of idiots to
>descent people.  Hopefully, Bilzzard will write a patch that will
>allow these new features.  

I agree with y'all, I am known for cheating at games, but that is only
on my system and my system alone.  I've worked at a character with a
little help from higher level characters on battle.net, but I'm afraid
of encountering a pkiller or and extreme cheater.  Blizzard should let
the session creator impose limits on that particular game.

Charles C. Faust <fa...@ciai.net> wrote in article
<32f1678a...@news.alt.net>...
> On Mon, 27 Jan 1997 18:13:13 GMT, sy...@internet.net (Heir Verboten)
> wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, 22 Jan 1997 14:20:30 GMT, nice...@worldnet.att.net (Ian
> >Mercado) wrote:
> >
> >>I just sent this e-mail to sup...@blizzard.com.  This may have
> >>already been discussed, in one of these groups, but since my feed
> >>isn't the best out there, I figured I'd post it anyway.  Any comments
> >>or additions you guys may have are welcome.  I'd hate to see
> >>battle.net become a place to avoid because of an abundance of pkillers
> >>and cheaters that are beginning to swarm over the place.
> >>
> >>
> >>To sup...@blizzard.com:
> >>
> >>"Seems like you guys should come up with some kind of game creation
> >>options (as is done in Descent I and II) that allow a person to
> >>specify parameters for a game, like whether pkilling is allowed, what
> >>level range of characters are allowed to play, whether or not
> >>characters can bring weapons/armor/spells into the game, whether or
> >>not they can leave with them, etc.
> >>
> >>"This would give multi-player Diablo an entirely new dimension which
> >>the game-creator can control.  It would also help to numb the effects
> >>of the pkillers/cheaters that are destined to shortly make battle.net
> >>a no-fun place to be.  It would also still place no "burden of proof"
> >>on the battle.net servers for tracking attributes of characters.
> >>
> >>"This is a fantastic game, and I hope you guys are willing to put in
> >>some extra effort to ensure that its multi-player appeal will last for
> >>a long-long time!"
> >>
> >>Ian
> >>(NiceGuy)
> >>
> >I agree 100% and would like to see this implemented.  If others don't
> >like it, then don't use it.  I would like to play public but never
> >have because I used to be an old mud player.  Pking got out of hand in
> >mud games.  I sent many emails to Blizzard about the exact same issue
> >in Oct of 96 when they were beta testing battle.net .  Otherwise I
> >only play/hold private games.  I don't bother with chat rooms to feel
> >out other players because there is about a 10:1 ratio of idiots to
> >descent people.  Hopefully, Bilzzard will write a patch that will
> >allow these new features.  
> 
> I agree with y'all, I am known for cheating at games, but that is only
> on my system and my system alone.  I've worked at a character with a
> little help from higher level characters on battle.net, but I'm afraid
> of encountering a pkiller or and extreme cheater.  Blizzard should let
> the session creator impose limits on that particular game.
> 
or is there at least a way to let the player know whether or not a certain
player is PK? like when they say something,a nd a brief message when they
go from non-PK to PK, (like Chewbacca just went PK, or Firefly decides to
attack his friends too  ;) )
  just a thought 
/Nosferatu

WHY do you people care about PK'ers?  It's no big deal. You don't
lose your stuff, just a little gold, and that's easy to replace.
I can't believe all the whining that is going on about this. I've
had people kill me in the dungeon, and I just shrug it off, leave
the game, and join a new one.  It's not the end of the world.

And cheaters....I don't understand these people. So you can copy 
your items then trade them away. Or max out your stats. Or get as
much gold as you want. This is kinda pointless in a game like Diablo.
The whole point to Diablo is to gain experience and get better stuff.
That's it. There is NOTHING else to the game. So if you go and cheat 
to do those things, why bother buying the game in the first place? 
Cheating has got to be the most boring thing, but if you want to do it,
go ahead. I don't care because it doesn't affect MY game any.

..Kevin
Lo...@infobahn.icubed.com

On 1 Feb 1997 07:08:56 GMT, "Nosferatu" <nosf...@minn.net> wrote:
[snip] 
>or is there at least a way to let the player know whether or not a certain
>player is PK? like when they say something,a nd a brief message when they
>go from non-PK to PK, (like Chewbacca just went PK, or Firefly decides to
>attack his friends too  ;) )
>  just a thought 
>/Nosferatu

In the old mud (multi user dungeon) on the net players that did *any*
pkilling were labeled as "killers" when they appear.  Also there are
pkiller designated areas.  Meaning that if you pass point X then you
are in pkiller land.

> And cheaters....I don't understand these people. So you can copy 
> your items then trade them away. Or max out your stats. Or get as
> much gold as you want. This is kinda pointless in a game like Diablo.
> The whole point to Diablo is to gain experience and get better stuff.
> That's it. There is NOTHING else to the game. So if you go and cheat 
> to do those things, why bother buying the game in the first place? 
> Cheating has got to be the most boring thing, but if you want to do it,
> go ahead. I don't care because it doesn't affect MY game any.

That has been my point form the begining of all these cheating discussions,
if you cheat you rip your self off.

The prices i have seen in this group for diablo differs from 40-50$ and
that's shit load of money if your about to throw it away.