So, in the target list in the AtkShop there are a lot of un-attackable people due to the 60 day time out. Is there a way to clear their names from the list? Or maybe get their name to go under a different column?
Just a thought.
RenegadeNukes
Sep 12 2007, 07:10 AM
Sounds like a good idea to me
Bone
Sep 12 2007, 12:50 PM
Lots of other targets are avaliable that you cannot see in the targets range
Psycrow
Sep 12 2007, 01:30 PM
And how do you find them?
Bone
Sep 12 2007, 01:39 PM
Depends. Top 10 Richest attackers. Member profile and posts.
rurounikenshin
Sep 13 2007, 01:52 AM
Should users who haven't played IBPro Battle be removed automatically when they don use the feature for 60+ days?
perry10
Sep 13 2007, 02:16 AM
They should be, does anyone know how to though?
flaco46
Sep 13 2007, 06:26 AM
That would be an admin thing. But I that would be great to remove those inactive ones.
perry10
Sep 13 2007, 11:58 PM
Yeah, who should we talk to about that?
RustPuppet
Sep 14 2007, 12:01 AM
Um, a staff member?
I'll have a look if it's possible under the AtkShop settings.
Moo
Sep 17 2007, 06:22 AM
QUOTE(rurounikenshin @ Sep 13 2007, 04:52 AM)
Should users who haven't played IBPro Battle be removed automatically when they don use the feature for 60+ days?
No.What if the come back online?
Psycrow
Sep 17 2007, 06:42 AM
I don't think it would remove their progress through the rankings just from the target list so you can't attempt to attack them and it says "cannot attack someone who has been inactive for 60 days"
But when they come back they're in the list.
Did that make any sense?
Moo
Sep 17 2007, 07:04 AM
Oh. That seems to be a good idea.
Gitano
Sep 17 2007, 07:13 AM
QUOTE(perry10 @ Sep 14 2007, 03:27 AM)
sounds good
QUOTE(Moo @ Sep 17 2007, 10:04 AM)
Oh. That seems to be a good idea.
People, these are NOT valid posts! They dont add any value to this topic at all. If you wanted to reply, reply with something more substantial.
Any more one line crap from any of you and warnings will be coming your way.
perry10
Sep 17 2007, 11:21 AM
i think the inactive targets should be removed. how's this sound. Remove them, and then if they want to start playing again, they have to start back at level 1?
Gitano
Sep 17 2007, 02:02 PM
Good post Perry, reformation is happening
Yeah sounds like an alright idea.... BUT wouldn't that really discourage users from ever coming back? I mean if I went away on holiday or something, Id like to stick my account as disabled, and then when I get back, I start again from where I was, because everyone else has had time to get past you.
Surge
Sep 17 2007, 10:09 PM
I think that one SHOULD be allowed to attack inactive targets rather... Would help newbies to move up in the rankings a LOT.
perry10
Sep 18 2007, 08:49 AM
Being able to attack inactive targets isn't a bad idea, but I still think they should be removed, having everyone on the targets list being active just keeps the game more interesting, but maybe we should have a vote on it and go from there?
cyfermaster
Sep 18 2007, 08:57 AM
Doesn't look like you can remove the inactive players from the targets list. you can however remove the restriction on attacking inactive players.
RenegadeNukes
Sep 18 2007, 09:18 AM
We should be able to attack em!
cyfermaster
Sep 18 2007, 09:20 AM
Dude, it won't help you. You are already too many levels above them for it to be worthwhile for you to be able to attack them. It will only be valuable to new comers to the game, and I am reluctant to let them be able to attack them. I have my reasons... If Rusty et al are fine with it, then so be it.
RenegadeNukes
Sep 18 2007, 09:23 AM
QUOTE
Dude, it won't help you. You are already too many levels above them for it to be worthwhile for you to be able to attack them. It will only be valuable to new comers to the game, and I am reluctant to let them be able to attack them. I have my reasons... If Rusty et al are fine with it, then so be it.
I'm aware, i'm thinking about the benifit it will have for new playes (and my guild mates)
But in general if it goes yay, if it doesn;t happen, well nvm
Gitano
Sep 18 2007, 10:33 AM
Cyf: what are the inactive players gaining by being inactive? Before we had the bank it was a great safeguard for your gil, but now I dont really see a whole lot of advantage? Gimme message if you want
RenegadeNukes
Sep 18 2007, 11:20 AM
QUOTE
Before we had the bank it was a great safeguard for your gil, but now I dont really see a whole lot of advantage? Gimme message if you want biggrin.gif
Also if you were inactive for 60 days to qualify for the inactive guard, most of the gil in your profile would have been wiped out anyway People will have smelt the blood in the water
Besides when / if they do come back, they will have a helluva load of gil in the bank - so they wouldn't really care about losing the gil earlier
perry10
Sep 18 2007, 01:50 PM
looks like we're going to have some people moving up the list if we can eventually attack them!!
Gitano
Sep 18 2007, 03:13 PM
Nukes, you can become an inactive voluntarily without the 60 inactivity period.
Nukes, you can become an inactive voluntarily without the 60 inactivity period.
That is 1 reason why I don't want to enable it so you can attack inactive players. Inactive players will earn interest on the gil in their bank, but they would end up using that gil to move up the ranks if they became active again. I for one don't want to have like a zillion kills against me if I go away, and then come back after a while.
Surge
Sep 18 2007, 11:53 PM
I reckon if you voluntarity took yourself outta the game, then you should not be subject to attack, but if you are automatically made not able to be attacked, then the newbies should be able to attack and move up the rankings...
cyfermaster
Sep 19 2007, 01:08 AM
hmm.... it looks like they are different. You don't become inactive. You actually stop playing.... You can then start playing again at a later stage.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.