Topic: [ANN] SatoshiGalaxy - Browser MMORPG + BTC Faucet {FOR SALE} - page 87. (Read 109828 times)

Hello, black_wulf!

I'm not sure if you're doing anything wrong, but 1 month should be enough to acquire at least some upgrades. I would suggest asking other players around.

---

Yeah, absolutely.

BTW, are you doing anything funky with custom javascript? I've seen some weird log entries on your account.

I'm getting a reduced CPU recharge rate, can you fix this?

 

Hello, znjole!

Sorry for you troubles, I've whitelisted that IP.

---

[/quote]

No problem, thanks! 

Hey,
How can i get a better ship?
Anything is very expensive ._.
playing 1 month now and still Start gear.
What am I doing wrong?

Right, that much is obvious. Well, there are no plans to make this happen, but I shouldn't have said "never".


Yeah, that's pretty annoying with no good reason for it. That's on the list, and it also includes cargo capacity upgrades. Not sure about the warehouse, but also likely.

---

Hello, znjole!

Sorry for you troubles, I've whitelisted that IP.

---

Hello, Devesh!

Thanks for your feedback :)

I love this game no problem to me so far

Same problem here. Username: znjole.

I'd argue further but I fear it would detract from the main point I was making:


To elaborate, if given the choice between

• keeping the current scheme (batch size limit == cargo slot capacity), such that players with large cargo capacity will ostensibly have an advantage over others in the marketplace
• changing to the proposed scheme (sell entire cargo content in one go similar to selling to NPC), such that selling/buying on marketplace might be up to 8x faster (with Trucker's 8 cargo slots)

I'd choose #2 anytime.

---

GIP: Dynamic upgrade stepsize instead of fixed stepsize of 1

Found out that you can only upgrade ship energy by 1 each time. Same goes for hull armor.

I'm hoping that this could be changed so that you can upgrade by any amount you want as long as you have the money.

It'd also be nice if you could increase warehouse slots by say 5 or 10 at a time.

Larger size is always more advantageous with all other things being equal.


World of ads is weird :) Thanks for the report, this typo keeps popping up :/

---

Sorry for late reply; I believe your account was "fixed" already.

---

Hello, dewilinsade!

Sorry for your troubles. I think I've restored your account, buy could you please PM your in-game name or IP address to make sure?

IPBlocked

reason Adblock i  think
i just first time come to site and while i was registred ip was blocked.

again my cpu is down from 11 to 7

Not necessarily true. I might pick the smaller batch because it's closer to rounding up my copper to 10. Or I might just buy both batches because the price is very good. If I buy more than I need, I either have to let the excess take up a marketplace slot, sell the excess to NPC (possibly at a loss), or otherwise handle the excess in some way - so I might just end up with more work with the larger batch.

In any case, regardless of whether you think smaller or bigger batch sizes is more advantageous, it doesn't change the fact that with the current scheme, buying or selling large quantities of merchandise on the marketplace is tedious because of the number of transactions you need.

Besides, just getting to keep more of the ores you mine and getting to move more stuff around easier is reward enough for having large slot  capacity. Keeping this scheme for the sake of rewarding sellers with larger slot capacity seems unnecessary.


This seems to argue for a uniform batch size limit (i.e. what's the largest batch size that the CONS ships can handle) rather than a batch size limit that depends on the cargo slot capacity. I mean, the latter is weird if you think about it: let's say 2 guys go to a CONS office to sell 10 ores. The first guy gets to sell as a single batch of 10 because he's flying an upgraded Trucker. The second guy has to sell as 2 batches (8+2) because he's flying an upgraded Bucktooth. Isn't that a weird way of doing things?

---

Just saw this ad which is just a referral link to another ad network. I don't even.

p/s: typo on "Advertisment"

We are on the same page.

Think about it like that: you're a buyer and you see 2 batches of copper ore for sale, from two different sellers. The price is the same, but batch #1 has 6 units of copper, while batch #2 has 10. Which one would you pick, taking your CPU points and your time into account? Buying in bigger batches is an incentive for sellers, and selling in bigger batches is a reward for having more cargo capacity.

As for the server, HTTP requests are not the only concern we face in terms of server load, and we roughly measure the stress from each operation in CPU points. So some operations turn to be "bite-sized" as a result. But that has lower relation to this particular issue.

In-universe, items are not being beamed/teleported, but are being held in escrow and transported around by CONS ships. While en route, they use their own resources, to fulfill the contracts as quickly as possible. And those ships have limited cargo space too, so it makes it easier for their logistics to use "common" slot capacities for batch sizes. :)

Just to be clear that we're on the same page:

Let's say my ship has 4 slots containing 6 copper ores each. Why is it that I can't sell them on the marketplace as a single batch of 24 copper ores? Instead I can only sell them as 4 separate batches of 6 copper ores.

I know cargo slots are a precious resource, but that doesn't explain this seeming arbitrary marketplace restriction, i.e. individual marketplace offers are somehow constrained by cargo capacity.

Another thing to consider is that with this restriction, in this example the seller would need to submit 4 http requests (or full page loads) and to use up 4 CPU to sell all those copper ores. Similarly the buyer would need to submit 4 http requests and to use up 4 CPU to buy all those copper ores. Without this restriction, it's 1 http request and 1 CPU for both seller and buyer - 4 times less. Seems like a good thing for both user experience and for the server.

In short, it would make more sense logic wise, leads to better user experience, and saves network traffic. So yeah, I'm puzzled by this marketplace restriction.

RE: IPs, the systems we use claim to already take into account things like time since last suspicious activity, different blacklist weights, etc. It's their business, and we definitely are not going to re-implement the wheel. Also, our system (in theory) is more graceful than the ones encountered on other faucets, as we ban "gradually" (by slowly reducing the CPU rate). And we use the same services that are being used by other faucets too, I actually believe one is being provided by FaucetBOX itself (but don't quote me on this). However, all this theory clashes with what's actually happening pretty hard.

I too hope that we'll reach better equilibrium, because it's really tiring.


Don't think that is going to change, cargo slots are also a resource, which is linked to several of your activities, including the marketplace. Another example is crafting, some recipes require you to have more slots/capacity, altho that might not make perfect sense.


Good point! Should be an easy fix.

Re:IP ban, my ISP uses dynamic IP, and sometimes I use mobile internet which also uses dynamic IP.

So far never have I been banned on other sites because of "evil" IP - be it forum, faucets requiring email activation (e.g. Alien Faucets, Hitpxl, ClaimBTC), or faucet not requiring activation (e.g. Milli.io, Moonbit.co.in). I did encounter captchas on CloudFlare-protected sites sometimes, but it's a captcha not an automatic ban. In contrast, I've been banned automatically several times on Satoshi Galaxy.

---

Also, IP blacklists are more nuanced than an evil-vs-not-evil dichotomy. For example Project Honey Pot tells you if an IP has been associated with suspicious behavior


To me, "crafting window" involves moving required ingredients from your inventory to a designated space then doing the crafting there. That's not really what I'm proposing.

What I'm proposing can be thought of as adding extra cargo slots temporarily to your ship when you're at a place with crafting area.

Let's say your ship has 4 ship cargo slots with capacity 6, and the crafting area has 2 slots with capacity 10.

So if you want to craft a copper plate, instead of getting an error about "cargo is full" slot, the system would place the copper plate in crafting area's slot #1 instead. If you craft a 2nd copper plate, that would go to crafting area's slot #1 too just like how items normally stack in ship cargo.

Everyone's CPU rate has been restored. Sorry for the delay.

I think I've already explained how this works, but I guess I should add further explanations.

We employ several "IP checking" services that basically work like this: we ask is IP so-and-so evil? They reply: "yeah, pretty much" or "nope, looks good". It's somewhat similar to this: http://www.ipvoid.com/

And they reply "evil" more often than not. There are many reasons for this, but the main one is: IP checks is a stupid concept in the first place. It's very naive to think people are mapped to IP addresses in one-to-one fashion. But not doing those checks is even more stupid. It's a lose-lose situation and we have to thank spammers and botnets for it.

So I do my daily rounds of going through every player (flagged as suspected), examine their logs in detail, and reset the CPU rate if I think she's OK. It's a very tedious job and I get sloppy sometimes :(. The best way to deal with this, if you got banned, is to send me a PM or an e-mail or post right here, like you guys usually do.

I know some of you are going to suggest inverting the system so it works the other way around, but sadly it's not really an option. We're constantly working on improving the heuristics of bot/multi-acc/adblock/etc detection, but it's never going to be perfect :(

Trust me, I'd rather spend more time in this forum, chatting with you, but I'm drowning in the "security" minutia :(

---

That's pretty horrible, but well within the rules. I think there are several ways to minimize the risk and I think some players have already posted useful tips regarding this. My usual advice is to play with friends/squad-mates, everything is simpler that way.

You should ask around, maybe you can take your planet back :)


Ah, good question. There's no way to "craft" software right now, but it's a common loot item for pirates. I'm not exactly sure if there's ever going to be an option to "craft" your own software, I'll double check.


No wipes/resets planned (aside from the in-game forum, which has like 50/50 chance of getting wiped after we finish Beta). As for nerfs/rates, etc, there are no immediate plans, but yeah, you should never consider any of those "stable" or set in stone. Aside from some "guaranteed" things, nothing is safe!


Don't think there's a good enough reason for this, players can choose for themselves. However, I always agree, that proper manual would do us much good. Hopefully we'll finish it in the end of Beta.


Thank you!

---

We will think about it, but you probably won't like it. Almost every discussion we have ends with "yeah, we should obviously lower those rates, people are earning too much, we can't keep up". It's in our best interest to make this game more lucrative for players, there's absolutely no reason to make it painful or unfair, but we're pressured by external factors as much as our players are pressured by the rules we impose.


I too am still up to it. Good idea regarding upping the prize pool. Hopefully someone would sign up for this, that could be fun!

---

Hello, kosya666z8!

I've whitelisted your IP.

This IP address is blocked

Same here. Seems to be happening every few days or every week.

same problem with my cpu also, going down from 7 to 11 ( i know u have alot of problems corecting bugs, but i insist that in future that u make smth with scanners from market and improve the skilling of tracking...atm the free scanner give u 40 and when u make 1 level in profesion u get only 1 , this means 2,5 % from 40 that is much to low ( atm i am lvl 9 in tracking and for every action i am using 6...is impossible for me to make 6 more levels in profesion only to get 1 more asteroid ( plz think about to a way where u can show the % influence of skills, like u did with trade skill and navigation.....i am waiting for that constest , bet to be held, if some hunter will do better then me with my mining at his prize i will give him also 30 aregentum alloy, will add this to prize pool