Suggestion:20080415 Zerging Countermeasure

	Edited Suggestion
	This suggestion has been removed from voting because the suggestion being proposed was significantly edited after voting was under way. Suggestions that need modification should be removed and resubmitted as a new suggestion.

20080415 Zerging Countermeasure

Garviel Loken^{No Pity! No Remorse! No Fear! Talk}04:27, 15 April 2008 (BST)

Suggestion Type:

Game Mechanic

Suggestion Scope:

Any users who run more than one character

Suggestion Description:

This one is VERY simple and depends on the game's mechanics. It would not ban people from running multiple characters but it would make zerging literally impossible to do end of discussion.

Whenever a character from the same IP address comes within ten spaces of another character of the same IP address, those characters CANNOT, under ANY circumstances move any closer to one another, kind of like when you hit the barrier. While this may seem to suck for people trying to move an alt through, it would make it impossible for more than one alt per user to be in the same suburb or similar distance. It may impeded safehouse choices and the like but in the spirit of the game alts from the same user should be at least not in the same suburb, this would take it from spirit to alts from the same user CANNOT be in the same suburb, period end of discussion. This would also open up possibility for implementing trading and the like without fear of alt abuse occurring at all. That and if you are running alts true to the spirit of the game you shouldn't be getting your alts that close to eachother ANYWAY, so the only ones to really fear or suffer from this are those who actively abuse alts.

ON EDIT: Ok 10 spaces isn't the same as different suburb, but each suburb is a 10x10 grid so it would effectively keep them a suburb's worth of distance separated. I am not sure about the issue of people being on the same IP address, but as I understand it most computers go on a different IP Addy so this would work on most in the case of zerging and unless there is a huge number of people who are all working on the same network when they play UD (not betting on it) then I don't see how it would have much of an impact there.

As far as message goes, maybe something along the lines of tripping, falling, and twisting one's ankle (happens all the time in horror flicks) or something happens that keeps you from going further, like maybe somehow you get stuck and have to go backwards to get unstuck, things like that.

Voting Section

Voting Rules

Votes must be numbered, justified, signed, and timestamped. # justification ~~~~ Votes that do not conform to the above may be struck by any user.

The only valid votes are Keep, Kill, Spam or Dupe. If you wish to abstain from voting, do not vote.

Keep Votes

1. Keep - Ecellent Idea, the thought that trading is even a little closer makes my toes curl Richard Rose 04:43, 15 April 2008 (BST)
2. Keep - I think this is a great idea, I can't see why its so bad. Danny Williams 14:14, 15 April 2008 (BST)
3. Weak Keep- It stops people acidentally activating the zerging countermeasures. It doesn't affect zergs much though- most zergs use proxy servers anyway.--Studoku ^W! 17:46, 15 April 2008 (BST)

Kill Votes

1. Kill - Not good enough. --Pgunn 06:03, 15 April 2008 (BST)

   How is it not good enough? --Garviel Loken^{No Pity! No Remorse! No Fear! Talk}07:47, 15 April 2008 (BST)

2. Kill - this doesn't fix any of the limitations of the current zerging countermeasures -- boxy ^{talk • i} 14:27 15 April 2008 (BST)
3. Kill If someone has multiple characters it would be possible for them to trap each other so the player could not move them apart. --Jon Pyre 15:25, 15 April 2008 (BST)
4. Kill - this doesn't really fix anything --~~~~ [talk] 19:05, 15 April 2008 (BST)

Spam/Dupe Votes

1. Spam Same suburb and 10 spaces are NOT the same thing. Your also hurting people who play together more than zergers. Besides its an incomplete suggestion. What happens to your character? what kind of messages?--Pesatyel 04:40, 15 April 2008 (BST)

   What would work for a message for said character? -—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Garviel Loken (talk • contribs) at an unknown time.

2. Spam - This does not "make zerging literally impossible to do". In fact, if a good way of making zerging impossible actually existed, don't you think it would have come up before? --Pdeq^Talk* 05:48, 15 April 2008 (BST)
3. Spam - I really don't want to spame this suggestion; but it would hurt people who use the same IP address to much, but besides that it's a really good suggestion.--Jamie Cantwel3 06:25, 15 April 2008 (BST)

   Can you think of anything that could address that issue? --Garviel Loken^{No Pity! No Remorse! No Fear! Talk}07:47, 15 April 2008 (BST)

4. Spam - Edited when under voting. -- John Rubin^{T! ZG} 08:52, 15 April 2008 (BST)
5. Spam - Sorry, I'm also against zerging, but it won't help too much. It will mostly hurt people playing from one LAN. And it won't stop most hardcore cheaters who use many proxy servers. -- 
   •  Nevin McAvoy 
   •  (talk) 
   09:34, 15 April 2008 (BST)
6. Spam - Not everyone is in the country which owns two-thirds of the world's IP addresses (read: USA). If you really need to be reminded, a lot of countries have a large number of internet users sharing a very small range of IP addresses. This will do more harm than good. ~Ariedartin • Talk • A KS J abt all 16:35, 15 April 2008 (BST)
7. Spam - As above, especially Ariedartin (You saw into my mind! Get out of it! If you choose to stay though, be aware it's rated M...) -- The Lethal Trio ^{[Tlk|NTCS|RRF] U! E!} 17:29, 15 April 2008 (BST)
8. Spam - As Ariedartin, plus, gods help them, those poor AOL users.  Billy Club Thorton  T!  RR  18:08, 15 April 2008 (BST)
9. Spam - Edited under voting, also you can move into the barrier.... -- . . <== DDR Approved Editor 19:28, 15 April 2008 (BST)
10. Spam - Damn edit conflict. >:( As above. Also edited after voting began. Goodbye. -- Cheese 19:29, 15 April 2008 (BST)