Time to enforce the name holding expiration rules

[Rathulfr]

4 minutes ago, Krimson said:

If you are really sure that there is wrongdoing happening, then how did that information get to you? Surely it had to come from somewhere, and if said information that you insist is real does in fact exist, there is evidence. Burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused, and you are making some hefty accusations based on "logical deduction". So in this day and age of people standing before judges and shouting, "The wrongdoing is real. You gotta believe me!", yes I am being dismissive. If you can't prove that you're not just making things up, don't complain when people don't believe you.

 

I'm not accusing anyone of anything.  I'm discussing a logical conclusion from the circumstances at hand.  I think you're being absurd. 

 

Player accounts exist.  Character names exist.  Character names are reserved.  If you wanted to name a character "Rathstar" right now on any of the 5 shards, you could not, because I have characters named "Rathstar" on all 5 shards.  And they will continue to exist as long as this instance of the game exists.  If I decided to stop playing this instance of the game right now, "Rathstar" would never be available to anyone else, ever, unless/until the HC team decides to start enforcing their published name policy.

 

There's no conspiracy theory here.  There's no accusations.  There's just facts of what is.  What's so difficult to understand about that?

 

[Galaxy Brain]

27 minutes ago, Krimson said:

If you are really sure that there is wrongdoing happening, then how did that information get to you? Surely it had to come from somewhere, and if said information that you insist is real does in fact exist, there is evidence. Burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused, and you are making some hefty accusations based on "logical deduction". So in this day and age of people standing before judges and shouting, "The wrongdoing is real. You gotta believe me!", yes I am being dismissive. If you can't prove that you're not just making things up, don't complain when people don't believe you.

What is being accused here? This is just common sense and you can even back it up with the statistics thread in general.

 

There are X number of total accounts, and Y active accounts each day that are a fraction of the total. It stands to reason that a chunk of X are people who logged in for the first few months, then left never to play again once their nostalgia itch was scratched. Those accounts that have been left untouched for over a year could be assumed to be abandoned. 

[Haijinx]

21 minutes ago, Rathulfr said:

 

I'm not accusing anyone of anything.  I'm discussing a logical conclusion from the circumstances at hand.  I think you're being absurd. 

 

Player accounts exist.  Character names exist.  Character names are reserved.  If you wanted to name a character "Rathstar" right now on any of the 5 shards, you could not, because I have characters named "Rathstar" on all 5 shards.  And they will continue to exist as long as this instance of the game exists.  If I decided to stop playing this instance of the game right now, "Rathstar" would never be available to anyone else, ever, unless/until the HC team decides to start enforcing their published name policy.

 

There's no conspiracy theory here.  There's no accusations.  There's just facts of what is.  What's so difficult to understand about that?

 

Also you can create as many accounts as you want, AND its 1000 characters per shard.

 

Of course there are characters that are now idle/ effectively dead.   

 

I have quite a few.  

 

I tend to recycle my "good" names and name my idle characters something number.  

 

But I have a few that aren't "quite" idle.  

[Galaxy Brain]

Just now, Krimson said:

I haven't had any problems finding names I like. Logically, if you use a bit of imagination, then coming up with an original name isn't a form of hardship. But if the OP thinks he can use gentle force to get the Homecoming team to work at a pace that he likes, then good luck to him. I'm not going to make presumptions about a free game run by volunteers. No one I actively play with has had any trouble coming up with names. Therefore based on my own personal experience, which is just as valid as anyone else's, the problem doesn't exist. 

 

I already offered a solution. Get rid of names completely and just use global names. Everyone is their global, and if you want to call your toon something else, put it in the bio space. I highly doubt many care about the names of other people's toons, only their own. So if you get rid of them completely, there would literally be nothing to complain about. 

It doesn't matter if you can find names or not, the issue is that compared to live there is a massive amount of character real estate and a large amount of abandonment on a game with no barrier to entry. That means there will be inactive names just sitting there when they are a commodity.

 

Swapping everything to globals is too fundamental a change, so inactivity is something that could be enforced. 

 

Besides, this is something that had been brought up by the devs themselves so there is an expectation that it would be done in some manner. Figuring out how it will be done is up for question. 

[Greycat]

32 minutes ago, Krimson said:

If you are really sure that there is wrongdoing happening, then how did that information get to you? Surely it had to come from somewhere, and if said information that you insist is real does in fact exist, there is evidence. Burden of proof is on the accuser, not the accused, and you are making some hefty accusations based on "logical deduction". So in this day and age of people standing before judges and shouting, "The wrongdoing is real. You gotta believe me!", yes I am being dismissive. If you can't prove that you're not just making things up, don't complain when people don't believe you.

Um...

 

What, exactly, are you reading in his statement that says anything about "wrongdoing?"

 

Wrongdoing would be "Someone is logging into other peoples' accounts without their knowledge and renaming their characters so the name is freed," for instance. In which case, yes, he should talk to the devs and admins.

 

His statement, though, is that the problem (as he sees it) is the names "Locked behind inactive accounts." While you can (and I have, somewhat) argue that he doesn't *know* the names that usually lead to this sort of thread are on inactive accounts, that's not an accusation of any sort of malicious activity. It's a simple statement which, yes, does make logical sense. There are accounts that are not being used. Those accounts have characters on them. Those characters, as part of the creation process, are named. Those names are removed from availability (locked) until/unless something is done to free them up, whether it's dev action or the account holder coming back and renaming or deleting them.

 

There's a huge gap between that and "wrongdoing is being done." Pretty sure you can see that gap clearly from orbit, it's so wide.

 

 

[Rathulfr]

8 minutes ago, Haijinx said:

Also you can create as many accounts as you want, AND its 1000 characters per shard.

 

Of course there are characters that are now idle/ effectively dead.   

 

I have quite a few.  

 

I tend to recycle my "good" names and name my idle characters something number.  

 

But I have a few that aren't "quite" idle.  

 

To me, it doesn't matter if the characters are idle, as long as your account is active.  If you're actively playing the game, logging on at least once per year, then you have nothing to fear.  Nobody should swoop your names, even if you haven't played a particular character since April of 2019.

 

My complaint -- which I don't think is unreasonable -- is accounts that haven't been played in over a year getting to keep character names they aren't using anyway.  Hell, I'd even grant them the privilege of keeping their level 50 character names forever, if it would allow for the release of other names below 50.

 

[Bastille Boy]

Has anyone on Homecoming ever obtained a name by persuading another player to rename a character?

 

I would expect most emails asking a player to rename a character to receive either no response or a negative response.

[Rathulfr]

8 minutes ago, Bastille Boy said:

Has anyone on Homecoming ever obtained a name by persuading another player to rename a character?

 

I would expect most emails asking a player to rename a character to receive either no response or a negative response.

 

I'd be delighted to get a negative response.  I've asked for negative responses in my e-mails.  I don't care if the recipient cusses me out a blue streak a mile wide to say "Hell, NO!"

 

At least that would be a response.  I've tried /tell, /gfriend, and in-game e-mails.  I've yet to receive a single response.  Not ONE response.  Zero.  Zip.  Zilch.  Nada.

 

I've a short list of global names that I try every quarter or so.  I've never gotten anything back, ever.   This thread reminded me that it has been a few months since my last round, so I just sent another batch of /tells and mails.  Let's see what happens.

 

Edited December 13, 2020 by Rathulfr

[Snowdaze]

On 12/12/2020 at 3:28 PM, Tyrannical said:

Following on from my earlier comment, I might have something of a raw ballpark formula that we could work from, taking the following into consideration;

 

• Account inactivity
• Character inactivity
• Character level
• Playtime (in hours)

 

Account Inactivity + Character Inactivity = Total Inactivity

(Character Level x Playtime) - Character Inactivity = Character Career

Total Inactivity - Character Career = Inactivity Value

When your Inactivity Value is a positive figure, you are flagged and your name may be taken.

I like where you are going with this, BUT I think there should be some initial give to account for fresh accounts AND people squatting on lvl one names that are actively at least logging the character on to hold the name. If they want to put forth the effort to maintain 70 lvl 1 name holder then what ever they are paying their dues. Right now your math will basically flag low playtime lvl 1's. But this could be as simple as adding a buffer -90 (3 months I'm being generous) to log in any character. If and thus ANY character if logged on in the last 90 days is always safe as well.

[Snowdaze]

Some people are complaining about notification...
If there is a forum post, a discord @everyone, and a popup server notification the one you have to click 'ok' a couple times before it happens... You've been warned. If none of these catch your attention either:
a) you never read anything and it's your own fault if you loose a name 
b) you are an idle account.
c) extenuating circumstances (could be handled on a case by case basis which applicable evidence to support your case)
 

If you have a problem with logging on your characters at least once every X days [example 90] to maintain a character name, you:
a) have a problem and have far too many characters, and you should probably get some help
b) you are a dragon, name squatting on countless names and you don't feel like you should ever have to invest any of your time to maintaining your stash of names

c) you don't actually play any of your characters, and you just like to watch the world burn

[Alchemystic]

2 hours ago, Snowdaze said:

I like where you are going with this, BUT I think there should be some initial give to account for fresh accounts AND people squatting on lvl one names that are actively at least logging the character on to hold the name. If they want to put forth the effort to maintain 70 lvl 1 name holder then what ever they are paying their dues. Right now your math will basically flag low playtime lvl 1's. But this could be as simple as adding a buffer -90 (3 months I'm being generous) to log in any character. If and thus ANY character if logged on in the last 90 days is always safe as well.

The formula should flag anything that indicates inactivity or name squatting, regardless of level.

I didn't originally think of putting a safety buffer in because I wasn't sure how it could be abused, but if we can find something that can eliminate it flagging new characters without also it also being open to manipulation then I think we have something we can work with.

 

Though realistically speaking, so long as you make a new character, and then just continue to play it (even casually) it shouldn't flag you.

 

The only way I can see this system being cheated is if somebody literally logs into every level 1 character they're squatting with every day. They would have to actively do this which I dont think many people would.

 

I'm not saying the formula is foolproof, because is sure isn't, but it's a strong enough deterrent that makes namesquatting harder to do, while also ensuring that accounts that are completely inactive arent also sitting on names.

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Tyrannical

[Clave Dark 5]

7 hours ago, Rathulfr said:

 

The problem isn't "running out of names".  The problem is names that are locked behind idle accounts.  Many of us here had character names we loved back in retail, and when we came to Homecoming, we were dismayed to discover that they had been taken by others. 

 

Now all's fair in love and war, and it's one thing if we were unlucky enough to have missed our opportunity by being late to the party.  That's fair enough.  But it's been almost two years now (April 2019 was over 18 months ago), and most of the initial surge of returning players have come and gone (as evidenced by the number of active players visible on the status page at any given moment).  Is it fair that many of those long-gone players get to keep their unused names forever?

 

The proposal here is to simply start enforcing the published name policy (or some variation thereof), to unreserve names that are locked behind idle accounts.  The proposal is that active accounts should get priority over idle accounts, where the definition of "idle" is liberally defined as "no logon in over 1 year". 

 

Of course, there should be adequate notification to inform idle accounts of any pending actions, using patch notes, launcher text, Discord messages, and e-mail notifications (all accounts have corresponding e-mail addresses).  Additionally, players with idle accounts who cannot logon by the chosen deadline date (TBD) should have the option to open a support ticket via forum or e-mail to request an exemption/bypass.

 

In other words: set the policy, announce the policy, enforce the policy.  Give all players the opportunity to act/respond by a specified deadline before action is taken.  Active accounts would automatically be exempt from the policy, as well as any others who specifically request exemptions.  That would leave only those accounts who choose not to act/respond by the deadline subject to effects of the policy.  Is that fair enough?

 

(edit) BTW: If it's a matter of manpower, I volunteer to assist.  Point me towards where I can sign up to help, if only for this one specific task.  I'm an IT guy by profession, having managed Active Directory for over 20 years.  I'm intimately familiar with identity management systems, so this kind of thing is right up my alley.

 

I've seen it described as running out of names more than once, yes, not everyone here believes that, but it's not absent from the conversation going on.  If the live game could run for years with real sub numbers, I think we can obviously get along fine without enacting the unlocking policy.  I don't really care if they do or don't - the more updates to the old game the better! - but I've been led to believe it's not an easy thing?  Maybe I'm wrong on that. 

 

The hyperbole of it all is what I was reacting to.

[Clave Dark 5]

9 hours ago, BadMinotaur said:

No one is trying to make anyone "bend" a certain way, because real life people aren't cartoon villains who exert control for no reason. We only play as them in this video game instead =P

How is it not a bend?  Hyperbole about cartoon supervillians is silly here - villains take what they want by force and don't give options to opt out, ha ha.

[Snowdaze]

47 minutes ago, Clave Dark 5 said:

I've seen it described as running out of names more than once, yes, not everyone here believes that, but it's not absent from the conversation going on.  If the live game could run for years with real sub numbers, I think we can obviously get along fine without enacting the unlocking policy.  I don't really care if they do or don't - the more updates to the old game the better! - but I've been led to believe it's not an easy thing?  Maybe I'm wrong on that. 

 

The hyperbole of it all is what I was reacting to.

name freeing script would not actually be a modification to the game code at all, it would be a script run against the character database only which is a separate server then the game code and program.

[Clave Dark 5]

12 minutes ago, Snowdaze said:

name freeing script would not actually be a modification to the game code at all, it would be a script run against the character database only which is a separate server then the game code and program.

That's splitting hairs, tt's still a change to "the game" that were in place previously.  One wonders however why they haven't done it already yet, then; maybe they have good reasons.

 

Seems to me this is just a lot of work to achieve partial results (every returning vet won't get their favorite name back, for instance).  The best way to address that and every other issue surrounding the topic would be to work towards freeing up all names for anyone, no unique names for anyone, then the most people will be able to play happy.

[Player2]

  

9 hours ago, Rathulfr said:

BTW: If it's a matter of manpower, I volunteer to assist.  Point me towards where I can sign up to help, if only for this one specific task.  I'm an IT guy by profession, having managed Active Directory for over 20 years.  I'm intimately familiar with identity management systems, so this kind of thing is right up my alley.

 

It isn't really an issue of manpower.  See bottom of this post.

 

  

27 minutes ago, Clave Dark 5 said:

That's splitting hairs, tt's still a change to "the game" that were in place previously.  One wonders however why they haven't done it already yet, then; maybe they have good reasons.

 

Seems to me this is just a lot of work to achieve partial results (every returning vet won't get their favorite name back, for instance).  The best way to address that and every other issue surrounding the topic would be to work towards freeing up all names for anyone, no unique names for anyone, then the most people will be able to play happy.

This has actually been addressed already on page 2.  See GM Impervium's reply below.

 

As for how much work it might be, well... there was a script of this nature run in the past.  Not sure if they have access to that code or if they have to write their own, or maybe they have access to the old but need to make changes to it to account for changes to the game that Homecoming has made (such as increasing character slots to 1000 per shard per account).

 

  

On 12/10/2020 at 9:04 AM, GM Impervium said:

Just popping back in for a sec to remind everyone to keep things civil and to be excellent to each other 😃

And, as an aside, I do want to say that we are still looking into this. However, experience has shown that when we make a sweeping change, sometimes things get overlooked, or there's unintended consequences, or whatever. I'm sure everyone knows about the adjustment to /ebfp, and the introduction of LRTP and all that, and how through feedback we added more powers, and changed requirements, and kept going back and forth, and no matter what, some people were still... not very happy. Well, guess what? On top of all of that, if you transfer between shards, LRTP no longer works (Pro tip, don't transfer characters right now, it breaks LRTP). So THAT's broken, and we're still trying to fix it.

Note that this is NOT the thread to discuss these changes, but I bring them up to draw a hypothetical comparison:

If we're going to do this? We have ONE shot. We won't get weeks of fine tuning, and adjustments, and feedback. We'll code it in, flip the switch, and it's DONE. And if there's just one misplaced argument, or IF statement, or 1 or 0? Then it might make all CURRENT names unlocked, and suddenly you'll see someone with YOUR main's name in Atlas broadcast screaming out for DFB. Or maybe everything will seem fine until you transfer servers, and despite the name being available, it gets lost in the void and becomes unclaimable. Or someone else transfers onto your sever and takes your name WHILE you're playing that character!

All the same people who want names freed up, are the same people who are most likely to be negatively impacted if things go wrong. So we HAVE to get it right the first time. It's a huge undertaking, so we just ask for patience while we dot our i's and cross our t's. Thank you 😃

(Note that I'm not trying to be the final word on this, feel free to continue exchanging ideas, but again, please keep it civil!)

 

[MTeague]

8 hours ago, Bastille Boy said:

Has anyone on Homecoming ever obtained a name by persuading another player to rename a character?

 

I would expect most emails asking a player to rename a character to receive either no response or a negative response.

How I responded would depend greatly on the name in question.

 

I have 40 characters total.  15 or so names I have that I'm "meh" on, and if it was a big deal to someone, I'd probably relinquish one of those 15.  The other 25 are mine until the sun explodes, or until the devs change their policies such that the name can be taken out from under me.  I'd be polite on that first refusal, saying "Nope, sorry, I'm very attached to that name, and I got it first. That's the way it goes." Followup questions asking if I had the name on live and if so for how long, or offering me influence (or anything else) to relinquish the name, would be met with /gignore. For those 25 names it is not a matter of barter. It matters to me to have them. I will not willingly relinquish them. Ever.

 

That said, I do only take names on one server, even for names I'm very attached to.

As long as I have the name on the server where I play, it's no skin off my nose if someone else has that same name on a different server. 

[Wavicle]

You would have to supply actual evidence that "idle" accounts were holding a lot of names on low level characters. Right now all you have is an assertion that that is the case with no actual evidence supplied.

[Player2]

10 hours ago, Bastille Boy said:

Has anyone on Homecoming ever obtained a name by persuading another player to rename a character?

 

I would expect most emails asking a player to rename a character to receive either no response or a negative response.

For me, I've had one positive experience dealing with an active player with the name of his main from Live.  I created a character  with the same name on one server, and he on another.  I chose the server I thought friends were joining and when I asked to switch, he asked for a little time to figure out where his friends were going... a week later, he agreed to switch.  Several months later, a couple of my friends moved back to where I'd started in the first place.  I kept an eye out on the friends list and when I saw that player again, asked if he was happy with the switch.  Turns out his friends gravitated to his first choice server as well, so we switched back again.  It was all very friendly and such.

 

Aside from that, no other response from people I've tried to get in contact with regarding names and I just gave up.

 

Actually, one other...  I did post a list of names in the character release thread that I was looking for.  One player saw that and offered me the name where I was moving to.  It happened much later after my initial request and I'd almost forgotten about it.  But, yes... that makes two.

 

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Player2

[Alchemystic]

@Snowdaze in regards to the safety buffer for lower levels.

 

Perhaps just to ensure people cant abuse the system just by farming to 50, the grace period should be 6 days + 1/2 your level (rounded up).

 

So a level 1 character would need to log in at least once a week. A level 50 character would have to log in at least once a month.

 

Obviously, this is just the for characters that are created and then immediately left aside, the formula will still treat all other characters fairly, and ensure that casual players arent accidentally flagged too.

 

This safety buffer should probably come into effect after the formula has done its job, so if you are flagged, you have X amount of time (as above) to go active again or risk losing your name.

 

As a side note; I'm not sure how easy it may be to implement, but instead of being instantly generic'd by the system, make it so you keep the name until somebody else tries to use it (either when making a character or changing a name), at which point they get the name and you unfortunately lose it.

 

That way you can still retain ownership of any of your names so long as nobody else tries to use it. So for the most part, this should ensure the game isn't flooded by generic'd characters.

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Tyrannical

[Excraft]

On 12/10/2020 at 11:33 AM, Galaxy Brain said:

Agreed @Six Sixand @Solarverse, though I still think it's probably fair to start looking at accounts where there's been NO activity.

This is how it should be done.  The live Devs ran this name script thing years ago and hardly any names were released. 

 

1 hour ago, Tyrannical said:

A level 50 character would have to log in at least once a month.

No. 

[Alchemystic]

@Excraft

 

You do realise that logging in once a month would only be the case if you were flagged, and you'd only ever get flagged on a level 50 character if they have low playtime (such as being farmed and left aside) or if the account has been inactive for an incredible amount of time.

 

And even then, you have an entire month to fix that before your name might be taken by somebody else, it's not a certainty.

 

If any of that is an issue for you, then you're likely the reason threads like this exist. It's a formula intended to target serial name squatters or abandoned accounts.

 

Edited December 14, 2020 by Tyrannical

[Snowdaze]

1 hour ago, Tyrannical said:

@Snowdaze in regards to the safety buffer for lower levels.

 

Perhaps just to ensure people cant abuse the system just by farming to 50, the grace period should be 6 days + 1/2 your level (rounded up).

 

So a level 1 character would need to log in at least once a week. A level 50 character would have to log in at least once a month.

 

Obviously, this is just the for characters that are created and then immediately left aside, the formula will still treat all other characters fairly, and ensure that casual players arent accidentally flagged too.

 

This safety buffer should probably come into effect after the formula has done its job, so if you are flagged, you have X amount of time (as above) to go active again or risk losing your name.

 

As a side note; I'm not sure how easy it may be to implement, but instead of being instantly generic'd by the system, make it so you keep the name until somebody else tries to use it (either when making a character or changing a name), at which point they get the name and you unfortunately lose it.

 

That way you can still retain ownership of any of your names so long as nobody else tries to use it. So for the most part, this should ensure the game isn't flooded by generic'd characters.

 

I do feel you are a little over zealous on how much of a revolving door of names you want. Keep in mind any formula is still only used in a single run script. Which mean that yes there should be plenty of warning and if you are active and paying attention you will not be at risk of loosing any names personally. However I do feel erring on the side of caution will save headaches for the GM's in the long run, and giving a wider "buffer" is that way.

So despite your believe that a lvl 1 should log on once a week and a lvl 50 once a month, they will likely only run the script once....
I feel the script should be run once a year right before anniversary, and the range should be more like  lvl 1 within the last month up to lvl 50 anytime that year, is much more fair, if one cares about ones name they can find 5 minutes once a year per character its not hard, and also not even remotely encroaching due to fair warning and the event being scheduled annually. If you actively play the game you should be given every chance to maintain any names you already own, this is about inactivity first and foremost.

[Alchemystic]

31 minutes ago, Snowdaze said:

So despite your believe that a lvl 1 should log on once a week and a lvl 50 once a month, they will likely only run the script once....

 

Again, logging in once a week/month would only happen if you were at all flagged by the system, it's not expected of everyone.

 

The first part of the formula is designed to find who should be flagged, but it doesn't cause anything to immediately take effect. So a level 1 character would only be flagged if they were created and then instantly set aside.

 

If you at least play for a little while you'll be absolutely fine, it just encourages people to make use of the characters they have created so you're safe, even if that's just idling in Atlas Park or RPing somewhere. Same applies to level 50s who were farmed up, but the system is more forgiving of that.

 

Then the safety buffer gives people who have been flagged the opportunity to log in, and that would be enough to remove the flag.

 

If you're flagged and you dont log on at all, that's when your name may be up for grabs, but you're safe if nobody else attempts to use it.

 

it's a fairly forgiving three step process in my opinion.

Edited December 14, 2020 by Tyrannical

[Excraft]

48 minutes ago, Tyrannical said:

@Excraft

 

You do realise that logging in once a month would only be the case if you were flagged, and you'd only ever get flagged on a level 50 character if they have low playtime (such as being farmed and left aside) or if the account has been inactive for an incredible amount of time.

 

And even then, you have an entire month to fix that before your name might be taken by somebody else, it's not a certainty.

 

If any of that is an issue for you, then you're likely the reason threads like this exist. It's a formula intended to target serial name squatters or abandoned accounts.

 

Answer is still no.  50s should never be flagged unless the account owner asks for their account info to be deleted.  You can't know one way or another for sure if someone is away permanently or is just taking a break.  Not everyone's life revolves around this game to the point where they have to be logging in every day to prevent someone else from stealing a name.  If you didn't get the name you wanted, do what everyone else does and use another name or do without.  "Serial name squatters" are a myth like Bigfoot.  There's far more combinations of words in the English language to use than names that would get freed up.