When the APL was removed, much of the complaint came from the idea that people liked to log in when they saw someone online they wanted to shoot. Since people don't tend to buddy people they like to shoot for RP reasons, here is a suggestion to get that kind of use back out of the APL.

We should add the following to the "Active Players" link: A list of people who have been seen on 100 (and/or 1) in the last hour. These people are NOT guaranteed to be online, but rather are just said to have been online recently. The list would only update every 15 minutes (or even every hour).

I don't think this idea would re-enable alt-trackers, as alts could easily log in within the same 60 minute timeframe (and therefore completely bork any attempted alt-tracker).

I'd like something like this.

I don't like this one. I like the surprise of an enemy pilot suddenly showing up. Conversely, I also like that my enemies don't see when I'm online.

If its really that big an issue for people... just log in, go do something else for a bit, come back and go to the menu for ignoring people and it will show you everyone who's said anything on any channel you have open.

The APL being gone is a good thing. There is no reason RL or RP for it to exist in any form. Its the equivalent of the Taliban calling the US military to find out if they are around.

"much of the complaint came from the idea that people liked to log in when they saw someone online they wanted to shoot."

The rest of the complaints came from people who wanted to know if there were people on who would shoot them.

ryan: if you don't want people to know you're online... don't talk on 100. That's already standard procedure. Why not make that data available to people who are offline?

that being said, I'm not heavily invested in this suggestion. I'm just saying your argument is flawed.

This is already something that anyone who cared enough could implement. And there's no way of making it non-implementable (even if they took out IRC, as long as you're ingame you can maintain a table of names). I agree with Atice that that particular argument is flawed.

However, there are some questions I have about the implementation. Would it only do 100? Other common public channels? I just typed "obviously not 11," but I guess that's not really necessarily obvious. Anyone maintaining their own table would have access to whichever nation's channel they are. I guess I would support just 100, because otherwise it gets more and more complicated, with user-defined channels, etc.

diqrtvpe: I was thinking just 100 and 1 because they are standard public channels. Maybe it could work for the channels you monitor... but then an account could monitor 32*6=192 channels (a bit much).

But yes, anyone who cared could currently write this if they pleased.

Roda: your suggestion is unnecessarily complex and non-intuitive. The general concept of being able to tag someone to a pseudo-apl is a good one; however, it is not the subject of this thread.

I would be interested to see the before and after data since the removal of the APL. I personally doubt, based on my own observations, that there has been any significant change in the frequency with which players log in or in what activities they pursue- which was at the core of the argument for removing it.

The active players list was removed for a reason. If some one wants to know who's on, log in. I am personally against anything that gives current in game info to anyone who is not in game.

Seriously, what's this about? Did CHRN, CLM, THC and SAS put VPR on the ignore list so the "/msg "pirates name" ping" isn't working for you guys any more?

This... (and your motives)... are so transparent its pathetic.

ryan... I can see 100 just as well as anyone else. what does /ignore have to do with anything? stay on topic mate.

edit: or better yet, think before posting.

OK, since you're going to "play" dumb here...

This is an obvious attempt by you to circumnavigate the removal of the APL, much like VPR and others did by PM spamming or writing scripts that would "/msg 'Name Here' PING" in order to figure out who was on and who was not.

You can pretend that it isn't... but you, me and every one who doesn't join you in the neighborhood of make believe knows exactly what this is and why you want it.

can someone lock this obvious troll for a day thread?

:P

EDIT: if this ever gets implemented (which it won't) i'm just gonna start using 4357 as my main working channel. : )

ryan. it obviously isn't trying to circumvent the removal of APL. please think. if you talk on public channels, you reveal that you're online. this has nothing to do with /msg, or scripts (which never existed). Moreover, just because you made it onto the proposed list doesn't even mean that you're still online. Please read the OP. Stop trolling and GTFO of this thread.

TBF: not a troll thread. just a controversial one. just cause I enjoy controversy doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

"or scripts (which never existed)."

oh.. they did exist, because i have seen them. there were a few alt-checkers around if you knew who to ask.

and

just cause I enjoy controversy doesn't mean it's not a good idea.

no. it doesn't necessarily mean that it's not a bad idea. but the fact that they just removed this from the website, means that SOMEBODY obviously thought it was a bad idea......

the fact that they just removed this from the website

no. they did no such thing. they removed an up-to-date player list which told you definitively what players were online within a minute of accuracy, whether or not a player was trying to run silent. learn2read.

I'm going to use the smallest words I can here Atice, just so you can hopefully understand what my point is.

"if you talk on public channels, you reveal that you're online."

I have no issue with this. I talk on 100 when I don't care if people know I'm on, people who are logged in, people who are actively playing at the time that I am talking. No one not logged in has any reason to know if I or anyone else is logged in.

I'm truly sorry if you had any problems understanding any of that... it's just that I don't know if I can explain it monosyllabically enough for you to understand. Maybe this'll help you...

www.hookedonphonics.com/learntoreadcontent
www.merriam-webster.com

I talk on 100 when I don't care if people know I'm on, people who are logged in, people who are actively playing at the time that I am talking. No one not logged in has any reason to know if I or anyone else is logged in.

So when my buddy comes online, and I tell him that I saw you on chat 30 min ago... you'd have a problem with that too?

What's wrong with making info that is already public, public? Especially if it brings more people online.

I don't care if you tell your buddy that you saw me 30 minutes ago or 5 minutes ago.

This would lead to the same situation as the APL with people using it to avoid certain people or conversely hunt certain people. I'm not going to not talk on 100 just to avoid detection by people OFF LINE. It is public information... for the people in game. For people out of game, log the hell in if they want to now who's on.

My other problem with your idea is that even if its only a small amount of time, it takes time away from things the Devs could be doing to IMPROVE the game, rather than give you the "all clear its safe to log in and CHRN/CLM/SAS/THC won't vaporize you.

This would lead to the same situation as the APL with people using it to avoid certain people or conversely hunt certain people.

If you don't want to be avoided, run silent (at least on 100). It's as simple as that. Why so paranoid? I've never known someone to say "oh look, rats are on. I'm not gonna log in now". The only thing I've ever heard them say is "oh look, rats are talking (aka active), guess I'm not gonna trade in dangerous parts". If they're talking... then they're talking, and the info is out there anyways.

I'm not paranoid... apart from some feeb seeing I'm on, this has no affect on me what so ever. It's just a bad idea and a waste of time.