Go ahead, pull the other one.

---

TG, TG, GL, et al.

They also usually prompt you somehow to respond to them. I've only ever seen two script checks. Once was a bird I had to wave to, and it was very obvious that I had to wave to it. The other was a cat that showed up and played with my character's sandals. I ended up feeding it crab claws or something and got a RPA out of the deal.

It you see something odd, just respond to it. You never know what will happen. :)

---
Inauri

>>Jwark4: So I'm sitting in a room training skills and a mesquito starts buzzing around. I'm curious what will happen with it and watch it for awhile. Next thing you know I'm being warned for scripting. How is this just?

Without seeing the entire script check, I can't say whether you should've known that you were supposed to respond to the mosquito, but in my experience, it's very obvious when you are being script checked. A script check may begin as something subtle, but it becomes increasingly obvious. By the end (usually several minutes later), something is repeatedly demanding a response from you.

---

Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall rank!

>>Yes it started becoming very frequent. I still was curious what was going to happen. I did not suspect someone was purposely trying to get me in trouble. It said "you better slap it" or something but I didn't want to. What exactly is obvious? The mesquito or what the reason is behind it?

A mosquito was buzzing around your ear and the messaging intentionally indicated you should slap it. This occurred frequently and for a nice chunk of time.

You didn't respond at all? You don't have to follow the messaging prompt by slapping it; you could curse, or swear to end the mosquito's life, or make humorous observation: anything tht indicates to the GM you are, in fact, present at the keyboard.

They did not give me a send, there was nothing in monster bold. It appears I do not get experience when logged off now as well so just moving on is not something I'm interested in doing unless moving on means cancelling my account for being treated this way.

<<After the frequency increases of the messaging the GMs will give you a [Send]. it shows up in monster bold and it very very obvious on what is going on.>>

>>That is not accurate at all.

It isn't? Not that I have a huge amount of experience when it comes to AFK checks, but it's always been my understanding that AFK checks start off as IC nudges but eventually become super loud flashing light alarm sounding (well, at least the text equivalent...) "ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION"s.

<<It isn't? Not that I have a huge amount of experience when it comes to AFK checks, but it's always been my understanding that AFK checks start off as IC nudges but eventually become super loud flashing light alarm sounding (well, at least the text equivalent...) "ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION"s.>>

There's no [SEND] or monsterbolded text involved (although you do get a [SEND] once you're in the holding room letting you know why you're there), however, a properly executed script check is impossible to miss or to confuse for anything normal near the end.


Solomon

>>It isn't? Not that I have a huge amount of experience when it comes to AFK checks, but it's always been my understanding that AFK checks start off as IC nudges but eventually become super loud flashing light alarm sounding (well, at least the text equivalent...) "ARE YOU PAYING ATTENTION"s.

It depends on the GM.

Some are obvious and he will spam you if you don't respond.

Some are actually kind of subtle and can get lost in combat spam.

Honestly having played for so many years it's a call and response action for most of us. But for genuinely new players it's probably pretty confusing.

AFK checks are complete crap in my opinion. Generally, you HAVE to interact with whatever the GM is doing to you to get it to stop, which is forcing your character to respond in a specific way. If my character saw an annoying monkey, he wouldn't scream at it. He'd probably stick it full of arrows, skin it, and eat it.

A few times I've gotten AFK checks in an obvious OOC manner, and it bright yellow letters. This is vastly preferred, because it's WAY more obvious, way easier to notice when I'm running multiple screens, and it doesn't force me to break character.

But, of course, our opinions don't matter. We're just the customers.

>>Generally, you HAVE to interact with whatever the GM is doing to you to get it to stop, which is forcing your character to respond in a specific way.

Why not just REPORT back with something that acknowledges the script check?

>>If my character saw an annoying monkey, he wouldn't scream at it. He'd probably stick it full of arrows, skin it, and eat it.

While I'd love for a GM to weigh in on this, something like "report screaming at a monkey wouldn't be something my character would do" would probably be a reasonable way to pass a script check.

>>2) Blatantly OOC script-checks are easy to counter in your afk scripts by logging the character out when you receive a SEND, or some such. I am not a GM, but I think there is a reason they have switched to IC methods: it's impossible to afk script past a script check when the script check involves different messaging every time.

Except they reuse the same few over and over. It's just as easy to avoid those as it is to avoid SENDs.

<<While I'd love for a GM to weigh in on this, something like "report screaming at a monkey wouldn't be something my character would do" would probably be a reasonable way to pass a script check.>>

I would think that since a GM is there watching the room, the use of MYCHAR might be an option instead of report.

Yamcer

---

"You know, while I understand the importance of seeing the (personal) validity in other's arguments, it's impossible for me to believe fully that others are correct. If their argument was correct, I'd change mine." - My GF

>>I would think that since a GM is there watching the room, the use of MYCHAR might be an option instead of report.
I was considering that option, too, but I don't know if GMs would always get mychar messages. It seems like something they could choose to ignore.>>

Both are probably acceptable responses to script checks. You can always appeal even a failed one. If your getting script checks and spamming mychar wants you to leave me alone this monkey sucks, I'm sure even if you get a failed check the GMs would look at the log and pass you. I think a lot of this you fail and your screwed mentality is kind of crazy. Its REALLY hard to fail a script check, and its IMPOSSIBLE in every way to fail one if your actually ATK. (unless of course you dont speak and read english... if that is the case you probably have larger issues playing a text based game in English.)

>>By the end of the test, they are far from subtle.

The ones I've gotten for sure, but I've never failed an AFK scripting check. I get the full benefit of the doubt.

I've seen plenty of absolutely bollocks AFK checks from folks who are not so fortunate.

>>Except they reuse the same few over and over. It's just as easy to avoid those as it is to avoid SENDs.

They don't, although there are strong parallels between them because, well, they all are trying to accomplish the same goal.

But that all avoids the real crux of the issue. New accounts receive extra attention and more frequent AFK checks. I realize this is a function of somewhat automated criteria checking, but it honestly would alienate a new player who wasn't made aware that these are going to happen, and with frequency, until they're about 20th circle (and beyond, depending on a few things).

>>I'm sorry, but that's just blatantly false. There are no mechanics involved that increase or decrease the odds of any account being checked for violating any policy based on its age.

And yet directly observable. I realize it's not in your interests for people to realize that there are criteria that make your character more likely to receive an AFK scripting check, but please have the decency not to lie directly to your customers.

>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

Fair or not, there actually is a VERY strong perception among players that new and/or returning players are far more likely to be script-checked. As much as I want to tell people they're being paranoid and delusional, my firsthand circumstantial evidence says otherwise. After returning from a 5 year break from DR I was script-checked twice in the first month or two after I returned, and not once in the ~18 months since. I'd put my money on the most likely explanation being that it wouldn't be uncommon for GMs to repeatedly script-check someone who is frequently running scripts in an inaccessable room (backroom of a Trader shop in my case), but that after a couple checks where the player responds immediately and then gets an RPA for it, they would be more likely to receive benefit of the doubt when seen repeating the same behavior

Anyone who thinks there is some automated system for script-checking new people, would be crazy (seriously, of all the things to spend GM time coding?). But I would not dismiss at all the likely possibility that people who have played a long time are given more benefit of the doubt which leads to being script-checked less often - perhaps just subconciously, or perhaps after earning that benefit of the doubt by having already passed multiple script checks

Apu
_
http://www.elanthipedia.com/wiki/User:Apu

Confirmation bias may be applied to this as well, but I can tell you that I had gamed hard for months (i.e. played most of the day months at a time (I had a lot of time, and not much money, but this was my fun thing to pay, and for me basic subscription costs weren't over-the-top, I know some complain of that but, I don't see it). And I never received a script check, I figure it was over a year before I saw my first script check, the next one came a bit closer to the first then the long period I had never seen one.

I don't think I've had more then two, and currently its been months and months.

This is just ancedotal evidence, but maybe it'll sway a few of you, to realize that chances are AFK checking are done on people in areas that not a lot of things other then scripting are done, and those people who tend to frequent those areas will largely be checked. And I have nothing to suggest that SIMU does this, I just feel that they probably try to get the most bang for the time they spend script checking, I'd also figure they do it not to get people out of the game, but rather to try and keep a certain environment uphold, and as such some people from time to time get thrown out, or hopefully just have minor penalties placed on them.

Once again, just my personal feel of this. I am not a SIMU employee, nor anything other then a paying playing player.



_____________________________________
Victory Over Lyras, on the 397th year and 156 days since the Victory of Lanival the Redeemer.

Been script checked many times, never noticed any pattern with being checked for reactivation or what-not.

<<And yet directly observable.>>

Oh, I forgot. You have access to see exactly who gets checked and who doesn't, so you can see that there's clearly an active effort made to script check new accounts. You've also seen the system that scans and suggests people to check, so you know that contains a check to weight new accounts and push them toward the top.

<<I realize it's not in your interests for people to realize that there are criteria that make your character more likely to receive an AFK scripting check, but please have the decency not to lie directly to your customers.>>

Just stop.


Solomon

>>Oh, I forgot. You have access to see exactly who gets checked and who doesn't, so you can see that there's clearly an active effort made to script check new accounts. You've also seen the system that scans and suggests people to check, so you know that contains a check to weight new accounts and push them toward the top.

I'd prefer you just apologized for lying directly to your customers and move on instead of trying to redirect here. If I did have substantiating evidence presenting it in a public forum to support my claims would completely undermine your ability to conduct policy enforcement.

Please don't bait me and do the right thing.