Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

DJDavid98 · Before February 2015

After being on Everybody Edits for a year now, I see guest bombing is a bit too overused to make NOOB levels more popular. I don't say everyone who guestbombs has a noob level, but in most cases, thus there should be a limitation:
1st Way: add maximum x number of guests limit & idea (see below)
2nd Way: guest and player worlds could be separated just like beta and normal worlds, also allowing guests to make worlds. This way, guests could not play levels, therefore no guest bombing. You are thinking: "This is bad! Guests won't be able to see what other players created!" In most games, you MUST register to even play.
With this limitation guests could try out the game, maybe with most of the blocks, and register to try getting them. This solution is a bit hard and may be considered bad for 75% for the people out there.
3rd Way:

?tilla wrote:

Only maximum of 2 of the same IP-Addresses allowed in a single room.

- THE IDEA -

My general idea is, to make levels ABLE to be highlighted in the level list.
This one idea is about using gems, to get your level a different colored name, or different look on the world list. Even possibly a new tab "Hot" or something like that.

Now, I don't care if Chris does not even read this, please keep me away from the posts saying that
I care about what the community thinks, and not "****" "gay" "this **** suks" "no", if you dare to post anything explain what is the problem, not "your argument is invalid" "just no".
Thanks.

Last edited by DJDavid98 (Jun 9 2012 10:29:57 am)

Buzzerbee · Before February 2015

There's nothing wrong with guest bombing.

~Omri~ · Before February 2015

BuzzerBee wrote:

There's nothing wrong with guest bombing.

exacly

DJDavid98 · Before February 2015

smileyxp · Before February 2015

BuzzerBee wrote:

There's nothing wrong with guest bombing.

of course he knew that.

It's bad when all those 'boring' worlds go to the top of the list.
like those stair worlds, or code is ' ' ' '.

DJDavid98 · Before February 2015

smileyxp wrote:

...

You deserve a trophy for figuring that out

Last edited by DJDavid98 (Mar 11 2012 2:10:12 pm)

XxAtillaxX · Before February 2015

Or, how about a better idea. Only maximum of 2 of the same IP-Addresses allowed in a single room.

Problem solved.

smileyxp · Before February 2015

DJDavid98 wrote:

smileyxp wrote:
...
http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/6604/whyws.png

I changed it, My profile is viewable now.

DJDavid98 · Before February 2015

smileyxp wrote:

DJDavid98 wrote:
smileyxp wrote:
...
http://img38.imageshack.us/img38/6604/whyws.png
I changed it, My profile is viewable now.

Still not for me. :rolleyes:
EDIT: Cleared chache, still not :\
EDIT2: Now it works

Last edited by DJDavid98 (Mar 12 2012 7:51:55 am)

Jaybm · Before February 2015

?tilla wrote:

Or, how about a better idea. Only maximum of 2 of the same IP-Addresses allowed in a single room.
Problem solved.

That would be perfect.

SWL · Before February 2015

I agree with DJDavid98,because without guestbombing,there will be less nooby worlds in the top of the list(still lots of nooby ones,but less)

Shift · Before February 2015

Hm, yeah, except that the bad levels aren't usually guestbombed... Crappy levels are popular because they're the only levels that noobs can actually handle, not because they're guestbombed. If we can't guestbomb anymore, then decent levels will rarely ever become popular again.

DJDavid98 · Before February 2015

You guys don't seem to read my idea, which could change guest bombing in a good way to a better and more suitable solution.

xRichTofenx · Before February 2015

I hate useing guest bombing I just do what some regular people do is by just haveing people join and playing my world not useing guest bomb.

DJDavid98 · Before February 2015

xRichTofenx wrote:

I hate useing guest bombing I just do what some regular people do is by just haveing people join and playing my world not useing guest bomb.

Just a small correction, not to blame you, but it's having and using, the E magically disappears in these cases, just so you know

DJDavid98 · Before February 2015

meredith1999 wrote:

Did you know even mihb guestbombs

Yeah, and?

St Cool · Before February 2015

The problem with only 2 IP's is if a brother or sister wants to play in your world when you have 2 of you.
Even though I'm not against guest bombing because it gets people to your world quick. If you guest bomb that world yourself aswell their guestbomb aswell as your will crash.

Koya · Before February 2015

Meh, Guest bombing is for the people who create 44 guests.

Shift · Before February 2015

DJDavid98 wrote:

You guys don't seem to read my idea, which could change guest bombing in a good way to a better and more suitable solution.

No, you don't seem to read my answer.

XxAtillaxX · Before February 2015

St Cool wrote:

The problem with only 2 IP's is if a brother or sister wants to play in your world when you have 2 of you.
Even though I'm not against guest bombing because it gets people to your world quick. If you guest bomb that world yourself aswell their guestbomb aswell as your will crash.

The reason I said two is because in some cases there is two people who have the same IP. But I really doubt those two IPs will be playing the same EE level if playing EE at all..

Oh and, the brother/sister thing. I don't think the brother and sister will be using the same computer, more like they will be using two separate computers with Internet connections. Thus they have two different IP addresses.

There's not much of a problem with this solution. It's perfectly viable, nobody gets upset.

32OrtonEdge32dh · Before February 2015

Jaybm wrote:

?tilla wrote:
Or, how about a better idea. Only maximum of 2 of the same IP-Addresses allowed in a single room.
Problem solved.
That would be perfect.

I think four would be better, because I know a lot of people who play with their siblings.

Deetz · Before February 2015

I personally use guest bombing at one time or another, and it's good for a level you want to get "jump-started" for the first time.

Example: my level "the holy grail"- I guest bombed just to get people to see, as I think it is a good level worth viewing.

Another Example: In a nonsaved world I made as a public service announcement against stairs, (it didn't work, noobs still make stairs) I guest bombed to get people to see this argument.

In these situations, guest bombing is a useful tool and I believe that it should not be prevented, it just needs to be understood that terrible levels don't deserve to be at the top of the level list. That is what I have to say on the subject. Thank yyou for your time.

Buzzerbee · Before February 2015

Why is this even a problem? If people want to guest bomb then they can guest bomb.

If people want to hack they can hack.

It doesn't really matter it's not like it's affecting anyone in a negative way.

N1KF · Before February 2015

If guest-bombing goes down, than it comes down to user-bombing. BUT, I would need to remember a bunch of passwords/emails, OR I could make the passwords really simalar.

xRichTofenx · Before February 2015

Omg hwo needs guest bombing I just plane hate it so much. Its used just to get noob levels to the top. :/

Official Everybody Edits Forums

#1 Before February 2015

Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#2 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#3 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#4 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#5 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#6 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#7 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#8 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#9 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#10 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#11 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#12 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#13 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#14 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#15 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#16 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#17 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#18 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#19 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#20 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#21 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#22 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#23 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#24 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

#25 Before February 2015

Re: Possible solution(s) against Guest-bombing

Board footer