Agma Forum

[Breakfast]

I got a new Idea. We nned a Forum for Agma. Maybe gold nicks for gold members, Same colors as agf forum. Maybe add games to the forum.

There are so much ideas

[Meerkat]

you make me so freaking hungry!

[Kevin/HazR]

Then it would make more sense to just Rename the current forums and add the features you just said.

[Sugar]

@Breakfast , you always come up with the brightest ideas lol keep them coming!

When I started in this forum, it does get kind of tricky because I wasn't sure which website they are talking about, whether agar.io or agarioforums.io. Now with the agma.io people who are new are even more confused. Also during threads, we always ask people which website they are referring to. 

So yes, I agree. There should be 2 parts of this forums. One for vanilla agar and the other is for agma.io and agarioforums.io if that is still relevant.  

I play agma.io but there are a lot of people in this forum that refers to agar.io too and we dont want to lose those audience as well. So naming the server exclusively for agma.io may not be that wise. @Kevin/HazR  

[Kevin/HazR]

(09-02-2017, 12:56 PM)Sugar Wrote: @Breakfast , you always come up with the brightest ideas lol keep them coming!

When I started in this forum, it does get kind of tricky because I wasn't sure which website they are talking about, whether agar.io or agarioforums.io. Now with the agma.io people who are new are even more confused. Also during threads, we always ask people which website they are referring to. 

So yes, I agree. There should be 2 parts of this forums. One for vanilla agar and the other is for agma.io and agarioforums.io if that is still relevant.  

I play agma.io but there are a lot of people in this forum that refers to agar.io too and we dont want to lose those audience as well. So naming the server exclusively for agma.io may not be that wise. @Kevin/HazR  

No maybe not, but at anytime. Agar.io could get butthurt and copyright strike us, and then we're forced to change name anyways..

[markverano99]

Please make the virus be low price because its to hard to earn coins in agma - [Virex]Master

[Sora]

(03-21-2019, 06:12 AM)markverano99 Wrote: Please make the virus be low price because its to hard to earn coins in agma - [Virex]Master

It's priced highly because it should be hard to get. If everyone could get lots of viruses easily, they could just spam virus drops around the map and players would get annoyed.

[Inuyasha]

Can you make the blocks of coins together so that its not too hard to farm coins and so that its will not disturb players to eat other players cause it blocking players

[Squirrel]

(03-24-2019, 07:46 AM)Inuyasha Wrote: Can you make the blocks of coins together so that its not too hard to farm coins and so that its will not disturb players to eat other players cause it blocking players

I have a feeling that your first language is not English, and just wanted to let you know I had trouble understanding what you were trying to say.

Could I suggest that you try to be a little more specific, and try to explain again what you're hoping that they will change??

[YaGirlBantrr]

I miss agma forums ngl lmao

at least i still got mah testimonial on the main page xD

[FilipCro125]

(03-24-2019, 03:29 PM)YaGirlBantrr Wrote: I miss agma forums ngl lmao

at least i still got mah testimonial on the main page xD

yeeee rip



xcc

[Legend34]

nhocloi2010 spamming ups he use 4 accounts and blocking room 1 and room 2

[FilipCro125]

(04-15-2019, 06:53 AM)Legend34 Wrote: nhocloi2010 spamming ups he use 4 accounts and blocking room 1 and room 2

actually



I think thats allowed xD, I mean spamming powerups is allowed

idk for having 4 accs

[Squirrel]

(04-15-2019, 07:43 AM)FilipCro125 Wrote:

(04-15-2019, 06:53 AM)Legend34 Wrote: nhocloi2010 spamming ups he use 4 accounts and blocking room 1 and room 2

actually



I think thats allowed xD, I mean spamming powerups is allowed

idk for having 4 accs

This is actually a good question.

As far as I know, I thought that we were each limited to one account.

But do the rules actually say that?

What about the intent of the game?

To this point, it has not been possible to identify (via algorithm) people who are teaming. Is it possibly beneficial for the game, or it's lifespan, to simply allow teaming, and make it easier for people to team "by themselves"? I imagine scripts come in handy there.

And would it even be enforceable to hold someone to one account?

People can always claim their younger sister has an account; the two would have the same IP address, and it would be difficult to prove.

But not impossible. TCP/IP streams are encapsulated (packets wrapped), so that they may be delivered to two different machines. They use ARP (Address Resolution Protocol), and each machine has a different identifier. By unwrapping and inspecting packets, you could determine that the brother & sister were playing on the same machine... which means they were one person, not two.

Nevertheless, to have four accounts, I think is simply pushing it too far, and that should be stopped. But again, to prove it, it would take work.

Four people playing from the same office would have the same initial IP -- the outgoing IP on their firewall device, and need to have packets unwrapped to see if they were coming from the same, or different machines.

It all seems like a lot of work over a game that should not be a huge priority in anyone's life?

I'm not even sure I can decide whether to be for or against multiple accounts, even with my bias against Teamers.

[roya]

(04-15-2019, 03:13 PM)Squirrel Wrote:

(04-15-2019, 07:43 AM)FilipCro125 Wrote:

(04-15-2019, 06:53 AM)Legend34 Wrote: nhocloi2010 spamming ups he use 4 accounts and blocking room 1 and room 2

actually



I think thats allowed xD, I mean spamming powerups is allowed

idk for having 4 accs

This is actually a good question.

As far as I know, I thought that we were each limited to one account.

But do the rules actually say that?

What about the intent of the game?

To this point, it has not been possible to identify (via algorithm) people who are teaming. Is it possibly beneficial for the game, or it's lifespan, to simply allow teaming, and make it easier for people to team "by themselves"? I imagine scripts come in handy there.

And would it even be enforceable to hold someone to one account?

People can always claim their younger sister has an account; the two would have the same IP address, and it would be difficult to prove.

But not impossible. TCP/IP streams are encapsulated (packets wrapped), so that they may be delivered to two different machines. They use ARP (Address Resolution Protocol), and each machine has a different identifier. By unwrapping and inspecting packets, you could determine that the brother & sister were playing on the same machine... which means they were one person, not two.

Nevertheless, to have four accounts, I think is simply pushing it too far, and that should be stopped. But again, to prove it, it would take work.

Four people playing from the same office would have the same initial IP -- the outgoing IP on their firewall device, and need to have packets unwrapped to see if they were coming from the same, or different machines.

It all seems like a lot of work over a game that should not be a huge priority in anyone's life?

I'm not even sure I can decide whether to be for or against multiple accounts, even with my bias against Teamers.

 "((