<?xml version="1.0"?><!-- generator="bbPress" -->

<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
>

<channel>
<title>Ace of Spades Game Forums &#187; Tag: private - Recent Topics</title>
<link>http://forumarchive.spadille.net/</link>
<description>Ace of Spades Game Forums &#187; Tag: private - Recent Topics</description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Sun, 03 May 2026 16:23:15 +0000</pubDate>

<item>
<title>Guphanti on "Can&#039;t Host Server"</title>
<link>http://forumarchive.spadille.net/topic.php?id=4092#post-56342</link>
<pubDate>Mon, 25 Jul 2011 14:07:40 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>Guphanti</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink="false">56342@http://forumarchive.spadille.net/</guid>
<description><p>I wanted to start a private server so me and my friend could build the ultimate bunker on pinpoint and save it to use online once it is finished. He brought his computer over, and I started up the server by opening the Ace of Spades server application, and loaded the pinpoint.vxl (without the .vxl of course) set max players to 2, and said no to master server advertisement. I went to Spadille and went to favorites and loaded local server and it loaded up pinpoint with only me on it. Then he connected to my Wi-Fi and opened Spadille but there was no option to connect to a local network. Then he set up a server, but this time it said that the local server was either full or misconfigured. When I tried to reconnect to mine, it said the same thing, and now it won't work no matter what. What do I do?
</p></description>
</item>
<item>
<title>outwrangle on "Password protected server discussion"</title>
<link>http://forumarchive.spadille.net/topic.php?id=3152#post-40627</link>
<pubDate>Tue, 05 Jul 2011 13:24:26 +0000</pubDate>
<dc:creator>outwrangle</dc:creator>
<guid isPermaLink="false">40627@http://forumarchive.spadille.net/</guid>
<description><p>I've seen a lot of people making suggestions on how to stop griefing. Accounts, IP banning, additional build restrictions, more admin tools, ban lists, ect. Unfortunately, a lot of these suggestions are really easy to work around and they make the game a lot less fun and accessible for everyone else. No one wants to have a bunch of extra bullshit added to the game just to combat griefers.</p>
<p>However, there hasn't been a lot of discussion on implementing invite-only servers. </p>
<p>Here's how I think they should work:</p>
<p>1. There should be the option to make your server "keypass protected": password protected servers would require a keypass in order to access the map and play on the server. </p>
<p>2. Each individual player would have their own, unique keypass given to them by the admin. The keypass could either be randomly generated or be custom set by the admin at the request of the player. By giving each player their own keypass, there won't be a risk of a password leak causing a mass influx of uninvited players.</p>
<p>3. Only one person can play using the keypass at a time. If two people try to log on to the server using the same keypass at the same time, they will be rejected and the admin will be notified. This is to further ensure that there isn't a mass influx of uninvited players.</p>
<p>4. If the player breaks the server's custom rules and they are votekicked by the players on the server or kicked by the admin, their keypass is deactivated and they can no longer get on. Once deactivated, the player would have a chance to appeal their ban, and the admin could choose to either reactivate their keypass or not.</p>
<p>   I feel like the game should remain free as possible, and the creation of invite-only servers would be the way to do so. The admins of these servers could come up with their own, unique ways to vet the people applying to join their server, and would thus be able to create a fun game environment for everyone on their server. Hell, if they wanted to, they could charge a small membership fee to join the server.</p>
<p>So what do you think? </p>
<p>Would you play on an invite only server or do you think this idea is doomed to fail? Also, do you have any ideas on how to implement this (admittedly rough) idea better?
</p></description>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
