Giving AO a shot

Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

So, casting around for a new MMOG to involve myself in, I was told about
Anarchy Online's fantastic offer; the game is free, and a year's play
time is free.

Most games offer a month free time when you buy the game. This is
radically different; I wasn't particularly interested in AO before
seeing this offer, but its just too good to turn down.

So, I went to the web site
http://www.anarchy-online.com/content/news/articles/8387L
which explains the deal. Looks like they are serious, of course the
idea is that I'll want the expansions, which I'll have to pay for and
which will break the "free year" part of the deal.

Thats ok with me, if I like the game I don't mind paying for it, or
paying for play time. I spent 5 years playing EQ1 and bought every
expansion, even the last couple which I didn't really get much use out
of (well, I played a berserker, which I couldn't have done without GOD,
but I didn't really do more than poke my head into GOD zones a couple
times, and only spent about 30 seconds in OOW).

The monthly fee bothers me even less, I've spent more on games in the
couple months since quitting EQ than I spent in a year of EQ
subscription fees; MMOG can be a money saver for me.

So why am I hooked on this free offer? Well, its the buyer's remorse
angle. I look around at all the games I could buy, and then I look at
games I've spent my money on over the years, most recently for example
Temple of Elemental Evil. I spent ten bucks on that game... and I
regret it.

Free, though, well, how can I go wrong? If I like it, I'll get
expansions and pay, most likely. If it turns out not to my taste,
though, I'm out nothing, hard to regret spending nothing.

OK, so I click download. Bah, it doesn't download right away, turns out
you need Bittorrent to download with. Following the links, it looks
like I have to pay at least $19.95. Aha, this is like the stuff they
offer to send you "free" by mail, only they require a "shipping and
handling" fee. I ship swords out by mail occaisionally, and I'll tell
you a deep dark secret; it costs me between five and ten bucks to ship
something, but I charge everyone twenty... whatever is left over is the
"and handling" part. Why do I do this? Because I hate shipping,
because I have to find a box that will fit and make sure the sharp end
doesn't end up poking out and hurting a postal worker (don't want to
disgruntle one), and because I don't want to take the time to figure out
exactly how much to charge when I don't even know what the final weight
of the package will be.

Thats a digression, though, my point is that it looked like "free" was
really going to cost me twenty bucks, and I started wondering what the
kickback arrangement was between Bittorrent and AO. Looking a bit
further though, I'm wrong, you can download Bittorrent without the part
of the arrangement that costs money. I'll have to look at the
arrangement deal and find out what they are trying to sell me... but for
my immediate purposes, just the software is free.

Downloaded that in about ten seconds, back to the AO site. Set up to
download AO; I get some weird Torrent file that takes about half a
second to download. Open that and Bittorrent opens up (along with a
donations page that I guess is part of the freeware package. I'll think
about it.) I specify a destination and at last the real download begins.

150 hours. This time drops steadily till it hits the 40 hour mark more
or less, but that seems to be a real figure. Less than a gigabyte of
content, on a DSL line which claims to give me 54 Mbps, now I don't know
a lot about how these things really work, but doesn't that mean I should
be able to get a gig in less than 18 seconds? Maybe thats 18 minutes?
Whatever, its been an hour so far and I'm at 7%. Now that implies that
the total time will be under 10 hours, but thats the same order of
magnitude as 40 hours, not as 18 seconds.

At the moment, Bittorrent reports a download rate of 6 KiB/s, downloaded
63.3M, out of a total of 817.6 MB.

More curiously, it reports and upload rate of 20 KiB/s and uploaded 165.2M.

Upload? What the heck is that about, I don't want to upload anything do
I? I've uploaded nearly three times as much as I've downloaded, if this
was just about sending the occaisional checksum back upstream to report
on how I'm doing I would expect a really tiny upload compared to download.

So, this first post isn't so much about AO as it is about the download
process itself. I guess I'll check back in a few hours and see how its
going, in the meantime I'll poke around a bit and look at the game
itself as featured on the web site and maybe I can find a Usenet group
for it or something to look at.

I bet I'll be one of the reviled crop of newbies, coming into the game
on a free scholarship like this, I know people railed against the free
magazine offers from CGW and the like back when EQ1 did it. Or maybe
they'll look on us as the potential new blood reviving the game, the way
some looked at the Platinum version newbies in EQ1.

Lance
47 answers Last reply
More about giving shot
  1. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "Lance Berg" wrote:
    > I bet I'll be one of the reviled crop of newbies, coming into the game
    > on a free scholarship like this, I know people railed against the free
    > magazine offers from CGW and the like back when EQ1 did it. Or maybe
    > they'll look on us as the potential new blood reviving the game, the way
    > some looked at the Platinum version newbies in EQ1.

    My experience with AO was very positive as far as being a newbie. The only
    real reason I left AO was that I decided that I preferred the fantasy genre
    for my MMO games. Though cancelled, my AO account is still active. It's
    been a while since I've patched or hit the forums.

    My suggestion would be to go to Jobe with your first character ... the newb
    garden there is the most similar to what you'll be familiar with from EQ.
    If your client doesn't come with Shadowlands, then it's six of one, half
    dozen of the other. The RP folks really play up the Omni/Clan chatter from
    time to time. Omni will have access to better gear, Clanners seem to have a
    lot of fun working the 'Rebel' angle. Folks who start out as neutral
    generally don't stay that way for long.

    You'll see some familiar stuff. LDoN was lifted straight from the AO
    mission terminal concept. I was running instanced missions in AO long
    before LDoN came along.

    Funcom's CS is first rate ... the gold standard IMO. You'll get a visit
    from an ARK (AO's version of a GM) in your first few days just to check on
    you .. make sure you're adjusting to the environment and answer any
    questions you may have.

    It's a fun game ... based on your posting history, I believe you'll enjoy
    it.

    Crash
  2. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg wrote:
    > So, casting around for a new MMOG to involve myself in, I was told about
    > Anarchy Online's fantastic offer; the game is free, and a year's play
    > time is free.
    >
    > Most games offer a month free time when you buy the game. This is
    > radically different; I wasn't particularly interested in AO before
    > seeing this offer, but its just too good to turn down.
    >
    > So, I went to the web site
    > http://www.anarchy-online.com/content/news/articles/8387L
    > which explains the deal. Looks like they are serious, of course the
    > idea is that I'll want the expansions, which I'll have to pay for and
    > which will break the "free year" part of the deal.
    >
    > Thats ok with me, if I like the game I don't mind paying for it, or
    > paying for play time. I spent 5 years playing EQ1 and bought every
    > expansion, even the last couple which I didn't really get much use out
    > of (well, I played a berserker, which I couldn't have done without GOD,
    > but I didn't really do more than poke my head into GOD zones a couple
    > times, and only spent about 30 seconds in OOW).
    >
    > The monthly fee bothers me even less, I've spent more on games in the
    > couple months since quitting EQ than I spent in a year of EQ
    > subscription fees; MMOG can be a money saver for me.
    >
    > So why am I hooked on this free offer? Well, its the buyer's remorse
    > angle. I look around at all the games I could buy, and then I look at
    > games I've spent my money on over the years, most recently for example
    > Temple of Elemental Evil. I spent ten bucks on that game... and I
    > regret it.
    >
    > Free, though, well, how can I go wrong? If I like it, I'll get
    > expansions and pay, most likely. If it turns out not to my taste,
    > though, I'm out nothing, hard to regret spending nothing.
    >
    > OK, so I click download. Bah, it doesn't download right away, turns out
    > you need Bittorrent to download with. Following the links, it looks
    > like I have to pay at least $19.95. Aha, this is like the stuff they
    > offer to send you "free" by mail, only they require a "shipping and
    > handling" fee. I ship swords out by mail occaisionally, and I'll tell
    > you a deep dark secret; it costs me between five and ten bucks to ship
    > something, but I charge everyone twenty... whatever is left over is the
    > "and handling" part. Why do I do this? Because I hate shipping,
    > because I have to find a box that will fit and make sure the sharp end
    > doesn't end up poking out and hurting a postal worker (don't want to
    > disgruntle one), and because I don't want to take the time to figure out
    > exactly how much to charge when I don't even know what the final weight
    > of the package will be.
    >
    > Thats a digression, though, my point is that it looked like "free" was
    > really going to cost me twenty bucks, and I started wondering what the
    > kickback arrangement was between Bittorrent and AO. Looking a bit
    > further though, I'm wrong, you can download Bittorrent without the part
    > of the arrangement that costs money. I'll have to look at the
    > arrangement deal and find out what they are trying to sell me... but for
    > my immediate purposes, just the software is free.
    >
    > Downloaded that in about ten seconds, back to the AO site. Set up to
    > download AO; I get some weird Torrent file that takes about half a
    > second to download. Open that and Bittorrent opens up (along with a
    > donations page that I guess is part of the freeware package. I'll think
    > about it.) I specify a destination and at last the real download begins.
    >
    > 150 hours. This time drops steadily till it hits the 40 hour mark more
    > or less, but that seems to be a real figure. Less than a gigabyte of
    > content, on a DSL line which claims to give me 54 Mbps, now I don't know
    > a lot about how these things really work, but doesn't that mean I should
    > be able to get a gig in less than 18 seconds? Maybe thats 18 minutes?
    > Whatever, its been an hour so far and I'm at 7%. Now that implies that
    > the total time will be under 10 hours, but thats the same order of
    > magnitude as 40 hours, not as 18 seconds.
    >
    > At the moment, Bittorrent reports a download rate of 6 KiB/s, downloaded
    > 63.3M, out of a total of 817.6 MB.
    >
    > More curiously, it reports and upload rate of 20 KiB/s and uploaded 165.2M.
    >
    > Upload? What the heck is that about, I don't want to upload anything do
    > I? I've uploaded nearly three times as much as I've downloaded, if this
    > was just about sending the occaisional checksum back upstream to report
    > on how I'm doing I would expect a really tiny upload compared to download.
    Bittorrent is a distributed download client. Your system is downloading
    kinda random chunks (not in order like a normal download) from other
    people that have already downloaded them, either from each other or from
    the 'seeders' (seeders are machines making the whole thing available).
    (As an example of how it's semi random, if the people you 'see' have
    parts 1-250 of 255, your connection to a 'seeder' will download the 251
    to 255 first...)

    It's a bandwidth saving option for the people providing the software.
    Their bandwidth expense is running the bittorrent control server and a
    few seeder machines.
    The downsides are some networks specifically block bittorrent traffic,
    and some don't work well with it. Also, a friend got eatten alive by his
    ISP during the WoW beta, because they use bittorrent and he has a strict
    upload cap on his cable. Plus it's generally much slower than a normal
    download.

    Part of the basic bittorrent design is that your download rate is
    relative to your upload rate.
    http://bittorrent.com/
    Is the official site, the program is open source though, so there are
    hundreds of variants. some of them charge or install spyware (or both)
    I use http://krypt.dyndns.org:81/torrent/index.phtml


    > So, this first post isn't so much about AO as it is about the download
    > process itself. I guess I'll check back in a few hours and see how its
    > going, in the meantime I'll poke around a bit and look at the game
    > itself as featured on the web site and maybe I can find a Usenet group
    > for it or something to look at.
    >
    > I bet I'll be one of the reviled crop of newbies, coming into the game
    > on a free scholarship like this, I know people railed against the free
    > magazine offers from CGW and the like back when EQ1 did it. Or maybe
    > they'll look on us as the potential new blood reviving the game, the way
    > some looked at the Platinum version newbies in EQ1.
    >
    > Lance
  3. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Usenet and AO:

    Found the group alt.games.anarchy-online

    368 posts in it all told, dating back to 2003. More than half of them
    aren't AO related.

    This is certainly no alt.games.everquest!
  4. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote:
    >
    > At the moment, Bittorrent reports a download rate of 6 KiB/s, downloaded
    > 63.3M, out of a total of 817.6 MB.
    >
    > More curiously, it reports and upload rate of 20 KiB/s and uploaded 165.2M.
    >
    > Upload? What the heck is that about, I don't want to upload anything do
    > I? I've uploaded nearly three times as much as I've downloaded, if this
    > was just about sending the occaisional checksum back upstream to report
    > on how I'm doing I would expect a really tiny upload compared to download.
    >
    > So, this first post isn't so much about AO as it is about the download
    > process itself. I guess I'll check back in a few hours and see how its
    > going, in the meantime I'll poke around a bit and look at the game
    > itself as featured on the web site and maybe I can find a Usenet group
    > for it or something to look at.

    While you're at it, you should poke around and learn some about bittorrent.
    It's the "wave of the future" in software distribution, and is a bit of
    technological genius, but to get it working well, particularly on an
    asynchronous connection, requires a touch of knowledge and a little
    fiddling.

    But thanks for the pointer. I think I'll sign up myself. I always thought
    it looked like a neat game, and even bought it when it came out, but the
    initial launch was so incredibly bad that I gave up on it. I'm assuming
    they got all those technological hurdles figured out by now.
  5. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 10:53:34 -0500, Lance Berg wrote:

    <snip the download story>
    There are plenty of free bittorrent clients out there. I prefer Azureus
    myself. It seems like this is the choice you have to make nowadays. As a
    matter of fact the WoW patch client is torrent based from what I've read.
    If you're a heavy .torrent user you will be able to download faster (that's
    my own take on it) sort of like the emule client rating you higher the more
    you transfer.

    Now I've done some p2p in the past but I'm very wary of using *any* p2p
    client to do game patching. I know that when I patch NWN it goes to a
    Bioware ftp server. I have *no* clue when using a torrent where exactly
    that file is coming from. It could be a "spoofed" torrent for all I know
    and is infecting my entire family with the ebola virus. I just really worry
    about security with them.

    I also believe that companies are "cheaping out" as a recent trend. I guess
    they figure "we got you to buy the game then we can get you to host our
    patches." That worries me because what else will they cut back on. Lord
    knows the software they're pushing out the door isn't finished. Where else
    will they cut corners?

    I think it's a good thing that Funcom is giving away the client. I'm apt to
    agree with you that the community there will look at it as attracting "new
    blood". When I played everyone was very friendly and helpful. I might give
    it a try again - I'm kind of torn now. I was most likely going to get the
    new Catacombs expansion for DAoC but since this is free I might just go AO
    for a bit.

    --
    RJB
    12/16/2004 11:19:07 AM

    "In a hierarchy, every employee tends to rise to his level of
    incompetence."
    -Laurence J. Peter
  6. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote:

    [snip]

    If you find it available anywhere for straight download, let us know.
    I've tried BitTorrent several times in the past and have always been
    disappointed - usually ending up with fragments of the file I want but
    never the whole thing, not once.

    You know the old saying about only getting one chance to make a good
    first impression? BitTorrent missed several chances with me. I know it
    has its fans and userbase, but based on past experiences I won't go
    through the effort of installing it yet again.

    I'd like to try the AO offer, though, so if a 'real' download location
    is available, I'd jump on the chance.

    --
    Exodus 22:18 can kiss my pagan ass
    www.lokari.net
  7. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <R5adnRdHhagXMlzcRVn-gA@dejazzd.com>, emporer@dejazzd.com
    says...
    > So, casting around for a new MMOG to involve myself in, I was told about
    > Anarchy Online's fantastic offer; the game is free, and a year's play
    > time is free.
    >
    > Most games offer a month free time when you buy the game. This is
    > radically different; I wasn't particularly interested in AO before
    > seeing this offer, but its just too good to turn down.

    Going through this process myself...

    > So, I went to the web site
    > http://www.anarchy-online.com/content/news/articles/8387L
    > which explains the deal. Looks like they are serious, of course the
    > idea is that I'll want the expansions, which I'll have to pay for and
    > which will break the "free year" part of the deal.

    Yep. They appear to be serious. Looks like there's a one month window on
    creating the free accounts, but once your in its free until next
    January.

    > Thats ok with me, if I like the game I don't mind paying for it, or
    > paying for play time. I spent 5 years playing EQ1 and bought every
    > expansion, even the last couple which I didn't really get much use out
    > of (well, I played a berserker, which I couldn't have done without GOD,
    > but I didn't really do more than poke my head into GOD zones a couple
    > times, and only spent about 30 seconds in OOW).
    >
    > The monthly fee bothers me even less, I've spent more on games in the
    > couple months since quitting EQ than I spent in a year of EQ
    > subscription fees; MMOG can be a money saver for me.
    >
    > So why am I hooked on this free offer? Well, its the buyer's remorse
    > angle. I look around at all the games I could buy, and then I look at
    > games I've spent my money on over the years, most recently for example
    > Temple of Elemental Evil. I spent ten bucks on that game... and I
    > regret it.
    >
    > Free, though, well, how can I go wrong? If I like it, I'll get
    > expansions and pay, most likely. If it turns out not to my taste,
    > though, I'm out nothing, hard to regret spending nothing.
    >
    > OK, so I click download. Bah, it doesn't download right away, turns out
    > you need Bittorrent to download with. Following the links, it looks
    > like I have to pay at least $19.95.

    Ah... this confused me too.
    On the matrix you want the last column. The first columns have free
    downloads for the full game including different expansions, but you only
    get a 14 day trial, not a free year with those. And signing up for that,
    requires CC authorization for 19.95 (for the game with expansion) and
    the subscription fee which will automatically be charged unless you
    cancel before the free trial is over.

    The last column however, is a free download, free signup without credit
    card info, and free subscription.


    > Aha, this is like the stuff they
    > offer to send you "free" by mail, only they require a "shipping and
    > handling" fee. I ship swords out by mail occaisionally, and I'll tell
    > you a deep dark secret; it costs me between five and ten bucks to ship
    > something, but I charge everyone twenty... whatever is left over is the
    > "and handling" part. Why do I do this? Because I hate shipping,
    > because I have to find a box that will fit and make sure the sharp end
    > doesn't end up poking out and hurting a postal worker (don't want to
    > disgruntle one),

    rofl. I love that word. "disgruntled", the opposite of which must be
    "gruntled". I dunno... I envision a cute little bear cub with a new
    found honey pot as being 'gruntled'. I hope my postal worker is having a
    similiar day. ;)

    > and because I don't want to take the time to figure out
    > exactly how much to charge when I don't even know what the final weight
    > of the package will be.
    >
    > Thats a digression, though, my point is that it looked like "free" was
    > really going to cost me twenty bucks, and I started wondering what the
    > kickback arrangement was between Bittorrent and AO. Looking a bit
    > further though, I'm wrong, you can download Bittorrent without the part
    > of the arrangement that costs money.

    Actually the you can even download it without bittorrent, for free, but
    I'm at 4% after 10+ hours give or take. Looks like they're really
    throttling bandwidth on that... which is understandable.

    > I'll have to look at the
    > arrangement deal and find out what they are trying to sell me... but for
    > my immediate purposes, just the software is free.
    >
    > Downloaded that in about ten seconds, back to the AO site. Set up to
    > download AO; I get some weird Torrent file that takes about half a
    > second to download. Open that and Bittorrent opens up (along with a
    > donations page that I guess is part of the freeware package. I'll think
    > about it.) I specify a destination and at last the real download begins.
    >
    > 150 hours. This time drops steadily till it hits the 40 hour mark more
    > or less, but that seems to be a real figure. Less than a gigabyte of
    > content, on a DSL line which claims to give me 54 Mbps, now I don't know
    > a lot about how these things really work, but doesn't that mean I should
    > be able to get a gig in less than 18 seconds? Maybe thats 18 minutes?
    > Whatever, its been an hour so far and I'm at 7%. Now that implies that
    > the total time will be under 10 hours, but thats the same order of
    > magnitude as 40 hours, not as 18 seconds.
    >
    > At the moment, Bittorrent reports a download rate of 6 KiB/s, downloaded
    > 63.3M, out of a total of 817.6 MB.
    >
    > More curiously, it reports and upload rate of 20 KiB/s and uploaded 165.2M.

    Ah...you are new to bittorrent. Bittorrent is a unique type of p2p
    software. It was designed to allow the distribution of very large files
    efficiently, by having the community that downloads them share them
    simultaneously. Your downloading your copy from users who have
    downloaded theirs, and people are downloading from you the part you have
    already downloaded.

    Its becoming commonly used by companies to distribute software as it
    reduces their bandwidth requirements, as its essentially provided by
    people who are downloading the software. The best way to download Linux
    distros (routinely 3+ GB) in particular is via bittorrent.

    Of course, it can and is also used to pirate music, movies, and
    software. But its the first p2p software that seems to be gaining
    widespread commercial use for legit purposes in addition to that.

    I recommend reading the FAQ & Documentation on BitTorrent. It should
    explain all.

    > Upload? What the heck is that about, I don't want to upload anything do
    > I? I've uploaded nearly three times as much as I've downloaded, if this
    > was just about sending the occaisional checksum back upstream to report
    > on how I'm doing I would expect a really tiny upload compared to download.

    I'm guessing there is a considerable rush on downloads at the moment. On
    the upside I'm showing 31hrs remaining on bittorrent, getting 24kb/s,
    which is rapidly overtaking the download directly from funcom which had
    a 10 hour headstart.

    > So, this first post isn't so much about AO as it is about the download
    > process itself. I guess I'll check back in a few hours and see how its
    > going, in the meantime I'll poke around a bit and look at the game
    > itself as featured on the web site and maybe I can find a Usenet group
    > for it or something to look at.
    >
    > I bet I'll be one of the reviled crop of newbies, coming into the game
    > on a free scholarship like this, I know people railed against the free
    > magazine offers from CGW and the like back when EQ1 did it. Or maybe
    > they'll look on us as the potential new blood reviving the game, the way
    > some looked at the Platinum version newbies in EQ1.

    That's if any of them notices us at all in the AO equivalent of the long
    abandoned Qeynos Hills, Nektulos Woods, or Tox Forest. :D
  8. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:56:14 GMT, 42 wrote:

    > Yep. They appear to be serious. Looks like there's a one month window on
    > creating the free accounts, but once your in its free until next
    > January.

    Read the fine print at the bottom though. If the lag associated with the
    new free subscribers interferes with the paying community they can, at any
    time, revoke the free period. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, they're in
    it to make money of course and giving it away while pissing off existing
    paying customers is just bad business. I'm just pointing it out now incase
    they *do* have to cancel it at some point.
    --
    RJB
    12/16/2004 12:53:30 PM

    "A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human
    history - with the possible exceptions of handguns and tequila."
    -Mitch Ratliffe
  9. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Started at around 1030 am my time, its not 545pm my time and I'm at 25%
    finished. Might be things will pick up late tonight as fewer people are
    using the net... or maybe not.
  10. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote in
    news:R5adnRdHhagXMlzcRVn-gA@dejazzd.com:

    > 150 hours. This time drops steadily till it hits the 40 hour mark
    > more or less, but that seems to be a real figure. Less than a
    > gigabyte of content, on a DSL line which claims to give me 54 Mbps,
    > now I don't know a lot about how these things really work, but doesn't
    > that mean I should be able to get a gig in less than 18 seconds?
    > Maybe thats 18 minutes? Whatever, its been an hour so far and I'm at
    > 7%. Now that implies that the total time will be under 10 hours, but
    > thats the same order of magnitude as 40 hours, not as 18 seconds.

    54 Mbps? That's quite a connection there, you sure it's not more like 5
    Mbps, or even lower? The DSL connections I've seen have been in the 0.5
    Mbps to 3 Mbps range.

    5 Mbps will work out to around 500k bytes per second. 800MB/.5MB=1600
    seconds, or a bit under 30 minutes.

    Your actual throughput will vary considerably depending on the load of
    the server your are downloading from, as well as your ISPs load, and
    anything in between the two. The likely limiting factor is going to be
    their server, if many folks are taking advantage of this offer.

    >
    > At the moment, Bittorrent reports a download rate of 6 KiB/s,
    > downloaded 63.3M, out of a total of 817.6 MB.
    >
    > More curiously, it reports and upload rate of 20 KiB/s and uploaded
    > 165.2M.
    >
    > Upload? What the heck is that about, I don't want to upload anything
    > do I? I've uploaded nearly three times as much as I've downloaded, if
    > this was just about sending the occaisional checksum back upstream to
    > report on how I'm doing I would expect a really tiny upload compared
    > to download.

    Does sound awfully high for downloading the game.

    --
    On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
    Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Prophet of 69 seasons

    On Steamfont
    Graeme, 18 Dwarven Shaman, 15 Scholar
  11. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    >
    >OK, so I click download. Bah, it doesn't download right away, turns out
    >you need Bittorrent to download with. Following the links, it looks
    >like I have to pay at least $19.95. Aha, this is like the stuff they
    >offer to send you "free" by mail, only they require a "shipping and
    >handling" fee. I ship swords out by mail occaisionally, and I'll tell
    >you a deep dark secret; it costs me between five and ten bucks to ship
    >something, but I charge everyone twenty... whatever is left over is the
    >"and handling" part. Why do I do this? Because I hate shipping,
    >because I have to find a box that will fit and make sure the sharp end
    >doesn't end up poking out and hurting a postal worker (don't want to
    >disgruntle one), and because I don't want to take the time to figure out
    >exactly how much to charge when I don't even know what the final weight
    >of the package will be.

    bittorent is free, though there are, it seems, some sites which try to
    charge you for it.


    http://www.bittornado.com/


    >
    >Thats a digression, though, my point is that it looked like "free" was
    >really going to cost me twenty bucks, and I started wondering what the
    >kickback arrangement was between Bittorrent and AO. Looking a bit
    >further though, I'm wrong, you can download Bittorrent without the part
    >of the arrangement that costs money. I'll have to look at the
    >arrangement deal and find out what they are trying to sell me... but for
    >my immediate purposes, just the software is free.
    >
    >Downloaded that in about ten seconds, back to the AO site. Set up to
    >download AO; I get some weird Torrent file that takes about half a
    >second to download. Open that and Bittorrent opens up (along with a
    >donations page that I guess is part of the freeware package. I'll think
    >about it.) I specify a destination and at last the real download begins.
    >
    >150 hours. This time drops steadily till it hits the 40 hour mark more
    >or less, but that seems to be a real figure. Less than a gigabyte of
    >content, on a DSL line which claims to give me 54 Mbps, now I don't know
    >a lot about how these things really work, but doesn't that mean I should
    >be able to get a gig in less than 18 seconds? Maybe thats 18 minutes?
    >Whatever, its been an hour so far and I'm at 7%. Now that implies that
    >the total time will be under 10 hours, but thats the same order of
    >magnitude as 40 hours, not as 18 seconds.

    the speed will change depending on the number of "seeds" (people
    sharing the completed file), and peers (others downloading the file,
    like you).
    it usually starts off slowly and picks up as more people complete the
    file/ get more parts of the file.

    >
    >At the moment, Bittorrent reports a download rate of 6 KiB/s, downloaded
    >63.3M, out of a total of 817.6 MB.
    >
    >More curiously, it reports and upload rate of 20 KiB/s and uploaded 165.2M.

    while you are downlaoding through bittorent, you are also sharing the
    parts of the file you already have, with other people.
    nothing else is being uploaded from your pc.
    the link i gave above has a version which allows you to throttle the
    upload speed. useful for systems where if you max the upload, it slows
    your download (like my cable modem)
    >
    >Upload? What the heck is that about, I don't want to upload anything do
    >I? I've uploaded nearly three times as much as I've downloaded, if this
    >was just about sending the occaisional checksum back upstream to report
    >on how I'm doing I would expect a really tiny upload compared to download.

    the point of bittorent is to share what you are downlaoding among the
    other downloaders.
    theres an faq on the link i gave above.

    rb
  12. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "Graeme Faelban" <RichardRapier@netscape.net> wrote in message
    news:Xns95C17110EC0C9richardrapiernetscap@130.133.1.4...
    > Lance Berg <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote in
    > news:R5adnRdHhagXMlzcRVn-gA@dejazzd.com:
    >
    > > 150 hours. This time drops steadily till it hits the 40 hour mark
    > > more or less, but that seems to be a real figure. Less than a
    > > gigabyte of content, on a DSL line which claims to give me 54 Mbps,
    > > now I don't know a lot about how these things really work, but doesn't
    > > that mean I should be able to get a gig in less than 18 seconds?
    > > Maybe thats 18 minutes? Whatever, its been an hour so far and I'm at
    > > 7%. Now that implies that the total time will be under 10 hours, but
    > > thats the same order of magnitude as 40 hours, not as 18 seconds.
    >
    > 54 Mbps? That's quite a connection there, you sure it's not more like 5
    > Mbps, or even lower? The DSL connections I've seen have been in the 0.5
    > Mbps to 3 Mbps range.
    >
    > 5 Mbps will work out to around 500k bytes per second. 800MB/.5MB=1600
    > seconds, or a bit under 30 minutes.
    >
    > Your actual throughput will vary considerably depending on the load of
    > the server your are downloading from, as well as your ISPs load, and
    > anything in between the two. The likely limiting factor is going to be
    > their server, if many folks are taking advantage of this offer.
    >
    > >
    > > At the moment, Bittorrent reports a download rate of 6 KiB/s,
    > > downloaded 63.3M, out of a total of 817.6 MB.
    > >
    > > More curiously, it reports and upload rate of 20 KiB/s and uploaded
    > > 165.2M.
    > >
    > > Upload? What the heck is that about, I don't want to upload anything
    > > do I? I've uploaded nearly three times as much as I've downloaded, if
    > > this was just about sending the occaisional checksum back upstream to
    > > report on how I'm doing I would expect a really tiny upload compared
    > > to download.
    >
    > Does sound awfully high for downloading the game.

    Everyone and their dog is attempting to download this game. The host
    bandwidth is probably extremely congested and will be for a good while. I
    set my comp to download all night last night (8 hours on a 56k) and only
    downloaded 29 megs of material. Usually I can get in a good 120+ in 8 hours.
  13. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    <wanink@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
    >
    > > Does sound awfully high for downloading the game.
    >
    > Everyone and their dog is attempting to download this game. The host
    > bandwidth is probably extremely congested and will be for a good while. I
    > set my comp to download all night last night (8 hours on a 56k) and only
    > downloaded 29 megs of material. Usually I can get in a good 120+ in 8 hours.

    From the time of my last post until this one (feels like maybe 2 hours, but
    I can't be bothered to check), I downloaded the entire 800+ megs. I'm on a
    "slow", asynchronous DSL line.

    I would hate to try and download anything this size over dialup though.
  14. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Did you say something, Lance Berg <emporer@dejazzd.com>?

    [AO downloading]

    >150 hours. This time drops steadily till it hits the 40 hour mark more
    >or less, but that seems to be a real figure. Less than a gigabyte of
    >content, on a DSL line which claims to give me 54 Mbps, now I don't know
    >a lot about how these things really work, but doesn't that mean I should
    >be able to get a gig in less than 18 seconds? Maybe thats 18 minutes?
    >Whatever, its been an hour so far and I'm at 7%. Now that implies that
    >the total time will be under 10 hours, but thats the same order of
    >magnitude as 40 hours, not as 18 seconds.

    My numbers started at 24 hours, then 12 hours, and kept dropping as I
    progressed (probably as I got more stuff for others to upload). I
    ended up getting the whole thing in 4-5 hours.


    Cel
    Retired druids & sundry
  15. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    "Faned" <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote in message
    news:slrncs3su5.8ne.faned@wyld.qx.net...
    > <wanink@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
    > >
    > > > Does sound awfully high for downloading the game.
    > >
    > > Everyone and their dog is attempting to download this game. The host
    > > bandwidth is probably extremely congested and will be for a good while.
    I
    > > set my comp to download all night last night (8 hours on a 56k) and only
    > > downloaded 29 megs of material. Usually I can get in a good 120+ in 8
    hours.
    >
    > From the time of my last post until this one (feels like maybe 2 hours,
    but
    > I can't be bothered to check), I downloaded the entire 800+ megs. I'm on
    a
    > "slow", asynchronous DSL line.
    >
    > I would hate to try and download anything this size over dialup though.

    2 hours? sigh. Looks like I may have to find a person w/ a copy of this game
    and just borrow it. taking much too long
  16. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

    >You -can- download it directly from AO. (On the download page they
    >provide both options)

    Are you talking about the link that ultimately goes to CNet? That's
    the only one I can find. But I'm old, and probably going blind in my
    dotage.

    >I gave up on the direct download myself, but its there if you want to
    >subject yourself to it. :)

    All evidence indicates that I was put on this Earth to suffer.

    --
    Exodus 22:18 can kiss my pagan ass
    www.lokari.net
  17. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <su5ho0y9p0o9$.dlg@robartle.nospam.hotmail.com>,
    robartle@NOSPAM.hotmail.com says...
    > On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:56:14 GMT, 42 wrote:
    >
    > > Yep. They appear to be serious. Looks like there's a one month window on
    > > creating the free accounts, but once your in its free until next
    > > January.
    >
    > Read the fine print at the bottom though. If the lag associated with the
    > new free subscribers interferes with the paying community they can, at any
    > time, revoke the free period. I'm not saying that's a bad thing, they're in
    > it to make money of course and giving it away while pissing off existing
    > paying customers is just bad business. I'm just pointing it out now incase
    > they *do* have to cancel it at some point.
    >

    I did see it. And as you did, reasoned that it was a perfectly
    reasonable limitation. And as it really doesn't affect the value of the
    offer (being 'free' and all), I didn't mention it.
  18. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
    news:MPG.1c2bf6cc8a1b7f2f989934@shawnews:

    > In article <su5ho0y9p0o9$.dlg@robartle.nospam.hotmail.com>,
    > robartle@NOSPAM.hotmail.com says...
    >> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:56:14 GMT, 42 wrote:
    >>
    >> > Yep. They appear to be serious. Looks like there's a one month
    >> > window on creating the free accounts, but once your in its free
    >> > until next January.
    >>
    >> Read the fine print at the bottom though. If the lag associated with

    also, keep an eye on your account, log in and check to make sure they
    aren't going to charge you in the next billing period. When you are going
    to the funcom site, be very very careful not to click on anything about the
    expansions as it'll sign you up for them without any confirmation or any
    way to cancel. I used a free trial period and that happened to me, one of
    the few reasons I didn't continue with the game. Very enjoyable game, a
    bit more complicated than EQ (not necessarily a bad thing). Was fun
    blasting things with my laser guns.
  19. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:29:04 GMT, Bebinn <bebinn@invalid.com> wrote:

    >also, keep an eye on your account, log in and check to make sure they
    >aren't going to charge you in the next billing period.

    Simple solution: They have the option when setting up your account not
    to give them any billing info at all. I presume this is to accommodate
    game cards. Use that option.

    --
    Dark Tyger

    Sympathy for the retailer:
    http://www.actsofgord.com/index.html
    "Door's to your left" -Gord
    (I have no association with this site. Just thought it was funny as hell)

    Protect free speech: http://stopfcc.com/
  20. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <t815s09aahj7sn9np4mq20s29age8ifk6h@4ax.com>,
    darktiger@somewhere.net says...
    > On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:29:04 GMT, Bebinn <bebinn@invalid.com> wrote:
    >
    > >also, keep an eye on your account, log in and check to make sure they
    > >aren't going to charge you in the next billing period.
    >
    > Simple solution: They have the option when setting up your account not
    > to give them any billing info at all. I presume this is to accommodate
    > game cards. Use that option.

    The 'new' 'free subscription' deal doesn't require you to enter any
    credit card information in order to start playing.

    If you've been prompted for CC info, its because you downloaded the
    wrong version, with expansions, with a free 14 day trial -- and not the
    'AO classic' without expansions, with the free subscription.

    At any rate, the software shouldn't ask you for your CC, and if you
    don't enter any CC in, you can rest assured you can't be billed for it.
  21. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg wrote:


    > 22 hours later I'm at 93%. I've downloaded 761.5M while uploading
    > 1376.5M... sounds, from what you are saying, that I could have throttled
    > my upload rate down to where the two were about even?

    Here's another oddity; early on my download rate was about half my
    upload rate, but now the two are about even (sadly, because my upload
    rate slowed down to meet my download rate, not the reverse)

    Now if I understand things right, the upload is me sending out to other
    users, while the download is me getting from other users.

    Since I now have 93% of the packets, I'd think I'd have a lot more
    chance of having what any given user needs then back when I had 3% of
    the packets.

    But instead of starting out with little upload and lots of download, and
    then gradually swapping places, it looks like the reverse happened, the
    more I have, the less people want of what I have.

    I saw somewhere that throttling upload wouldn't work because sharing is
    on a peer to peer basis, so the less upload I allow, the less download
    I'm allowed. That seems like a good idea to me, preventing freeloaders,
    but I can also see where I'd still want to throttle upload down a bit,
    if my total upload+download is fixed; throttling to 1/4th my total would
    mean I'd get matching dowload of only 1/4th, but if upload uses up
    3/4ths my total then all the room I have left for download is also
    1/4th the total. By throttling upload to 1/2 the total, I'd maximize my
    download speed to 1/2 the total.

    If that analysis is correct, then it looks like my upload was at around
    2/3rds my total yesterday, so I only had room for 1/3rd. And now this
    morning, I'm only uploading 1/3rd my total, so I'm limited to 1/3rd my
    total for download as well. I'd go faster if only there was more demand?

    Lance
  22. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 05:29:04 GMT, Bebinn <bebinn@invalid.com> wrote:

    >42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in
    >news:MPG.1c2bf6cc8a1b7f2f989934@shawnews:
    >
    >> In article <su5ho0y9p0o9$.dlg@robartle.nospam.hotmail.com>,
    >> robartle@NOSPAM.hotmail.com says...
    >>> On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 16:56:14 GMT, 42 wrote:
    >>>
    >>> > Yep. They appear to be serious. Looks like there's a one month
    >>> > window on creating the free accounts, but once your in its free
    >>> > until next January.
    >>>
    >>> Read the fine print at the bottom though. If the lag associated with
    >
    >also, keep an eye on your account, log in and check to make sure they
    >aren't going to charge you in the next billing period.

    Click the option which does not require credit card details, then no
    worries :)


    Palindrome
  23. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg wrote:

    >
    > Started at around 1030 am my time, its not 545pm my time and I'm at 25%
    > finished. Might be things will pick up late tonight as fewer people are
    > using the net... or maybe not.

    10:12 am the next day, completed download. Slightly under 24 hours
    total, on my DSL connection with a completely untwinked version of what
    seems to be the original BitTorrent client
  24. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    > Lance Berg wrote:
    >
    > >
    > > Started at around 1030 am my time, its not 545pm my time and I'm at 25%
    > > finished. Might be things will pick up late tonight as fewer people are
    > > using the net... or maybe not.
    >
    > 10:12 am the next day, completed download. Slightly under 24 hours
    > total, on my DSL connection with a completely untwinked version of what
    > seems to be the original BitTorrent client

    How were your other internet activities during that time? I suspect that
    you, like most people on DSL, have a very limited upload bandwidth. I know
    that before I figured out how to throttle the upload side of my connection I
    could saturate it to the point where it would severely impact my download
    bandwidth. The simple explanation for this is that your computer has to
    "upload" a request for more stuff to download, and if your upload bandwidth
    is saturated, it doesn't matter if you've got tons of unused download
    bandwidth, cause your computer can't get a message out asking for more to
    download.
  25. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <ur6dnRXUW6qPKVzcRVn-hQ@dejazzd.com>, Lance Berg wrote:
    > Usenet and AO:
    >
    > Found the group alt.games.anarchy-online
    >
    > 368 posts in it all told, dating back to 2003. More than half of them
    > aren't AO related.
    >
    > This is certainly no alt.games.everquest!

    Most games post-EQ have not really developed much of a usenet presence.
    There's a brief spurt for a few months when the game is new, and then most
    activity seems to be on web-based forums.

    Here's how many posts Google has in alt.games.anarchy-online each month
    for the first two years, starting at March 2001:

    6
    44
    92
    3238
    9164
    3704
    1336
    899
    389
    89
    137
    96
    114
    93
    44
    123
    129
    62
    38
    13
    21
    27
    48
    75

    The DAoC group shows a similar pattern, and the SWG shows signs that it will
    do the same thing. For whatever reason, it seems that most games since EQ
    have had most of their discussion activity in web-based forums, rather than
    on usenet.

    --
    --Tim Smith
  26. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <1gcq2wvjq6x7r$.dlg@robartle.nospam.hotmail.com>, RJB wrote:
    > Now I've done some p2p in the past but I'm very wary of using *any* p2p
    > client to do game patching. I know that when I patch NWN it goes to a
    > Bioware ftp server. I have *no* clue when using a torrent where exactly
    > that file is coming from. It could be a "spoofed" torrent for all I know
    > and is infecting my entire family with the ebola virus. I just really
    > worry about security with them.

    The tracker should be on the game company's site, and so is no more
    susceptable to spoofing than a patch that comes directly from them.
    If someone were to try to spoof that parts of the file their Bittorrent
    client is sharing with you, your client would catch that because the
    checksum would fail for that part, and your client would get it from
    somewhere else.

    --
    --Tim Smith
  27. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On Fri, 17 Dec 2004 10:59:17 GMT, Tim Smith wrote:

    > In article <1gcq2wvjq6x7r$.dlg@robartle.nospam.hotmail.com>, RJB wrote:
    >> Now I've done some p2p in the past but I'm very wary of using *any* p2p
    >> client to do game patching. I know that when I patch NWN it goes to a
    >> Bioware ftp server. I have *no* clue when using a torrent where exactly
    >> that file is coming from. It could be a "spoofed" torrent for all I know
    >> and is infecting my entire family with the ebola virus. I just really
    >> worry about security with them.
    >
    > The tracker should be on the game company's site, and so is no more
    > susceptable to spoofing than a patch that comes directly from them.
    > If someone were to try to spoof that parts of the file their Bittorrent
    > client is sharing with you, your client would catch that because the
    > checksum would fail for that part, and your client would get it from
    > somewhere else.

    Heh seeing virii and worms come and go I guess I'm just a bit overcautious
    on these things. I usually install on my alternate machine first (with no
    online access) anything I download from any p2p app. Like I said, I don't
    know the technical ins and outs so it's good to hear I don't have to worry
    that much about it.
    --
    RJB
    12/17/2004 8:06:01 AM

    "Success is that old ABC -- ability, breaks, and courage."
    -Charles Luckman
  28. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Well, went and registered, which means putting in a whole boatload of
    information, but specifically does -not- require any CC or billing
    information; there's a step where you -can- put that info in, and you're
    told that if you do then when your free period is over you'll
    automatically get charged, but its very clear and simple how not to do so.

    Finally got to the submit page, which took a while to process but
    finally said "done" and then just sat there.

    Well, looking at it, I'm supposed to get something via email. I put my
    real email address in there, so I'm waiting. Looks like they are saying
    it could take up to 15 minutes.

    Check my email box, nothing.

    Checked 15 minutes later, nothing.

    Half hour, nothing.

    45 minutes, nothing.

    Went back to the site and tried to log in, with my username and
    password, won't let me in.

    Tried to register again, in case I'd done something wrong; says my
    username is already in use. I hit that with my first attempt at a
    username, and not with this one, when I first registered, so I guess it
    took my new name and is doing -something- with it.

    Does this mean that the registration process is jammed up and its taking
    forever to process each new registrant?

    Or does it mean I've done something wrong, and I'm not going to get this
    account registered after all?

    It was free, I can just make up new user names till I find one that
    works, if I made some numbskull error.

    But I can't think what I did wrong, so its hard to correct that.

    I guess I'll give it a few more hours, but at this point I'm already
    over 24 hours from time I decided to give AO a try, this is kind of sad
    for a free demo!

    Lance
  29. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:

    >I visted the site with the intention of posting the direct link for you.
    >But it looks like they removed it since yesterday. I'm guessing they
    >removed it due to congestion. I assure you it *was* there yesterday.

    Sure, kid. Did you bring enough for everyone to smoke?

    --
    Exodus 22:18 can kiss my pagan ass
    www.lokari.net
  30. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg wrote:


    > Or does it mean I've done something wrong, and I'm not going to get this
    > account registered after all?
    >
    > It was free, I can just make up new user names till I find one that
    > works, if I made some numbskull error.
    >
    > But I can't think what I did wrong, so its hard to correct that.
    >
    > I guess I'll give it a few more hours, but at this point I'm already
    > over 24 hours from time I decided to give AO a try, this is kind of sad
    > for a free demo!

    After waiting over 2 hours, I went in and used a totally different EMail
    address, made up name, address, etc. This time I instantly got a
    response on the web page, instead of just a "done" message.

    So I guess something went wrong the first time thru.

    Checking my dummy email (mostly there to collect spam) I got an
    automated message within 30 seconds of registering.

    Went and registered again with my real info, real email et al, and it
    worked the same way. SO I guess out there somewhere is a year's account
    with my real info on it, but I can't get into it, which is fine because
    it won't ever be billed (and doesn't have billing info if there's a glitch)

    Email, by the way, has nothing of note, unlike something I've seen
    frequently where to verify that the email exists and is mine, they mail
    something crucial there. Apparantly you can enter any information you
    want, and as long as you come up with a unique user name you are in.
    (barring whatever mess I made the first time)

    Lance
  31. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg wrote:
    > Well, went and registered, which means putting in a whole boatload of
    > information, but specifically does -not- require any CC or billing
    > information; there's a step where you -can- put that info in, and you're
    > told that if you do then when your free period is over you'll
    > automatically get charged, but its very clear and simple how not to do so.
    >
    > Finally got to the submit page, which took a while to process but
    > finally said "done" and then just sat there.
    >
    > Well, looking at it, I'm supposed to get something via email. I put my
    > real email address in there, so I'm waiting. Looks like they are saying
    > it could take up to 15 minutes.
    >
    > Check my email box, nothing.
    >
    > Checked 15 minutes later, nothing.
    >
    > Half hour, nothing.
    >
    > 45 minutes, nothing.
    >
    > Went back to the site and tried to log in, with my username and
    > password, won't let me in.
    >
    > Tried to register again, in case I'd done something wrong; says my
    > username is already in use. I hit that with my first attempt at a
    > username, and not with this one, when I first registered, so I guess it
    > took my new name and is doing -something- with it.
    >
    > Does this mean that the registration process is jammed up and its taking
    > forever to process each new registrant?
    >
    > Or does it mean I've done something wrong, and I'm not going to get this
    > account registered after all?
    >
    > It was free, I can just make up new user names till I find one that
    > works, if I made some numbskull error.
    >
    > But I can't think what I did wrong, so its hard to correct that.
    >
    > I guess I'll give it a few more hours, but at this point I'm already
    > over 24 hours from time I decided to give AO a try, this is kind of sad
    > for a free demo!
    >
    > Lance

    Worked perfectly for me although I suffered the same lengthy download as
    most everyone else. Any chance of a typo in your password or it being
    case sensitive or something like that? I had no trouble at all
    registering so it must be working ok on thier end I would think.


    --
    Get Thunderbird - Reclaim Your Inbox
    http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

    Get Firefox! - The Browser You Can Trust
    http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
  32. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lokari wrote:
    > 42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I visted the site with the intention of posting the direct link for you.
    >>But it looks like they removed it since yesterday. I'm guessing they
    >>removed it due to congestion. I assure you it *was* there yesterday.
    >
    >
    > Sure, kid. Did you bring enough for everyone to smoke?
    >
    > --
    > Exodus 22:18 can kiss my pagan ass
    > www.lokari.net

    There was an ftp link right beneath the bittorrent link at first but
    they removed it. I saw it also.

    --
    Get Thunderbird - Reclaim Your Inbox
    http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

    Get Firefox! - The Browser You Can Trust
    http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
  33. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote in
    news:1_KdndSkf_ugm17cRVn-1Q@dejazzd.com:

    > Well, went and registered, which means putting in a whole boatload of
    > information, but specifically does -not- require any CC or billing
    > information; there's a step where you -can- put that info in, and
    > you're told that if you do then when your free period is over you'll
    > automatically get charged, but its very clear and simple how not to do
    > so.
    >
    > Finally got to the submit page, which took a while to process but
    > finally said "done" and then just sat there.
    >
    > Well, looking at it, I'm supposed to get something via email. I put
    > my real email address in there, so I'm waiting. Looks like they are
    > saying it could take up to 15 minutes.
    >
    > Check my email box, nothing.
    >
    > Checked 15 minutes later, nothing.
    >
    > Half hour, nothing.
    >
    > 45 minutes, nothing.
    >
    > Went back to the site and tried to log in, with my username and
    > password, won't let me in.
    >
    > Tried to register again, in case I'd done something wrong; says my
    > username is already in use. I hit that with my first attempt at a
    > username, and not with this one, when I first registered, so I guess
    > it took my new name and is doing -something- with it.
    >
    > Does this mean that the registration process is jammed up and its
    > taking forever to process each new registrant?
    >
    > Or does it mean I've done something wrong, and I'm not going to get
    > this account registered after all?
    >
    > It was free, I can just make up new user names till I find one that
    > works, if I made some numbskull error.
    >
    > But I can't think what I did wrong, so its hard to correct that.
    >
    > I guess I'll give it a few more hours, but at this point I'm already
    > over 24 hours from time I decided to give AO a try, this is kind of
    > sad for a free demo!
    >

    Does not sound like a way to win over a customer...

    --
    On Erollisi Marr in <Sanctuary of Marr>
    Ancient Graeme Faelban, Barbarian Prophet of 69 seasons

    On Steamfont
    Graeme, 18 Dwarven Shaman, 15 Scholar
  34. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Faned <faned@wyld.qx.net> wrote:
    >
    > How were your other internet activities during that time? I suspect that
    > you, like most people on DSL, have a very limited upload bandwidth. I know
    > that before I figured out how to throttle the upload side of my connection I
    > could saturate it to the point where it would severely impact my download
    > bandwidth. The simple explanation for this is that your computer has to
    > "upload" a request for more stuff to download, and if your upload bandwidth
    > is saturated, it doesn't matter if you've got tons of unused download
    > bandwidth, cause your computer can't get a message out asking for more to
    > download.

    Bit Torrent only performs well if you allow it to share with peers. It
    is a peer to peer software and it is engineered to enforce file sharing.
    To get it to work correctly, you need to allow uploads via the ports
    6881 through 6889.

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
    Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.
  35. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 23:12:54 -0600, Lokari wrote:

    > Are you talking about the link that ultimately goes to CNet? That's
    > the only one I can find. But I'm old, and probably going blind in my
    > dotage.

    This is the one I'm currently downloading, it is very slow though:

    http://http.ao-alien-invasion.gamigo.de/anarchy_online/ao/AOInstall15.7.3_EP0_live_nointro.zip
  36. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <Xns95C25F3BD31E7richardrapiernetscap@130.133.1.4>,
    RichardRapier@netscape.net says...
    > Lance Berg <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote in
    > news:1_KdndSkf_ugm17cRVn-1Q@dejazzd.com:
    >
    > > Well, went and registered, which means putting in a whole boatload of
    > > information, but specifically does -not- require any CC or billing
    > > information; there's a step where you -can- put that info in, and
    > > you're told that if you do then when your free period is over you'll
    > > automatically get charged, but its very clear and simple how not to do
    > > so.
    > >
    > > Finally got to the submit page, which took a while to process but
    > > finally said "done" and then just sat there.
    > >
    > > Well, looking at it, I'm supposed to get something via email. I put
    > > my real email address in there, so I'm waiting. Looks like they are
    > > saying it could take up to 15 minutes.
    > >
    > > Check my email box, nothing.
    > >
    > > Checked 15 minutes later, nothing.
    > >
    > > Half hour, nothing.
    > >
    > > 45 minutes, nothing.
    > >
    > > Went back to the site and tried to log in, with my username and
    > > password, won't let me in.
    > >
    > > Tried to register again, in case I'd done something wrong; says my
    > > username is already in use. I hit that with my first attempt at a
    > > username, and not with this one, when I first registered, so I guess
    > > it took my new name and is doing -something- with it.
    > >
    > > Does this mean that the registration process is jammed up and its
    > > taking forever to process each new registrant?
    > >
    > > Or does it mean I've done something wrong, and I'm not going to get
    > > this account registered after all?
    > >
    > > It was free, I can just make up new user names till I find one that
    > > works, if I made some numbskull error.
    > >
    > > But I can't think what I did wrong, so its hard to correct that.
    > >
    > > I guess I'll give it a few more hours, but at this point I'm already
    > > over 24 hours from time I decided to give AO a try, this is kind of
    > > sad for a free demo!
    > >
    >
    > Does not sound like a way to win over a customer...
    >

    Hmmm... I just ran the registration wizard. But I didn't even see an
    indication that I needed to wait for an email. After completing the
    form, and printing the 'receipt', their was a 'done' type button, and
    'sign in to your new acount'. I clicked the latter, entered my user name
    and password, and could order expansions, change subscription options,
    review payment/personal info, and access the forums.

    Looks like this is a 'work in progress' for them. :)
  37. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <MPG.1c2cc6c92a19dd5298993a@shawnews>, nospam@nospam.com
    says...
    > In article <Xns95C25F3BD31E7richardrapiernetscap@130.133.1.4>,
    > RichardRapier@netscape.net says...
    > > Lance Berg <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote in
    > > news:1_KdndSkf_ugm17cRVn-1Q@dejazzd.com:
    > >
    > > > Well, went and registered, which means putting in a whole boatload of
    > > > information, but specifically does -not- require any CC or billing
    > > > information; there's a step where you -can- put that info in, and
    > > > you're told that if you do then when your free period is over you'll
    > > > automatically get charged, but its very clear and simple how not to do
    > > > so.
    > > >
    > > > Finally got to the submit page, which took a while to process but
    > > > finally said "done" and then just sat there.
    > > >
    > > > Well, looking at it, I'm supposed to get something via email. I put
    > > > my real email address in there, so I'm waiting. Looks like they are
    > > > saying it could take up to 15 minutes.
    > > >
    > > > Check my email box, nothing.
    > > >
    > > > Checked 15 minutes later, nothing.
    > > >
    > > > Half hour, nothing.
    > > >
    > > > 45 minutes, nothing.
    > > >
    > > > Went back to the site and tried to log in, with my username and
    > > > password, won't let me in.
    > > >
    > > > Tried to register again, in case I'd done something wrong; says my
    > > > username is already in use. I hit that with my first attempt at a
    > > > username, and not with this one, when I first registered, so I guess
    > > > it took my new name and is doing -something- with it.
    > > >
    > > > Does this mean that the registration process is jammed up and its
    > > > taking forever to process each new registrant?
    > > >
    > > > Or does it mean I've done something wrong, and I'm not going to get
    > > > this account registered after all?
    > > >
    > > > It was free, I can just make up new user names till I find one that
    > > > works, if I made some numbskull error.
    > > >
    > > > But I can't think what I did wrong, so its hard to correct that.
    > > >
    > > > I guess I'll give it a few more hours, but at this point I'm already
    > > > over 24 hours from time I decided to give AO a try, this is kind of
    > > > sad for a free demo!
    > > >
    > >
    > > Does not sound like a way to win over a customer...
    > >
    >
    > Hmmm... I just ran the registration wizard. But I didn't even see an
    > indication that I needed to wait for an email. After completing the
    > form, and printing the 'receipt', their was a 'done' type button, and
    > 'sign in to your new acount'. I clicked the latter, entered my user name
    > and password, and could order expansions, change subscription options,
    > review payment/personal info, and access the forums.
    >
    > Looks like this is a 'work in progress' for them. :)
    >
    Hmmm.. correction... the forums tab doesn't actually provide access to
    the official forums, just a page saying access to that is reserved for
    paying customers.

    At first I didn't think that made sense... but then giving away free
    access with no cc info required is just asking for trolls to sign up.
    (ie people who have no intention of playing but who want to start flames
    on the forums...) They also might do some of their customer support
    there, and again don't want to impact their paying playerbase... so
    perhaps its understandable.
  38. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg wrote:
    >
    >
    > Lance Berg wrote:
    >
    > If that analysis is correct, then it looks like my upload was at around
    > 2/3rds my total yesterday, so I only had room for 1/3rd. And now this
    > morning, I'm only uploading 1/3rd my total, so I'm limited to 1/3rd my
    > total for download as well. I'd go faster if only there was more demand?
    >
    > Lance

    the ul/dl speed ratio is not fixed, but usually you can get 3-4 times
    your upload rate. One of the things it does do is realize 'hey, noone
    WANTS what he has to give, so I can't hold his upload rate against him'.

    A very good reason for limiting upload rates on things like DSL
    connections is to prevent saturation of the upstream transfer. If too
    much uploading happens, it drags down the speed you can download at.
    (DSL is generally asymetric, upload << download).
  39. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On Thu, 16 Dec 2004 23:12:54 -0600, Lokari wrote:

    > Are you talking about the link that ultimately goes to CNet? That's
    > the only one I can find. But I'm old, and probably going blind in my
    > dotage.

    It's also available on these sites, probably more use to those a bit
    closer than me:

    http://www.ausgamers.com/files/
    http://www.gamearena.com.au/files/details/html/14886

    (If you're concerned about authenticity get somebody you trust to give
    you the MD5 sum of the original, and then compare them.)
  40. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    On 16 Dec 2004 18:06:53 GMT, Graeme Faelban wrote:

    > 54 Mbps? That's quite a connection there, you sure it's not more like 5
    > Mbps, or even lower? The DSL connections I've seen have been in the 0.5
    > Mbps to 3 Mbps range.

    A 0.5 Mbps (Mega-bits per second) DSL link would be close to saturated
    at 54KB/S.
    I suspect there has been some confusion of units?

    I have a 768Kbps link and I can get close to 80KB/S. At work (I work at
    a university) we have a high (don't know what exactly) speed connection
    and I've never managed to sustain more than 500KB/S from anywhere.

    54Mbps sounds very unlikely...
  41. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Gary Beldon wrote:
    > On 16 Dec 2004 18:06:53 GMT, Graeme Faelban wrote:
    >
    >
    >>54 Mbps? That's quite a connection there, you sure it's not more like 5
    >>Mbps, or even lower? The DSL connections I've seen have been in the 0.5
    >>Mbps to 3 Mbps range.
    >
    >
    > A 0.5 Mbps (Mega-bits per second) DSL link would be close to saturated
    > at 54KB/S.
    > I suspect there has been some confusion of units?
    >
    > I have a 768Kbps link and I can get close to 80KB/S. At work (I work at
    > a university) we have a high (don't know what exactly) speed connection
    > and I've never managed to sustain more than 500KB/S from anywhere.
    >
    > 54Mbps sounds very unlikely...
    >
    >
    That's somewhere around a full T3 iirc...
  42. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Michael wrote:

    > Lokari wrote:
    >
    >> 42 <nospam@nospam.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>> I visted the site with the intention of posting the direct link for
    >>> you. But it looks like they removed it since yesterday. I'm guessing
    >>> they removed it due to congestion. I assure you it *was* there
    >>> yesterday.
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Sure, kid. Did you bring enough for everyone to smoke?
    >>
    >> --
    >> Exodus 22:18 can kiss my pagan ass
    >> www.lokari.net
    >
    >
    > There was an ftp link right beneath the bittorrent link at first but
    > they removed it. I saw it also.
    >
    At one point today I saw a link for direct FTP, server located in
    Germany. It wasn't there yesterday when I started the download, though.
  43. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Michael <NOSPAM_Lin_mukai@comcast.net> wrote:

    >> Sure, kid. Did you bring enough for everyone to smoke?

    >There was an ftp link right beneath the bittorrent link at first but
    >they removed it. I saw it also.

    Sooo, what you're saying is that 42 brought enough for you to smoke,
    at least :)

    --
    Exodus 22:18 can kiss my pagan ass
    www.lokari.net
  44. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    In article <48adnQItr7KZGV7cRVn-1Q@vallnet.com>,
    tyas_mt@hotplonkmail.commies says...
    > Gary Beldon wrote:
    > > On 16 Dec 2004 18:06:53 GMT, Graeme Faelban wrote:
    > >
    > >
    > >>54 Mbps? That's quite a connection there, you sure it's not more like 5
    > >>Mbps, or even lower? The DSL connections I've seen have been in the 0.5
    > >>Mbps to 3 Mbps range.
    > >
    > >
    > > A 0.5 Mbps (Mega-bits per second) DSL link would be close to saturated
    > > at 54KB/S.
    > > I suspect there has been some confusion of units?
    > >
    > > I have a 768Kbps link and I can get close to 80KB/S. At work (I work at
    > > a university) we have a high (don't know what exactly) speed connection
    > > and I've never managed to sustain more than 500KB/S from anywhere.
    > >
    > > 54Mbps sounds very unlikely...
    > >
    > >
    > That's somewhere around a full T3 iirc...
    >
    And exactly the number that Wireless-G supports. So perhaps he's got a
    big fat 54Mbps connection between his PC and his router... and from
    their out he's in the 512kbps-1mbps most DSL users get. :|
  45. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lance Berg <emporer@dejazzd.com> wrote:
    >
    > So, I went to the web site
    > http://www.anarchy-online.com/content/news/articles/8387L
    > which explains the deal. Looks like they are serious, of course the
    > idea is that I'll want the expansions, which I'll have to pay for and
    > which will break the "free year" part of the deal.
    >

    Not exactly a lot of peers out there, but what the heck, it is free!
    :-)

    --
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
    Spammers please contact me at renegade@veldy.net.
  46. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Lokari wrote:
    > Michael <NOSPAM_Lin_mukai@comcast.net> wrote:
    >
    >
    >>>Sure, kid. Did you bring enough for everyone to smoke?
    >
    >
    >>There was an ftp link right beneath the bittorrent link at first but
    >>they removed it. I saw it also.
    >
    >
    > Sooo, what you're saying is that 42 brought enough for you to smoke,
    > at least :)
    >
    > --
    > Exodus 22:18 can kiss my pagan ass
    > www.lokari.net

    LOL! No, I gave it up many years ago. Then again after all the shrooms,
    coke, acid, pot, ups, downs, booze, etc. I did in my youth it is
    reasonable to question anything I have to say I suppose. Which game was
    that download for? I forget now...

    --
    Get Thunderbird - Reclaim Your Inbox
    http://www.mozilla.org/products/thunderbird/

    Get Firefox! - The Browser You Can Trust
    http://www.mozilla.org/products/firefox/
  47. Archived from groups: alt.games.everquest (More info?)

    Just for a report so people have an idea, my bittorrent client is
    getting the game at ~28k, upload rate 13k (I can adjust it with my
    client, and have locked it at no more than 13k)
    I'm connected to 16 seeds and 12 peers.

    I'm on a dual bonded t1 lines with about 2/3rd's their bandwidth free,
    but I don't want to saturate the download.
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games