Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

What I find interesting is @wishformore creates a "ghost" account yesterday to respond to just this topic and seems to have so much info about this.. WHY?

Also, according to @djvogans this has happened many times before. If so, then the "Boss" should be fired as well for allowing it to happen again and again.

One last comment.. if a member of the Admin team offers items to a player for RMT, don't blame the player for accepting the offer. Blame the Admin for not implementing protections to prevent this from happening... especially when it has already occurred OVER and OVER AGAIN!!

In the end, the ADMIN is responsible for all corruption, decisions, actions made by his team.

  • 3 weeks later...
Posted (edited)

Here we are, in 2023 blurring the lines between RMT from items generated by the game world, and RMT items spawned by staff, to justify, I don't even know what. 


 

Edited by Mr_Zero
Posted (edited)
On 3/2/2023 at 6:29 AM, Mr_Zero said:

Here we are, in 2023 blurring the lines between RMT from items generated by the game world, and RMT items spawned by staff, to justify, I don't even know what. 


 

You'd be surprised to what extent admins can take corruption in their own servers. Recently I got my hands on the source of a very famous project that was live for more than 5 years and there was an automated adena-trader bot system. The system literally spawned random dwarfs in-game that shouted adena-trade websites which led to a website that used a callback when you purchased adena just like donation systems. Then the server would automatically move these dwarfs to the player, trade them and give them the adena.

 

They were basically destroying their own server's economy actively and in secret for the shake of a few extra hundred dollars per month, while the server made over 60-70k per opening.

Edited by An4rchy
  • Upvote 1
Posted
34 minutes ago, BruT said:

every single private server owner or admin is selling items under the table, why does that surprise you?


Transparent donation systems are put in place to generate income to their respective owners; often these systems are more than adequate, especially on some of the successful servers. 

Since the corruption of the specific topic took place on DEX, I can tell you that DEX in particular has an aggressive donation system that yields a lot of income per opening.  

I doubt that it takes place on "every single server", but yeah, most likely does in most. 

But why should we be downplaying it? 

F*ck this, man. Seriously. 

  • 4 weeks later...
  • 2 weeks later...
Posted
On 2/14/2023 at 8:51 AM, wishformore said:

FA cp is nothing more than a mid tier CP with big wallets and good interface. So calm your titties

Low* tier CP with big wallets and good interface.

FA CP, we w8 more proofs on discord, merge was done, nabs!

 

  • 2 months later...
  • 9 months later...
Posted
On 3/2/2023 at 4:29 PM, BruT said:

every single private server owner or admin is selling items under the table, why does that surprise you?

why would admins waste their time selling epic items or high level gear for just 50 bucks?
mid-rate server can generate over 30k per month with average online activity.

Posted
15 hours ago, SkyLord said:

why would admins waste their time selling epic items or high level gear for just 50 bucks?
mid-rate server can generate over 30k per month with average online activity.

they make special offers and discounts depending on the sum

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Posts

    • LIVE VERIFICATION? SUMSUB? “IMPOSSIBLE”? ▪ Spoiler: it is possible — if you know who to work with. A client came in with a task to pass **live verification** on **WantToPay**, a Telegram virtual card service. On the platform side — **Sumsub**: liveness check, SMS, manual review. “Fast” and “by eye” simply don’t work here. › What was done: → analyzed the verification scenario and Sumsub requirements → built the correct flow: phone number, email, timing → **completed live verification remotely, without account handover** → handled SMS and confirmation codes → brought the process to final approval ▪ Result: → verification passed → access granted → no flags or repeat requests ▪ Live verification is not luck. It’s scenario-based preparation — not hope. › TG: @mustang_service ( https:// t.me/ mustang_service ) › Channel: Mustang Service ( https:// t.me/ +6RAKokIn5ItmYjEx ) *All data is published with the client’s consent.* #verification #sumsub #livecheck #kyc #case
    • IMPORTANT INFO: In a few days, I will switch to completely new code, written from scratch with a new download system, patch building and management system. The Updater will become true 2026 code with "foolproof systems". I'm going to create a Discord server for customers to request new ideas and features. FIRST CUSTOMERS ARE ALREADY USING THE NEW UPDATER ON LIVE SERVERS! Watch this topic for upcoming info because the new updater is around the corner! Yes, you can still use self-update on the previous updater! No, the new updater won't be compatible with the old patch system! A new build is required, but players who already have game files won't have to download the entire patch again! New templates and updates to existing templates are coming soon! Sneak peek:  
    • i used guytis IL project and source. i found in his project there are 3 Client version source... 1,CliExt_H5   --->this one cant be compiled in VS2005,i did know why..is it for H5 client? 2,CliExtNew  --->this one is IL version ,but when i compiled it and use it.player cant login game,MD5Checksum wrong.i check the source code,but not found any hints. 3,L2Server    --->this one for HB client?im not sure...   so my question is what are the differences between these three versions of cliext.dll?how can i fix the issue of the MD5Checksum not matching problem?   01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, [CCliExt::HandleCheckSum] Invalid Checksum[1130415144] vs [-721420287] packet[dd] len[29] sum[2698] key[30] HWID[] Account[]! 01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, SocketLimiter::UserSocketBadunknownprotocol 11111111111 01/29/2026 21:04:11.366, [usersocket]unknown protocol from ip[113.137.149.115]!      
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This community uses essential cookies to function properly. Non-essential cookies and third-party services are used only with your consent. Read our Privacy Policy and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..