Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Vonpenguin

Preventing multiple accounts for single users

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, Daddie said:

And yet they need to balance teams. If 10K players sign up for Team A and only 1K for Team B the outcome is already decided before the campaign starts. Same for concurrent playing players. If technical limitations allow for 10K concurrent players it would be unfair if Team A logs in with 9K players leaving only 1K spots for the other team. 

One way or another.. every multiboxing account takes up extra spots.

If a team does that to a world, move to a world that team is not part of.  Quickly that team will only encounter worlds that close within weeks because they already "won", and rewards are based on how long a world lives, so zerg teams will end up with crappy worlds, crappy rewards, and crappy experience.

Quote

Rewards scale up based on the difficulty of the Campaign and the duration. In effect, you can earn more rewards by making the longer-term commitment – and, of course, by winning.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

 

The way to do this in my opinion is not the stick, but the carrot.

Give overlapping advantages for multiple crows on the same account. (I would call them your "murder".)

For example VIP accounts can choose which crow uses  the extra Archetype training, shared access and control of EK assets. If one crow in your Murder has a skill already trained, future crows can train it at reduced time cost. EK shared spirit bank among crows, and other convenience features.

Things that express and enhance the relationship of the crows to Player, rather than cutting it off at the login level.

I'd even go as far as speeding up General training as well. I know I said I'm against training multiple generals so I think training speed and perks for already trained skills is the better option. I'd be ok with taking that next step in multiples as long as it doesn't hurt those who actually want to specialize in a single area like Harvesting/Crafting/Economy. There should still be benefits of specializing over taking a more broad approach. I'm generally good with ideas even if I may be against them if its for the better of the game.

Edited by pang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pang said:

I'd even go as far as speeding up General training as well. I know I said I'm against training multiple generals so I think training speed and perks for already trained skills is the better option. I'd be ok with taking that next step in multiples as long as it doesn't hurt those who actually want to specialize in a single area like Harvesting/Crafting/Economy. There should still be benefits of specializing over taking a more broad approach. I'm generally good with ideas even if I may be against them if its for the better of the game.

That's why I suggested the "if you have a crow that has it".  There is no way that any member of your "murder" would get to the end quicker, but you would be able to follow in the footsteps the second time through.  The big advantage to new or secondary crows would be in the basics lines, not in the specializations, but it would give incentive to players to contain multiple crows within a murder, rather than separate ALT accounts.

This in turn would allow ACE to control multi boxing, as most "normal" players would rather have the advantage in re-training, than the advantage of having two crows out in the wild at once.

It would also make me personally feel like I didn't NEED to multi account to try all the aspects of the game, I just had to earn/pay for more crows for my Murder.  Not sure if it was this thread, but I did suggest that additional crow slots be a reward for winning campaigns.  Perhaps in sections based on band, or as an artifact you recover from a world.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

If a team does that to a world, move to a world that team is not part of.  Quickly that team will only encounter worlds that close within weeks because they already "won", and rewards are based on how long a world lives, so zerg teams will end up with crappy worlds, crappy rewards, and crappy experience.

 

I just checked the link, I cannot find any reference about the loot being based upon the length of a campaign. Also reducing the loot because the winning team was able to outsmart the enemy would piss people off not to mention the winning team prolonging the eventually defeat to increase loot.

But again.. the only reason why multiboxing exist is because some people just want to be independent of other players or because they don't want to be forced into a role.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Daddie said:

I just checked the link, I cannot find any reference about the loot being based upon the length of a campaign. Also reducing the loot because the winning team was able to outsmart the enemy would piss people off not to mention the winning team prolonging the eventually defeat to increase loot.

But again.. the only reason why multiboxing exist is because some people just want to be independent of other players or because they don't want to be forced into a role.

I literally quoted it for you. [CTRL-F] is your friend.

It's item 19. I just followed the link and for some reason the deep link didn't work to take you right there. 

 

Pair it with 5 and 6, and you have the scenario I described. 

Quote

 These worlds last only until a victor is declared.

....

How long will they last? As long as the game is still fun!

Zerg group dominates a world, that world ends quickly and rewards are low. Kings of a lonely hill only they care about.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

JTC plans to give us enough to to with our chosen niche player roles that we won't have enough time to play roles we don't enjoy.

Someone else in the guild will be handling that end.

And we should be able to trade our efforts in one chosen endeavor for the gear we need anyway.

Edited by chancellor
deleted typo

I think the K-Mart of MMO's already exists!  And it ain't us!   :)

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

I literally quoted it for you. [CTRL-F] is your friend.

It's item 19. I just followed the link and for some reason the deep link didn't work to take you right there. 

 

Pair it with 5 and 6, and you have the scenario I described. 

Zerg group dominates a world, that world ends quickly and rewards are low. Kings of a lonely hill only they care about.

Very offtopic, but I don't see how the reward will be lower when players are able to outsmart the enemy and force a quick win. I don't think you can combine some "items" for that list and come up with new rules ;)

But again.. I am sure people will multibox with the current skill training which will hurt other players inside the same campaigns. Ill leave at that and lets agree to disagree on this ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎6‎/‎2017 at 11:41 AM, Daddie said:

Very offtopic, but I don't see how the reward will be lower when players are able to outsmart the enemy and force a quick win. I don't think you can combine some "items" for that list and come up with new rules ;)

But again.. I am sure people will multibox with the current skill training which will hurt other players inside the same campaigns. Ill leave at that and lets agree to disagree on this ;)

Rewards are time based as well. Shorter CW = less rewards.

https://crowfall.com/en/faq/campaign/

Quote

 

19. WHY WOULD I PARTICIPATE IN A LONG CAMPAIGN? IT SEEMS LIKE I WOULD GET MORE REWARDS FROM DOING A BUNCH OF SHORTER ONES?

Rewards scale up based on the difficulty of the Campaign and the duration. In effect, you can earn more rewards by making the longer-term commitment – and, of course, by winning.

Again, it’s all about risk and reward.

 

 

Edited by pang

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, pang said:

Rewards are time based as well. Shorter CW = less rewards.

 

Ah well.. doesn't matter about my views on multi boxing and Crowfall. Seems not only the team with multi-boxers has a disadvantage , but also the winning team as the campaign duration is shorterend due to faster victory and thus less rewards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

More accounts = more $ for ACE. ACE is a company designed to make itself (and now its shareholders) money. Ergo, this is a completely asinine argument. Creating multiple accounts is neither cheating, violating the spirit of Crowfall, or in any other way an abuse of game mechanics. Now...with that being said...IF ArtCraft wanted to limit the ability of players to bring multiple vessels into a Campaign World, they could limit guild or faction size. This could, potentially have some effect because the guild would only want combat ready vessels instead of alt crafters/harvesters in their ranks. Of course, if there were no limits also on the number of guilds, a guild would just then put all of their alts in an alt-guild. In any respect, its a waste of time, effort and brainpower to even discuss this subject. There is no way on god's green earth that a company that has been actively raising investment capital from 3rd parties to then tell those investors "we aren't going to maximize profits but instead want a "pure gaming experience" where players will only be able to play on one account." Isn't going to happen. Period. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, Gradishar said:

More accounts = more $ for ACE. ACE is a company designed to make itself (and now its shareholders) money. Ergo, this is a completely asinine argument. Creating multiple accounts is neither cheating, violating the spirit of Crowfall, or in any other way an abuse of game mechanics. Now...with that being said...IF ArtCraft wanted to limit the ability of players to bring multiple vessels into a Campaign World, they could limit guild or faction size. This could, potentially have some effect because the guild would only want combat ready vessels instead of alt crafters/harvesters in their ranks. Of course, if there were no limits also on the number of guilds, a guild would just then put all of their alts in an alt-guild. In any respect, its a waste of time, effort and brainpower to even discuss this subject. There is no way on god's green earth that a company that has been actively raising investment capital from 3rd parties to then tell those investors "we aren't going to maximize profits but instead want a "pure gaming experience" where players will only be able to play on one account." Isn't going to happen. Period. 

That bold line is one hell of an assumption. You enter campaign worlds practically naked, with limited resources that will certainly not carry you to the end. In fact I would expect the Dregs to be zero import zones, where you come in as a naked crow. The primary accounts you will want in those worlds, will be harvesters and crafters.

I would LOVE to be against a full guild of players with only combat training. The bitter tears, the cries of anguish, as their naked and shivering forms degraded and destroyed by properly equipped players of my guild, would warm many a hearth, and fill many a happy cup.

Besides, the math is easy.  1 60$ or less account is less valuable than a single 15$/month account after just 5 months. Ace is wise to want residual income accounts over one offs.

Edited by KrakkenSmacken

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

I would LOVE to be against a full guild of players with only combat training. The bitter tears, the cries of anguish, as they their naked and shivering forms degraded and destroyed by properly equipped players of my guild, would warm many a hearth, and fill many a happy cup.

Don't forget that you can loot stuff from other players. Combat-trained characters may be able to equip themselves by raiding and looting other people.


IhhQKY6.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, KrakkenSmacken said:

In fact I would expect the Dregs to be zero import zones

And you would expect wrong. Its been stated multiple times that the band itself doesnt have anything to do with import values or campaign rulesets. ACE stated that the import rules and campaign rulesets for campaigns in a band can be changed, they even stated that some dregs CWs will have imports.

That outdated as hell image, that showed a general mock view of the campaign bands, was just to show in general that Outter bands are easier with less rewards and inner bands are harder with better rewards. Inner bands can have import worlds and no import worlds, and so can outer bands. Inner bands can have Standard campaigns and bloodstone (i think thats what its called anyways) rulesets and so can the outer bands.

So its up to the players/guilds to decide which bands to join and how to gear appropriately for the start up of the campaigns. Your right a guild going into a no import dregs might very well choose to have more crafters, but a guild going into a no import gods reach or shadows(if shadows is a thing still idk) might want more fighters than crafters, but that doesnt mean those are the only viable strategy for those given circumstances.

Edited by ShadowwBoi13

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, Jah said:

Don't forget that you can loot stuff from other players. Combat-trained characters may be able to equip themselves by raiding and looting other people.

 

7 minutes ago, ShadowwBoi13 said:

And you would expect wrong. Its been stated multiple times that the band itself doesnt have anything to do with import values or campaign rulesets. ACE stated that the import rules and campaign rulesets for campaigns in a band can be changed, they even stated that some dregs CWs will have imports.

That outdated as hell image, that showed a general mock view of the campaign bands, was just to show in general that Outter bands are easier with less rewards and inner bands are harder with better rewards. Inner bands can have import worlds and no import worlds, and so can outer bands. Inner bands can have Standard campaigns and bloodstone (i think thats what its called anyways) rulesets and so can the outer bands.

So its up to the players/guilds to decide which bands to join and how to gear appropriately for the start up of the campaigns. Your right a guild going into a no import dregs might very well choose to have more crafters, but a guild going into a no import gods reach or shadows(if shadows is a thing still idk) might want more fighters than crafters, but that doesnt mean those are the only viable strategy for those given circumstances.

As fun as theory craft is, and as much as I am looking forward to facing these master race guilds filled with the toughest hombres ready to make their way by looting, this is hardly the thread for it, nor does it change the fact that ACE has said they would prefer VIP regular income over one off purchases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...