The /who command needs to go.

[Ble 510]

It should not be available in zone and if you want it available in faction, could it please just return an number and not a list of names?   The zone /who needs to go though.  If spies want to spy, make them be deticated at that screen and have to follow the force they are keeping tabs on.

I think it would inevitably lead to more fights because it would be more difficult to assess your numbers vs. their numbers and people might be less concerned with ensuring they have 2x numbers before they take a fight.

Edited March 21 by Ble

[Medicaid 52]

should also fix the whole ....   "if i close my launcher, i can run another crowfall.exe"

[mandalore 2,413]

1 hour ago, Medicaid said:

should also fix the whole ....   "if i close my launcher, i can run another crowfall.exe"

@vkromas

[Staff 342]

dont need to worry about spies when you play order

[Ayuden 2]

2 hours ago, Medicaid said:

should also fix the whole ....   "if i close my launcher, i can run another crowfall.exe"

This doesn't fix anything really when it comes to tactical advantage. And those of us that run a crafting/gathering account and a Combat account would virtually be out of work as well.

 

To the initial thread request, I agree that the /who returning a total number is just as beneficial if you're using it in faction (not spying), as whoever it is you're looking for you probably already have another means of connection to...(discord/faction/guild/etc). So the /who providing a # would still give you volume for the purpose of siege intentions, but would require you to actually go "spy" if that's the intent. Do work Guinea Nation!

 

-Ayu

[mandalore 2,413]

12 minutes ago, Ayuden said:

And those of us that run a crafting/gathering account and a Combat account would virtually be out of work as well.

You wanting to keep something thats not supposed to be able to be done doesn'y mean its okay.  They clearly don't want us doing it and then we, the players find a work around.  that's called an exploit.  If they wanted us to be multiboxxing wouldn't they just allow it then? 

[Ayuden 2]

44 minutes ago, mandalore said:

You wanting to keep something thats not supposed to be able to be done doesn'y mean its okay.  They clearly don't want us doing it and then we, the players find a work around.  that's called an exploit.  If they wanted us to be multiboxxing wouldn't they just allow it then? 

I apologize for my ignorance in this regard. I'm unaware of the EULA prohibiting a single owner having multiple accounts. If this is the case I'm out of line on the subject, but would like to understand the philosophy or intent of the rule...

-Ayu

[Silverbranch 17]

Attempting to prevent multiboxing is a complete fools errand.

So long as there is tangible reason to have multiple accounts, which Crowfalls system rewards... to an incredible degree if you're looking to be at all self sufficient, then people will find ways to multibox.

Whether that be a way of running multiple clients on the same instance, running VM's or actually going back to the namesake and literally running multiple boxes.

 

But to the point at hand, I'd advocate for a complete removal even when compared to just showing online numbers, being able to see spikes in active numbers, even without names, is a tangible piece of free intelligence.

[Duffy 248]

If anyone really thinks that trying to play with account limits will solve anything versus aggravate your player base and drive people away hasn’t been playing sandboxes enough. At best you’ll get rid of the lazy spies and inhibit non conflict player actions, at worse you’ll solve nothing and drive away players and revenue.

[rutaq 14]

I support removing /who,  it is a cheap way to gather intel and doesn't actually encourage playing the game.

Real world scouting should be the primary way to gather intel.  

[Marth 377]

49 minutes ago, rutaq said:

I support removing /who,  it is a cheap way to gather intel and doesn't actually encourage playing the game.

Real world scouting should be the primary way to gather intel.  

This /who pretty much makes faction able to know how much to lock a zone. We would see more chaos invasions or balance invasions with it gone. If you /who and see 50 people in your zone you are just gonna dodge (sadly).  Being able to hide a raid in a forest and sneak attack would be a massive boon to pvp.

[Ayuden 2]

15 minutes ago, Marth said:

This /who pretty much makes faction able to know how much to lock a zone. We would see more chaos invasions or balance invasions with it gone. If you /who and see 50 people in your zone you are just gonna dodge (sadly).  Being able to hide a raid in a forest and sneak attack would be a massive boon to pvp.

You mean, like "open world" PeeVeePeeeee ?

Seems legit.

 

-Ayu

[Frykka 1,675]

Yes...  /who can go.

Multibox, multiclient... No, that is part of the game...   need my leadership bot in my ek dust/ember farm.    Having no tab target or follow removes inactive bot play from fights which is the old school reason to limit multi-accounts.

Edited March 22 by Frykka

[Kraahk 3,634]

The /who command has to be gone before launch. Or at least to be limited heavily (like only be usable in EK's or only showing guild members in the guild channel ... something like that). No doubt about that.

However, "right now" /who is an interesting function to see how many people are online on which side and to allow people to make some statistics on their own. I think right now it opens more opportunities than it causes harm.

Btw. multiboxing is a different topic. Worth an own thread. Even though it has already been discussed several times throughout the years. Just let's try to keep things easy for the ACE team. Just saying.

[vkromas 659]

So, I wasn't sure if this note from our check-in history should be player facing so I initially left it out. After reading this thread though I've updated the patch notes to now include the following excerpt: 

/who is now a CSR only command and no longer accessible by players.

This has been noted in the 5.8.5 Test Patch Notes posted today, 3/21/19.

Edited March 21 by vkromas
clarifying which patch notes

[ZYBAK 2,817]

Efforts to make multiboxing/multiaccounting less accessible will only make it MORE POWERFUL for the people who will inevitably do it. There are so many ways around efforts to block multiboxing that it's laughable. Most of them don't even cost money. Even if they had some sort of insane hardware ID system similar to what Blizzard uses to ban cheaters it's still really easy to get around.

The Crowfall audience has a lot of disposable income and is willing to spend it for an advantage. 

Luckily for the moment Crowfall doesn't seem to be a game you can actually play multiple accounts effectively in. No tab targeting, action combat, no follow command etc. all make key-cloning multiboxing not really a thing. 

Edited March 21 by ZYBAK

[Marth 377]

4 minutes ago, ZYBAK said:

Efforts to make multiboxing/multiaccounting less accessible will only make it MORE POWERFUL for the people who will inevitably do it. There are so many ways around efforts to block multiboxing that it's laughable. Most of them don't even cost money. Even if they had some sort of insane hardware ID system similar to what Blizzard uses to ban cheaters it's still really easy to get around.

The Crowfall audience has a lot of disposable income and is willing to spend it for an advantage. 

This archeage tried that and it just led to the people that missused it the most got wayy ahead. 

[Gradishar 1,064]

39 minutes ago, ZYBAK said:

Efforts to make multiboxing/multiaccounting less accessible will only make it MORE POWERFUL for the people who will inevitably do it. There are so many ways around efforts to block multiboxing that it's laughable. Most of them don't even cost money. Even if they had some sort of insane hardware ID system similar to what Blizzard uses to ban cheaters it's still really easy to get around.

The Crowfall audience has a lot of disposable income and is willing to spend it for an advantage. 

Luckily for the moment Crowfall doesn't seem to be a game you can actually play multiple accounts effectively in. No tab targeting, action combat, no follow command etc. all make key-cloning multiboxing not really a thing. 

Remove the ability of Embers and Dust to drop in EKs. Problem largely solved. 

[Marth 377]

3 hours ago, Gradishar said:

Remove the ability of Embers and Dust to drop in EKs. Problem largely solved. 

I dont see why eks shouldnt have the same things as the safezone temples. 

Edited March 21 by Marth

[Medicaid 52]

7 hours ago, Ayuden said:

I apologize for my ignorance in this regard. I'm unaware of the EULA prohibiting a single owner having multiple accounts. If this is the case I'm out of line on the subject, but would like to understand the philosophy or intent of the rule...

owning multiple accounts is different than playing multiple accounts at the same time sir.