What is your opinion about multiplaying?

[Ermabwed]

This was never intended to be a decisive poll. And multiple posts indicate that moderating the game would become harder not easier, thus gaining the hard working folks an increase in headaches.

Can you point me the relevant posts? I fail to understand, multiplay is forbidden under the rule "Do not cheat", and if it get changed, no special thing get added, just removed.

 

Less rules -> less rules broken -> less problems to mods to solve -> less overhead for the mods.

 

Its wrong the stuff above?

I'm too lazy to dig through all this just because you are too lazy

Three things that came up regarding rules were:

* can't have an alt sitting at a specific NPC just to get around antisocial (I guess that'd stand out as a log on, series of trades, log off, would be easy to hide the 'obviousness' of this though. What would happen to Antisocial perk, it's easy to plan ahead so even if you had to walk your alt to the NPC to trade the perk would be basically free PPs)

* scammed goods can't be transfered (How you check that? What trades would be considered scams? Scams are legal but trading scammed items is not? (explain that to players) Can I check with an alt who is in a PK area and go in to kill somebody? Would trading the loot be against the rules and who's going to check and prove that I did check with an alt first? Would I be posted to outlaws just because somebody saw a newbie char look into the same map before I entered it?)

* limit the numbers of alts or trades (now that has to be easily as confusing as the no multiplay rule, "I got banned because I traded 5001 items even though I was allowed only 5000", "Oh I thought a week was already up and I could trade again", "Oh but the other 5 are my brother's alts, he's living at the same place". Certainly more of a PITA to (control number of alts) * (number of players on IP) for legal/illegal trades. Would it be illegal trade if my alts traded among themselves? Would it be legal if my alt trades another player's alt who then trades it to his main and sells it to my main to get around the trade limitations? Would I get banned because another player breaks some rules on the limits in trades that involve me or my alts?)

 

I fail to see how that is easier as a rule for moderators and players than

"Don't trade with your alts and don't try to get around this."

that we have now in place for trades with alts.

 

So as not to confuse anybody, as I limited myself to trades above:

Illegal multi-playing means using more than one character to help you gain benefits that using a single character would not.

 

Anyways, although "Yes" won, the "No" folks were far more vocal against the proposal. And that is surprising to me since there are not a solid argument against (

Which obviously indicates that they had more arguments in favor of their vote and many valid ones (valid as in not being countered) but as stated above you didn't bother to read them

And just to note again: people who want to transfer the work from char A to char B, would do so sooner or later. Therefore there should happen all the problems the "No folks" boldly prophesied, but i fail to see any of that stuff on game).

Please tell me how I can transfer, let's say, ingredients for 10k true sight potions from 4 alts (one with 90k Wormwood, one with 70k Toadstools, one with 30k Henbane and one with 10k vials and 5k feasting potions that I gave the money to to purchase them) to my main under the current rules without breaking them That would convince me

[Lorck]

I'm too lazy to dig through all this just because you are too lazy

Three things that came up regarding rules were:

* can't have an alt sitting at a specific NPC just to get around antisocial (I guess that'd stand out as a log on, series of trades, log off, would be easy to hide the 'obviousness' of this though. What would happen to Antisocial perk, it's easy to plan ahead so even if you had to walk your alt to the NPC to trade the perk would be basically free PPs)

* scammed goods can't be transfered (How you check that? What trades would be considered scams? Scams are legal but trading scammed items is not? (explain that to players) Can I check with an alt who is in a PK area and go in to kill somebody? Would trading the loot be against the rules and who's going to check and prove that I did check with an alt first? Would I be posted to outlaws just because somebody saw a newbie char look into the same map before I entered it?)

* limit the numbers of alts or trades (now that has to be easily as confusing as the no multiplay rule, "I got banned because I traded 5001 items even though I was allowed only 5000", "Oh I thought a week was already up and I could trade again", "Oh but the other 5 are my brother's alts, he's living at the same place". Certainly more of a PITA to (control number of alts) * (number of players on IP) for legal/illegal trades. Would it be illegal trade if my alts traded among themselves? Would it be legal if my alt trades another player's alt who then trades it to his main and sells it to my main to get around the trade limitations? Would I get banned because another player breaks some rules on the limits in trades that involve me or my alts?)

 

I fail to see how that is easier as a rule for moderators and players than

"Don't trade with your alts and don't try to get around this."

that we have now in place for trades with alts.

Everything you pointed is illegal right now. To make some other things legal have nothing to do with it.

 

But ok, it could be confusing, to this is quite simple: scam is usually quite well defined, since its ILLEGAL in several games, and yes, even EL has a modality of scam which is illegal: password scamming. How hard is to extend a notion which is already present in another rule?

 

About chars sitting at npc, it would be quite straightforward. And finally, about limitations, i never saw any proposed limitation, so its not inherently a problem, obviously. Any char could trade any amount, as far as i could read.

Anyways, although "Yes" won, the "No" folks were far more vocal against the proposal. And that is surprising to me since there are not a solid argument against

Which obviously indicates that they had more arguments in favor of their vote and many valid ones (valid as in not being countered) but as stated above you didn't bother to read them

Nah, no argument was solid, it was just profecies and stuff like that. Furthermore, they aren't valid since they can be countered with this: if i can get advantages to a main char using multiple chars right now, and that should destroy the community/market, why the mentioned community and or market aren't destroyed right now?;

 

And just to note again: people who want to transfer the work from char A to char B, would do so sooner or later. Therefore there should happen all the problems the "No folks" boldly prophesied, but i fail to see any of that stuff on game).

Please tell me how I can transfer, let's say, ingredients for 10k true sight potions from 4 alts (one with 90k Wormwood, one with 70k Toadstools, one with 30k Henbane and one with 10k vials and 5k feasting potions that I gave the money to to purchase them) to my main under the current rules without breaking them That would convince me

Well, it would not be in a single step.

You could for instance use your chars to harvest and make gc, then sell that gc to one of the many players who buy gc for US$. Then use your US$ to buy the items for your main from one of the many players who sell gc for US$. Nothing of this is illegal. And if you instead of buying from players who sell gc, you buy items from the shop, i would offer an honest thanks for helping the generous folks who makes the game free for us all to play.

 

See, where is the wrecked economy and/or community?

Edited June 24, 2007 by Lorck

[Ermabwed]

Everything you pointed is illegal right now. To make some other things legal have nothing to do with it.

Yes, but the point is that it's not other things that would be made legal but exactly that or areas skirting that and as I pointed out it would in fact create more issues with rules and moderating than less.

 

About chars sitting at npc, it would be quite straightforward. And finally, about limitations, i never saw any proposed limitation, so its not inherently a problem, obviously. Any char could trade any amount, as far as i could read.

The proposal for limitations was (perhaps for the first time in this thread) mentioned on page 10, first post.

 

Nah, no argument was solid, it was just prophecies and stuff like that. Furthermore, they aren't valid since they can be countered with this: if i can get advantages to a main char using multiple chars right now, and that should destroy the community/market, why the mentioned community and or market aren't destroyed right now?;[/qoute]

But then we are back at it being a matter of how many chars you can run. And while I never mentioned the community or market in my post above, it is not seeing the effects of your proposed method of gaining advantages for you main character because it is not a very secure method and I doubt there'd be enough players willing to actually buy all the gc that'd get 'harvested' if everybody did that.

 

Well, it would not be in a single step.

You could for instance use your chars to harvest and make gc, then sell that gc to one of the many players who buy gc for US$. Then use your US$ to buy the items for your main from one of the many players who sell gc for US$. Nothing of this is illegal. And if you instead of buying from players who sell gc, you buy items from the shop, i would offer an honest thanks for helping the generous folks who makes the game free for us all to play.

 

See, where is the wrecked economy and/or community?

That is a very insecure and bothersome way of getting it though and in fact by the wording of the illegal multiplay rule it is against the rules just not punishable

Plus I wouldn't be left with any of the things I desired but with gc, adding at least another step to the whole process but I agree that it is a way to get gc on my main char by skirting detection that is not purely academic.

But it's a pain now and the differences to "just trade your alt" are obvious (requires other players, fast harvestables like lupines (as opposed to stuff you need only to check on every 15 minutes), doesn't get you the items you want) thus it being possible now has little to no value as an indicator of what might or might not happen.

 

PS: if the "no folks" speak only prophecies, I guess they are in luck:

1 : an inspired utterance of a prophet

2 : the function or vocation of a prophet; specifically : the inspired declaration of divine will and purpose

3 : a prediction of something to come

skipping 1, they are either declaring divine will and purpose (can you offer better?) or predicting something to come (nobody can do better when it comes to the future in a non-deterministic universe )

 

PS: the quotes seem to be messed up, I'm sure it's not too many

Edited June 24, 2007 by Ermabwed

[Lorck]

EDIT: Bleh @ quotes.

Yes, but the point is that it's not other things that would be made legal but exactly that or areas skirting that and as I pointed out it would in fact create more issues with rules and moderating than less.

I don't quite agree with this. If there is less rules, there should be less rules breaking, not more. If they mess with exceptions and stuff to make their work harder, its their choice.

But then we are back at it being a matter of how many chars you can run. And while I never mentioned the community or market in my post above, it is not seeing the effects of your proposed method of gaining advantages for you main character because it is not a very secure method and I doubt there'd be enough players willing to actually buy all the gc that'd get 'harvested' if everybody did that.

Well, since some of them advertise wanting to buy gc, at least at the moment its not a problem, so using some alts would benefit someone who is determined enough. And what i said in the beggining? If one is really willing to make a main char benefit from a few alts, he will do so sooner or later.So lets just remove that rule, and make the life of everyone easier, not just the folks who happen to be determined enough to do that (that was my first argument on this thread, btw ).

 

And if you don't 'forecasted' or 'profetized' the market or community, it still fails to address a simple issue: there is a legal way, and even some people who use that method, and all the stuff you and others profetized or forecasted (that it would happen if that was legal) simply don't happened so far, with something trully similar being legal.

That is a very insecure and bothersome way of getting it though and in fact by the wording of the illegal multiplay rule it is against the rules just not punishable.

Plus I wouldn't be left with any of the things I desired but with gc, adding at least another step to the whole process but I agree that it is a way to get gc on my main char by skirting detection that is not purely academic.

Well, if a rule can't be enforced, it has the exact same practical effect of having no rule in the first place!

 

And about prophecies, there is plenty of false prophets, like people who prophetized that the world would end up in 1998, Anyways, its easy to laugh at those people now, but plenty of other people took them seriously. But honestly, in my humble opinion, those who say 'xyz' will happen if to help a main char with alts become legal is similar to forecast that the world ended in '98. You can do that (with some effort, granted!) and 'xyz' did not happened.

Edited June 24, 2007 by Lorck

[Mr.Mind]

You can fight about it all you want, but the fact is that this issue is much like the illegal drugs issue in the USA. If people want to do it, they will do it anyway. No amount of rule setting or strict punishments will stop them. So who has the advantage right now? The people who aren't afraid of getting caught.

 

In the same way, if it is made legal then moderation's job becomes easier because they don't have to look for as many infractions. But then it also becomes less fun because they don't get to ban as many people.

[agis29]

The whole conversation was very usefull.Some people really mentioned some good reasons against multi.(I voted yes).Of course players that want multi to be allowed are more.People that were banned never voted...

Ent from the first moment cleared that there will be rules and suddenly players started talking about armies of alts!!

Generally some people read what they want to read and understand what they want to uderstand...

[Aislinn]

But then it also becomes less fun because they don't get to ban as many people.

And you seriously wonder why your posts get deleted.

[Ermabwed]

Well, my point is that exceptions to allowing multiplay were already announced, thus what we'll see is something simple (don't trade on alts and don't try to get around this) be replaced by something complicated (don't trade scammed items with a clear definition of "scammed item" plus an explanation why something legally acquired cannot be traded; don't just park an alt at a NPC to circumvent antisocial perk (raising more questions: what would be considered parking? Would it be legal under this if I harvested lilacs/whatever for a few minutes after helping my main Mira/whatever NPC? If I always logged off at Mira with that alt I could always do whatever after helping the main, claiming someone was on the phone or something if I didn't want to stay on longer on that alt or whatever)).

 

And that's just on top of everything else

 

Oh and on the prophesy business: everybody has to make predictions as I said. It's not just the "no folks", it's the "yes folks" as well, except they, as pointed out, seem to have less to predict

[TirunCollimdus]

A simple majority of the players of EL either support multiplay or are not against it. Add the votes from the I don't care to the yes vote and you get a simple majority. You can say the same about the no votes except their simple majority will be by a smaller amount. I would also like to point out that the people who already got banned for multiplay would make the vote for yes insurmountable even adding the I Don't Care to the No vote. Clearly then the yes vote won. Will we get an answer to this topic? I would just like this loose string tied up so it can be properly put away.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Perseverance and Tolerance Honored

[Ermabwed]

However, notice that this thread is for our information, and for our informtion alone; it doesn't mean that if people vote for it we'll make it legal, or that if people vote against it we won't make it legal. We are just trying to see what people think of it, and we'll have the final vote.

Yes the vote was close but nonetheless the yes votes still won the vote. The topic seems to be dead now so I was wondering if the decision has been made and if multiplay will be allowed. Are there going to be limitations as some have suggested or just the rule against scamming?

 

This was never intended to be a decisive poll.

 

A simple majority of the players of EL either support multiplay or are not against it. Add the votes from the I don't care to the yes vote and you get a simple majority. You can say the same about the no votes except their simple majority will be by a smaller amount. I would also like to point out that the people who already got banned for multiplay would make the vote for yes insurmountable even adding the I Don't Care to the No vote. Clearly then the yes vote won. Will we get an answer to this topic? I would just like this loose string tied up so it can be properly put away.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Perseverance and Tolerance Honored

As I already pointed out above, the result of this poll was never meant to be decisive, so the actual or predicted numbers are basically meaningless.

My post above also successfully argued the case of the rules becoming more complicated and harder to understand and to control than now if multiplaying was allowed. I say "successfully" since nobody, including you Tirun, brought up any arguments to counter mine or answer the questions raised or provide possible answers respectively.

So, please do that, if you can. Thanks.

[TirunCollimdus]

NPC camping to avoid antisocial. If your IP login record shows you have a alt that logs in close to every NPC that can buy things that bring a player profit and sell things that characters need as well or even a majority of the locations and you have antisocial isn't that kind of obvious? It would require a small army of alts logging in to a lot of different locations to actually make the effects of antisocial negligible. The number of alts alone along with the perk is a perfect flag for finding people who are breaking that rule.

 

I figure that Entropy had an idea for how to avoid letting people sell scammed items but even so I can tell you that since every trade is logged then following a scam should not be hard either. The mods would not be the ones checking every trade. There would have to be a complaint of a scam and then the mods could check the specific trades in questions to see if the scammed item was traded to an alt. How hard is that?

 

It is a whole lot easier to monitor log in spots and numbers of alts and investigate reported scams to see if they were traded to alts than it is to try to catch multiplayers and it has been pointed out that using RL money can be used for undetectable or at least unprovable multiplay anyway. People obviously work hard to get around the rule. If the rule was not there then everyone could benefit from multiplay instead of just the people with the money or the determination to work around the rules. Trying to track all of the storages and items needed to catch a multiplayer seems like a much bigger task to me.

 

Entropy and company are always coming up with new ways to catch macroers and other rule breakers and I have ever confidence that they can find ways to make it easy to catch rule breakers for relaxed multiplay too. It would be a lot easier to do just because there would be so few players who would be doing it. IMO there just aren't that many people in game who will go to the extreme of using an army of alts. There is no real need to do it when you can multiplay legally with a couple of alts in the first place.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Perseverance And Tolerance Honored

[Ermabwed]

So, your post explains

1) why I can't trade a scammed and thus LEGALLY acquired item to or from my alts?

2) if it is considered illegal having an alt that also harvests a bit before or after being used to get around antisocial?

 

Where?

 

on 1) sorry, that just doesn't make sense to me

on 2) There's a flower shop in WSC and in Irsis for potion npc, for tavern use EVTR, lots of flowers there too, for general store perhaps south redmoon, also lots of flowers there. How many minutes do I have to harvest before or after for that alt to not be considered a "get around antisocial character"? You don't need an army of alts, a few select ones, carefully backed up with a harvester story, will suffice.

(1 WSC covers Mira and magic store, 1 for general store and 1 for tavern, 1 for Tankel (could use Mira one) and Heavybeard (could use EVTR tavern one) each, 1 for Closca and 1 for Ringa. Makes 7 (or 5).)

Simple IP check and log off/on location close to an NPC plus trading with the main are hardly sufficient proof, especially if one works just a tiny bit on providing a bit of extra service they'd provide one with. And if one did that tiny bit of extra work on them they'd turn from evil rulebreaking alts into good alts helping me out

[TirunCollimdus]

I don't have to explain Entropy's rule for why alt's cannot trade scammed items. If you want to know why he wants to have that rule then forum PM him and see if he responds.

 

As to how much work has to be done with an alt before it is just a way around the antisocial perk that is something I can work on. If you have antisocial and 5-7 alts and they all just happen to log in close to an NPC then the odds are pretty good you are breaking the rules don't you think? It is just coincidence that your alts happen to harvest flowers in bad places for them and on maps it is hard to get for what reason? It should be painfully obvious that someone is cheating if they are using alts to camp NPCs. It is not hard to find the best spots for most flowers in game because they are not secrets.

 

The fact that there are a very limited number of storages with NPCs close to them including the quest NPCs should make it very easy to detect campers. If someone is just logging on and off long enough to make trades even if they were harvesting during the short waits it would still be obvious what was happening. Since you are starting with only looking at players with antisocial and several alts I just don't see how this would be harder than checking all same IP trades.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Perseverance And Tolerance Honored

[Ermabwed]

1) Well, perhaps there is no plan, question remains though. I'll add: can my alt sell the scammed item and give me the money? Consider this under the condition that my alt frequently harvests money for me anyways, please.

 

2) So, I can't choose where to harvest with my alts if they also help me around antisocial? And I can't choose where to log off?

My tavern and general store alts are already very well covered with a good harvester story, Mira and Irsis alts as well (coal/diamonds/lilacs and rue/mugworth just to name a few), Tankel alt (blue star flower, yarrow,...), Ringa (wolf furs, bones, meat, makes huge FE ingreds deposits), Closca (could use the general store alt or get coal/iron/some flower, possibly into hyperbag).

[vytukas]

This scamming part is most unclear to me as well. You'll get caught into stories like "he/she doesnt return me a CoL that he/she borrowed" - "I don't return cause he owes me bagjumped my friend" - "blah blah" - just look at outlaw forums, many cryptic stories like that. Or are moderators going to dig into these shitty dung-like stories?

[Mugwump]

I voted "Yes" and "Both". Personally, it means nothing to me as my alt characters are specifically set up to do different things in the game. The little voices in my head that control them tell me they would neither get along or cooperate with each other anyway...

 

I voted yes because I'm not afraid of other people using it as a tactic to complete their goals and it may clear up some arguments in the rules that often dominate forum and game conversation. Frankly, I don't see how I could control two clients and players at once (let alone walk and chew gum) and the best use would be harv'ing and hauling. Doing that with ones self as opposed to guild mates seems rather pathetic even for a hermit like me!

 

I don't foresee any great troubles, fighters will all outwit each other with the same tactics anyway, even if you give them the H-bomb, and gold lovers will do the same. Maybe a handicap of some kind for amassing gods and perks to an IP's advantage, but otherwise I say go for it!

[TirunCollimdus]

1) Well, perhaps there is no plan, question remains though. I'll add: can my alt sell the scammed item and give me the money? Consider this under the condition that my alt frequently harvests money for me anyways, please.

 

2) So, I can't choose where to harvest with my alts if they also help me around antisocial? And I can't choose where to log off?

My tavern and general store alts are already very well covered with a good harvester story, Mira and Irsis alts as well (coal/diamonds/lilacs and rue/mugworth just to name a few), Tankel alt (blue star flower, yarrow,...), Ringa (wolf furs, bones, meat, makes huge FE ingreds deposits), Closca (could use the general store alt or get coal/iron/some flower, possibly into hyperbag).

 

1) The question is for Entropy and I would guess he has a plan.

 

2) Your story is totally bogus and painfully transparent. Your alts can get all of the stuff that you say they are getting a lot closer to storage and that makes it a whole more profitable. You are for 'some reason' choosing to reduce your income with your alts. Could it be you have an ulterior motive? The only way you can camp at NPCs and use your alts to dodge antisocial is by being obvious because they would do you more good in other places if you were actually using them for something besides dodging antisocial.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Perseverance And Tolerance Honored

[Ermabwed]

1) The question is for Entropy and I would guess he has a plan.

 

2) Your story is totally bogus and painfully transparent. Your alts can get all of the stuff that you say they are getting a lot closer to storage and that makes it a whole more profitable. You are for 'some reason' choosing to reduce your income with your alts. Could it be you have an ulterior motive? The only way you can camp at NPCs and use your alts to dodge antisocial is by being obvious because they would do you more good in other places if you were actually using them for something besides dodging antisocial.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Perseverance And Tolerance Honored

1) So you are saying that forbidding trading legally acquired items makes sense to you (and to everybody else, yes that's how "sense" is spelled, please remember that.), please enlighten me.

 

2) I could restate what I said above because my story is not bogus, the only difference to "legal alts" is the intent, the maps and the occupations aren't even that inconvenient (some are even very good to best) for what I proposed and some of the alts I could use for regular harvesting alts.

Another question: If for some reason I wouldn't need my legal alts and just logged on to them for antisocial issues over the course of a few weeks, would they then turn into illegal alts? How many weeks before I'd have to "renew" their legality by harvesting on them (and for how long?)

 

And let me just repeat:

So, I can't choose where to harvest with my alts if they also help me around antisocial? And I can't choose where to log off?

[Mugwump]

I agree, this whole idea is flexible. Obviously if one IP address turns into a 30 headed tentacle player then admins, mods, and us yappers will make things change! No reason not to see how it works... I hope EL stays Beta forever!

[TirunCollimdus]

1) The question is for Entropy and I would guess he has a plan.

 

2) Your story is totally bogus and painfully transparent. Your alts can get all of the stuff that you say they are getting a lot closer to storage and that makes it a whole more profitable. You are for 'some reason' choosing to reduce your income with your alts. Could it be you have an ulterior motive? The only way you can camp at NPCs and use your alts to dodge antisocial is by being obvious because they would do you more good in other places if you were actually using them for something besides dodging antisocial.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Perseverance And Tolerance Honored

1) So you are saying that forbidding trading legally acquired items makes sense to you (and to everybody else, yes that's how "sense" is spelled, please remember that.), please enlighten me.

 

2) I could restate what I said above because my story is not bogus, the only difference to "legal alts" is the intent, the maps and the occupations aren't even that inconvenient (some are even very good to best) for what I proposed and some of the alts I could use for regular harvesting alts.

Another question: If for some reason I wouldn't need my legal alts and just logged on to them for antisocial issues over the course of a few weeks, would they then turn into illegal alts? How many weeks before I'd have to "renew" their legality by harvesting on them (and for how long?)

 

And let me just repeat:

So, I can't choose where to harvest with my alts if they also help me around antisocial? And I can't choose where to log off?

 

 

1) I did not say anything that even hinted at the forbidding of trading legally acquired items makes sense. I have no idea at all why Entropy said that would be a rule to begin with and if it does make sense then someone needs to explain it to me. The only thing I can come up with is that he wants scammers to be able to scam but he wants everyone to know who they are. It was not my business since it was not part of the poll so I just let Entropy have his plan whatever it is. If you want to him to explain his motives then ask him.

 

2) If your alts are at the best places to harvest stuff and being used for harvesting then they are legal alts if they get used for that purpose. How much harvesting determines legal alt status for avoiding being accused of dodging the antisocial perk could be based on total experience of the alts or total time logged in. I don't know how they catch the current multiplayers so I have no idea how they would catch the people abusing the legal multiplay system. It seems to me that the people who suggested the idea might have had an idea about how to do this since they did bring up the whole idea.

 

Personally I don't see why we would be the ones who would come up with the way to catch people breaking the rules. What you are asking is for us to define the actual rule which will be the definition of legal multiplay. Why should we have to provide all of the answers in this thread. The ones suggesting this are Entropy and certain mods. I think we need to let them see whether we support the idea which we it seems we do and the let them figure out how to implement it or ask for our advice on how to implement it in another thread. Alts will through direct transfer of gold coin or goods be in someway skirting the antisocial perk so as long as the alts are legal and not just campers it seems skirting antisocial ins someways will be legal. I think how to enforce and define the rules however is really up to the people in charge.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Tolerand And Perseverance Honored

Edited July 12, 2007 by TirunCollimdus

[Ermabwed]

1) I did not say anything that even hinted at the forbidding of trading legally acquired items makes sense. I have no idea at all why Entropy said that would be a rule to begin with and if it does make sense then someone needs to explain it to me. The only thing I can come up with is that he wants scammers to be able to scam but he wants everyone to know who they are. It was not my business since it was not part of the poll so I just let Entropy have his plan whatever it is. If you want to him to explain his motives then ask him.

 

2) If your alts are at the best places to harvest stuff and being used for harvesting then they are legal alts if they get used for that purpose. How much harvesting determines legal alt status for avoiding being accused of dodging the antisocial perk could be based on total experience of the alts or total time logged in. I don't know how they catch the current multiplayers so I have no idea how they would catch the people abusing the legal multiplay system. It seems to me that the people who suggested the idea might have had an idea about how to do this since they did bring up the whole idea.

 

Personally I don't see why we would be the ones who would come up with the way to catch people breaking the rules. What you are asking is for us to define the actual rule which will be the definition of legal multiplay. Why should we have to provide all of the answers in this thread. The ones suggesting this are Entropy and certain mods. I think we need to let them see whether we support the idea which we it seems we do and the let them figure out how to implement it or ask for our advice on how to implement it in another thread. Alts will through direct transfer of gold coin or goods be in someway skirting the antisocial perk so as long as the alts are legal and not just campers it seems skirting antisocial ins someways will be legal. I think how to enforce and define the rules however is really up to the people in charge.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Tolerand And Perseverance Honored

The point I started out with above was that allowing multiplay would make the rules more complicated, harder to understand, harder to moderate and harder to enforce (besides other problems that weren't addressed yet). (That is why we discussed that)

 

At the moment we have:

5. Do not cheat.

Cheating in the game means using (.....) or any (..) form of illegal multi-playing*.

Illegal multi-playing means using more than one character to help you gain benefits that using a single character would not.

And some examples.

This is controlled by trade-logs, storage-logs, possibly an IP monitor program and other means, moderator interference additionally activated by #abuse reports.

 

You propose to replace that with

1) a rule that doesn't make sense even to you and raises more questions, the answer to which would at best put the old rule back in place for the "scamming alts",

2) a list of "best places to harvest" (if you insist that I can't choose where to harvest and to log off), a detailed description of how, in what quantities and under what conditions an alt may be used to gain advantage from (including trade volumes, trade values, trade intervals, possible 'trade sessions', minimum required experience gain or minimum play time in between, how multiple alts are dealt with especially if multiple alts are used for the same task, trades between alts, trades of alts with other players that also trade with me or whose alts also trade with me or my alts (how would I or s/he know?), event restrictions, ...).

 

So, "scamming alts" would be dealt with as everybody is now, most likely increasing scam reports to moderators, effectively making those alts "single players".

The trades could be controlled as they are now, timing would be easy to control as well, multiple alts situation should be fairly easy as well though the over all effort might very well be significant, you could also monitor for impossibly large storage deposits indicating alts harvesting into hyperspace bags to circumvent the trade restrictions, this would require logging all player activity to determine if it is possible that I harvested this myself over the course of a indefinite time or had somebody else harvest it for me or if it is indeed a rule being broken etc. etc.

Automated control would be not much more work than it is now (once it is in place), the individual case would be much harder and complicated to deal with, especially if triggered by an #abuse report. The rule would be much longer (the list of things that would need to be covered is easily as long as the current rule without the examples and don't think you'd get away without examples for the new rule) and much more complicated.

Thus you would, and I'd guarantee that, end up with more players banned or otherwise troubling the moderators and administrators, making the rule unfeasible to enforce.

 

Thus it follows, since you can't reasonably govern alt trades, there shouldn't be rule trying to do that. So, you might as well give every player, that owns a computer that can run two clients at once 10, pickpoints.

And it also follows that moderating reality proposes an antithesis to control preventing getting around antisocial perk as I showed above, thus it is a contradiction to the conditions posed by Entropy.

 

Solution: do not allow multiplay or remove antisocial perk.

1) do not allow multiplay and we're done.

2) remove antisocial perk (oh the outcry!) and only introduce one additional rule (you'd have to keep the illegal multiplay rule or something more complicated for the "scamming alts"), that doesn't make sense and increases moderator workload. And we're back at all the other issues that came up in this thread before, which include giving game advantages based on RL attributes such as the computer used to play, and which I won't go into further at the moment seeing that this post is long enough already

[TirunCollimdus]

I think that all you have to do is tell everyone that if they park alts by NPCs they will get banned. Being able to multiplay at all is enough benefit to compensate for any punishments that are handed out. Trying to say that you can run multiple alts and dodge the antisocial perk with them without being caught is ridiculous. You are saying that people could do the things required to avoid the Antisocial perk entirely innocently. Anyone with that many alts who parks them near NPCs is automatically guilty.

 

I have antisocial. How on earth do I function with that perk? I have friends and guild mates to help me. The perk is not to completely keep people from functioning just makes it harder. I can keep doing that even if multiplay is legal. Yes a single person could do the same thing with an army of alts but that is why they would be considered automatically guilty for parking by NPCs. You can use your alts have antisocial and still have friends help you get around the perk as always without getting in trouble. Why not do that?

 

It would be easier to keep doing that then it would be to get caught doing something wrong so in IMO antisocial has nothing to do with multiplay. Mulitplay is enough of an advantage that anyone who even looks like they are abusing the rules would be guilty and banned. There is no reason to do all of the jumping through hoops you are talking about. You cannot coincidentally wind up with antisocial and an army of alts parked by NPCs. That gets you banned no matter what unless you ask to be unbanned because all of your characters get equal playing time and that would be obvious by skills and OA.

 

I said ask Entropy about the scamming thing since it is his idea and I stick to that. There is no reason to consider that in this discussion.

 

TirunCollimdus

CoGM of PATH

Perseverance And Tolerance Honored

[The_Piper]

Yes, the anti-social perk is such a problem, ppl would park armies of alts close to npcs to bypass the perk and try to cheat.

 

There is a simple solution: Get rid of that perk and no one will be able to cheat with his alts and still have the pickpoints for free.

 

Same with the bagjumper perk (aka MM perk), it causes only trouble and is way to cheap imo.

 

Piper

[mufossa]

Yes, the anti-social perk is such a problem, ppl would park armies of alts close to npcs to bypass the perk and try to cheat.

 

There is a simple solution: Get rid of that perk and no one will be able to cheat with his alts and still have the pickpoints for free.

 

Same with the bagjumper perk (aka MM perk), it causes only trouble and is way to cheap imo.

 

Piper

what about people who already have the anti perk?

strip them of the pp? can u physically remove pp from their accounts? will they get to choose from where the pp will be removed.....

this surley brings about a series of questions , i think it would be more complicated to legalize multi then to leave it as is..

 

also im under impression that we were being asked if we wanted it legalized in an AS IS EL, i didnt see entropy mention that things would change so drasticaly to implement this...otherwise i think MANY would have voted different.......thats like telling a man with a missing hand that u can give him a new hand, But first you have to chop off his legs

[Mr.Mind]

One way to stop trading is to simply have the server check IP for each trade. When people who are on the same IP attempt a trade it could be blocked by the server. Saves time checking it out. Could be expanded to bag trading and such, but the hardcore people are probably going to cheat anyway no matter what kind of set up you have.