Play Now Login Create Account
illyriad
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - 24FEB15 - ACCOUNT SITTING 90-DAY LIMIT
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

24FEB15 - ACCOUNT SITTING 90-DAY LIMIT

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
Author
 Rating: Topic Rating: 1 Votes, Average 5.00  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Hora View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 839
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hora Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 08:44
Originally posted by abstractdream abstractdream wrote:

It'll actually be 160 to 180 days for the inactive accounts to delete (90 to end sitting and 60 for non purchasing or 90 for Prestige purchasing accounts to auto-delete). That's as much as six months for harvesting. Plenty of time. Then there'll be a few spots opened up but I'd expect any of those spots not captured to be settled by the alliance mates of those inactive accounts.

Well, the second 90 days you would have to rely on thiefs then... as you won't have caravans/cotters to send out, and can't place new item building orders...
Back to Top
Mr Damage View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 01 Jan 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 592
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Mr Damage Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 10:02
Applaud this decision but you must also be realistic enough to concede that permasats are at best half the problem. Account sharing, as many have suggested previously, is just as big of an issue if not bigger. Policing this is far more difficult judging by the amount of sharing going on in the game. Alas this step is a huge step forward for reducing the game to live accounts rather than multi-accounting.

Edited by Mr Damage - 25 Feb 2015 at 10:03
Back to Top
Dragonwort View Drop Down
Wordsmith
Wordsmith
Avatar

Joined: 10 Feb 2014
Location: Central USA
Status: Offline
Points: 139
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dragonwort Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 12:13
Kudos.....but...


Ends the perma-sats but the cities still belong to the alliance and with the new 10+ city rule, the perma-sats will simply be sieged by the same players who perma-sat them. And nothing will change, except the griping about perma-sats...lol..
The devs aren't going to alienate the long time mega-alliance players....

Please, somebody tell me I'm wrong about thisConfused Dragonwort
Just another wrench in the works..
Back to Top
GM Rikoo View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar
Community & PR Manager

Joined: 28 Mar 2014
Location: Mars
Status: Offline
Points: 1233
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GM Rikoo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 12:55
Originally posted by Mr Damage Mr Damage wrote:

Applaud this decision but you must also be realistic enough to concede that permasats are at best half the problem. Account sharing, as many have suggested previously, is just as big of an issue if not bigger. Policing this is far more difficult judging by the amount of sharing going on in the game. Alas this step is a huge step forward for reducing the game to live accounts rather than multi-accounting.

Do me a favor. If you know someone is multiaccounting or sharing passwords or anything that breaks the rules, REPORT it to me. Especially if you know of so many.

Otherwise, you are just speculating. Either way, please help make my job a little easier. Thank you!

GM Rikoo

Illyriad Community Manager / Public Relations / community@illyriad.co.uk
Back to Top
Hora View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 839
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hora Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 13:54
Originally posted by Dragonwort Dragonwort wrote:

Kudos.....but...


Ends the perma-sats but the cities still belong to the alliance and with the new 10+ city rule, the perma-sats will simply be sieged by the same players who perma-sat them. And nothing will change, except the griping about perma-sats...lol..
The devs aren't going to alienate the long time mega-alliance players....

Please, somebody tell me I'm wrong about thisConfused Dragonwort

I don't know what's so bad about having big players in a game designed to build up cities and pop. You don't have to fight those few. If you do, try to be allied to another big player Wink

You'll hardly find a 1 on 1 in Illyriad, and for alliances/powerblocks it will equal out anyway...

And I welcome the change from sitting to big "standard" accounts... it doesn't feel like using a loophole any longer and it's nearer to roleplay.
Back to Top
jcx View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior


Joined: 09 Oct 2013
Location: Tallimar
Status: Offline
Points: 281
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jcx Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 14:00
::::----, push pin! 

this will make future battles more exciting.. :D

wonders* what will happen first - battle of permasats or live player battle?

hehe. grats Devs! 5th year anniv was a hell of a boom!!!
Disclaimer: The above is jcx|orcboy's personal opinion and is not the opinion or policy of Harmless? [H?] or of the little green men that have been following him all day.

jcx in H? | orcboy in H?
Back to Top
Brandmeister View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General
Avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 2391
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Brandmeister Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 15:18
Originally posted by GM Rikoo GM Rikoo wrote:

Do me a favor. If you know someone is multiaccounting or sharing passwords or anything that breaks the rules, REPORT it to me. Especially if you know of so many.

Otherwise, you are just speculating. Either way, please help make my job a little easier. Thank you!

GM Rikoo
I find this to be an unreasonable request. The only way you'd have hard proof is if someone came right out and announced password sharing in alliance chat or personal mails. Who wants to rat out their friends? Let's face it, the people you would want busted are the players you don't like, and all you would have is speculation.

Your software already keeps login records. It should be plainly obvious which accounts never see the owner log in, and do nothing but make resources that get sent to a tiny handful of other accounts. The problem to date hasn't been that the signs of permasitting weren't obvious, but a lack of will to enforce the game rules. A few simple queries would give you a list of accounts to watch for further evidence of multi-accounting.
Back to Top
Hora View Drop Down
Postmaster
Postmaster
Avatar

Joined: 10 May 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 839
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Hora Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 17:17
Brand, some years ago the Devs said something about quite effective queries being at work to prevent multiaccounting.
But any query can be tricked by using more than one computer, different proxies, etc... then there is NO chance to get them by tech alone.

Also there had been cases, where there were some signs of multiaccounting (which got immediately reported) like more than three accounts with almost the same name doing patterns on the map, someone signing a mail with the other accounts name, etc... had been more obvious before sitting was implemented, of course...

Further: As the case with the money generation showed, the DEVS won't hesitate to also punish helpers... maybe an advice to any friends in question to report themselves and get less hard punishment would be highly adviceable... Wink
Back to Top
Albatross View Drop Down
Postmaster General
Postmaster General


Joined: 11 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1118
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Albatross Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 17:24
From my own experience of making software that has many different paths for getting something done... It's possible there are some quite sophisticated algorithms for fingerprinting the patterns of how a player uses the interfaces. They are mostly unique to each player, even if they try to disguise their movements.

This stands out above any IP-based attempts to cover the identity of the player. It's also a good way of spotting player bots and mis/mal-configured search engines.
Back to Top
Berde View Drop Down
Forum Warrior
Forum Warrior
Avatar

Joined: 10 Dec 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 380
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Berde Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 25 Feb 2015 at 17:52
Originally posted by Dragonwort Dragonwort wrote:

Kudos.....but...


Ends the perma-sats but the cities still belong to the alliance and with the new 10+ city rule, the perma-sats will simply be sieged by the same players who perma-sat them. And nothing will change, except the griping about perma-sats...lol..
The devs aren't going to alienate the long time mega-alliance players....

Please, somebody tell me I'm wrong about thisConfused Dragonwort

But at least you won't get old players getting 10+ cities on their own account and then getting 10+ cities on a sat account to boot.

I see nothing wrong with an alliance continuing to claim ownership over and redistributing cities of players who have become inactive. Those cities were likely built with assistance and resources supplied by members of that alliance and should be guarded as the investment that they are.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 7>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.