| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
The Duke 
Forum Warrior
Joined: 22 Jul 2011
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 464
|
 Topic: how many accounts r u permasitting
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 16:38 |
|
I sit 3 accounts between me and my alt. 2 of which i started sitting recenlty. None of them are in Shade. 2 of these accounts Ive sat for over a year. One of them is my Rl friend who plays everyday. One of the things we have always talked about when we get together is Illy, and he will on occasion call me and say hey can you jump over to my account and do this or that. I also sit an account where the player is in and out of the hospital. I am not a fan of permasitting for ppl who never return and actually removed the player from Shade and was giving out the cities when he came back and asked to look after it a bit longer. Hes currently going through Chemo and I agreed. The last of the 3 accounts I was appointed to about a month ago. The player is moving in RL and promised to return. Idk if they will or not but if they do- im happy to have helped. If they dont- another one bites the dust.
|
|
"Our generation has had no Great Depression, no Great War. Our war is spiritual. Our depression is our lives."
|
 |
bansisdead
Postmaster
Joined: 08 Jan 2012
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 609
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 15:59 |
|
Would it not be possible to add a mechanism which makes public sat accounts and who is sitting them? At least with a bit more transparency we would know where we all stood.
|
|
|
|
Albatross
Postmaster General
Joined: 11 May 2011
Status: Offline
Points: 1118
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 15:39 |
 Roland Gunner wrote:
... I believe this practice is so wide spread that its nearly "Too large to fail". If they banned everyone that is feeding their own towns from sat accounts, we would lose so many influential accounts ... |
I'm sure it's possible (for devs) to draw up 'balance' stats of extreme consumers and providers, probably outside the trading system (though that would get them more ranking points, for a tax hit), and then investigate. But like you say, it's difficult to implement change without offending, unless lots of notice is given.
The problem could be eliminated by using smarts and new dynamics. For example, what if vans could be intercepted en-route with Pathfinding™. This would create problems for those sitting 'supply accounts', because vigilante players would have opportunity to enforce their will, probably by stealth.
My own opinion on this subject is that Illyriad T&C prohibit owning more than two accounts. Permasitting is not against the letter of the 'Law', but it's certainly against the spirit.
From an alliance perspective, "one player with control over many accounts in the same alliance" is not much different from "many players having control over the same accounts". However, if those accounts span alliances, the power and influence increases, (hypothetically) to the point where a loose confederation is actually just one alliance of hundreds-strong 'permasat' accounts.
Looking at it slightly differently, how is this different from a well-knit confederation? Does it matter to those outside the Permasat Confederation, whether it is 1000 players strong, or 200 players with alts and sat accounts?
|
|
|
|
Arakamis
Greenhorn
Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Location: Waterdeep
Status: Offline
Points: 97
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 14:51 |
DeathDealer89 wrote:
Arakamis wrote:
sometimes you just can't have it all.. :)) |
Well then you should be fine with the account sitting mechanic. |
or just the opposite.. you should be fine with 90 days with or without sitting for an account to go abondoned..
|
|
DeathDealer89
Postmaster
Joined: 04 Jan 2012
Status: Offline
Points: 944
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 13:50 |
Arakamis wrote:
sometimes you just can't have it all.. :)) |
Well then you should be fine with the account sitting mechanic.
|
|
Roland Gunner
Greenhorn
Joined: 26 Sep 2011
Location: Seattle
Status: Offline
Points: 55
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 13:46 |
|
The sitting exploit is probably the top of my personal wish list for changes to the game. I know a number of people who are taking advantage of the loose policing of sitting, many of them are friends. They justify it by saying that so many others are doing it, they would fall behind if they didn't do it themselves.
To take advantage of the extra cities, you don't have to run them as you would your own, just max out gold production, drop all troops, and send the gold on to your own towns. This takes very little time and opens up some opportunities for larger/faster army growth. If you have some extra time, start some Cows and Chain up for even more of an advantage.
You bust your rear end off trying to dig for a 10th (or 20th) town, and the guy that is willing to bend the rules can have an extra 30-35 towns. That's upwards of a Billion (or a couple Billion if you spend some time) gold a month for the time it takes to send some caravans.
If the Devs have given a green light to this practice, I missed it. If they haven't then its not really fair to say that anyone can do it, as some don't like to use exploits, even ones that it appears currently the Devs are turning a blind eye towards.
The problem now is I believe this practice is so wide spread that its nearly "Too large to fail". If they banned everyone that is feeding their own towns from sat accounts, we would lose so many influential accounts it would end up being worse for the game than staying with the status quo.
To be candid, I don't have a solution, or at least a very good one. If the goal of long term sitting really is to allow people to be away for months at a time, then find a way to keep those resources "quarantined" in that account until the owner returns.
I guess in the end I don't have much to add except my voice to those that believe there is a problem that needs to be looked at.
R.
|
|
Anjire
Postmaster
Joined: 18 Sep 2010
Status: Offline
Points: 688
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 13:26 |
What I would like to see on the alliance member list page is the last log-in split to show when the player actually logged in last and when a sitter last logged on. Additionally, if the account is "online" it will show "player online" or "sitter online".
~The account I was assigned as sitter that turned into a "perma-sat" situation has been resolved. After 6 months, I started offering the cities to alliance members and began deconstructing the account. After 9 months, I dropped myself as sitter. One account with 10 cities is quite enough for me - yep, got rid of my alt as well.
|
|
|
|
Arakamis
Greenhorn
Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Location: Waterdeep
Status: Offline
Points: 97
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 07:52 |
|
Even now, we have that problem. Putting a hard deadline will probably increase demand :) for multiple
account management but i don't think it will be a huge problem.
There is no way to completely remove multiple account management problem (more than 2 accounts with login info in this case) without putting some real effort into it. However, if you have the motivation to minimize it, there are ways to control such accounts and even ways to automate such checks to certain level.
and remember the penalty in such a case is to loose all your accounts.
|
|
Brandmeister
Postmaster General
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
Location: Laoshin
Status: Offline
Points: 2396
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 07:15 |
|
How will you address the problems inherent with players giving their login and password to others? A hard deadline sounds easy, until you consider the alternatives.
|
|
Arakamis
Greenhorn
Joined: 09 Jul 2012
Location: Waterdeep
Status: Offline
Points: 97
|
Posted: 08 Aug 2013 at 06:21 |
|
a single login resets the timer. if the guy is unable to login at least once in 90 days (3 months that is) then so be it. sometimes you just can't have it all.. :))
|
|
Tweet
how many accounts r u permasitting
