Account Sitting
Printed From: Illyriad
Category: Miscellaneous
Forum Name: Suggestions & Game Enhancements
Forum Description: Got a great idea? A feature you'd like to see? Share it here!
URL: http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/forum_posts.asp?TID=2995
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 13:56
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Account Sitting
Posted By: scottfitz
Subject: Account Sitting
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 06:54
|
Given the history of account sitting abuse or accusations of abuse, I really wonder if we need sitting at all. I am curious how many people actually use this function. I don't, and although I have been asked to serve as a sitter for others in the past, I have not agreed to being a sitter for quite some time, and I have never had a sitter for either account, and I never will. It just seems to cause more problems than it is worth.
|
Replies:
Posted By: Truth
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 06:57
|
I feel it is the bane of Illy and voted as such. Everyone can have two accounts... Use the second account for your meta gaming needs... No need for a sitter. On the other thread it may have seemed as if I was for sitting. Not true, I am not for making accusations without proof to back it up. |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 06:58
|
I have used account sitting during a period when I needed to take a weeklong break from the game. I found it valuable for that purpose. Perhaps there should be a rule that the account owner has to log in at least once a week, and a limitation to the number of days per year that account sitting is allowed? I suppose if account sitting weren't allowed, people would be tempted to violate the Terms of Service by sharing password information. Perhaps that would cause more problems than eliminating account sitting would solve? I don't know, I can see both sides.
|
Posted By: Truth
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 07:00
If people shared passwords to allow another player play his or her account, these players would get their in game accounts suspended. So, good luck trying to get away with this method. |
Rill wrote:Posted By: Jane DarkMagic
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 07:05
| I think maybe the tasks an account sitter can perform should be limited. Keeping resources and defenses up, but not attacking or moving around the map? That way your friend can give you some peace of mind while on vacation but it wouldn't be the same as playing the account? |
Posted By: Jane DarkMagic
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 07:06
| So maybe confine sitter permissions to just stuff you can do within the city itself. |
Posted By: Jane DarkMagic
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 07:07
| Because should be able to go without leveling your commanders or sending resources to other people while on a brief vacation! |
Posted By: Faldrin
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 07:56
|
I would like the account sitting rules GMs warned us about a long time ago put in force: 90 days pr. year and max 90 days. ------------- 
|
Posted By: White Beard
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 10:54
|
Why not have a holiday / vacation function in place?
The account owner activates this function and all activities in the account stops, research building troop making etc.
And give a sort of newbie protection so attacks are impossible.
|
Posted By: Createure
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 12:19
|
Haven't sat anyone or been sat myself for many months. But I'm happy with sitting as it currently is... If I ever decide to break from Illy for a few months again I would like to see someone keeping my account alive - and likewise I'd be happy to keep friends accounts alive over extended periods of inactivity. |
Posted By: Tordenkaffen
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 18:55
|
Actually, having never been away from Illy more than a week or so, I
have yet to draw full advantage of sitting, however, I have allowed new
players to sit my account in the past so that they could send themselves
basic resources from my cities, meaning I dont have to.
I know thats not how sitting is intended, but it really makes the
game far more enjoyable that you can assist your allies with resources
without having to go through the daily tedium of dispatching caravan
after caravan. Maybe this feature could be altered to fit the
game/intended purpose, like e.g. a pool of allied cities providing free
resources for the new players to pick up as they like.
I disagree with the notion that the sitting option never
being used at it is intended tho - many of my allies have utilised the
sitting option when they have gone off for a holiday. Even if its just
to allow little tweaks and details to be sorted while away, its always
good to leave your account in ACTIVE hands - that way you don't get any
nasty surprises when you come back. To limit multiaccounting, maybe we should require players to couple their accounts (register main and alt with the devs), effectively leading to any one singular player being able to sit the accounts of any one singular other player, and never more than one at a time.
|
Posted By: Angrim
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 21:14
|
90 days seems like a very reasonable, even generous limit. I have wondered for some time how the one-alt rule could be enforced when I could easily recruit friends who, if/when they tired of the game, would bequeath me unending sitting rights on their accounts. It also seems very reasonable to keep accounts that are being sat out of tournament standings--not by limiting the actions of the account, but by ignoring accounts with a sitter named during the tournament for purposes of scoring.
|
Posted By: Raritor
Date Posted: 29 Dec 2011 at 23:54
| I have had sitters on my account almost from the begginning of this option and so far i never had a problem with them. I agree that there should be a time limit (like the 90 days a year) so you don't get a permanet sitting, but other than that i find it perfect the way it is. |
Posted By: SunStorm
Date Posted: 30 Dec 2011 at 02:37
|
It is abused. Pro: I have used this function once to allow access fir a person to read an in game message - thus confirming the authenticity of the message which I had previously forwarded to them. Con: Sitters should never have access to alliance chat of the person they are sitting for. In addition, there should be other restrictions on actions allowed. -------------
|
Posted By: GM Luna
Date Posted: 30 Dec 2011 at 03:19
|
Hi all, Thanks for all the feedback with your thoughts on account sitting. Overall, the mechanic is intended to be used as a temporary measure for players who are away from the game for a period of time. Permanently sitting accounts that a player doesn't intend to return to or using the system for other means (while not strictly against the rules at this time) isn't really in the spirit of the mechanic. Measures that put a limit on the amount of time an account can be sat for (as mentioned by SC in the past) are in the cards at some point. We hope that will steer players more toward the intended use of the system. Luna ------------- GM Luna | Illyriad Community Manager | community@illyriad.co.uk 
|
Posted By: Babbens
Date Posted: 30 Dec 2011 at 17:32
I'd like to have that function and no sitting. As it is, I voted for "should be modified to prevent abuse". |
Posted By: scottfitz
Date Posted: 30 Dec 2011 at 22:37
| What if we simply disallowed sending armies, diplos or vans for sat accounts. None of those three functions are necessary for legitimate sitting, but defense, research, construction, advanced production and troop training would be unaffected. |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 30 Dec 2011 at 23:57
I like this general suggestion, but it would need to permit at least Sally Forth, and I don't think Sally Forth can be used against blockades. There is also the difficulty of defending sovereignty. A lot of people will appoint an account sitter specifically for the purpose of sending vans to support alliance mates during periods of inactivity. The caravans point is more of a "nice to have" part, but being able to sally forth and send troops to defend sovereignty is a pretty crucial aspect of the game -- one which we fortunately do not have to use that often in this time of relative peace.
|
Posted By: SunStorm
Date Posted: 31 Dec 2011 at 00:57
-------------
|
Posted By: G0DsDestroyer
Date Posted: 31 Dec 2011 at 17:57
|
Honestly, if you have any reason not to trust someone to sit your account. Don't let them!!! Quite obvious. I believe it still says what a sitter can do with your account, so it's not like experienced players don't know what they're getting into when they appoint a sitter.As for newer players who don't know better, is there a section in this newb guide on sitting telling them the risks of what can happen? It's in your power to appoint someone as a sitter for your account, if they screw your account up intentionally, it's your fault for having them sit your account. One reason it wouldn't be your fault is if someone else took your account password and appointed someone as your sitter, and if that is happening, you're screwed either way I'd think. I voted for the first option of course. ------------- http://live.xbox.com/en-US/MyXbox/Profile?gamertag=G0DsDestroyer" rel="nofollow - Tia mi aven Moridin isainde vadin |
Posted By: Brids17
Date Posted: 31 Dec 2011 at 22:31
|
I think you're misunderstanding what the problem is G0Ds. The issue isn't people misusing your account while they're sitting you, the issue is people permanently sitting someone in order to bypass the only allowed two accounts rule. -------------  |
Posted By: G0DsDestroyer
Date Posted: 31 Dec 2011 at 23:24
|
Aye, but you can't permanently sit someone's account. And they are talking about abuse and problems caused by people sitting accounts, which is brought on by someone doing something with an account that they shouldn't, like starting wars or getting someone's account destroyed. Both issues seem to be in this discussion, people will abuse it if it's here, that's the way some people operate. ------------- http://live.xbox.com/en-US/MyXbox/Profile?gamertag=G0DsDestroyer" rel="nofollow - Tia mi aven Moridin isainde vadin |
Posted By: Quackers
Date Posted: 01 Jan 2012 at 01:27
There is nothing in the rules or Terms of Service against sharing passwords or accounts. I have read through both and did not see anything, I also searched for key words like account and password and found nothing that says you cannot share accounts. If your going to be away from the game for a very long period of time then I would see why sitting or even account sharing would be useful. But I do believe that an account that has not been logged into by a player in over 3/6 months should be suspended or locked until the player logs onto the account. Locked meaning that a sitter cannot log onto the account but the account is not fully suspended yet, and can be unlocked by logging onto the account directly. Something to that effect might solve the problem more the anything. Since this is the suggestions page I would just like to add in my suggestion. Though I should have just made a new topic, sorry for posting here. |
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 01 Jan 2012 at 01:31
|
It's under Restricted Access, Quackers: If we provide you with a user ID and password to enable you to access restricted areas of our website or other content or services, you must ensure that that user ID and password is kept confidential.
If you're thinking they could have stated it more clearly, I agree. I seem to recall it is stated more clearly elsewhere, I will look for it.
|
Posted By: Quackers
Date Posted: 01 Jan 2012 at 02:12
|
Very true Rill but the way that is now, it can easily be argued against. The whole "If we provide you with a user ID and password" sounds like they were just referring to the website when they wrote that, if they wrote it. To me it just sounds like the login info to the Illyriad main website. Not to the game itself. But I could be wrong, but it does not sound like it was written to include the game. Guess "other content or services" could mean the game but oh well. Not really the place to discuss this. I still believe the sitting should be changed and I'm glad it is still on the table. Though I do hope stuff like this does not stop other things from being brought forward with. Edit: So we don't end up hijacking this topic I sent a message asking GM Luna. I'll post back here if/when she responds. If the response is not made public. |
Posted By: GM Luna
Date Posted: 01 Jan 2012 at 02:53
|
Players that sign up using an outside service (facebook, etc) will not receive an Illy password, as they are technically using an outside password via the service. Sharing your Illyriad account info and password is strictly forbidden. Don't do it or you could risk losing your account. Hope that helps clarify. Luna ------------- GM Luna | Illyriad Community Manager | community@illyriad.co.uk
|
Posted By: Ancient Nightowl
Date Posted: 02 Jan 2012 at 20:44
|
As a newbie in here I am looking in from outside I guess but what Whitebeard said seems to make a lot of sense and nullifies most of the concerns expressed - several years ago in another similar game, after a long illness I found I had almost lost everything I had ever built up so reluctantly abandoned it all and never returned. Whitebeard - " Why not have a holiday / vacation function in place?
The account owner activates this function and all activities in the account stops, research building troop making etc. And give a sort of newbie protection so attacks are impossible." No arguments, no losses, no accusations... Ancient Nightowl. |
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 04 Jan 2012 at 05:35
| I suggest having options for sitters. So you can trust a sitter from just production, to sending out units, and other higher functions. |
Posted By: liberty6
Date Posted: 06 Jan 2012 at 02:39
|
from my reading it seems everybody is interpreting the issue differently and some have no idea what they are talking about.... now the system has some safe guards ie cannot permanently babysit the account. also you can only sit 2 accounts and you can appoint 2 sitters that in of itself can prevent abuse as appoint 2 sitters and give them the same set of instructions. many of the vets in the game know about sitting and the risks if you appoint someone and they screw your account up its your fault as it makes it clear what your getting into. ------------- whats happened to the world? if intelegent life came to earth is RL would they consider us intelligent or not? probably not!!!! |
Posted By: Bonaparta
Date Posted: 06 Jan 2012 at 17:55
I totally disagree! The vacation/holiday function was abused in many similar games. The player that was attacked just entered vacation mode and waited for some time until war ended. In Illyriad sometimes weeks are needed to mount any offence and all those preparations would be for nothing if player could simply enter vacation for 14 days... We would also see a large amounts of "holiday" player towns on the map from people that simply quit. About sitting. I'm pretty sure that many players are sitting 4 accounts from players that left on permanent basis. That is a problem since it gives them a lot more tactical advantage and resources... That is an abuse that must stop. Even 90 days per year can be abused since year long queues on advanced resources are not hard to create and a player can simply rob those accounts to get them and has a nice little farm in backyard. I would rather see that account gets suspended after it has no sitting time left and 90 days have passed since last login of the original owner. |
Posted By: Jane DarkMagic
Date Posted: 06 Jan 2012 at 23:18
On the other hand, anyone who's played the game any significant amount of time can think of at least once instance where an inactive account was kept active "for the good of the alliance" or whatever other reason through the sitter function. Even if no one says it outright. It's less about abuse of active vacationing players accounts and more about it being used to keep inactives from being suspended.
|
Posted By: liberty6
Date Posted: 07 Jan 2012 at 06:44
|
i think the system works as is if you regulate it any more it will get ridiculous. and yes i know some have been kept active for the good of the alliance. but the 90 days is good enough only a quarter of the year. not a whole lot. i would be more concerned about password sharing then the sitting stuff as with any system there will be abuses. ------------- whats happened to the world? if intelegent life came to earth is RL would they consider us intelligent or not? probably not!!!! |