Sugestion:
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=5081
Printed Date: 17 Apr 2022 at 13:45 Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.03 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Sugestion:
Posted By: Sliveen
Subject: Sugestion:
Date Posted: 04 May 2013 at 23:12
|
I have a suggestion. I strongly suggest that when an account is in sitter mode it has some sort of visible ticker or highlight to the account name. I also suggest it has a countdown and after 30 days the account be deleted. I think it would clean up Illy really fast.
|
Replies:
Posted By: Sliveen
Date Posted: 04 May 2013 at 23:15
|
Also, I suggest the sitter account be locked out so that everytime the sitter closes the account the account owner has to reinitialize it. That way they cant keep it open for 29 days then re-sit. It really would delete the abandeoned large accounts that are being sat long term by many players. It really is an abuse of the Devs 2 account rules
|
Posted By: dspn23
Date Posted: 04 May 2013 at 23:29
|
a solution to that is already being developed by devs not shure where it can be found...
|
Posted By: Sliveen
Date Posted: 04 May 2013 at 23:38
|
I will believe it when i see it. Especially since this appears to be the 2nd most prolific commented complaint about players and game mechanics in this game
|
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 04 May 2013 at 23:50
|
So what you want is exactly what was discussed in the below thread. Posted in the suggestion forum, where 'suggestion's are made?
http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/inactive-large-accounts_topic5077.html" rel="nofollow - http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/inactive-large-accounts_topic5077.html
So yea same counter sentiment as in that thread.
And to tell where on elgea you came up with 2nd most prolific commented compliant? I've heard this compliant from few very few as in like <5 maybe 10. Meanwhile I've heard plenty of other issues by way more.
Also out of curiosity whats number 1 most prolific commented complain? and 3rd?
|
Posted By: Rill
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 00:27
|
The devs have said elsewhere that they don't intend to do anything in the near future to change the rules for account sitting. While a change was contemplated a while ago (about a year and a half) the last word from them was that they are not going to change anything at this time.
|
Posted By: Sliveen
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 00:29
|
your negativity compellingly smells like horse mud.
The first most commented complaint on player mechanics would be newbs starting alliances or newb upstarts, or franly the now defunct trove war.
Read the above fully before commenting please. I said player mechanics, not game mechanics.Game mechanics complaints abound.
|
Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 01:13
This is going nowhere. Devs will do what they will do and a few folks complaining wont change that...thank the gods. If they listened to the vocal minority, this would be a dead game.
------------- Bonfyr Verboo
|
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 01:31
Sliveen wrote:
your negativity compellingly smells like horse mud. |
... Excellent argument abounds with logic.
Sliveen wrote:
The first most commented complaint on player mechanics would be newbs starting alliances or newb upstarts, or franly the now defunct trove war. |
So in your fun mental math, the most complained about thing is newbs starting alliances...or soup war... Who are you talking to in this game where you came up with that as number 1? Also not to mention devs have zero control over whether anybody goes to war or not.
Sliveen wrote:
Read the above fully before commenting please. I said player mechanics, not game mechanics.Game mechanics complaints abound. |
Read your own post you stated "Player and game mechanics" aside form the fact that you decided you can arbitrarily separate the two.
I think there are plenty of other more pressing problems than this. And I have no idea where you come up saying its one of the most pressing concerns. Did you poll just yourself? Even then you couldn't decide what was number 1.
|
Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 02:07
The complaints about the Consone War come from a vocal minority (mostly the loosing side and even then not all of them), which seems a likely source for the sitter complaints.
I have stated this elsewhere but I'll reiterate: this issue is not a problem. It does not affect game play to the extent that it needs addressing by the Dev team. I personally dislike the "strategy" of maintaining large accounts through sitter's rights but I have way more important things to attend to....like dinner.
EDIT: newb started alliances is an annoyance, not a problem. There is a difference.
------------- Bonfyr Verboo
|
Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 02:10
I agree that dead accounts that are sat by other players need to be deleted asap. I've seen this tactic used on just about every game i've played. Everybody knows it is used to get around the one or two account rule.
If a player can't get online for awhile, for personal reasons, they should be able to notify the devs to keep their account active or should have the option to suspend their account.
|
Posted By: Sliveen
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 02:18
|
ok great, you dont think its a problem. Shut up, move on, dont comment here. but there are tons of peopel who are fed up with a handful of players running illy politics with the massive resources of handfuls of accounts. The equalizer of only two accounts is mishandled and frankly in poor form. No respect for the rules means no respect for the Illy community. This is a simple case of ethics. Either you have it or you don't.
|
Posted By: Sliveen
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 02:31
|
Heres the rules I found in the forums. Every person who is sitting on accounts long term is breaking these rules.
If you have bought, or been gifted an account you are breaking the rules.
If your alliance is sitting on an account, they are breaking the rules.
Those big players that are tired and want a break? They shuld quit and start over when and if they come back. Or they should trudge along. Or abandon their accounts. Giving those accounts to other players is not acceptable. Why have rules the rest of s follow so that a few can use those resources to build huge armies, or sit on all the resouce plots on the map?
Frankly, they should be turned in. Everyone should be turning in those people who are breaking the rules!!!
Welcome to the Illyriad community forums. The goal of these forums is to create a welcoming, enjoyable environment in which players can interact with one another as well as the Illyriad staff. In order to foster such an environment, we've instituted a Code of Conduct as listed below. You will also find rules with relation to the forums and in game channels of Illyriad. Please read this thread as well as the http://www.illyriad.co.uk/Home/TermsConditions" rel="nofollow - Terms and Conditions before interacting on the forums.Code of ConductIn order to create a positive and respectful environment for both the Illyriad players and staff, the following are strictly pr http://www.illyriad.co.uk/terms-and-conditions" rel="nofollow - ohibited both in game and on the forums:- obscene, racist, homophobic or sexist language and imagery
- posts of a sexually explicit, inflammatory or violently threatening nature
- abuse, harassment and name-calling
- posts with the intent to provoke or disrupt other players aka "trolling"
- profanity is forbidden in game and strongly discouraged on the forums
- impersonating fellow players or Illyriad staff
- discussions and debates of a real world religious or political nature
- spamming, for example: repeating information or posts of a nonsensical nature
- posting personal information such as address, phone number, real name or other
identifying information - use of copyright protected material without express consent of the owner
- discussion of illegal activities
- violation of local, state, national or international laws or regulations
- posting of advertisements
Forum Specific:- Do not post the same topic in multiple areas of the forum. Please familiarize yourself with the different sections of the forums and choose the one most appropriate for your topic.
- "Bumping" forum posts by making a short response with the intent of moving the topic further up the list or adding to post count is prohibited.
- Please stay on topic and do not attempt to derail forum threads. Create a new topic if needed to continue or expand on a discussion.
- When posting game feedback and suggestions, please be constructive and specific. Negative feedback is welcome as long as it adheres to the Illyriad Code of Conduct as listed above.
- Public posting of private messages between fellow players or players and Illyriad staff is prohibited. This includes discussions of warnings and suspensions of both game and forum accounts.
In Game Specific:- Character, commander, army, alliance and city names must adhere to the Illyriad Code of Conduct and not be l33tspeak.
- All in game player content including player profile and alliance profile must adhere to the Illyriad Code of Conduct.
- Each person may have access to only 2 Illyriad accounts. Any account you log in to directly (not using the account sitting feature) counts against this.
- Sharing accounts and passwords is strictly forbidden.
- Serial creation and abandonment of secondary accounts in order to exploit the "buddy referral" prestige bonus is an exploit and bannable offense.
- Automated procedures or "bots" used to either capture data or perform actions in game are prohibited. More information regarding use of third party tools in Illyriad can be found http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/rules-regarding-third-party-tools_topic756.html" rel="nofollow - here .
- Prestige is non-refundable under any circumstances.
- Repeated or bothersome begging for resources in Global Chat is discouraged.
Reporting:If you experience a bug or need technical support in game please first file a petition via the http://uk1.illyriad.co.uk/Account/LogOn?ReturnUrl=%2f#/Player/Support" rel="nofollow - Support & Petitions page. If you are unable to do so for any reason, you may then post about your issue in the appropriate section of the forums. If a player is violating the Code of Conduct while in Global Chat in game you have the option of blocking them by clicking on their name and choosing "block in chat." You may also file a support petition to report the player in game if necessary. If a player is violating the Code of Conduct on the forums, you can report the thread by contacting GM Luna via private message with a link to the thread. Outcomes with relation to reports of Code of Conduct violations will not be discussed with the person who filed the report.Language:At this time, English is the only language supported on the Illyriad forums and in game. Please refrain from posting in other languages.Failure to comply with the Illyriad Code of Conduct and Rules may result in warnings followed by either a temporary or permanent suspension of your game and/or forum account per the discretion of the Illyriad staff. These rules are subject to change at any time. Discussion of moderation and disciplinary action is to be kept private.Any questions about the Illyriad Code of Conduct and Rules can be directed to http://forum.illyriad.co.uk/member_profile.asp?PF=1829" rel="nofollow - GM Luna via private message on the forums or email at community@illyriad.co.uk.
**Sept. 7, 2012 Edit to clarify multi-account, account sharing and prestige exploit rules.**
|
Posted By: GM Luna
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 02:31
As has been stated before, the concerns about account sitting are duly noted. There is no need to get antagonistic about it.
Please continue the discussion respectfully or it will be closed.
Luna
------------- GM Luna | Illyriad Community Manager | community@illyriad.co.uk
|
Posted By: Llyr
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 03:10
|
I don't have sitters for my accounts, nor do I sit anyone else's.
My impression is that account sitting is meant to accommodate a player who has to be temporarily absent from the game for an extended period, not to accommodate a player who decides to leave the game indefiinitely.
If that is in fact the case, then account sitting does need a time limit to prevent abuse. As to what time limit is appropriate, that would be up to the devs to decide. Personally I think 30 days in any given 12-month period should be more than enough. When that time limit expires the account should be deleted.
I don't know if an account sitter can in turn select another sitter for the same account; if that is possible it should be eliminated. The owning player should only be allowed to select one sitter, and only the owning player should be allowed to change the sitter.
------------- http://elgea.illyriad.co.uk/a/p/187558" rel="nofollow">
|
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 03:11
Sliveen wrote:
ok great, you dont think its a problem. Shut up, move on, dont comment here. but there are tons of peopel who are fed up with a handful of players running illy politics with the massive resources of handfuls of accounts. . |
Do you think that there are a handful of players running Illy politics with massive resources because they sit many accts?
In my experience, in war, that becomes a liability, as you can't use prestige on sat accts and therefore, you are at a major disadvantage versus an enemy who has their alliance filled up with acts from live players who can either use their own prestige or alliance prestige... Unless someone is willing to spend vast amounts of time constantly updating accts. In which case, it almost limits itself, doesn't it? (simply from the amount of RL time needed to keep that many accts going).
Imo, the best thing would be much more rapid removal of abandoned accts and players with no activity for a certain period of time (including sitters). That would clear the map much faster...
Just my two cents...
|
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 03:28
I might also add that the recent war and tourney have severely depleted the reserves of most of the big alliances... having 70 million troops lost in the last tourney and God knows how many10s of millions lost in the war cost a boatload to replace. So, actually, right now, Illy is probably on its most even playing field alliance resource wise than it ever has been...
Goodness knows us simple Harmless farmers are bankrupt and begging... ;)
|
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 03:41
Sliveen wrote:
Heres the rules I found in the forums. Every person who is sitting on accounts long term is breaking these rules. |
Good job finding the rules please follow them yourself.
Sliveen wrote:
If your alliance is sitting on an account, they are breaking the rules. |
Alliances can't sit accounts so not against the rules, it simply can't be done. So thank you for showing your knowledge of the 'sitting' mechanic. Please go read up on those
Sliveen wrote:
Those big players that are tired and want a break? They shuld quit and start over when and if they come back. Or they should trudge along. Or abandon their accounts. Giving those accounts to other players is not acceptable. Why have rules the rest of s follow so that a few can use those resources to build huge armies, or sit on all the resouce plots on the map? |
If I want to take a break for a month why shouldn't I let someone sit the account? Perhaps you haven't noticed but thats part of the reason for the sitting mechanic.
Sliveen wrote:
Frankly, they should be turned in. Everyone should be turning in those people who are breaking the rules!!! |
Please do, do you know of any of these players who are breaking the rules? You don't then stop pretending its a big problem, your barking at something that isn't there.
If you do then go turn them in and stop harping about it in the forums because there is already a procedure in place to turn in rule breakers.
The devs updated the game fairly recently so that 90 days inactive and the account gets deleted.
|
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 03:47
Sliveen wrote:
but there are tons of peopel who are fed up with a handful of players running illy politics with the massive resources of handfuls of accounts. The equalizer of only two accounts is mishandled and frankly in poor form. No respect for the rules means no respect for the Illy community. This is a simple case of ethics. Either you have it or you don't. |
Tons of people hmm? As near as I can tell any reference to, whats most problematic and how many people have problems with it is completely made up by you. So please point out these 'tons of people'
Tell me about this handful of players running the illy politics? I want to meet them.
|
Posted By: scottfitz
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 04:39
|
I find amusing the notion that the deletion of a few perma-sat accounts would have any appreciable impact on the politics of Illy!
|
Posted By: Machete
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 04:49
|
I keep seeing comments about large number of abandoned accounts being sat. What is large number? 5, 10, 100, 1000? what is a large account? 1k, 10k 100k population?
Also you say tons of people compalin. A ton is 2k. I have seen maybe 5 to 10 people complain.
Please give one or two examples. These tons of people need to speak up about these hundreds of accounts being perma-sat.
If you can't be specific, it's very hard to get other people to agree.
|
Posted By: tansiraine
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 07:22
|
ok.. my point of view on st accounts ( not that i really count) sometimes life happens... putting a time limit on how long someone can sit an account is wrong.
I know some players that were sat for long periods of time cause of real life emergencies and tragedies. They plan on coming back they may have spent money on prestige maybe not but why should they have to give up 6minths a year 2 years of work cause they can not play for a few months.
I can understand the point of view of perma sat accounts they people quit they do not plan on coming back but the account is being grown by a sitter.. sometimes people are in denial they want the person to change their mind. burn out happens and people come back... most perma sat accounts people get tired of caring for in the long run and the hope is gone and they let them go. So really instead of making a huge issue out of something that sooner or later will work itself out lets focus on what is really important.
|
Posted By: Kumomoto
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 08:09
What Tansi said is true. I've known some members who went to Afghanistan or Iraq and have been sat for a year tour and come back... And the player picked back up after.
Is that wrong?
|
Posted By: Auraya
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 11:12
+1 tansi. I know of 4-5 perma-sat accounts. Of these, at least 3 are players who are considering returning but have rl commitments such as university to concentrate on. I don't believe that people should feel pressurised to log in during their final year at all.
I've personally sat an account for 4 months whilst a player moved house and couldn't afford his internet because of the moving costs. He's now back and actively playing again. My own brother left for a few months whilst getting ready for his new baby. Life happens, you can't put a time limit on that and expecting people to will simply backfire. You'll force people who would ordinarily follow the rules to do things like password share. The problem won't be solved just because a new rule is made, you'll only punish the good players.
|
Posted By: Tordenkaffen
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 11:32
|
Isn't the problem excatly that people dont say: "hey Im leaving and not coming back, please perma sit my account?"
We never know if they are going to show up again, and you can't really ask people to dump their friends just because you "feel" there are too many perma sat accounts.
So really youre ending the same place with this as we did earlier - there is no good solution at this point.
*typo
------------- "FYI - if you had any balls you'd be posting under your in-game name." - KP
|
Posted By: Arakamis
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 12:41
Maybe putting 90 day limit for sat accounts as well will do the trick. The counter will reset when the original owner of the account logs in. I'm sure whatever happens, a person can at least log in once in 90 days. It is not too much to ask for imo and will prevent perma-sat accounts.
|
Posted By: twilights
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 12:45
its a tough topic. right now we have around 7k accounts. of that about 1200 have eight or more cities. over 1200 have 100 or less population. watch the totals for next week. we should do what is over all good for the game. the older players might be unhappy with this statement but gosh the game is getting stale. it should be concern to the devs also cause once you reach 10 cities there is little incentive to play regularly. we use a system of text messaging to alert players when there are tournaments or their accounts are close to deletion....maybe the question should be asked how do we make these players more active and why does the game make it so easy to daily maintain larger city accounts? but i am young and dumb so my opinion never counts.....we need more new peeps, we need more active players, we need more fun, we need to tap into the teenage crowd! runs and hides from all the canes and walkers being thrown at her.
|
Posted By: Ossian
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 13:25
Kumomoto wrote:
What Tansi said is true. I've known some members who went to Afghanistan or Iraq and have been sat for a year tour and come back... And the player picked back up after.
Is that wrong?
|
Only if Kumo suggests it ( just light heartened and affectionate humour - Luna)
...but seriously I actually prefer playing in games where vacation mode is used as an alternative to sitting. In my view sitting leaves itself open to the worst offence that a gamer could commit. By this I mean "multi accounting" or "push accounts".
When extended sitting is permitted for extended periods, to my mind, the original player has passed ownership of the account to someone else (along with their committment to the game). I would say that where a player leaves the account for 12 months, or even as little as 3 months, then they have effectively abandoned the game and that it is entirely unfair to others to allow them to renter an account that has been played by proxy for such a long period.
However if a form of Vacation mode were introduced, excluding sitting and effectively freezing the account (protecting it from attacks etc) then that would allow players to leave and return for longer periods ( not more than 3 months , imo).
Having said that - Silveen's suggestions in the first two opening posts seem the best alternative when operating a sitting arrangement which would not be open to abuse and would be prevented by setting a time limit for sitting. ( Silveen seems to indicates that it should be renewable after each sitting session). The 30 day absentee time limit for account closure would also seem reasonable.
I would urge the Devs to look at this as a matter of priority.
|
Posted By: Twist
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 13:37
|
for what little my opinion counts as just a regular but lesser figure in Illyriad, I would be against someone sitting an account having full functionality on that account....
much better if game mechanics protected a sat account in the same way as new player protection, but the sitter not being able to queue production, buildings or research
if someone leaves the account for someone to sit, if and when they return the account should be at the same stage as when they left..... this would greatly reduce the benefits of any abuse of account sitting,
it would mean the player picks up where they left of, instead of jumping forward in development (leaving the game when the account has only 2 towns and only knowing the bare basics of the game, coming back 10 months later to 8 cities, some of them huge or even legendary)
so, either freezing an account.... or letting someone sit the account, but only in order to keep it alive, with heavy restrictions, would imo be the best way forward
|
Posted By: Machete
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 16:26
|
I guess I am going to be just as bad as the peeps saying there is a problem and repeat myself.
Examples please. Numbers please.
It's easy to say there is this big problem. If you can prove it, you may persuade others to take up your cause.
|
Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 17:55
Proof? Everyone keeps asking for proof of foul play. This is a game, some players are always going to try to cheat. It's common sense.
Are players in this game abusing the account sitters feature? Most definitely!
Are players using hidden IPs or other tricks to get around the 2 account max rule? Most definitely!
All it takes is one cheating player to ruin a fun game. I've seen it happen too many times.
Give players the option to suspend their accounts for up to a year and limit account sitting to a max of 30 days every 6 months.
I can't imagine how anyone would be unable to find a computer within a year to keep their accounts alive. Our military has internet on frontline military bases, even our prisons have internet.
|
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 19:40
Epidemic wrote:
Proof? Everyone keeps asking for proof of foul play. This is a game, some players are always going to try to cheat. It's common sense.
|
If you have no proof of foul play nor knowledge of any actual foul play then you admit you are just making stuff up. Making a rule that these 'cheaters' have to follow won't make them follow it. If someone is breaking 1 rule, they won't worry about breaking 2 rules. Its common sense.
Epidemic wrote:
Are players in this game abusing the account sitters feature? Most definitely! Are players using hidden IPs or other tricks to get around the 2 account max rule? Most definitely! All it takes is one cheating player to ruin a fun game. I've seen it happen too many times.
|
Please show some! You can't, yet you 'know' people are doing this. So logically the only way this works is that you yourself are doing it and don't want to turn yourself in. So with equal proof as you have presented I guess I should submit a petition that you are cheating?
Epidemic wrote:
Give players the option to suspend their accounts for up to a year and limit account sitting to a max of 30 days every 6 months.
|
Rehashing the same idea over and over doesn't make it any better.
Epidemic wrote:
I can't imagine how anyone would be unable to find a computer within a year to keep their accounts alive. Our military has internet on frontline military bases, even our prisons have internet. |
Yes this is exactly what I want our military to be focused on overseas is to be sure their Illy account is still active. Or if I go for a business Illy is what I want to worry about. In fact I would say until you come up with a solution that didn't result in that 1 marine losing his account then we deal with these 'cheaters' which may or may not exist.
But why not go further, you timeline is purely arbitrary. So I say we just delete accounts that have been offline for more than 1 hr. Does this seem crazy to you? Yes it does, good because lets say your idea is implemented, whats to stop me from saying 1 month isn't to long? It should be a week, and then a day and then an hr? Devs chose 90 days leave it alone.
As for the freeze account idea. That has worse exploits than the sitting account. You can siege a sat account off the map. If I wanted to I could make an account teleport it 10 sq's away from ur city, settle a few cities on the good spots around your city then freeze the account. And you wouldn't be able to do squat about it. Oh and did I mention that I could then repeat that as many times as I want? So between someone sitting an account that I can raze, and someone creating an account that blocks city spots all over the map I choose the one that razing can fix.
|
Posted By: abstractdream
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 19:45
Sliveen wrote:
ok great, you dont think its a problem. Shut up, move on, dont comment here. but there are tons of peopel who are fed up with a handful of players running illy politics with the massive resources of handfuls of accounts. The equalizer of only two accounts is mishandled and frankly in poor form. No respect for the rules means no respect for the Illy community. This is a simple case of ethics. Either you have it or you don't. |
Interesting how you dismiss counter arguments with "Shut up, move on, dont comment here." This is a public forum, for players of Illy, which you either are not or don't care enough to be recognized. EDIT: MY MISTAKE, YOU ARE A PLAYER. I MISSPELLED. MY APOLOGIES.
The metaphorical tons of people who are fed up with Illy politics are just not trying. I doubt that is the case anyway as anyone who does not care to participate in political manuvering can sit it out, in a peaceful alliance or on their own and be none the worse for wear.
The folks who wield the power in Illy have worked to get where they are. The accusations of cheating are coming, in my opinion because it's easy to do. Smearing reputations takes little effort compared to the time and skill, and downright luck in many instances it takes to build power, political or otherwise.
I know of a few instances of sitters maintaining accounts but they are not the majority, not by a long shot. Generally, when the owner leaves and never returns the sitter is reluctant to let it go. There may be sentimental reasons but they also have a vested interest in these accounts. Sooner or later, in most cases they will give them up. If the sitter is active and a member of a vital alliance I don't see how they can keep sitting inactive accounts anyway. They usually are needed for more pressing matters.
Involved, active players who sit accounts are more likely to drop them sooner rather than later because some smaller member needs help, not to mention the fact that a growing alliance needs to cash in on those cities. Their locations and size (assuming these are large accounts we are talking about) are way more valuable for siege/capture. In an robust alliance, inactive accounts are just tools and shortly are cast out as their usefulness is fleeting.
The Illy Dev team is clearly intelligent or this game would suck. They know this is a red herring.
------------- Bonfyr Verboo
|
Posted By: Epidemic
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 20:32
...DeathDealer, please bother the devs with a petition that I might be cheating.
You and I both know that account sitting can be abused and is common to internet games.
I would think that suspended accounts would either be taken off the map, losing all claims and/or have to follow strict guidelines that prevent abuse; i.e. no player with less than 6 towns can suspend.
|
Posted By: Brandmeister
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 21:31
DeathDealer89 wrote:
If someone is breaking 1 rule, they won't worry about breaking 2 rules. Its common sense. |
qft
The account sitting policy probably cuts down on 90% of password sharing and full account transfers. That's a huge security headache for online games. If the remaining 10% are truly determined to break the rules, then they will immediately find a way to circumvent any new rules put in place.
It wouldn't surprise me to learn that there are at least 50 perma-sitter accounts with 9 or 10 cities. By perma-sitter I mean that the original player has largely abandoned and has no intention of ever returning to Illy. Let's use 100 to keep the math simple. Using the 10 square radius, those accounts could at most maintain a zone of 300 squares around each city, for 3000 per account and 300,000 total. There are 4M squares in Illy, so you're still talking about less than 10% of all squares.
Additionally, players don't claim everything within their 10 squares. So if you settle 10 squares away, you can claim tiles 6-10 squares from their cities and still obey the rule. That would mean an effective 5 square radius around a city site of claimed squares, or 75,000 squares total (1.875% total squares).
That puts 98.125% of squares in play for active players. And that's assuming 100 perma-sitter accounts with 10 cities, which I think is a very generous assumption.
|
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 21:35
|
It would be better than your assertion that everyone is cheating except you don't actually know of any.
If sitting an account while waiting for the user is abuse then yes it is. On a similar note I'm sure you think people abuse cav when they use them to kill off bows defending on plains. Even though you know thats in part exactly what they are designed to do.
Ah cool so instead when I come back my cities are just able to magically teleport to wherever I want. Sure thats an interesting way of doing things. And yes its always good to single out smaller players by not letting them use a part of the game they currently can.
Your 'solutions' are getting worse and worse. I say to solve the solution of people complaining about cheaters we just ban those people from the forum. Then no1 will complain. Thats a horrible idea but luckily right on par with yours.
|
Posted By: Sliveen
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 23:39
|
Your negativity is unwholesome . I wish I could ban you from this thread. Since I cant, I will choose to ignore from this point onwards. Continue to talk to yourself and drool as you continue to give a onesided conversation that attacks without any meaning ful presentation as to why you are so negative about the actual intent of this thread. In otherwords, GM luna please ask this troll to get off this thread!!!
|
Posted By: DeathDealer89
Date Posted: 05 May 2013 at 23:57
|
Actually everyone who had something bad to say about your idea discussed it point by point. Then discussed counter points.
And yes there is negativity, because lets face it when someone spews a bad idea you respond with 'don't do that' not 'good job' Stuffing your fingers in your ears and not addressing problems with your idea will not get it implemented faster even if you could eventually create a 'good idea' that addressed the problem. Or convince people that your idea was in fact good to start.
If you can't have a rational discussion then perhaps you don't belong on the forums. In otherwords, GM luna please ask this troll to get off this forum!!!
|
Posted By: GM Luna
Date Posted: 06 May 2013 at 03:43
This is an extremely childish back and forth calling each other trolls. Really unwelcome behavior here.
Closing thread.
Luna
------------- GM Luna | Illyriad Community Manager | community@illyriad.co.uk
|
|