Forum Discussion
8 years ago
Thanks @gamedruid for your response, and I can understand the need for a duty of care towards players, it is just a shame that the many are affected by the actions of the foolish/selfish few.
But if that is the case this time then I really do not understand as the annoying thing is that all these sub-requests were all given with specific sell privileges from the account owner, but have now been removed following an update.
As you will know, quite some time ago that (sell) element was understandably added to the substitution options, (following abuse by some players, and complaints by those affected), which had the same affect as this time round, (everyone losing that privilege unless a new request was submitted specifically authorizing that action). That was a nuisance but quite understandable to protect players interest.
But the difference this time round is that we are losing a privilege that had already been specifically approved by the account owner, just so it can be specifically approved again(?!) - and to me that makes no sense at all as the account owner had already given his authorization, and that has now been removed by EA, not the account owner. In older and less active worlds that permission is not now so easy to get back if a player has left the game.
This means that the management of the account you are able to provide on behalf of the player that has entrusted you to look after his account, has been reduced by the restrictions imposed by EA, after it has been specifically approved by the account owner in order to allow you to manage the account. I am not sure how that is in anyone's best interest.
But if that is the case this time then I really do not understand as the annoying thing is that all these sub-requests were all given with specific sell privileges from the account owner, but have now been removed following an update.
As you will know, quite some time ago that (sell) element was understandably added to the substitution options, (following abuse by some players, and complaints by those affected), which had the same affect as this time round, (everyone losing that privilege unless a new request was submitted specifically authorizing that action). That was a nuisance but quite understandable to protect players interest.
But the difference this time round is that we are losing a privilege that had already been specifically approved by the account owner, just so it can be specifically approved again(?!) - and to me that makes no sense at all as the account owner had already given his authorization, and that has now been removed by EA, not the account owner. In older and less active worlds that permission is not now so easy to get back if a player has left the game.
This means that the management of the account you are able to provide on behalf of the player that has entrusted you to look after his account, has been reduced by the restrictions imposed by EA, after it has been specifically approved by the account owner in order to allow you to manage the account. I am not sure how that is in anyone's best interest.
About Tiberium Alliances Technical Issues
Having problems running the game or a script? Get help with Command and Conquer: Tiberium Alliances with the community!1,659 PostsLatest Activity: 3 days ago
Recent Discussions
- 3 days ago
- 4 days ago
- 20 days ago