Multiple accounts

ColonKicker

Many worlds ago EA stopped the ability to 'farm' bases. This was mainly due to the use of multiple accounts by single players. It has left the game stale, and biased heavily towards those that can afford to fund their accounts. I realise that EA want to make money, but it has taken away a lot of the equality that farming brought to the game.
I'd like to suggest that making it impossible for multiple accounts on the same IP address to farm, attack, or otherwise assist another account on the same IP address would allow the game to get some of the fun back into the game. The epic months long wars have gone. Hitting the fortress in a few months is something only the heavily funded can do. The tech exists, and is used on games like 'Forge of Empires'.
The ability to grow quickly using farming, even in some limited way, would go some way to equalizing the very obvious difference between highly funded and non funded players.

gamerdruid

Using IP addresses has been discussed many times and every time is rejected by the developers for a lot of reasons. Technically it may be possible but I don't think it's going to happen. You plan would prevent two people in the same household (they'd share IP address that is visible externally) from playing co-operatively. Also, accommodation halls for students would effectively prevent the same as their IP address viewed externally is the same.

Similarly, your plan wouldn't prevent the use of substitution for the farmed accounts.

Soixie

Nope.

bobbzat

I've a question about using alts, if you have two accs, say, one gdi, one nod, and a player attacks both of them can you then retaliate with both?

gamerdruid

There is no reason not to be able to do so, provided both accounts still have a 100% on the Command Centre. If they are in different alliances there may be an enforced wait, but no reason for multiple players/accounts not to attack in turns.

EinarThePillager

Multiple accounts tend to be difficult to maintain after researching the 3rd base. If you have 4 accounts for farming, getting the 2nd base up would double the number of bases to 8. Getting the 3rd base would bring it to 12. Attacking becomes more complicated as you start researching new units and rise in offense level. The suggestion for such is either 1 or 2 accounts... 2 if one wants to play GDI and Nod in the same world.

gamerdruid

Multiple accounts are used for a variety of reasons, sometimes developing them as fast as a main account isn't done, required or desired.

Wait until you're at 15-25 bases on the main account and you'll see subsidiary accounts falling behind unless you have no other pastime or life than playing the game almost 24/7.

MaggyNoggy

> @gamerdruid said:
> Multiple accounts are used for a variety of reasons, sometimes developing them as fast as a main account isn't done, required or desired.
>
> Wait until you're at 15-25 bases on the main account and you'll see subsidiary accounts falling behind unless you have no other pastime or life than playing the game almost 24/7.

do you get paid for your services, or is that why ur so bitter,

EinarThePillager

@MaggyNoggy, That's because maintaining multiple accounts in the long run is tedious. Imagine 1 month in and you have 4 to 5 bases per account, multiply that number to 5 to 8 and you get 20 to 40 bases. Things get worse 1 month later... Tried to play 8 bases with 8 accounts, that's 64 bases with at least 24 offense bases.

pcshost

Not enough talk on this topic of Multi-accounts and this game. I have seen fake alliances filled with them and to me there is nothing more annoying than seeing a low level base in a high level area. Simple fix is to prevent bases from being able to move past certain coordinates. Level 30 or below bases do not belong in the 46+ area of the map. Level 20 or below don't belong in the Level 41+ area of the map. If someone wants to use an alt to block, hold a POI or block then play the account(s) with some intention. It can be finagled however but for me this is a good way to deal w/ alt accounts being abused.

Kinshasa551

Don´t bother - lot of talk in the past about that but there is no will to change anything.

If a discussion gets uncomfortable EE_Elephterion is closing the thread faster than you can look.

gamerdruid

The thread was closed because nothing new was being said.

As you stated, there has been a lot of talk by players about multi-accounts and not a lot has been done about them. You don't know the reasons why, neither does anyone else apart from those that make the decisions.

Your idea of limiting where low level accounts can be located doesn't work as all new bases start off as low level so 10th base couldn't be placed in the level 20 area even as it starts off as a level 1 base on the vast majority of worlds (a Vet world is different).

A refinement on your idea may just be feasible. I'm not sure of the technical issues it would raise and it certainly won't be introduced for a new world in the next 6 months.

sangove

This thing about not being able to limit IP addresses isn't entirely true. I could tell you about harddrive serial numbers, but what's the point. The cheaters FUND....and that's what EA is interested in, not fair play. Its a business. the end.

Kinshasa551

you´re right - that´s business / they want to earn money. I can´t say anything against that.

If you want to change the situation there are a few things every player can do:

Boycott playing against the Project guys!
Leave the server as soon as you see guys like Ganja, Sannahopea, Bruellhusten and so on playing!
Don´t play/waste money for the WCS + any other world they are playing!

TIB 53 they are playing without any competition
WCS they will play without any competition
-> guess that´s a lot of fun for them

Looks like that is the only way these guys learn that they are destroying the game for everybody else. The CIC of Project (Bruellhusten) unfortunately give the impression that he´s unable to make any changes. Lot of talking but no action at all. Sad.

gamerdruid

sangove wrote: »

This thing about not being able to limit IP addresses isn't entirely true. I could tell you about harddrive serial numbers, but what's the point. The cheaters FUND....and that's what EA is interested in, not fair play. Its a business. the end.

In a technical sense, yes you can limit IP addresses. That would limit each household to one account, each dormitory at University to one account etc. VPN's would get around that. Also, in the UK and possibly elsewhere, not everyone has a fixed IP address. I can change mine at will simply by turning off the router.

As for harddrive serial numbers, it has the same effect on family use if they share the machine. It's also possible now to play on machines that have no harddrives too.

In the end the bad effects are thought to outweigh the good ones. EA are in it to make money so that limits what they are willing to authorise.

one_cIown

Again no point even trying to limit multiple accounts if guys have time to play them then all good if they don't then who cares.

But start many servers and then players can pick and choose which server to play and which servers to leave (customers love to have choice). At moment there is little or no choice either we have to play a server or not play the game at all. If we do stop playing game there is a chance we will never come back....

As with the WCS being a forgotten attack server i will not play, my money that i would have spent in game i will instead spend on something nice for Mrs Clown's xmas. However if EA were smart and started multiple servers then Mrs Clown would not be getting a xmas i would enjoy playing a new server ;-p

Simply put the game is like everything else, it has flaws we notice them because we have too much time to study them. Open the game up (continually start multiple servers) and the flaws will still be there but they won't be so noticeable and people will have more fun playing game and EA will make more money.

EA building the game back up (unless they intentionally wish it to die) to make more money will take time as presently they have recently chased away customers with their current server strategies. They will need to regain the community loyalty and respect. Then they will then blossom and new players will join us....... or maybe it is now too late?

Kinshasa551

@one_cIown

you´re right concerning more new servers and all the consequences.

But how many times you have written that in the last weeks/month? 5x, 10x or even more.

@chadthurston also have made some sensitive suggestions more than 1x.

How many responses? 0!

So don´t waste your time here respectively enjoy your time with Mrs Clown + buy some more presents^^

one_cIown

@Kinshasa551

Yeah i have said same thing many times recently my hope, my xmas wish is for EA to waken and see they have something quite special and dare i say it quite unique but presently it is dying.

I have been saying same message time and time again with hope that somebody of authority or that knows of somebody in authority gets a glimpse of all our messages and looks further, but of course my light now grows dim too.

Enjoy your xmas too ;-)

gamerdruid

Someone who knows someone in authority does read them, @EE_Elephterion but whether those he knows a) have sufficient authority or b) are willing to change, remains in doubt.

My money on that they have sufficient authority but are unwilling to re-examine their model of working. (or if they have re-examined it, came to a different conclusion to what many desire!)

EE_Elephterion

Hello Commanders,

we have discussed this issue a lot internally too, but the matter is not as easily resolved as limiting IP addresses or invasive measures like hardware IDs. That would be a privacy nightmare.

We know multi-accounting is an issue, but one that is near-impossible to solve in the confines of a 10 year old browser game like CCTA. We very much recognize the issues that multi-accounting is for game balance and player experience. It is simply not true that the few individuals who fund their alts make that much of a positive financial impact.
Rather, multi-accounts are used to circumvent the costs of attacking continuously that regular players would face with the same playstyle.

I hope everyone can see that as developers we also have no incentive to support this feature. But there is also little we can do against it within the constraints that are set.

SpeirFein

There is a very simple, elegant solution to alts. Create a specific morale limiter for attackbases on FA worlds. Some rule where if a Forgotten base is hit by more than x (say 10) percent, a morale limiter of 50 percent is applied to any other accounts that hit the base. The morale limiter goes away if the base fully reheals or heals back to 90%.