EA Forums - Banner

Alternate account ideas

13Next

Replies

  • i know the tricks to everything bro
    you know nothing, John Snow :)

  • chertosha wrote: »
    i know the tricks to everything bro
    you know nothing, John Snow :)

    How cleaver and endearing and helpful to the conversation like I said go get all your buddies to come and agree with you and that will put the argument to bed, that’s how you win servers too right? Outnumber me? Lol
  • Alright I’m sorry I’m just passionate about cnc and I miss it I can’t play it in these one sided stale servers I need action and fair play which is just not even there we got t52 in a one sided war w28 one sided war fs17 one sided can’t even call it a war more like a wipe. Wcs only is one team in it same as 51 53 like cmon guys just look around you for once and tell it like it is. Cause that’s what I’m trying to do.
  • There is too far of a gap between the skill level of old and new players and there’s too much of an advantage for growth compared to high volume players and casual ones. We are looking for ways to mitigate these advantages given to you guys that have all decided to play together degrading and disbanding many many teams in the process.
  • chadthurston
    435 posts Member
    edited January 24
    Who agrees with me they would like a fair and competitive environment with an equal chance to win and experience the entire progression of a server under these conditions and not just a one sided free for all against a bunch of noobs and iggy and a half team of spies? Yo guys seriously it’s the exact same thing every single server no matter what and it been years and now there’s a thousand players left in any given world that will finish because of it.
  • chertosha wrote: »
    settle this in w28 then, dont use alts come with project and see how far ahead you get of everyone else then.

    Look, I'm telling you from experience. On wrath 27 (FA no morale, with project) I did exactly that experiment - started in same sector as everybody, used strictly 0 alts, not even layout search. Was still in top 5 all server and highest offense at fortress.

    Now the trick with starting in a different sector and relocating after a few days into main dig lane per se is a benefit in many ways: layouts, poi, easy bases, saving on cp. Every big team over the years, since tib 18 when we first came up with this trick, has used it. Schaffa on last wcs used it. With or without alts it helps. That's not really related to alts, and its available to everybody. That benefit washes away if you don't do things right in mid game.

    The only big benefit of alts was pre-hitting so that you can dig and one-shot 5-10 bases per day from main account. That is gone and unavailable with the patch. You can maybe save rt somewhat with what sanna and maly are doing, but you can't scale that up (i mean have many people do that), and last wcs saving lots of rt didn't help the coalition, it only weakened their main bases. So that washes away also if you don't do other important things right.

    pvp is always over in project servers before they begin because you project guys are too afraid to lose or have competition anywhere close to even so you recruited absolutely everyone that plays FA servers to join.

    not always. Just as recently as tib 44. Was a good fight and social distancing beat project, with minimal alt use.

    This wcs has no competition because two of the strongest players in the game, for personal or other reasons, all quite understandable, did not play, so the rest of the opposition could not organize without them. That is the real reason. Things will change.

    From what I've experienced, you're right... although the ability to shoot 5-10 bases a day and pre-hit hard bases to capture strategic POIs in of itself is extremely advantageous.

    While not discrediting your achievement of being top 5 all server without using alts, how many other people were using alts? How many POIs did you have before other people due to said alts, allowing faster growth from bigger bonuses?

  • xxsly wrote: »
    how many other people were using alts? How many POIs did you have before other people due to said alts, allowing faster growth from bigger bonuses?

    This was a response to chad's request of doing a particular experiment - playing in top alliance that uses alts, without using them myself. The point being to check how alts help individual growth relative to team. The answer is not much.

    Of course being on a top team helps relative to not being on one, digging faster helps relative to slacking, etc etc. Having your team using alts speeds up digging relative to not using them. By how much and is it worth it - that's a good question.

    On tib 18 we used to rotate people through main alliance in large numbers so as to kill more bases and dig faster. You would think you can dig 3x faster. That particular way didn't work very well, it turns out it is better to have strong mains to dig. There are many ways of doing it. Everybody tries to find a faster way.

    I think alts are useful, but you know for the peace of mind more than digging faster. E.g. you start a base and are a little short on bullets, didn't calculate right, or got killed and it gets harder without bonuses. Then bring an alt to help you out a bit to finish the base.

    Compared with that, for example the BaseShare script has done a lot more to speed up digging, than using alts. You can predict much better if you are going to kill a base, whether it fits your faction and attack units. I think on this current wcs just that one script cut down the dig time by nearly a week compared with last wcs. Maybe having rules for who can shoot what, and related to cherry picking also helped in combination. Alts didn't have nearly a comparable effect.
  • chertosha wrote: »
    xxsly wrote: »
    how many other people were using alts? How many POIs did you have before other people due to said alts, allowing faster growth from bigger bonuses?

    This was a response to chad's request of doing a particular experiment - playing in top alliance that uses alts, without using them myself. The point being to check how alts help individual growth relative to team. The answer is not much.

    Of course being on a top team helps relative to not being on one, digging faster helps relative to slacking, etc etc. Having your team using alts speeds up digging relative to not using them. By how much and is it worth it - that's a good question.

    On tib 18 we used to rotate people through main alliance in large numbers so as to kill more bases and dig faster. You would think you can dig 3x faster. That particular way didn't work very well, it turns out it is better to have strong mains to dig. There are many ways of doing it. Everybody tries to find a faster way.

    I think alts are useful, but you know for the peace of mind more than digging faster. E.g. you start a base and are a little short on bullets, didn't calculate right, or got killed and it gets harder without bonuses. Then bring an alt to help you out a bit to finish the base.

    Compared with that, for example the BaseShare script has done a lot more to speed up digging, than using alts. You can predict much better if you are going to kill a base, whether it fits your faction and attack units. I think on this current wcs just that one script cut down the dig time by nearly a week compared with last wcs. Maybe having rules for who can shoot what, and related to cherry picking also helped in combination. Alts didn't have nearly a comparable effect.

    This is true, I think you raise some valid points. However, one could argue though that something like base share is accessible to all players and doesn't increase the 'cost' required to play competitively with other people who use it.

    Unfortunately it's very hard to quantify the exact benefits of using alts and disadvantages of not using them when there are so many factors at play.

    It would be interesting to see how much of an affect an alliance using no alts compared to an alliance using alts has. Unfortunately this will never be tested since there are too many variables to control, not to mention how time consuming it would be.
  • Smild36 wrote: »
    chertosha wrote: »
    omg i cant believe how blind you are here to the problems of pvp. the real issue is the horde mentality of the current player base there project everyone on the same team!!!!! holy man how dont you see that and the secondary problems are lockdowns and penalties for being destroyed. ok goodnight

    come on, look at the roster, i'm on it too :)

    the horde mentality is not a feature of the game, it's a feature of humans, no patch can fix that :)

    we've seen that before so many times, even in wcs 2015, all the top players gathered on one team, competition not showed up

    but sadly this topic you are raising is unrelated to what i was writing about, not at all

    I agree with Chertosha about the fact that at the start of the alts do not give a big advantage in terms of growth of the main account. I myself spent the first 2 weeks of the championship around the top 10-15. After that, yes. Plays the level of the team as a whole. At the expense of pvp he's also right. Exchange of account keys between players is the only adequate solution when waging war. And if they make a block - 1 network unit 1 account then pvp will come to an end.

    and if you cant stand to be destroyed in a war game enough to give your passwords out for someone to use your account and save you then you break rules and cheat that way too. pvp doesnt end just because you might lose btw and to be honest, pvp is always over in project servers before they begin because you project guys are too afraid to lose or have competition anywhere close to even so you recruited absolutely everyone that plays FA servers to join. look at yourselves before you say things like pvp will be over if project cant share account info and alts dont get a big advantage, what a joke.

    Chad I am the only commander who first challenged the project to a championship and jumped to fight in their sector. With no real chance of winning, but it was a challenge.
    I did not even start with them, although a place in the second lineup I was guaranteed, and did not do it because play with them comfortably, but boring.
    I simply agree with chertosha's conclusions regarding the mechanics of the game.
    You can write as much as you want that the project is an alliance of alt lovers. And gathered in the basis of many strong players. This is a fact.
    Another fact is that really many chickened out, did not start and did not fight a day or two before the date of the jump, even when the war previously agreed on 5 alliances. And this is an indicator of morale is much greater than hundreds of pages of lengthy arguments.
    But that's not the topic of this discussion.

  • gamerdruid
    4648 posts Moderator
    edited January 25
    Please keep the discussion on topic and not let it be another 'project' bashing thread!

    The discussion is about Alternate Account Ideas not the bad or good things that can be done with alts.
    We all know what the result of going off piste is here - the big bad moderator shuts down the discussion!
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • Kinshasa551
    156 posts Member
    edited January 25
    i like project bashing threads - because they are justified!

    Regarding all the other aspects (pvp, alts, funds) -> we can write 100 more pages -> i keep every bet that there will be no significant changes the next 12 month (also i doubt that there ever will be any changes).

    You only have to read the comments @EE_Elephterion in detail (or what he continuous keep quiet about).
  • Smild36 wrote: »
    Smild36 wrote: »
    chertosha wrote: »
    omg i cant believe how blind you are here to the problems of pvp. the real issue is the horde mentality of the current player base there project everyone on the same team!!!!! holy man how dont you see that and the secondary problems are lockdowns and penalties for being destroyed. ok goodnight

    come on, look at the roster, i'm on it too :)

    the horde mentality is not a feature of the game, it's a feature of humans, no patch can fix that :)

    we've seen that before so many times, even in wcs 2015, all the top players gathered on one team, competition not showed up

    but sadly this topic you are raising is unrelated to what i was writing about, not at all

    I agree with Chertosha about the fact that at the start of the alts do not give a big advantage in terms of growth of the main account. I myself spent the first 2 weeks of the championship around the top 10-15. After that, yes. Plays the level of the team as a whole. At the expense of pvp he's also right. Exchange of account keys between players is the only adequate solution when waging war. And if they make a block - 1 network unit 1 account then pvp will come to an end.

    and if you cant stand to be destroyed in a war game enough to give your passwords out for someone to use your account and save you then you break rules and cheat that way too. pvp doesnt end just because you might lose btw and to be honest, pvp is always over in project servers before they begin because you project guys are too afraid to lose or have competition anywhere close to even so you recruited absolutely everyone that plays FA servers to join. look at yourselves before you say things like pvp will be over if project cant share account info and alts dont get a big advantage, what a joke.

    Chad I am the only commander who first challenged the project to a championship and jumped to fight in their sector. With no real chance of winning, but it was a challenge.
    I did not even start with them, although a place in the second lineup I was guaranteed, and did not do it because play with them comfortably, but boring.
    I simply agree with chertosha's conclusions regarding the mechanics of the game.
    You can write as much as you want that the project is an alliance of alt lovers. And gathered in the basis of many strong players. This is a fact.
    Another fact is that really many chickened out, did not start and did not fight a day or two before the date of the jump, even when the war previously agreed on 5 alliances. And this is an indicator of morale is much greater than hundreds of pages of lengthy arguments.
    But that's not the topic of this discussion.

    Ok disagree with chertoshas conclusions based on ten years experience in hundreds of servers as a keen and unbiased observer but I’m going to withdraw from this conversation now because I don’t play FA worlds where the problem of multiple accounts is prevalent. What happens happens and you have my outlook on it after or not.
  • gamerdruid wrote: »
    Please keep the discussion on topic and not let it be another 'project' bashing thread!

    The discussion is about Alternate Account Ideas not the bad or good things that can be done with alts.
    We all know what the result of going off piste is here - the big bad moderator shuts down the discussion!

    This discussion actually does includes the good and bad things that can be done with alts ???
  • gamerdruid
    4648 posts Moderator
    Maybe the phrasing was slightly inaccurate.

    It maybe should have read something like: " Ideas not the bad or good things that are being done with alts by any one particular group of players."

    Yes, including the bad things (or good things) needs to happen, but only to suggest ways to mitigate them.

    Now I'm off piste too! :smiley:
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • After reading what I have written, I can only say the following. If alts are so ineffective, then why do most of the strong players use them. The game develops exponentially. The whole game is tied to technology, they in turn are tied to credits. Starting from 27lvl bases, if you are behind in technology, your shooting efficiency drops sharply. In order to get technology quickly, you need to build bases as quickly as possible. I don’t consider the option of buying credits because it’s not a skill, but just a purchase. Starting from 20lvl bases, when snipers and mammoths appear, effective shooting is achieved with the help of alts. Roughly speaking, how many attacks do you need to kill a mammoth with scorpions as Nod? The answer is many times more than if you shoot paladins. In general, I can only say that if everyone stops using alts without any patches, I would gladly play against any team and if I lost, I would not have any negative feelings, since the game was fair and we lost because we played worse, so the whole message.
  • gamerdruid wrote: »
    Maybe the phrasing was slightly inaccurate.

    It maybe should have read something like: " Ideas not the bad or good things that are being done with alts by any one particular group of players."

    Yes, including the bad things (or good things) needs to happen, but only to suggest ways to mitigate them.

    Now I'm off piste too! :smiley:

    ya well when you said this it ended every forum topic for me :neutral:

    "no major changes to the game will be released, not just in the next 6 months but I'd say in the next decade and beyond!
    Yes, changes will happen, as mentioned, such as different settings for the worlds but they won't be addressing the problem of alts+pvp. "
  • Start multiple servers all at same time and once first badge is done start another server of that type and continue. The bad things with alts will then slow down as many alts is a lot of work but if there are more frequent servers to move to then who cares about alts on a server anymore? I'm pretty dammed sure the same guys playing with 10 15 or 20 alts will not want to be playing competitively on multiple servers all at same time while also maintaining their main accounts too. The MANY MANY Alts will be too much even for the guys that love to play with them. The game is meant to be fun and even the most competitive players want fun too. With too many accounts or servers to maintain the fun disappears so there will be servers for all to play, as all require fun at some level or another. Multiple servers more frequently is the main answer the games current needs.

    Or if you wish to finish Command and Conquer and start Command and Farm then start blocking alt accounts by blocking IP addresses etc etc that will KIll PvP but will also kill the game. SO multiple servers more frequently at least worth a try?

    Another thing to consider.
    I am not a great player and if honest not even a good player but i do enjoy playing with more than one account at a time on any server that i play i do that because i feel one account is not enough for the fun i require from game. Any accounts i use are funded equally and therefore EA make multiple incomes from me. Stop me from playing with more that one account and my whole interest in the game will start to fade (because i am not a great player i find my fun with my accounts playing side by side - take that away and for me the fun fades) and then not only will i only be funding one account but my funding of that account will also fade because for me one account is not enough for me to enjoy the game. Not sure but there might be other like minded players also playing game.....

    So multiple servers more frequently i think is at least worth a try before any PATCHES or UPDATES.

    Clown
  • I do agree that multiple servers starting at once could work, but I don't think it would happen for two reasons:

    1. It's a band aid that doesn't solve the underlying issue.

    2. More servers means more ongoing operational costs. If there are already concerns about development costs then chances are, increased operation costs are going to be a no go.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.