EA Forums - Banner

Stop Multi-account exploitation

System
552 posts Member
This discussion was created from comments split from: When is next new world?.

Replies

  • sacipeps
    18 posts Member
    edited May 2017
    thanks moderators
    this topic has solved ^^
    Post edited by sacipeps on
  • methuselah
    428 posts Senior Moderator
    Multi accounting is an issue with most games like this and is difficult to do much about. I'm not a technical guy (obviously) but anything that blocks multi's potentially can block legitimate customers and they are simply not going to do that and I don't really blame them.

    I know that isn't the answer you wanted but it's the only one I have.
  • I'm not a technical guy either but lock the IP of the player to a certain account per world and he can only attack with this acc, I dont know if it is possible but if it is an idea.
    I was not expecting any response, maybe banish the account that is doing it in the specific world... just ideas for not having alliance's with 50 accounts of the same player
  • methuselah
    428 posts Senior Moderator
    I can't respond the the technical piece either as I know enough to be dangerous and that's about it but you know what? Anyone that has the time to run an entire alliance would frustrate me too.....but more than that I pity them.
  • methuselah
    428 posts Senior Moderator
    Why would anyone silence you? Superior alliances, whether they are multi's or not, currently have the right to help or hinder. Looks like hinder was the decision in your world which sucks. Rally everyone else to defeat them!
  • methuselah
    428 posts Senior Moderator
    Look I've been on both sides of that, victorious alliance and a blocked one. You are blaming that all on multi's when in reality it is part of the game. You can be blocked by an alliance of 50 that don't like you and you can be blocked by one guy with a lot of time.

    Multi's have very little to do with that strat although I feel your pain, do something about it! Organize the other alliances, go after them. There is no mechanism to make people go away once they defeat the fort, whether you like that or not that is how the game rolls at this time, either beat it or start a new server.
  • gamerdruid
    3953 posts Moderator
    edited May 2017
    The who? 'Online Game Commission'? Never heard of them!

    Games commissions world wide tend to be about controlling or regulating gambling.
    I am not an employee of EA/Envision. The views expressed are my own!
  • methuselah
    428 posts Senior Moderator
    I'm not going to argue with you, do whatever you feel necessary. All I'm saying is that you are griping about an end of server problem that could very well have nothing to do with your core issue which is multi accounts. You do not have to have multi's to clog up a server, one guy on 50 accounts can do that as 50 guys on 50 accounts the result is the same.

    If you are going to have a beef with multi's you are going to have to come up with a better example to get my sympathy.
  • sacipeps
    18 posts Member
    I'm newbie but the advantage is too big. If we have 50 players and each players kill one base, each players will catch almost the same resources, but if you have 49 accounts to preshoot for you, you will need 16 cp for kill one base and catch the resources, so you need 800 cp (almost 3 days if you use funds only for energy) to kill the same 50 bases but you will keep all the resources in one account so you just spend your funds to help with energy and your army/base will growth without limits. others 1 acc players never reach the same lvl as you because this difference cannot be denied with supply points. So the multi acc players can made god accounts, if they grab the real alliance near of the multi acc to protect him he will be undefeated. I think the result of this is all players will be multi acc players because you dont need to spend to much with funds and will growth more and faster.
  • methuselah
    428 posts Senior Moderator
    I'm not trying to say multi's aren't a problem but

    1) It takes a lot of time to do what you are describing and
    2) You can do it as well

    I've never had any trouble keeping up with the multi's but I won't argue that it does present an advantage to an extent. There is no solution imminent as far as I am aware so if you find yourself being dominated by that strategy fight fire with fire!
  • I have what you call multi accounts 3 on one world, 2 in one alliance and 1 in a sister alliance
    But all are run as separate accounts all financed

    But tell me TOTO what is the difference to me being on line with my 3
    and 3 players arranging to be on line at the same time with 1 each

    And part of the game is once you have taken Fortress you help your Sister alliances take it.

    It is called Tiberium Alliance and a Alliance can be more than 50 players by creating a 2nd sister alliance.

    Suggest you try to get the other alliances on your world to support each other,

    Attack the POIs of the offending alliance Decrease his Bonus of military POIs and at the same time increases yours.

    Dont blame others, for your apparent lack of strategy
  • methuselah
    428 posts Senior Moderator
    There is very little difference which is part of why nothing was ever done about it. As for your complaining about the endgame toto that is the current design I'm sorry you don't like it. A conquering alliance has every right to clog up a server or to help.
    an
    If they are clogging it is up to you to defeat that by working together with your allies to over come them. Think about it, what if situation was reversed and you worked a year on a server, funded, and won? Perhaps you'd help others do the same, perhaps you'd want to stay fight. The game design currently allows for that choice so either beat it or move on to another server and have better luck next time.
This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!