Want multiple accounts?

[Luke]

Thought that would get your attention. We're just curious, and want to do an innocent poll here.

The question is:
Would you like multiple accounts to be legal?

That question does not mean it will happen. Just gathering info from our players.

Some would be asking: Why the hell would you ever ask that in the first place? Why would it even cross your mind?

It's a provocative idea that Prophet came up with. My first answer was that it was ridiculous. There is 1 thing for it though:
What about those players that have brothers/nephews/roommates/schoolmates and girlfriends playing. Ofcourse some of those are real. But some might also not be real. So in theory the player playing by the rules could be in a disadvantage now.

So the question is if you would consider creating multiple accounts if they were legal.

Upside:
A more fair game, as multiple accounts on IP would be limited whether they are real people or not. No questions asked.
Bank transfers are gone, so every account would still have to work for it by themselves.
Crew can devote their time on mostly other stuff than tracking down duplicate accounts.

Downside:
A problem with spies in alliances.
A good cheater could perhaps create the max of multiple accounts on different IP addresses.
The biggest gewar rule would get broken.

At the moment this is all it is...a provocative idea which is being run by players to see what opinions are.

[Ptah]

...in some other games - you can have 2-3 per comp. but have to send mail to the admins, that your "brothers are playing" on one comp. (e.g. travian).

P.S. it brings more $$ to the game

[Luke]

Oh I forgot yes:
Upside:
More activity

[HouseOfRothschild]

I agree with this. Without transfers it seems that the only advantage one could gain would still have to be gained through time put into the game. I have a brother that would probably like this game, but I never mentioned it to him, because of the rule, now he could play.

The activity level would be awesome to see go up, as the game would become much more exciting and action-packed. I am honestly all for it. If transfers still existed, I would vote no.


::Edit::
Do you think that it would be wise to set a max per IP though? Something like the possible max a household would hold, say 10-15 possibly? This would cover large families but it would prevent a single player from wiping out a 20 player alliance by attacking them with 50 different accounts total geos at the same time.

[Peonboss]

Well

Idea aside, there is no excuse to not track down multiple accounts. Just takes time and effort. And since I did it for a year and caught a crap load of of morons there is no excuse.
And responsible man power is avail just power hungry people try to hoard it even though many refuse to actually do much..

As to the idea, ok idea as long as no other accounts are allowed on an ip unless they are all donation accounts. Period no exceptions.

Biggest issue is someone losing and just making new account to use start up cash.

Ok nother issue but same lines..

I think we screwed up when we let admin make 2 nd accounts.
It should be other way around.

All staff accounts should be terminated cept Luke and anyone rejoining staff should have a staff account using a staff name. With or without personalization. Like mod 1. Admin 1

Yeah we will figure em out but fact is we have a ton of staff that is never here, never plays, and the accounts for staff should be set and the players jawing them change as needed..

I know it sounds like I am crapping on staff, and I am not really, just the inactive and lazy ones..we should all have none of the staff accounts invisible so you can see who is online and msg someone as needed.. And if mod 6 only logs in once every 2 weeks then you change the pw and give it to an other player. Who will actually work..

[Ptah]

i would suggest max 3 per IP, if the first one is donator.

[Luke]

Peonboss:
I think you misunderstood what I wrote. It's not about not having an excuse for tracking accounts. It's that some will just say those are family members. And with some it's true, and with others not.

Besides that, a lot of players are too smart to be tracked. It's not now what it was when you were crew. Players became smarter too. Ofcourse we have some new techniques of tracking them, and eventually some slip up...but it's more and more becoming an impossible task. More and more applications out there that will help cheaters. That will make their lives easier. That is why we dont have bank transfers anymore.

Even though this is just gathering info: However if we put too much rules on this idea, then it's easier to keep it like it is because it would mean people still get to cheat on it and crew would still constantly be tracking them.

But keep all ideas coming. But the best ones are the simple ones. I myself, if this would ever become reality, would more be for the 'no questions asked if you keep it under the max' idea.

[HouseOfRothschild]

@Ptah

I agree the first account should be a donator, but is 3 accounts max really enough? Maybe I did overshoot it with my first suggestion, but I was just thinking about the "what ifs", because I know a few households that have 10+ kids in them. But that is very rare. Perhaps a max of 5-8 per IP?

[HouseOfRothschild]

...would more be for the 'no questions asked if you keep it under the max' idea.

^^^ That is what I am saying. :lgewar

[Luke]

There were real folks out here that worked at 1 company and were with 5 or more already. And they really did exist. Some others around here even met them.

I have a question though: why should the first one be a donator? I don't quite understand that one, yet I read that from 3 players already.
My fear is it makes the whole idea a lot harder to do. We'd constantly still be checking, and players would still cheat on it. Then it's easier perhaps to just keep it as it is?

[Spywareagen7]

This basically reminds me of how diablo 2 runs, you have one account, and then you have essentially different "characters" that play gewar. That would be the only way I could fathom this working, you'd need to know who the character owner is. Basically SpywareAgen7 is my username, and my accounts would be Joshmo and curly, but everyone could click on either of them and see they are owned by me. But this would be hard to manage if you had multiple people with multiple accounts on the same IP... hmm further thought required here haha

The only catch about making it a donator benefit would be that n00bs would have EVEN LESS chance in the game, because the vet's who start at the beginning of the round now have 2 accounts that have been stockpiling resources for the whole reset..

All in all, I don't know that I'm a huge fan, to have multiple accounts on the same IP you should have to be able to prove they are different people, through the wonders of facebook (if you create a fake facebook so that you can get a dupe gewar account you're pathetic and shouldn't even play), credit cards etc etc it's not hard to differentiate people, if an occurance comes up thats not reported it gets banned.. should be pretty black and white, but what do I know.

[Ptah]

I have a question though: why should the first one be a donator? I don't quite understand that one, yet I read that from 3 players already.
My fear is it makes the whole idea a lot harder to do.

as you said, "smart" people can avoid limits, more of it, they can even "donate" to buy additional ip or device. Better allow them donate to gewar legally.

[Luke]

New problem then arrises: there are a lot that hate facebook and don't wish to be on any social network site :p.

Ptah: but spyware makes a valid comment also...new players might stand less of a chance then. Which could mean we get less new players and therefor also less new donators. That is also a concern of mine.

It's not like I want to diss ideas coming out. I appreciate them. I just want every idea to be shown with a turnside of that idea. I did that before with what I myself said even. It's the best way to possibly have a solid idea later.

[HouseOfRothschild]

My reason for going with the donator first idea is that it would get more to donate I would think, but since one of the main aspects of you mentioning this Luke, was to eliminate the need to "police" who has multiples and who doesn't. Making it donator only, would not eliminate the need to check, but it would actually probably make it worse.

[Ptah]

Ptah: but spyware makes a valid comment also...new players might stand less of a chance then. Which could mean we get less new players and therefor also less new donators. That is also a concern of mine.


true but that is another, NOOBs problem. On the other hand, the less difference between noob and vet, the less donations?

[King_Diamond]

First of all I think we should have less start up cash. That would make dup accounts less effective. maybe even give just 500 geos at start, like it was in the past.

About multiple accounts: I really don'T know, I myself think that even having 1 account you actively play with is taking enough time. I'm not nearly making everything out of my possibilities. So I would never mind creating another account.
That's why I think this feature wouldn't be abused so much.
Of course you can always be jealous saying the others do it. But I really don't care. If you need multiple accounts to compete and put fair gamers down you are nuts imo.

So I think finally my vote will go to yes, for the benefit of the players legally using it for friends and family members.

[thomas85]

I personally would like to play "Dr. Jekyll und Mr. Hyde" just to have some fun.

[HouseOfRothschild]

I personally would like to play "Dr. Jekyll und Mr. Hyde" just to have some fun.

I totally agree, it would be a blast.

This is turning into quite a horse race, neck and neck 4 - 4.

[Jeff Lebowski]

Well

Idea aside, there is no excuse to not track down multiple accounts. Just takes time and effort. And since I did it for a year and caught a crap load of of morons there is no excuse.
And responsible man power is avail just power hungry people try to hoard it even though many refuse to actually do much..

As to the idea, ok idea as long as no other accounts are allowed on an ip unless they are all donation accounts. Period no exceptions.

Biggest issue is someone losing and just making new account to use start up cash.

Ok nother issue but same lines..

I think we screwed up when we let admin make 2 nd accounts.
It should be other way around.

All staff accounts should be terminated cept Luke and anyone rejoining staff should have a staff account using a staff name. With or without personalization. Like mod 1. Admin 1

Yeah we will figure em out but fact is we have a ton of staff that is never here, never plays, and the accounts for staff should be set and the players jawing them change as needed..

I know it sounds like I am crapping on staff, and I am not really, just the inactive and lazy ones..we should all have none of the staff accounts invisible so you can see who is online and msg someone as needed.. And if mod 6 only logs in once every 2 weeks then you change the pw and give it to an other player. Who will actually work..

One good idea here and I have a rant-like comment on another:

Good idea, multiple account must be a donator. That's a good idea. It helps to limit, and combining that with the "Must register multiples" that House mentioned it could be successful. Basically, any account not a donator and not in the registered list...gets a ban if the IPs cross.

On the admin account, I used to be of that frame of mind. I used to think that every mod/admin account should be anonymous to avoid that "personal" feel people get when talking to staff. A players feelings toward a potential battle enemy should never impact the way they take advice, punishment or speak to staff members (use me as a prime example...people HATE me (jeff) in this game, but they shouldn't let it cloud their judgment when I speak as an admin).

Ultimately, what changed my mind was the creating of an account in the other direction. As soon as this account was created there were 10 alliance board messages, 3 forum posts, and a massive campaign to uncover. The same would happen in reverse. There are too many creepy people around here that can't just be satisfied with playing a game. They have to find every way, even subversive, to attack and/or undermine staff members. It's been this way for years, and until those people are gone (which is never) that idea won't work.

As far as the idea goes....Prophet always makes sense. Especially when you add in Cash's idea of hiding alliance details (cash and troop counts).

[Peonboss]

That's why if it got obvious you just swap up accounts. People wouldn't know and I'd they figured em out just swap em around and people would be screwed again.

Of not a great example, but recent. Joe has been doing lots of staff speak. If it had came from Luke or sj I would have paid attention but I pretty much ignore joe cause his past and lack of activity. If it had just been mod 3. I might have actually believed and cared more. No insult intended just an example.

[Peonboss]

Can't find a post by cash. You losing it or me proph?

[Jeff Lebowski]

Can't find a post by cash. You losing it or me proph?

Private conversation with him last round (note to all players...I remember every idea you give me).

His idea was to shield alliance information (cash and troop counts). Still have alliances, but basically make it less of an attraction for dupes/spies. So you could see the information that's already public about the players in your alliances, but your bank/available and troop counts are your own business.

[Cash]

Still have alliances, but basically make it less of an attraction for dupes/spies. So you could see the information that's already public about the players in your alliances, but your bank/available and troop counts are your own business.If you did this I think Multiple Accounts would not be a problem for me.

If you left geos/troop counts on in alliances I could not be 100% sure about a new member joining the alliance and would always feel like Im being cheated when I lose.

[HouseOfRothschild]

If you did this I think Multiple Accounts would not be a problem for me.

If you left geos/troop counts on in alliances I could not be 100% sure about a new member joining the alliance and would always feel like Im being cheated when I lose.

I absolutely agree that hiding geos/troops counts in alliance would make this a lot closer to being an "air tight", problem free addition. Seeing that so far the "for" out number the "against", I certainly hope that this becomes an option for us, perhaps for next round.

One other thing I just thought of. I know Luke stated that the more "restrictions" placed on this new addition, the more reason to maybe just leave things as they are now; but one restriction I could see maybe being needed would be making it so accounts on the same IP could not attack each other. I wouldn't have too much difficulty rising in the player rankings if I made 10 other accounts and had them all attack my "main" account constantly.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I absolutely agree that hiding geos/troops counts in alliance would make this a lot closer to being an "air tight", problem free addition. Seeing that so far the "for" out number the "against", I certainly hope that this becomes an option for us, perhaps for next round.

One other thing I just thought of. I know Luke stated that the more "restrictions" placed on this new addition, the more reason to maybe just leave things as they are now; but one restriction I could see maybe being needed would be making it so accounts on the same IP could not attack each other. I wouldn't have too much difficulty rising in the player rankings if I made 10 other accounts and had them all attack my "main" account constantly.

Good point. We would need to change the player ranking script so it checks IP and eliminates dupe attacks. While we're at it we should check for same alliance and eliminate those attacks as well.

[HouseOfRothschild]

I agree. Same alliance attacks should be off-limits as well dude. Good catch, I didn't even think of that one.

[tony bennett]

I feel that allowing multiple accounts will kill the game.
Look at all of the problems the game had had over the years, with this that and the other problem.
The mods currently do a good job eliminating the potential for cheating and this option would make their job nigh on impossible.

Just my two cents worth, which is why my vote was no.

[RagingMongoose]

*Sighs heavily*, ok, where to start?! Let's do a good ol' fashioned points list, one for positive, one for negative. Not that anyone will read a post this long, however at least if this idea is implemented then I'll be able to say "I told you so" when it goes horrendously wrong.

The positive points to this idea:

1) More donatorships - this is an important point that shouldn't be underestimated. If insanity does take hold and this is implemented, all accounts on an IP must be donators in my opinion. Luke, the reason for this is that an already common in-game event is for a non-donator to plant, blow their 5k starting geos on an alliance, then they disappear forever. This was always obvious when WTO did it due to account name conventions caused by the language barrier, and over time WTO got an unfair amount of flak for it. Let's be honest though, there are many alliances who have done this in the past, it's just more difficult to track when a language barrier isn't in place.

2) Possibly more activity - although 1 player only has 2 hands and could only do so much at once.

3) Less admin overhead in finding/investigating dupe accounts - not necessarily a good thing in my view, but let's look at it from an "efficiencies" business perspective.

The negative points:

1) We all know the allegedly legitimate dupe accounts out there at the moment, between us all then we could come up with 90% of the accounts in the game that exist in this fashion. Many of these were no doubt controlled by real people at the point of registration, however I could name at least 20 accounts that now clearly have the same person controlling behind that lovely little public IP address of theirs. They're a scourge on the game, a major negative point for me and many others out there, and they're the 'elephant in the room' at all times on these forums - a massive problem that we're not allowed to speak about, and when anyone attempts to they get punished, let alone when they succeed like I did and they get muted and threatened with bans. It's a pathetic situation already and so many rules have been brought in to fight this problem that staff insist doesn't exist (i.e. no bank or resource transfers), it's actually a bit of a joke around here amongst players - but hey, that's the only way to deal with the ridiculous, make a joke out of it, right?

Are we seriously going to say "that's fine, crack on, don't worry that we've already had to reduce the in-game features and put time and effort in on that so you can't affect the game so dramatically, in fact now we'll make a new rule up just to justify your existence"?

2) Whilst more activity might be a result, what's the point if that's all one player's activity behind the scenes? Wouldn't it be better to come up with ways to make it so that 1 player account can ramp up their geo income (without having to jewel - I'm thinking along Prophet's multiple resource plants idea or geos for donatorship idea), rather than having several accounts per 1 player, all of which are pretty much limited to the same income per round?

3) Spying won't increase and therefore, the hope of making the game more interesting won't happen. All you will get is alliances with more members in, only a percentage of which have real individuals behind them, and then a load of merc style accounts out there.

Alliances don't trust new players already and there's a major issue where most are loathed to take them in. Given that the majority of new players who stick around this place are those who join an alliance, are we seriously suggesting we exponentionally exacerbate the player retention issues we have by making it even more difficult for legitimate new players to find an alliance?

4) Inactivity. Given that the majority of this game's members continue to log in round after round just so they can look at a pretty little city list when they login, and war is frowned upon for the most part, what's the point of giving players multiple accounts? Most players already don't fight and go to war with their 1 account, do we really just want them to have X amount more accounts sat there saving?

5) Even less opportunity for player growth and new alliances to form. New players who sign up won't want to pay for multiple accounts at first. However, they will enter an environment where a lot of veteran players and alliance have multiple players in them. How will they ever compete? That's right, they won't, and we'll lose even more players.

6) Crap players need multiple accounts, good players don't. At the moment, for the majority of the time, a player can shine because they are good. If they are willing to jewel and have the time available, a player can make a real impact on the game. I did this when I started, many others have done it before and since, and R2D2 is the most recent example I would give. Leaving newbies aside, each round generally has a player that stands out - maybe they've had more time for that round, maybe they've just really got into the game that round - regardless, they stand out but are unlikely to bother having multiple accounts. This idea would stop all of that - new and veteran players wouldn't be able to excel unless they too had multiple accounts. There would be no point playing unless you could max your player account limit.

7) Many stick around here and continue to return for the social side of the game. What's the point in allowing a load of accounts to exist who won't ever respond or get involved in the banter?

8) Given the age we now live in with multiple devices allowing a single individual to have multiple IP addresses already, is this really a good idea? Ok, resource planting would be difficult, but with Luke's work to allow GEWar KML's on mobile devices then this will presumably become easier. I'm not even a gadget freak yet I have a personal mobile phone, a work mobile phone, a home computer, and a work computer - all with different public IP's already - and that's before we get to the technology in my next point. If I kept all separate, I could already have 2 accounts easily without anyone knowing, with Luke's work on mobile devices, that will soon be 4. By allowing multiple accounts and depending on the limits in place, I could then have 15, 20, 50 accounts? Seems like madness to me, but then I only have 1 account when I could have 2 without any inconvenience already. Some around here already abuse this and don't see it as madness, so why increase the problem?

9) Given that as already said, anyone with a bit of time, money, and a brain can have multiple IP addresses on the same device (different to point 8), how will allowing all to have multiple accounts improve this situation? In 5 minutes time, I could have 100 different accounts and there's no way GEPolice would ever find out, why make it so that I could have 500 or 1000 accounts for no additional effort/cost beyond registration time? I know, there's a limit to what one person could have time to do, but I'm using extreme numbers to demonstrate the point.

That seems to cover the main areas given that this is the first I've thought about it really. Basically, my opinion is that if there is a problem - and there really is a major problem with this - it's better to resolve the root cause of that problem than to make a rule to allow the bad points to continue legitimately. Appeasement never works, at some point you always end up having to sort out the root problem, it's just that by appeasing then odds are that problem will be a billion times bigger than when it was first identified. Think there's a problem with multiple accounts existing without real players behind them? Easy, ban them on that suspicion - even better, ban them when 99% of the game agrees theres a problem. Want me to send the list of accounts over now for bans to be given out, or can I name them here without a mute/ban? haha

My suggestion would be to keep the current model for multiple accounts in place, but force all accounts on the same IP to be donators now anyway. If new players on that IP address want to trial the game, see what it's about, well they live/work with someone who can show them that. That would alleviate some of the current problem, plus I would then put a limit on the number of accounts that can exist under 1 IP address as well. Personally, I just don't see how allowing multiple accounts per player as standard, regardless of whether there are actual individuals behind them, can help this game or be of benefit to it.

However, I guess this all boils down to 1 question in reality:

Is the additional income from forcing multiple accounts on the same IP to be donators worth the cost of destroying everything that this game should be about and everything it should be trying to achieve?

Only 1 person can answer that question, and that is Luke because he has to pay for this game to exist.

[HouseOfRothschild]

Damn, Rage. You have brought up some seriously valid points. Makes me look at how I originally seen this a little bit differently.

[RagingMongoose]

Damn, Rage. You have brought up some seriously valid points. Makes me look at how I originally seen this a little bit differently.

Thanks. The truth though is that there's no right or wrong answer to this debate. The posts so far who have said it's a good idea aren't wrong as such, however those posters just aren't as pesimistic as I am.

Whilst I have no doubt that the majority of people would only bother with multiple accounts if they had the time, the fact is the current multiple account rules are flouted by a minority, and if legitimised, new rules would be abused too. The difference is that the current rules are somewhat restrictive, whereas multiple accounts as discussed in post 1 would simply increase the current problem for the minority who abuse the system and it then introduces the current problem to all players in my opinion. Basically, those who abuse the system will abuse it more, plus every player in the game will become part of the current problems that exist due to a minority of multiple accounts, except it will be multiplied across all players potentially.

My post caters for the minority who would abuse the system, however unfortunately it is the minority who should always be considered for areas such as this because the effect they could have in-game would be significant and potentially devastating.

[King_Diamond]

Since there seems no possibility to control the creation of duplicate accounts using the standard registration methods, what do you think of the following?

1. Freeze all existing accounts.

2. Confirmation of accounts has to be done by mail (not email, lol)
You get it? I mean letters :-)
Accounts that are not confirmed in 3 months will be deleted.

3. New registrations may be done the standard way to try the game out first. Only Level 1 will be allowed then. In order to move up to Level 3 you need to confirm your account as mentioned above.

[Luke]

lol. Ok I'm never going there. By mail? :p. Who would bother? And it's too much work and costs too much.

I remember ebay did it in the past, but stopped it as the costs were too high and new registrations too low. And thats ebay...who would ever do that for just a game they don't know?

The main reason I'm interested in the idea is that right now it's too easy to create new accounts we can't do anything about. So the players that play fair have the disadvantage.

And ofcourse some stuff would need to be changed(like alliance info on geos and troops). I wouldn't put too many restrictions on it because the more complicated it becomes, the less it actually changes and the more cheating will still exist. It isn't an idea that is created so we can have more cheating. It's to minimize the cheating. We stopped a lot of cheating with no bank transfers, and if this could ever become possible we could have even less.
That said; it's still just an idea. And I like the feedback on it.

For the ones raising concerns: those points have also all been spoken about behind the screens. We didn't bring this out blindly. We talked about it for a very long time before polling it in public. We made lists of positive and negative points and debated those thoroughly.

[Ptah]

@RMongoose: you want to kill us with huge and heavy texts and explanations. :focus

you left not many pros for "brothers which can't play" ;)

[Ptah]

lol. Ok I'm never going there. By mail? :p. Who would bother? And it's too much work and costs too much.

I remember ebay did it in the past, but stopped it as the costs were too high and new registrations too low. And thats ebay...who would ever do that for just a game they don't know?


for sure, paper is in the past.

[Luke]

By mail has been one I wished was possible many times in the past. So it's not like it was the most bizarre idea. But it's just really not possible.

[King_Diamond]

Luke, you can't compare ebay with gewar.net. At the moment we have 400 accounts which are used. In case there are dup accounts the number is even lower. So where is the problem? You don't pay the bill for the letters.

[Peonboss]

Ok. I am amazed. Long winded boy changed my mind. And that is not an easy thing to do usually.

No time to post really I'll try later but in bullet points.

Freeze accounts who are in question

Talk to them on phone

All dup ips donations.

No legal 2nd. Only for fam. And such.

Complete crap they are hard to track or prove.

[RagingMongoose]

Long winded boy changed my mind.

Is that me? Ah Peon, you and your pet names for me, it's ok you think I'm awesome, you can just admit it haha.

I did warn my post was long, but I would also argue it was thorough.

Freeze accounts who are in question

Talk to them on phone

All dup ips donations.

No legal 2nd. Only for fam. And such.

The problem is that illegitimate dupe accounts will never be eliminated. The massive game developers out there have an issue with multiple accounts, and they have budgets running into millions/billions of dollars and teams of people devoted to finding them.

Even if you made people on the same IP address send a letter, phone, or even send copies of passports (I've seen this before), it doesn't matter. All you are doing is capturing proof that the person exists at the point of registration. Unless you did this every time they logged on, which isn't even possible in reality, the fact is that the registering "dupe" player doesn't have to keep playing. As I've said already, in many cases around GEWar, I don't doubt that the dupe account was once owned by a real person, however I refuse to believe they still are now.

Back to the original point of this thread now. One of the best ways to reduce the temptation is to make people part with their hard-earned cash, so the introduction of all multiple accounts on the same IP address having to be donators is definitely a good idea in my view. However, in my opinion, overall it's best just to accept that a percentage of players will always abuse the rules, but to make it difficult and inconvenient for them to do so, with bans for anyone caught. Adding a rule to allow all players to have multiple accounts certainly doesn't achieve that, in fact it plays right into the hands of those who already abuse the system.

[Luke]

I would never ever go into that kind of registration procedure or chase multiple accounts that way. I just wouldn't even want to bother with it.

We were aiming for less interference with crew. Actually having phonecalls with people would create way more work. Same goes for registration by mail.

There is not 1 hair on my head that would even ever think about going that way :p.

[RagingMongoose]

I can understand that Luke, but just opening up the floodgates and allowing everyone to have multiple accounts is surely too far the other way.

I mean murders are a pain in the arse for the police to deal with and are only committed by a minority, but you don't see murder being made legal to save on admin time. Now ok, I'm arguing socratically here, however multiple accounts in GEWar are at the extreme end of the issues around here and in my opinion, the issue requires very tight controls and restrictions as to avoid the game becoming a borderline unplayable farce.

[Luke]

I think a lot underestimate the amount of multiple accounts there are right now. This is not just to save time. It was actually brought up to compensate other players.

[RagingMongoose]

I don't think any veteran players underestimate it as such and I got the impression from your first post (and the fact that Prophet even suggested it) that it must be as a kind of "it's so rife, why don't we just open it up a bit."

Again, I can understand that approach, but I don't personally think it will help. Out of the 300 or so active players showing on the hitpoints killed leaderboard, I'd estimate about 50 of them share IP's. Given that I know of at least 20-25 who I would deem as suspicious, I'm just doubling that to cover who I don't know about. Could be wrong, it genuinely wouldn't surprise me if it was more.

Luke - Not sure if you'll want to answer this or even be able to, but it's a valid question so I'll ask anyway:

Out of the accounts that share an IP address, what percentage do you suspect only have 1 player, a puppet master if you will, behind those multiple accounts rather than genuine individual players?

[HouseOfRothschild]

The main reason I'm interested in the idea is that right now it's too easy to create new accounts we can't do anything about. So the players that play fair have the disadvantage.



^^^ This right here is probably the biggest reason, aside from family members being able to play, that I would like to see this happen.

If as you say Luke, it is near impossible to stop the cheating accounts, then at least leveling the playing field for the rest of us is the least that can be done.

@Rage's points
I really must say that I agree 100% with your thoughts on the cons about this. My only thing is that if at the end of the day the cheating accounts can't be eliminated, then we the people that do play fair, should at least be equipped with the same "ammo".

[RagingMongoose]

@Rage's points
I really must say that I agree 100% with your thoughts on the cons about this. My only thing is that if at the end of the day the cheating accounts can't be eliminated, then we the people that do play fair, should at least be equipped with the same "ammo".

Yeah, I'm of the same 'end of discussion' view myself and if all else fails, the playing field needs to be levelled and multiple accounts need to be available to all.

Before that though, I guess the main aim of my posts is to explore other options to control the issue, and in the process of doing so, save myself having to plant resources, convert resources, manage armies, and plan attacks for multiple accounts - should I ever stoop to this sad, pathetic level before just quitting instead of course. Don't get me wrong, I love this game, I really do, but I just think it's a pretty sad state of affairs if we end up going down a route where to play and compete, you need multiple accounts.

[HouseOfRothschild]

@Rage

I agree that it is a sad state of affairs. I am just trying to look at the positives, in being the level playing field. I also look at the more action we could gain from this, with the obvious more geos, more troops, more battles. I mean 100% I wish this didn't even need to be discussed, but if others are using multiples, then we at least need the option.

[Luke]

I play a couple of online games. What I noticed that in the past, those online games warned about multiple accounts. Like Neopets(yeah shame on me but I played it).

However these days now it seems most online games have given up on that. I think every webbased game gets cheated on. I read that even World of Warcraft is full of duplicate accounts, and that is a pay to play game.

So the main thing is that it's impossible. The only alternative is to allow no other player on same IP. Which could hurt as then collegeaus and family members aren't allowed to play. So I would never go down that road. I know some great players around here that are real people, and are collegeaus.

Allowing multiple accounts was in my opinion the most ridiculous idea ever, and when Prophet brought it up I thought he lost his marbles. But later I had to accept that instead of ridiculous, it might be brilliant. As we've discussed all other options and they all lead to nothing. I can't imagine there's an idea out there that hasn't been discussed. We've looked at tons of other games also.

Though as I said before it's still just an idea. And if it would ever work, things(in-game) would need to be tweaked. And if there are people that can give enough cons that we overlooked, it could happen that we even stop thinking about it at all.

For example I have another problem:
What when a player gets muted? What happens to the other accounts? What when a player gets banned?

[RagingMongoose]

Well that was my motivation for asking the question regarding the percentage of total multiple accounts that you suspected to just have one owner.

I mean if we're talking 50 accounts who share an IP and 10% of those are suspected to be just one individual behind multiple accounts then that's not really a reason to change things. If we were talking 75% then that's a different matter. Similarly, if I've drastically underestimated the number of accounts who share IP's then that's also a concern, particularly if say 50% of 150 accounts were suspected to only have 1 person behind their group of accounts.

For me, without knowing the scale of the problem with some hard stats then it's pretty difficult to assess whether multiple accounts for all is a necessary evil, or just a reaction to a problem that whilst not good itself, could potentially be far worse if this idea is implemented.

[RagingMongoose]

The last thing in the world we want, in my humble opinion, is the option to be able to cheat so that we can combat any perceived cheaters.

Definitely where I'm coming from on this one too.

[Luke]

And exactly how I reacted too at first.

And then after a long time of thinking I softened up to it a little. Started seeing it different.

Right now everyone has 1 account except for the fact that a lot have more.
Basically gameplay would change. With this idea you would have 5 characters. Its up to you if you want to stick to 1. Its up to you if you have 2 and the other one is played by your collegeau. Or whether you play 3. Or if all 5 are played by others. Every IP would get 5 characters.

After I softened up to it I agreed it would make the game more fair. Still we discussed this for more than 4 months behind the screens before polling it in public.
It isnt something just thought of, and also not something I will enforce unless everything is discussed and I would have no doubts.

[Luke]

Guys....take it to trashtalking please. This is gewar support.

*posts moved to alliance trashtalk

[tony bennett]

Guys....take it to trashtalking please. This is gewar support.

*posts moved to alliance trashtalk



Luke, you lost me. I was pointing out a fact relevant to the debate not talking trash.
But it's your euro !

[Luke]

Well not the way you pointed it out ;). Reread your post. You can copy and paste it though, but just keep it serious in here.

So no "No of course you don't, unless your a drug dealer dude. :-)" or:
"Mouse, dude.
I applaude your obvious commitment to the game and I appreciate you are probably going to say that you don't have to experience having yer leg cut off to know it's going to hurt
BUT"

I moved it because that can too easily make this support forum a trashtalk forum, while I really want to keep this part serious.

[tony bennett]

Rather than take this Off Topic I will pm you in the morning.

[Jeff Lebowski]

So the main thing is that it's impossible. The only alternative is to allow no other player on same IP. Which could hurt as then collegeaus and family members aren't allowed to play. So I would never go down that road. I know some great players around here that are real people, and are collegeaus.


I had a much larger response to Rage's epic, book-like post of pros and cons, but then I remember how much it won't be read...so I scrapped it.

Anyway, all games have dupes/cheaters. Even ones that have major budgets. I know what they try, and I know why it fails. It fails because the idea of dupe thwarting is based on genuine IP...Which just won't work.

In this game, we can go one of 3 ways. Either allow dupes, keep going as we have been, or we go draconian. We ban anyone sharing an IP address and remove that part from the rules. People will look at the second option as "staff removing stuff" instead of "players abused so staff had to remove stuff", and it will make life around here very quiet.

I find just as many negatives in the current structure as I do in the allowed and draconian methods. However, the reason the idea was brought up was to possibly find a middle ground that made it fair for all players of the game. My idea was to just remove the part about multiple accounts/multiple IPs from the rules and go on with our lives. Let the players slowly figure out that this wasn't part of the rules anymore. Judging by the language and rule infractions handed out around here...I doubt anyone reads the rules...So it could take awhile to find its way to mass exposure.

[Melek~Taus]

I can see it now. Alliances with 10 people in it, only opperated by 1 or 2 players.

I for one choose the last option. HELL NO! The idea behind this game is

1) to play in conjuction with Google Earth®

2) to play along with people from across the world.

By allowing multiple accounts, you assure that the second idea is squashed. Yes, a number of folks will stay single account, though think of the new alliances that will form up.

ONLY EXAMPLE!!!
3rd could consist of just Kaltho, JW and say Laevus. They each have 4 accounts. Now, when you attack one guy, you are in fact taking on 1 guy with his/her other 3 accounts.

The game is supposed to be about team play and using strategy and communications to win the day. With multiple accounts, you omit that. There is no communications because you can be the whole alliance.

This is an old idea, one which I am completely against. There is no difference between this, and have a program running to jewel for you. One person will have one account to have the cities, the other to use geos to make the troops, the other to save for rainy days. It's all about geos, and the fact is, 4 accounts for one person means 4X the geos for one person. If you allow that, then allow jeweling scripts.

Oh, and I am against that too, so I am just showing the stupidity of this idea. Disagree all you want, but it's a geo hog idea.

:hand

Ps....those 11 that voted yes....better you be newbs. I'd hate to see vets voting in such a manner.

[outofnowhere]

The last thing I would like to see happen in this game is admin sponsered and wholesale sponsered cheating.....with no questions asked, let me think abunch of accounts at home, abunch af accounts at work, abunch of accounts on cell for one guy....etc. I hope anyone with even half working brain would not sujest this stupitidy....:rtfm

[outofnowhere]

I am 100% with you Melek ! Any OLD of old time players who could agree with this probly are all ready cheating. JUST the way I see it !!!!!;ipunk

[Jeff Lebowski]

The last thing I would like to see happen in this game is admin sponsered and wholesale sponsered cheating.....with no questions asked, let me think abunch of accounts at home, abunch af accounts at work, abunch of accounts on cell for one guy....etc. I hope anyone with even half working brain would not sujest this stupitidy....:rtfm

Lmao. If i said that if you knew that this is already possible and happening...what would you say then? You might say that its a staff problem but I would counter that the only way they can stop it is multiples on same ip. Your scenario are different accts per ip.

The idea was thought up by an old player...like you... that analyzes real game data and is sick of the outofnowheres and meleks of the game getting such a tilted game.

[laoma]

well, I am not that old player......but I'm a vet and I voted yes

actually I feel tired and frustrated to see that kinda poll after what was posted in the past days....

that poll is 100% meaningless at that stage...because it won't help at all

I name that hiding before the bigger problems......

very frustrating to read all the post from the past days and then having that poll popping up....

[outofnowhere]

I remember in the old days, Whirlpool alliance, Mark of Shame, Alpha Omega and others, many worked at the same IP place, and others had some yfi clubs, but had to get permission to operate each account there through the help desk and with a vouch from another player.The system worked on trust. I guess alot has changed sence then. No one can be trusted. Alot less admins giving there time away. I just do not think this is an option.

[outofnowhere]

Jeff I know all this is happing, but how can giving each cheater alot more accounts at each IP doing any good? I voted your nuts !!! ;soap

[Jeff Lebowski]

Jeff I know all this is happing, but how can giving each cheater alot more accounts at each IP doing any good? I voted your nuts !!! ;soap

Fedup...not nuts. I remember the old mos btp rcmp nar days when this wasn't only frowned upon but swifty destroyed by all alliances. We used to protect each other...oh how times have changed.

[HouseOfRothschild]

To address those that keep worrying about the disadvantages this would give them, and advantages others would now have, allow me to say this. Right now the only advantages are held by those that have multiples. We the single account users are the disadvantaged. If this rule became law, then we at least will be on level ground. There is no advantage if everyone can do this. The only unfairness is and would be if multiples were not permitted. Then we the fair, the "unscripted", would be at a loss.

[tony bennett]

I am so against the idea of allowing multiple accounts can a mod, if at all possible, please change my vote to:
No, are you out of your freaking minds?


Thanks In Advance.

[thomas85]

I am so against the idea of allowing multiple accounts can a mod, if at all possible, please change my vote to:
No, are you out of your freaking minds?


Thanks In Advance.
Sorry, too lazy to search the thread... what did you vote in the first place? Of course, I can change your vote then.

[Peonboss]

Sorry, too lazy to search the thread... what did you vote in the first place? Of course, I can change your vote then.

Thomas, not singling you out, just hammering a point made earlier in thread.
If you can not bother to read every word on every thread every freaking day you should not be a mod.

Sorry but that's your only reason to exist.

[thomas85]

Ha! That was exactly the comment I was expecting to be made by someone! Thanks peon. Point taken. The truth is, I have read this thread and I'm also intensively thinking about the matter (no lie) but I did not write down the opinion of every user while reading. Also I didn't observe a fundamental change of opinion posted by tony.

[brett]

The current system keeps the honest people honest. It's a shame that there are just some players that play that way and it is very difficult to police. Sure, maybe there's also a sister, brother, mother, and goldfish that play along side, but I don't think that's always the case. IP addresses are way too easy to get as very few people are assigned static addresses.

It's simply a yes or no vote. I believe if you add conditions, we never have the original problem fixed. Only donor accounts? No. An arbitrary limit? No. Any type of restriction or regulation is the same as keeping the original regulation that the fringe will exploit.

I predict that, if enabled, there will be a surge in accounts. We would plant homebases in multiple strategic locations. Some of these homebases are single use to perhaps hit quickly hit a city. It could also be used for some quick anonymous attacks. We could also attack naps without reprisal. Of course, nobody would really know who's attacking whom so I doubt we'd see all out war between two alliances. I can just imagine Spyware's thread now "War declared on Deleteme Temp Alliance 321 -- C3P0 and Itschy have attacked us for the last time..."

I'm not really for or against this as any rule change creates an impact that we just have to work around. Allow it for the next reset and take it away if it doesn't work.

[RagingMongoose]

Firstly, let me just say that I HATE this idea.....with a passion.....honestly, I absolutely despise it.

Ok, now after reading some of the other comments made here and thinking about it a bit, I guess I have come round to the concept somewhat. Afterall, if this area really is being abused that much that Luke and Prophet are seriously suggesting this solution, I think that's enough to show it needs some attention.

Previous comments are also correct about the fact that GEWar or other games have tried a number of different rules and features to eliminate this problem and none have been successful. So maybe we do need to look at more extreme measures - possibly the unthinkable of what's been suggested here.

Have I mentioned I hate this idea? Oh I have, good, just checking haha.

Brett is right really. Without trialling it for a round then we'll never know the full impact or what the game will be like. I think that's a good suggestion and there isn't much to lose by trying it.

To those who are abusing the current rules, you really do need to examine your lives. I mean seriously, this is a game. A game is meant for fun, possibly with an element of achievement/competition involved. Sure it all boils over here and there now and again, but where's the satisfaction if you're cheating?! Re-examine your priorities in life and get a grip. You know who you are, and just so you know, between us then we all know who most of you are too!

Did I say I hate this idea?! :p

EDIT - You know what's really interesting? The absence of certain posters who normally have a lot to say, especially on threads like this, who due to the topic are silent. Interesting.....veeeeeerrrrryyyyyy interesting!

[tony bennett]

Sorry, too lazy to search the thread... what did you vote in the first place? Of course, I can change your vote then.


I voted No.
Despite all and every comment I am totally against the idea and therefore think everyone must be out of their minds even thin king about it.
regards

[Luke]

Tony: But you agree there is a problem? Currently? One that practically all webbased games face. To which none of those that have the same problem could find a solution?

And those against the idea:
I know where you come from as I was the whole first month this was brought up behind the screens. I didn't even want to discuss it.

But then I saw it as the 5 character idea I described some posts back. And that looked like a sweet solution to a problem. Which is not only a solution but could become a game strategy.

I'm not affraid of multiple IP's at all. I'm not now either. Those are usually the ones getting caught. It's the ones that keep expanding friends, collegeaus and family members(mind though: there are some that really have collegeaus or family members playing) which we can't do anything about. Creating fake accounts is the easiest thing and your easiest way of getting an advantage.

Others are right though that we can't know unless we try for a round. But I'm on the other hand also for taking it slow and thinking about it thoroughly.

ps: did I mention that for the whole first month I voted for 'are you out of your freaking minds?'?

[tony bennett]

Tony: But you agree there is a problem? Currently? One that practically all webbased games face. To which none of those that have the same problem could find a solution?

Luke dude,
I am not being sarcastic when I say, If you wanted everyone to vote yes, why give two options to vote no.

For me the game isn't broke so I currently do not see the need to fix it and I reiterate:
The last thing in the world we want, in my humble opinion, is the option to be able to cheat so that we can combat any perceived cheaters.



Others are right though that we can't know unless we try for a round. But I'm on the other hand also for taking it slow and thinking about it thoroughly.


Odd, I must have missed this last bit somehow when quoting you.

I believe with hand on heart that once we bring this change in it will be foreever and not just a round.
This needs examing more closely and from a different perspective.
The professional in me can see something entirely different again that isn't for expounding upon here.
My gamers side will always say NO. I make no apologies for being the odd one out here.

[RagingMongoose]

I make no apologies for being the odd one out here.

I don't think you're the odd one out Tony, I absolutely agree with you when looking at this from the perspective of a gamer and someone who has a competitive streak. However, I've also forced myself to look at it from a different perspective.

Firstly, for Luke and Prophet to put forward an idea as insane as this, maybe the problem is bigger than you or I could ever realise.

Secondly, when have you ever known Luke to post a thread like this where only 11 unique posters (ignoring Staff responses) have replied? This thread has had 930 views, 71 responses, with 14 people responding, with only 11 of which being players?! 2 of those 11 are newbies too, not that their opinion doesn't count, it very much does, however this is the type of thread that any self-respecting player and regular forum poster should be straight on replying. It seriously concerns me that there haven't been more replies, especially given some of the names missing given their track record for forum posting and threads like this.

I guess the 2nd point has just made me think that there's a reason why Luke is pushing this that we aren't aware of or can't see. For that reason, and that reason alone, I'm willing to entertain conversation on the topic.

[Peonboss]

I have much to say but nothing to add. Cheaters are going to cheat. This will just multiply it by 5.

[Cash]

I have much to say but nothing to add. Cheaters are going to cheat. This will just multiply it by 5.I agree with you peon. I just want people to play fair and if you have a multiple account at least have them in the same alliance!

[SJ]

In an ideal world, everyone would play fair, but on a realistic point, there are some who wish to win at any cost. We know some will still kick the backside out of it, by perhaps hiding behind ip's etc. I can honestly tell you, some already do that now. But this was brought to the players for discussion, to see if you could all see anything more than we could. This is stillvery much a discussion topic and really not something which is definately going to be input.I agree with you peon. I just want people to play fair and if you have a multiple account at least have them in the same alliance!

[Cash]

I don't know what to add... other than "its all about the geos baby!" -Puff Daddy lol

[Luke]

Tony:
I want people to be able to vote no. And I heard some good reasons. Although most reasons I read aren't valid.

I will point it towards your post:
a) You say there is no problem. It isn't broke. While currently there is a really big problem. Which needs to be fixed
b) I put in 'no' so people can come up with alternatives. Maybe there's a brilliant idea out there
c) It isn't allowing people to cheat. With the 5 character idea it isn't cheating anymore. It's altering the game which means that it isn't cheating anymore. It's way safer than the current system. The rules are then much clearer to everyone, and punishments can be handed out without there being a gray area. Then there is only black and white.

As said: i was an advocate for no, until I saw (and allowed myself to see) the other side.

Ragingmongoose, Peonboss and Tony:
Can you simply tell me how the 5 character system has more flaws than the current system? I think if you answer that, we have a clearer discussion than when we all start repeating ourselves.

ps: no other reasons than that the problem with fake accounts is bigger than you suspect. Well one reason perhaps: if I want to start advertising, I can see the problem explode even. As said before...there is no black or white around here...just gray...in an area that needs clear rules we are lacking.
And...if I really wanted to push this I would've just done so. I put my own cons in post 1 already, meaning I myself see some problems. It's a discussion. And when everyone starts off being positive, I show them some of the negative points. And when all treat it negative, I want to show the positive side as well. Just to keep the discussion going and hope we can learn more from it.

[Joedeuces124]

Bottom line is this is a good way to blance out the fairness. There are IMO a few people allready playing multiple accounts and claiming them to be collegues ,brothers, sisters etc etc. If everyone was allowed to do this is would be fair for everyone. As staff and as a vet player I support this idea 100%

[Peonboss]

People who cheat are going to cheat period. If they have went to the trouble to try and mask ips they will continue to. It won't be 5 it will be one person with 40.

And frankly sorry but I still think they can be caught pretty easy. Just takes a few hrs a day and work.

[tony bennett]

Luke,
I will do as you ask.
Can you do som ething for me in return please?


I would like you to use the VB Option for a news letter or an all member e-mail.

In it I would ask that you point out the 5 character system, include the link to this thread and ask evry player to visit and cast their vote. Post their opinion if they want or n ot as the case may be.
Obviously we all have different writing styles so the words in which you explain it will be yours not mine but please write from the midground .

Would you do that please?

As someone previously said the views,votes and posts so far are not truly reflective of the member base (donator status and non donator status alike) and I for one think this vote needs a clear winner as opposed to decison based on some proportional representaion vote.

[Luke]

An email to point to this thread? I think that would not be appreciated. I get some harsh words thrown at me when I email about a reset already, and that is more important.

I could make this a forced thread to read however. Then everyone who logs into the game will have to check it out.

Peonboss: Uncatchable. If you say your son is going to play, then you can unfortunately get away with anything. Even by posting under the wrong account(you can say you didn't notice he was still logged in). Or if you log out and he logs in(you say you use the same pc and take turns).

Know thought that even though I want to show the other side, because I feel it is underestimated by some vets mostly, I do take into account all that is being said.

[RagingMongoose]

Ragingmongoose, Peonboss and Tony:
Can you simply tell me how the 5 character system has more flaws than the current system? I think if you answer that, we have a clearer discussion than when we all start repeating ourselves.

Ok, ignoring the potential benefits and just answering your question Luke - For me, 4 main reasons:

1) I guess I just see this becoming a kind of nuclear arms race, just with multiple accounts. People playing properly with just 1 account will possibly be forced to get 2 accounts, maybe more, just to be able to compete. This means extra overhead in time for playing a game that is already pretty time intensive.

2) As the accounts arms race intensifies, people with 2 accounts will get 3, those with 3 accounts will get 4, and so on. It potentially becomes ridiculous, ruining any form of "individual" talent required.

3) Those cheats with 2 or maybe 3 dupe accounts at the moment can suddenly have 5 accounts. Admittedly everyone can, but the cheats have forced us to give them even more than they had already.

4) When someone cheats and gets multiple IP addresses, rather than just the 1 account per extra IP, they will now have 5 accounts per IP to cheat with. That could really cause an issue, and as Peon says, potentially this plan will just multiply the current problem by 5.

[tony bennett]

An email to point to this thread? I think that would not be appreciated. I get some harsh words thrown at me when I email about a reset already, and that is more important.

I could make this a forced thread to read however. Then everyone who logs into the game will have to check it out.



Ok then a forced thread, the basics are everyone should be afforded the opportunity to at least vote, I'm sure all would agree. (OT I'd like to know how you do that in VB4.1.2.)

I am still thinking about your five character system. I am stuck at the moment on "Why 5"?

[Cash]

I am still thinking about your five character system. I am stuck at the moment on "Why 5"?I would think that 5 is the avarage family size...

[Peonboss]

I disagree Luke. I think it is not just ip. I think you can tell 90% of dupe accounts by how they are played. When you look at login times. Refreshes and everything I think it is easy. That's how I caught a bunch.

[Peonboss]

This threads been up for a while. Of they don't read threads they don't get a vote. Sucks to be them.

[RagingMongoose]

One idea for consideration is around the work you've been doing on mobile GEWar Luke. Would it potentially be sensible to only allow resource planting on computers?

At the moment, resource KML's don't work on mobile devices anyway as far as I know, so it's as simple as not making a resource KML available for these. However, should it ever become possible to open the current GEWar KML's on mobile devices, could it be limited in the code to look for certain browsers or OS types that are only available on computers?

Just an idea I had, not sure how feasible it would be, however given that without resource planting an account is useless, it would certainly reduce the threat of multiple accounts being created using mobile devices.

[King_Diamond]

I think you would need a database where all activity and especially login times are saved. Then you need to find certain patterns. I don't know how hard this is to be programmed but it sounds manageable.

On another note, how good is geographical IP identification?

[Luke]

Login information is pretty useless when you have a family playing. It would be logic if log out and the other logs in etc. Or even if they play at exactly the same time or even at exactly the same time and pc. Peonboss, times have changed.

This idea however wasn't the only idea thrown out there to tackle the problem. And I'm not going to push anything. I'm going to give it a long thought also again. Thanks for the detailed feedback on both positive and negative points.

[HouseOfRothschild]

To me what this really boils down is that the ones that benefit most from this will be those with the most time to put into this game, whilst putting those with less time at more of a disadvantage. I personally am in a position in life right now that affords more free time than I want, so I see this from my side as a benefit. If I didn't have as much free time, maybe I would of voted "no". But to be honest I still would vote yes, and here is why.

Like Luke mentioned previously about how the "5 per" rule would give the gameplay more dynamics, and I think it not only would, but that would be a great thing. I would be in all favor for what Spy mentioned earlier in this thread, for the other four accounts to be under our main one, so people would know who they belonged too. This would be great in my opinion as these "other" 4 accounts could play different roles for the "lead" account. This would give lone players more of a fighting chance as well I think. Plus it would kill some of the waiting for geos or resources on one account to be able to do something in game. Now you could if you so wanted, have 5 times as much things to do.

And even if you are one of the players with little free time, you would still have the benefit of the other 4 accounts gaining resources and geos to help you in your game. Consider it making the game more challenging for everyone. Not too mention all the extra action. And for all the above written reasons, I honestly am very emphatic in my "yes".

[RagingMongoose]

Unfortunately the only way that activity would potentially increase is if the accounts were anonymous. If accounts 2 to 5 could be linked to original account 1, the fact is that it would be considered an act of war by account 1, regardless of whether it was accounts 2 to 5 who attacked. If it was anonymous, there wouldn't be any way to link the attack back to a specific individual and accounts would be free to attack wherever and whenever they wanted, only impacting the alliance they were a member of.

[HouseOfRothschild]

@Rage
You make a valid point. If one was wanting to play the game differently by using multiple accounts, then anonymity is an essential. Which people playing the different user accounts in that such manner could bring some problems, just like mentioned. But say if people would just use these "5" accounts as additions to their main ones, then it wouldn't be a problem. I look at it as adding 4 new "generals" under my command.

[thomas85]

I don't really look forward to reading flame wars of accusations of player A accusing player B of being the puppet master of accounts C, D, E, F and the reply, "no thats nonsense, and even if, it would be legal so shut up".

But I admit, that's really the least of the problems.

[HouseOfRothschild]

I don't really look forward to reading flame wars of accusations of player A accusing player B of being the puppet master of accounts C, D, E, F and the reply, "no thats nonsense, and even if, it would be legal so shut up".

But I admit, that's really the least of the problems.

Which is another good reason why I would say have the sub-4 accounts listed under the main.

[SJ]

Which is another good reason why I would say have the sub-4 accounts listed under the main.
Will not work, unfortunately those who have dups now do so not just because they want to win, they love the anonymity as well as the spying potential. They will then just go underground. PB as for a couple of hours work etc, there are so many ways now to hide cheating, I can honestly tell you, we know/suspect who the dups are, in many cases I would even happily put money on being correct, but far short of going to a persons house or webcamming them We cannot prove conclusively they are not who they say they are.

[RagingMongoose]

I can honestly tell you, we know/suspect who the dups are, in many cases I would even happily put money on being correct, but far short of going to a persons house or webcamming them We cannot prove conclusively they are not who they say they are.

How about a poll on whether we trust the Staff's suspicions on the dupe accounts and if consensus allows then we just ban them on the basis of that suspicion? Get my "Yes" vote!

This isn't the International Court of Justice here, suspicion based on decent admin stats/facts/observations/info would be good enough for me. Just ban them and pick up the fall out from the minority of cases that are wrong - seems like less work than implementing 5 accounts for all to me.

EDIT - If Staff wanted to be all nice and cuddly and fluffy before handing out the bans, they could even have a "Dupe Amnesty Month", where for one month and one month only, players can hand over their dupe accounts with no ban imposed on their primary account. I wouldn't do this, but then I'm not as nice as Staff are. If I was 99% sure of who dupes were then I'd sell any of their personal details I had to nasty people over the internet - just saying I would, not that you should haha.

[thomas85]

Well that suggestion sounds tempting but it wouldn't work out. A lot players will claim to be "false positives" and some of these will really be and there probably won't be a way to differentiate them. The consequences of excluding innocent people from the game are unpredictable. And the amnesty idea will just be abused to gain a clean slate again when reporting just some but not all of the dupe accounts.

Sorry, but these suggestions don't convince me more than the 5 accounts idea.

[RagingMongoose]

Well for me, it brings up the question I asked before again. What's the scale of the problem?

If we're talking 30 accounts, who cares, ban them all. If we're talking 75 accounts, well maybe there's something to think about. Of course, if it's half the playing population, 150 accounts, I agree that's risky.

Without knowing this, it's difficult for us to judge the positives or negatives of any proposed solution.

[SJ]

EDIT - If Staff wanted to be all nice and cuddly and fluffy before handing out the bans, they could even have a "Dupe Amnesty Month", where for one month and one month only, players can hand over their dupe accounts with no ban imposed on their primary account. I wouldn't do this, but then I'm not as nice as Staff are. If I was 99% sure of who dupes were then I'd sell any of their personal details I had to nasty people over the internet - just saying I would, not that you should haha.

Been done in the past, doesn't work !!

[RagingMongoose]

Been done in the past, doesn't work !!

I'm sure the ultimate solution of bans following would though haha.

Ok, so back to Luke's proposal. Let's say it was decided to implement it, what are the outstanding issues with it that Staff have identified for areas that need sorting out or decisions made?

[SJ]

I'm sure the ultimate solution of bans following would though haha.

Nope, honestly we had an amnesty, gave everyone the chanc to give up dups etc, and they still didnt, we had a few who were honest, but other than that people will always hide. Its about the winning mentality RM, you know yourself how everyone loves to brag they have the biggest blah de blah on here, its all about getting one over on your enemy.

[RagingMongoose]

Nope, honestly we had an amnesty, gave everyone the chanc to give up dups etc, and they still didnt, we had a few who were honest, but other than that people will always hide. Its about the winning mentality RM, you know yourself how everyone loves to brag they have the biggest blah de blah on here, its all about getting one over on your enemy.

An amnesty without a threat afterwards holds no motivation for anyone to own up. Now as discussed, my threat would be "own up or I sell your details to those lovely Nigerian criminals who hack Paypal accounts, steal your credit card details, go on a spending spree, and leave you with years of bad credit history and potentially as a bankruptee". Some would see this as extreme, I would say it's karma.

However, back to the matter at hand, if an amnesty is offered with no threat, of course people will hide. However, if the option to hide is removed as the end result and replaced with an option of being banned, I'm sure that will provide some motivation. If it doesn't, fair enough, you've only offered the amnesty out of goodwill and in an effort to reduce your complaints after the bans are actually implemented anyway. It's the final step of following through and banning all those reasonably suspected of having dupe accounts that's the crucial one, not the amnesty.

[SJ]

We did that RM, they were told if you do not tell us your dups we will ban your main and dup acct, and I can promise you the majority did not own up. We even banned the ones we knew afterwards.

Players would rather take the chance, I can say that 200% hand on my heart.

[Starbuck]

EDIT - You know what's really interesting? The absence of certain posters who normally have a lot to say, especially on threads like this, who due to the topic are silent. Interesting.....veeeeeerrrrryyyyyy interesting!

I guess this is meant for me?

Nice one, I am reading it all but don't really have something to add. I live with someone that plays the game, actually 2 that do but the one quit. I feel like I have to prove that this person exists and I know there's more players that feel the same.

I am against this and voted according to that, I will probably stop playing if this ever happens. I can't imagine fighting a 20 man alliance but it's 4 people running the alliance, it'll ruin the game for me.

[RagingMongoose]

We even banned the ones we knew afterwards.

I'm still waiting to hear the drawback to my proposed plan haha.

It could become a yearly event, kinda like GEWar's anniversary, except that instead of a resource rate raise you ban some dupes! We could even celebrate it in some way, I'm thinking along the lines of burning effigies of offending players, but hey, I'm open to suggestions! :D

I guess this is meant for me?

Actually, no. I'll say no more as Luke has requested no trashtalking on this thread.

[SJ]

I will probably stop playing if this ever happens. I can't imagine fighting a 20 man alliance but it's 4 people running the alliance, it'll ruin the game for me.

Whose to say this isnt happening now?

[Starbuck]

Whose to say this isnt happening now?

I know of one alliance that you might be talking about but no I honestly can't see that it's happening now.

[RagingMongoose]

I know of one alliance that you might be talking about but no I honestly can't see that it's happening now.

That's the problem though, us players can never be 100% sure. I agree with your point by the way, one of my major concerns is that in implementing the idea proposed in this thread, we lose the facility for an individual player to truly shine and perform well.

[Starbuck]

That's the problem though, us players can never be 100% sure. I agree with your point by the way, one of my major concerns is that in implementing the idea proposed in this thread, we lose the facility for an individual player to truly shine and perform well.

I'm not 100% sure but I am 90% sure that this isn't happening right now but it will most likely soon be happening :(

I don't want to say this but I am going to, the game will be lame. You'll be fighting the same people all over the place and off course the 5 accounts of one person will work together to get the 'main' account a top spot in player rankings. The fairness will go away so you might as well cancel top player\alliance etc

[Cash]

I don't want to say this but I am going to, the game will be lame. You'll be fighting the same people all over the place and off course the 5 accounts of one person will work together to get the 'main' account a top spot in player rankings. The fairness will go away so you might as well cancel top player\alliance etcThe game will not be lame. It will be exactly what it is today "FUN!" You will never know which account is tied to another.

[Starbuck]

The game will not be lame. It will be exactly what it is today "FUN!" You will never know which account is tied to another.

Actually if you think about it it'll not be as much FUN as it's now. Hopefully spying won't be an option with these accounts (info going away etc before this comes into play) so why bother having one account in each alliance. Just chuck them all together and when this happens you will soon learn who is playing with what accounts.
Example: The main account will use the other accounts to mainly hit and run a little while the main account picks up the cities and then the rest will go back to saving. It'll be fairly easy to find out who is who after a while.

[Melek~Taus]

So, if this is already occuring, the those that are doing it are shameless. They are those that cannot handle real life as the only way to get anywhere is to, let's face it...cheat. That's what this is right now. Multiple accounts is cheating. If you are doing this right now, then as far as I am concerned, it is a mirror image of your real life.

Now, should this be allowed? Again NO! This is funny because it is like real life. Where there are no losers, and we're all winners. To conform to an idea which we all years ago said was cheating is succumbing to the 'terrorist' if you will.

We have our standards, and to bow down to those that want cheating invites the next level of cheaters.

This is a none-issue. It is wrong and this thread should now be closed!

[Luke]

This is funny because it is like real life. Where there are no losers, and we're all winners.

Ah well that is one that is valid to me. That your account is you.

Still however we would in some way need a fix for a problem that is getting larger or in a while 50% of gewar players could be fake accounts.

I'm open to ideas. The confirm by mail is pretty solid, but not doable. Neither is registration by phone unfortunately.

[Cash]

Example: The main account will use the other accounts to mainly hit and run a little while the main account picks up the cities and then the rest will go back to saving. It'll be fairly easy to find out who is who after a while.Thats the way some play now. Are they cheats? maybe, maybe not. Everyone has his or her own playing style.

[Melek~Taus]

How about Facebook? Have them send you a friendship request to validate their identity. Once done, you can easily delete them from you list, or not accept them at all. Make yourself (and mods if needed) a GEWar facebook account to which ALL members must be friends to. You don't share any information with anyone. The account is just there for you to see who's real and not real. If a person has 0 friends, then they either are fake, to which you ask for more proof, or they just have no friends. To which we should all give a hug to them to cheer them up.

I know FB isn't the only one out there, but at least you, or those that would be accepting new players, would be able to tell who is real and who is a dupe.

Yes, no?

[Luke]

Well we were talking about something like that also behind the screens, Melek.

[Cash]

How about Facebook? You just lost a player if you want my facebook....

[Melek~Taus]

Are you one of those with no friends Cash?

Do you need a hug?

http://www.mdjunction.com/components/com_joomlaboard/uploaded/images/hugs05-446cc35671126ad37759657dddf7c764.jpg

"The thing however is that not everyone wants to be on facebook"

Which is why I mentioned that. Perhaps have one Mod on FB, another on whatever else is there, and so on. If not, you could always have a conversation with all those affiliated with the same IPs? You can tell when you are speaking with the same person. It's very hard to keep track of 4 conversations at once and get the right responses in time.

[Luke]

No Cash, he meant only for a multiple account to prove the identity(to prove it's a real person by showing his facebook or something).

The thing however is that not everyone wants to be on facebook.

[Cash]

Are you one of those with no friends Cash?

Do you need a hug? No Melek I have a 122 hahaha. Plus your my friend in Gewar. I think Facebook would be to personal for me. Im sorry. Shouldn't a payment through paypal be enough?

[Melek~Taus]

What about those who don't donate? How do you tell then? If this is only for donators, then there is no point to the topic, cause donators don't usually leave the game. Newbies who are starting out would only be more frustrated with vets killing them with 5 accounts. Imagine..

Peonboss
Peonbosses
Peonbooze
Peonbossing
Peonlover

Some people can't even stand one of him...imagine 5! :sho

[Luke]

Well ofcourse a paypal payment is even better. But can't force everyone to pay and not everyone has paypal.

[Luke]

Melek: this was never just for donators.

[Melek~Taus]

Melek: this was never just for donators.

That was in response to Cash.

[Cash]

Oh man this is a big deal... Iam sorry Luke that you and Gewar have to go through this.

How about a level just for donators?

[King_Diamond]

Now as discussed, my threat would be "own up or I sell your details to those lovely Nigerian criminals who hack Paypal accounts, steal your credit card details, go on a spending spree, and leave you with years of bad credit history and potentially as a bankruptee". Some would see this as extreme, I would say it's karma.

LMAO I really like that idea. You made my day man :D

[tony bennett]

Well I have had a think.
I've come back to post to find pictures of bears and other such mucking about on this a serious thread in GEWar Support !!!!

I am totatly opposed to the 5 character system.
The suggestion (thanks cash) that is potentially down to family size doesn't ring right.
Are we not still in the 2.4 Nuclear family age?

5 isn't the only prime number and that's about the only possible reason the number 5 has been muted. I cannot see any other explanation at this time.

Also, as a side issue, would having mutiple accounts give false membership figues somehow?

For me the game boils down to donators and non donators. Non donators are more than welcome but why should they be given 4 other accounts with which to attack?
If you want to introduce multiple accounts, let them be bought and identify each and every person that has paid for more than one account. Doing so would be easy.

AND why are we against spying per se all of a sudden? Don't we have spying in the real world? Spying is an honourable pastime for some people in this world ;-)

So I say again, No to the 5 charcater system, Yes to spying and yes to getting more donators onboard.

[Cash]

Yes to spyingYes to spying?? Do mean letting people know geo and troop counts? If so that is cheating! Now if you mean what a alliance is planning then I would think thats spying...

[RagingMongoose]

Make yourself (and mods if needed) a GEWar facebook account to which ALL members must be friends to.

I'd be out of here then. Unfortunately I'm not allowed a Facebook account - you see all my friends are real! That's right, I don't have 1242 "friends", I only have 74 contacts in my personal phone, and I'd only consider about 30 of them friends or family. The rest I safely file away in that section in my brain for "acquaintances", but I do actually see or talk to all of those 74 at least once a fortnight - thereby making them the exact opposite to what a Facebook friend is defined as.

Also, I know some very funny and entertaining people who I enjoy spending hours or days with at a time. However, I can safely say that none of those people I know are interesting enough that I'd want to see an update as to what they're doing every 5 seconds of the day. I'm not that interesting, and here's news for all those with Facebook accounts, neither are you. When you go to type that status update, just remind yourself of the following - NO ONE CARES!

If I wanted to feel popular at all times then I'd buy a dog. Fortunately I'm secure enough in myself and capable of going more than 3 seconds without checking to see how popular I am by a friend count - "oh look, I have 1500 friends, 1499 of which I've never met and only added so I could level up on Mafia Wars, and the other 1 is the profile I made for my pet gerbil Ralph - I'm so popular".

Facebook is for nerds, the friendless, and the weak. I refuse to use it and never will, no matter what justification people can think of.

Anyway, rant over, as you were haha.

[tony bennett]

Yes to spying?? Do mean letting people know geo and troop counts? If so that is cheating! Now if you mean what a alliance is planning then I would think thats spying...


No spying is NOT cheating.
How do you think your government get intelligence?

Course spying and assasination was more profitable when we had bank transfers but the real Multiple account cheats spoilt that game.


Facebook is for nerds, the friendless, and the weak.

Anyway, rant over, as you were haha.
FB is also for the retired.

[Luke]

Really RM? Here in Holland if you lose your job you are forced to open a facebook account. No facebook, no unemployement money. Same counts for linked-in.

It's because they aren't just social networks anymore. People find new jobs with it. People network and find new jobs through networks.
And for companies facebook is extremely valuable ofcourse.

A lot of companies here offer their facebook profile if you are interested in knowing more about them. Making personal websites become more obsolete around here.

But as to this case once again, the talks were about multiple accounts having to prove themselves...not every single user.

[Cash]

No spying is NOT cheating.

Well I think the opposite of you on that issue...If geos and troop counts get deleted off alliance pages I will not have to worry about it.

[RagingMongoose]

Really RM? Here in Holland if you lose your job you are forced to open a facebook account. No facebook, no unemployement money. Same counts for linked-in.

It's because they aren't just social networks anymore. People find new jobs with it. People network and find new jobs through networks.
And for companies facebook is extremely valuable ofcourse.

A lot of companies here offer their facebook profile if you are interested in knowing more about them. Making personal websites become more obsolete around here.

But as to this case once again, the talks were about multiple accounts having to prove themselves...not every single user.

Yep, really. I detest Facebook and all it stands for. Last time I checked then it would be considered a bad idea and inadvisable to put my personal information and endless details about my life in the hands of a spotty nerd with rich parents, who's never had a real job or any real life experience, who clearly has the morals of satin and a cold, dark, empty heartless soul! Still, I realise that whilst that makes me one of the only sane people left on the planet, it also makes people think I'm the weird one - oh how times have changed haha.

I suppose if I ran my own business then I'd have an account for that, but for me personally, why bother? I have a phone, can't think of any better or more efficient way to keep in contact with people than that. Besides, with phone calls, texts, and emails all there already to keep track of, not to mention IM chat programs like WhatsApp, I can't think of anything worse than adding yet another medium for people to contact me on and for me to have to keep track of.

Still, I suppose time will tell, no doubt there will be some reason like that in Holland that will force me to sign up, but until that point then I'll happily live without a Facebook account.

[Luke]

I know you don't open up easily when you have judged, RM, but it could very well be the future. From letter contact, to phone contact to text messaging and emailing...and then to something like facebook which will no doubt in the future be replaced by something more advanced. The more advanced thing of facebook vs email is that when you exchange profiles with someone, you are reminded of those persons regularly. While with email, or exchanging phonenumbers you often never contact eachother or even forget about eachother completely. It's common that when on vacation you meet new friends. Now when you exchanged phonenumbers or email addresses then in 95% or more of the time you would be out of contact very soon.

About sharing your private stuff with the world: You don't. You share it only with those you wish to share it with.

I know it won't change your mind, but just thought I'd throw it out here. Don't even know why as I don't want to actually change your mind...but you were so strong and aggressive in your post about facebook and who it is for that I wanted to show that thought is really old-fashioned imo.

*wow...talk about offtopic :p. Shame on me.

[Melek~Taus]

While I understand your sentament Rage, I will say this. I was against it to at the beginning. Though in the end, I found a lot of old friends that I have seen for a very long time. It was FB that allowed a reach out to these old chums. I ended up meeting with a few of them as result to catch up. So, I understand why you don't want to join up, but for those that use it for such reasons it can come in handy.

Next, it is not a matter of you 'have' to join and give out all your info. It was more a if you want more than one account on one IP, you have to prove that you aren't the same person. If you have one IP account, then you stay as you are now. Besides, you are only giving the info to Luke (example). He only would need to accept you as a friend, then delete when he is sure you are not the same person.

If Peon's wife joined the game, he and she would send requests to Luke's GE FB account (because I think that would be the practical approach for him), and he see's two individuals. You are on his list for say 10 minutes, then he kicks you out. When my lady was playing this game I sent a request to Princess I beleive with that knowledge that we were two people, otherwise my IP was blocked. Now with what I am reading is a number of people with dupe accounts, something has to be done to stop single players owning more than one account.

Again, only for those who have multiple accounts on the same IP. If you aren't one of them. Then you need not worry.

[SJ]

Would the owner of this game please be reminded to keep the thread on topic lol

[Luke]

Would the owner of this game please be reminded to keep the thread on topic lol

I agree. That guy sucks! Telling other people to stay on topic in this thread and then does it himself!

[SJ]

Are we tag teaming each other? I feel like we are on one page to another lol. Ok back on topic, .....................

[RagingMongoose]

I know you don't open up easily when you have judged, RM, but it could very well be the future. From letter contact, to phone contact to text messaging and emailing...and then to something like facebook which will no doubt in the future be replaced by something more advanced.

Well I'll concede that in this scenario, where it would essentially be a centralised communications arena, I would probably consider it. Until then, it's just yet another thing for me to have to check, respond on, and have to find time to keep in order.

I know it won't change your mind, but just thought I'd throw it out here. Don't even know why as I don't want to actually change your mind...but you were so strong and aggressive in your post about facebook and who it is for that I wanted to show that thought is really old-fashioned imo.

Well maybe my tone did come across as aggressive, however it's another of those cases where the intended tone didn't come across. I intended it to be a heavy handed, yet tongue-in-cheek mockery of Facebook. Whilst I mean what I said, i.e. I do believe that people base too much of their self-worth/opinion on their Facebook account, I obviously don't feel aggression towards those who use it.

Next, it is not a matter of you 'have' to join and give out all your info. It was more a if you want more than one account on one IP, you have to prove that you aren't the same person. If you have one IP account, then you stay as you are now. Besides, you are only giving the info to Luke (example). He only would need to accept you as a friend, then delete when he is sure you are not the same person.

If Peon's wife joined the game, he and she would send requests to Luke's GE FB account (because I think that would be the practical approach for him), and he see's two individuals. You are on his list for say 10 minutes, then he kicks you out. When my lady was playing this game I sent a request to Princess I beleive with that knowledge that we were two people, otherwise my IP was blocked. Now with what I am reading is a number of people with dupe accounts, something has to be done to stop single players owning more than one account.

Again, only for those who have multiple accounts on the same IP. If you aren't one of them. Then you need not worry.

Yeah, I agree in that situation it would be a valuable way of proving that more than one actual person exists behind the IP.

However, as I raised before, part of the problem with dupe accounts around here is that even with something like Facebook, you're only capturing the fact that the 2nd person exists at the point of registration. After that, the real person can disappear and the account then becomes operated by the other person who was the exisiting member. I have absolutely no doubt that many accounts on the same IP address around here are operated as such.

[SJ]

Yeah, I agree in that situation it would be a valuable way of proving that more than one actual person exists behind the IP.



But would it actually prove it? At the end of the day it is merely a photo, it still doesnt really prove anything.

Just to answer another point further down the thread, The idea behind FB, was to enable you to prove you had an active fb acct, so therefore proving you are indeed not just some made up person.

I do not imagine for a moment Luke plans on adding 500 people to his acct to verify this, I would suspect it would be done via a centralised acct, then you would be verified and then removed. That way your personal details would not be out there for all and sundry to see, although you can actually set your privacy settings for nobody outside of specific friends/lists.

So I think in some ways a verification process may work, but in others I can see flaws. However it is a suggestion, and I could very well be uninformed in the verification process under scrutiny.

[Peonboss]

I think you are going to far to find a fix all situation.

Example

You are 90% sure two people sharing house are actually one person.

You watch and log a few days and then when they log on you tell them you need a phone # because you want a voice contact. If they refuse ban em. I have free calling in all of us and it's cheap for 90% of the rest of the world. Ok chinese might be a prob but not a insurmountable one.

Hard to claim both playing when you can ask ?'s bout recent attacks.

Would not work on all but would on 80%.

Sorry but I think you are going at this wrong way.

But I am fascinated, anyone, Luke included, if you have ever thought I had a dup account please please msg me then name. Seriously I think it would be a riot.

Edit. Don't need to verify people you don't think are cheats.

[RagingMongoose]

@SJ

Well no, you're right, it's not "proof". I guess it's just an added inconvenience that requires a particularly sad and pathetic level of individual to go to in order to have a dupe account. Yes, that level of individual is out there, but there's slightly less of them than the level above it haha.

However, as many others and I posted earlier on the thread, the only guarenteed way to prove there is more than one person behind the account is to make them pay using credit card or paypal - i.e. only donators can be duplicate accounts on the same IP. This in itself brings issues as have been raised in that not everyone has a credit card and/or Paypal account. However, if we're talking about the confidence level you can have in a method of proof, this is the best available.

[SJ]

However, as many others and I posted earlier on the thread, the only guarenteed way to prove there is more than one person behind the account is to make them pay using credit card or paypal - i.e. only donators can be duplicate accounts on the same IP. This in itself brings issues as have been raised in that not everyone has a credit card and/or Paypal account. However, if we're talking about the confidence level you can have in a method of proof, this is the best available.. In one respect I do agree that proof does perhaps lie in a donation via paypal. However I would then be concerned about those who are under age for a credit card or paypal acct. Or for those of us who donate for others. It would to some extent force us to stop being able to do that and alienate those under the age of 18.

I do not know what the perfect solution is, I can say that we have had those with dups even donate for their dups in the past. Yes it brings extra money for the game in, but it also theoretically has the same adverse impact that has been mentioned in this thread already.

Chuck I do agree with you about activity of dup accts, but in some cases they are even smarter than that simple catch.

At the moment we are just trying to come up with the best possible solution to the problem in hand, if a player can think of it, we would welcome it. But so far everything has it's flaws. We just need a solution which will be beneficial to all, whilst not trying to give any one group a distinct advantage. By groups I mean donator and non donator.

[Jeff Lebowski]

I think you are going to far to find a fix all situation.

Example

You are 90% sure two people sharing house are actually one person.

You watch and log a few days and then when they log on you tell them you need a phone # because you want a voice contact. If they refuse ban em. I have free calling in all of us and it's cheap for 90% of the rest of the world. Ok chinese might be a prob but not a insurmountable one.

Hard to claim both playing when you can ask ?'s bout recent attacks.

Would not work on all but would on 80%.

Sorry but I think you are going at this wrong way.

But I am fascinated, anyone, Luke included, if you have ever thought I had a dup account please please msg me then name. Seriously I think it would be a riot.

Edit. Don't need to verify people you don't think are cheats.

I think you missed the "provocative thought" part. It's a discussion point. People around here claim that staff isn't transparent enough...so we bring one of our 30-40 discussions in public. Do I think it makes sense? Yeah. No one has given an absolute point of contention in this entire thread other then "cause I say so". There are a few valid points being made, but most of those are just assumptions, exceptions, and sub-discussion points. I haven't seen one good reason to sway my thinking yet.

Now on to your point...No one in crew, playing this game, thinking about this game or anything around this game is going to use a phone for verification. Not gonna happen. If you say you would do it...you're only one side of a phone call. All that would do is alienate people and lead to more gray area, subjective decision-making then we already have.

Other verification methods:
- Facebook...yeah right. Like that helps. I see more fake on fakebook then I see in this game.
- Email. Hey I won a South African lottery according to my email. That thing lies all the time, and it's one of the key contributors to the problem we're discussing.
- OpenID...Possibly could help, but could it get buy-in for current and new players...probably not.
- xFire/VoiceChat...Another beautiful way to lie. Hell I can lie to players now on there and claim to be one of their alliance mates, and get every battle idea they have.

The way I see it, you do 1 of 3 things:
1. Allow all dupes. Roll out the welcome mat and enjoy the party.
2. Keep what we have. Tons of gray area, frustration, tons of upkeep.
3. Go postal. Ban anyone using the same IP address (programmatic). Watch for patterns in mobile use (programmatic). Ban all SOCKS IP addresses (programmatic).

If #3 is off the books due to fairness, and #2 is proven to be unfair...#1 is the only other option...Hence this discussion.

[Melek~Taus]

What about option four?

Prove you are all independant people. Make them all play at the same time. If not on different computers for IPs then have them send you the same thing at the same time. Imagine.

Luke sets up 4 accounts. They all have to login to that Chat room. Luke puts up a sentence or phrase, they all type at the same time and push send when Luke types stop. If they are all different, then they will end at different areas, or not. It isn't easy typing on four computers and ending at variable parts. Now obviously, the less accounts the easier it is (time wise), but I am sure there are ways around that.

So #4: Have dupe accounts prove they are different people on chat.

You could even have 2-3 mods on the chat each send a different sentence at the same time to 2-3 different accounts. Luke says send to the mods. Luke says stop to the players. 2-3 different sentences should appear. Better yet....make it international...a math question.

(2+3)x(45-32)+4-53 / 7.4 = ?

Send equations like that (noting that is grade level math [bedmas]).

Not 100% but it is another way?

[Jeff Lebowski]

What about option four?

Prove you are all independant people. Make them all play at the same time. If not on different computers for IPs then have them send you the same thing at the same time. Imagine.

Luke sets up 4 accounts. They all have to login to that Chat room. Luke puts up a sentence or phrase, they all type at the same time and push send when Luke types stop. If they are all different, then they will end at different areas, or not. It isn't easy typing on four computers and ending at variable parts. Now obviously, the less accounts the easier it is (time wise), but I am sure there are ways around that.

So #4: Have dupe accounts prove they are different people on chat.

You could even have 2-3 mods on the chat each send a different sentence at the same time to 2-3 different accounts. Luke says send to the mods. Luke says stop to the players. 2-3 different sentences should appear. Better yet....make it international...a math question.

(2+3)x(45-32)+4-53 / 7.4 = ?

Send equations like that (noting that is grade level math [bedmas]).

Not 100% but it is another way?

That's more of a sub-discussion to option 2. If we decide to stick with option 2...this is how they get verified and approved. Anything not passing this verification fails and gets banned.

The options are All, Some, None.

[outofnowhere]

I got an idea, lets also throw in an auto jeweler as fair play.This way even Jeff could be beat. Everyone would have lots more to spend and Jeff would have some real time to do things. :love

[Jeff Lebowski]

I got an idea, lets also throw in an auto jeweler as fair play.This way even Jeff could be beat. Everyone would have lots more to spend and Jeff would have some real time to do things. :love

I do things now...I mowed the lawn, cleaned the pool, waxed the bike and went fishing today (vacation time). Last night I watched 2 movies, put the baby to bed, played a PS3 game with the 9 year old, scolded the 17 year old, went out for dinner, did some other stuff, and still destroyed the hopes and dreams of lesser players.

You know if people were any good at this game I may have to actually play as much as they think I do :)

[outofnowhere]

I think Luke should have posted this topic in the Psychiatric Ward

[Peonboss]

I think that is the mental block we are missing with the dupes. It is not up to you to prove they are not a dupe.

Its up to them.

So if they want to pay for it with 2 paypal, great. Want to voice verify or anything else they can think of, great. But you look at the patterns and say your accounts are frozen and will be banned if you can not prove they are dupes.

Period. have a nice freaking day.

Now I have dealt with this forever. Since I had a one week ban no one in my house is allowed to play. Period. I control the internet of a couple hundred other people, i blocked gewar.net.

Because I know that when I am in the mood and play for 36 hours straight people will claim I am 5 people or some other crap so I stopped any chances. I would love to let the wife play and kids, but I will not risk a ban. To me, cheating would be boring, and pointless to others it would be a means to an end. I disagree no points of contention, there are multiple. The biggest being it will not fix the problem but expand it. Instead of 4 dups they will have 20.

Now can someone watching everything catch everyone, no. But, if they can be good enough and work hard enough to fool me then they deserve a dupe. Sorry, but I really think this is a back end issue that would remove 95% of it.

Sb has 3 people playing in her house, great. She is an old player I believe her. But if they all plant one after the other, or attack same group one after the other then you flag it and its HER job to prove its real not yours.

Upset a few people? I doubt it, the honest ones will just prove it. Others can get stuffed.

[Peonboss]

Sb was an example not an attack n
Btw.

[outofnowhere]

Peon, some great sugestions but we have no coders the GE war police is retired, luke is too busy schooling to code, jeff is too busy jeweling and the game is owned by the cheats. I just want say TGoH do not need Jeff and he is ignorant to the fact that his helping the top alliance hands down, has had a negative effect on this game. If we (GEPlayers) must fight the cheaters by doing the same as them....I am outofhere. ALL SAID.

[laoma]

The way I see it, you do 1 of 3 things:
1. Allow all dupes. Roll out the welcome mat and enjoy the party.
2. Keep what we have. Tons of gray area, frustration, tons of upkeep.
3. Go postal. Ban anyone using the same IP address (programmatic). Watch for patterns in mobile use (programmatic). Ban all SOCKS IP addresses (programmatic).

If #3 is off the books due to fairness, and #2 is proven to be unfair...#1 is the only other option...Hence this discussion.

smile...kinda like #1...just let them pay for it

Luke, if you are willing to allow other people changing your mind, better do it about the real problem..."how to make Gewar a success" and don't waste your time about a discussion like that...

Gewar as any other other online game will always have dupe accounts, doesn't matter what kinda budget you have..even there would be millions...

Gewar is talking about dupe accounts since how long ? at least 2007...
Gewar has countless threads about dupe accounts.......
Gewar is paying so much time to find solutions about dupe accounts....
Gewar player have so much emotion to talk about dupe accounts....

obviously almost everybody in Gewar is sticking in a deep mud by talking about dupe accounts.......

I am missing Melek opening a new thread about a conspiracy
"does the endless discussion about dupes in Gewar make us blind"

*Melek...mostly like to read your theories, so don't get me wrong if I name you here

[Jeff Lebowski]

Peon, some great sugestions but we have no coders the GE war police is retired, luke is too busy schooling to code, jeff is too busy jeweling and the game is owned by the cheats. I just want say TGoH do not need Jeff and he is ignorant to the fact that his helping the top alliance hands down, has had a negative effect on this game. If we (GEPlayers) must fight the cheaters by doing the same as them....I am outofhere. ALL SAID.

When did the police retire? Did I miss a meeting? Isn't Luke going to school to learn to code? Jeff hasn't coded here for over a year. I retired last May.

GOH doesn't need me, and I help every alliance I'm in. Was it a bad thing when I was in BTP, GDI, NAR, NO, UNO? Was I as bad for the game then? How can one player be bad for the game? How can one player that plays daily, is a lifetime donator, has donated for many others, and actively helps newbies be bad for the game?

...Oh I see. It's because you expect to log-in once a week and you think your entitled to be able to keep up with active players. That's laughable. You get owned every round. Every alliance you guys fight ends up destroying AO. People don't need me in their alliance to destroy you guys. You and your band of ultra-savers haven't mattered around here for 3-4 years. Talk about ignorant to the fact.

I'm bored with this...You bore me old man. Now hurry along to your I Hate Everything meeting...I'm sure they're expecting you.

[RagingMongoose]

I think that is the mental block we are missing with the dupes. It is not up to you to prove they are not a dupe.

Its up to them.

Upset a few people? I doubt it, the honest ones will just prove it. Others can get stuffed.

I agree, this is one angle that I think although isn't being missed, I think it's heavily overlooked in favour of "fairness". Now don't get me wrong, fairness is required, however in my opinion my previous suggestion of an amnesty, followed by a ban, would be fair. From there, I'd just ban based on suspicion each and every month.

If we had a playing community of thousands/millions, I could understand not doing this due to the overhead, but the fact is we've got a small player base at the moment (internet gaming-wise) and so I'd say just wade on in and bite the bullet. As Peon says, and I agree, proving the account isn't a dupe is an overhead that lies with the individual, not GEWar staff.

Maybe I'm missing something though having not had time taken out of my day doing the dupe tracking.

When did the police retire? Did I miss a meeting?

1984 (first time around), then they reformed in 2007 for a reunion tour, before retiring finally in 2008 again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Police

[SJ]

Peon, some great sugestions but we have no coders the GE war police is retired, luke is too busy schooling to code, jeff is too busy jeweling and the game is owned by the cheats. I just want say TGoH do not need Jeff and he is ignorant to the fact that his helping the top alliance hands down, has had a negative effect on this game. If we (GEPlayers) must fight the cheaters by doing the same as them....I am outofhere. ALL SAID.

You are out of order and quite possibly one of the reasons many staff feel so demoralised. How dare you make remarks about Jeff like that. I will be Frank, the game does not need players like you, if you hate it so much here, then please leave, I am doubtful anyone will shed any tears over your departure.

[King_Diamond]

Maybe he should join another alliance and learn how to play this game instead of always moaning about the better players...

[Jeff Lebowski]

Maybe he should join another alliance and learn how to play this game instead of always moaning about the better players...

This post will be made into a signature...Soon.

[tony bennett]

I agree. That guy sucks! Telling other people to stay on topic in this thread and then does it himself!


Yes, all of the bounders posts should be hived off and a new thread started elsewhere LoL;boohoo

[HouseOfRothschild]

...Oh I see. It's because you expect to log-in once a week and you think your entitled to be able to keep up with active players. That's laughable.

That to me is the underlying reason for most (not all) of the "against" I do believe. Those who do not have enough time as it is to keep up with those that have ample free time, will certainly see this as their harbinger of doom.

On another front, Jeff said,
You and your band of ultra-savers haven't mattered around here for 3-4 years.

Well just think about it. Now AO can have 5 times the bank accounts to pinch pennies and collect interest. I am not sure why they are complaining then.



1984 (first time around), then they reformed in 2007 for a reunion tour, before retiring finally in 2008 again.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Police

^^^ lmfao This was a good one.

[tony bennett]

Did jeff really shave his legs last night or was he toying with us?


19 saying no against 16 saying yes now.

[RagingMongoose]

That to me is the underlying reason for most (not all) of the "against" I do believe. Those who do not have enough time as it is to keep up with those that have ample free time, will certainly see this as their harbinger of doom.

Unfortunately, I don't agree House. The "against" points are far more deep seated than this, however.....

On another front, Jeff said,


Well just think about it. Now AO can have 5 times the bank accounts to pinch pennies and collect interest. I am not sure why they are complaining then.

......This is one of my major "against" concerns too. Of the major alliances (those with 10 plus players), only 2 have been anything that could be considered active by GEWar standards of rounds past - AI and GoH. Beyond that, nothing of noteworthiness can be spoken of.

That brings me to the major area of concern. This hope of increased activity is, in my opinion, just that - hope. The fact is we'll have the same alliances, formed from the same player base, most of whom will happily sit for a round saving. Whether they have 1 account or a million accounts doesn't matter, if they don't go to war with 1 account, why would they with 5?

My concern is that rather than an alliance of say 10 players sitting doing nothing all round, before then blowing their total of about 7 million geos in the last couple of days of a round, instead that alliance would have 35 million geos. There's no point to it and it's just another issue that's exacerbated rather than resolved.

The hope of this idea creating more activity is a fruitless hope. Unless player mentality changes in the game then it won't be any different to now.

[HouseOfRothschild]

Unfortunately, I don't agree House. The "against" points are far more deep seated than this, however.....


To be fair Rage, I did say "most", leaving room for those with their own reasons to be against this, such as yourself.

Honestly, I do agree with points on both sides of the board on this, but I really don't think that any form of opinion I have on this is all that relevant. What I mean is that this is a huge, potentially game-changing event, and my month's time of service here is no where near enough to really speak upon it with more than just a passing contemplation.

I will be here tomorrow regardless to which way this one goes, so I think all you "vets" need to figure this one out.

[RagingMongoose]

Ahhhh, anyone remember the glorious days of hope that this thread brought to us all? The discussion on either providing the ability to combat multiple accounts or the removal of all of them? Good times, wonderful times in fact!

[Luke]

Sometimes I think every online game has to deal with the fact that if people want multiple accounts, they can do it without ever being caught. People can moan, but the internet provides the tools for it and there is nothing anyone can do about it.

[Peonboss]

Then make a profit off it and make all dup accounts be donation accounts.

[xjac07]

I play on another site, a web game based on RISK, and multiple accounts are enabled, allowing the integration of new players (unlike here) but it is easily destroyed by other players or by the admins if he does not play correctly. In addition, on this site, if a players is not connected to the game he loses the game depending on the mode of the game and duration*.

The homebase should be placed randomly, bonus for cities, bonuses for continents (continents = alliance ), remove the stuff of children ( plants ressources ).

Like the real game of RISK.

The goal of RISK is not to finish second or third, but to win, and a way to win is to attack the strongest. What they have not seen here.

That way there would be much more interaction between players, social, friendly talk ...
Bad players and cheaters would be easily identifiable by good players and they would set aside maybe even banished.

GEWAR is fun and addictive, just keep the game simple.

P.S. When I started playing on the other site (more than seven years now) there were more options for donors, but now there are too many players, too many connections. Now everything is free.

* I have a game on this site that has been going on a 591 days ago, and it is not yet complete.

[accipitus]

single account is well, multiple account will be confused.

[Starbuck]

single account is well, multiple account will be confused.

Says the one who got caught cheating for doing exactly what he claims will be confusing ;club

[King_Diamond]

And not the first time I might add.