One-empire-per-server really needs to be reinstated

[Illtempered]

...like now

[p0intman]

question: I have three SOE accounts. What the fuck is to stop me from using them instead to negate that? I also have my own email hosting with near infinite storage as far as text is concerned, so creating more accounts to evade bans really isn't that huge of a deal, nor is creating more google accounts to do the same for other poeple.

[Timealude]

question: I have three SOE accounts. What the fuck is to stop me from using them instead to negate that? I also have my own email hosting with near infinite storage as far as text is concerned, so creating more accounts to evade bans really isn't that huge of a deal, nor is creating more google accounts to do the same for other poeple.

your average joe isnt going to go through all that...they just made it easier for people to grief other factions.

[Illtempered]

yeah...

[p0intman]

your average joe isnt going to go through all that...they just made it easier for people to grief other factions.
if a griefer is dead set on it, it literally doesn't matter what you do.

it isn't terribly hard to set up multiple accounts, either. last i checked, its honestly just your name, email, dob and username/pw selection. hell, you can use the same email for more than one account.

[Illtempered]

I guess my point is, SOE shouldn't make it so easy. I mean, right now, any nub platoon can quickly send 1 squad of new characters to grief the shit out of the enemy. It would take, what, five minutes?

Is this not a problem?

[p0intman]

I guess my point is, SOE shouldn't make it so easy. I mean, right now, any nub platoon can quickly send 1 squad of new characters to grief the shit out of the enemy. It would take, what, five minutes?

Is this not a problem?
if you have a decent computer, you can dual log ps2 and do it anyway.

[gunshooter]

It's an F2P game if you missed it. All that 1 empire per server or any sort of time limitation would do is hurt players with premium.

At worst, it should have a time limit if you haven't spent any money on your account. But soon there'll also be account wide SC unlocks.

[Illtempered]

I have premium and it wouldn't hurt me a bit.

And Pointman....ironically you're missing the P0int. Let's not make it so easy.

[p0intman]

I have premium and it wouldn't hurt me a bit.

And Pointman....ironically you're missing the P0int. Let's not make it so easy.

i do get the point, actually. I honestly just think you're trying to split a non-existent hair over how easy it is. its already pathetically easy even with the restriction. its quite literally a non-starter to solve the problem of greifing. i bitched about this specific point relentlessly pre-beta. the PROBLEM is that it is FREE TO PLAY. It does not require a single cent, at all, to endlessly create new accounts.

[EightEightEight]

I currently enjoy this I have a TR and a NC on Connery and I am currently playing the NC. You guys say no one will make other accounts why it's easy they even have an option to switch seamlessly between the two. You can save your password and just use the drop down. Anyone using this system for malicious reasons would opt for that because it would be a secondary account not tied to their first one. The people using this option for their benefit such as playing with other faction friends would just make a new char to be able to enjoy the benefits of subscription and soon cross faction unlocks.

Also griefing is against the Terms so report them if they are using their main account to create BR1 chars then they will get their entire account banned. But more then likely they created new accounts to do this so that they would not loose their main account.

[gunshooter]

I have premium and it wouldn't hurt me a bit.

.

Ah, clearly, I was just proven wrong! You win the argument.

[RykerStruvian]

I have premium as well. If I want to play TR or VS, I'll just create one on a different server. Not being able to roll them on a single server is not a detriment to me in any way.

[duomaxwl]

I must have amazing luck. I rarely ever get griefed. If they grief you just kill them?
I really don't see this is a big deal. The F2P aspect is going to allow for more griefing than different empires on the same server ever would.

[ItZMuRdA]

your average joe isnt going to go through all that...they just made it easier for people to grief other factions.

Disagree. The revert that is being proposed just makes it more of a hassle for the many legitimate players that enjoy playing with different outfits/communities on a given server.

People who care enough to grief or empire hop will most definitely create a second account to continue to do so. Changing this back just harms those of us that are playing to have some fun with old friends.

This is my favorite change so far and wouldn't want to have it any other way. I hope they leave this alone.

[gunshooter]

I have premium as well. If I want to play TR or VS, I'll just create one on a different server. Not being able to roll them on a single server is not a detriment to me in any way.

Not sure why you think that adding your own personal preference here is relevant to anything. You don't care? Great, but plenty of other people do.

[Rivenshield]

At a civilized minimum, they need to add a cooldown timer. We had (I think) an eight-hour timer in the OLD GAME, and even then the Fourth Empire was a game-distorting pain in the ass.

Whatever you make super-easy, you incentivize; whatever you incentivize, you get more of. It's easy to attack and easy to change sides. These are two sides of the same coin. And both are wrecking the franchise right out of the starting gate.

[RykerStruvian]

A cooldown timer wouldn't though because someone could just make another account and switch that way. Something could probably be done, but what that is I have no idea. It is part of the problem of the free2play model. In a subscription model it would work because who would seriously pay $30/mo for two accounts just for faction swapping without restrictions? F2P is an entirely different story.

Not sure why you think that adding your own personal preference here is relevant to anything. You don't care? Great, but plenty of other people do.
Your snarky comments are irrelevant because they don't contribute to the discussion.

[rookBishop]

Anybody else miss the point that if a griefer uses their main account to grief, get caught and banned, their main character gets banned as well?

I don't see what the issue here is. The main complaint is griefing, but all the "smart" griefers would make new accounts anyways. Hell, I'm all for implementing this is it gets a few people banned for being stupid.

[RykerStruvian]

There are two things being pointed out in this thread. The first is multiple characters on a single account and a person having multiple accounts to play multiple characters.

Multiple characters on an account:
To play other factions for fun
To play characters of the same faction to circumvent vehicle timers
To grief other opposing factions of the main character
To spy on opposing factions

Multiple accounts per person:
To play other factions for fun
To play characters of the same faction to circumvent vehicle timers
To grief other opposing factions (without risking their main account)
To spy on opposing factions

It really isn't just a single issue or problem. It's multiple issues and problems due to the fact it is a f2p game and that the account creation process is too simple/easy to abuse.

[Crator]

They should remove the grief system. It doesn't matter anyways cause the game is F2P and all you have to do is login to another free account to work around it.

[ItZMuRdA]

I've been playing PS2 and PS1 for a very long time and have never seen an instance where I could say with certainty someone was deliberately griefing or empire hopping because of the ability to play multiple empires on one server. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, just that in my tens of thousands of hours of playtime I haven't seen anything that would cause any damage to the integrity of the game as is being discussed here.

I have, however, met hundreds of people who, like myself, enjoy being a part of different communities and outfits within the game. Often those communities belong to opposing empires on a given server. The ability to create multiple characters on one server, hassle free, has been one of the best changes to this game (imo, a 9 year PS veteran and big community member) and has improved the quality of life for a ton of people.

Anything shy of this freedom of movement between characters would be an unnecessary burden and hurdle in a free to play game. The timer made some more sense in PlanetSide 1, where there was a subscription required in order to play, but I don't believe that even the timer makes sense here. It becomes so easy for someone who is motivated to grief or empire hop to make a second or third account when it's completely free that those people will do so even at the slightest inconvenience to what they are trying to accomplish. Think about it, a guy who is griefing you isn't attached to his character or his account. He has nothing to lose anyway -- this will not solve your concerns, only hurt legitimate people.

On the other hand, those of us just looking to have a good time with some old friends get the crap end of the stick if all of a sudden some restrictions are placed on the characters that we have invested time and money into thus far. It's really just not a good move for anyone. If someone is legitimately griefing you, I'm sorry to hear that and would suggest that you report them. I'm sure if the conduct is inappropriate, SOE will deal with them as they have others in the past -- but changing or reverting or modifying the multiple empires per server freedom is not the way to attempt to accomplish this. Doing so will only frustrate many legit players while merely placing a minor obstacle in the way of those with ill intent, one that will not prevent them from making a new account to grief on a BR1 anyway, as they have no attachment to the characters they are griefing from to begin with.

[RykerStruvian]

I understand what you are saying I believe that the people who are interested in simply playing the game without griefing are a majority. I believe this to be true and I understand it. However, having the ability to create multiple characters, easily, on a single server across multiple factions has the risk of creating a conflict of interest.

In my own experiences, albeit a rare scenario, players of opposing factions on Connery have done things to the New Conglomerate to hurt our chances of success by faction swapping. An example would be a griefer, or a group of griefers, purposely destroying turrets at a base, destroying deployed sunderers, etc for the sole purpose of making their outfit have a higher chance of success when they actually do attack (or their faction's zerg).

This doesn't happen often, sure. But it's not so much the frequency but rather the fact it happens and shouldn't happen to begin with.

[Helwyr]

Anything no matter how small to make it harder to be 4th Empire is an improvement.

[ItZMuRdA]

I understand what you are saying I believe that the people who are interested in simply playing the game without griefing are a majority. I believe this to be true and I understand it. However, having the ability to create multiple characters, easily, on a single server across multiple factions has the risk of creating a conflict of interest.

In my own experiences, albeit a rare scenario, players of opposing factions on Connery have done things to the New Conglomerate to hurt our chances of success by faction swapping. An example would be a griefer, or a group of griefers, purposely destroying turrets at a base, destroying deployed sunderers, etc for the sole purpose of making their outfit have a higher chance of success when they actually do attack (or their faction's zerg).

This doesn't happen often, sure. But it's not so much the frequency but rather the fact it happens and shouldn't happen to begin with.

That may be true in your case, but I would report those people, as I know of people who were banned for that very reason. I also would be willing to bet that people who would engage in that type of activity would create a second account anyway to attempt to avoid being tracked back to their primary account. As such, making a change to one empire per server doesn't do anything to hurt them, but creates a huge inconvenience and frustration for all of those legitimate players just looking to have fun with their friends. I totally understand and respect your position, but like I said I think this is the wrong approach to dealing with that issue.

[Dragonskin]

I understand what you are saying I believe that the people who are interested in simply playing the game without griefing are a majority. I believe this to be true and I understand it. However, having the ability to create multiple characters, easily, on a single server across multiple factions has the risk of creating a conflict of interest.

In my own experiences, albeit a rare scenario, players of opposing factions on Connery have done things to the New Conglomerate to hurt our chances of success by faction swapping. An example would be a griefer, or a group of griefers, purposely destroying turrets at a base, destroying deployed sunderers, etc for the sole purpose of making their outfit have a higher chance of success when they actually do attack (or their faction's zerg).

This doesn't happen often, sure. But it's not so much the frequency but rather the fact it happens and shouldn't happen to begin with.

Then please also understand that preventing people to have the multiple characters on the same server in different factions will not stop this. People that want to cause harm to the other factions will create new accounts to acheive this goal if they can't do it from 1 account already. Some will create new accounts because they don't want any actions taken against their main account for what they did on an alt character. Either way they will acheive their goal because it's simply too easy to create more accounts because it is a free to play game.

So limiting it really does not stop anything. It only creates an illusional barrier that would only serve to make you feel better.

[Ghoest9]

The people going on how cros faction play is fine because you cant stop serious griefers are deluded.


This is like saying you should keep on your valuables on the front side walk since locking them up wont stop a serious crook.


No one is saying this will fix every problem - but the current system lets every angry loser do a revenge grief with no effort at all - it lets totally clueless 12 year old switch sides on a moments notice(they dont even have to close the game) to get eral time info for his squad.
Its as if they want you to do this.

[Dragonskin]

The people going on how cros faction play is fine because you cant stop serious griefers are deluded.


This is like saying you should keep on your valuables on the front side walk since locking them up wont stop a serious crook.


No one is saying this will fix every problem - but the current system lets every angry loser do a revenge grief with no effort at all - it lets totally clueless 12 year old switch sides on a moments notice(they dont even have to close the game) to get eral time info for his squad.
Its as if they want you to do this.

They do... why else would they allow you to send tells cross faction... obviously its for the sole purpose of griefing players... That is also why they gave us vehicles that can mass farm infantry with HE rounds... It's all SOE wanting us to deliberately grief others. I think you figured it out.

[ItZMuRdA]

The people going on how cros faction play is fine because you cant stop serious griefers are deluded.


This is like saying you should keep on your valuables on the front side walk since locking them up wont stop a serious crook.


No one is saying this will fix every problem - but the current system lets every angry loser do a revenge grief with no effort at all - it lets totally clueless 12 year old switch sides on a moments notice(they dont even have to close the game) to get eral time info for his squad.
Its as if they want you to do this.


With all due respect, that is a very poor analogy. There are many more people that benefit from this for legitimate reasons like playing alongside outfits and friends they've known for years, if not almost a decade now. On the flip side, there is absolutely no benefit to leaving your valuables on the sidewalk.

Likewise, let us realize that it is very easy and fast to create a second account, whether you are a griefer or a legitimate player looking to play with friends. The big difference between either of these activities is how invested the person is in them. The griefer does not care about the account or the character, has likely spent little or no certs or station cash on it, and in most cases prefers to make a second account so it cannot be tied back to him or his primary account. The legitimate players, on the other hand, especially now since this feature has been active for over two weeks, have spent plenty of time and resources (both in the form of certs and real money via station cash) on their characters. To then go back and further restrict that is a huge problem for them, with little to no effect on the griefers that you are all supposedly trying to target with this.

I'm sorry, but this really isn't the right solution. I love this game and plan to play it for years to come as I did the original, but if SOE randomly decided to reinstate 1 empire per server, let alone even restrict my choices in a free to play game by implementing an empire switch timer, after I have spent a bunch of time and money on each of my characters, saying that I would be disappointed would be putting it very lightly. It wouldn't be so easy to just create a new account when I've got 3 characters above BR20 and one at BR50, all with station cash spent on them; but that griefer would have absolutely no problem creating another BR1 on a fresh account. I can only hope this message is getting through to you guys. Please find a different approach and don't cause a serious downgrade in quality of life for so many of us that have been enjoying the innocence of playing multiple empires on a given server.

[MyOdessa]

None existing problem in search of unneeded solution. Dear OP, why don't solve world peace problem, it would give you way more satisfaction.

[Ghoest9]

With all due respect, that is a very poor analogy. There are many more people that benefit from this for legitimate reasons like playing alongside outfits and friends they've known for years, if not almost a decade now. On the flip side, there is absolutely no benefit to leaving your valuables on the sidewalk.

Likewise, let us realize that it is very easy and fast to create a second account, whether you are a griefer or a legitimate player looking to play with friends. The big difference between either of these activities is how invested the person is in them. The griefer does not care about the account or the character, has likely spent little or no certs or station cash on it, and in most cases prefers to make a second account so it cannot be tied back to him or his primary account. The legitimate players, on the other hand, especially now since this feature has been active for over two weeks, have spent plenty of time and resources (both in the form of certs and real money via station cash) on their characters. To then go back and further restrict that is a huge problem for them, with little to no effect on the griefers that you are all supposedly trying to target with this.

I'm sorry, but this really isn't the right solution. I love this game and plan to play it for years to come as I did the original, but if SOE randomly decided to reinstate 1 empire per server, let alone even restrict my choices in a free to play game by implementing an empire switch timer, after I have spent a bunch of time and money on each of my characters, saying that I would be disappointed would be putting it very lightly. It wouldn't be so easy to just create a new account when I've got 3 characters above BR20 and one at BR50, all with station cash spent on them; but that griefer would have absolutely no problem creating another BR1 on a fresh account. I can only hope this message is getting through to you guys. Please find a different approach and don't cause a serious downgrade in quality of life for so many of us that have been enjoying the innocence of playing multiple empires on a given server.



NO NO NO

Im not making the case that the cons are stronger than the pros.

Im pointing out that its a fallacy to say that because someone can over come a barrier with signifigant effort that the barrier is there for not effective in general.

[ItZMuRdA]

NO NO NO

Im not making the case that the cons are stronger than the pros.

Im pointing out that its a fallacy to say that because someone can over come a barrier with signifigant effort that the barrier is there for not effective in general.

A valid point "in general," but even you say that you aren't making the case that the cons outweigh the pros here. All of us on the other side of the coin, however, are making the case that this simply isn't the right solution, given the much more widespread negative impact on legitimate players for little or no gain in the griefer department.

[Helwyr]

The people going on how cros faction play is fine because you cant stop serious griefers are deluded.

I don't think it's so much because they're deluded as it is they are 4th Empire players and will make any argument to support that way of playing.

[Figment]

Guess what was one of the reasons why I said servers should have been large enough for 30K people at the same time by simply having more copy continents on the same server. Hell, we could have been getting experience with a large scale intercontinental meta-game by now. >.>


"BUT NO, THE IMMERSION LOSS OF TEMPORARILY HAVING THE SAME CONTINENT A FEW TIMES OVER!!11one!twelve! D:"

Silly forummers don't plan ahead. :p Servermergers are coming. Accounts will require multiple characters on different empires per server.

Hey was that the same reason as to why we got multi-chars per empire when Johari and Konried were about to merge with Markov and Emerald? Why yes, yes it was (and why Werner got it too despite Jackson not ever really being that interesting). And did we learn from it? No, not all of us...

But what did they do to dampen the chain reaction of masses of people wanting to switch empire? They added a long duration switching timer! D: EGADSES. But since we have free accounts now, who needs to wait? Just make a spare account! So why bother adding a timer... :p :(



Of course not. Why use experience from the past? :p That'd be silly. :D

[ItZMuRdA]

I don't think it's so much because they're deluded as it is they are 4th Empire players and will make any argument to support that way of playing.

It's no secret that I play all 3 empires, and the same can probably be said for most people who share my side of this debate. I can guarantee, however, that I've never sat there and decided to switch to a winning empire. That concept seems very foreign to me for a number of reasons.

First, and perhaps most prominently, it isn't even very lucrative to switch to the winning team unless you get off on seeing that VICTORY message when you take a base. It is usually very boring following the zerg steamrolling the underpopulated defenders for your small chunks of capture experience. Not only is it boring, but I tend to get a heck of a lot more exp from actually killing people than I do from capturing bases. I think anyone who is reasonably skilled and has a basic knowledge of the game would find more efficiency in going for kills, doing support activity, etc., than just capping bases as well.

Secondly, many of us that play multiple empires have played PlanetSide for a very long time and have grown with various communities. I'm not sure if you played the original, but the community was a huge part of the game unlike any other I've seen in my 15+ years of online gaming. In PlanetSide 1, I took on a ridiculous feat of leveling 12 different characters to BR23-25 and CR5; 4 characters per empire. Over the course of that and while playing thereafter, I came to know and become very friendly with hundreds of wonderful people among the ranks of many of PlanetSide's premier outfits. That being said, I haven't ever anticipated the release of a game sequel like I have PlanetSide 2, and much of that anticipation came from the desire to hook back up with old friends and have some fun like old times. Since I was a rather large part of the PS community, I know literally hundreds of people who share this sentiment and who welcome the ability to play multiple empires on one server for these reasons, never for any "4th empire" nonsense or with any regard to griefing.

I honestly feel like the 4th empire phenomenon was just made up and pushed by people who were looking for a reason to blame whatever they are dissatisfied with on at any given time. Just like tons of kids these days scream "HACKER!" when they die ONCE to somebody who just happens to be good at a game. It happens all the time in games like Battlefield 3, and I'm seeing it more than I probably should in PS2 as well. I'm not so naive as to say that there isn't some guy out there who gets off on capturing bases and who always swaps to the winning team, but there are just as many, if not more, countering that by switching to the underdogs to get to defend their favorite base -- or people, like me, who play each empire depending on what we find fun while shooting the shit with our buddies. Either way, I highly doubt it's causing much of a problem or any significant imbalance in the way the game works. Perhaps you should work on realizing that many of us have legitimate reasons for wanting the multiple empires per server change to stay, and there isn't all of this 4th empire hoopla that you seem to think is underlying all of our motivations.

[ItZMuRdA]

Hey was that the same reason as to why we got multi-chars per empire when Johari and Konried were about to merge with Markov and Emerald? Why yes, yes it was (and why Werner got it too despite Jackson not ever really being that interesting). And did we learn from it? No, not all of us...

You have no idea how happy I am that you remember Jackson. The server that seems to always get lost whenever anyone speaks of Emerald, Markov, Werner, Konried, and Johari.

Kudos, friend.

[krnasaur]

here lies the problem with F2P games

[Helwyr]

[...]I'm not so naive as to say that there isn't some guy out there who gets off on capturing bases and who always swaps to the winning team, but there are just as many, if not more, countering that by switching to the underdogs to get to defend their favorite base -- or people, like me, who play each empire depending on what we find fun while shooting the shit with our buddies. Either way, I highly doubt it's causing much of a problem or any significant imbalance in the way the game works.

All the reasons for Empire switching you listed including your own puts you in the 4th Empire Camp. While a common complaint about 4th Empire is they're players that constantly switch to the winning team, it isn't what defines them IMO, it's their complete lack of Server Faction loyalty. Naturally you say how is this a problem? In a game lacking much of a meaningful meta game in the first place not very much TBH, at least beyond the griefers and winning team band-wagoners that you've said isn't you. But what happens when players like myself push SOE for a meaningful Meta game that rewards and penalizes an entire server faction based on their successes and failures, will you support that or cry foul? Most 4th Empire are going to cry foul if the successes of say their TR character is going to handicap and penalize their NC and VS ones and visa versa.

It isn't for me to tell you what to find fun, but personally I find the idea of playing on all the sides and essentially against myself to be undesirable. I want everyone to feel invested in their Faction and to care whether their Faction controls a continent or base. I want wining and losing to go beyond how many certs I personally farmed or how great or bad my personal K/D happens to be. That's fun to me. All this requires metagame mechanics that will make being 4th Empire undesirable to most typical gamers.

[ItZMuRdA]

All the reasons for Empire switching you listed including your own puts you in the 4th Empire Camp. While a common complaint about 4th Empire is they're players that constantly switch to the winning team, it isn't what defines them IMO, it's their complete lack of Server Faction loyalty. Naturally you say how is this a problem? In a game lacking much of a meaningful meta game in the first place not very much TBH, at least beyond the griefers and winning team band-wagoners that you've said isn't you. But what happens when players like myself push SOE for a meaningful Meta game that rewards and penalizes an entire server faction based on their successes and failures, will you support that or cry foul? Most 4th Empire are going to cry foul if the successes of say their TR character is going to handicap and penalize their NC and VS ones and visa versa.

It isn't for me to tell you what to find fun, but personally I find the idea of playing on all the sides and essentially against myself to be undesirable. I want everyone to feel invested in their Faction and to care whether their Faction controls a continent or base. I want wining and losing to go beyond how many certs I personally farmed or how great or bad my personal K/D happens to be. That's fun to me. All this requires metagame mechanics that will make being 4th Empire undesirable to most typical gamers.

I don't necessarily agree with your categorization of myself and those with similar playstyles as "4th empire," but I respect the fact that some people have different definitions of it. I will have you know, however, that I don't jump around empires all willy nilly. I usually invest a significant amount of hours to playing one at a given time, depending what my outfits and friends are up to. I also led NCSF for many years in PlanetSide 1, where at times we had 200-300 relatively active members and even though I'd dabble in TR and VS alts I certainly was primarily aligned with NC and felt a degree of faction loyalty in that. Regardless, I think our particular discussion is going a bit far off the topic of the thread. I'd like to see metagame improvements for PS2 as well, and I'm sure I'd adapt to them however need be to enjoy myself.

I still don't think any of this warrants a change back to one empire per server, though (or any restrictions on it for that matter). I understand the arguments in favor of that, but I feel like it's a long shot of a hopeful solution that wont really solve the problems or concerns that you all have. If metagame mechanics are implemented to where it is beneficial to align with one empire moreso than multiple, then so be it, and let the players that choose to play multiple empires also choose how they want to handle that. I don't think for any reason, however, would it be a good idea to pigeonhole people into being forced into playing one empire per server, or having to go out of their way to create multiple accounts to do so. I just don't think it adds up. Many of you have valid points in and of themselves, but I still don't think changing, reverting, or restricting multiple empire per server gameplay will help out anybody. Again, in a free to play model, it really just serves to hurt people looking for some legitimate enjoyment, where those who might like to abuse the system will still find a way around it by easily taking a minute to create a new account and hop on their new anonymous battle rank one character.

[Suitepee]

I think one empire per server should be reinstated.

After seeing threads like ComerEste's, I'd rather not have "griefers" do that on a regular basis, or see victory-hoppers just because their chosen faction is getting knocked around a bit.

If people want to make three accounts then fine, they can do that. But at least make them go through the trouble of doing that, rather than having a quick-swap easily accessible to all.

[Redshift]

As others have said, it's futile. People who wish to grief will make a second account, legit players who wish to play with friends are hurt instead, i said this right from the start when they said it would be 1 char per server.

The only fix for what you are worried about is to link players grief between chars on an account, (i don't know if they already do this or now in PS2). But even then any actual griefer would just spend 2 mins making a new account

[Illtempered]

It's no secret that I play all 3 empires, and the same can probably be said for most people who share my side of this debate. I can guarantee, however, that I've never sat there and decided to switch to a winning empire. That concept seems very foreign to me for a number of reasons.

First, and perhaps most prominently, it isn't even very lucrative to switch to the winning team unless you get off on seeing that VICTORY message when you take a base. It is usually very boring following the zerg steamrolling the underpopulated defenders for your small chunks of capture experience. Not only is it boring, but I tend to get a heck of a lot more exp from actually killing people than I do from capturing bases. I think anyone who is reasonably skilled and has a basic knowledge of the game would find more efficiency in going for kills, doing support activity, etc., than just capping bases as well.

Secondly, many of us that play multiple empires have played PlanetSide for a very long time and have grown with various communities. I'm not sure if you played the original, but the community was a huge part of the game unlike any other I've seen in my 15+ years of online gaming. In PlanetSide 1, I took on a ridiculous feat of leveling 12 different characters to BR23-25 and CR5; 4 characters per empire. Over the course of that and while playing thereafter, I came to know and become very friendly with hundreds of wonderful people among the ranks of many of PlanetSide's premier outfits. That being said, I haven't ever anticipated the release of a game sequel like I have PlanetSide 2, and much of that anticipation came from the desire to hook back up with old friends and have some fun like old times. Since I was a rather large part of the PS community, I know literally hundreds of people who share this sentiment and who welcome the ability to play multiple empires on one server for these reasons, never for any "4th empire" nonsense or with any regard to griefing.

I honestly feel like the 4th empire phenomenon was just made up and pushed by people who were looking for a reason to blame whatever they are dissatisfied with on at any given time. Just like tons of kids these days scream "HACKER!" when they die ONCE to somebody who just happens to be good at a game. It happens all the time in games like Battlefield 3, and I'm seeing it more than I probably should in PS2 as well. I'm not so naive as to say that there isn't some guy out there who gets off on capturing bases and who always swaps to the winning team, but there are just as many, if not more, countering that by switching to the underdogs to get to defend their favorite base -- or people, like me, who play each empire depending on what we find fun while shooting the shit with our buddies. Either way, I highly doubt it's causing much of a problem or any significant imbalance in the way the game works. Perhaps you should work on realizing that many of us have legitimate reasons for wanting the multiple empires per server change to stay, and there isn't all of this 4th empire hoopla that you seem to think is underlying all of our motivations.

Well-said, and I don't doubt your intentions or sincerity in this post. I just worry about lamers who do have a 4th empire mentality. We can't deny they exist. I'd also like it to be a little harder to quickly switch empires and grief. I know it's impossible to stop it, but what's wrong with making it a little harder each step of the way?

[Ghoest9]

As others have said, it's futile. People who wish to grief will make a second account, legit players who wish to play with friends are hurt instead, i said this right from the start when they said it would be 1 char per server.

t

aarrgghhhh

stop with the fallacy

[Redshift]

aarrgghhhh

stop with the fallacy

I just made 2 new accounts in less than 1 minute, i was able to use the same email address (actually i didn't even need to click the verification email to log in regardless), i needed to click 4 drop down boxes (the info in each was irrelevant), and tick one box each time.

Bearing in mind it just took me longer to reply to your post than it did to make two new accounts I don't think it's going to stop anyone greifing.

The fact you think this is a serious barrier to any griefer is ludicrous.

[Sirisian]

Odd thread as it solves no current problem with the game. My only issue is that we have to use a different character name for each faction. I'd prefer if the character name was not tied to a faction or server but just the stats per faction. The only thing stopping character independence from server and factions completely is probably monetary. They said they're currently adding server transfer for people that want to use it. We'll have to see how that's implemented.

[Dragonskin]

I just made 2 new accounts in less than 1 minute, i was able to use the same email address (actually i didn't even need to click the verification email to log in regardless), i needed to click 4 drop down boxes (the info in each was irrelevant), and tick one box each time.

Bearing in mind it just took me longer to reply to your post than it did to make two new accounts I don't think it's going to stop anyone greifing.

The fact you think this is a serious barrier to any griefer is ludicrous.

^QFT. People that think one empire per server will actually solve anything are delusional. The problem at the core is that the game is F2P and it's stupid easy to make more accounts. There is no reason to add timers or restrictions when it doesn't solve the core issue. People will just make more accounts at the drop of a hat. SOE would have to make that more difficult.. which they won't because that is anti-consumer friendly... so we are stuck with what we have.

[Hamma]

Yea for some reason SOE's system does not require a unique e-mail. :lol:

[Kaldapas]

Agree. Been intentionally teamkilled [or simply for sick fun] multiple times now. Its getting annoying.

And why peeps here say that you can just create a new account, after you get ip/harware banned by SOE.

If thats the case, than whats the point in banning them at all ?

[Dragonskin]

Agree. Been intentionally teamkilled [or simply for sick fun] multiple times now. Its getting annoying.

And why peeps here say that you can just create a new account, after you get ip banned by SOE.

If thats the case, than whats the point in banning them at all ?

You can change your IP.... Account banning is not the same as IP banning. IP banning helps, but you can get around it. Account banning also helps, but you can create unlimited accounts. In the end there is absolutely no way to prevent people from ruining your gameplay... all you can do is keep shutting them down until they give up.

[Kaldapas]

I know its super easy to change your ip, but most of those kids surely wouldn't know how to come around a hardware ban.

[Dragonskin]

I know its super easy to change your ip, but most of those kids surely wouldn't know how to come around a hardware ban.

What is the first place most people visit online if they want to find out about something? Google.... Good luck stopping the young generation (anyone 35 or younger that is... hell most people up to 50 are good now). You would stop my dad... he doesn't know about the googles... :lol:

[Redshift]

I know its super easy to change your ip, but most of those kids surely wouldn't know how to come around a hardware ban.

You'd have to be doing some seriously hardcore griefing for SOE to hardware ban you, if you're that dedicated to it you'll be well versed at getting round it