1 empire per account and F2P

[QuiCKaNdDeaDLy]

Another Horrible Idea by SOE...

[ArcIyte]

Originally Posted by Graywolves

I don't think it makes sense to lock an account to 1 empire when you're fully aware that they can hop on another empire any time they want by making a new account. Might as well just save players the trouble.

No? How about we make it as troubling as possible.

[Bags]

Just charge people to allow making a new character for teamswapping, and make it so you can't swap if the empire is >some%.

[Brusi]

srsly no need to consider IP and MAC locking accounts to a single empire...

There are simpler carrot solutions to things like empire loyalty.

EDIT: such as bags single line answer ^x2

[Redshift]

Yea tbh duke you're really trying to make things too hard, it'll be a bitch to code bug free, it'll piss people off and ultimately it has little effect

[CutterJohn]

Originally Posted by Brusi

[*]switch empires to join which ever outfit has the best leadership/seems most successful, rather than rising up to be competitive.

How can you consider this griefing any more than someone who switches outfits within the same empire.

Many people do not give two shits what side they play for, because its a game, and the 'empire loyalty' thing is as silly for a game as it is for sports or chess.


Spies can hurt a bit. Not much though. Nothing like what players in EVE must deal with on a daily basis. Practice some opsec. And as I've repeatedly said, spies will not share an account with their main. They will be in a separate window on a f2p account. The only possible thing to do against them is aggressive AFK timers.

TKers? Don't let fresh accounts deal friendly damage for the first 10 hours of gameplay. They still get grief points. Now they have to literally play the game for ten hours if they want to grief people, and can't just keep rerolling F2P accounts. Could also make offline grief reduction cost $5.

4th empire? Don't let people switch to the higher pop empire. Offer enticements to encourage people to stay on or switch to the low pop empire. Hell, make an official '4th empire' option that people can choose, which allows them to be automatically team balanced, but they are given some benefit or another. Use the people without a strong empire loyalty as an asset.

[Brusi]

Originally Posted by CutterJohn

How can you consider this griefing any more than someone who switches outfits within the same empire.

I would consider it teamstacking.

Switching outfits within the same empire doesn't directly harm that empire.

[Kilmoran]

Is this really a debate about how to not inconvinience people that are playing for free?

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by IDukeNukeml

ANY sort of IP blocking is extremely simple... I would literally volunteer sixty hours of my life to implement this. It's not difficult, it's just more work.

IP blocks can't be used on an MMO. You often have people sharing huge IP ranges. For instance, at a university campus using Wi-Fi. Seriously look how well it's worked for IRC. 90% of the time you're not blocking the person you want to you just hit someone in the cross-fire.

You're targeting the problem wrong if you have to use hardware based defenses. Think outside the box.

[Bonius]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

IP blocks can't be used on an MMO. You often have people sharing huge IP ranges. For instance, at a university campus using Wi-Fi. Seriously look how well it's worked for IRC. 90% of the time you're not blocking the person you want to you just hit someone in the cross-fire.

You're targeting the problem wrong if you have to use hardware based defenses. Think outside the box.

^This.

Any remotely competent individual will be able to bypass the IP-block anyway, rendering it completely useless - along with what Sirisian is mentioning with the "cross-fire" that is at the core of IP-blocking.

[Skitrel]

A griefers could be a player or account who does any or all of the following:[*]gathering intel for another empire, not assisting their own

I really disagree with this one, though I agree with absolutely all of your other points. Inserting spies into the enemy faction, and even enemy outfits altogether even so far as infiltrating enemy teamspeak, is all part of the meta game. Inciting doubt, distrust, spreading uncertainty, these are all very key parts of warfare and while underhanded they're perfectly legitimate tactics. It's a strategy anyone that doesn't undertake is simply failing to utilise a very important strategy.

I agree on all other points though, thankfully all of those, particularly teamkillers and griefers of that sort, are all very easy to get rid of through various penalty methods.

Tapatalk.

[Raka Maru]

Don't quite know how to do this with the FTP model, but tying an account to our very mature financial system would prevent a lot of hackers.

PayPal, credit cards, debit cards, bank accounts.

Let Johnny hacker boy get all grandma's cards banned and it's done. He can't get back in the game.

[Kilmoran]

I still don't understand how having to make another account for a game you aren't paying for is punishment. Though i do agree with 1 empire per server.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Kilmoran

I still don't understand how having to make another account for a game you aren't paying for is punishment. Though i do agree with 1 empire per server.

I don't really care about what people do that aren't paying. If they want to manage multiple accounts to play on the same server with different empires that's fine by me. As a convenience point though I'd prefer membership accounts (or a way to purchase) convenience regarding using your character on each empire. If designed correctly it can be just that. Convenience.

[Kilmoran]

I don't see a problem with convinience. I only see a problem with demanding it for free.