Second Accounts

CaptainCharisma I don`t want a balanced server. I want an ENDING server.
Years ago i let a bunch of travianplayers check UC/GC and the answers were all the same: nothing to "win" and impossible to compete with 10 year old players (mostly due to artifacts and research-lvls).
An ending server would make everybody start with nothing (but experience). The goal would be the UW, which would kill the server.

As a mostly passive player for the past decade, I largely treat GC and UC like idle games, both on RT servers. The other speeds are too slow to fully enjoy restarting to play different races or with different setups, and restarting on RT where many begin their first empires could result in the annoyance of losing valuable assets that don`t carry over through a standard restart. Asocial styles of play like mine don`t lend themselves well to post-mission gameplay, defaulting to exploration rather than war.

Perhaps as a compromise born from this perspective, and to limit the possibility of exploitation, a new and renewable (like VM) Passive Mode other than VM could be used, only accessible if the empire hasn`t attacked anyone for 3 days, plus other criteria if necessary to avoid exploitation. This mode could allow for accumulation and use of turns, but locks the empire out of social elements like the market, attacking, appearing in the attack list, artifact use on other empires, etc.

It gives the choice of which account they want to be fully active without sacrificing time and progress on empires they have been playing for years, but limits what they can do other than exploration/colony upgrades, resource collection, infrastructure research, and artifact creation on the affected empire, while their active empire can still fully participate in the game. Otherwise, players could keep their primary empire fully active while their PM Empire is used for restarts and to re/play the various races with their respective missions.

That said, there are at least three problems I recognize with this compromise:

1. The intended experience for new/restarting players is altered if they choose to use PM to avoid the risk of attacks
2. This could potentially be exploited to balloon planet count if a further restriction isn`t placed on PM Empires to prevent them from creating more than one C3 while PM is used
3. Enforcement is still required for multi-empire users to us

As a casual player, I`m not sure I completely understand the severity or breath of the issue at hand, but it seems to me since you have to VM one account or the other in order to have both (which has been a long-standing thing if i`m reading correctly), you are really just trading one account for the other. Looking at it this way, it seems like that if the time between swaps is long enough (I think purposed time is 2 weeks, but I think we can all agree it can be extended to whatever time limit solves the most issues), you can freely treat each account as a separate entity. This will mean that while no other rules are broken, there is no need to restrict the second account in any way, (which if I`m reading correctly is how the current state of affairs is). Apart from monitoring who has which account, (something I would assume is already being done), and a declaration of some sort of "I put X account into VM, I`ll be back in Z to play Y Account." I don`t see any added workload. This I believe would solve the whole "He swapped at suchansuch time! That`s not fair!" Now I cannot speak to the plethra of other issues and possible abuses mentioned already, but I think if people involved separate this from those other issues (albiet seemingly counter-productive), we can reach a logical conclusion that makes everyone content.

KalZul came out to spice things up a bit on RT. It was a spur the moment thing and to try a new kind of event style play where the NPC actually attacked you instead of just UW and be done. Kal will be around for a bit. There is an event in the works but I cannot go into detail on it.

As for a KalZul on TB, let me see what can happen with that.

Now on to this multi account thing. So, as it stands, it is perfectly legal. I myself have not made a second account and have no intention to as I barely have time for this one. You see my light on alot because I login, dump turns, and typically get called away with work or something.
I will caution that while what I`m about to say isn`t set in stone, it IS a good practice until stated otherwise: keep similar names on both your accounts. Have the same email and real name on both. If that`s not the case, and you`ve had the account a long time already, that`s fine, just keep doing what you`re doing but remain within the rules here.
I will also uh... suggest ...that artifact use on the second account be kept to a minimum. And I also suggest, that on TB, let`s try 3-week usage times.

Personally, I dont really support multi accounts, but I will try to be fair with what the majority of people want so here we are. And CC, thank you for your vote of confidence, i appreciate it.

~AS

in principle when I found out I agreed one account for each server.

I was and i stress WAS going to make a 2nd turn based account and I told badwolf with the new rules I would say what when I decided as like a lot of Turnbased people Id rather not lose all my stuff of years on normal or fast for instance.

I am glad I have not, due to this now going crazy in chat and now the forum

The reason personally for doing it on fast and normal was to make more of things like food or minerals or cgs for people instead of restarting.

events are fine. Its why I asked Kalzul come to turn based Like omeg asked. Post minerals and stuff.

I`m going to be the bad guy here (no pun intended)

I`m against having a second account,while I do appreciate the extra effort being put in to support and monitor this I feel the ends don`t justify the means and staff will take on unnecessary loads of work.

War is the blood that pumps through this games veins keeping it alive and active so instead of second accounts I propose regular N.P.C. events with rewards based on non exploratory colonies so that players are forced to fight for and defend what they have. Encouraging more fighting in the field promotes a better economy and will bolster the market. Simplify and expedite events and in turn having more regularity may help some players not VM in the first place. Understandably so real life causes us to VM and it`s a great tool when we need to use it.

Personally as a player I think we can encourage more activity taking a different route and getting aggressive with an event system in place that will get everyone active.

its to late for that baa. People have 2nd accounts months or years old now because it was legal just not widely known. Those people with 2 accounts will demand compensation for those who played it legally even if it wasn`t widely known. Whether that`s refunds on paids or artifacts or land or all of the 3 meaning more super accounts getting stronger etc as they will want them transferred into one account. If this something new as in just posted 3 days ago very few 2nd accounts would exist and it would be simple to fix but its been around longer than most people knew so

this is bulldung... one account per person ... people will abuse this all you are doing is opening a can of worms and a can of work for yourselfs

sorry 3rd post.

IF 2nd accounts are to be gotten rid off remember this that person will demand compensation for their other account in terms of something. And if they played 2nd account legally for years even though the rules were not published then they will get paids, gordos, artifacts reinburshment or badwolf will lose money in refunding cash if the main account is max and they already have a year plus paid.

Game cop idea or enforcers should be considered separate to badwolf or EE so they can focus on updates.

I made this suggestion a long time ago. This would sort out the mess of who is who,
karolina and asmodean are very active to check things out more than badwolf or EE have the time. both would be in charge of a section of 2nd accounts. Not any they are allied to on EACH server.
or if you want a RT enforcer and then Turn based ones separate.

I will reply to you blablah first
Badwolf wants to make a new server and is working on that where their is balance and limits on the effects of gordo`d empires etc

This is going to be a long post sorry.
In responce to omegian. 2nd accounts on ANY server should not be allowed to dig then. 2nd accounts where I felt primarily allowed to help TB with minerals, food and cgs.

RT theres plenty of them but thanks to me ansd others miners don`t post them unless its needed for cash (you guys are welcome)

3rd. I explained to badwolf the issues with 2nd accounts and naming 2nd accounts weeks ago before the rules were posted. I explained to teaspoon them last night in private as I am not posting them here as it means either only some people will be allowed to be linked and others won`t be and people won`t accept that meaning 2nd accounts all together will HAVE to be removed which will annoy people who have legally up to now, not planet traded or mineral traded and so on who have 100 day plus empires.

I anticipated the issues now being complained about but Badwolf maybe I didn`t fully explain them to you the other week but teaspoon understands it and the consequences of it

I want 2nd accounts for turn based. SLow Normal and fast. Ultra a no. RT a no.

why? those servers need them, but NO artifacts allowed on 2nd accounts.

Grumpy I was informed part of the rules around 2nd account in private was you were not allowed to join a *enemy fed* to spy on them with your 2nd account by asmodean but they are not part of this rules update.

Another wider discussion- Enforcement of all rules and activity of admins.
Solving this i`d promote karolina, asmodean, to Admin cop as they are unbiased in my opinion one on each side to monitor 2nd accounts if you don`t link the names. One from each side

Lastly I know people with 1 account doing sketchy things never mind one account. People want proof examples I will post them. The bigger issue is active rule enforceme

What a game like this, and UC btw, needs is a fresh server, not second accounts. Prefrably a server that ends with an succesfull UW.
This ofcourse also means you`ll have to make everything you can pay for (FIX THAT...) cheaper as you`ll loose it all when the server ends.
Not sure what`s left anymore, but considering half the players i`ve seen the last 10 years are probably frustrated, i can already see them turn back to their old arti-loaded accounts when being a newb again didn`t realy work out for them and then bomb the hell out of new players (if there are any....).

And if you can`t make an ending UC/GC server, then at least have a new server for this idea so everybody stars fresh.

2nd account is a bad idea in my opinion. Instead of doing this please just offer some daily missions with rewards to promote activity. These missions could be very simple but fun. We also should put an ounce of energy into email validation fixes. If we can`t fix it then remove it. Sell access to a new ship for $10 a month for any empire and use all of that money to pay to advertise this game? There are plenty of ways to grow our base of players without going through this mess of policing multiple accounts.

Some amazing points brought up below. I have actually been looking forwards to this.

Yes we should name the empire the same. It will stop a lot of headache in tracking abuse and preventing abuse.
Full name is needed. Plus to make the same email for account activation between primary and secondary account. This should stop impersonation to a certain extent.
Try it out for only rt server for a certain period of time first. Iron out the rules before rolling out to tb server.
Certain Artis hoarding might be abuse. Hence all the negative effect Artis should be reset to zero in the secondary account once person swith account from secondary to primary. This is to prevent people from using stuff like 500 dinero to an empire to stop potential uw unfairly. More rule about Artis could be discussed.

Rule i would like to see.... is if you have a 2nd account, the 2nd account has to be the same name as the 1st account, so it is publicly known to everyone.

This will also prevent abuse :
- people trying to hide a 2nd account & allow to see everyone is following the rules already here.
- people using a 2nd account to impersonating someone else on the same server or another server.
- people using a 2nd account to infiltrate a federation, to spy or take over and disband a federation ( Past issue )
- person using a 2nd account to anonymously artifact harass another player.

So if i created a 2nd account my primary would be
Primary - GrumpyOldMan
Secondary - GrumpyOldMan2

I think Omeg brings up some good, valid points (see, I can be reasonable). The artis is the biggest concern of mine, but I like the fact that we can actually have the option of a 2nd account, Im just cautious of abuse as I know some will look to use it like that. More discussion to follow I`m sure, but good points Omeg.

So, thanks for taking the time on working on this and believe the idea is sound, but do worry about a few things that could be abused. While I do believe it would take the dedication of someone out for vengeance, you could technically do significant harm (more so to a TB server) than a RT server.

1 - Real name is honestly the only way it should be done so agree with this, impersonating others would be what type of offense and how will this be defined under the game rules policy? Will this affect both accounts or only the true primary account where the secondary is banned?
2 - For RT and higher TB servers (Ultra/Fast), what is to stop me if I was super determined to max our artifacts on both accounts and make the server unplayable for a while for those who play against me? What is to stop me from mass historiaing, dineroing with one account and then switching to the other when my 2 week period is up and I can legally switch accounts. I could see a huge artifact abuse here which is why I would call for a limitation of artifact stores (max cap - 255 is too high).
3 - I think this is fair, but still have some concern based upon comment (2).
4 - I think Pre-UW this could be abused on TB more so than RT based upon comment (2). May want to increase this to a month, but open to other thoughts on this?
5 - I think this is fair, would paids carry over or be seperate/shared? Also - I would like to know if there is something that can be done on X U planets as there is not a marauder in the sky on some TB servers that isn`t in your fed to delete that stuff, almost would pay for a 1000 turn project to just plunder it as miner/terran.

These are my opinions, flame as you like or call me crazy, there are a few other issues I think needs to be considered, but that should be a separate topic.

This needs a sticky otherwise it will get lost at some point.