Increasing Playerbase/Targets/Interest: Legalised Multying

[Coruba]

Although I like your idea in principle all it does is allow the more active players with lots of time on their hands double the chance of hitting the minor players. I can't see the good in that?

My suggestion is slow down the rate of gain that the high amount of land and seed production it gives you or make land/troops worth less at higher levels and that is assuming you want to level out the top 2-3 alliances. If you don't then go with CF's idea :lol:

 

[Garrett2]

Of course this is a cover up for a lack of players. That's kind of the point.

furthermore, legal multis just entertains the needs of a few and doesn't help the game in the least.

Right now, all we have left are the few. What's wrong with boosting the entertainment value for them? They might hang around longer and remain active community members.

I don't know how I can spell it out more clearly. This is not an alternative solution to advertising, new player protection, tutorials, sleep protection etc, the things which might help draw new people in and retain them. This is purely to try and keep the interest up of those already here.

Honestly tell me the game wouldn't be marginally more interesting if everyone had (or at least had the option of) 1 allied ID and 1 solo ID? I know I would like to have a solo briber ID on the side for fun, but I don't want to dedicate an entire round to it, and I know other people who feel the same. Why would you want to deny that option?


And btw, I'm only arguing this because I like a debate. The suggestions forum has been purely academic for years.

I know it's not a solution and I enjoy the mostly levelheadedness of this topic.


That being said, I personally wouldn't enjoy more with a multi, but that's largely due to my play style. I prefer to be allianced. I like to watch over and defend my alliance (when I'm not attacking) and no you did not say all id's would need to be allianced, but playin other id's would take away from my alliance and I tend to be a focused player.

Tho with there being opposition in this thread before I joined in, while some players would enjoy and stay.. some people don't like the idea and therefore they would not stay and not enjoy. So you have a null gain and potential loss in base. Which undermines why you posted this in the first place.

 

[jamesNchina]

For 5 rounds now I have been reading all sorts of ideas to try and 'fix' this game. Some seem to have their merits, although every idea posted has been met with a multitude of arguments against said idea.
Multi's and more bot's seem a bit more desperate than many ideas, imo
All the ideas however have one major flaw, and that is it would take involvement by Azzer himself, which doesn't appear to be forthcoming.

So instead of wasting the thoughts trying to come up with ideas good or bad, why doesn't somebody open a thread with ideas for getting Azzer's attention and or involvement. At the very least you will still be able to generate a full thread of people arguing the validity or effectiveness of the idea.

 

[LuckySports]

CF - Whilst I like the general idea of being able to try out 2 routes simultaneously..

In order to prevent abuse, it would be pretty stifling..

unable to hit the same alliance that one of your IDs is part of would limit targets (and is almost necessary to prevent folks from using their 2nd ID as a spy) and you would still have the issue with 1 person spying for an alliance so their mates can attack them, using an ID they don't care about.

Now, if you limit it to 1 allied 1 solo, that would cut out a lot of the potential abuse, but you still have the potential for 2 different people to swap IDs, using each others multi for land/troops ect..

While I like the idea, I do still see a lot of potential for abuse that would be difficult to avoid..

 

[Elevnos]

Everyone instantly goes RPG/Striker + SA/PA

 

[CFalcon]

Everyone instantly goes RPG/Striker + SA/PA

2 IDs controlled by the same account can't attack or defend each other, and can't attack or defend another ID simultaneously.

Lucky, cheaters always find a way to cheat. This might make it marginally easier for them, but I don't think we'd see very much change.

And Garrett, we appear to be at an impasse over personal taste rather than viability.

 

[Garrett2]

And Garrett, we appear to be at an impasse over personal taste rather than viability.

Only if you fail to see that by some peoples personal choices to not liking the multi idea makes it not viable because it won't retain as much as you were hoping. Either that or shedding a few more players is ok to you as long as you can have more than 1 ID.

It's peoples personal tastes that need to be taken into account on a broad and generic scale to get people to play a multiplayer game in the first place.

Or rather, Mr. Spock put it best when he said "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."

 

[CFalcon]

And Garrett, we appear to be at an impasse over personal taste rather than viability.

Only if you fail to see that by some peoples personal choices to not liking the multi idea makes it not viable because it won't retain as much as you were hoping. Either that or shedding a few more players is ok to you as long as you can have more than 1 ID.

It's peoples personal tastes that need to be taken into account on a broad and generic scale to get people to play a multiplayer game in the first place.

Or rather, Mr. Spock put it best when he said "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one."

I really really doubt anyone would leave over something like this. Most people's objections seem to be about possible abuse. If those could be taken care of, would anyone really quit over it?

 

[Dax]

More bots for the little people is my only point to contribute here.

Multi allowance would be ruinous, after seeing the Thais/PI! abusing masses of accounts.
Merely a viewpoint.

 

[Alcibiades]

There are already tons of bots for the little people. Why on earth would we need more? In fact, there are already way more bots than there are little people, so my question still stands....

2 rounds ago, I spent the previous few rounds with an ID, a coupla dozen/hundred acres, and barely teched and I was being bashed and waved by bots (even got bashed by an Old ID of mine!) and I can only imagine how much worse it would be for new players to get bashed by automated players, and once they've cleared that hurdle (i.e. enough score) they get raped by human players, then land ****ed by bots, then they quit.

Bots are not a solution to the playerbase problem.

And as for allowing multis: No.

 

[tobapopalos]

I really really doubt anyone would leave over something like this. Most people's objections seem to be about possible abuse. If those could be taken care of, would anyone really quit over it?

I would definitely stop playing.

It would make it far more than "marginally easier" for people to cheat. Consider that Azzer is not here to watch over people, and it would be virtually impossible to tell legal multis from illegal ones in any case. Cheating would be absolutely manic. Legalised multiing would just kill the game off once and for all imo.

 

[Garrett2]

plus putting enough effort to control botting would be almost as much effort as advertising and getting more real individual people back into the game. so rather than all that work for plaster, do the same/similar amount of work for a fix.

 

[Dax]

plus putting enough effort to control botting would be almost as much effort as advertising and getting more real individual people back into the game. so rather than all that work for plaster, do the same/similar amount of work for a fix.

All these ideas as always are hopeless without an implementor anyway

 

[willymchilybily]

CF i like the idea. for many reasons.

i would not cheat and never have....as far as im aware. but i would like a second account sometimes.. when pom i realy wanted an rpg to kill zaheen. if i could create a second account it would be a great equalizer in my eyes. a chance to get revenge and attack pesky annoying people my route is not set up to attack. you could even suicide on them and not care.

I would like to if ever at rank one. sit back and go wow im bored.. no ones doing anything... lets go have some fun hitting bots and bribing troops at the lower ranks.

if i had a second ID on the same account i would love two bites at the apple for getting profile awards... one ID very honourable and happy to lose land and have the most land stolen. the other played more seriously....you've been forced to go pom for your alliance but hate not killing you have an outlet.. you have someone spamming you with abuse but is too small to attack.. you have a recourse that doesnt involve you suiciding... you are thinking of playing bunkers sentrys next round.. why not try it this round. it would be lovely i think.

I also think it would make it nice that there are more targets. even if you cant attack a few of them its no big deal. and i also like people may be distracted from thier main account more chances for mistakes and slip ups. more chance to catch people off guard.

big fan of the idea... shame i didnt check this thread before it became spammed by alot of people who dont read the first suggestion in full before posting. Or are too narrowminded to see the benfits outweigh the risks. for 90% of the posts against the suggestion. though 1 or 2 do have valid points. nothing unsrumountable or unaddressable. so props for the suggestion. shame so many are against for such un-thought through reasons, and as such it wont come to fruition. if its any consolation.... no suggestions have been implimented for the best part of two years. and some of them had real merits, so even if they had given it more thought i doubt much would come of it.

cheaters cheat. they will do so anyway. this makes it no easier. if they want to spy another id they create a new account. If anything this suggestion improves things as thier second id cannot interact in any useful way with thier first id. it will make it just as easy as it is now to spot blatent cheats. no not every one will go rpg/striker sa/pa with thier two ids. because you cannot interact with the second id... serious do you guys even read. but luckerly all those too lazy to read the first post properly are too lazy to read this, and dont know how much of a dissapointment they are to me... S.H.B.D.A.B.

[edit] ps. i did notice you put in alot of thought to loop holes and how you make it un attractive to use the facility to cheat if people gave half the time in thier thought process as you did to this suggestion i wouldnt be saying good idea 4 pages back...far from the madding crowd

 

[Garrett2]

plus putting enough effort to control botting would be almost as much effort as advertising and getting more real individual people back into the game. so rather than all that work for plaster, do the same/similar amount of work for a fix.

All these ideas as always are hopeless without an implementor anyway

that was previously stated as understood. go back to the post where CF said we were enjoying a debate.

 

[Steve_God]

I've been asked to post it as an official helper via an in game mail:

ID played by Blasp: "Hello. I'm unable to make a forum account but another helper i think its Cfalcon posted a idea about haveing several ids and most people complain that the top allys would have another ally and so on. If you could just get the message to him that its a good idea. I think if only 1 of you ids can be in a all and the rest had to be solo it could work"



Note: this is not my opinion - not decided either way tbh.

 

[Alcibiades]

This is a totally different kind of criticism but speaking from experience, I have enough trouble working up enough time and energy to manage one single ID let alone two! There are billions* of complaints in these forums about how activity intensive this game is, and here we are proposing to give ourselves more stress/time/pressure? No thank you, I'll opt out.

Personally, I don't much like the idea of having multis, as I've expressed previously. I don't reaaaaally think it would help improve the game situation but that's my opinion I suppose.

*Exaggeration

 

[edd]

I was surprised to find that i support this idea tbh,

[00:16] <@ed> i can think it is an exciting addition tbf
[00:17] <@ed> no route is the same/played the same each round because of the number of other routes, particularly counter routes around
[00:17] <@ed> being able to test out a number of routes under varying conditions, and while at first glance you might think that the ratio of routes would roughly be the same each round...That just isn't true

[00:26] <@ed> + it means you can play with more of your friends than you migth usually
[00:27] <@ed> many people keep saying they only play for the people they have met here
[00:27] <@ed> it gives you a chance to either meet lots of new people and teach more newbies or to just hang with all your friends or do a combination of the two


I do understand a lot of what is said against it but i just think here that the good outweighs the bad (ignoring all the things that can be countered by some extra coding). Granted something would need to be done about rushes otherwise the top ally would be having no end to the SA/RPG rushing (i know they wouldn't be allowed to rush the same ID at the same time but you don't need the two in combo to be a gigantic pain). This also extends to 2 ids hitting the same alliance at the same time i suppose, but there may already be a counter to this as i haven't read all the posts.

I also think people might be more tempted to try bribing with more targets available, i know i would be.



However, i concede that i have only been around for 15 rounds and i never experienced this game when there were 1500 + players and i really do understand that you might just think of this as a mockery of bushtarion. I do think this might make some people quit purely out of principle and that would be a shame indeed.

 

[Alcibiades]

a chance to get revenge and attack pesky annoying people my route is not set up to attack. you could even suicide on them and not care.

I like the first part of this. Revenge would be sweet, and there are definitely times where you want revenge, but it's simply not possible. However, the last part worries me... having ID(s) that are willing to just suicide against top ranks because they are simply "a lowbie nothing ID" (in comparison of course, it must have enough troops to be irritating) then that could be a problem, no? If I was the top ranks and was constantly getting rushed by stupid amounts of little people, I'd be furious. Many people win so that they can just sit back and relax for a round. It would make winning quite annoying. Could you imagine an alliance full of people with multiple rushing IDs? *suicide*

 

[timtadams]

This is a totally different kind of criticism but speaking from experience, I have enough trouble working up enough time and energy to manage one single ID let alone two! There are billions* of complaints in these forums about how activity intensive this game is, and here we are proposing to give ourselves more stress/time/pressure? No thank you, I'll opt out.

Personally, I don't much like the idea of having multis, as I've expressed previously. I don't reaaaaally think it would help improve the game situation but that's my opinion I suppose.

*Exaggeration

I was thinking this yesterday.

a chance to get revenge and attack pesky annoying people my route is not set up to attack. you could even suicide on them and not care.

I like the first part of this. Revenge would be sweet, and there are definitely times where you want revenge, but it's simply not possible. However, the last part worries me... having ID(s) that are willing to just suicide against top ranks because they are simply "a lowbie nothing ID" (in comparison of course, it must have enough troops to be irritating) then that could be a problem, no? If I was the top ranks and was constantly getting rushed by stupid amounts of little people, I'd be furious. Many people win so that they can just sit back and relax for a round. It would make winning quite annoying. Could you imagine an alliance full of people with multiple rushing IDs? *suicide*

This may or may not eventuate. It really depends on the mentality of people. I'm sure some would probably do it at some point. But im not sure that many people would do it to make it become a problem.

I reckon the only way you would find out is if this suggestion was tested.