Block on 4942's fam member

Wait, the game allows you to join a 3rd galaxy even if you aren’t a patreon? As I say in IC “if the game allows it!”

It no longer allows a single account to play in three but because of how families play the game, multiple accounts can be made in one IP. What cannot be stopped without stopping families play is to block multiple accounts on one IP.

But already stated in common sense is that making a new account to go around a specific game rule is prohibited.
So the 3 galaxies maximum rule should not be bypassed (such as you cannot bypass a block with a new account because it is common sense).

Also @I_like_pie please split this into a new topic.

If I want I can have 100 several ip adresse and have 100 account …

You can try

The common household has 1 IPv6 address. My house has 2 and then a shit load of VPN addresses (which all act as separate IPv6 addresses) but that is to be expected for us.

what I infer from this is that you want to bypass the 2 galaxy limit.

From The Imperial Conflict Rulebook:

2.1 Accounts

You are allowed to have only one user account. This account will be considered your account and not anyone else’s. You must keep this account throughout your game time. There is no way to delete it.

This is not vague or ambiguous. Players who make multiple accounts intentionally violate this rule hoping that they will not be caught. There is no warning to be had, they know what they are doing and know the risk they take when they decide to violate this rule.

Unfortunately, taking this risk also risks any team members that would be impacted by their block if they get caught. The staff has no responsibility to soften the blow or ease the transition when this happens.

When a player breaks the rules, they are putting their family at risk. The damage done is solely on the player who violated the rules, not on the staff for enforcing them.

1.1 Enforcement

1. The Imperial Conflict team reserves the right to take any steps, within its domain, it deems required to correct rule violations. This includes modification or deletion of your account without warning.

6. What is considered a violation of these rules is at the discretion of the Imperial Conflict team. When in doubt, err on the side of caution.

7. A player may or may not be warned for rule violations. The decision to warn is at the discretion of the Imperial Conflict team.

Again, people who break the rules are not entitled to warnings. The best way to not get blocked is to not break the rules.

1.1 Enforcement

3. Any information on specific enforcement decisions is private and will be not be disclosed by the Imperial Conflict team to any outside parties.

As a reminder, we can discuss generalities here to help if people have questions, but let’s refrain from mentioning specific names as much as we can.

Not sure if joking, but no, this is a blockable offense. Not only that, but it’s a slap in the face to all the Patreon subscribers who decided to support the game financially in order to receive the perk that bypasses this restriction.

Many people want to play more than the 2 galaxy limit. If everybody just made an alternate account because they didn’t feel like paying, our efforts to keep the game running would suffer.

While this is correct, IP addresses aren’t the sole factor when we decide to block somebody. We take other things into account, including statements that infer that players are willing to circumvent the rules if they feel they can get away with it.

Better Solutions

I am aware that innocent family members are affected by this, which is unfair to them in the short term. Unfortunately, sparing the violator of appropriate punishment reduces the effect of the deterrent and is unfair for the larger community in the long term.

Our current process, despite its flaws, is the best balance between rule enforcement and fairness we can offer.

There are better solutions in the works, including freezing and redistributing a blocked player’s assets, but those have technical dependences that aren’t yet completed.

It isn’t that we’re doing anything out of cruelness, or that we don’t care. It’s that the players who choose to break the rules put us in a tough spot, and we have to go with what presents the most effective deterrent so that we can discourage others from doing the same.

In this case, whether or not a player “cheated” with a multiple account makes no difference. We have to enforce the rules as consistently as we can. Multiple accounts are illegal. End of story.

We would all have a much easier time if people didn’t break the rules in the first place, but unfortunately that’s not what happens.

In Summary

  • Players that violate the rules put their families at risk by doing so.
  • The best way to not put your family at risk is to not violate the rules.

Very much so lol. Multi rules have been in stone for years; heck, this account only goes so far back because I did it myself like a decade ago! Dark times…

Yeah, same here. I got blocked/deleted my very first round for trying to be sneaky. :sweat: That was the last time I ever tried.

Deterrents are effective.

Man, I dont have enough time to play two galaxies at once…

Unfortunately, sparing the violator of appropriate punishment reduces the effect of the deterrent and is unfair for the larger community in the long term.

it does not effect annything its just like a new personne play and if it does get catch then just block him on galaxy where he is alone and then let fam orgineze to take his planet and give to next player that will take his place its not difficult to do then everybody is happy and then if he ever try again to get more galaxy to play then he can then just do the same thing but then block him for 3 month then after he do again block 6 then if ever do again block for ever but dont punish a fam that spent weeks of free time and then lose leader and cant take his planet cant get all his cash and cant not kick him before 7 day why why so horrible for fam punish ???

  1. your punishments in months is like killing off players.

  2. it took you 4 days to write that paragraph?

Pretty sure the second gal I ever played in I had a second account that got blocked for being a multi. Nothing ever happened to the original one though :slight_smile:

This is an assumption. It’s actually not that simple. Every situation is different and distributing the blocked player’s resources in a fair and consistent way every time will only work if we have an automated process around it.

It just isn’t feasible right now to manually manage this. We don’t have sufficient staff to handle this on a case by case basis. That’s why I said the following:

Saying “it’s not that difficult” is a slippery slope. If we do it once for one blocked player and their family, then we’re not being fair if I don’t also do it to everybody else who gets blocked.

We don’t have enough time do do this, so we don’t do it for anybody. Hence the need for an automated process.

Because:

only issue i have is that if we all know end result is that account will be deleted. Don’t make the fam wait 7 days to get a new player.

That’s reasonable, and something I intend to change.

Being the blocked player in question there are multiple things i find strange.

I created my secondary account because i could not delete from sn and wanted to do the balius challange airwing proposed.

My primary account (mw/sn) got blocked till eor of mw
My secondary account (balius) got blocked for 24h

Reasoning

  • we won balius already
  • i should not be in mw if i play balius
  • block from mw is biggest punishment
  • I shouldn’t be able to join mw again this round (yet I get to keep a second account which allows for this)

Imho there should be a clear guideline regarding something as common as multi accounts.

Apparently block length is dependent on remaing round lenght for me.

Imho when there is a second account the following should happen.

Removal second account (that shouldn’t have existed in the first place)
Block on primary account for two weeks.

That sends a clear msg up front, reduces moderator time coming up with punishment and most important treat all players equal.

The goal of punishment is to deny play or to deter progress on a player, not to disrupt a whole galaxy.

As for impact on fams. That should be minimal. Give the player 24h to transfer assets and than delete / pull him from the galaxy to open up a new spot.

The reasoning that the player shouldn’t be in the galaxy and the fam isn’t entitled to his stuff is flawed. If he wouldn’t have played, it’s likely someone else would have played or the fam would have invested in someone else.

Atm, my mw fam got screwed tripple times:
Me being blocked and having one less ultra active player (thats on me sorry guys)
My assets frozen (24h transfer time could fix that)
Me taking up space (that can be fixed by pulling me out)

I agree, and this is something that I intend to put together. There are however competing priorities that need my attention, and this isn’t the #1 issue for the game at this time.

This is approaching the problem backwards. Say for example, the #1 empire is found to be cheating in the middle of the round’s biggest war, and is also the family’s leader and primary attacker. Surely block/deletion in that situation would also disrupt the entire galaxy. That’s no reason to not proceed.

Now imagine that all 3 leaders of the top 3 families are caught/blocked/deleted. Even worse.

It’s unreasonable to let a galaxy’s disruption get in the way of punishment, or even to effect said punishment’s severity. Galaxy disruption from blocks/deletions will always happen due to the nature of the game, but it is never the goal.

This punishment in question successfully denied play and deterred progress, as you suggest. Disruption was a byproduct.

There’s an issue with false equivalence here. Blocking you for 2 weeks in a galaxy that is practically over is not the same as blocking you for 2 weeks in a galaxy that is still running.

Every situation is different, and while we will benefit from some baselines, we should not assume that every single violation always gets the same punishment regardless of context. Context matters.

You and your family had already won Balius when you were caught. You already got to attempt, and succeed in the Balius challenge that airwing proposed. You did this all with an illegal account.

Nothing we do at this point can take away from the fact that you achieved your goal in Balius. Punishment for you in Balius is practically meaningless. Even if we wipe you from the official records, you still got to achieve your goal in that you experienced a round that you should not have.

Given that blocking your alternate account has practically no effect, the only viable alternative is to block your main account. 2 weeks is not sufficient given that you illegally partook in and won an entire round elsewhere.

The most suitable punishment in this circumstance is to block you out of MW entirely. An illegal (Balius) round gained for another round (MW) lost.

That isn’t our reasoning. I don’t disagree that the family should get the resources. Unfortunately, there’s no practical way to do this currently. I don’t have time to manage this, and am not interested in going out of my way to make an exception for your family as that would be unfair for future families who may go through the same thing.

It would also be unfair for Airwing’s family who went through the same thing last round. Or anybody in the past for that matter.

Ultimately though, I do intend to fix this in a way that is manageable and that requires less manual work on my end. Until that happens, players are indeed putting their families at risk of being screwed triple times, as you put it.

But that’s on the offending player. If the player doesn’t put themselves in a situation where they get blocked, their family will not suffer any consequences.

I do have responsibility to improve this system, and intend do. However, players who break the rules also have responsibility for any negative impact their family suffers as a result.

Agreed

Again, once the system (as in, an adequate game moderation tool) is in place to do this, yes. As I’ve said repeatedly, I am not against doing this but I do not intend to manage this manually as we don’t have the staff resources to do so.

Again, this is also something that will change as to be less disruptive.

Yes, but all 3 screwings are on you. The risk to your MW family was worth your decision to break the rule. You did not intend to get caught. It isn’t fair or reasonable to blame the staff because things went differently than you expected.

You are in fact only waiting 2 days as long as you vote a new leader and mark this player rogue/inactive. Thanks to the new update.

Whilst I agree with it being unfair to past players, change will always hurt or at least change the balance of a game. After all, the whole purpose of change is to do something different. No matter how small it is, it will more often than not give leeway to one person over another or at least screw someone in the future that it could have saved (not giving them the benefit of the doubt that the past players had) and vice versa.

@I_like_pie would shoving a players planets into reserved (whether you keep buildings or hopefully not) once you remove someone work?