Open Discussion Account pushing and coplaying

bambamsam1997

Member
Reaction score
2
I think that if players will coplay, it must be their only presence on the world. It's not fair when two or more people all create accounts, build up a cluster, and then feed their villages to one account and then all merge into it.

Coplayers should start the world together on the same accounts. IMO if two accounts have logged in from the same IP to the same world, both accounts should be considered cheaters. (edit: I would be in favor of removing outright the connection sharing option -- I think that has been mentioned in this thread)

Possibly you should make an ingame option to declare yourself a coplayer, and allow you to login with your own account information. This would allow for better tracking of the coplayers for cheating (you can tell when an account associated with IP is also link to the coplay account, although there are obvious ways around this), and for better safety of the account (perhaps one coplayer goes rogue, he could be 'kicked' from the coplay setup. also no sharing of password).

I understand the reason for coplaying (24/7 activity) and that reason doesn't make me upset. It only starts to suck when players are growing separately only to deliberately surrender their villages to someone they had been colluding with since the beginning, giving themselves huge advantage.
I also understand why TW doesn't really want to outright ban this type of behavior. Tons of PP gets spent in this process
 
Last edited:

DaWolf85

In-Game Staff
Tribal Wars Team
Team
Reaction score
356
It's not fair when two or more people all create accounts, build up a cluster, and then feed their villages to one account and then all merge into it.
I actually do agree with this. The question is what do you do about it?

We've discussed in this thread why explicitly legalizing coplaying really isn't likely to be viable, so I won't repeat that discussion. Likewise, determining intent is something I doubt mods should be getting into.

I think your options here are:
- Banning merges of small accounts
- Banning merges before a certain stage in the world
- Attempting to discourage the practice through other rules that make it more annoying to execute - for example, banning merges of accounts that have sat each other; banning the player that will delete their account from conquering other villages during the merge; banning resource transfers while merging; making the wait time between switching accounts longer, and so on.

IMO none of these will actually completely resolve the problem, but they would certainly make it more difficult to execute that strategy. The question then becomes, are you just legalizing only the worst cases of the problem, and giving those people an even bigger advantage?
 

bambamsam1997

Member
Reaction score
2
My suggestion is to altogether ban account merging -- if you want to coplay, it should be the only presence you have ever had on that world.

The main argument I can see against this (aside from the people who will cry when they don't have an unfair advantage) is the amount of PP getting spent by multiple accounts before the merge is financially helpful to TW.

My argument against that is that the spending of PP should be fair. If I spend an equal amount of real money on my account compared to the 5 accounts of a push-merge-coplay strategy, I cannot get the same real benefits ingame from the same amount of money. It isn't fair that they have 5 avenues to spend PP, especially in the early game when spending PP can really start a snowball effect

Banning account merging doesn't 100% solve the account pushing issue, but it does remove some of the motivation to do it in the first place. If an account has to be on a completely separate connection from any connection that will be used for the intended coplay account, account pushers would have to be a friend of the players in the main account but not intend to coplay with them. I see less people willing to do that. (Of course this is still countered by using a VPN for the pusher account. It's a hard problem to 100% solve.)
 
Last edited:

TW.PLAYER

Member
Reaction score
8
Just ban gifting of villages. If a account player is leaving that world. His villages should barb out.
 

MarcMadness

Member
Reaction score
5
Just ban gifting of villages. If a account player is leaving that world. His villages should barb out.
But then what happens at mid game or end game when someone needs to quit because of RL or because they don't have time to play.
There tribe should suffer because for 2 weeks there player is inactive and then when it barbs its gives there enemies chance to jump in that's just not an option
 

bambamsam1997

Member
Reaction score
2
There tribe should suffer because for 2 weeks there player is inactive and then when it barbs its gives there enemies chance to jump in
Definitely this is what should happen. A tribe member quitting is supposed to hurt. If you want to hand over your villages to the tribe you should have to set a sitter and have them dodge your tribemate's noblemen, or wait for them to go barb/lose their troops.
 

Alushu

Active Member
Reaction score
31
Definitely this is what should happen. A tribe member quitting is supposed to hurt. If you want to hand over your villages to the tribe you should have to set a sitter and have them dodge your tribemate's noblemen, or wait for them to go barb/lose their troops.
You've never played a world till the end have you? This reply alone hows how oblivious you are to end-world play, depending on world settings, nah in general honestly. If something like that happens it can lose you the world immediately. That'd just get messy.
 

bambamsam1997

Member
Reaction score
2
You've never played a world till the end have you? This reply alone hows how oblivious you are to end-world play, depending on world settings, nah in general honestly. If something like that happens it can lose you the world immediately. That'd just get messy.
Well, I have played a few worlds until end, but never on a very large account because I don't cheat/coplay like the rest of yas. So I don't really stand much of a chance. These days I mainly play just to see how much I can slow down you cheaters and coplayers, sniping nobles and such. That and of course the community :)

Yes, if a critical member of your tribe leave the game, it can certainly change the outcome of the world. I think that is a good thing.
You think it's 'messy' to have to renoble all of his villages, I think it's 'messy' (and honestly quite scummy) that the move to take is just change who is playing the account after such an event. (You have a giant advantage against any tribe who doesn't share account information)

I must say, I can't blame you coplayers for doing it this way when the TW staff allows it. Kinda like how international corporations don't pay taxes in America, it's the fault of the system.
 
Last edited:

MarcMadness

Member
Reaction score
5
I mean it's not cheating have multiple people playing an account, it's just sensible if I sleep between 13st and 20st then it would make sense for someone who is awake to play this.
It also can't be seen as cheating when everyone has the ability to play that way and it gives no advantage to me other than the fact I can sleep and the fact my wife hasn't left me yet for defending ops on our wedding anniversary lol.
I would suggest the reason you hate it is because you don't have one which is only your own fault tbh.

If you wanted the game levelling you would need to remove pp abuse (never going to happen) and push accs but there we go.

And as regards if a big acc falls it should cost you the world i think your a moron.
Everyone else in that tribe has also played a year to get to that point and shouldn't lose out because of a RL event that has happened.
 

bambamsam1997

Member
Reaction score
2
I would suggest the reason you hate it is because you don't have one which is only your own fault tbh.
I guess this is, in part, true. The reason I hate it is because if you don't play this way, you can't win. An unfair advantage over anyone who doesn't share account information.
And as regards if a big acc falls it should cost you the world i think your a moron.
The reason you think this is because like the others you think of these accounts as things that can be transferred freely.. Accounts are supposed to be people. Perhaps if that person isn't willing or able to play the world until the finish, they were not a good choice for your tribe. Sharing account information, you can avoid these problems. But then everyone has to share account information or they are at a huge disadvantage.

I think really, it's a different game that you and I are playing. I play the way the game used to be played, and you play the discord circlejerk version.
 

Alushu

Active Member
Reaction score
31
Better or worse is not the quality we are analyzing here, it's fairness. Although, I am inclined to believe that's not actually a concern for many of you
I don't know what you expect anyone to say. It's not 2007 anymore, most players are older, grown up and have an actual life like full-time jobs etc. It's entirely unrealistic to expect people to solo an account nowadays with how the game's playstyle has evolved. I might be biased but to me it just sounds like whining cause you don't have it yourself even though it's rather easy to find/obtain if you bothered.
 

bambamsam1997

Member
Reaction score
2
I don't know what you expect anyone to say. It's not 2007 anymore, most players are older, grown up and have an actual life like full-time jobs etc. It's entirely unrealistic to expect people to solo an account nowadays with how the game's playstyle has evolved. I might be biased but to me it just sounds like whining cause you don't have it yourself even though it's rather easy to find/obtain if you bothered.
I have been offered positions on multi-player accounts but I refuse. I find it repulsively scummy that the "game's playstyle has evolved" into a situation where if you don't bend the rules you have a complete disadvantage. That, you at least seem to admit, is an unfair advantage; to have multiple people start the world together on separate accounts, intending to end up on one.

I hope ATissue from your tribe on 115 is following the rules and didn't go ahead with his planned merger before the other associated accounts had no villages ;)

And I do suppose that my posting here only amounts to whining, since the TW team will literally never take an action that results in less motivation to buy PP on several accounts. Two easy steps to completely obliterate this account pushing issue, I would bet money the TW team will not do it though:
1. Remove connection sharing option
2. If an IP address touches more than one account on a world, IP banned.

This would ensure that any co-playing is STRICTLY for the purpose of 24/7 activity, and would require premade co-players instead of merging accounts in after they have finished pushing for the account they intend to play on. TW will never do this because they make more money when you can push accounts to get an advantage.

I will just make my own game I suppose. Database CRUD app with a shiny finish is not exactly an impressive feat.
 
Last edited:

Alushu

Active Member
Reaction score
31
I have been offered positions on multi-player accounts but I refuse. I find it repulsively scummy that the "game's playstyle has evolved" into a situation where if you don't bend the rules you have a complete disadvantage. That, you at least seem to admit, is an unfair advantage; to have multiple people start the world together on separate accounts, intending to end up on one.

I hope ATissue from your tribe on 115 is following the rules and didn't go ahead with his planned merger before the other associated accounts had no villages ;)

And I do suppose that my posting here only amounts to whining, since the TW team will literally never take an action that results in less motivation to buy PP on several accounts. Two easy steps to completely obliterate this account pushing issue, I would bet money the TW team will not do it though:
1. Remove connection sharing option
2. If an IP address touches more than one account on a world, IP banned.

This would ensure that any co-playing is STRICTLY for the purpose of 24/7 activity, and would require premade co-players instead of merging accounts in after they have finished pushing for the account they intend to play on. TW will never do this because they make more money when you can push accounts to get an advantage.

I will just make my own game I suppose. Database CRUD app with a shiny finish is not exactly an impressive feat.
Didn't know who he was before this world. I actually met him ingame but I appreciate the accusation which had nothing to do with my remark earlier- whatever floats your boat big boy.

I wonder why you even bother if you blatantly refuse to move along with the meta / evolved game state. ( Yes, I also hate PP abuse, I adjust. Didn't spend a dime so it's not like that'd stop them if I did anything illegal)

Let's just agree to disagree. I live in the here and now and you live in the past, which is fine if that's what you want
There's only so many barbs you can take though ;)

If you want to make your own game, be my guest.

Peace.
 

AuroraMoon

Non-stop Poster
Reaction score
136
this is the last time ill be trying this line of thought in this thread
but just bring co-playing in as an official part of the game like account sitting
where the player gains access to the co-played account via their own account upon logging in

once that is done
monitoring, restrictions and rules can actually be enforced while limits are put in place to prevent abuse
with both push accounts and co-played accounts (the most common aspect of push accounts being mergers or gifted villages)

now for shits and giggles
lets look at the future of tw without co-playing becoming an official part of the game and if everyone done it

mergers - will become more often, decreasing the overall amount of wars and conflicts in general
push accounts - built solely for the purpose of merging into another account without issues (sometimes more then once, also harder to monitor)
pp usage - will increase however it wont be via spending money it will be gained via the exchange (less money for inno/tw)
night bonus - becomes pointless and instead becomes another advantage for the merged
world size - becomes smaller and smaller as the amount of co-players on an account increases via mergers (average at moment seems to be 4 co-players)
spying/sabotage - will increase, their existence on a world is no longer tied to a single account so more dodgy situations will form
new players to TW - are at a constant disadvantage with very few options to learn or even play without putting in multiple worlds before hand, otherwise their influenced to co-play another account which rarely actually helps the co-player over all

personally it seems like inno/tw is branching into more markets (facebook, mobile, steam) on a regular basis to gain new players
yet the account numbers are barely increasing ingame, instead it seems like the amount of coplayers an account has is increasing

also why play a game on easy - it devalues the experience and the achievements
winning isnt what matters, its how you won
 

bambamsam1997

Member
Reaction score
2
What is the mechanical difference between 5 coplayers starting accounts on a world intending to merge, and me myself having 5 separate accounts on a world that I log into and manage myself with the intent to noble all the pushing accounts with one?

No difference, but only one of them is considered cheating by TW staff at the moment

if you want to coplay, it should be the only presence you have ever had on that world
If the TW staff wants to be fair, they will either ban account merging, or allow me to play 5 accounts without connection sharing penalty.
 
Last edited:

old gheboasa

New Member
Reaction score
1
on the french server you are allowed to coplay as long as you do it from the beginning on a single account.
if you noble someone then you give him your password and admin sees the connection from one account to the new one, boom ban.
seems fair:)
 

ATissue

Member
Reaction score
8
We didn't plan on merging or even knew each other as alushu said, bambamsam. First I've talked to alushu was when he capped a tribesmates vill, and I *attacked* him. After a few weeks we decided to merge afterwards which has been delayed a few times since due to wars breaking out. I never logged on his acc and I just don't see what advantage it gives him. It's not a premade, at the end of the day he could've nobled the barbs I did with the same amount of nobles. Only difference was that i could play when he was on too, but who cares? It makes no difference at all at the end of the day since nothing was planned and if anything our positioning was far from ideal.