These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

Handling throwaway alts
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#1 - 2013-11-02 15:40:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Antihrist Pripravnik
Throwaway alts are one of the things that are breaking the game. In fact, it's the core principle of EVE that everyone is responsible for their actions in-game that is broken with the existence of throwaway alts. I have a proposal that would at least have some impact (I know it will not solve the problem entirely), but fist let's get any potential "agenda" out of the way:

- I have nothing against suicide ganking. EVE is a cold, dark universe and I like it because of it.

- I have nothing against scamming. In fact, I stayed in this game for 7 years because of the freedom it offers compared to other games. I've never scammed myself, but I sure enjoy watching new creative scams when they appear and reading about all the drama and meta gaming when they are discovered. It's something no other game can offer.

- I have nothing against alts in Factional warfare. Sure, the swarm of t1 frigates with all WCS in lows are annoying, but hey - if you want to circle a beacon for 10-20 minutes and call that fun, who am I to judge that decision. Go and have fun.



Now, with that out of the way, a proposal:

When a character is created, that slot on the account will be occupied for a fixed amount of time (60 days?). Whether you delete the character or not, you will not be able to create another one in that slot for the duration of the timer.

Example #1:
- A character is created and the timer of 60 days is started (60 days is just an example);
- The character gets deleted after 45 days;
- Character slot on the account is locked for another 15 days;
- 60 days from the moment of creation of the character that was in that slot, you are again free to create another one.

Example #2:
- A character is created and the timer of 60 days is started;
- The character gets deleted after 61 days;
- You are immediately free to create another character in that same slot.

Like I said, it isn't the final solution, but it's a start.
UPDATES:
- A problematic situation with alts made for bidding on characters is spotted: Link to post
- Confusion for new players and a proposed solution: Link to post
Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#2 - 2013-11-02 17:03:52 UTC
+1. Excellent solution to a known problem that CCP has to spend time and resources on chasing down.

Profit favors the prepared
Aang Caldari
Hellbringer-66th-Brigade
Insidious.
#3 - 2013-11-02 19:12:04 UTC
+1 SUPORTING
Jasmine Assasin
Doomheim
#4 - 2013-11-02 19:35:27 UTC
As someone that has utilized "throwaway alts" (incidentally that's exactly what this character is) I just can't approve. There are many valid reasons why people would want to use one and besides when a char is deleted all the time put into it is lost. Be it training to gank, setting up scams, etc. I don't see a problem here if people choose to play this way.

Just because you don't approve doesn't make it wrong or worth "fixing". Never mind that you didn't actually state what you were wanting to "fix" in the first place but instead used a blanket statement that "Throwaway alts are one of the things that are breaking the game". You only gave some examples of what you think is valid uses of an alt.


-1
Mag's
Azn Empire
#5 - 2013-11-02 20:03:57 UTC
I'm guessing the OP has some statistics on the amount of people that exploit this and are subject to a ban where applicable?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#6 - 2013-11-02 20:10:55 UTC
Mag's wrote:
I'm guessing the OP has some statistics on the amount of people that exploit this and are subject to a ban where applicable?


Nope. But I would like to have it, if CCP would be so kind to provide it. After all, I only see manifestations of the problem in-game and don't have appropriate tools or resources to work on the statistics. It became obvious enough (even without statistics) to be noticed by players in empire space, so I'm guessing that the scale of the problem is big enough to need some action against it.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#7 - 2013-11-02 20:14:18 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I'm guessing the OP has some statistics on the amount of people that exploit this and are subject to a ban where applicable?


Nope. But I would like to have it, if CCP would be so kind to provide it. After all, I only see manifestations of the problem in-game and don't have appropriate tools or resources to work on the statistics. It became obvious enough (even without statistics) to be noticed by players in empire space, so I'm guessing that the scale of the problem is big enough to need some action against it.
So you're simply guessing it's a problem, through your own assumptions?

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#8 - 2013-11-02 20:29:19 UTC
Mag's wrote:
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Mag's wrote:
I'm guessing the OP has some statistics on the amount of people that exploit this and are subject to a ban where applicable?


Nope. But I would like to have it, if CCP would be so kind to provide it. After all, I only see manifestations of the problem in-game and don't have appropriate tools or resources to work on the statistics. It became obvious enough (even without statistics) to be noticed by players in empire space, so I'm guessing that the scale of the problem is big enough to need some action against it.
So you're simply guessing it's a problem, through your own assumptions?


Observations, to be more precise.

When I see something happening in the game, I go to forum to see if anyone else notices the same. It turns out that there are other players that have noticed the same about throwaway alts, so it can't be only my assumption.
Jasmine Assasin
Doomheim
#9 - 2013-11-02 20:37:58 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:


Observations, to be more precise.

When I see something happening in the game, I go to forum to see if anyone else notices the same. It turns out that there are other players that have noticed the same about throwaway alts, so it can't be only my assumption.



So tell us what the problems are because so far you have failed to do so.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#10 - 2013-11-02 20:54:49 UTC
Jasmine Assasin wrote:
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:


Observations, to be more precise.

When I see something happening in the game, I go to forum to see if anyone else notices the same. It turns out that there are other players that have noticed the same about throwaway alts, so it can't be only my assumption.



So tell us what the problems are because so far you have failed to do so.


From the OP:
Quote:
it's the core principle of EVE that everyone is responsible for their actions in-game that is broken


There it is.

I don't have anything against any play style, but if anyone decides to play a certain way, there has to be some decision making involved in the process. Always having an option of doing an action without any consequences involved simply breaks the balance.

If a player wants to do whatever throwaway alts are doing today, then by all means, let him do it. But let there be at least something that will make that play style decision stick for a while.

If it runs wild and uncontrolled like it is now, it's only going to get worse.
Astroniomix
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#11 - 2013-11-02 21:39:10 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
[quote=Jasmine Assasin][quote=Antihrist Pripravnik]

Observations, to be more precise.

When I see something happening in the game, I go to forum to see if anyone else notices the same. It turns out that there are other players that have noticed the same about throwaway alts, so it can't be only my assumption.

"ramblings on the forums" don't constitute evidence when you are talking about a banable breach of the TOS.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#12 - 2013-11-02 21:59:09 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:

"ramblings on the forums" don't constitute evidence when you are talking about a banable breach of the TOS.


You aren't really going to try and pretend that people don't abuse throw away alts to avoid negative consequences are you?
CCP can just only automate deletion of -10 alt detection since defining 'negative consequences' in a computer script way is hard when it comes to things like scamming. But sticking your head in the sand, singing lalala & pretending it doesn't really happen is just a joke.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#13 - 2013-11-02 22:05:17 UTC
Astroniomix wrote:

"ramblings on the forums" don't constitute evidence when you are talking about a banable breach of the TOS.


Players can't provide evidence, only CCP can. But players can provide feedback based on their own observations.

As far as I can see, nothing is changed for TOS respecting players with this proposition, so there isn't much of a reason why it shouldn't be implemented.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#14 - 2013-11-02 22:13:43 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Nevyn Auscent wrote:
Astroniomix wrote:

"ramblings on the forums" don't constitute evidence when you are talking about a banable breach of the TOS.


You aren't really going to try and pretend that people don't abuse throw away alts to avoid negative consequences are you?
CCP can just only automate deletion of -10 alt detection since defining 'negative consequences' in a computer script way is hard when it comes to things like scamming. But sticking your head in the sand, singing lalala & pretending it doesn't really happen is just a joke.
Just as claiming it is so pervasive, as to require draconian measures to stop it. It's an old argument never backed up with any facts.

The only ones who know are CCP and I'm pretty sure they have a handle on it. What we don't need is anecdotal evidence from pilots, who then make poor game changing suggestions based on just that. Blink

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Sipphakta en Gravonere
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#15 - 2013-11-02 22:26:57 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
[As far as I can see, nothing is changed for TOS respecting players with this proposition, so there isn't much of a reason why it shouldn't be implemented.


I biomassed several alts because I no longer needed them (used only for buying a character) so it would impact me.

Also, I don't see why the change is necessary. Recycling gank alts already is a TOS violation and should be reported to CCP.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#16 - 2013-11-02 22:28:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
i like the proposed alt "limiter". Eve is all about consequences, and using throw away alts is the easiest way of entirely evading any kind of consequences. It doesn't fix the problem but it mitigates it.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#17 - 2013-11-02 22:49:20 UTC
OP, you proposal changes nothing as there are 3 slots on account and even if 1 is temporary frozen nothing prevents players from creating on 2 other slots and/or accounts. So the problem will still be there, but dev time wasted.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#18 - 2013-11-02 22:54:43 UTC
Mag's wrote:
The only ones who know are CCP and I'm pretty sure they have a handle on it. What we don't need are anecdotal evidence from pilots who then make poor game changing suggestions based on just that. Blink


Well, they are not exactly famous for having a handle on a situation until it escalates Smile

Anyway, I agree that evidence provided by players should not be taken for granted. The only relevant evidence would be from a public statement and statistics from CCP. Now, if that happens and it turns out that the observations of players had the right direction, the question is what can be done to minimize the damage. An open discussion on "Features & ideas" where players themselves can challenge an idea before anything is done seems like a nice place to discuss the potential impact of any change.


Sipphakta en Gravonere wrote:

I biomassed several alts because I no longer needed them (used only for buying a character) so it would impact me.

Also, I don't see why the change is necessary. Recycling gank alts already is a TOS violation and should be reported to CCP.


That's an interesting side effect. As I never traded a character, I just want to make sure I got it right:
- You create an alt that will bid on a character sale thread. At this point there's another empty slot available on the account;
- Bought character is transferred to an empty slot;
- You delete the auction bidding alt and want to create another character in that slot;


Well, yes, it sure is a problem for that particular situation.

Some change is necessary because a TOS violation like this is hard to spot by players in order to be reported in the first place and automated scripts can't detect everything. Having a way to deal with the problem before it happens instead to only deal with cases so obvious a player can easily spot is usually good.
Antihrist Pripravnik
Cultural Enrichment and Synergy of Diversity
Stain Neurodiverse Democracy
#19 - 2013-11-02 22:57:44 UTC
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:
OP, you proposal changes nothing as there are 3 slots on account and even if 1 is temporary frozen nothing prevents players from creating on 2 other slots and/or accounts. So the problem will still be there, but dev time wasted.


Correct. Nothing prevents players from creating on 2 other slots. Those slots would be affected as soon as they do, however.

Yes the problem is still there, but the impact is lowered.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#20 - 2013-11-02 23:02:09 UTC
Antihrist Pripravnik wrote:
Mag's wrote:
The only ones who know are CCP and I'm pretty sure they have a handle on it. What we don't need are anecdotal evidence from pilots who then make poor game changing suggestions based on just that. Blink


Well, they are not exactly famous for having a handle on a situation until it escalates Smile

Anyway, I agree that evidence provided by players should not be taken for granted. The only relevant evidence would be from a public statement and statistics from CCP. Now, if that happens and it turns out that the observations of players had the right direction, the question is what can be done to minimize the damage. An open discussion on "Features & ideas" where players themselves can challenge an idea before anything is done seems like a nice place to discuss the potential impact of any change.
CCP do many things behind the scenes, they do not advertise or shout about from the roof tops. Mostly because it's gives away too much information. Banning bots comes to mind and the systems they have in place to do just that.

I've read a few throw the accusations out regarding throw away alts, but not one person was able to back up those claims with facts.

If you do have any facts, then the best people to tell would be CCP. Please report them ASAP.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
123Next page