Coplaying ?

[DeletedUser]

Is it allowed ?

<3

 

[DeletedUser]

Have you ever been in the InnoGames-team?

No, but I have one dev, 2 product managers, and a multitute of CMs and (IG) mods on skype, and am familiar with the TW adminpanel.

sitting within families → multi's are impossible to detect, everyone claims to be co-sitting for the familymember.

Yes, hence on tw the shared net connection rules. On gepolis I'm not sure if there is a similar thing, however the shared connection rules make profiting from multi-accounting difficult.

Hacking → when someone co-plays on an account an decides to change the password you're in for a treat. If this would happen to you would you expect your account back? Because this is seldomly done. It's your choice to co-sit, so you're responsibility. I'd like

That isn't hacking, it is account theft, there is a difference, and generally you can get the account back with the email address. I've had that happen (twice), and continue to coplay, and have the accounts that it occurred on currently.
Also, on .net there are account returning possibilities, they are just annoying to do.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hacking → when someone co-plays on an account an decides to change the password you're in for a treat. If this would happen to you would you expect your account back? Because this is seldomly done. It's your choice to co-sit, so you're responsibility. I'd like

they change pass i log into a little thing called my email.....

 

[DeletedUser]

Coplaying penalizes solo-players
how so? Ive soloed and ived coed, havnt felt penalized either way

Anecdotal. Your personal experience does not dictate what generally occurs. Solo players cannot play with the same intensity, or to the same level of coverage, as coplayers. That's common sense.

Coplaying discourages new players (as they invariably start out as soloists)
they start off solo, and as they progress in game play ability , they can co, or if they struggle another play can ahve them co play and help teach them.

Soloists often decide to stay soloists, because that's how they like to play or because they don't feel comfortable sharing their account with others. However, that's not really a response to your argument.

Your argument is that a new player will eventually become familiar with the game and then end up teaming up with another player to co-play. But, your argument is an assumption. It's an assumption that a new player may not get discouraged from the fact everyone else is coplaying and that he/she is not "connected" like the others. It's an assumption that the player is social, when in fact many players are not social bugs and thus would prefer to play solo but are forced to co-play in order to compete on an equal level.

The fact is, a person starting the game is impressed upon by the circumstances of that game within the first month. From there, they either continue to play or they quit. So, within one month, a new player will need to stay alive in a largely disadvantageous environment, then link up with another player that he/she trusts enough to share the account, that isn't already playing in that world and speaks the same language, and then they need to coordinate their efforts. The chances of that is slimmer, far slimmer, in growing a player base than it is to simply not allow coplaying. Thus, without coplaying, everyone who joins doesn't have to survive the gauntlet and then hook up with a partner to continue playing.

No, it's quite obvious that coplaying acts as a filter, diminishing the total amount of players that eventually "stay" to play.

Coplaying isn't all that good for business, as it reduces the need for premium features
more people on the account so greater chance they can afford premium, also i have co's on tribal wars and i still use premium features.

That's circular logic. Two players on one account doesn't increase the chance they can afford premium. Individually they can afford premium. Together they can afford premium. Altogether, they can afford to buy the same amount of premium, whether coplaying or solo. The DIFFERENCE is that there's less NEED for purchasing premium when you have two or more people managing the same account, and thus less likely that such will occur.

Coplaying increases the workload for mods and managers
I dont see how, makes less i think, as there would be more accounts, i interviewed mods and such for this one and they seem to be in agreement with me. since i am in a position to talk to people that mod helps me see that this isnt the case.

If you wish to pose credentials, I was a CM with Inno, worked with many other community managers, had a large team of moderators, covered and provided assistance in other Inno communities besides the one I cmed, wrote policies, etc. Before Inno, I moderated in other games and participated in betas, going back to Everquest (and before -- Tradewars anyone?). I have had ample discussions about coplaying and otherwise, with developers, pms, other cms, and with moderators (ingame and forum).

However, this isn't a debate about credentials...

Coplaying provides an easy means to account-steal
not really i have coplayed often and never had my accoutn stolen, you have to trust your coplayer just as you would trust your tribemates.

Once again, Yal, anecdotal. Account stealing happens. Just because it hasn't happened to you is not a rebuttal.

Coplaying focuses on the account, instead of the players, and is thus rather impersonal, which cuts down on the larger social aspect
more people on the account forces them to be social, most co's have a group chat were they talk, more co's on the account is more people to post on the forums, and on skype so it increases the social aspect of the game in my eyes.

You're misconstruing what I wrote. I said, "larger social aspect." The larger social aspect is player vs player, not two players vs two players. And while there's the social aspect of teams vs teams, it dismisses the individual social aspect that is, by and large, greater in diversity and intensity.

You also pointed out another thought here --- which is that you say it "forces them to be social." As I indicated earlier, some players don't want to be social, they don't want to socialize. They just want to play and be an antagonist to others (or protagonist, in their own eyes). Being "forced" to socialize is yet one more reason not to avow for coplaying.

Coplaying means less actual bodies (1:1 player to acct vs 2:1 player to acct), causing worlds to be less populatedless population is less strain on the servers, expecially important for this game. less of a world population, consisting of accounts that are ran to the full ability co wise or solo in turn makes a better world to play on.

You are incorrect. The player pop is managed by splitting player pop between servers, or instances. More players means more players, simple as that. In coplaying, 2:1 player vs account is very much a decrease in player count, which doesn't look as good (to potential investors and prospective players) when account numbers pose the impression of a smaller player base.

So, the list I provided earlier stands, in that coplaying:

1. penalizes solo-players
2. discourages new players (as they invariably start out as soloists)
3. isn't all that good for business, as it reduces the need for premium features
4. provides an easy means to account-steal
5. increases the workload for mods and managers
6. focuses on the account, instead of the players, and is thus rather impersonal, which cuts down on the larger social aspect
7. means less actual bodies (1:1 player to acct vs 2:1 player to acct), causing worlds to be less populated

A few additional factors are that:

1. it requires additional programming to accommodate coplaying, developer time taken away from content development.
2. it requires more ingame moderators (volunteers) to manage and police coplaying, particularly if the tools are not up to the task (which they invariably are not, since we're dealing with humans and their Machiavellian ways).
3. dismissing all other considerations, coplaying doesn't make the gaming experience any better.

Here's what it is Yal --- I provided 10+ reasons why coplaying is not a good idea, while you have not provided 10 reasons (let alone one reason) why it is a good idea. Ultimately, the decision for coplaying rests firmly in the hands of the project manager and his development team, and I will respect whatever decision they present. But, for the sake of fair play in these discussions, let's see your 10 reasons.

 

[DeletedUser]

Just to add to this already meaningless discussion,

It is almost impossible for a mod/admin or higher to screen and find out wether there is a hacker active, this is a duel account and co-sitting for family members would be prohibited since it is impossible to see the difference.

It will be way to hard for InnoGames-staff to work. Co-op should be prohibited.
May I remind everyone this is not tribalwars, not even close.

For those who are or were InnoGames-staff know that this isn't feasible.

It's really not that hard to see I have caught more than 100's of multis on The West, with a bit of experience you can tell the difference between hackers, co-ups and multi accounts. Innogames has the tools

 

[DeletedUser]

Agreed soulspark, but coplaying muddies the waters quite a bit. Would you agree on that?

 

[DeletedUser]

I can play solo and be top 5 i can play with a co and be top 5 there's no super power given if coed. but ive argued the point enough I feel it should be the players right to choose you say give the state all the power so lets leave it at that instead of going back and forth and back and forth.

 

[DeletedUser]

Hehe, once again anecdotal. What you can do (presumably) is not relevant. It is relevant what the vast majority of players can, cannot, will, or won't do. By your own claims, you do not represent the vast majority of players.

I was really hoping you would try for that 10 reasons thing. Ah well...

 

[DeletedUser]

This game does not need co-players, the ranking system shows why enough. Im rank 38, 116.354, Jules is rank 1, 254.336!

Soloing is what this game is, you do not need top players to win. Im catching up to the top soloing and i have passed people who have started before me.

 

[DeletedUser]

This game does not need co-players, the ranking system shows why enough. Im rank 38, 116.354, Jules is rank 1, 254.336!

Soloing is what this game is, you do not need top players to win. Im catching up to the top soloing and i have passed people who have started before me.

you prove my point it dosnt need co's to pass others, if you can pass people that started before you, it makes sense you could pass co's as well...

 

[DeletedUser]

In my opinion, this game would be great without any kind of coplaying.

This game can be played by one single player / account, and it's more fair for everybody. As long as one player can still log-in on multiple locations, I agree.

 

[DeletedUser]

you prove my point it dosnt need co's to pass others, if you can pass people that started before you, it makes sense you could pass co's as well...

Hehe, fortunately it doesn't prove your point (do you really have one?). Two or more players on the same acct can far more effectively avoid gaming fatigue than a solo player, and thus while a player like hefty can sprint to the front, it will be harder for him to maintain that pace than, say, two players jogging on the same acct, particularly when life throws those little curves.

Take me for instance. I was #30 something and sprinted to #1. I maintained it for just a short time before life snuck up on me and gave me things to do. That's where "gems" would have been really helpful, and I may very well have purchased some (if they were available) just to stay near the top in rankings. On the other hand, if I had someone else playing my acct, I would merely have coordinated a schedule so we have better coverage --- without the need for gems.

Coplaying changes the dynamics of the game, makes it harder, even disconcerting, for soloists. Coplaying forces coplaying, leaving us with no other alternative if your goal is to compete. Gems would no longer be the tool for people with busy lives to compete on an even level with those who can play all day. In short, coplaying replaces gem purchasing. Now tell me how that's a good idea?