Previous Thread
Previous
Expand All
Collapse All
Ignore Author
Reply
<<Are there any client restrictions?>>
No client restrictions.
Solomon
>You could have your own F2P page boy walking locker, right? Give him a very large cloak and backpack, and you're set. How many page boys/girls would you want? How many might park at an inn table? I remember when empty tables were tough to come by.
Tables being hard to come by would be a blast from the past!
But this is, yet another reason, I don't see why we are allowing multiple logins. Even if one wants to defend MAing as it presently is...free accounts should not MA what-so-ever.
I agree. As an old player from waaay back , recently returned. It seems to me that a large percentage of the characters I see running about are not much more than drones. You can nod at them, no response. They come in to the locksmith, hit their scripts , spam your screen and then poof. In my mind if you were actually roleplaying and went into a shop where others were you would nod, smirk, scowl or whatnot. I understand we are sometimes in a hurry, our time is limited and we have errands to run etc but it certainly leaves me with the impression there are more drones than true characters in the game. :(
>>free accounts should not MA what-so-ever.
If I recall, free accounts are limited to a single character. How do we allow multiple character exploration, on the free account structure if we insist only one character?
Don't punish future generations of customers for the ills we've accumulated today.
Doug
If I recall, free accounts are limited to a single character. How do we allow multiple character exploration, on the free account structure if we insist only one character?
Don't punish future generations of customers for the ills we've accumulated today.
Doug
>>>>free accounts should not MA what-so-ever.
>>If I recall, free accounts are limited to a single character. How do we allow multiple character exploration, on the free account structure if we insist only one character?
In the world of broadband and relatively cheap wifi, this cannot be reasonably enforced. Scenario: Dad played 20 years ago, might want to try the F2P account before committing. His wife, curious, also plays on HER laptop. Their teenage child, as they get excited, also wants to play, plays on his/her computer. That's 3 accounts right there, same household, same internet connection. I am certain that there are some ways to make this distinguishable from me running 3 accounts off my laptop, but ... what does it achieve, for all the additional work, when there are already plenty of MA'ers in the lands already - and - plenty of restrictions for the F2P accounts to begin with?
*
I am not a heavy MA scripter selling silver or characters for gain - however, I've had multiple accounts nearly every time I've been subscribed. It's for convenience, for me, for inventory, for RP interactions (as different characters interact with the world in different ways, and of course, how they interact with each other, although I've gotten way too old and slow for that nonsense), and of course, to get an extra vote in the upcoming WL election (haha?).
Initially, I envisioned scenarios between my main PC and his brothers/relatives, some of which I had the energy to go through with, and I did want them "opposite" each other, or at least in the lands at the same time so that they could potentially .. I dunno.. make faces at each other or whatever. It was also nice to have a 2nd account for more anonymous styled IC postings, which I used to do quite a bit back then.
But, even in my most anti-social, time killing mode of gaming, I hunt one, while he rests, I hunt the other. They spell each other up, maybe one is better at foraging and the other is better at selling things. There were stages of leveling where the resting spot was isolated, and there was no interaction to be had, so the other account was nice to be able to RP and/or hunt while Turin was in some remote part of Elanthia grinding out his mutant training plan.
I'm not trying to validate my choices. I game how I game. I just wanted to share my perspective, as it's not always so treacherous and annoying as MA is often perceived. For a very long time, I kept my other PC's separate and their identities separate and had them in different parts of Elanthia, and really, unless you knew one or the other well enough, you'd have no idea I was the player behind them. I have nearly full rosters on two accounts, it's highly likely you don't know most of my characters. I don't engage in any activity, in the game, via scripting or otherwise, that I would consider "annoying" or "spammy". The worst thing I've done is attend some merchant events with a couple characters at a time, and even then, I'm trying really hard to run both characters reasonably (of course, merchant events can go one of two ways, and most of the time, it's preferable if folks are quiet and patient, etc., especially in a super crowded room, such that the NPC's requests and information can be 'heard'.)
I do think, if we want the "annoying MA" stuff to go away, it's not going to be done by regulating it. It's got to come as a culture shift from the playerbase. "Hey. We are not going to buy things from annoying MA scripters and therefore enable their continued annoying MA scripting." The fact is, whether or not I personally find such things troublesome or annoying, so long as the actions are enabled by some notable segment of the population, it's going to continue. If "rules" are made, those rules will be circumvented - people don't muck around when it comes to their wallets. So long as the GS culture values things such as high level characters with notable utility and X amount of silvers in the bank or X amount of value in gear - over - things such as RP quality, notoriety and the value a PC adds to any given storyline or event -- MA scripting is going to continue.
I'm not making a value judgment here, just to be clear. I'm simply pointing out that these things take place, because collectively, the playerbase places value on the end result. So long as this culture continues, so will MA scripting. When the most valuable things in the game can no longer be scripted to be achieved, then the MA scripting will go away.
Personally, I would rather Simu just take over whatever secondary "illegal" market is being supported by the 'annoying' behavior, but I am relatively certain that's not going to happen.
Don't get me wrong. It's intriguing to me that money can be made playing a game, and I don't think it's a terrible, awful thing. I applaud the ambition and resourcefulness. It's just not how I game, and I enjoy the game more when the culture is more geared towards epic events and roleplay and such. I also believe, somewhat strongly, that the latter will ultimately draw more folks into the game, than whatever potential economic advantages are to be had by scripting ad nauseaum.
Different strokes for different folks and all that.
*
Concerning the topic at hand, I suppose... I trust Wyrom and Solomon to become aware and responsive if someone is suddenly running a 100 freebots in order to... I dunno... whatever could be achieved. Sellable high level utility character. X silvers for sale at Y per mil. Etc. Until bad things begin to happen, I think it would do more harm than good to prevent multiple F2P for a single person.
~ Bill, Coyote.
The best government is a benevolent tyranny tempered by an occasional assassination.
~ Voltaire
>>If I recall, free accounts are limited to a single character. How do we allow multiple character exploration, on the free account structure if we insist only one character?
In the world of broadband and relatively cheap wifi, this cannot be reasonably enforced. Scenario: Dad played 20 years ago, might want to try the F2P account before committing. His wife, curious, also plays on HER laptop. Their teenage child, as they get excited, also wants to play, plays on his/her computer. That's 3 accounts right there, same household, same internet connection. I am certain that there are some ways to make this distinguishable from me running 3 accounts off my laptop, but ... what does it achieve, for all the additional work, when there are already plenty of MA'ers in the lands already - and - plenty of restrictions for the F2P accounts to begin with?
*
I am not a heavy MA scripter selling silver or characters for gain - however, I've had multiple accounts nearly every time I've been subscribed. It's for convenience, for me, for inventory, for RP interactions (as different characters interact with the world in different ways, and of course, how they interact with each other, although I've gotten way too old and slow for that nonsense), and of course, to get an extra vote in the upcoming WL election (haha?).
Initially, I envisioned scenarios between my main PC and his brothers/relatives, some of which I had the energy to go through with, and I did want them "opposite" each other, or at least in the lands at the same time so that they could potentially .. I dunno.. make faces at each other or whatever. It was also nice to have a 2nd account for more anonymous styled IC postings, which I used to do quite a bit back then.
But, even in my most anti-social, time killing mode of gaming, I hunt one, while he rests, I hunt the other. They spell each other up, maybe one is better at foraging and the other is better at selling things. There were stages of leveling where the resting spot was isolated, and there was no interaction to be had, so the other account was nice to be able to RP and/or hunt while Turin was in some remote part of Elanthia grinding out his mutant training plan.
I'm not trying to validate my choices. I game how I game. I just wanted to share my perspective, as it's not always so treacherous and annoying as MA is often perceived. For a very long time, I kept my other PC's separate and their identities separate and had them in different parts of Elanthia, and really, unless you knew one or the other well enough, you'd have no idea I was the player behind them. I have nearly full rosters on two accounts, it's highly likely you don't know most of my characters. I don't engage in any activity, in the game, via scripting or otherwise, that I would consider "annoying" or "spammy". The worst thing I've done is attend some merchant events with a couple characters at a time, and even then, I'm trying really hard to run both characters reasonably (of course, merchant events can go one of two ways, and most of the time, it's preferable if folks are quiet and patient, etc., especially in a super crowded room, such that the NPC's requests and information can be 'heard'.)
I do think, if we want the "annoying MA" stuff to go away, it's not going to be done by regulating it. It's got to come as a culture shift from the playerbase. "Hey. We are not going to buy things from annoying MA scripters and therefore enable their continued annoying MA scripting." The fact is, whether or not I personally find such things troublesome or annoying, so long as the actions are enabled by some notable segment of the population, it's going to continue. If "rules" are made, those rules will be circumvented - people don't muck around when it comes to their wallets. So long as the GS culture values things such as high level characters with notable utility and X amount of silvers in the bank or X amount of value in gear - over - things such as RP quality, notoriety and the value a PC adds to any given storyline or event -- MA scripting is going to continue.
I'm not making a value judgment here, just to be clear. I'm simply pointing out that these things take place, because collectively, the playerbase places value on the end result. So long as this culture continues, so will MA scripting. When the most valuable things in the game can no longer be scripted to be achieved, then the MA scripting will go away.
Personally, I would rather Simu just take over whatever secondary "illegal" market is being supported by the 'annoying' behavior, but I am relatively certain that's not going to happen.
Don't get me wrong. It's intriguing to me that money can be made playing a game, and I don't think it's a terrible, awful thing. I applaud the ambition and resourcefulness. It's just not how I game, and I enjoy the game more when the culture is more geared towards epic events and roleplay and such. I also believe, somewhat strongly, that the latter will ultimately draw more folks into the game, than whatever potential economic advantages are to be had by scripting ad nauseaum.
Different strokes for different folks and all that.
*
Concerning the topic at hand, I suppose... I trust Wyrom and Solomon to become aware and responsive if someone is suddenly running a 100 freebots in order to... I dunno... whatever could be achieved. Sellable high level utility character. X silvers for sale at Y per mil. Etc. Until bad things begin to happen, I think it would do more harm than good to prevent multiple F2P for a single person.
~ Bill, Coyote.
The best government is a benevolent tyranny tempered by an occasional assassination.
~ Voltaire
>>free accounts should not MA what-so-ever.
>If I recall, free accounts are limited to a single character. How do we allow multiple character exploration, on the free account structure if we insist only one character?
>Don't punish future generations of customers for the ills we've accumulated today.
Having multiple characters, or accounts, is not what I call "MAing". It's having them logged in, simultaneously, in the same room. Like the pocket wizard to spell your main character up, etc.
I have multiple characters I play, just I don't play them at the same time. I might do some fringe behavior which is considered MAing since my wife and I both play, and both have multiple characters (and we trade buff spells sometimes, or services).
>>Tables being hard to come by would be a blast from the past!
>Gosh, them were the good ol' days. Being in the know to all the different places one could find a table was a certifiable way to identify a local. :D
Yes. I think my post was unclear. I was actually welcoming the days when tables were full, and you had to know where all the tables were located to get one for yourself. That I really don't mind, and would be kind of cool to see again in general. Ideally, not because everyone makes locker characters and parks them there, though.
>In the world of broadband and relatively cheap wifi, this cannot be reasonably enforced. Scenario: Dad played 20 years ago, might want to try the F2P account before committing. His wife, curious, also plays on HER laptop. Their teenage child, as they get excited, also wants to play, plays on his/her computer. That's 3 accounts right there, same household, same internet connection. I am certain that there are some ways to make this distinguishable from me running 3 accounts off my laptop, but ... what does it achieve, for all the additional work, when there are already plenty of MA'ers in the lands already - and - plenty of restrictions for the F2P accounts to begin with?
We already have two people playing from the same router quite often. From what some other people are saying (and even initially I said it might be difficult), my idea was, if it was possible, to limit multiple logins from the same computer. Obviously anyone with multiple computers could get around that, but only up to how many computers they do have. An arbitrary number still, but with a higher price than how many front ends your machine can handle.
It gains not being a slap in the face for lockers as they currently exist. It also puts some bottleneck on script-hunting F2P accounts only to sell them off. It also would show bonafide new players that this culture is frowned upon (although...I'm not sure it actually is overall).
>I do think, if we want the "annoying MA" stuff to go away, it's not going to be done by regulating it. It's got to come as a culture shift from the playerbase. "Hey. We are not going to buy things from annoying MA scripters and therefore enable their continued annoying MA scripting."
The culture shift is evident to me. It's towards MAing, not away from it. That's why I anticipate piles of locker characters. I'd probably even be doing it myself, but since I'm mostly in River's Rest, it isn't free for me. But not having to swap lockers around, and get my wife or a friend or a stash point to exchange boxes I put in a locker to be picked with another (my main) would even be more convenient than the locker space I'm paying for.
It doesn't sound like staff will be implementing any changes on the F2P grounds; although only players replied, it sounds like limiting MAing from the same machine would be difficult.
Personally, as someone who pay for Premium, I'd like to see a common chest in my premium home, that functions like a multi-character locker. We've been asking for this for years. This would be a nicer way to RP the situation for me, give more utlity to my home, and ... wait why should some free option be better mechanically than things I pay for?
"What Kaldonis does on his off time is totally Kaldonis's business, dude." ~Scribes
>If I recall, free accounts are limited to a single character. How do we allow multiple character exploration, on the free account structure if we insist only one character?
>Don't punish future generations of customers for the ills we've accumulated today.
Having multiple characters, or accounts, is not what I call "MAing". It's having them logged in, simultaneously, in the same room. Like the pocket wizard to spell your main character up, etc.
I have multiple characters I play, just I don't play them at the same time. I might do some fringe behavior which is considered MAing since my wife and I both play, and both have multiple characters (and we trade buff spells sometimes, or services).
>>Tables being hard to come by would be a blast from the past!
>Gosh, them were the good ol' days. Being in the know to all the different places one could find a table was a certifiable way to identify a local. :D
Yes. I think my post was unclear. I was actually welcoming the days when tables were full, and you had to know where all the tables were located to get one for yourself. That I really don't mind, and would be kind of cool to see again in general. Ideally, not because everyone makes locker characters and parks them there, though.
>In the world of broadband and relatively cheap wifi, this cannot be reasonably enforced. Scenario: Dad played 20 years ago, might want to try the F2P account before committing. His wife, curious, also plays on HER laptop. Their teenage child, as they get excited, also wants to play, plays on his/her computer. That's 3 accounts right there, same household, same internet connection. I am certain that there are some ways to make this distinguishable from me running 3 accounts off my laptop, but ... what does it achieve, for all the additional work, when there are already plenty of MA'ers in the lands already - and - plenty of restrictions for the F2P accounts to begin with?
We already have two people playing from the same router quite often. From what some other people are saying (and even initially I said it might be difficult), my idea was, if it was possible, to limit multiple logins from the same computer. Obviously anyone with multiple computers could get around that, but only up to how many computers they do have. An arbitrary number still, but with a higher price than how many front ends your machine can handle.
It gains not being a slap in the face for lockers as they currently exist. It also puts some bottleneck on script-hunting F2P accounts only to sell them off. It also would show bonafide new players that this culture is frowned upon (although...I'm not sure it actually is overall).
>I do think, if we want the "annoying MA" stuff to go away, it's not going to be done by regulating it. It's got to come as a culture shift from the playerbase. "Hey. We are not going to buy things from annoying MA scripters and therefore enable their continued annoying MA scripting."
The culture shift is evident to me. It's towards MAing, not away from it. That's why I anticipate piles of locker characters. I'd probably even be doing it myself, but since I'm mostly in River's Rest, it isn't free for me. But not having to swap lockers around, and get my wife or a friend or a stash point to exchange boxes I put in a locker to be picked with another (my main) would even be more convenient than the locker space I'm paying for.
It doesn't sound like staff will be implementing any changes on the F2P grounds; although only players replied, it sounds like limiting MAing from the same machine would be difficult.
Personally, as someone who pay for Premium, I'd like to see a common chest in my premium home, that functions like a multi-character locker. We've been asking for this for years. This would be a nicer way to RP the situation for me, give more utlity to my home, and ... wait why should some free option be better mechanically than things I pay for?
"What Kaldonis does on his off time is totally Kaldonis's business, dude." ~Scribes
>>It's having them logged in, simultaneously, in the same room. Like the pocket wizard to spell your main character up, etc.
Yes, I understand. Very similar to some of the other greats of yesteryear which had party-based exploration for the solo type player.
And we will likely attract solo type players, and players that are 'close control, fringe society' players, and players who want to join up with groups full of others but cannot play at convenient times, and a whole host of other sub-categories that will want multiple accounts with multiple characters that they will want to use as they see fit.
>>The culture shift is evident to me. It's towards MAing, not away from it.
This I agree with - I just believe the cause is not really clearly understood. I am of the opinion that the game environs (what is offered as entertainment to the masses) seems very general and broad at first, but ultimately offers the notion of self-sufficiency in gaining the pinnacle of power - however measured. The path to do that is through multiple-character accounts, some of which interact at times (like passing off boxes to be picked). But that interaction is purely mechanical and almost always justified from a personal perspective, not a rules or environs perspective.
For the longest time, this game survived on the RP angle as the primary reason - reinforced by limited mechanics knowledge that wasn't broadly shared between players. Then rules and inside information became more common knowledge, computers more powerful, connection speeds improved, costs reduced, and information distribution mechanisms improved; so teams were assembled to take advantage . . . here we are.
To combat this, I would submit, there need to be unique reasons to join in non-automated, multi-controlled group settings. There has to be a reason for characters from different players to band together. There are many significant efforts that support this (storylines) and many significant efforts that do not support this (merchants / quests), today. The core of the engine attempts to support this conceptually by offering increases in advancement (spells more effective in groups, grouping giving additional experience absorption rates) but these rules-based attempts can be met without reinforcing the different-player scheme.
It isn't very difficult to create mechanisms to detect unique connections, but to be most successful it would require some client work. These days, it's even possible with 95% plus certainty to isolate a particular user simply by their browser and IP address, using the massive amount of data flowing through the connection. Adding a client that can detect the MAC address to IP address and browser data easily moves the probability into the fourth sigma - presuming the backend is also developed in support. That's a lot of work. It isn't the detecting that is the challenge, it's what you do with the information and resource constraint.
And here is where I feel we may subject future generations to our woes. Encouraging different behavior in the player-base is decidedly different from forcing players to behave in ways that detract from their interests. Fortunately, we see seeds of such engagement going on around us, every day. That orchestration is incredibly difficult yet the current team seems to be vested in pulling this off, and is doing some good work!
>>Personally, as someone who pay for Premium, I'd like to see a common chest in my premium home
And SACKS!
Doug
Yes, I understand. Very similar to some of the other greats of yesteryear which had party-based exploration for the solo type player.
And we will likely attract solo type players, and players that are 'close control, fringe society' players, and players who want to join up with groups full of others but cannot play at convenient times, and a whole host of other sub-categories that will want multiple accounts with multiple characters that they will want to use as they see fit.
>>The culture shift is evident to me. It's towards MAing, not away from it.
This I agree with - I just believe the cause is not really clearly understood. I am of the opinion that the game environs (what is offered as entertainment to the masses) seems very general and broad at first, but ultimately offers the notion of self-sufficiency in gaining the pinnacle of power - however measured. The path to do that is through multiple-character accounts, some of which interact at times (like passing off boxes to be picked). But that interaction is purely mechanical and almost always justified from a personal perspective, not a rules or environs perspective.
For the longest time, this game survived on the RP angle as the primary reason - reinforced by limited mechanics knowledge that wasn't broadly shared between players. Then rules and inside information became more common knowledge, computers more powerful, connection speeds improved, costs reduced, and information distribution mechanisms improved; so teams were assembled to take advantage . . . here we are.
To combat this, I would submit, there need to be unique reasons to join in non-automated, multi-controlled group settings. There has to be a reason for characters from different players to band together. There are many significant efforts that support this (storylines) and many significant efforts that do not support this (merchants / quests), today. The core of the engine attempts to support this conceptually by offering increases in advancement (spells more effective in groups, grouping giving additional experience absorption rates) but these rules-based attempts can be met without reinforcing the different-player scheme.
It isn't very difficult to create mechanisms to detect unique connections, but to be most successful it would require some client work. These days, it's even possible with 95% plus certainty to isolate a particular user simply by their browser and IP address, using the massive amount of data flowing through the connection. Adding a client that can detect the MAC address to IP address and browser data easily moves the probability into the fourth sigma - presuming the backend is also developed in support. That's a lot of work. It isn't the detecting that is the challenge, it's what you do with the information and resource constraint.
And here is where I feel we may subject future generations to our woes. Encouraging different behavior in the player-base is decidedly different from forcing players to behave in ways that detract from their interests. Fortunately, we see seeds of such engagement going on around us, every day. That orchestration is incredibly difficult yet the current team seems to be vested in pulling this off, and is doing some good work!
>>Personally, as someone who pay for Premium, I'd like to see a common chest in my premium home
And SACKS!
Doug
I agree with a lot of your post, Doug. It's quite eloquently described, and sets a high bar, as well as some fair and detailed analysis.
The only thing I will point out isn't a disagreement, but:
>And we will likely attract solo type players, and players that are 'close control, fringe society' players, and players who want to join up with groups full of others but cannot play at convenient times, and a whole host of other sub-categories that will want multiple accounts with multiple characters that they will want to use as they see fit.
Playing from Japan and mainly in River's Rest is about as fringe as it gets as far as convenient times etc. Yet I am the one here arguing against MAing...
"What Kaldonis does on his off time is totally Kaldonis's business, dude." ~Scribes
The only thing I will point out isn't a disagreement, but:
>And we will likely attract solo type players, and players that are 'close control, fringe society' players, and players who want to join up with groups full of others but cannot play at convenient times, and a whole host of other sub-categories that will want multiple accounts with multiple characters that they will want to use as they see fit.
Playing from Japan and mainly in River's Rest is about as fringe as it gets as far as convenient times etc. Yet I am the one here arguing against MAing...
"What Kaldonis does on his off time is totally Kaldonis's business, dude." ~Scribes
>>Playing from Japan and mainly in River's Rest is about as fringe as it gets as far as convenient times etc. Yet I am the one here arguing against MAing...
Yes, I understand. I hope it is only because there don't seem to have been enough options available to overcome your concerns, and not simply 'because'. . . Believe me, I'm aware of the seeming irony. I feel I share those concerns to a degree, I just see the potential for a different path (especially based on Bill's thoughts).
Doug
Yes, I understand. I hope it is only because there don't seem to have been enough options available to overcome your concerns, and not simply 'because'. . . Believe me, I'm aware of the seeming irony. I feel I share those concerns to a degree, I just see the potential for a different path (especially based on Bill's thoughts).
Doug
I used to MA, but the charm wore off. I opted for the premium account, because over a dozen different characters is more fun than just one or two half-heartedly played characters.
I have a huge screen so I didn't even have to "switch" characters; everything fit nicely in two different windows. No scripts, because I could see all the action. And I chronically let my "main guy" get killed while hunting because my alt was talking and drinking and generally having more fun in town. Oops. Priorities. At the end of the day, it wasn't even very fun to have my main and alt RPing in town because just one of them would do. It was a matter of picking one.
My last attempt at MAing was to have a 20th level empath for my wife to use at will. She doesn't like the game that much, so I figured I could do the grind portion for her and she would use the empath for RP because that is what she enjoys. It worked well enough.. once. Then she noticed that she hated empaths and wanted to be a paladin. We rolled one and she used it for 20 some days then quit before the next bill came around.
She is the perfect candidate for F2P. She isn't troubled by numbers or combat, she just likes RP. I am kind of hoping she will join the fun because there is no real money on the line.
Magarven the Mad
I have a huge screen so I didn't even have to "switch" characters; everything fit nicely in two different windows. No scripts, because I could see all the action. And I chronically let my "main guy" get killed while hunting because my alt was talking and drinking and generally having more fun in town. Oops. Priorities. At the end of the day, it wasn't even very fun to have my main and alt RPing in town because just one of them would do. It was a matter of picking one.
My last attempt at MAing was to have a 20th level empath for my wife to use at will. She doesn't like the game that much, so I figured I could do the grind portion for her and she would use the empath for RP because that is what she enjoys. It worked well enough.. once. Then she noticed that she hated empaths and wanted to be a paladin. We rolled one and she used it for 20 some days then quit before the next bill came around.
She is the perfect candidate for F2P. She isn't troubled by numbers or combat, she just likes RP. I am kind of hoping she will join the fun because there is no real money on the line.
Magarven the Mad
What about......
Names! The choices are so limited. So many good names seem to be taken but not used. A name can make or break a character in my humble opinion. It took a long time for me to find a name I was happy with when I started last month. Is it possible there might be some kind of purge to free up names for an influx of new players?
I have 2 friends (husband/wife) I'd like to bring to GS from another mud- but this F2P thing does not, to me, seem appropriate at all as it's not a genuine GS experience. Does the old 30-day+credit card routine still exist? Or should I just suggest they pay the $15 to start out with a normal account? I don't see where I might have them sign up to do that- looks like the only way to sign up now is via an F2P account. Could use some clarification here.
In the sign up area, after you submit some info, it has an area to upgrade.
Have them try it out on the F2P tier, they get most the same experience until level 10.
~Wyrom, APM
>>They call him Wyrom, not afraid to get dirty; work all day, in game by 5:30; loresongs eloquent, item embellishment, double speed development... ~Silvean
Have them try it out on the F2P tier, they get most the same experience until level 10.
~Wyrom, APM
>>They call him Wyrom, not afraid to get dirty; work all day, in game by 5:30; loresongs eloquent, item embellishment, double speed development... ~Silvean
I am another player who has returned after 12 years and was a week or so into my "free" 30 days when I found that it was converted to a F2P account. I was NOT pleased to say the least, in fact I felt ripped off because I was forced to subscribe before that 30 days was up (3/29 would be when it was up) just to be able to use the things I had already done - like my locker with stuff in it! This is wrong on SO many levels, Simu! I cannot even begin to imagine what "real" new players would think to have their play "nerfed" in the middle. I mean I already knew I was gonna subscribe. Ridiculous!
>Names! The choices are so limited. So many good names seem to be taken but not used. A name can make or break a character in my humble opinion. It took a long time for me to find a name I was happy with when I started last month. Is it possible there might be some kind of purge to free up names for an influx of new players?
One suggestion I would like to make along these lines is that you have a confirmation step before creating a character when the name is available. It isn't uncommon that the first several names you enter are taken. Then you get slightly more experimental, but as soon as you hit something unique now that name is taken by you.
Definitely wouldn't mind an extra confirmation step in here.
Not a complaint but, a feature that would modestly improve the situation in my opinion.
"What Kaldonis does on his off time is totally Kaldonis's business, dude." ~Scribes
One suggestion I would like to make along these lines is that you have a confirmation step before creating a character when the name is available. It isn't uncommon that the first several names you enter are taken. Then you get slightly more experimental, but as soon as you hit something unique now that name is taken by you.
Definitely wouldn't mind an extra confirmation step in here.
Not a complaint but, a feature that would modestly improve the situation in my opinion.
"What Kaldonis does on his off time is totally Kaldonis's business, dude." ~Scribes
>>In the sign up area, after you submit some info, it has an area to upgrade.
>>Have them try it out on the F2P tier, they get most the same experience until level 10.
>>~Wyrom, APM
I appreciate this suggestion but it's not what I'm looking for. The F2P accounts are really a subpar experience imo, no societies- no weekly gift (a big deal for newer players), and I'd like to give them some gear and money as well so dealing with that tedium is just not worth it.
I still don't see how someone goes about just opening a normal account for $15. This seems VERY strange!
>>Have them try it out on the F2P tier, they get most the same experience until level 10.
>>~Wyrom, APM
I appreciate this suggestion but it's not what I'm looking for. The F2P accounts are really a subpar experience imo, no societies- no weekly gift (a big deal for newer players), and I'd like to give them some gear and money as well so dealing with that tedium is just not worth it.
I still don't see how someone goes about just opening a normal account for $15. This seems VERY strange!
How does the treasure cap work, does it include all items both personally collected from kills and random pickups found in the wilds or is it general loot found in a single day?
What are the times in which these caps get reset? Is it 24h's after receiving the message or at a specific time on the server?
Are there any commands to see what boosts are currently active on my toons?
Will there be any way to buy temp locker space using silvers instead of real money at any point?
Why have you not added more payment options to the simustore!?!
I have been bugging both mentors and as of yesterday a GM and GH about this as well as contacting billing. So I'll go ahead and add it here as well... Is it possible to add Paysafecard as an option to pay for simucoins? I love the game and really would love to get the most out of it sadly due to real life issues I do not have a personal bank account and all payments are made with cash. Any online payments are typically made using Paysafecard which works almost every were... but here... grumbles
Will you guys just take my money and let me play? Please???
What are the times in which these caps get reset? Is it 24h's after receiving the message or at a specific time on the server?
Are there any commands to see what boosts are currently active on my toons?
Will there be any way to buy temp locker space using silvers instead of real money at any point?
Why have you not added more payment options to the simustore!?!
I have been bugging both mentors and as of yesterday a GM and GH about this as well as contacting billing. So I'll go ahead and add it here as well... Is it possible to add Paysafecard as an option to pay for simucoins? I love the game and really would love to get the most out of it sadly due to real life issues I do not have a personal bank account and all payments are made with cash. Any online payments are typically made using Paysafecard which works almost every were... but here... grumbles
Will you guys just take my money and let me play? Please???
I'd never heard of paysafecard and from what I've read in my brief research, it seems very popular in Europe. Whether Simutronics will accept it will probably be determined by what fees paysafecard charges. It'll have to make financial sense. I'm kind of puzzled about why Paysafe didn't partner with Visa or Mastercard for transaction handling. At any rate, the decision is above any GH or GM's pay grade. If you've let billing know, you've done what you can, I believe.
SGM Sleken
SGM Sleken
