Warrior General Games

Originally posted by tremele
I'm not reporting anyone, that was just a joke. I like Ravenwood's idea about combining the accounts. For real it was a common misconception that multis were allowed. I don't think anyone should be banned for it now, even if they have 100s. But lets stop pretending it's not breaking the rules as a way to circumvent the pay to win model.

And let's be real here again. Nothing about having 'multis' as you put it is enhancing the dots as it would in a fantasy world pay to win model. The dots don't get 10% better with each account. I don't have a level 80 Paladin with game breaking equipment that led to an epic collapse of the game engine (that would be PooWahn Con)

Originally posted by SmithsterSmitty
And let's be real here again. Nothing about having 'multis' as you put it is enhancing the dots as it would in a fantasy world pay to win model. The dots don't get 10% better with each account. I don't have a level 80 Paladin with game breaking equipment that led to an epic collapse of the game engine (that would be PooWahn Con)



You could make the argument that someone with multiple accounts has better coordination with tactics vs someone who is having to work with other agents but that is pretty small and I'll concede that the playing field is level for the most part. My concern is primarily around the cost. There are pro teams out there spending less than AA teams. That's not right.

Originally posted by tremele
You could make the argument that someone with multiple accounts has better coordination with tactics vs someone who is having to work with other agents but that is pretty small and I'll concede that the playing field is level for the most part. My concern is primarily around the cost. There are pro teams out there spending less than AA teams. That's not right.

That is fair

Originally posted by tremele
You could make the argument that someone with multiple accounts has better coordination with tactics vs someone who is having to work with other agents but that is pretty small and I'll concede that the playing field is level for the most part. My concern is primarily around the cost. There are pro teams out there spending less than AA teams. That's not right.

BTW IF it is multis not contributing with a payment at all, it is multiple accounts in a 'don't pay to lose' model as nobody is competing really without custom equipment etc.

If we define "playing" as having dots with full levels and custom gear, GLB is clearly pay to play not pay to win.

So do we want to go with the "Shame" listing, or what are we edging towards here?

I'm willing to admit multis are not officially allowed. Are you willing to admit that Bort/DD have zero interest in taking any action in any way to limit/deter/consolidate/discourage multi use?

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
If we define "playing" as having dots with full levels and custom gear, GLB is clearly pay to play not pay to win.

So do we want to go with the "Shame" listing, or what are we edging towards here?

I'm willing to admit multis are not officially allowed. Are you willing to admit that Bort/DD have zero interest in taking any action in any way to limit/deter/consolidate/discourage multi use?





Pretty obvious they have little to 0 interest. When you still have a team in Pro2 that appears to be very obvious, who just beat a team with a high quality owner with experienced co-ordinating skills handily.

Seems they rely on the paying customers to bring these issues to the forefront when we finally get tired of watching it take place, instead of policing it themselves.

Perhaps someone should list the current pro teams with zero multis on them.

I'll assume OPT and Florida (while taking no effort to look at players/agents). Who else do we have?

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Perhaps someone should list the current pro teams with zero multis on them.

I'll assume OPT and Florida (while taking no effort to look at players/agents). Who else do we have?

You think Ryan appreciates you always giving him the benefit of the doubt? He's thanos, magic fingers, man behind the curtain, got the infinity stones....

Also there is at least one or two multi's on his teams, and I for one, plan to take a stand against this atrocity. I propose we pool our funds and hire Jackie Chiles.

Take away multi's and suddenly everyone will have to find a way to tell their wife/spouse/cat that they spend money on dotball.

I already get ridiculed enough and she has no idea how much money is dumped in.

Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN


I'm willing to admit multis are not officially allowed. Are you willing to admit that Bort/DD have zero interest in taking any action in any way to limit/deter/consolidate/discourage multi use?



That's clear. Its why I wonder why so many have tried so long in so many ways to keep something going that the owner and creator has little to no interest in.

there are 2 kinds of "multi's"

1 - where people would create multiple accounts on their own to get free flex (back when that was a thing) to spend less money on the game - which I believe was the original intent of the "no multi rule"

2 - when someone no longer wants to play the game, but they have unused flex, they give their password to someone they have played the game with to make use of the flex rather than have it go to waste - I seem to remember a comment by Bort/DD/Catch or someone that if flex had been purchased on the account, it was less of an infraction than multi's created under version 1 listed above - the "multi's" had purchased lots of flex and the game creator had gotten their money out of their playing the game

as far as benefits - obviously the players are no better no matter what account they are on, but the benefits are that coordination of tactics, VA's etc. can be more assured as well as (and this might be the biggest reason) you didn't have to worry about the agent disappearing

at the end of the day, as long as there are not people cheating the game like those just recently banned, the playing field is the same for all when it comes to the competitiveness of the games, which is why with clean dots, there is no domination of one team of dots over the rest of GLB - it's tough to win in the Pros because the playing field is pretty level

I literally could care less if/when/how this game ends, but the strawman arguments against a simple, basic, factual statement that having multi accounts is against the TOS and is therefore cheating is equal parts lol, wtf, and sad at the same time.

"Breaking the rules is cheating".

...


"So you want to kill the game?"

"But it's clearly too expensive so it's acceptable."

"But no one is enforcing the rules so it's acceptable."

"But so many others are doing it if I don't too I'm at a disadvantage."

"The game is dying anyways so who cares?"

"There's really not much of an advantage" (this is the biggest lol one of them all)

...

All while also asking, "Why is this game dying? Why can't we keep the interest of new players joining? It must be they just don't appreciate the hard work and dedication it takes to succeed at this super fair strategy game that I love so much."


Whatever helps you self-justify I suppose. I could care less about how it impacts this game, but it's a sad reflection of the mentality of a failing society at large.

"[insert strawman argument responses to this last statement]"

Originally posted by Daedalus
I literally could care less if/when/how this game ends, but the strawman arguments against a simple, basic, factual statement that having multi accounts is against the TOS and is therefore cheating is equal parts lol, wtf, and sad at the same time.

"Breaking the rules is cheating".

...


"So you want to kill the game?"

"But it's clearly too expensive so it's acceptable."

"But no one is enforcing the rules so it's acceptable."

"But so many others are doing it if I don't too I'm at a disadvantage."

"The game is dying anyways so who cares?"

"There's really not much of an advantage" (this is the biggest lol one of them all)

...

All while also asking, "Why is this game dying? Why can't we keep the interest of new players joining? It must be they just don't appreciate the hard work and dedication it takes to succeed at this super fair strategy game that I love so much."


Whatever helps you self-justify I suppose. I could care less about how it impacts this game, but it's a sad reflection of the mentality of a failing society at large.

"[insert strawman argument responses to this last statement]"


I bet many of the old people don't know about the changes which were implemented. They might think that there is the old dot building process still in place. And the old dotbuilding process SUCKED time wise.

A advertising mail to all users would be a good first step.

Originally posted by Tomcic
A advertising mail to all users would be a good first step.


This. 1000 percent.

Originally posted by Daedalus
I literally could care less if/when/how this game ends

Originally posted by Daedalus
I could care less about how it impacts this game

Small quibble - "I could not care less" is the expression.

Originally posted by Ravenwood
Small quibble - "I could not care less" is the expression.



May want to confirm whether he could care less first. In my case I could care less, but not much less.