forum.freeciv.org

Corbeau wrote:

drdogbot7 wrote:The real solution might be to reduce the number of slots in LT games to say… 40?

No, because you can't be sure who will become an idler and who won't. You'd end up again with 80% idlers and 20% active people, only this time that 20% would be 8 players.

You may be right, but I think it would be worth experimenting with. Anything that increased the ratio of active players to idlers would be a good thing IMO. I guess that's really a topic for it's own thread.

Eh, I do worry a bit that some people might abuse the ability to create multiple accounts but I'm glad you can right now. Helps get more human-controlled nations. I do think it will need to be cracked down on at some point but when that happens I ask please allow 2 accounts per IP at least. It can be fun to play under a different alias. Also until there are considerably more longturn games up, you can get messed up in several and then have very little to do each day.

About reducing the # of players per game. I do think it should be reduced but 40 seems far too low to me. I was thinking more like 100-150 for your average game. 250 occassionally.

Allowed two accounts? I think most people, including me, wants to play one civ. Controlling several accounts just doesn't feel like the spirit of the game for me.

You can still just play 1 civ then. It's not a big disadvantage in a game with so many people. Make 1 good ally. Bam you've evened things out no problem.

And I think at least 15-20% of people would like to make a second account. Maybe more. The negative effects seem extremely small and the positives considerable. At least in terms of longturn. Smaller games it could be a bigger issue but who cares about small games? Longturn is where it's at.

Actually, I was told of a group of players who said their goal is to screw up others as much as possible (and I met at least one). I can very well imagine those people using multiple accounts to get the upper hand.

Canik wrote:You can still just play 1 civ then. It's not a big disadvantage in a game with so many people. Make 1 good ally. Bam you've evened things out no problem.

And I think at least 15-20% of people would like to make a second account. Maybe more. The negative effects seem extremely small and the positives considerable. At least in terms of longturn. Smaller games it could be a bigger issue but who cares about small games? Longturn is where it's at.

No, it's not just to make an ally to even it out. An ally doesn't transfer all his cities and gold to you.

I can't believe anyone actually endorses multi-accounting on this forum. Considerable positive sides and extremely small negative effect? What will happen if multi-accounting gets to be common, or perceived as common is that the people that actually want to play a good fair game leaves, and this will leave game in ruins.

If there are that many people that multi accounter freeciv, go ahead make a fork. I bet it will be fun.

Well I don't endorse using the 2nd account in that way. I just would like, if possible, to not punish those who wouldn't abuse it. Or for those who would have a family member or roommates play with them. Maybe that isn't possible but it would be great if it was, IMO.

I agree that room mates and familiy members. should be allowed to use same PC/IP whatever.

For "true" multi-accounting, that one player makes multiple accounts, I think that it's too difficult to lay out rules about what is fair and unfair use of it, and also, too hard for the player in question to actually follow these rules.