Ban warning policy!

  • Ban warning policy!

    Salix  Samisu  DippyNikki

    Do you have this and in what cases is it applied?


    In my opinion, in most cases, players should be given the opportunity to change their behavior.

  • There are many cases in which things are not so clear.

    In addition, many players will change their behavior even with a warning.

  • Since when is it possible for two people to have 1 account?? So when the real player is busy, the account is hosted by somebody else. Is this fair? (there is a rule not to share your login password, so should be strange if this is allowed!)

    I don't like this a bit.

  • Yes, we have a policy in place and internal practices - details we will not share in public.

    Without going into details, our first goal is always to teach players about our rules and guide players to change their behavior. If at all possible, we wish to avoid actions beyond warnings.

    After warning the player and after the chance to change behavior, if a player continues to break the rules - it is a decision the player made and we will move into punishments like bans.

    On rare occasions, punishment may be the first and only solution but that's saved for especially grave rule violations. Punishments nor warnings are not something we wish to do, handling those are never fun for any participant.

  • Thanks for the reply.

  • Since when is it possible for two people to have 1 account?? So when the real player is busy, the account is hosted by somebody else. Is this fair? (there is a rule not to share your login password, so should be strange if this is allowed!)

    I don't like this a bit.

    This has always been allowed in a special case!

    Quote


    1.3. It is a violation of the rules to share passwords and will be punished as such. An exception is made for multi-player accounts. These are only permitted if the players of the account do not possess or play any other account in the same game world. Accounts that are played from the same PC are not allowed to use the same password. In case of suspicion, the game support team has the right to evaluate the situation and take necessary action if that is required in order to protect fair gameplay.

    Free browser-based online strategy game - Rail Nation

  • Strange is when we all know some teams that move almost all accounts in EG with a few players and RN don't do nothing about it... and that some of us know it's simple to cut off if RN wants...

    It is much harder to prove abuse than you imagine.

  • Why despite all evidences

    - moving trains on the same route, at the same time, for 3 months; if one loses recalculation by 13 minutes, the other one missed the recalculation in the same way. This happened for 3 months.

    - the players wrote a public message on forum from his other account and signed with the other name

    - same competitions, same entry

    - same investments

    - both accounts used as support accounts (grabbing money for 4 epochs and throwing billions for important workers during 5-6 epochs)


    Many reports, many emails;

    Both accounts are buying gold (best trains first minutes era changing). We know. But both accounts are against 1.1. and 1.3 RULES OF THE GAME.

    WHY DESPITE OF ALL EVIDENCES the rules does not apply for those players who buy gold?


    Is this fair for the other players who sacrified hours/nights to perform on the round?

  • this happens so often and they are not recognized as multi accounts. I reported an entire asso of 26 with all the the same name with following numbers from 1 to 26. They exact same steps as you describe. It took me also several tickets to proof it. Made lots of screenshots when I caught the abuser online and could follow the pattern. Finally it was recognized after a some time. We as players see the and recognize the ones with multi accounts. There should be hunters at all server for 24/7.

    :engine1::engine1::engine1:

    Work for a cause

    Not for applause

    Live life to express

    Not to impress

  • Yes but in our case, even if we reported and of course we are not wrong, nothing happened. A new round started, they changed their names, but of course we have records and knew the number of their rounds + best position as a confirmation; now, the question. why RN allow this? only for 1-2000 $ they put in game / round? or why? is this fair for all the others players? why they break 1.1 and 1.3 and nothing happened on our reports?

  • Ok so I stop playing, this is totally stupid. In a game with a ranking, it should only be permitted to play with only 1 avatar, with one human. Sitter is restricted to a certain period (in amount of days + not during the endgame), this way even 3 or 4 or whatever amount of ppl could share 1 account.


    Have fun, not for me anymore.

  • Ok so I stop playing, this is totally stupid. In a game with a ranking, it should only be permitted to play with only 1 avatar, with one human. Sitter is restricted to a certain period (in amount of days + not during the endgame), this way even 3 or 4 or whatever amount of ppl could share 1 account.


    Have fun, not for me anymore.

    For us to know if a couple plays on the same account is just as hard as knowing what that same couple had for dinner or what movie they watched last night.

    Games and game accounts can be shared when it is the only account you use, and that's the industry default. A rule to tell someone not to play on one shared account together could never be enforced.

    What we can do though is set a rule against multi accounts, like we have. Players can have access to each server with only one account, and then we offer the sitter function for days when someone needs a hand.

    I can easily understand the first reaction when hearing there can be two people playing as 'Railway Ron', if you weren't expecting that. But there's nothing strange about it, just like there's nothing strange when you lend a gamepad to a friend when playing Super Mario.

  • Long time players at Cylinder Head have seen that multi-accounts who spend money are no longer banned despite a lot of evidence sent in. In our last endgame a team of clones "appeared" on day 5 of era 6 and methodicaly destroyed our factories in the eg. Of course nothing was done despite reports. If it is true that those who buy so much gold can get away with anything they want, then the server will close because honest, competitive and competent teams who have been there since the begining will finally move on. In the beginnng the bans were issued, now those with lots of goldto spend, are left to run and disturb those who have to watch it happen. Obviously the online players who see the abuse and report it know what they are talking about and I don't believe you are checking properly. Beth Harmon is right in all he has said here. Somone admin should start looking at Cylinder Head closely.

  • Long time players at Cylinder Head have seen that multi-accounts who spend money are no longer banned despite a lot of evidence sent in. In our last endgame a team of clones "appeared" on day 5 of era 6 and methodicaly destroyed our factories in the eg. Of course nothing was done despite reports. If it is true that those who buy so much gold can get away with anything they want, then the server will close because honest, competitive and competent teams who have been there since the begining will finally move on. In the beginnng the bans were issued, now those with lots of goldto spend, are left to run and disturb those who have to watch it happen. Obviously the online players who see the abuse and report it know what they are talking about and I don't believe you are checking properly. Beth Harmon is right in all he has said here. Somone admin should start looking at Cylinder Head closely.

    I have seen and do see it also. I know some asso's which are build or with multi accounts or do password sharing between the members. These asso's spend lots of money, accounts got bans for short periods and after that they can continue with the same abuse. And this isn't only at one server.

    :engine1::engine1::engine1:

    Work for a cause

    Not for applause

    Live life to express

    Not to impress

  • I am very sorry to say Samisu , but here you are very wrong. Unless this has changed in the last something like 3-4 weeks..... You do not have such a policy, or at least its not used by the moderators.

  • I am very sorry to say Samisu , but here you are very wrong. Unless this has changed in the last something like 3-4 weeks..... You do not have such a policy, or at least its not used by the moderators.

    There can be other factors, for example, bad behavior repeats - one example is banning someone from chats and discussions so they could not continue spamming and harassing, something where we need to act fast.

    Another example could be a player who breaks the rules in multiple different ways before we hear about it and then we look at the whole picture.

    Bottom line is, each player has accepted to follow our rules. If someone gets a punishment, our support will tell where the punishment came from and why, and we always have documentation to back our decisions.

  • There can be other factors, for example, bad behavior repeats - one example is banning someone from chats and discussions so they could not continue spamming and harassing, something where we need to act fast.

    Another example could be a player who breaks the rules in multiple different ways before we hear about it and then we look at the whole picture.

    Bottom line is, each player has accepted to follow our rules. If someone gets a punishment, our support will tell where the punishment came from and why, and we always have documentation to back our decisions.

    This is something I don't doubt, but if you ban/punish a player you should always let them know. If there is not time to let them know in advance, you should let them know afterwards. Leaving a player with "no clue" is never a good solution. People have accepted your rules, but its not always a 100% straight forward to interpret the rules in the same way as a mod. If you don't tell people why a decision was made, you risk the violation to happen again, even without the player knowing what was wrong. Also some penalties might be confused with other actions, and a player don't even know that he/she was penalised....