Hot-Seating, should it be legal?

  • We got off topic in another thread so I created this one to continue


    Under the current rules for RN, it is legal for two or more people to play on the same account provided they do not play other accounts on that server.


    What do you think about this?

  • We got off topic in another thread so I created this one to continue


    Under the current rules for RN, it is legal for two or more people to play on the same account provided they do not play other accounts on that server.


    What do you think about this?

    You already know my feeling, :D It is a way to bend the rules which the unscrupulous may, and very likely do use to gain an unfair advantage. I think it is a window of opportunity which needs serious attention. An account, imo, should belong to one person and one person only. The only alternative access should be an appointed sitter restricted by the normal rules governing account sitting.

    In this world there is nothing softer or thinner than Water.

    But to compel the Hard and Unyielding it has no equal.

    (Lao-Tse)

  • This is like one player would play on several servers simultaneously. Career points would be earned just a bit more faster. Imo this changes nothing, I don't see any abuse with this legal term.

  • We got off topic in another thread so I created this one to continue


    Under the current rules for RN, it is legal for two or more people to play on the same account provided they do not play other accounts on that server.


    What do you think about this?

    if the account is used by multiple people at the same device it is not traceable. And some leave the game always opened and they seem to be online for 24/7. The only ones who can detected are the account sharers who are not from 1 household and using different IP's.

    This is like one player would play on several servers simultaneously. Career points would be earned just a bit more faster. Imo this changes nothing, I don't see any abuse with this legal term.

    This can't be compared with one player who is playing multiple servers. This is at one server and with two or three people one account is active 24/7.

    :engine1::engine1::engine1:

    Work for a cause

    Not for applause

    Live life to express

    Not to impress

  • It is a way to bend the rules which the unscrupulous may, and very likely do use to gain an unfair advantage.

    Since this game is not built to be fair, I do not consider it unscrupulous for a player who wants to win at any aspect of the game using every legal means to do so. No bending required here.


    Is it unscrupulous to purchase a plus account? That is an unfair advantage to someone who can not afford it and only can earn them in game.

  • Do not forget that we talk on a forum were some people think that pay 2 win is a problem. So, about sharing account with other players? Of course this is saw with bad eye, because this gives an advantage. Some players also think that hyper active players are abusive...

  • Since this game is not built to be fair, I do not consider it unscrupulous for a player who wants to win at any aspect of the game using every legal means to do so. No bending required here.


    Is it unscrupulous to purchase a plus account? That is an unfair advantage to someone who can not afford it and only can earn them in game.

    Rather an amoral remark! Carry this to it's extreme and you have no rules and no structure. There has to be structure and there have to be rules even though people who can pay for extra benefits have an advantage over those who cannot. Paying for increased benefits is a fact of online gaming. Actually, it is also a fact of life! But that does not mean we should expect to behave badly, or, does it?


    It follows, that the structure is fair is even more important than otherwise. Those who cannot pay or who can pay only a little need to know that they are not further disadvantaged by poorly formulated or administered rules. Just because something can be done, does not make it right to do it.

    In this world there is nothing softer or thinner than Water.

    But to compel the Hard and Unyielding it has no equal.

    (Lao-Tse)

  • Rather an amoral remark! Carry this to it's extreme and you have no rules and no structure. There has to be structure and there have to be rules even though people who can pay for extra benefits have an advantage over those who cannot. Paying for increased benefits is a fact of online gaming. Actually, it is also a fact of life! But that does not mean we should expect to behave badly, or, does it?


    It follows, that the structure is fair is even more important than otherwise. Those who cannot pay or who can pay only a little need to know that they are not further disadvantaged by poorly formulated or administered rules. Just because something can be done, does not make it right to do it.

    Yes it’s an amoral POV because the game itself is amoral.


    There is no need to carry an argument to an extreme because there is a structure and rules to the game. Furthermore that structure and rules I agreed to play by when I signed up for the game.


    “Just because something can be done, does not make it right to do it.”. If it is allowed by the rules, then it is right to do it. Saying someone doesn’t have scruples because they are willing to play within all the rules while you limit yourself because of your world view to me is judgemental

  • Yes it’s an amoral POV because the game itself is amoral.


    There is no need to carry an argument to an extreme because there is a structure and rules to the game. Furthermore that structure and rules I agreed to play by when I signed up for the game.


    “Just because something can be done, does not make it right to do it.”. If it is allowed by the rules, then it is right to do it. Saying someone doesn’t have scruples because they are willing to play within all the rules while you limit yourself because of your world view to me is judgemental

    The rules and the structure are not what I signed up to 8 years ago they have both evolved. Strange you say they have not changed for you! Interesting!


    So, you see no point in trying to improve anything?

    Or, even looking to see if an improvement is needed?

    What is must always be?

    If a rule is not a good rule then it should be preserved because it is there, not altered or even reconsidered?

    If something is currently allowed by the rules it is absolutely right?


    In life rules change. In a game, or in life, rules should be constantly reviewed and adjusted. The need is there while the game is evolving. The rules of this game probably can be improved they are not set in aspic or, if they are, they should not be.


    It is strange, to me, that you accept the change which stopped sitters sitting during the end-game but overlooked hot-seating during the end game. They are very closely related actions and should have been addressed at the same time. Maybe they were, I don't know, but it really does not look like it. Why the resistance to having this rule re-evaluated?


    Yes, if playing within the spirit of the rules and expecting the same from those i play with is judgemental, then, I accept the label. Resisting any change without due consideration, BTW, is reactionary. Or is this a case of any change to the rule on "Hot seating" would adversely affect you personally?

    In this world there is nothing softer or thinner than Water.

    But to compel the Hard and Unyielding it has no equal.

    (Lao-Tse)

  • The rules and structure, whatever they may be at the time, you agree to every time you log in.


    Where have I ever said that the game (rules) haven’t evolved? Where have I ever said there shouldn’t be any changes.


    “If something is currently allowed by the rules it is absolutely right?“ It certainly isn’t wrong for someone to play that way. If you want a change to the game or the rules there is an entire suggestion category to post in.


    The issue for me that has grown in these discussions is the notion that someone playing legally is an awful person because they don’t play like the group plays.


    Someone playing a multi for any reason is cheating. If they get caught they should get banned


    But hey Zen of Rail Nation.I can’t control how other people play, I can only do the best I can do using my moral compass, and whatever the results may turn out, I am always a winner.


    Others may disagree with that philosophy, that is fine. I am much happier a player now than I was before.

  • Do not forget that we talk on a forum were some people think that pay 2 win is a problem. So, about sharing account with other players? Of course this is saw with bad eye, because this gives an advantage. Some players also think that hyper active players are abusive...

    Why the unnecessary jab at other players regarding the pay 2 win aspect? I could also make a jab at you and say that 8 out of 10 phrases you write can be considered spam since they don't contain any substance, they are but reiterations of what someone else has said already. This isn't Discord where you get a point for each line of text you write.


    Moving on, the pay 2 win aspect is a problem in EVERY game out there for almost EVERY other player except those that, well, pay to win.


    Lastly, on the topic, hot seating (account sharing) should be forbidden and straightaway banned but since Rail Nation has different views than other, bigger online games, it's allowed and this ultimately leads to exploits since I can ask my friends in Canada or the States to play on my account when I sleep and vice-versa, making me effectively a prestige gathering machine.


    For example World of Warcraft forbids account sharing. This should be the only argument needed to include this in the game rules, no further discussion.

  • You think what I say has no substance just because you don't agree with it. I would never dare to say that to someone I don't agree with (unless he doesn't have arguments).


    Blizzard forbids account sharing, and this is their problem and they have their reasons. So why should TG do the same thing Blizzard do? Maybe you think that RN should be Pay-to-play too as WoW is?

  • Hello everyone,

    By the rulebook at this moment, account sharing is allowed with several criteria though.
    1. The people sharing an account on gameworld 1, cannot have access to any other account on game world 1.
    2. The same account is played by 2 different people in 2 different game worlds.

    If the players keep these criteria they are within the rules.

    I will leave the discussion open, but I ask you to keep it nice to each other. We are constantly monitoring all the discussions and as stated by some of you before, adjusting the rulebook as the game evolves. At this moment we don´t consider this to be a problem, any other player by using gold or lots and lots of time in-game without sleep can make the same effort. ( We are not talking about multi accounts but 1 account being active, let's say 20 hours a day as 2 players play on it)

    Sincerely,
    nEwW

  • I honestly don't know what to say anymore to your statement. Basically you're saying that if a person finds itself at a disadvantage with another player who, when he sleps, is backed by another player, basically the very definition of sharing an account, to simply buy gold or sleep less. How can this be considered fair treatment or fair chance?

  • At this moment we don´t consider this to be a problem, any other player by using gold or lots and lots of time in-game without sleep can make the same effort.

    Start seeing it as a problem.


    The difference is that one person can play 20 hours non-stop for 3.4 days, and several players on one account can play 24 hours a day non-stop for three months.


    You really don't see it?


    On the other hand


    Providing login details is not allowed, without any reservations in the rules of the game.


    You consider sharing login details as illegal when sharing with a player who has a different account on that server.


    At the same time, you consider sharing your login credentials allowed when shared with a player who has no other account on the server in question.


    Why these contradictions in the rules?


    Why is one rule that excludes another more important?


    I do not understand this completely.


    There is no logic to it.


    P.S.


    Someone might think that you are interpreting your own rules in favor of specific players.


    Someone could want that the rules contain a prohibition on TG employees and their families from playing.


    One might think that then the rules will be the same for everyone?


    See as it looks in the eyes of ordinary gamers.

  • Did I said account sharing was fair? On a Free-to-play it is impossible to be fair between every player. There will always be a part of the players with an advantage and especially on this kind of game and whatever the way they use. Donators are necessary to maintain servers open and game to free access. And account sharing is allowed but with a restriction. But I have to say that allow an account to be shared with more than 1 player is too much, this point should be modified.

  • Is this really truth or am i dreaming?


    You don't see a problem?... well for me it looks you CAN NOT solve the problem and decide to make a rule to fix it!!!... as usually...


    And by the way where is that in the rules? I can't find any text saying that... what i find is that SHARING login details is against the rules... more (and this i'm 100 % sure) you have ban people for this in some cases and let others play all servers doing the same thing, just because they were gold payers...


    So please assume that ALL paying players have a different status in the game... That's all...


    You have to decide fast what are the rules of this game and make it clear...

  • If any player can share passwords with anyone (said by @nWeW), the best thing you can do is delete the individual ranking from all your servers since with this insane explanation about rules you (nWeW) gave will make individual Ranking not individual at all...

    And you can delete de fair play rule also, isn't doing nothing at all neither since every kind of no Fair Play still being allowed wich makes that rule useless..

  • Ok. So Jack has a brother Jim. For whatever reason, they are available at different times. For the sake of argument, Jack is in Europe and Jim is in Australia.


    Jack sets up an account on Steam Boiler and Jim sets up an account on Coal chamber. They exchange passwords. Effectively they can play both accounts 24 hours per day as a syndicate. This cannot be fair or right. If both now also spend significant real money they ought to be unbeatable. Big money spenders beware!


    RN, I think you need to think it out again!

    In this world there is nothing softer or thinner than Water.

    But to compel the Hard and Unyielding it has no equal.

    (Lao-Tse)