Forgotten Tales

rearrow wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:31 am

Ryaca wrote: Fri Mar 09, 2018 12:22 am

Leone wrote: Thu Mar 08, 2018 9:34 am It seems to me that the only people who should be concerned about this are those who have been /are sharing accounts.

Those were my exact thoughts also Leone

Why would a player that doesn't share accounts complain about this?

@ryaca,
because of several reasons.
1) because he finds the proposed punishments too harsh for the deed. the same way he would object to a thief having his hands shopped of as punishment.

i asume you ate no thief, but also asume you would be against this punishment.

Since i don't support account sharing and never have, I do not find the punishment too severe.

2) because, although sharing has indeed been forbidden for years, the last 3years it has never been enforced while for quiet a few accounts it was well known.
this implies that although its officially forbidden it is not seen as a capital offense.
A severere penalry for new sharing, now that its clear would be fine with me.even perm jail.

The rule clearly states that account sharing is forbidden. Just because it has not been strictly enforced does not make it ok to break the rule. Just because a player cando something does not mean that they should.

But not for past offenses.
that would belike suddenly saying driving a mile to fast (not allowed but not enforced) suddenly gets you a $100000 fine, even if it was last year.

I have already been told by a GM that it is not for past sharing or trading, just from present time forward.

3) because there are lots of ways sharing happened.
this is where the gm decission comes in.

from serious offense to less serious in my personal opinion.

more serious:
1) many sharing one accounts for hours each day,grinding lvls.
2)2people sharing one acount daily.
3) multiple people buying the lvls on shared account.

less serious
1) occasional use of an account to craft.
(you have askedsomeone to make you a 1k plate and hes tried for hours or days, failing. he got no time anymore and gives u access to try.
2)a duke is sick, in hospital, or otherwise cant play and an urgent alliance is needed or something needs to be sold urgently. not doing so could risk the city which took a year to build.logging on. getting everything explained takes to long so he goves temporary access to account to trusted clanmember. later he changes pw again.


3)i would consider sharing an account for defence of city as less serious as well but can see if others dont agree.
my reasoning is that some people can siege and attack for 20hours in a row. others have jobs, kids, etc and cannot defend so long. or they are calkwd away regularly.
In the end the ones with enough time would always win. and the ones with a lot of cash and time....
i myself cant fault someone who has just defended for 8hours and gives a friend access to defend while he gets some sleep. especially if the attackers are abusing bugs and somehow manage to keep the soege up for days (posdibly sharing themselves)

Whether you would consider account sharing to be acceptable or not, it is in fact not ok. And sharing an account to help defend a base is a GROSS abuse. Whether or not a player has time or not is not the point. That account in the scenario you described above is now being shared to gain an unfair advantage. Period.
Pointing out that others may use a bug whileattacking your base does not make it ok to break the rules yourself. Two wrongs do not make a right.

If a duke is sick or in the hospital then they should step down as duke and let an active player assume the role.

Crafting on another's account is unfair. I've been leveling my craft on my account for days straight trying to get my craft to level 7 and it would be unfair to me to allow account sharing for crafting or any reason.

Lastly,
As someone who cannot afford to buy lvls (and prices are the same in 'rich'countrirs as in 'poorer) and who has grinded 3years only to see changes that :
a)allowed people to get a multitude more lvls in seconds buy buying them and
b) pets which quadruppeled the grind rate

does not find the 'fair play' argument for not letting others grind an account very fair.
The whole 3years of grinding before pets are basicly wasted since you can get the same amountbof lvs in a month now. or buy them in seconds.
fair would be to be to compensate, reward these for all the time they poored into the game before it became easy.

Also for those without money to buy lvls a big part of clan game and pvp is now unavailable.
If you dont buy but do want to be in a clan basicly anyone who does buy lvls can kill you. when i took my break 1.5years ago therecwere maybe 20wo whould easily kill lv500rearrow. one year later theres a few 100. theres lv 1500-10k everywhere and if ypur in a clan and not 2k+ you die in a few hits to them.
The one loophole here was if a high lvl was willing to allow you to use his account occasianally if you felt like pbping or to get revenge on that 2k that killwd you a few times.

Im a grinder, proud of my grinded lvls and i suck at pvp. dont like it. but others do and i find some of these player proposed punishments grosly unfair to those who trusted their expensive account to a friend to let him enjoy it.
I admire a guy who lends his Ferrary to his friend who can only afford a Scoda.

death911 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:48 am Rearrow has made some real valid ponts.
HUGEST +1

Yes i very much support the Grading of Sharing which he has categorised as more serious and less serious.

account sharing our trading is forbidden.
There is no grey area. It is clearly stated in the rules.

Both group are little different and need to be dealt differently. Perm jail for more serious group who have used shared accounts for grinding and Bought levels for shared acount and have shared almost daily..

Two players spending real money on a shared account does not make account sharing ok


The other group who just shared occasionally for help doesn't deserve so harsh punishment. Yes sharing is illegal and is punishable i agree. But the punishment for this group should be a less severe one. Maybe jail for a week..

sharing an account whether often or occasionally are both against the rules. It does not make it ok just because an account is occasionally shared vs shared for a considerable amount of time.

In real world if we take examples, some people commit theft like huge scams and loot other people for money, whereas there are other people who just steal bread to satisfy their hunger. Both committed theft yes. But both don't deserve same punishment in my opinion..

death911 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 1:40 pm Yea whatever lvls bought thats absolutely fine. But many levels are grinded by some players by sharing. Ok nothing can be done now. But i hope they don't share in future.

death911 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 10:56 am Also the accounts deserve some punishment who have already gained 1000s of levels by sharing in past years inspite of knowing sharing is forbidden but now stopped sharing because of new rules.

They wont be much affected now , would they?
After already having 6k or 7k or even 9k + levels by sharing, now they won't much be affected after already being high levels.

death911 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 2:22 pm @ryaca
Yes we all agree account sharing is forbidden lol.
But the point what rearrow trying to make is punishment should be given according to the degree of Sharing.
To those who are always sharing accounts and grinding level and almost always sharing they get perm jail.
To those who occasionally share for help others get 1 week jail and a warning. On repeat offence they can be given harsher punishment.

Obviously both groups are doing mistake by sharing and should get punishment. But both don't deserve equal punishment. Punishment should be according to the severity of offence.

death911 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 2:36 pm @ryaca
I never said that bought levels make shared accounts ok. In fact i said shared accounts which have bought levels from more than one player should be perm jail.if u read the post u will understand what i am saying.

Ryaca wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 2:28 pm

death911 wrote: Sun Mar 11, 2018 2:22 pm @ryaca
Yes we all agree account sharing is forbidden lol.
But the point what rearrow trying to make is punishment should be given according to the degree of Sharing.
To those who are always sharing accounts and grinding level and almost always sharing they get perm jail.
To those who occasionally share for help others get 1 week jail and a warning. On repeat offence they can be given harsher punishment.

Obviously both groups are doing mistake by sharing and should get punishment. But both don't deserve equal punishment. Punishment should be according to the severity of offence.

I did not miss the point. The GMs are now enforcing this rule. Whether an account is occasionally shared or always shared is not acceptable according to the rules. I understand what you are saying but the truth is that what you are saying will not be considered. That is what the word "FORBIDDEN" means. From present time forward, any and all account sharing will be punished by perm jail.