Dude. That's not what I am even debating. I said it's not fair play in my view. We do understand the difference between fair and not fair, regardless of the rules. It's the difference between right and wrong, and it doesn't come from a TOS.
Just because there are no rules against it currently doesn't make it fair play.
What makes something fair play is when it isn't prohibited by the rules and the general consensus of the participants is that the behavior is not out of bounds. There's no objective basis for judging fairness in a game that makes it possible for the majority opinion to be wrong. By definition, if the rules allow it, and there's no generally accepted social convention against it, it is fair play.
What makes it fair play is whether it is fair for the other participants in the spirit of healthy competition. If it were up to concensus, there would be a great many things that aren't fair allowed.
Judged by who.
In this case, the competition. It is not fair play when, in this example, an individual is running an entire Alliance by themselves, taking up a spot on the Board that Allies who are competing with, and receiving Rank Rewards for an entire team.
The competition disagrees with you. And as a player of the game, you either accept that fact, or you don't, but the competition will not care either way. The game designer makes the rules, consensus determines social conventions, and if you disagree with either, there is no one to appeal to. That's what it means to be authoritative by definition.
Just because there are no rules against it currently doesn't make it fair play.
What makes something fair play is when it isn't prohibited by the rules and the general consensus of the participants is that the behavior is not out of bounds. There's no objective basis for judging fairness in a game that makes it possible for the majority opinion to be wrong. By definition, if the rules allow it, and there's no generally accepted social convention against it, it is fair play.
What makes it fair play is whether it is fair for the other participants in the spirit of healthy competition. If it were up to concensus, there would be a great many things that aren't fair allowed.
Judged by who.
In this case, the competition. It is not fair play when, in this example, an individual is running an entire Alliance by themselves, taking up a spot on the Board that Allies who are competing with, and receiving Rank Rewards for an entire team.
The competition disagrees with you. And as a player of the game, you either accept that fact, or you don't, but the competition will not care either way. The game designer makes the rules, consensus determines social conventions, and if you disagree with either, there is no one to appeal to. That's what it means to be authoritative by definition.
I'm saying for me, there's a point that it becomes no longer fair. It's also worth pointing out that when those rules were written, there are a number of game modes that never existed, and never posed a situation where someone could monopolize on them. Either way, I do not think it's fair for an individual to run an entire Ally in those modes, and I would support certain limitations in place for running multiple Accounts in Alliance-based game modes. That's how I feel.
If Seasons were active and someone was taking up a spot in Plat 1 with 29 Alts, I think my point would be clearer. Lol.
Clear as mud. How so? If one person can successfully run 30 accounts, fairly, per the TOS, and achieve such a feat, I’d like to shake their hand.
The amount of time, effort and money that would be needed to run 30 accounts and be that successful would deserve whatever place they earned as long as they created,owned, and were the only person using those accounts.
I truly do enjoy your rebuttals though. I appreciate a good amount of comedy after a long day!
To be clear, one person running a couple Accounts in the same Ally is not what I find unfair. When you have one person running entire Allies and BGs solo, that's where it goes into that territory for me. Just my thoughts.
I still don’t think people see it as unfair. As I mentioned before the time invested in such a feat is astronomical. If someone really invests that much time, energy, and money to do so, I don’t see how that’s unfair. In fact I think that’s impressive. It’s not like having 30 accounts gives you the best champs and skews drop rates. Every account is subject to the same odds and opportunities as everyone else’s accounts so it’s unbiased. Some people might find it an interesting challenge to see how they themselves stack up to another alliance. There is no unfairness and I still have yet to see an actual reason you think it’s unfair other than your personal opinion of it being unfair. I’m not arguing just to argue but honestly you haven’t really given an actual reason.
Just because there are no rules against it currently doesn't make it fair play.
What makes something fair play is when it isn't prohibited by the rules and the general consensus of the participants is that the behavior is not out of bounds. There's no objective basis for judging fairness in a game that makes it possible for the majority opinion to be wrong. By definition, if the rules allow it, and there's no generally accepted social convention against it, it is fair play.
What makes it fair play is whether it is fair for the other participants in the spirit of healthy competition. If it were up to concensus, there would be a great many things that aren't fair allowed.
Judged by who.
In this case, the competition. It is not fair play when, in this example, an individual is running an entire Alliance by themselves, taking up a spot on the Board that Allies who are competing with, and receiving Rank Rewards for an entire team.
The competition disagrees with you. And as a player of the game, you either accept that fact, or you don't, but the competition will not care either way. The game designer makes the rules, consensus determines social conventions, and if you disagree with either, there is no one to appeal to. That's what it means to be authoritative by definition.
I'm saying for me, there's a point that it becomes no longer fair. It's also worth pointing out that when those rules were written, there are a number of game modes that never existed, and never posed a situation where someone could monopolize on them. Either way, I do not think it's fair for an individual to run an entire Ally in those modes, and I would support certain limitations in place for running multiple Accounts in Alliance-based game modes. That's how I feel.
I don't doubt that's what you believe. I'm simply saying it is not relevant to what is considered fair for the game as a whole. Everyone who plays a game either chooses to accept the rules of the game and its social conventions, or not. You can complain about them, but those rules and norms will be enforced upon you whether you choose to allow them to or not.
Just because there are no rules against it currently doesn't make it fair play.
What makes something fair play is when it isn't prohibited by the rules and the general consensus of the participants is that the behavior is not out of bounds. There's no objective basis for judging fairness in a game that makes it possible for the majority opinion to be wrong. By definition, if the rules allow it, and there's no generally accepted social convention against it, it is fair play.
What makes it fair play is whether it is fair for the other participants in the spirit of healthy competition. If it were up to concensus, there would be a great many things that aren't fair allowed.
Judged by who.
In this case, the competition. It is not fair play when, in this example, an individual is running an entire Alliance by themselves, taking up a spot on the Board that Allies who are competing with, and receiving Rank Rewards for an entire team.
The competition disagrees with you. And as a player of the game, you either accept that fact, or you don't, but the competition will not care either way. The game designer makes the rules, consensus determines social conventions, and if you disagree with either, there is no one to appeal to. That's what it means to be authoritative by definition.
I'm saying for me, there's a point that it becomes no longer fair. It's also worth pointing out that when those rules were written, there are a number of game modes that never existed, and never posed a situation where someone could monopolize on them. Either way, I do not think it's fair for an individual to run an entire Ally in those modes, and I would support certain limitations in place for running multiple Accounts in Alliance-based game modes. That's how I feel.
I don't doubt that's what you believe. I'm simply saying it is not relevant to what is considered fair for the game as a whole. Everyone who plays a game either chooses to accept the rules of the game and its social conventions, or not. You can complain about them, but those rules and norms will be enforced upon you whether you choose to allow them to or not.
The point I was trying to make is there is a difference between what is allowed and what is fair. Many people take advantage of the rules and that doesn't make their actions fair.
Someone posted here on the forums that they do have 30 accounts in the same alliance that they personally created/play across multiple devices but was hit for piloting after season 1
Just because there are no rules against it currently doesn't make it fair play.
What makes something fair play is when it isn't prohibited by the rules and the general consensus of the participants is that the behavior is not out of bounds. There's no objective basis for judging fairness in a game that makes it possible for the majority opinion to be wrong. By definition, if the rules allow it, and there's no generally accepted social convention against it, it is fair play.
What makes it fair play is whether it is fair for the other participants in the spirit of healthy competition. If it were up to concensus, there would be a great many things that aren't fair allowed.
Judged by who.
In this case, the competition. It is not fair play when, in this example, an individual is running an entire Alliance by themselves, taking up a spot on the Board that Allies who are competing with, and receiving Rank Rewards for an entire team.
The competition disagrees with you. And as a player of the game, you either accept that fact, or you don't, but the competition will not care either way. The game designer makes the rules, consensus determines social conventions, and if you disagree with either, there is no one to appeal to. That's what it means to be authoritative by definition.
I'm saying for me, there's a point that it becomes no longer fair. It's also worth pointing out that when those rules were written, there are a number of game modes that never existed, and never posed a situation where someone could monopolize on them. Either way, I do not think it's fair for an individual to run an entire Ally in those modes, and I would support certain limitations in place for running multiple Accounts in Alliance-based game modes. That's how I feel.
I don't doubt that's what you believe. I'm simply saying it is not relevant to what is considered fair for the game as a whole. Everyone who plays a game either chooses to accept the rules of the game and its social conventions, or not. You can complain about them, but those rules and norms will be enforced upon you whether you choose to allow them to or not.
The point I was trying to make is there is a difference between what is allowed and what is fair. Many people take advantage of the rules and that doesn't make their actions fair.
I agree there is a difference. All of my posts explicitly articulate repeatedly what that difference is.
Someone posted here on the forums that they do have 30 accounts in the same alliance that they personally created/play across multiple devices but was hit for piloting after season 1
Reference?
30 accounts would be a full time job and then some. In order to play enough to rank and grow each of those accounts, would take an enormous amount of time. I’m sure it’s possible, but not super probable in a realistic scenario.
I can only speculate, but I’d bet money they piloted at some point or did something against the TOS and we didn’t tell the full story from them, if it’s true.
We will never really know though. No way for us to verify they own all 30 accounts and never did something they weren’t supposed to with any of them. Kabam could, but they wouldn’t post that info in the forum since they don’t discuss account actions in the forums.
Someone posted here on the forums that they do have 30 accounts in the same alliance that they personally created/play across multiple devices but was hit for piloting after season 1
Reference?
30 accounts would be a full time job and then some. In order to play enough to rank and grow each of those accounts, would take an enormous amount of time. I’m sure it’s possible, but not super probable in a realistic scenario.
I can only speculate, but I’d bet money they piloted at some point or did something against the TOS and we didn’t tell the full story from them, if it’s true.
We will never really know though. No way for us to verify they own all 30 accounts and never did something they weren’t supposed to with any of them. Kabam could, but they wouldn’t post that info in the forum since they don’t discuss account actions in the forums.
I don't remember the specific threads involved, but I recall a poster making that claim in more than one thread relatively recently. Of course, there's no way to verify the claims, only that the claim was made.
It doesn’t. It says you can have as many accounts as you want as long as you play them per the terms of the TOS.
However, nothing there or in the TOD says there is a limit on the # of legit accounts you can run or how many of them can be in an ally.
There are tons of people with multiple accounts and many that use them in the same ally. Common scenario is to backfill people that leave, but I’ve played with people who have 2 or 3 in one ally because it’s too much work to coordinate them everywhere at a certain point and they still want to use them.
I don’t know anyone who has more than 4 accounts or anyone who has more than 2 good accounts and some baby accounts. I’m sure there are some, and I’m sure people can provide examples, but...
Who cares if 1 person can run 2, 3, 5, 10 or even 30 accounts in 1 ally if they’re putting the work in and not cheating? They are disadvantaged too as it takes effort to run all those accounts and get moves in on time.
Piloting is different. Players who aren’t putting in the time and aren’t skilled enough to progress are having other people do the work for them. It is different because the person with multiple accounts is not cheating (assumption this entire time they are all being played per the TOS) and earning everything they put the work in for.
Those that don’t agree with this, that’s fine. But understand that’s just an opinion and has no bearing on whether or not it is fair as the game stands from inception to this point. You may feel they have an advantage, and in some cases they may, but they’ve earned it and put themselves in that position by doing what it takes to get there and staying within the limits of the same rules we all must abide by. Who are you to say it’s ok to have 2 or 3 accounts in one ally, but not 10?
@TitoBandito187 where in your photo says "You can own 2 or more accounts in the same alliance"
You can own 2 or more accounts in the same alliance, there's nothing in the rules that states that you can't do that.
Hell my former leader had 3 accounts in the same one, I have two in the same one so does other people as long as we're the only one who's using them.
There might be some limit or that person was sharring with other people which is against the rules can't fathom anyone running 5+ accounts naturally but some may do it.
Running multiple accounts can be a bit time consuming depending on the amount of devices, and what modes you do though auto play makes it so much easier to manage most of the time.
I have an email from Kabam Brazillian Support saying that if someone has 2 accounts in the same alliance they can consider it wrong.
So... What are the rules to use two or morr accounts in the same Alliance, dear Kabam???
Cmon...
I would recommend forwarding that email to one of the mods, because the mods keep telling us that playing multiple accounts simultaneously is acceptable so long as you are the creator and owner of those accounts. That statement means if you have two accounts in one alliance that is acceptable so long as you are the creator and owner of both accounts. Otherwise, it isn't a true statement that playing two accounts simultaneously is acceptable so long as you are the creator and owner of those accounts.
Comments
The competition disagrees with you. And as a player of the game, you either accept that fact, or you don't, but the competition will not care either way. The game designer makes the rules, consensus determines social conventions, and if you disagree with either, there is no one to appeal to. That's what it means to be authoritative by definition.
I'm saying for me, there's a point that it becomes no longer fair. It's also worth pointing out that when those rules were written, there are a number of game modes that never existed, and never posed a situation where someone could monopolize on them. Either way, I do not think it's fair for an individual to run an entire Ally in those modes, and I would support certain limitations in place for running multiple Accounts in Alliance-based game modes. That's how I feel.
Clear as mud. How so? If one person can successfully run 30 accounts, fairly, per the TOS, and achieve such a feat, I’d like to shake their hand.
The amount of time, effort and money that would be needed to run 30 accounts and be that successful would deserve whatever place they earned as long as they created,owned, and were the only person using those accounts.
I truly do enjoy your rebuttals though. I appreciate a good amount of comedy after a long day!
I still don’t think people see it as unfair. As I mentioned before the time invested in such a feat is astronomical. If someone really invests that much time, energy, and money to do so, I don’t see how that’s unfair. In fact I think that’s impressive. It’s not like having 30 accounts gives you the best champs and skews drop rates. Every account is subject to the same odds and opportunities as everyone else’s accounts so it’s unbiased. Some people might find it an interesting challenge to see how they themselves stack up to another alliance. There is no unfairness and I still have yet to see an actual reason you think it’s unfair other than your personal opinion of it being unfair. I’m not arguing just to argue but honestly you haven’t really given an actual reason.
I don't doubt that's what you believe. I'm simply saying it is not relevant to what is considered fair for the game as a whole. Everyone who plays a game either chooses to accept the rules of the game and its social conventions, or not. You can complain about them, but those rules and norms will be enforced upon you whether you choose to allow them to or not.
The point I was trying to make is there is a difference between what is allowed and what is fair. Many people take advantage of the rules and that doesn't make their actions fair.
I agree there is a difference. All of my posts explicitly articulate repeatedly what that difference is.
Reference?
30 accounts would be a full time job and then some. In order to play enough to rank and grow each of those accounts, would take an enormous amount of time. I’m sure it’s possible, but not super probable in a realistic scenario.
I can only speculate, but I’d bet money they piloted at some point or did something against the TOS and we didn’t tell the full story from them, if it’s true.
We will never really know though. No way for us to verify they own all 30 accounts and never did something they weren’t supposed to with any of them. Kabam could, but they wouldn’t post that info in the forum since they don’t discuss account actions in the forums.
I don't remember the specific threads involved, but I recall a poster making that claim in more than one thread relatively recently. Of course, there's no way to verify the claims, only that the claim was made.
Maybe he'll comment now otherwise there is always the search function.
However, nothing there or in the TOD says there is a limit on the # of legit accounts you can run or how many of them can be in an ally.
There are tons of people with multiple accounts and many that use them in the same ally. Common scenario is to backfill people that leave, but I’ve played with people who have 2 or 3 in one ally because it’s too much work to coordinate them everywhere at a certain point and they still want to use them.
I don’t know anyone who has more than 4 accounts or anyone who has more than 2 good accounts and some baby accounts. I’m sure there are some, and I’m sure people can provide examples, but...
Who cares if 1 person can run 2, 3, 5, 10 or even 30 accounts in 1 ally if they’re putting the work in and not cheating? They are disadvantaged too as it takes effort to run all those accounts and get moves in on time.
Piloting is different. Players who aren’t putting in the time and aren’t skilled enough to progress are having other people do the work for them. It is different because the person with multiple accounts is not cheating (assumption this entire time they are all being played per the TOS) and earning everything they put the work in for.
Those that don’t agree with this, that’s fine. But understand that’s just an opinion and has no bearing on whether or not it is fair as the game stands from inception to this point. You may feel they have an advantage, and in some cases they may, but they’ve earned it and put themselves in that position by doing what it takes to get there and staying within the limits of the same rules we all must abide by. Who are you to say it’s ok to have 2 or 3 accounts in one ally, but not 10?
You can own 2 or more accounts in the same alliance, there's nothing in the rules that states that you can't do that.
Hell my former leader had 3 accounts in the same one, I have two in the same one so does other people as long as we're the only one who's using them.
There might be some limit or that person was sharring with other people which is against the rules can't fathom anyone running 5+ accounts naturally but some may do it.
Running multiple accounts can be a bit time consuming depending on the amount of devices, and what modes you do though auto play makes it so much easier to manage most of the time.
I have an email from Kabam Brazillian Support saying that if someone has 2 accounts in the same alliance they can consider it wrong.
So... What are the rules to use two or morr accounts in the same Alliance, dear Kabam???
Cmon...
I would recommend forwarding that email to one of the mods, because the mods keep telling us that playing multiple accounts simultaneously is acceptable so long as you are the creator and owner of those accounts. That statement means if you have two accounts in one alliance that is acceptable so long as you are the creator and owner of both accounts. Otherwise, it isn't a true statement that playing two accounts simultaneously is acceptable so long as you are the creator and owner of those accounts.