Voted Maybe. I enjoy playing alts, but in a pvp-centric sandbox game I don't mind giving that up to avoid alt-abuse. Multiple accounts is an easy way around that, though. If the only consequences of having one character per server is that those who enjoy playing alts for the fun of it can't, and those who want to abuse alts have to pay more, but are still able to, I don't really see the point.
I voted no. Not allowing a player to create several chars is the same as saying "yeah we COULD do that, but we want to sell more boxes and increase the number of accounts this way".
As I'm reading the Earthrise-forums, there's a guy/girl? who keeps telling about multiple accounts to circumvent the limitation and something about rich people being favoured.
So I'd say, Yes! if we make sure, that people can't purchase more then a single account.
I actually prefer games that foster single character play. If a game needs alts to keep you entertained, then it mostly likely follows a very short character progression model.
The game design has to be able to support playing a single toon, year after year. If you took a level based game with no form of alternate advancement and allowed only one toon per account, people would get bored after a month or two and leave.
As I'm reading the Earthrise-forums, there's a guy/girl? who keeps telling about multiple accounts to circumvent the limitation and something about rich people being favoured. So I'd say, Yes! if we make sure, that people can't purchase more then a single account.
That would be my favorite laughing-stock, Xyleya. You'll no doubt also notice everyone else pointing out that alts offer no benefit aside from allowing a player two personalities in ER. Everything you can do with two accounts, you can do just as easily with one.
The rich are afforded very little extra advantage, and it's nothing too much concern should be drummed up over.
I voted NO. Basically, I like to experiment with different builds to try and find one that adheres to my playing styles. Not sure if Earthrise is classeless, but even still I would like the opportunity to try different builds. The freedom of doing so makes the idea of playing more appealing (any game given the same circumstance).
It's better to have more options than less so No is my vote and definate answer.
As I'm reading the Earthrise-forums, there's a guy/girl? who keeps telling about multiple accounts to circumvent the limitation and something about rich people being favoured. So I'd say, Yes! if we make sure, that people can't purchase more then a single account.
That would be my favorite laughing-stock, Xyleya. You'll no doubt also notice everyone else pointing out that alts offer no benefit aside from allowing a player two personalities in ER. Everything you can do with two accounts, you can do just as easily with one.
The rich are afforded very little extra advantage, and it's nothing too much concern should be drummed up over.
Ohhh... So the examples of a person multiboxing on eve and doing pretty much what is takes a corp to do is a very little advantage? You really need to look into what kind of advantage a person multi-boxing has over a person who does not. It is HUGE! even if every one has three characters per account that offers an even more advantage over someone who just has the typical three characters and only plays one character at any given time.
There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters but also becoming a one man army. This not only ruins gameplay but also ruins the economy to a degree.
Now you are probably wondering why I brought up multiboxing when it comes to alts.. Well alts makes the life of a person who multiboxes easier and more affordable. Then having one alt per account making it more expensive and also hardier to get up to such great numbers of multiboxing. Meaning less people will be interested in partaking in this act of taking complete advantage of a games that really relies on people cooperating with each other.
I voted NO. Basically, I like to experiment with different builds to try and find one that adheres to my playing styles. Not sure if Earthrise is classeless, but even still I would like the opportunity to try different builds. The freedom of doing so makes the idea of playing more appealing (any game given the same circumstance). It's better to have more options than less so No is my vote and definate answer.
Not only is Earthrise classless, but any character can learn all skills (you can only use skills corresponding to your equipped gear). So making alts to try builds would be a complete waste of time. It's better just to train all the skills on your main.
I believe it is imperative to have a game with FFA full loot pvp have only one character per account. MMO's are about community, and if you are an asshat then there are consequences. No one will want to deal with you if you get a bad name for yourself. Sure it doesn't stop a person from buying a second account...and it ends up helping the company.
another way to fix that and still have alts would be to make it so every character you make has the same last name. like grenada espada did, all your alts belonged to the same family so all had the same last name.
but for me i voted no, i like playing different classes/playstyles. sometimes i feel like playing a healer type but i wouldn't want to play nothing but a healer all the time.
Hmmm... What if you could play any class you wanted with a single. The way you want to play is depended on what kind of setup you have. For example, lets say you want to play as a healer but you are currently wearing heavy armor which allows you to use skills that give you defensive buffs and taunts and stuff that tanks would use. So in order to change into a healer you put on lighter gear that unlocks skills that give you healing capabilities. However the skills that you had when wearing heavy armor are now locked (you can't activate them again unless you wear the gear you were wearing before).
I think in a case like this there is no real need for an alt at all. If this does not make sense please say so and I will try describing it in an other way.
Heroes of Telara.
Unfortunately, we haven't heard anything out of them since last year's E3 announce. But, should it ever be released, HoT would make Alts meaningless, as there are no restrictions on class, crafting, etc. Guild going on a run and need a healer, but you're currently in full plate? Go to a town / inn, and change your class on the fly.
One of my biggest concerns with no reroll alts, is that if the game is designed with level specific areas, then the lower-level areas will be come more of wasteland than current levling games with top-heavy player bases. One thing I like about having alts is that I can play with players of lower levels from time to time. I like grouping up with people on thier first character, 60 levels below my main character. I think if players weren't allowed to reroll alts, it would cut down on the variety a game had to offer, especially in the early or starting areas.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
I believe it is imperative to have a game with FFA full loot pvp have only one character per account. MMO's are about community, and if you are an asshat then there are consequences. No one will want to deal with you if you get a bad name for yourself. Sure it doesn't stop a person from buying a second account...and it ends up helping the company.
another way to fix that and still have alts would be to make it so every character you make has the same last name. like grenada espada did, all your alts belonged to the same family so all had the same last name.
but for me i voted no, i like playing different classes/playstyles. sometimes i feel like playing a healer type but i wouldn't want to play nothing but a healer all the time.
Hmmm... What if you could play any class you wanted with a single. The way you want to play is depended on what kind of setup you have. For example, lets say you want to play as a healer but you are currently wearing heavy armor which allows you to use skills that give you defensive buffs and taunts and stuff that tanks would use. So in order to change into a healer you put on lighter gear that unlocks skills that give you healing capabilities. However the skills that you had when wearing heavy armor are now locked (you can't activate them again unless you wear the gear you were wearing before).
I think in a case like this there is no real need for an alt at all. If this does not make sense please say so and I will try describing it in an other way.
Heroes of Telara.
Unfortunately, we haven't heard anything out of them since last year's E3 announce. But, should it ever be released, HoT would make Alts meaningless, as there are no restrictions on class, crafting, etc. Guild going on a run and need a healer, but you're currently in full plate? Go to a town / inn, and change your class on the fly.
Not HoT, this game, Earthrise. In Earthrise, you can learn all skills, which you use are determined by gear.
One of my biggest concerns with no reroll alts, is that if the game is designed with level specific areas, then the lower-level areas will be come more of wasteland than current levling games with top-heavy player bases. One thing I like about having alts is that I can play with players of lower levels from time to time. I like grouping up with people on thier first character, 60 levels below my main character. I think if players weren't allowed to reroll alts, it would cut down on the variety a game had to offer, especially in the early or starting areas.
Earthrise is a sandbox. The "early" areas are like Eve's high security space. Instead of going to easy territory to help your lowbie friends, help them come out to the tougher areas. Leveling in Earthrise gives more options than raw power. A group of lowbies could take down a veteran (mob or player).
I actually prefer it in sandboxes. Players are who they are in the world, and can't hide behind alts. Also sandboxes kind of wipe away all the negatives of creating alts like desolate low level areas because they are not treadmills where you go through a zone and never go back ending up where the entire game revolves around an instanced, shallow, isolated end game.
If one character can over time do everything and learn everything, then sure, one character per account, good times.
If not.. then suddenly the game company is limiting what variety I can play in their game, causing it to become dull over time alwas playing the same thing. I want to be able to test different character type game play, etc, without having to erase all my current progress. See?
Anyway I haven't been following earthrise since last year, so maybe it will be like ryzom and have unlimited potential single character progression, which would be great.
I believe it is imperative to have a game with FFA full loot pvp have only one character per account. MMO's are about community, and if you are an asshat then there are consequences. No one will want to deal with you if you get a bad name for yourself. Sure it doesn't stop a person from buying a second account...and it ends up helping the company.
another way to fix that and still have alts would be to make it so every character you make has the same last name. like grenada espada did, all your alts belonged to the same family so all had the same last name.
but for me i voted no, i like playing different classes/playstyles. sometimes i feel like playing a healer type but i wouldn't want to play nothing but a healer all the time.
Hmmm... What if you could play any class you wanted with a single. The way you want to play is depended on what kind of setup you have. For example, lets say you want to play as a healer but you are currently wearing heavy armor which allows you to use skills that give you defensive buffs and taunts and stuff that tanks would use. So in order to change into a healer you put on lighter gear that unlocks skills that give you healing capabilities. However the skills that you had when wearing heavy armor are now locked (you can't activate them again unless you wear the gear you were wearing before).
I think in a case like this there is no real need for an alt at all. If this does not make sense please say so and I will try describing it in an other way.
Heroes of Telara.
Unfortunately, we haven't heard anything out of them since last year's E3 announce. But, should it ever be released, HoT would make Alts meaningless, as there are no restrictions on class, crafting, etc. Guild going on a run and need a healer, but you're currently in full plate? Go to a town / inn, and change your class on the fly.
Not HoT, this game, Earthrise. In Earthrise, you can learn all skills, which you use are determined by gear.
Just saying HoT will allow for this. Earthrise looks like its doing the same.
Anyways, definitely looking forward to Earthrise. Will be giving it a shot when released.
Eh, I was trying to get at the fact there was no need to discuss HoT, as ER definitely offers the same thing. Why use an outside example when the game you're discussing is the same in that respect?
I think a lot of people read the first few posts, then skip to the end, posting without realizing the nature of the game.
Eh, I was trying to get at the fact there was no need to discuss HoT, as ER definitely offers the same thing. Why use an outside example when the game you're discussing is the same in that respect? I think a lot of people read the first few posts, then skip to the end, posting without realizing the nature of the game.
Yeah, my bad, OP threw me off a bit with the question "a game", not "this game" ie Earthrise specifically lol.
Eh, I was trying to get at the fact there was no need to discuss HoT, as ER definitely offers the same thing. Why use an outside example when the game you're discussing is the same in that respect? I think a lot of people read the first few posts, then skip to the end, posting without realizing the nature of the game.
Yeah, my bad, OP threw me off a bit with the question "a game", not "this game" ie Earthrise specifically lol.
Cause I cheated! Mwhahaha this is only a way to get attention towards Earthrise! SIKE! Nah I did it for multiple reasons. We have almost this exact same thread about alts and there is still the discussion of even if you can get everything in the game there still needs to be alts. We also do not really talk about Earthrise mechanics and are starting to really get into the fundamentals of why people actually like alts even without the thought of what Earthrise has to offer.
This is also here to support the idea of no alts in Earthrise as some people will not know anything about Earthrise then find out that there is no alts. It is kinda like a census poll, seeing if people who know nothing will still try something out.
As I'm reading the Earthrise-forums, there's a guy/girl? who keeps telling about multiple accounts to circumvent the limitation and something about rich people being favoured. So I'd say, Yes! if we make sure, that people can't purchase more then a single account.
That would be my favorite laughing-stock, Xyleya. You'll no doubt also notice everyone else pointing out that alts offer no benefit aside from allowing a player two personalities in ER. Everything you can do with two accounts, you can do just as easily with one.
The rich are afforded very little extra advantage, and it's nothing too much concern should be drummed up over.
Ohhh... So the examples of a person multiboxing on eve and doing pretty much what is takes a corp to do is a very little advantage? You really need to look into what kind of advantage a person multi-boxing has over a person who does not. It is HUGE! even if every one has three characters per account that offers an even more advantage over someone who just has the typical three characters and only plays one character at any given time.
There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters but also becoming a one man army. This not only ruins gameplay but also ruins the economy to a degree.
Now you are probably wondering why I brought up multiboxing when it comes to alts.. Well alts makes the life of a person who multiboxes easier and more affordable. Then having one alt per account making it more expensive and also hardier to get up to such great numbers of multiboxing. Meaning less people will be interested in partaking in this act of taking complete advantage of a games that really relies on people cooperating with each other.
I see you misinterpret my point, I salute you.
Last I checked, this forum was about ER, not EVE. As such, my point is aimed towards ER, and again. . Not EVE. I also stated people with 2+ subs were afforded multiple personalities, read, "There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters".
As for other advantages in ER for extra subs. . Name some, and I'll gladly rebuke them to the best of my ability, and knowledge with what we have been offered thus far.
This game is played actively, so please explain to me how the average player is going to be able to pull that one off? Their multis would just be extra targets; they could use expensive third party programs to pull it off (maybe), but then you'd have to deal with the consequences of being caught. Again, the average multi-sub won't be taking this road. . Too much real cash risk for zero real gain.
Last I heard - correct me if I'm wrong, it was an old interview - crafting and combat have separate experience pools, so you don't need a crafting subscription. .
Reds can do everything blues can, their city(s) have the same amenities as non-pk cities (mission terminals are up in the air still, to my knowledge). No need for a second account here either. . Hell, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume reds can even join their own faction, seeing as how the game has criminal groups.
The only other feasible reason to have multiple accounts that I can think of off the top of my head is seeing what both of the factions have to offer. Then again, they have said you can defect from one side to the other. . . Voila!
Sure, some things will be a little simpler with two accounts, but nothing that will give multi-sub players any great advantage (except the really demented ones that shell out an arm and a leg for TPPs, but they would find some way to gain an advantage irregardless) other than being able to misbehave. There really is no set-in-stone way to stop bad behaviour, and I don't foresee one for a long time.
With all of this said, I voted yes prior to my original post. I personally prefer SCS. I just don't like seeing people scream doom unreasonably. . Multi-boxxing can hurt a lot of theme-park games, but the impact on the more recent sandbox styles is minimal in my experience.
Just to echo the sentiment, not only would I be willing, I would PREFER that only one character per account be allowed. Especially in a FFA PVP game where reputation is more important than anything.
As I'm reading the Earthrise-forums, there's a guy/girl? who keeps telling about multiple accounts to circumvent the limitation and something about rich people being favoured. So I'd say, Yes! if we make sure, that people can't purchase more then a single account.
That would be my favorite laughing-stock, Xyleya. You'll no doubt also notice everyone else pointing out that alts offer no benefit aside from allowing a player two personalities in ER. Everything you can do with two accounts, you can do just as easily with one.
The rich are afforded very little extra advantage, and it's nothing too much concern should be drummed up over.
Ohhh... So the examples of a person multiboxing on eve and doing pretty much what is takes a corp to do is a very little advantage? You really need to look into what kind of advantage a person multi-boxing has over a person who does not. It is HUGE! even if every one has three characters per account that offers an even more advantage over someone who just has the typical three characters and only plays one character at any given time.
There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters but also becoming a one man army. This not only ruins gameplay but also ruins the economy to a degree.
Now you are probably wondering why I brought up multiboxing when it comes to alts.. Well alts makes the life of a person who multiboxes easier and more affordable. Then having one alt per account making it more expensive and also hardier to get up to such great numbers of multiboxing. Meaning less people will be interested in partaking in this act of taking complete advantage of a games that really relies on people cooperating with each other.
I see you misinterpret my point, I salute you.
Last I checked, this forum was about ER, not EVE. As such, my point is aimed towards ER, and again. . Not EVE. I also stated people with 2+ subs were afforded multiple personalities, read, "There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters".
As for other advantages in ER for extra subs. . Name some, and I'll gladly rebuke them to the best of my ability, and knowledge with what we have been offered thus far.
This game is played actively, so please explain to me how the average player is going to be able to pull that one off? Their multis would just be extra targets; they could use expensive third party programs to pull it off (maybe), but then you'd have to deal with the consequences of being caught. Again, the average multi-sub won't be taking this road. . Too much real cash risk for zero real gain.
Last I heard - correct me if I'm wrong, it was an old interview - crafting and combat have separate experience pools, so you don't need a crafting subscription. .
Reds can do everything blues can, their city(s) have the same amenities as non-pk cities (mission terminals are up in the air still, to my knowledge). No need for a second account here either. . Hell, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume reds can even join their own faction, seeing as how the game has criminal groups.
The only other feasible reason to have multiple accounts that I can think of off the top of my head is seeing what both of the factions have to offer. Then again, they have said you can defect from one side to the other. . . Voila!
Sure, some things will be a little simpler with two accounts, but nothing that will give multi-sub players any great advantage (except the really demented ones that shell out an arm and a leg for TPPs, but they would find some way to gain an advantage irregardless) other than being able to misbehave. There really is no set-in-stone way to stop bad behaviour, and I don't foresee one for a long time.
With all of this said, I voted yes prior to my original post. I personally prefer SCS. I just don't like seeing people scream doom unreasonably. . Multi-boxxing can hurt a lot of theme-park games, but the impact on the more recent sandbox styles is minimal in my experience.
I enjoy a good debate. . .
So... the simple fact that they have access to both factions at the same time does not make them have an advantage over a player that can only be on one side at one time? Meaning they have access to more technology and is most likely able to unlock more skills that might be tied with these faction based gear? I have to remind you that some technology is forbidden to one faction and might not to the other. This is giving the player access to more firepower then to someone who does not have multiple characters. Yes, that person will have access to those weapons if the person does try to gain the trust of that faction however they still have to work twice as hard the multiple account player.
This is a form of tweaking in my opinion and I believe tweaking is taking advantage of game mechanics. As it is helping you out to be stronger then other players who play the game how it is suppose to be played.
I agree though there is no way of stopping bad behavior, nor do I believe that there will be a way to really stop multi-boxing and giving players a advantage over players who play the game like it is suppose to be played. However I do believe there is a way of slowing it down and reducing those numbers of characters that multi-boxers are able to actually play.
Comments
Voted Maybe. I enjoy playing alts, but in a pvp-centric sandbox game I don't mind giving that up to avoid alt-abuse. Multiple accounts is an easy way around that, though. If the only consequences of having one character per server is that those who enjoy playing alts for the fun of it can't, and those who want to abuse alts have to pay more, but are still able to, I don't really see the point.
I voted no. Not allowing a player to create several chars is the same as saying "yeah we COULD do that, but we want to sell more boxes and increase the number of accounts this way".
Let's play Fallen Earth (blind, 300 episodes)
Let's play Guild Wars 2 (blind, 45 episodes)
As I'm reading the Earthrise-forums, there's a guy/girl? who keeps telling about multiple accounts to circumvent the limitation and something about rich people being favoured.
So I'd say, Yes! if we make sure, that people can't purchase more then a single account.
I actually prefer games that foster single character play. If a game needs alts to keep you entertained, then it mostly likely follows a very short character progression model.
The game design has to be able to support playing a single toon, year after year. If you took a level based game with no form of alternate advancement and allowed only one toon per account, people would get bored after a month or two and leave.
That would be my favorite laughing-stock, Xyleya. You'll no doubt also notice everyone else pointing out that alts offer no benefit aside from allowing a player two personalities in ER. Everything you can do with two accounts, you can do just as easily with one.
The rich are afforded very little extra advantage, and it's nothing too much concern should be drummed up over.
I voted NO. Basically, I like to experiment with different builds to try and find one that adheres to my playing styles. Not sure if Earthrise is classeless, but even still I would like the opportunity to try different builds. The freedom of doing so makes the idea of playing more appealing (any game given the same circumstance).
It's better to have more options than less so No is my vote and definate answer.
That would be my favorite laughing-stock, Xyleya. You'll no doubt also notice everyone else pointing out that alts offer no benefit aside from allowing a player two personalities in ER. Everything you can do with two accounts, you can do just as easily with one.
The rich are afforded very little extra advantage, and it's nothing too much concern should be drummed up over.
Ohhh... So the examples of a person multiboxing on eve and doing pretty much what is takes a corp to do is a very little advantage? You really need to look into what kind of advantage a person multi-boxing has over a person who does not. It is HUGE! even if every one has three characters per account that offers an even more advantage over someone who just has the typical three characters and only plays one character at any given time.
There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters but also becoming a one man army. This not only ruins gameplay but also ruins the economy to a degree.
Now you are probably wondering why I brought up multiboxing when it comes to alts.. Well alts makes the life of a person who multiboxes easier and more affordable. Then having one alt per account making it more expensive and also hardier to get up to such great numbers of multiboxing. Meaning less people will be interested in partaking in this act of taking complete advantage of a games that really relies on people cooperating with each other.
if i could do everything with 1 char then yes (or have the ability to take another path later with the same character)
but keep in mind that rich ppl will multibox anyway
I voted yes.
If its a RPG it should be only one character. Never understood what you need alts for.
I'd actually prefer to play an MMO with one character per server.
Not only is Earthrise classless, but any character can learn all skills (you can only use skills corresponding to your equipped gear). So making alts to try builds would be a complete waste of time. It's better just to train all the skills on your main.
Agreed!
another way to fix that and still have alts would be to make it so every character you make has the same last name. like grenada espada did, all your alts belonged to the same family so all had the same last name.
but for me i voted no, i like playing different classes/playstyles. sometimes i feel like playing a healer type but i wouldn't want to play nothing but a healer all the time.
Hmmm... What if you could play any class you wanted with a single. The way you want to play is depended on what kind of setup you have. For example, lets say you want to play as a healer but you are currently wearing heavy armor which allows you to use skills that give you defensive buffs and taunts and stuff that tanks would use. So in order to change into a healer you put on lighter gear that unlocks skills that give you healing capabilities. However the skills that you had when wearing heavy armor are now locked (you can't activate them again unless you wear the gear you were wearing before).
I think in a case like this there is no real need for an alt at all. If this does not make sense please say so and I will try describing it in an other way.
Heroes of Telara.
Unfortunately, we haven't heard anything out of them since last year's E3 announce. But, should it ever be released, HoT would make Alts meaningless, as there are no restrictions on class, crafting, etc. Guild going on a run and need a healer, but you're currently in full plate? Go to a town / inn, and change your class on the fly.
One of my biggest concerns with no reroll alts, is that if the game is designed with level specific areas, then the lower-level areas will be come more of wasteland than current levling games with top-heavy player bases. One thing I like about having alts is that I can play with players of lower levels from time to time. I like grouping up with people on thier first character, 60 levels below my main character. I think if players weren't allowed to reroll alts, it would cut down on the variety a game had to offer, especially in the early or starting areas.
Vault-Tec analysts have concluded that the odds of worldwide nuclear armaggeddon this decade are 17,143,762... to 1.
another way to fix that and still have alts would be to make it so every character you make has the same last name. like grenada espada did, all your alts belonged to the same family so all had the same last name.
but for me i voted no, i like playing different classes/playstyles. sometimes i feel like playing a healer type but i wouldn't want to play nothing but a healer all the time.
Hmmm... What if you could play any class you wanted with a single. The way you want to play is depended on what kind of setup you have. For example, lets say you want to play as a healer but you are currently wearing heavy armor which allows you to use skills that give you defensive buffs and taunts and stuff that tanks would use. So in order to change into a healer you put on lighter gear that unlocks skills that give you healing capabilities. However the skills that you had when wearing heavy armor are now locked (you can't activate them again unless you wear the gear you were wearing before).
I think in a case like this there is no real need for an alt at all. If this does not make sense please say so and I will try describing it in an other way.
Heroes of Telara.
Unfortunately, we haven't heard anything out of them since last year's E3 announce. But, should it ever be released, HoT would make Alts meaningless, as there are no restrictions on class, crafting, etc. Guild going on a run and need a healer, but you're currently in full plate? Go to a town / inn, and change your class on the fly.
Not HoT, this game, Earthrise. In Earthrise, you can learn all skills, which you use are determined by gear.
Earthrise is a sandbox. The "early" areas are like Eve's high security space. Instead of going to easy territory to help your lowbie friends, help them come out to the tougher areas. Leveling in Earthrise gives more options than raw power. A group of lowbies could take down a veteran (mob or player).
I actually prefer it in sandboxes. Players are who they are in the world, and can't hide behind alts. Also sandboxes kind of wipe away all the negatives of creating alts like desolate low level areas because they are not treadmills where you go through a zone and never go back ending up where the entire game revolves around an instanced, shallow, isolated end game.
If one character can over time do everything and learn everything, then sure, one character per account, good times.
If not.. then suddenly the game company is limiting what variety I can play in their game, causing it to become dull over time alwas playing the same thing. I want to be able to test different character type game play, etc, without having to erase all my current progress. See?
Anyway I haven't been following earthrise since last year, so maybe it will be like ryzom and have unlimited potential single character progression, which would be great.
another way to fix that and still have alts would be to make it so every character you make has the same last name. like grenada espada did, all your alts belonged to the same family so all had the same last name.
but for me i voted no, i like playing different classes/playstyles. sometimes i feel like playing a healer type but i wouldn't want to play nothing but a healer all the time.
Hmmm... What if you could play any class you wanted with a single. The way you want to play is depended on what kind of setup you have. For example, lets say you want to play as a healer but you are currently wearing heavy armor which allows you to use skills that give you defensive buffs and taunts and stuff that tanks would use. So in order to change into a healer you put on lighter gear that unlocks skills that give you healing capabilities. However the skills that you had when wearing heavy armor are now locked (you can't activate them again unless you wear the gear you were wearing before).
I think in a case like this there is no real need for an alt at all. If this does not make sense please say so and I will try describing it in an other way.
Heroes of Telara.
Unfortunately, we haven't heard anything out of them since last year's E3 announce. But, should it ever be released, HoT would make Alts meaningless, as there are no restrictions on class, crafting, etc. Guild going on a run and need a healer, but you're currently in full plate? Go to a town / inn, and change your class on the fly.
Not HoT, this game, Earthrise. In Earthrise, you can learn all skills, which you use are determined by gear.
Just saying HoT will allow for this. Earthrise looks like its doing the same.
Anyways, definitely looking forward to Earthrise. Will be giving it a shot when released.
Eh, I was trying to get at the fact there was no need to discuss HoT, as ER definitely offers the same thing. Why use an outside example when the game you're discussing is the same in that respect?
I think a lot of people read the first few posts, then skip to the end, posting without realizing the nature of the game.
Yeah, my bad, OP threw me off a bit with the question "a game", not "this game" ie Earthrise specifically lol.
Yeah, my bad, OP threw me off a bit with the question "a game", not "this game" ie Earthrise specifically lol.
Cause I cheated! Mwhahaha this is only a way to get attention towards Earthrise! SIKE! Nah I did it for multiple reasons. We have almost this exact same thread about alts and there is still the discussion of even if you can get everything in the game there still needs to be alts. We also do not really talk about Earthrise mechanics and are starting to really get into the fundamentals of why people actually like alts even without the thought of what Earthrise has to offer.
This is also here to support the idea of no alts in Earthrise as some people will not know anything about Earthrise then find out that there is no alts. It is kinda like a census poll, seeing if people who know nothing will still try something out.
That would be my favorite laughing-stock, Xyleya. You'll no doubt also notice everyone else pointing out that alts offer no benefit aside from allowing a player two personalities in ER. Everything you can do with two accounts, you can do just as easily with one.
The rich are afforded very little extra advantage, and it's nothing too much concern should be drummed up over.
Ohhh... So the examples of a person multiboxing on eve and doing pretty much what is takes a corp to do is a very little advantage? You really need to look into what kind of advantage a person multi-boxing has over a person who does not. It is HUGE! even if every one has three characters per account that offers an even more advantage over someone who just has the typical three characters and only plays one character at any given time.
There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters but also becoming a one man army. This not only ruins gameplay but also ruins the economy to a degree.
Now you are probably wondering why I brought up multiboxing when it comes to alts.. Well alts makes the life of a person who multiboxes easier and more affordable. Then having one alt per account making it more expensive and also hardier to get up to such great numbers of multiboxing. Meaning less people will be interested in partaking in this act of taking complete advantage of a games that really relies on people cooperating with each other.
I see you misinterpret my point, I salute you.
Last I checked, this forum was about ER, not EVE. As such, my point is aimed towards ER, and again. . Not EVE. I also stated people with 2+ subs were afforded multiple personalities, read, "There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters".
As for other advantages in ER for extra subs. . Name some, and I'll gladly rebuke them to the best of my ability, and knowledge with what we have been offered thus far.
This game is played actively, so please explain to me how the average player is going to be able to pull that one off? Their multis would just be extra targets; they could use expensive third party programs to pull it off (maybe), but then you'd have to deal with the consequences of being caught. Again, the average multi-sub won't be taking this road. . Too much real cash risk for zero real gain.
Last I heard - correct me if I'm wrong, it was an old interview - crafting and combat have separate experience pools, so you don't need a crafting subscription. .
Reds can do everything blues can, their city(s) have the same amenities as non-pk cities (mission terminals are up in the air still, to my knowledge). No need for a second account here either. . Hell, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume reds can even join their own faction, seeing as how the game has criminal groups.
The only other feasible reason to have multiple accounts that I can think of off the top of my head is seeing what both of the factions have to offer. Then again, they have said you can defect from one side to the other. . . Voila!
Sure, some things will be a little simpler with two accounts, but nothing that will give multi-sub players any great advantage (except the really demented ones that shell out an arm and a leg for TPPs, but they would find some way to gain an advantage irregardless) other than being able to misbehave. There really is no set-in-stone way to stop bad behaviour, and I don't foresee one for a long time.
With all of this said, I voted yes prior to my original post. I personally prefer SCS. I just don't like seeing people scream doom unreasonably. . Multi-boxxing can hurt a lot of theme-park games, but the impact on the more recent sandbox styles is minimal in my experience.
I enjoy a good debate. . .
Just to echo the sentiment, not only would I be willing, I would PREFER that only one character per account be allowed. Especially in a FFA PVP game where reputation is more important than anything.
That would be my favorite laughing-stock, Xyleya. You'll no doubt also notice everyone else pointing out that alts offer no benefit aside from allowing a player two personalities in ER. Everything you can do with two accounts, you can do just as easily with one.
The rich are afforded very little extra advantage, and it's nothing too much concern should be drummed up over.
Ohhh... So the examples of a person multiboxing on eve and doing pretty much what is takes a corp to do is a very little advantage? You really need to look into what kind of advantage a person multi-boxing has over a person who does not. It is HUGE! even if every one has three characters per account that offers an even more advantage over someone who just has the typical three characters and only plays one character at any given time.
There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters but also becoming a one man army. This not only ruins gameplay but also ruins the economy to a degree.
Now you are probably wondering why I brought up multiboxing when it comes to alts.. Well alts makes the life of a person who multiboxes easier and more affordable. Then having one alt per account making it more expensive and also hardier to get up to such great numbers of multiboxing. Meaning less people will be interested in partaking in this act of taking complete advantage of a games that really relies on people cooperating with each other.
I see you misinterpret my point, I salute you.
Last I checked, this forum was about ER, not EVE. As such, my point is aimed towards ER, and again. . Not EVE. I also stated people with 2+ subs were afforded multiple personalities, read, "There is not only the fact that they are getting away with the consequences tied to their characters".
As for other advantages in ER for extra subs. . Name some, and I'll gladly rebuke them to the best of my ability, and knowledge with what we have been offered thus far.
This game is played actively, so please explain to me how the average player is going to be able to pull that one off? Their multis would just be extra targets; they could use expensive third party programs to pull it off (maybe), but then you'd have to deal with the consequences of being caught. Again, the average multi-sub won't be taking this road. . Too much real cash risk for zero real gain.
Last I heard - correct me if I'm wrong, it was an old interview - crafting and combat have separate experience pools, so you don't need a crafting subscription. .
Reds can do everything blues can, their city(s) have the same amenities as non-pk cities (mission terminals are up in the air still, to my knowledge). No need for a second account here either. . Hell, it wouldn't be unreasonable to assume reds can even join their own faction, seeing as how the game has criminal groups.
The only other feasible reason to have multiple accounts that I can think of off the top of my head is seeing what both of the factions have to offer. Then again, they have said you can defect from one side to the other. . . Voila!
Sure, some things will be a little simpler with two accounts, but nothing that will give multi-sub players any great advantage (except the really demented ones that shell out an arm and a leg for TPPs, but they would find some way to gain an advantage irregardless) other than being able to misbehave. There really is no set-in-stone way to stop bad behaviour, and I don't foresee one for a long time.
With all of this said, I voted yes prior to my original post. I personally prefer SCS. I just don't like seeing people scream doom unreasonably. . Multi-boxxing can hurt a lot of theme-park games, but the impact on the more recent sandbox styles is minimal in my experience.
I enjoy a good debate. . .
So... the simple fact that they have access to both factions at the same time does not make them have an advantage over a player that can only be on one side at one time? Meaning they have access to more technology and is most likely able to unlock more skills that might be tied with these faction based gear? I have to remind you that some technology is forbidden to one faction and might not to the other. This is giving the player access to more firepower then to someone who does not have multiple characters. Yes, that person will have access to those weapons if the person does try to gain the trust of that faction however they still have to work twice as hard the multiple account player.
This is a form of tweaking in my opinion and I believe tweaking is taking advantage of game mechanics. As it is helping you out to be stronger then other players who play the game how it is suppose to be played.
I agree though there is no way of stopping bad behavior, nor do I believe that there will be a way to really stop multi-boxing and giving players a advantage over players who play the game like it is suppose to be played. However I do believe there is a way of slowing it down and reducing those numbers of characters that multi-boxers are able to actually play.