Sometimes i like to play with and by myself

[Veldt]

i mean, in your case it’s ok. but what i was saying is on the scenario when peeps bring people unrelated to the trip just to bypass that policy OwO

i even see peeps put dummies in their car just to do that XD

Well, if they put dummies in their car (just like bots), that is an instant ban.

But for people…it would depend on how much resources (time, expense, etc) you’d want your officers (staff) to spend on checking each passenger. (This is the grey area part)

For this discussion, i’d put it as…
Its easier to just rule that as long as you have a human passenger (someone actually playing - not multibot), then its ‘legal’, while if you use a dummy (bot), then its illegal.

[Aoi_Kanashi]

but as i said, having unrelated peeps riding in ur car just to bypass the policy is kinna the case here

like some people bring their househelp just for that ‘w’;;, which is kind of like this case, if OP is making multiple accounts just to avoid paid slots

[Veldt]

like some people bring their househelp just for that ‘w’;;, which is kind of like this case, if OP is making multiple accounts just to avoid paid slots

Yeah, which is why I left it as a ‘case-by-case’ enforcement based on IMC’s decision.

If he actually made 5 accounts, and plays them separately… uhhh… its… technically legal?

[Seiran]

There’ll be people playing on the same IP (dorms, families, etc), family and friends sharing accounts, etc…
An entire guild can gift the guild leader 1 out of 4 DAs (as an example), etc.

Trying to list each and every case explicitly is an exercise in futility.

No one wants to do that though, stop putting words in other’s posts.

They just need general guidelines of what’s allowed or not. lol

For example:

a) Trading suspicious silver to main accounts.
b) Abusing too many event rewards with accounts that shared IP at least once.
c) “AFK” helping the main some ways.
d) Leeching dungeon rewards.

Already covers your point, especially if your “cousin” never played the game and only logged in to use a Diamond Anvil.

If this, for example, is going to be against rules, even if your son, cousin etc make a new account just for the event, it can fit the rule and avoid honest people from mimicking this “I don’t even play, I’m here for abusing rewards” accounts. And this by making the whole thing against rules, not just the multi-account scenario.

[Veldt]

No one wants to do that though, stop putting words in other’s posts.

They just need general guidelines of what’s allowed or not. lol

Read my othe… ah whatever

Some details are already covered in other ‘areas’, anyway, like suspicious silver being tracked regardless of sub/main account.

Edit: Stuff like multi-bots would be already covered in the ‘bot’ category, and so on.

Edit: If we’re talking about event rewards, then its currently ruled as ‘legal’. Some might call it abuse, meh.

The entrance requirements are high enough that if anyone spent the time to do that, good for them, I guess.

[Aoi_Kanashi]

which is why i can’t blame imc when someone get banned due to these questionable circumstances ‘w’/

[diane]

Oh boy… its that time again…
Cant wait for 800 new posts in this thread when i get up tomorrow

[Veldt]

Well, if IMC says its against the rules, they’re the officer in this case, soooo… nothing to blame there

[Seiran]

Edit: If we’re talking about event rewards, then its currently ruled as ‘legal’.

And this is the point, if they deem this to be illegal, most people won’t abuse. Some will though.

But having a rule in place, even if not fully enforced, refrains good people from doing so. If bad people gets caught they can’t complain, it would be disallowed to being with.

It already works for reducing the occurrences of these events, not remove it entirely or ban every single case. And this is the big important thing, making sure the honest players know what’s actually against rules or not instead of leaving it blank, or rather, gray.

[Veldt]

And this is the point, if they deem this to be illegal, most people won’t abuse. Some will though.

Yeah, if they said it was illegal, then of course most folks won’t abuse it.

Doesn’t stop multi-accounting, though. Like in the case of OP. Or…multi-accounting for blessed shards (as yet - haven’t seen any official stance on this).

Oooh, or parking 4 accounts in CM + 1 Inquisitor.

[Seiran]

That why it’s good to put out general cases defined as against rules (if they plan to do so).

But for very specific cases, like you said, there’s no arguing it will go down to case by case. But at least some global rules are nice to have in place. :x

[Veldt]

No arguments with that.