Multiple Accounts

[Hollwie]

Hey guys I just wanted to ask if it's ok to create multiple Accounts for the sake of playing PvP  with more than one Deck which you aren't used to, if it's not allowed it would be a good Idea to allow players to create more than one character per Account (like it used to be in the old Battleforge) don't you think?

[Rondine]

First.. Multi Accounting is forbidden and will lead to a Ban.

Second: Why would you Need more accounts? You have deckslots as far as i remember... so you can have X different decks for PVP

[wojt5]

For a lot of reasons, like smurfing?

[Archeon]

3 minutes ago, Rondine said:

Second: Why would you Need more accounts? You have deckslots as far as i remember... so you can have X different decks for PVP

People did it in the original game so that they didn't ruin their ranking when they tried out a different deck. For instance, you could be an amazing Fire/Nature player and be in the top 5, and then also want to play Shadow but not be as good with it so only be rank 80 or something with it. People don't like spoiling their rank, so they feel like they're stuck playing only one deck, then they get bored and quit.

Personally, I don't care, I think if you want to play multiple decks then your rank should be based on how good you are with all of them. If I play Frost and suck, but enjoy it, well then I guess that means I sit at a lower rank than I would if I only played Fire and was awesome with it.

[Rondine]

Still not allowed and bannable... so no smurfing.

Sorry

Edited March 23, 2018 by Rondine

[MrXLink]

Shortly put, we endorse neither of those actions. There has been a lot of discussion going over this in the past, and we are of mind that smurfing heavily disrupts the ranked PvP scene and will, especially with an even smaller community that will rely heavily on newcomers, result in an insanely unfair PvP environment where matchmaking doesn't even matter anymore due to the sheer amount of artificially low-ranked pros dominating the entire game because they don't dare to face any opponents matched with when trying something new. This is not what ranked PvP is made for. Ranked PvP exists to test your PvP skills comparatively to people at the same level of you. Whether this is regardless of decks is debatable, but this is why unranked PvP exists, why there are Sparring Grounds. It's even in the term; Sparring Grounds. Sparring in boxing (and fighting) means that you're not landing your blows heavily so you can train. The same goes for the game; Sparring Grounds are for training your PvP skills without being judged harshly for it by the matchmaking system. This is, very briefly and shortly put, why we are against multiaccounting and it will result in bans. Smurfing destroys the purpose of the difference between ranked PvP and Sparring PvP, and your training needs are easily resolved by testing your new decks out in Sparring instead.

So, are you scared of losing your ELO because, skylords forbid, you are using a somewhat unconventional deck? Go to the Sparring Grounds. They are literally made for this exact purpose.

[Hollwie]

1 minute ago, Rondine said:

Still not allowed and bannable... so no smurfing.

Sorry

Hmm ok I see.. :/

[TimmieTuinbroek]

Why so grim? I'm quite positive there was a non-ranked mode.. 

[Archeon]

There was, as MrXLink mentioned, it was/is called the sparring grounds. Play there until you feel good enough to play ranked with the new deck, and if you never feel good enough then I guess you choose between having fun and playing the extra decks or grinding your rank with a single deck.

[RadicalX]

I think a character limitation would be a more useful way to deal with this problem. 

-> Having just 2-3 characters on a single account wouldn't affect the low elo experience, because really good players will run through the lower elo range in less than 2 days 

-> multiple characters will allow people to play more than just one deck which would lead to more diversity in PvP (otherwise almost everyone will just play meta decks)

-> it helps people to deal with ranked anxiety (especially in a small community, where people remember your name once you've reached a certain level) 

 

I still think, that having the option of creating 2 or 3 characters will allow a more healty PvP environment (low elo players won't be affected too much & high ranked players can enjoy a less lame version of PvP with different matchups than pure fire vs shadow frost). Having an account limitation is completely fine, but I think multiple characters would be quite useful for the majority of players. 

[FooFaFie]

How can you even combat multi-accounts?

[Eirias]

On 3/23/2018 at 6:28 AM, MrXLink said:

Shortly put, we endorse neither of those actions. There has been a lot of discussion going over this in the past, and we are of mind that smurfing heavily disrupts the ranked PvP scene and will, especially with an even smaller community that will rely heavily on newcomers, result in an insanely unfair PvP environment where matchmaking doesn't even matter anymore due to the sheer amount of artificially low-ranked pros dominating the entire game because they don't dare to face any opponents matched with when trying something new. This is not what ranked PvP is made for. Ranked PvP exists to test your PvP skills comparatively to people at the same level of you. Whether this is regardless of decks is debatable, but this is why unranked PvP exists, why there are Sparring Grounds. It's even in the term; Sparring Grounds. Sparring in boxing (and fighting) means that you're not landing your blows heavily so you can train. The same goes for the game; Sparring Grounds are for training your PvP skills without being judged harshly for it by the matchmaking system. This is, very briefly and shortly put, why we are against multiaccounting and it will result in bans. Smurfing destroys the purpose of the difference between ranked PvP and Sparring PvP, and your training needs are easily resolved by testing your new decks out in Sparring instead.

So, are you scared of losing your ELO because, skylords forbid, you are using a somewhat unconventional deck? Go to the Sparring Grounds. They are literally made for this exact purpose.

Just to play devil's advocate here . . . 

Back in the old days, it was impossible for me to try out a new deck in the sparring grounds against people at "my level." Even though I wasn't in the top 20, beginners could see my rank and would immediately kick me when I tried to join a game. For a while I was trying to learn pure frost (I literally had a deck level 20 without ice guardians) and I wanted to play around with people at a level where I could learn how to play the deck, but they would always get scared and kick me. Or if they did play me and they beat me, the would start chatting to me and telling me how I wasn't any good and I must have cheated to get my rank. Basically it was a pretty unpleasant experience and I could only spar against my higher-ranked friends, but of course they would destroy me if I tried to play a deck I fundamentally didn't understand and that didn't give me much opportunity to learn.

 

As @RadicalX said, in a small community, your name becomes well known very easily. As an important moderator, will you be able to have "peace" and just play the game, or will you be constantly barraged with messages and friend requests and invitations? The same will likely go for top ranked players and prominent forum members/streamers/youtubers.

 

I agree with RadicalX's solution: give each person 2-3 characters. In fact, the best solution would probably be to share all assets between those characters, so the only thing that changes is the name and ELO (this way you can't get extra bfp by multiaccounting). To get even fancier, perhaps those alternate accounts could not have an ELO at all and be prevented from entering ranked games--or if they did have ELO, the calculation of the opponent's score would be based on your highest character's ELO (this might lead to rating inflation though).

 

TL;DR: Playing sparring as a recognizable player is not as easy as it sounds. I recommend allowing multiple characters that all share bfp, cards, upgrades, and quests  but are banned from ranked, so that players can test things in sparring with anonymity. 

Or maybe you can just enable an "anonymous" mode, where your name and rank is hidden but you can't enter ranked. (but then @Anonymos will have problems )

[MephistoRoss]

Just throwing an idea in here: How about a matchmaking option for sparring grounds where the server would match you against a fitting enemy (like with ranked)? Of course we would also keep the current sparring grounds game selection so you can play against friends.

[NedDeppat]

https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Barcode


I want easy opponents,
i want not loose ranking points when loosing,
i want everyone to know my name

HAHAHAHAHA cmon guys...seriously? and its battleforge fault your friends not understand the terms of a "training match"?

i have a wish too, i want all cards from beginning because its unfair in pvp if other players pick good cards RNG before i get them
also i should be able to destroy everyone with a single deck because otherwise its not fun for me to play

multiple accounts used mostly to annoy new players or boost a main account through trading or pvp queue

so a big NO , bann them all on all accounts

Edited March 27, 2018 by NedDeppat

[DuellLord]

I know I wrote most of the following some times before in earlier threads. But I think this is a very important question for the game.

First, like @RadicalX mentioned, multiple characters/accounts are necessary for the diversity of played fractions. Especially the smaller community (@MrXLink) would mean, that in higher levels (from about earlier blue rank) you meet everytime the same 20 players (just a arbitrarily number) with the same 20 decks (maybe 5 of them will alternate between 2 or maybe even 3). Not very motivating about some month...Same effect will be in the middle ranks (gold) in a weaker expression.

Just the fact that you as a lower player will meet with higher probabillity a much better player isnt really a convincingly point: Because of the matchmaking-system you meet every rank after a minute or two anyway. This was in old BF depending on the time of the day on average every third match (valued). Because of your mentioned maybe smaller community this will be not really better. But even I think this point can be adjusted: Give the multiple characters on their start an aditionally basic elo not to far away from the "main character" of this account.

The Sparring ground is NO alternative to ranked for testing because of some reasons. ( @MephistoRoss; @MrXLink )
First you need a lot of more games than 10 or 20 for reaching a comparable level with a new fraction to your main fraction -> less diversity in ranked.
Secondly in the ranking queue it will be even more difficult to find a good/fitting opponent because of the splitting -> more fights highrank against beginners -> more frustrating for both. @NedDeppat Do you really think I have fun to follow fleeing werebeasts over the whole map to waste 5 minutes for getting 10 elo???

Even the problem with "unfair" elo-lose isnt really a valid point. In the first weeks of ranked the elo will not say really much about the skill anyway because of the different number of games different players made. After a while, if the elo nearly says something about the skill my mentioned above suggestion with the adapted basic elo would work. A bit imbalance in elo system is existing too, if I play different decks on the same account and character, because if I play my elo down with a new deck somebody can earn easier elo, if I play it up with my usual fraction I will take away more elo of my opponents than they deserve.

The problem of daily rewards can solved if you only can get it on one account (and not on each different character) only one time per day.

Last thing is that I remember someone of the staff explained, that its technically just not possible to find out who is smurfing and not. I know some people playing from the same house than an other player (family, friend ....). So its doubtful to make a rule which observance can not be checked exactly.

All in all i can understand there here are some concerns about smurfing, but if you think about the whole topic in details, there are some reasons pro smurfing and no indisputatable reasons against. All in all the game would profit on allowing smurfs clearly in the purpose of a higher activity of the players. So please rethink about your current decision against smurfs/multicharacters.

[SunWu]

On 27.3.2018 at 1:24 AM, NedDeppat said:

multiple accounts used mostly to annoy new players or boost a main account through trading or pvp queue
 

I strongly disagree, i think the other mentioned motives like anonymity, ranked anxiety, ELO loss prevention with new decks or fun decks played a far bigger roll. I won't deny players used to do the things you describe but your painting a far too dark picture.

I want to repeat a point wich too many new players don't consider: The ELO and matchmaking system produces faaar more unfair matchups than all smurfs combined.

An example where the activity system leads to such: An experienced player with emperor rank (blue shield, no dots) only has time to play on the weekend. Over the week his inactivity makes him lose quite a few ranks. When he starts playing on friday he's going to run through a bunch of gold and lower blue ranked players first, every week until he got back his full activity bonus. This activity system is totaly overcompensating imo, a player that doesn't play 3 weeks isn't going to go drop from blue ranked to bronze level skillwise but the inactivity penalty drops him to those ranks.

The other problematic system is the matchmaking itself, wich has already been discussed a lot in other threads...if the PvP population isn't going to explode suddenly and you're from america chances are you're never going to have matches wich are completly fair.

If the aim is completly fair matchmaking, eliminating smurfing is one step, but it's a really small one, the big bloodhorn in the room is the matchmaking/activity system.

[RainZy]

To resolve the ELO issue dropping I think rank seasons should be added similar to how overwatch system works. You lose score for losing matches but stay at your rank even if you're not playing. I think battleforge would benefit from this system. Smurfing however would be an issue as people could just play against themselves to increase ELO.

Another suggestion would be matchmaking could be randomised that way people cant party (I forgot how Ranked works in battleforge so sorry if this is already in the game and i am just unaware).

[DuellLord]

5 hours ago, RainZy said:

To resolve the ELO issue dropping I think rank seasons should be added similar to how overwatch system works. You lose score for losing matches but stay at your rank even if you're not playing. I think battleforge would benefit from this system. Smurfing however would be an issue as people could just play against themselves to increase ELO.

Another suggestion would be matchmaking could be randomised that way people cant party (I forgot how Ranked works in battleforge so sorry if this is already in the game and i am just unaware).

If you have all your characters on one account there is no problem with elo-boosting against yourself, because you cant logg in with two computers on the same time in one account.

Anyway in old bf there was never a real problem with people who trade elo between their accounts. Because of the small community it would be noticed from other players, if someone wins for example 5000 elo in one night so people know that other players would laugh about them because of this  

[ImperatorSK]

On 23.3.2018 at 12:28 PM, MrXLink said:

Shortly put, we endorse neither of those actions. There has been a lot of discussion going over this in the past, and we are of mind that smurfing heavily disrupts the ranked PvP scene and will, especially with an even smaller community that will rely heavily on newcomers, result in an insanely unfair PvP environment where matchmaking doesn't even matter anymore due to the sheer amount of artificially low-ranked pros dominating the entire game because they don't dare to face any opponents matched with when trying something new. This is not what ranked PvP is made for. Ranked PvP exists to test your PvP skills comparatively to people at the same level of you. Whether this is regardless of decks is debatable, but this is why unranked PvP exists, why there are Sparring Grounds. It's even in the term; Sparring Grounds. Sparring in boxing (and fighting) means that you're not landing your blows heavily so you can train. The same goes for the game; Sparring Grounds are for training your PvP skills without being judged harshly for it by the matchmaking system. This is, very briefly and shortly put, why we are against multiaccounting and it will result in bans. Smurfing destroys the purpose of the difference between ranked PvP and Sparring PvP, and your training needs are easily resolved by testing your new decks out in Sparring instead.

So, are you scared of losing your ELO because, skylords forbid, you are using a somewhat unconventional deck? Go to the Sparring Grounds. They are literally made for this exact purpose.

So have fun playing against always the same Decks in ranking, i bet in a short amount of time the playerbase of pvp will die. And if they are away also Hardcore pvp player will leave cause they can not find matchups (will be still hard with a that small player base).  I will definitely look how its work, but if i cant play other decks with different charakters the play fun will be fast gone.

Elo trading is not really an issue in a low playerbase game like this, there was a player in the old Battleforge who buy his elo from other player and even paid some High ranks for playing his Account, but then everyone knew in no time how he came to his rank. If that player try to play itself on his account he would just have dropped without end (im not going to call a name, but i think any high rank player know anyway which player i mean)

Edited March 31, 2018 by ImperatorSK

[wertyy]

this time will be f2p only ,it wont be so easy someone to make multiple accounts without effort

[tbpeti]

While on one hand I agree with @ImperatorSK and the fact that it will probably affect the pvp-playerbase after a while on the very high end, but i think it is much more important what @MrXLink wrote in order to keep the newcomers we shouldn't be able to have other accounts. Just think about it, if you were a platinum colored pvp ranker and you tried out other decks, you still would beat the sh*t out of everyone who were even on the low-gold ranks as well, not to mention the lower ranked players. What do you think they would feel after they're facing and getting crushed by an acc that has bronze ranks?! Most likely they ragequit, and maybe they stop playing forever - yeah, this would be a huge overreaction, but it can definitely happen.

And to @DuellLord and every other players who think about it: ffs, if once you could get to a high rank with one type of deck, you can climb with that back anytime, this way you have the opportunity to try the new decks on higher level. Does it take time? Yes. Does it take away some of your rating? Yes. But on the other hand if you are a high-level player your microing and macroing will be much crisper than those who are not on the same level, regardless of what type of deck you're using. You can outmicro anyone who's lower level with pure nature even if you played lost souls on your main account, doesn't matter, your knowledge of the game is so much higher compared to your opponents that you can beat them easily.

And why am I saying these things? I myself tested everything on my main account - true, had a small acc while i could have 2 accs on 1 profile, only used that for trading. First I played fire-nature, then tried pure nature, after that tried pure shadow, in the end settled down with shadow-nature, inside it first did the Embalmer-FoF-Soul Splicer combo and then refined my deck to my taste with trying out at least 10 different cards in it - even tried out the snapjaws in ranked games, so don't blame me, but I cannot understand your nonsense.

Just think about this part as in any moba: what happens when they ban your main champion, or you do not get the role you prefer? Will you just leave the ranked, or deal with it and play with another one even if you know your skills are not on the same level with the different characters?

 

Other thing, what @RadicalX and @Eirias mentioned: wait a minute, don't tell me you were annoyed during the battleforge was live because of messages. While you're only a high ranked player you can always put those who bothers you to your ignore-list. As a moderator IMO you have the right to tell them to not bother you. Also, as far as I know only those can see if you are online who added you as friends, and those who actually check the list on the top right, which shows who are standing in the same chat-server as you are.

 

Also, there are other parts of using multi accounts - mainly because of the daily quest system is the only way to get bfp, and this could make too big of a discrepancy. While on the same profile having multiple accounts can solve these bfp-problems, but it generates even more bugs that came out while the game was in it's prime time, and that was one of the reasons the EA shut it down previously.

 

All in all: I totally agree with the decision that was made to disable the multi-accounting, because it disrupts the game.

Edited April 1, 2018 by tbpeti
writing conclusion

[Eirias]

1 hour ago, tbpeti said:

Other thing, what @RadicalX and @Eirias mentioned: wait a minute, don't tell me you were annoyed during the battleforge was live because of messages. While you're only a high ranked player you can always put those who bothers you to your ignore-list. As a moderator IMO you have the right to tell them to not bother you. Also, as far as I know only those can see if you are online who added you as friends, and those who actually check the list on the top right, which shows who are standing in the same chat-server as you are.

No, I wasn't, but I wasn't making videos then either. I recall in conversations with FarRock (the most prominent BF youtuber in the old era, for other forum readers who might not know) that he would sometimes get annoyed by the frequency at which he was messaged on his main account--and I don't think he even had 1,000 subscribers. He was a large proponent of smurfs, and often used them to escape his "fame." 

 

Actually, come to think of it, I did sometimes get annoyed by messages in game. I played a lot of 2v2, many times with much weaker players. So there were nights when 5 or 6 players might ask me to play some 2v2. Most of the time I didn't mind this of course--and i think it would be really cool to get messages ingame from youtube fans. But sometimes I just want to play for 30 minutes and relax after a grueling day of tests, and being guilted into carrying a beginner in 2v2 wasn't what i wanted to do. And then of course I'd feel bad if my main partner came online. It would have been nice to just switch to an account where only my 2-3 main 2v2 partners knew me, and otherwise I'd have anonymity.

 

That's not my main point though. The situations where I'd be annoyed that a beginner contacted me are pretty rare. Mostly I was annoyed because I wanted to play 1 or 2 games of sparring with an experimental deck and even though it was level 20, lower ranked players would kick me from their sparring games. Of course I have no objection if I wanted to actually grind a new deck out, and I experimented with all sorts of things in ranked. But if I just want to play some frost t1 with MA and northguards for 2 games, then go back to my regular deck, I would either have to play against someone that would crush me 30 seconds into the game, or get kicked over and over in sparring.

[ferevus]

 

On 3/26/2018 at 8:28 AM, FooFaFie said:

How can you even combat multi-accounts?

Fair to say they can likely see-trade history among accounts and # of cards available to players in said account. 

Edited April 1, 2018 by ferevus

[SunWu]

16 hours ago, tbpeti said:

@DuellLordBut on the other hand if you are a high-level player your microing and macroing will be much crisper than those who are not on the same level, regardless of what type of deck you're using. You can outmicro anyone who's lower level with pure nature even if you played lost souls on your main account, doesn't matter, your knowledge of the game is so much higher compared to your opponents that you can beat them easily.

I've seen primes lose to legends and worse playing pure nature in ranked...

 

16 hours ago, tbpeti said:

What do you think they would feel after they're facing and getting crushed by an acc that has bronze ranks?! Most likely they ragequit, and maybe they stop playing forever - yeah, this would be a huge overreaction, but it can definitely happen.

 

You know the same thing happens all the time when you go inactive and then come back with a bronze- or silverrank? If you get rid of smurfing matchmaking doesn't become transparent and fair all of a sudden.

 

 

[Piromanijak]

5 hours ago, ferevus said:

 

Fair to say they can likely see-trade history among accounts and # of cards available to players in said account. 

I disagree with this , i mean if it realy was like this then anybody trading would get banned like example:

I collect pure fire my friend collects pure frost

We trade from the first booster we get, then he gets frost from me and i get fire from him

Then we get banned because we traded no logic

Only way to find if someone is multyaccounting is if one account trades all his goods to another account with nothing in return from the other account , but even then the guy might ge giving his stuff away to a friend because he is no longer gonna play or something like that.

In my opinion only way to stop multyaccounting is to track by IP if possible otherway there is absolutelyy no way to know.
 

Edited April 1, 2018 by Piromanijak