I don't understand the policy of up to 3 accounts per player by gamigo.
I think it's not fair when we are talking about a level playing field for everyone, that some people are going to have 3x accounts to generate gold with labor.
Whenever I mention that, nobody really disagrees that it would make more sense for everyone to only have 1 account. The only argument I hear is that it is hard to enforce that people only have 1 account.
But how does allowing 3 accounts not make this worse? If you went for 1 account per player you could assume that it would be relatively normal that 2 people are playing from one household, even though it would not be allowed if it was only one person. Then investigate when that number is suspiciously high or when there is a lot of one sided progress by only 1 account (like maybe based on achievement %).
With up to 3 accounts per player allowed how could that reduce the amount of accounts per player? How would that make sense?
Even if you only allowed 1 account per players and didn't watch over suspective behavior that would drastically decrease multiaccounting as long as someone is caught at least once in a while, even if its only by user reporting.
When was it ever the right way to allow something just because someone might do it anyway. We're not allowing murder cause some people are doing it anyway that may not be caught. It still keeps the murder rate lower than if it was allowed as long as some people are caught now and then. I can understand if they say they probably can't check if someone has two accounts or is just playing with his brother. But outright allowing 3 accounts per person opens the door to people then sitting on 6 accounts saying the other 3 are his brother, etc. It only makes the problem worse.
Just tell me WHY. I could accept if gamigo just revealed they want to make more cash by whales dropping 3x high value packs or whatever but the current reasoning makes me wonder what the point of this ruling is.
I think it's not fair when we are talking about a level playing field for everyone, that some people are going to have 3x accounts to generate gold with labor.
Whenever I mention that, nobody really disagrees that it would make more sense for everyone to only have 1 account. The only argument I hear is that it is hard to enforce that people only have 1 account.
But how does allowing 3 accounts not make this worse? If you went for 1 account per player you could assume that it would be relatively normal that 2 people are playing from one household, even though it would not be allowed if it was only one person. Then investigate when that number is suspiciously high or when there is a lot of one sided progress by only 1 account (like maybe based on achievement %).
With up to 3 accounts per player allowed how could that reduce the amount of accounts per player? How would that make sense?
Even if you only allowed 1 account per players and didn't watch over suspective behavior that would drastically decrease multiaccounting as long as someone is caught at least once in a while, even if its only by user reporting.
When was it ever the right way to allow something just because someone might do it anyway. We're not allowing murder cause some people are doing it anyway that may not be caught. It still keeps the murder rate lower than if it was allowed as long as some people are caught now and then. I can understand if they say they probably can't check if someone has two accounts or is just playing with his brother. But outright allowing 3 accounts per person opens the door to people then sitting on 6 accounts saying the other 3 are his brother, etc. It only makes the problem worse.
Just tell me WHY. I could accept if gamigo just revealed they want to make more cash by whales dropping 3x high value packs or whatever but the current reasoning makes me wonder what the point of this ruling is.