Helsa

Tsumuku wrote: »

Helsa wrote: »

As I noted earlier. Whereas multiple sessions from the same computer could reasonably be assumed to be a single user...

Honestly, from just this it's clear that you're missing the point.

I had assumed you meant that the ability for players to make multiple accounts conveys extra utility compared to those that only use one account; have I got that wrong?

Tsumuku wrote: »

The fact that you can fill out the form for an account with your info, and not make up names or aliases is part of the problem.

It's not against the rules to have multiple accounts so why the need for aliases?

Tsumuku wrote: »

With the current ToS it doesn't matter if it is 16 people on 16 computers or 1 person on 16 computers. In which case, does virtualizing those computers count?

Would 16 people with 16 computers doing the same thing as 1 person with 16 computers be a problem? I'm gonna guess no. So, this is an issue of degree rather than kind. Where to draw the line is a matter of opinion; Nexon draws it at multi-clienting. Multi-clienting involves third-party software the other methods do not. Whereas from a superficial utility point of view it seems the same, from an execution point of view it is not.

Tsumuku wrote: »

It seems like they don't care about that anymore as there is no check for VMs anymore.

People are getting banned for multi-clienting all the time, however, someone has to report them first, but not do so publicly.

Tsumuku wrote: »

This could be to allow people on Mac/Linux to play as well, but I am doubtful.

Porting is not a trivial process unless you want the game written in JAVA. The cost to benefit for Nexon here is probably something they've already made up their mind about.

Tsumuku wrote: »

Nexon has other games where they outright block launching on virtual machines, and where they have no problem banning for abuse of multiple accounts. It isn't costly to identify abuse, there are some telltale signs.

Do you have 3 accounts your ruin Tech missions with that are all under level 1000? Do they all connect from the same location? Do they always drop their key for you? Do you stream this abuse (there is a Mabi player that does)? Has a Community Manager been in that stream and not called out the blatant mods and abuse?

Even when they don't broadcast it, identifying non-progressing players that do nothing but events isn't terribly difficult. I know you might not feel like you're defending multi-clienting, but this excuse is easy to shut down, but you go through many jumps to try to make a defense.

If you say so. Mabinogi is an old game. Maybe this is a carry over from a time when Nexon didn't have such policy. Since, Mabinogi is so old you have legacy multiple accounts and Nexon has probably done a cost benefit analysis of ending that and decided against it. Corporations are inherently conservative in their decision making.

Tsumuku wrote: »

Also...

Most folks with multiple accounts use them for storage rather than to run bots and so on

If you're using multiple accounts for storage, that's still not acceptable. Space constraints are intentional, and within Mabi you can have more than enough space with pet inventories bank tabs and bags....

I would strongly advise you not to go with that argument. I understand that you have a passion about botting and that you feel obligated to counter any point that isn't supportive in a wholesale way. The thing is, nearly everyone would be with you on the issue of botting. Here though, you would be adversely affecting many many people who don't bot; there are a LOT of legacy multiple accounts. If your idea to handle botting is going to effect them, when they aren't botting, well, that's just bad politics.

Cho wrote: »

Helsa wrote: »

It's the classic dilemma in maintaining the law: you either stop all law breaking at the expense of some innocent people being sentenced, or you have no innocent people being sentenced at the expense of some law breaking happening.

In every one of these multi-boxer, botter callout threads, people always show up to defend it using the idea that if Nexon does anything, they might ban innocent players. It just seems you're being very light with the people cheating the system as if Nexon gave them no other option but to litter every dungeon, sm, and event with alts.

I'm not defending botting though. I'm defending that house holds can have multiple players in them and Nexon can't tell the difference. I'm defending that Nexon does allow for multiple accounts and pointing out that most people use them for storage rather than botting. As for the policing dilemma, I guess some people feel that its better to get all the bad guys at the price of some innocents but not everyone agrees with that and I pointed out that that will have consequences too.

If you want to stop botting then just keep reporting them to Nexon but don't do it publicly.

Sherri wrote: »

to me, multiple computers being used for alts and one machine running multiple alts is practically the same thing.. i don't know why using the same computer is such a big taboo, is it something to do with legal stuff?

It's not the same thing because one involves using third party software while the other involves third party hardware. Playing the game requires third party hardware anyway while with third party software they have no control over it other than to ban it outright. If two sessions come from the same computer then that is a single person. Multiple computers could be multiple people. Chasing down every instance and confirming it's legitimacy would mean a cost to Nexon NA that would probably make maintaining Mabinogi non-economic.

Tsumuku wrote: »

Helsa wrote: »

Because households can have multiple players in them, you have to allow for multiple sessions from separate computers.

Yes, this is correct. However, the current TOS allows for a single person to create

Nexon TOS - Code of Conduct wrote:

Creating more than one account within twenty-four hours or more than five accounts within thirty days, or otherwise exceeding your authorized access to any portion of the Services or any database, computer, or device.

This is the issue - the TOS allows a single person to hold more than 1 account, without usage limitation, so long as they do not create more than 1 per day, and no more than 5 per 30 days. It's such an odd choice. Most EULA/TOS limit account creation to 1 account per person (not residence). I understand that there is difficulty in enforcing this, however catching it should not be difficult any longer.

As I noted earlier. Whereas multiple sessions from the same computer could reasonably be assumed to be a single user. From multiple computers you can't tell how many users are involved. What if someone goes to the public library to make their account? What if a friend brings their laptop for a sleepover and plays Mabinogi at their friends house? What if you have a power failure and your router IP resets? Sussing this out and maintaining a constant vigilance will cost Nexon and will cut into their profits. Maybe, Mabinogi could still be profitable but would Nexon meet it's opportunity cost? That is doubtful. There is also an enormous amount of legacy multiple accounts, and why not it's not against the rules. Most folks with multiple accounts use them for storage rather than to run bots and so on. If they log in to a message saying "which ever account you log into will be saved the rest will be deleted"? Well, what might that do to the size of the player base? The actual complaint here is that folks have many simultaneous active sessions, not just two. If they're doing it with computers then how many folks can afford that? Multi-clienting from a single computer would be available to everyone; perhaps this is why its banned? So if they can sus out who is multi-clienting, and they can, just ask our favourite forum troll Pan, then they ARE addressing the problem. If it's not happening fast enough, then it's too expensive to work quicker. You also have the classic dilemma in law enforcement at play too.

So, what to do? Report suspected cases and let Nexon figure it out. Only don't report them publicly.

Because households can have multiple players in them, you have to allow for multiple sessions from separate computers. This also allows for the creation of accounts from households. It's the classic dilemma in maintaining the law: you either stop all law breaking at the expense of some innocent people being sentenced, or you have no innocent people being sentenced at the expense of some law breaking happening.

In this situation there might be nothing wrong happening. We are allowed to have multiple accounts. The only restrictions are on how often you create accounts. As long as you stay within the rules you can have as many accounts as you can make. Also, there is no restriction on how many active sessions you can have logged in simultaneously provided each such session uses a separate computer. So, in this case, if this is eight accounts on eight computers then they're not breaking any rules but if it's not eight accounts and eight computers, well, you've included the character names publicly there for all to see.