Maybe not account sharing, but similarly sounding names.

The biggest obstacle to this master account suggestion is enforcing it. How would you? Can sub each account with separate Credit Card/Paypal account. Vouchers are untraceable. Typical routers/modems today change IP daily. Sometimes two or more people live in the same house.

Basically put, to enforce this master account idea, the admins will need to arbitrarily decide which accounts belong to which people and then bundle the accounts under that person's master account. That's time and effort and thousands of accounts past and present to do. What about accounts with similar names? Maybe there was a guy who made Blizzara1, Blizzara2, and Blizzara3. Currently, all three accounts are used by very different people. Do you bundle them all together under the owner of Blizzara1?

The simple answer, is you don't actively enforce it, BUT for example, if reports are sent in about two particular people being one and the same, it wouldn't be too difficult to investigate the accounts in question, especially if the person in question connects to both from the same IP (even though you did mention a good point about IP's and two people in the same house connecting, it's difficult to really prove you're both different people playing in the same house, i figure if two people are the same it would be pretty obvious being as they'd likely be part of the same team and talk with the same people, whereas different people might be on a different team, or talk to different people, or even converse with the OTHER guy in the same house- though arguably that could be faked).

The ideal is that it's not officially allowed to control two master accounts yourself, so that if you do for some reason try to bypass the rule, you ARE taking a risk in that, if you get caught or you let it slip in pm's with someone that rats you out, or whatever may happen to bring that fact to light, and then you undergo an inspection you'd likely not even know is happening, a Ban is rightfully deserved when you're found guilty.

at the end of the day, think about it like this, Law's are in effect all over the world, some you may not even know exist, but people oftentimes break these laws- Frequently even.
Are they all instantly caught? No, hell no infact, i'd bet lots of people break those laws REPEATEDLY without being caught, if ever.
It's the same in games imo, not all hackers are caught, not all exploiters are caught, some rules in games just cant be actively enforced, It's too much work.
Does this mean they aren't considered at all? No, they are, but it's mostly up to the playerbase to catch alot of the people doing such things and report them.

I know a couple of parent / child players here. Generally they've been on the same team. I can only assume that they talk to each other face to face sometimes instead of logging in to star sonata.

What do?

This will cost Jeff money so it would be a no

If the parent and child act and type exactly the same in-game and talk to the same people, in general, not to eachother. Then imo, it's probably going to seem like they're the same person, not relatives. But at this point i feel we're reading into it too much, if a parent/child couple got banned in my eyes, with this system, it would be because somebody decided they wanted to be an asshat and report them, which imo would be a double edged sword if they prove that they are indeed different people, because then the fault lies on the person reporting them.

To be honest, i feel like if for example a mod were paying attention to both accounts, and saw one ship moving around and at the same time, the other account was also moving around (No AP), assuming they can do that of course, it would be pretty obvious that it cant be the same person, unless they're using two different PC's at the same time somehow, but then, you can't really prove that either then?


Well, you heard it here first folks.

Money > Balance

"Ratting people out"?

What.

That's even worse than having the admins arbitrarily decide which accounts should be put under a specific master. There are plenty of people who have ulterior motives.

For example, 13 likes to use the "It was technically not me because we all share accounts" reasoning whenever he does something in the grey area that is extremely unfair. If I just report to Jeff that all of those accounts are 13...Jeff would put them all under the same master?

There's like 15 accounts on his team. The whole damn team goes from 2250 slots to 150 in one fell swoop.

to be honest.. Its more like 21 accounts

Exactly. If people report 13 enough, all of Ada Souls drop from a crazy amount of slots to 150? You could do that to anyone if you hate them enough. Traders, SRX, RF, DSF...on and on and on.

The admins are not biased (not going to say they can't be stupid). Some devs might be biased (cough Red). But every single player is biased as hell. You let players ultimately decide who is who and all the politics come out to ruin the game.

Uhmmmm no. I'm strongly against this suggestion.

Well whatever, this discussion is over it seems.
I've made all the points i needed to, and yet people still insist on rejecting this in favor of maintaining MC'ers a very clear P2W advantage.

So tbh, enjoy the game while it lasts.

No one truly thinks MCing is good for the game. But no one wants *this* suggestion because of how hard, time consuming, or biasing that it has going for it.

Your team has like 3 people on it right? How about I get 30 other people to vote that maybe it's actually one person MCing 3 accounts. How bout dem apples? You like losing 2/3rd of your team's base slots? What happens to bases already deployed? I guess you're now exploiting. You've got 450 slots worth of bases deployed but only have 150 slots. I guess you now have a perma ban on your master account. Goodbye enemy team.

to even have this discussion we need 5k+ players, so best get on with that discussion instead

We wont GET 5k+ players at any point in time, running a system that benefits MC'ers.
So that logic is completely invalid.

there are plenty games that you can MC that have 5k+ players

A lot of those games i would assume, do not give blatant P2W potential to MC'ing in and of itself (witholding any value of being able to control several characters, the base point of MC'ing in the first place) Which is the entire point i've been trying to drive into all of your Lead-thick skulls.

And please, if you have a better solution, the tables clear, present it.