Limit Client Connections

[Orsi]

The problem is that multiple connections are already allowed, therefore no one sees a problem in having multiple clients. The assumption that limiting the clients to one or two would make more work for the admins is absolutely wrong and unfounded.

It's like smoking pot in the Netherlands. It's legal you see people smoking it everywhere, up and down the sidewalks sharing a joint with their buds. This is Second Age, multi-clienting is legal, so people do it, and because new players see everyone else doing it, they join in. It's ingrained in the culture.

On the flipside, we have Canada. Yes, it is illegal despite the reputation we have for being a relaxed society towards it. The mere fact that it is illegal prevents a great majority of Canadians from trying pot, or continuing to smoke it even if they do. You don't see people on the street in mid-day sharing joints, kids hide it from their parents and sneak off to remote parts of town to do it, and if you just so happen to be caught by a cop it becomes a judgement call to whether he lets you off or not. It's not going to send your ass to jail, but you are aware of the law. You won't see it being sold in cafes, and you won't feel like your missing out. Limiting connections will not make more work for admins on Second Age, it'll curb the general consensus that multi-clienting is the thing to do and knowing that it is possible to be busted for it is called deterrent.

[Donk]

I'm not sure how you expect Derrick to police individuals using 4 accounts so easily, however an IP limit can't be surpassed.

Actually, an IP limit can easily be circumvented by anybody who can work a proxy. They've been used by trolls and griefers to get around forum and IRC bans for years. If a stricter IP limit were put in place, anybody with minor computer knowledge and a determination to break the rules could bypass it, leaving only the players with a legitimate reason to have multiple connections from one IP locked out.

It's not uncommon for entire institutions, schools or even ISPs in some countries to share IP addresses. Restricting the number of connections from an IP address would do little to stop the problem of AFK mining or archer-botting and would instead just be a blanket restriction on a number of the shard's legitimate players.

Edit: All I'm saying is that you're presenting this issue as "Limit connections per IP, problem solved", when it's not really that simple. The problem will still exist, people will still use archer-bots and anybody who shares an IP will get screwed.

[Hemperor]

I'm not sure how you expect Derrick to police individuals using 4 accounts so easily, however an IP limit can't be surpassed.

Actually, an IP limit can easily be circumvented by anybody who can work a proxy. They've been used by trolls and griefers to get around forum and IRC bans for years. If a stricter IP limit were put in place, anybody with minor computer knowledge and a determination to break the rules could bypass it, leaving only the players with a legitimate reason to have multiple connections from one IP locked out.

It's not uncommon for entire institutions, schools or even ISPs in some countries to share IP addresses. Restricting the number of connections from an IP address would do little to stop the problem of AFK mining or archer-botting and would instead just be a blanket restriction on a number of the shard's legitimate players.

Edit: All I'm saying is that you're presenting this issue as "Limit connections per IP, problem solved", when it's not really that simple. The problem will still exist, people will still use archer-bots and anybody who shares an IP will get screwed.

There is already an IP limit of 4, who's to say this isn't already being exploited then? Might as well allow us infinite connections.

Also, this isn't about "screwing" people... Which OSI were you playing where you built 3 characters simultaneous and scoped out the places you wanted to go at ease on another ghost? It's becoming a legitimate standard here. New slogan ideas? "UO SecondAge: The Way It Wasn't But Sh*t It's Easier and More Convenient This Way"

[Orsi]

Edit: All I'm saying is that you're presenting this issue as "Limit connections per IP, problem solved", when it's not really that simple.

What I'm saying is "Limit connections per ip, problem less of a problem." Yes, it's more complicated, people will do quite a lot to circumvent any restrictions if they can get an advantage. A limitation is a long-term solution.

If it is to be acknowledged as illegal, it will lead to: players not telling newbies on the forums how to macro their characters up with multiple clients; current players acknowledging they are breaking policy and they may be caught. It will shape the future culture of the shard to one less willing to use multiple clients in order to macro, gather or provide everything possible for themselves.

[Donk]

Also, this isn't about "screwing" people... Which OSI were you playing where you built 3 characters simultaneous and scoped out the places you wanted to go at ease on another ghost? It's becoming a legitimate standard here. New slogan ideas? "UO SecondAge: The Way It Wasn't But Sh*t It's Easier and More Convenient This Way"

Back on OSI we all played from the same IP because OSI would let you play as many accounts as you had computers. What you are proposing (connection limit) would stop the problems you describe, it's true, but it would also have unintended consequences such as stopping legitimate IP sharing. It would be like stopping AFK resource gathering by removing mining, it's a heavy-handed, ill-concieved solution to a minor problem. I'm sorry that you got killed by SOME people abusing the connection limit in ways that weren't common back in the day, but that doesn't mean you should restrict ALL connections and act like that's solved anything.

[Hemperor]

Also, this isn't about "screwing" people... Which OSI were you playing where you built 3 characters simultaneous and scoped out the places you wanted to go at ease on another ghost? It's becoming a legitimate standard here. New slogan ideas? "UO SecondAge: The Way It Wasn't But Sh*t It's Easier and More Convenient This Way"

Back on OSI we all played from the same IP because OSI would let you play as many accounts as you had computers. What you are proposing (connection limit) would stop the problems you describe, it's true, but it would also have unintended consequences such as stopping legitimate IP sharing. It would be like stopping AFK resource gathering by removing mining, it's a heavy-handed, ill-concieved solution to a minor problem. I'm sorry that you got killed by SOME people abusing the connection limit in ways that weren't common back in the day, but that doesn't mean you should restrict ALL connections and act like that's solved anything.

We aren't proposing anything new, we are proposing a tweak to the system already in place. The limit is currently at 4 and I believe Derrick has agreed that it should be lessened to at least 3.

The proposition here isn't nearly as dark and extreme as you describe.