Multis / USD. (in General)


Godpanda February 13 2008 9:15 PM EST

It's a very real problem, as proven today in chat. CB tracks the exploitation of multis, not the creation of.

Can anyone think of a way to stop this?

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] February 13 2008 9:16 PM EST

It also tracks the creation of them.

Eurynome Bartleby [Bartleby's] February 13 2008 9:17 PM EST

Ban USD usage. Not a popular idea but still the most logical.

Yeah, lame and predictable answer, but I really think it is a valid option.

Not being able to sell out removes a good bit of the temptation to multi, right?

Duke February 13 2008 9:18 PM EST

Hint: have you guy ever try to make several account of paypal.

Yukk February 13 2008 9:19 PM EST

It's pretty hard to stop the creation. Say someone has internet at home and at work and they create a character at work and play it there and create one from home and play it there, how can anyone prove that's the same person ?
Of course this might not be very efficient but it's just an example.

48DangerZone February 13 2008 9:19 PM EST

It is too easy. And I thank you for making this post Epiphany. I think CB obviously needs to be stricter on some aspects of the game. Maybe first time multi = IP Ban. Like that strict. Because SOO many multi's sell CB for USD off there NUB it screws up the game. I bet. In every like 7 people ish, They own a Multi. Its that bad. But noone sees it.. So.. Time to change for the better.

48Zach February 13 2008 9:24 PM EST

"It is too easy. And I thank you for making this post Epiphany. I think CB obviously needs to be stricter on some aspects of the game. Maybe first time multi = IP Ban. Like that strict. Because SOO many multi's sell CB for USD off there NUB it screws up the game. I bet. In every like 7 people ish, They own a Multi. Its that bad. But noone sees it.. So.. Time to change for the better. "

Nuff Said.

Ulord[NK] February 13 2008 9:27 PM EST

Has anyone got proof or reasonable doubt that someone is multiing and generating cash for usd successfully without detection?

To stop USD transaction entirely is unfeasible. It would be incredibly labour intensive to enforce at the best. You might as well stop item trades entirely and kill the economy while you are at it.

of course, you don't even need to nub to generate massive amount of cash flow if your sole goal is to farm usd. Running a cash farm ncb can easily accumulate 500k a day if done correctly. That's 15mil give or take and 75 usd. Is such paltry amount worth the "work"? I really don't think so.

Daz February 13 2008 9:29 PM EST

Duke, 9:18 PM EST [collapse]
Hint: have you guy ever try to make several account of paypal.

I have 3.

Rubberduck[T] [Hell Blenders] February 13 2008 9:30 PM EST

I don't think we discuss this because it can't be stopped ;)

48Zach February 13 2008 9:30 PM EST

"Has anyone got proof or reasonable doubt that someone is multiing and generating cash for usd successfully without detection? "

DanegrZone and I did a test to see if we would get caught, turns out, we didn't. And yes, we have confessed and are wating our resets.

three4thsforsaken February 13 2008 9:31 PM EST

Don't act like you're doing us a favor by multing...

It's very difficult to track the creation of multi's I presume, so you gotta give CB some slack. They can't ban people with the same IP addresses right away because their can be multiple people on the same computer, if they do that they have to make a one account per IP address rule, which will be quite a bummer in public internet places.

And I believe a ban-reset is a good punishment, at least for the first time. It seems that one out of every 2 new players think they're so clever when they multi, but if we were to ban them all, it gives them no second chance. Most new players don't understand how competitive this game can be, and how it's so much more PVP than almost any other text based MMO out there. Once they realize this, many of them get their act in gear and play the game right. I think a 2nd chances is something CB needs to keep.

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] February 13 2008 9:34 PM EST

If any geniuses out there decide based on this thread that becoming a multi is a good idea... I think they'll be unpleasantly surprised.

NooneKnows February 13 2008 9:43 PM EST

back to the point of the thread...

ideas:

-one account/IP AND vice versa
screws over people (like me) who play in multiple places, but also hinders multi operation.

-disallow all accounts to sell for US$, but create a system where one can buy CB$ from Jon for a fixed US$ price.
one can invest in the game, but cannot turn it into a moneymaking machine. could possibly put market in check.
if this is implemented, I would like to have the option of paying Jon a larger amount of CB$ for supportership/supporter items, just because I'm stingy like that ;P

and why isn't "supportership" in the spellcheck? and why isn't "spellcheck?"

AdminQBnovice [Cult of the Valaraukar] February 13 2008 9:47 PM EST

Games where you can buy an unlimited amount of money or items from the owner are a joke.. that's not a real economy.

The only (And this will likely NEVER happen) way to accomplish any of these ideas would be to ban player to player xfers.

AdminLamuness February 13 2008 9:49 PM EST

You people do realize that one IP per account is not a viable option, right? That is not how networking works. But with the coming of IPV6 this "might" be possible, however that is still quite a time away. Also know that even though it is a minority, there is still quite a number of people on dial-up, thus dynamic assigning of IP addresses. And yes, this is not limited to just dial-up. IP addresses can / do expire on a network.

Wizard'sFirstRule February 13 2008 9:52 PM EST

ability to sell out is one of the main temptation of this game.

and if USD trading is banned and we can only buy CB from Jon, the exchange rate become fixed (how else is it going to change without a market to regulate?), waves of people buying from Jon (say 20% more) would result in a collapse of CB economy because there will be so much CB floating around, and prices of item goes up (because the spawn rate is still constant) and non-USD spender will have no chance to get anything decent.

Ulord[NK] February 13 2008 10:18 PM EST

managed economy fails, virtual or otherwise. Besides, admins have other means of catching multies that is not aware by the mass. Even if you have the perfect multi, your gain from selling CB2 will become increasingly a pittance, as the exchange rate falls due to over supply. Eventually, it won't be worth your while. This is already happening with or without the so called multies generating millions of CB to sell.

On the other hand, pushing the boundary and creating unnecessary headaches for the admins just to prove a point is immature and disruptive. You guys need to be punished, even banned. Topics like these should be conducted through CM, not in the public forum.

NooneKnows February 13 2008 10:26 PM EST

I didn't say I liked either idea, both go against the way I've honestly played the game. just trying to get the gears turning.

QBsutekh137 February 13 2008 10:32 PM EST

Yep, ban transfers, that's the only way. It's a tough nut to crack, so the "solution" would have to be tough. There's nothing easy here...

Lord Bob February 13 2008 10:43 PM EST

"-one account/IP AND vice versa
screws over people (like me) who play in multiple places, but also hinders multi operation. "

And if for some ludicrous reason this were ever to happen, I would instantly sell out. Thankfully I know Jon isn't anywhere near dumb enough to do this.

I'm one of those that think that even though multis are a problem,, the solutions proposed so far are much, much worse. And on the USD front, it doesn't bother me at all, so I don't see it as a problem to be solved.

Wizard'sFirstRule February 13 2008 10:53 PM EST

if I actually want to make money, I would be getting a job. I can get about 500k-1m a day with NUB and selling out would get me about $5 USD for about 1 1/2 hr of work. What do you think I am? a slave that can be underpaid?

[RX3]Cotillion February 13 2008 11:09 PM EST

I really don't see how banning USD can hinder CB... It makes it fair to people who don't want to spend actual money on a game. I'd suggest two different 'servers', but that is totally out of the question, considering 'I don't want to put the resources out to do it, so why should Jon?'.

I mean, there is the NUB that 'tries' to let new players catch up. The regen rates were halved making it nigh impossible to gain an advantage by putting more time into the game. Why not remove USD from CB and level that aspect as well?

Ulord[NK] February 13 2008 11:14 PM EST

Simply put: ban usd from game = ban player to player transaction. Think about that for a second and let it sink in. Is the medicine worse than the disease?

TheHatchetman February 13 2008 11:16 PM EST

Transactions are still possible through auctions.

[RX3]Cotillion February 13 2008 11:18 PM EST

FS/WTB Forum
Policy

This is for advertisements of items and characters for sale or wanted-to-buy. Those looking to buy or sell items are encouraged to use the built-in auction system instead, which is custom-built for this purpose and has several advantages over a generic forum: CB auctions are scam-proof, searchable, and offer email alerts for buyers interested in specific items. It's also generally cheaper, since there are no additional transfer fees.

If you choose to start a new thread here anyway (either because what you have to say isn't easily translated into an auction, or because you just feel like posting the items you want to sell), you will be automatically assessed a fee of $2,000. Posting in another forum to dodge the fee will result in a fine of $25,000. You may post addenda or otherwise "bump" your post, but each reply will also cost $2,000. (Only the thread creator may reply to his posts; it proved contentious to allow others to post potentially off-topic material as well.)

Duplicate threads and threads designed to flood/spam the forum will be removed with an optional appropriate fine.

FS/WTB threads are closed after two days, and deleted after six months.

--------------------------------------

Just thought I'd like to copy and paste that.

Ulord[NK] February 13 2008 11:18 PM EST

set up an auction with nominal prices, complete back end usd transactions. say hi to underground economy.

NooneKnows February 13 2008 11:26 PM EST

lol, black market auctions

TheHatchetman February 13 2008 11:32 PM EST

say hi to auctions are easy enough to check... I think if someone notices a whip getting bought out for the 2m BIN, they'd catch on...

TheHatchetman February 13 2008 11:34 PM EST

the issue with eliminating transfers isn't the reduction in player to player sales, but the inability to loan and/or pay on a payment plan...

chuck1234 February 13 2008 11:45 PM EST

As I have already pointed out several times before in this forum, the only way to sanitise the revenue flows in CB2 is for Jon to formalise the business model in tune with the scenario everywhere else in the online gaming world. This means the game-owner, i.e. Jon, sells CB2 at a certain price, say 1 mil CBD for USD 5. Naturally, people are free to trade CB2, but I think most USD players will prefer to buy direct from Jon, which will remove the single major incentive for becoming an NUB multi, generating CB$ to gain US$ in the bargain.

Seriously, its high time for Jon to wake up to this home truth; or he can examine any number of online games for their business model. Not that everything is hunky-dory everywhere, but at least in this game the multi problem will be seriously curtailed.

Admindudemus [jabberwocky] February 13 2008 11:51 PM EST

"everywhere else in the online gaming world"

i have read your other posts regarding this and wonder what games exactly you are referring to? wow doesn't do this, nor does any other mmorpg i know except maybe project entropa or whatever it was called. perhaps you are not referring to mmorpg's at all but i for one would like some clarification.

chuck1234 February 14 2008 12:13 AM EST

Off-hand i'll suggest vile city at vilecity.com, this also has several partner games, and all of them have the same business model; there are monthly memberships [i am a free player, not a member], you can in addition buy points, weapons, armour, and other in-game stuff which also spawns in "search downtown" and "lucky draw" daily chance events.

I also play Cricket Manager, at cricketmanager.co.uk, which is similar to baseball, football simulation games, where you get a random team, and can then buy players spawned in daily auctions. You can purchase points in various denominations, with which to place your bids at auctions; and there are prize tournaments [with entry fees] where you win points when placed in the top three. The players you buy last for 8 seasons on average [about one year's gameplay], with peak form stretching over 4 or 5 of them, so there's a bit of heartburn over these issues over there.

Though I don't play other MMORPGs regularly, i've checked various browser-based games from the games rating sites and all of these have a business model more or less as described above, though everywhere you can play for free.

About these games rating sites/ directories: cricket manager gives 5 points daily for voting on each of these sites for that game [which totals to 55-60 points daily] on various MMORPG rating sites. In fact I came across Vile City through an ad on one such site.

chuck1234 February 14 2008 12:15 AM EST

P.S.: Maybe Carnage Blender should figure in these online games rating sites as well. But, what incentive can Jon provide to players for voting daily for CB2 on these sites? Extra BA??? lol

DrAcO5676 [The Knighthood III] February 14 2008 2:01 AM EST

I would love to see Jon put his game on a few of those ratings sites... A good incentive would be 1 mil cbd per day if you vote on all the sites but I'm sure that would skew the economy... or maybe some points to use at the Blacksmith for points on items and such... More ba would be nice but I really don't know how that would work with the way Ranger is already so far ahead... and how would the N*b fall into that.

8DEOTWP February 14 2008 2:04 AM EST

[P.S.: Maybe Carnage Blender should figure in these online games rating sites as well. But, what incentive can Jon provide to players for voting daily for CB2 on these sites? Extra BA??? lol]

Good idea

Ulord[NK] February 14 2008 2:58 AM EST

To hatch:

Transfer log is no more difficult to check than Auction. Again, the admins will have more work to do hunting down the sneaky violators all day. You can eventually stymie the flow of game currency into usd by literally choking off the different means of commerce we have now and add on tons of restrictions. Again, is it really worth it to debilitate the game economy and negatively impact game experience just to stop usd trade?

With regards to the fixed exchange rate ideas, it's useless and redundant. If Jon is to set a fixed exchange rate, the players will only buy from Jon if the fixed rate is below market, ie Jon will have to artificially deflate CB2 value with regards to usd. Eventually, the market price will fall to the level of the fixed price, assuming it is not so low that there is no incentive to ever supply. That makes naming and supportership proportionally more expensive, not a good thing for bringing in new players. If you make the official rate the only way to purchase game currency with usd, only possible if you severely limit and monitor player trades, we are back to the point i made in paragraph 1.

QBOddBird February 14 2008 3:02 AM EST

"Again, is it really worth it to debilitate the game economy and negatively impact game experience just to stop usd trade?"

Some of us neither consider the idea of removing player-to-player trades as debilitating or negative...

Ulord[NK] February 14 2008 3:04 AM EST

I find that to be surprising but perhaps that's the difference in play style. To me the most important thing that attracts me in CB is its variety of items and a vibrant market place for them. From day one, I started as a camper and buying and selling was the high point of this game. If such interaction is removed, you will lose a portion of the player base such as myself. It also reduces the diversity and variety this game offers.

Wasp [Demon Forging] February 14 2008 3:13 AM EST

"chuck1234, Feb 13
As I have already pointed out several times before in this forum, the only way to sanitise the revenue flows in CB2 is for Jon to formalise the business model in tune with the scenario everywhere else in the online gaming world. This means the game-owner, i.e. Jon, sells CB2 at a certain price, say 1 mil CBD for USD 5"

A good idea, seems like it would work, on paper. People would then sell their cb$ for a lower price, say $4 a million, and undercut the $5 price. People always want the cheaper option.

chuck1234 February 14 2008 3:24 AM EST

imho, the "usual suspects" when it comes to regular or big usd deals would prefer buying direct from Jon.

Of course, there would some player-to-player cb$/us$ trade, but it wouldn't be as extensive as is functioning now because at present there is no possibility for buying CB$ direct from the game. We could have an informal honour system that identifies established sellers as opposed to new unknowns.

The important thing is that such a central disburser of CB$ will discourage the multi phenomenon, in that newcomers with a mercenary bent of mind will no longer find it lucrative to play multi since their gains wouldn't be convertible as easily into US$ as is possible today.


Ulord[NK] February 14 2008 3:49 AM EST

That still doesnt solve the problem that as long as market rate < fixed rate by jon, people will buy at market rate. How much premium would the fixed rate be able to have over the market rate because of ease of use? Assuming Jon programs a nice form for easy usd buying, still not much. Besides, this does not solve the supply problem. Players can still cash out, as long as they sell at a rate lower than the fixed rate, their cb2 can be just as easily liquidated as they do now.

Daz February 14 2008 4:14 AM EST

"RetPally[oRly], 2:04 AM EST [collapse]
[P.S.: Maybe Carnage Blender should figure in these online games rating sites as well. But, what incentive can Jon provide to players for voting daily for CB2 on these sites? Extra BA??? lol]

Good idea"

I seem to recall getting BA for clicking on ads or voting CB up many moons ago. I don't remember why it was taken down, though.


Regarding the discussion of buying Money from Jon;
The problem with that is that any money bought from Jon that way isn't currently in the game and it would create (more) inflation. With player to player Money transfers, the cash has been generated properly, the money exists within the game. Theoretically, the mpr gain from fighting should be a balance, as character size increase "requires" more money spent (Except in the cases where it doesn't), but this isn't really the case.

Flamey February 14 2008 5:34 AM EST

"Players can still cash out, as long as they sell at a rate lower than the fixed rate, their cb2 can be just as easily liquidated as they do now."

I'd rather play than sell 2 days worth of playing for something that doesn't even cover lunch.

Brakke Bres [Ow man] February 14 2008 6:35 AM EST

ban the use of USD all together, most game sites use this policy and have that big a problem with multies.
USD screws up the game dynamics as it is now, so ban its use and see the multi numbers drop.

Duke February 14 2008 6:37 AM EST

Paypal seem the best way to caught multi its hard to have several paypal account, as each need a Checking account or CC if you want to withdraw the money.

smallpau1 - Go Blues [Lower My Fees] February 14 2008 7:12 AM EST

Make it so NUBs cannot do money transfers until their NUB expires.

Godpanda February 14 2008 7:15 AM EST

I'd say make players wait until gondor to make money transfers. They can buy it, but not SELL it.

colonel [penny pincher] February 14 2008 7:16 AM EST

The idea of preventing player to player transfers would likely be most effective. A less effective, but maybe more palatable alternative may be to remove the NUB. I would go back to a previous post of mine where I suggested slowing the growth of the top chars (I suggested an old character penalty) rather than speeding the growth of the bottom ones. It may be that by removing the lure of easy money one can remove much of the temptation and thereby reduce (admittedly not eliminate) the potential for abuse.

Windwalker February 14 2008 7:35 AM EST

Once again I sign on with Epiphany! {cb1}smallpau1 that sounds good too. Most of the people that run multis are not going to wait that long to try their hand at the wheel and after someone has put in a solid amount of work on their character the risk of being caught is too great!! Nice ideas.

YOU February 14 2008 7:51 AM EST

working cb for money. lol , unless you are working in deep desert of africa, the USD you make here in a month probably worth less than my special dinner tonight.

QBBast [Hidden Agenda] February 14 2008 12:41 PM EST


$50k CB2 to the first person to list, in order of appearance, every name in this thread the very presence of which made me laugh out loud.

drudge February 14 2008 4:20 PM EST

ZAPs name?

Marlfox [Cult of the Valaraukar] February 14 2008 4:25 PM EST

DangerZone
Zach
YOU

Did I get it right? ;)

QBOddBird February 15 2008 3:11 AM EST

Duke, Dangerzone, and Zach, of course.

The only one I can imagine that I missed is the unconvicted KITTYOU.

Wizard'sFirstRule February 15 2008 7:13 AM EST

I request a multi account (requesting 3 extra accounts) permission from Jon for a week. I want to test for a few days, playing as much as I can using the 3 accounts for about 48 hours, and see how much CB I can make (but not transferring them away).

The result will be reported here and for the statistician to convert to USD and see how much money I can make per hour and per day. (I will not benefit personally from this exercise other than testing how much CB that a multi can make to discourage myself ever doing it again).

As far as slowing old character growth instead of NUB, it doesn't affect it at all. It is the relative growth rate between new/old character that matters, not absolute growth.

Wizard'sFirstRule February 15 2008 7:25 AM EST

sorry for double post. I was way too tired to think. I would like to see the result if such an exercise is allowed, but doing it myself would take way too much effort.

I retract my last post.

colonel [penny pincher] February 15 2008 7:45 AM EST

"As far as slowing old character growth instead of NUB, it doesn't affect it at all. It is the relative growth rate between new/old character that matters, not absolute growth."

I beg to differ on that slightly (at least I think we may differ). I believe the Multi problem, if there is one, is entirely due to the gaining of CBD with the extra account (and relative CBD growth through the NUB exaggerates it). Removing all NUBs and going with only NCBs (fast XP then but never fast CBD) would go a long ways towards addressing the motivation for the potential Multi problem.

I just tossed up the idea of slowing old character growth because I think it is more elegant than the NCB (elegant being it addresses, I think, the same underlying issues as or more effectively and just as easily--disclaimer: I am not a programmer. I really don't know what is easy. I just slept at a Holiday Inn Express last night.). In my mind there are certain significant advantages of older/larger characters and reigning those in could level the field between new and old more effectively because . . . as it stands now there are a few (pick your number--is it only Ranger or is it the top 10 or top 20--exacting an opinion on the number is of limited relevance) that have been able to turn and run from the field, but in doing so they have been able to stay out in front and I truly say "good job" for them. It is something I cannot do and do not really even strive to achieve (then why am I here---blah blah blah---I'm lame I know). The NCB has not been able to effectively let most other players approach that elite level. I think an old char penalty would completely change that dynamic and allow for greater broad based enjoyment and interest in CB.

I apologize for the ramble and perhaps haven't even been that clear, but thanks for reading and pointing out the good question.

Wizard'sFirstRule February 15 2008 8:10 AM EST

if the availability of CBD reduced, the whole supply curve shifts and people will end up paying more per million. It benefits current user because their CBD will sell for more, but the NUB's CBD earned will also be compensated by the higher price. I don't think changing a bonus to new player to hindering old players will affect the profitability of multi for CBD.

why isn't the spellchecker recognizing abbreviation of carnage blender dollar and NUB?

colonel [penny pincher] February 15 2008 4:01 PM EST

"if the availability of CBD reduced, the whole supply curve shifts and people will end up paying more per million. It benefits current user because their CBD will sell for more, but the NUB's CBD earned will also be compensated by the higher price."

I agree. However, doing nothing perpetuates the current, but I think my suggestion reduces the long-term impact as follows. (note: Here comes my slippery slope argument.) Reduce the incentive and you will reduce the Multi's. Reduce the Multi's and you will reduce the suppliers of CBD and then yes that will increase the USD/CBD exchange rate. However, I would ask who cares if the exchange rate is altered over several months if you have also brought the top within reach of those beginning at the bottom. I think it would in the end attract more CBers without changing the personality of CB players as much as other efforts may. (full disclosure: I think going after Facebook risks bringing in more of the immature/non-PG element that does not seem attractive to me. Yes, this is not my game and I do respect Jon's decision, it is just in this case that I have concern. Maybe he does too . . . I don't know.)

Wizard'sFirstRule February 15 2008 4:57 PM EST

"However, I would ask who cares if the exchange rate is altered over several months if you have also brought the top within reach of those beginning at the bottom."

the multis would. so they are getting the same payout with or without the change when the change is aimed to reduce the incentive to multi.

colonel [penny pincher] February 16 2008 12:23 AM EST

"the multis would. so they are getting the same payout with or without the change when the change is aimed to reduce the incentive to multi."

Again I agree with you. Multi's would care if the incentive is removed. However, I fail to see any reasonable argument or evidence to suggest that they would still get the same payout. So if the current NUB bonus is 216%, then I think that means they are getting over 3 times as much CBD. This change would immediately reduce their USD income potential by about 70%. How in the world does their payout remain the same? Do you really think that the USD/CBD rate would increase to $15+US per million CBD overnight? I still think not my friend.

QBOddBird February 16 2008 12:27 AM EST

It would be nice if it did though.

>.>

Weaker incentive to spend mass USD on the game, reduction in the inflow, fewer ridiculous items.

Wizard'sFirstRule February 16 2008 7:22 AM EST

when USD spender spends, they are buying for "purchasing power" in the game. While blacksmithing (and thus items + values) are constant, the base item price is not. If I spent $10 to get a mage shield before, I don't see why I can pay less for it after the CBD reduction. Or more people will pay for the mage shield. Thus the market price will slowly move back to where it started (maybe not fully, but a big chunk of it)

Brakke Bres [Ow man] February 16 2008 8:22 AM EST

USD screws up game dynamics anyway, this game is designed to last forever, with a tweak here and there and a feature here and there to improve gameplay (IE supporterships, naming and supporter items).
However if you mingle in USD to buy non supporter items and money to upgrade your "standard" items you screw up the dynamics.

Let say CB was USD free, the following would never happen in the same time span. nobody would be over 3 mil mpr or 2mil mpr, no big weapons over x10000 or +200, no 400 AC.

The characters in this game would be closer to each other and the fight for the number one spot would be shifting all the time. Nobody has a huge mpr advantage on each other. No need for overpowered evasion or ranged. Which result in a more strategic game where as you need to constantly change your strategy to effective.

With USD, well this game is the result of it, you get huge MPR differences, the mpr field is wide and apart, you have massive USD weapons, overpowered ranged and evasion. Huge amount of free cash floating in the game (NCB and NUB rewards are calculated off the top MPR spot?) and of course whining over anything that will cripple there precious USD weapons.

Frost February 16 2008 10:08 AM EST

Just get rid of NUB's extra cash percentage? NUBs have more money than i ever had, that solves the NUB cash selling

QBOddBird February 16 2008 11:05 AM EST

Frost - it isn't very attractive for a newbie to start out in the game, get a big boost to the top, and then be poor as dirt up there. The idea behind the NUB is to catch them up to the older players and give them a chance at the game - if you take away part of that entirely, you might as well throw the whole plan in the garbage.

(which is exactly what I'm in favor of seeing done...)

QBRanger February 16 2008 6:21 PM EST

I gave up on the whole multi hunting right after all the evidence that Ilovehellokitty and YOU were multiing was discarded by the admins.

Same computer, same PP account. What more was needed.

Ever since then, I really do not care about multis and try to enjoy the game without paying much attention to them.

Seems to me for every multi that is caught, another 5 take its place.

TinTizzy February 16 2008 7:03 PM EST

you was a multi and he didnt get bann?? wow i really dont like the way yall run this sometimes.

Godpanda February 16 2008 7:43 PM EST

Was never proven.

TinTizzy February 16 2008 8:09 PM EST

yes it was...

iztim February 16 2008 9:44 PM EST

just to be difficult, most of you are completely overlooking the easiest and most profitable way to multi. during the first two hours of a new account, no bot checks are done. all you have to do is set up several dozen accounts a few minutes before a new day starts, have them each get more turns on both sides of the day, and then have each of them sequentially work on forging a high value item. more than 800 turns per bot multi + NUB forging bonus + {(65-70% of millions per point upgraded)/(1 to 1.2 mil)}*$5 = a very nice daily (or at least hourly) profit considering that it takes very little work from the ring leader.

all loans and transfers are easily traceable, so wouldn't all parties involved be banned? not without also having the very distinct possibility of removing a perfectly legit USD spender who thought (s)he was hiring a legit forger. surely it wouldn't be that player's fault, and surely (s)he wouldn't be expected to throw away the item that probably already had a large amount of USD in it just because another party, "unbeknownst" to the "legit" player, decided to do the forging in an illegitimate fashion. even removing the item in question would be unfair to a certain extent. while it is perfectly rational to ban all of the multis involved in the forging, it's really not conceivable to ban the original possessor because he/she would most likely be paying close to market value in USD for the forging job, anyway, with the only difference from their perspective being the speed with which the job was completed.

this would be easily fixed by removing the bot-check-free period, but, since it's still in place, this should work. even with bot checks in place, i suppose one could supervise the proceedings and manually pass them (although that could become too tedious to be worthwhile). ip banning would eventually become an issue, but "new" ip addresses are easy enough to come by. i'm in no way encouraging anyone to do this, and just to be clear, i'm not entirely sure that you can transfer an item that is partially forged and keep its percentage. if i am wrong in that respect, please discount my entire post. these are just my late-night musings as i'm putting off my programming homework.

Ulord[NK] February 16 2008 9:57 PM EST

To the above poster:

Nub forge bonus is gone. What you illustrate is rather unpractical. The amount forged with a 1mpr character would be minuscule. It's also very easily detected. Anyone who gives a forge job to a 1mpr character deserves to have his/her stuff confiscated. In fact, people with so little common sense oughta be banned to restore sanity to the community.

iztim February 16 2008 10:11 PM EST

the person receiving the original item would be higher than that. your typical forger is in the 500k - 750k mpr range (at least from what i've seen), which doesnt take all that long to reach. i am aware that i am not that large, but i am also aware that i basically stopped playing a few weeks ago. if the NUB forge bonus is gone, i have two things to add. first, the wiki page should be updated. second, creating more multis would compensate.

for someone who actually enjoys playing this game, a constant NUB bonus on a semi-main character should be appealing. not only that, but the speed at which said player hit the reasonable range for a forger would decrease for each consecutive run. i suppose the additional liquid assets from the large character could be added in, but, with the dilution due to time required to create, the addition would be close to negligible per hour. since said person should be having fun in the process, i suppose that all money is a plus (making dilution per hour a non-issue). they could even have a real account on the side with an ip all to itself if they were cautious enough.

smallpau1 - Go Blues [Lower My Fees] February 16 2008 10:23 PM EST

No, the average forger with MPR of 500k-775k is ONLY the NUB forgers who are going to leave CB once their NUB expires, mark my words.

iztim February 16 2008 10:25 PM EST

in that case, i've seen several people leaving =P

iztim February 16 2008 10:28 PM EST

i've been trolling here long enough. back to my homework for now.

Ulord[NK] February 16 2008 10:28 PM EST

http://www.carnageblender.com/wiki/New+User+Bonus+%28NUB%29

This information is already in the wiki.

I'm not understanding what you are trying to say. How can a brand new account have a forger of 500kmpr+? Do you transfer a character to him? How is going to supply such a character?

iztim February 16 2008 10:37 PM EST

last response, i promise =P

you have one main account playing the game nicely and competitively. on the side, most likely through random proxies, you have one or more separate accounts also leveling in a fashion that appears to be legit (making sure not to let their ips cross). every time one of them hits somewhere you feel comfortable soliciting for a long term high valued forging job, you do so. within a day or two of receiving the item, you create the specified several dozen(+) multis. the secondary account (that still appears to be legit) passes his legitimately received item to the first in a long string of multis. each multi forges its 800 some turns and passes it on, with the last transferring it back to the employer.

looking at it like this, it appears that the transfer cost could quite possibly remove all profit (seeing as how to acquire such a sum would require the creator to purchase more CBD out of his/her profit). i can't say without actually doing all the math, and i don't feel like doing it now (or most likely ever for that matter). now for that homework.

QBOddBird February 17 2008 12:32 AM EST

I would have to say you give the admins too little credit, iztim.

iztim February 17 2008 1:06 AM EST

i am almost done with my homework now, so i can post again =).

i don't see how i am discrediting the admins. i would expect every account that touched the item (with the exception of the item's owner) to get banned shortly after completion. this would leave the primary, and any other secondary accounts not specifically involved with the current forging in tact (allowing the cycle to repeat). depending on how active the admins are (not to mention how efficient the code for the bot is and connection speed), it is possible that an admin would see the series of trades and drop the banhammer. this is where the cheating party/parties involved would hope that the item had enough time to move to the next multi before the multi currently possessing it got banned. theoretically the admin(s) would not be able to predict the next multi and would have to wait for the transaction notice, which could be enough time for the multi working on it to finish and pass.

ill admit that it being a feasible option at this point would be a stretch at best, but it did serve its purpose of killing time.
This thread is closed to new posts. However, you are welcome to reference it from a new thread; link this with the html <a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=002LnI">Multis / USD.</a>