Possible multi

[turkey_junior]

id=28461 Logs in every so often to try and take a planet, went from a 2 mil army size down to 1.5 mil without any upgrades done to the account, never has anything built besides a fleet and an attack weapon, and never has more than 1k AT's. It's not being raided bc no one would raid it down to 5k UU

[noone]

If it has fleets and attack weapons, and only few turns ... might I ponder about the possibility its attacking and loosing units that way ?

The money prolly goes to new weapons after sabs and repairs ?, or even MS slots ??

Just my hunch .......

[turkey_junior]

Possible but highly unlikely and it has never grown in size in the time that I have been watching it and with that low of an id one would suspect that the owner would have at least learned what is profitable. Just seems a little suspicious to me...

[noone]

There are many accounts out there in GW which hardly grow and only do the things they like ... they tend to vanish for months, or even years and suddenly return to continue old behaviour.
They also get raided and what not, farmed etc ....

if you go through the rankings between 1 and 3k you see dosens of old ID's with army sizes below 10 mill.

Anywaysz ....

Have you tried talking to the account in question ? (pm-ing)

[turkey_junior]

It's highly unlikely that he is losing that much stuff during attacks and as of right now he does not have ANY weapons besides the 1 fleet he has. And no I have not tried contacting him because if he was a multi why would he incriminate himself in a PM and if he is not a multi then there isn't much I can do about his play style and he doesn't have anything to mass. Regardless of the possibilities I am just reporting this because it's possible bc of suspicious actions. If it is a multi then sweet it'll be done bothering me and my alliance and if it's not a multi then such is life just bringing it to the attention of others.

[Ethereal Tassadar]

I do wonder what makes you think it is a multi.
First of all, multi of who?
Second of all, someone who has multi's often knows the game in and out - so wouldn't be so weak.
Following that, it is a low power account that couldn't possibly do anything major. The "no multi's" rule is to prevent a player from gaining unfair advantage over others. How can a player with so low capabilities shift the balance in favor of a player?
To continue, it IS possible to loose many units during sabotage missions. I myself experienced loosing 100000 coverts per sabotage.

I seriously do not understand, nor can imagine why you have a problem with an account like that which you described. It merely intrigued you.
I suggest you do more research and consider all possibilities from all points of view before you post a report next time. Simply pointless and a waste of the staff's time, in my opinion.

[Lithium]

if turkey thinks hes a multie then its his choice , there are no profs of him being multie but is hes so sure the emailing admin is the only option. there are thousands of that kind of account and prob most are feeders.

[Ethereal Tassadar]

Of course it is his choice to believe whatever, but as long as that account doesn't trouble anyone, I don't see the reason for him to report. He could merely render the account inoperative by massing or sabbing it, if it bothers him so much. People seem too jumpy about reporting multis.

[Clarkey]

but as long as that account doesn't trouble anyone, I don't see the reason for him to report.

Well that just sounds like you are saying it's ok to have multies if they don't trouble anyone.

And before you say that's not what you were saying, it is. Because if there is a multi with lets say 5 accounts that is feeding one account but none of them are troubling anyone else ingame then no-one should report them, and therefore you are saying it is ok for them to be ingame.

[noone]

but as long as that account doesn't trouble anyone, I don't see the reason for him to report.

Well that just sounds like you are saying it's ok to have multies if they don't trouble anyone.

And before you say that's not what you were saying, it is. Because if there is a multi with lets say 5 accounts that is feeding one account but none of them are troubling anyone else ingame then no-one should report them, and therefore you are saying it is ok for them to be ingame.

Ethereal is not saying that its ok for multi's to be in game.
He was saying the activity shown was hardly a reason to report a multi.

[Clarkey]

but as long as that account doesn't trouble anyone, I don't see the reason for him to report.

Well that just sounds like you are saying it's ok to have multies if they don't trouble anyone.

And before you say that's not what you were saying, it is. Because if there is a multi with lets say 5 accounts that is feeding one account but none of them are troubling anyone else ingame then no-one should report them, and therefore you are saying it is ok for them to be ingame.

Ethereal is not saying that its ok for multi's to be in game.
He was saying the activity shown was hardly a reason to report a multi.

He said if it doesn't trouble anyone there is no need to report (multies don't always trouble people), but if he reads the opening post it is clear the account bothered the author by attacking him.

[noone]

but as long as that account doesn't trouble anyone, I don't see the reason for him to report.

Well that just sounds like you are saying it's ok to have multies if they don't trouble anyone.

And before you say that's not what you were saying, it is. Because if there is a multi with lets say 5 accounts that is feeding one account but none of them are troubling anyone else ingame then no-one should report them, and therefore you are saying it is ok for them to be ingame.

Ethereal is not saying that its ok for multi's to be in game.
He was saying the activity shown was hardly a reason to report a multi.

He said if it doesn't trouble anyone there is no need to report (multies don't always trouble people), but if he reads the opening post it is clear the account bothered the author by attacking him.

True true
But in context I believe ethereal was referring to the mere taking of a planet occasionally, and the losses of the suspect.
Oh well.

[turkey_junior]

I do wonder what makes you think it is a multi.
First of all, multi of who?
Second of all, someone who has multi's often knows the game in and out - so wouldn't be so weak. At the cost of AT's these days multis are used mainly for the transfer of resources, occasionally for other purposes but not often.
Following that, it is a low power account that couldn't possibly do anything major. The "no multi's" rule is to prevent a player from gaining unfair advantage over others. How can a player with so low capabilities shift the balance in favor of a player? Unfair advantage by getting extra AT's each week?
To continue, it IS possible to loose many units during sabotage missions. I myself experienced loosing 100000 coverts per sabotage. I'm not even going to comment on this....

I seriously do not understand, nor can imagine why you have a problem with an account like that which you described. It merely intrigued you.
I suggest you do more research and consider all possibilities from all points of view before you post a report next time. Simply pointless and a waste of the staff's time, in my opinion.

[Ethereal Tassadar]

Believe what you will. My opinion was told, and I have the right to own and keep one.
Keep reporting random people with behavior that seems suspicious to you, if it makes you happy, but taking in consideration the number of farm-able inactive accounts out there, I don't think people still make farm accounts.
Turns are very easy to get, making the usage of such an exploit useless.
One has a set number of turns + 3 x market turns per week.
One may also buy turns from other players, which is fairly inexpensive.
To put up so much effort just to save a little naq?
Unlikely, is my opinion.

[Lithium]

turkey where is the difference between u and him?

u logs often and farm/raid/take planets/mass while he can don what hi limits are so we all multies?