I was just thinking about alt accounts and the election and realized something. Failbetter’s policy on alts is relatively straight forward. From the Terms and Conditions:
[quote=Terms & Conditions]Failbetter Games may suspend the accounts of any users it deems to be engaging in malicious or inappropriate conduct. Such conduct includes but is not limited to:
use of secondary accounts to harass other players or gain competitive advantage[/quote]
There are a bunch of other things in that section but that’s the one that’s relevant. So basically, you can have them but don’t be a jerk to other people and the competitive advantage part isn’t hard to avoid because FL isn’t really a competitive game. There was that one time Knife and Candle had a leader board and not much else (the more recent iteration of K&C could only be defined as competitive in fuzzy terms). That is, until the election.
Pretty much everything you do in Fallen London is isolated to your own little bubble with only the occasional social action crossing the rift between us. But we don’t each get to elect our own Mayor here. It’s a competition across the whole of the game to see who can get their preferred candidate into office and it would be difficult to argue that someone with multiple accounts doesn’t have an advantage here.
Now I think the correct response is to just not worry about it and carry on. Someone would have to be using a truly egregious number of alts to have an impact on the election results. So unless someone is, in fact, doing that it doesn’t really matter. But it is worth noting that anyone that has more than one account participating in the election is technically going to end up violating the Terms and Conditions (well, really more like sticking the tip of a toe over the line, but still over it).
In the interest of honesty, I have 2 alt accounts but they’re neck deep in Seeking so I plan to keep them out of it.
I did think a little bit about this since I do have four accounts, but for me at least it won’t matter. Sara will go for the Bishop, Madison will go for the Contrarian, and Gloria will go with Jenny. Depending on the mechanics these three with all cancel each other out, leaving me with one meaningful vote just like everybody else.
…you just made me realise I’m in the same boat. Sir Fred will likely go Jenny, Juniper the Bishop and Esther the Contrarian, leaving Hubris with the only meaningful vote, which he might not even cast.
Also, while it it true at least in the realm of the hypothetical that one could abuse the system and ballot-stuff for their own choice, none of us are privy to what, exactly, each candidate will then provide for their constituents once elected. For all we know, Sinning Jenny may outlaw scarlet stockings entirely and institute a porridge only breakfast ration. (Heaven forfend both of those vile and purely theoretical acts!)
I have several alts, but I only intended to view with my main character. In fact, when my alts reached the point when the game ask since polling questions (in exchange for Fate) I’ve opted out of any such research questions for all my alts because:
(1) I don’t won’t my alts to skew the polling results unfairly, and (2) I don’t want to abuse the free Fate which my alts don’t deserve (if I want to use Fate for an alt, I buy it specifically, so I don’t use the few points of free Fate each character gets along the way).
BTW, I don’t agree with your statement that: “the more recent iteration of K&C could only be defined as competitive in fuzzy terms”. K&C is by definition a competative activity. You attack other players, causing them (slight) harm and stealing valuable possessions. It could definitely be abused by using alts.
I have an alt who is barely played. (I was going to play through Heart’s Desire, but their stats are at 70 only through idling and occasionally changing profession.)
At the moment, Sinning Jenny looks like the one I’m most likely to vote for (I’ve been distracted lately and haven’t really read up on it), though if having voted provides some sort of in-game benefit like unlocking options on an opportunity card or whatever then I would be foolish not to use my alt to vote (most likely for the Jovial Contrarian because he’s the most ‘neutral’ of the three, if only through erratic stances on everything.) Again I don’t know how this is going to work.
Hopefully having voted is not a pre-requisite for anything, as that would only encourage people to involve alts.
I won’t spam the ballot box with either character (unless that’s a legit in-game character option). :-)
cathyr19355 is fanatically bent upon the destruction of Hell, so she will definitely vote for the Bishop. Not sure what my alt will do. She’s never had a firm goal (other than generally and inefficiently pursuing money and power, in that order), and she’s recently started the Search for the Name, so she’s kind of distracted. Since her connection to the Church has never been strong, she’s unlikely to vote for the Bishop. Her connection to the Bohemians is pretty strong, so it’s a reasonable bet that she’ll opt for Sinning Jenny. edited by cathyr19355 on 6/30/2016
[quote=dov]I have several alts, but I only intended to view with my main character. In fact, when my alts reached the point when the game ask since polling questions (in exchange for Fate) I’ve opted out of any such research questions for all my alts because:
(1) I don’t won’t my alts to skew the polling results unfairly, and (2) I don’t want to abuse the free Fate which my alts don’t deserve (if I want to use Fate for an alt, I buy it specifically, so I don’t use the few points of free Fate each character gets along the way).
BTW, I don’t agree with your statement that: "the more recent iteration of K&C could only be defined as competitive in fuzzy terms". K&C is by definition a competative activity. You attack other players, causing them (slight) harm and stealing valuable possessions. It could definitely be abused by using alts.[/quote]
Yes, but with its dueling mechanic it is much harder than it sounds to properly use alts. the best thing they can do is feed you information, and in the iron leagues, they can’t even do a good job of that. It’s certainly, while possible to abuse them, hard to do it accidentally, or unknowingly.
On that note, I think that we’ll probably have some kind of campaigning mechanic during the election, so as to make the more active players have more say- though i could be delusional, it sounds like a good way to make the election an active event. edited by Grenem on 6/30/2016
Since it is more of a summer festival event instead of just voting on a poll, I presume the players will have to spend many actions and resource campaigning in-game for their candidates, and the meager efforts of an alt aren’t going to do much.
Alternative, it is done like traditional events - it is actually self-contained for each players. We all share the same batch of candidates each year and can make suggestion to FBG for other candidates, but in-game we might just be picking the one we like, campaign for them, win for them and get a year-round effect.
I think the single-player variation is a bit more likely, really. It is less drama.
Yes, but with its dueling mechanic it is much harder than it sounds to properly use alts. the best thing they can do is feed you information, and in the iron leagues, they can’t even do a good job of that. It’s certainly, while possible to abuse them, hard to do it accidentally, or unknowingly.[/quote]In the Iron League, K&C is very much competitive and alts can be used for harassment very very easily (and also to get info, but that’s secondary). There’s nothing hard about that. If you have alts you can use them to attack someone else and steal items from them, and there’s no real defense as long as the target is in the League and has a form
In my opinion, this is the very thing that the Terms and Conditions are there to prohibit - using alts to gain a competitive advantage.
I think everyone should just be on the honor system to not vote with alts, unless they have three alts cancelling each other out.[li] edited by Saklad5 on 7/2/2016
I have no idea who I (main or alts) will vote for, but it doesn’t seem like very much of a problem if they are being roleplayed according to their characterizations.
This thread has been full of discussions about competitive advantage, but there needs to be a goal/benefit/resource in order for there to be meaningful competition.
This presumes that there is advantage to being on the winning side, but in Fallen London the players win either way and don’t win more for reading the same text more times. There is story to be read and silly roleplaying on the forums and twitter/facebook/etc, there is no win and no lose.
I can see people being upset at mass ballot stuffing (because it dilutes their ability to meaningfully impact events), but unless people are coordinating many, many alts, I can’t see it making much of a difference.
[quote=MrBurnside]I have no idea who I (main or alts) will vote for, but it doesn’t seem like very much of a problem if they are being roleplayed according to their characterizations.
This thread has been full of discussions about competitive advantage, but there needs to be a goal/benefit/resource in order for there to be meaningful competition.
This presumes that there is advantage to being on the winning side, but in Fallen London the players win either way and don’t win more for reading the same text more times. There is story to be read and silly roleplaying on the forums and twitter/facebook/etc, there is no win and no lose.
I can see people being upset at mass ballot stuffing (because it dilutes their ability to meaningfully impact events), but unless people are coordinating many, many alts, I can’t see it making much of a difference.[/quote]
Yes, that’s a valid point. here’s a valid counterpoint. I want the [Revolutionary Moderate] to win the election, and, failing that, for the [Sun-Bound Maniac] to lose. This has nothing to do with material rewards, but because i think one’s best suited, another’s worst suited, and that’s how i want the story to end. I won’t "ballot stuff", but this is just as much a competition for all that most of us really shouldn’t care that much. I care anyways. I’m sure I’m not the only one. edited by Grenem on 7/1/2016
Yes, that’s a valid point. here’s a valid counterpoint. I want the [Revolutionary Moderate] to win the election, and, failing that, for the [Sun-Bound Maniac] to lose. This has nothing to do with material rewards, but because i think one’s best suited, another’s worst suited, and that’s how i want the story to end. I won’t "ballot stuff", but this is just as much a competition for all that most of us really shouldn’t care that much. I care anyways. I’m sure I’m not the only one. edited by Grenem on 7/1/2016[/quote]
Of course. And I’m sincerely glad you care (as do I for that matter; ambivalence is not apathy), because it means that you’re engaged and enthusiastic about the story. And that’s good for everyone. It’s good for you, in that you get pleasure and entertainment out of it. It’s good for FBGs, in that, as a rule, engaged players are more likely to spend money. And it’s good for fellow forum-goers (like myself) because it gets you to post interesting perspectives and be generally helpful.
But, as long as your characters are in agreement with you, my point stands.
It’s the amazing thing about interactive fiction; character and player motivations converge and overlap. Your desires and motivations shape your characters and even the most OOC things become shameful compromises or moments of character defining weakness. If you (the player) campaign on behalf of the [Revolutionary Moderate] then you are, in fact, campaigning on/advocating for the future of your characters in Fallen London.
This goes the other way as well: your characters are utilizing your judgement to provide the story you want to read.
That was why I separated out sock-puppetting (how do you spell that?). They don’t really have a character to be acting-in.
Wouldn’t the designers have taken Alts into consideration when they designed the voting system in the first place? Alts might matter less then players willing to pay Fate.
Where does the idea that alts might matter less than having one character or that people who have alts might not be spending RL money on them.
I don’t think using Fate (unless there is a Fate-locked option during the election) or Exceptional Friendship should make a difference. There are many people who play only one character without spending RL money and people who pay for all their characters. It all depends on personal circumstances and how much money anyone is willing (or can afford) to spend on Fallen London.
My alts are separate characters, all of the established ones have EF and have unlocked different Fate-locked stories. They follow different paths, have different ideas. Of course there is some of me in all of them but they will make in character decisions so they will not all vote the same way.
Of course I don’t know how close the results will be but I doubt that a few (extra) votes will make a huge difference in the results as there are a lot of FL players.
Ochrasy will vote for the Bishop, Robitaille for Jenny, and Herr Horst for the Contrarian. so, I’m good haha
but if the devs say they don’t want anyone voting with their alts, I have no problem with that.[/quote]
Agreed. In any event, my alt and my main would not vote for the same candidate. My alt thrives on being contrary (it’s what led her into Seeking in the first place), and she detests the Bishop, who is getting my main character’s vote.
A few extra votes CAN matter. That’s the entire point of voting. If you vote twice, you are one person potentially negating the effects of two. Just because most people won’t use alts doesn’t mean it won’t matter if you do.