the NEW exeption system!

[xontas]

Some of you might have heard, some wont have, that Round 14 is seeing substantial changes to the exception system. As such I want to explain how this system is changing & how it will work.

When do you need a exeption?

- If two or more people play from the same location (ip number) you need a exception
- If you are on a school/work network you most likely share ip with all other people playing from that network, you need a exeption in that case.

You can see that you are on the same ip then others when you signup and if your ip is in our system we will give you a warning on the signup screen.

What's new?

As of R14 the exception system is coded into the game and you need to apply in-game. You can do this through the preferences menu and should include all co-ordinates and those planets must accept this application. If this is confirmed then you get a mail and this is the process complete, from that point on you cant interact as the system permits until you reach a certain point. All limits are hardcoded in the game and when you go over those limits the system wont let you!

What does that mean for this round?

If you choose to not have a exception and you do interact, it counts as cheating on the first time it happens and you will be closed and deleted without any chance of reopening! The excuses that you forgot to apply, you didn't know your brother is playing, or any other thing you can think of will not be accepted.

This system is created to give people that live in the same house the option of playing together without them risking closure! So if you chose not to use it, its at your own risk.

What does this system limit?

What follows is a list of the limits it sets

Attack Limit:
How much times you can attack the other account(s) on your exeption
Fake Attack Limit:
How much times you can fake attack the other account(s) on your exeption
Defence Limit:
How much times you can defend the other account(s) on your exeption
Attacking Same Galaxy Limit:
How many times you may attack diferent planets in the same gal with 2 planets from your exeption
Attacking Same Planet Limit:
How many times you are alowed to attack the same planet with other accounts from your exeption
Fake Attack Same Galaxy Limit:
How many times you may fake attack 2 different planets in the same gal with other accounts from your exeption
Fake Attack Same Planet Limit:
How many times you may fake attack the same planets with other accounts from your exeption
Defend Same Galaxy Limit:
How many times you may defend 2 different planets in the same gal with other accounts from your exeption
Defend Same Planet Limit:
How many times you may defend the same planet with other accounts in your exeption
Wave Limit:
How many times you may wave the other accounts in your exeption
Wave Same Galaxy Limit:
How many times you may wave 2 different planets in the same gal with other accounts from your exeption
Wave Same Planet Limit:
How many times you may wave the same target as others accounts in your exeption
Covert Ops Limit:
How many times you may covert op a account in your exeption
Covert Ops Same Galaxy Limit:
How many times you may covers op 2 different planets in the same gal with other accounts in your exeption
Covert Ops Same Planet Limit:
How many times you may covert op the same target with other accounts in your exeption

What is the goal of this system?

Over the past few rounds we've had a lot of complaints from people that life in the same house and want to play together. We're keen to allow this to happen in genuine cases but due to the nature of internet gaming people tend to cheat and as such we've taken a very strong line with regards to interaction of accounts that appear to be playing from the same location, closing people who do.

The new system allows us to set limits to the interaction and in that way allows people to play together. Unfortunately we do have those people that can't win fairly and will abuse this system! As such we need to strike a balance between a tight system where you cant really play together and a loose system where its multi heaven.

These are the options we are considering

1) Loose system
You get the option to attack together ones and defend a couple of times and waves and co-ops are set to 10 a day, limits reset every week
2) Moderate system
You get no attack options but some defence, waves and co-ops are set to 2 a day, limits reset every week
3) Tight system
You get no attack and 1 defence, waves and co-ops are set to 1, limits reset every week
4) Ultra tight system
You get no attack and 2 defence, waves and co-ops are set to 10, limits dont reset
5) No exeption system
All set to 0 and you may not interact

The less interactions we allow the harder friends will find it to play toghether but the more secure it will be.

Thankyou for reading this post, we hope that we've made it clearer as to where we're heading with this issue. If you have any questions please ask, opinions are also welcome but please concentrate on these 5 options.

[Ace]

Option 2 I think is best.
NO attacking eachother but attacking same gal I see no problem with.

[aNgRyDuCk]

agree with Ace.... attacking the same galaxy has to be an option, there are different players from different alliances in each galaxy... who knows what the political make-up will be, no way you can police that option.... so no attacks @ same target, couple of defenses, and you let players hit same galaxy as needed by their alliances targetting choices

[xontas]

the problem with support attacks is that you clearly gain from having 2 accounts and attacking with one, then attacking with the other as planets defend.
that way you can win a fight!

thats the reson why we also limit those!

i'm an opt2 fan.

[Ace]

Thats something else xontas.
What we mean is target claiming by alliances can go by gal.
and then most ppl launch same tick.
Your talking about getting a defender to pull with a attack fleet send by someone else (or a multi planet)

[ChipZ^]

option 2

[Phil^]

between option two and option three, however resetting them every week might be a little too soft.
With every new thing, there will be someone who tries to abuse it and this will be no different. - I would suggest resetting them every 2 weeks. After all you dont defend someone on your same ip every day but rather only when you have no other options.
Also, there should be an instant closure punishment with no chance of reopening for those who try to abuse the system to 'cheat legitmately'

[xontas]

ofc there will be :-)
but this post is for the people that want to play normaly

[edmoo]

I apollogise if I missed the point, but:
as I do a lot of my PA'ing from thed school computers, I cannot be certain if anyone else in my school plays PA, and so, obviously, cannot provide their co-ordinates, and cannot apply for an exception. But our school computers could look like they are multiing.
Again, I'm sorry if I misunderstood.

[wakey]

So whats is going to be classed as interaction. If person a attacks a galaxy and then 4 days later person b does is that interaction? If person A scans a galaxy one day while looking for targets and person b scans them a couple of days later is that interaction. If person a scans a planet and a few days later person b attacks them is that interaction. If the time it is considered interaction is too long and the different types of actions trigger interaction events then your going to limit players ability to play. After all theres a limit number of galaxies and its not hard for a single person to carrry out some kind of action be it attack. defence, scanning or cov op on the majority of them in a short period of time

Also I think edmoo's point is a good one, if your playing in some public places you might not know someone else is playing or if you do your might not know the people. Take uni halls or school for example you are talking about hundred if not thousands of people on the network and theres a good chance you wont know everyone whos playing

[Phil^]

I would assume ( and indeed hope ) that such public ips could be easily spotted by the multihunters.
if the reverse dns is a .edu or .ac type then thats fairly obvious. Internet cafes are harder to distinguish this way though.

interaction i would think is defined as an event at the same place either on the same tick or within x ticks of each other, 3 ticks would be a sensible range imo

[Jester]

Just let people on the same IP interact and get it over with.

[xontas]

Originally Posted by wakey

So whats is going to be classed as interaction. If person a attacks a galaxy and then 4 days later person b does is that interaction?
yes

If person A scans a galaxy one day while looking for targets and person b scans them a couple of days later is that interaction.

yes

If person a scans a planet and a few days later person b attacks them is that interaction.

yes

If the time it is considered interaction is too long and the different types of actions trigger interaction events then your going to limit players ability to play.

yes, but those same limits aply right now, they are just not hardcoded

After all theres a limit number of galaxies and its not hard for a single person to carrry out some kind of action be it attack. defence, scanning or cov op on the majority of them in a short period of time

thats why we reset them over a set amount of time

Also I think edmoo's point is a good one, if your playing in some public places you might not know someone else is playing or if you do your might not know the people. Take uni halls or school for example you are talking about hundred if not thousands of people on the network and theres a good chance you wont know everyone whos playing

edmoo does have a point and we are working out how to handle it
we have some options, and we need to deside what we are gonna do
atm i dont have a clear awnser on it, but i will before the round starts!

[xontas]

Originally Posted by Jester

Just let people on the same IP interact and get it over with.

erm........lets not :-)
but thanks for your input

[wakey]

Yes the limits might in theory be in place now BUT currently they allow for people to show some common sense . After all if share my ip with 3 others and then I scan some galaxies looking for a target the chances are that even if the other 3 are in differnt alliances and galaxies and arent about to help each other out that somewhere in the next couple of days and interaction will take place. And when you then throw in the attacks, defence, cov ops and things like alliance scans the chances of interaction is great.

However anyone with half a brain can look at the interactions and see they arent really interactions its just the lack of numbers in the game that forces the situation to happen. A hard coded limit is simply just too primative for a game like this one and in the current state its in. Its needs an intelligence to judge each case not some extreamly poor limits

[derry]

Originally Posted by xontas

erm........lets not :-)
but thanks for your input

heh, i agree with him tbh, Ip-sharing multi's are in general not smart (and will be caught fast enough anyways), but the hardcore cheaters AREN'T catched by IP, so stop bugging 90% of the normall ppl, and try to get something sorted to get those others caught

just my 1 cent. [yes, i'm poor ]

[noah02]

I just had to clean up my cup of tea of the computer then for these concerns (just concerns)

Originally Posted by xontas

You can see that you are on the same ip then others when you signup and if your ip is in our system we will give you a warning on the signup screen.

In work my computer runs of an army wide network and a lot of us have internet in are offices.
And my army accomodation has over 300 soldiers in 1 block and 600 in another and over 100 in the Officers mess and over 200 Sgts mess and I don't know every sinlge person to know if they have internet or play PA or not :/
I have'nt had a problem in the time I have played PA yet but if that 1 in a 1000 happens

Originally Posted by xontas

If you choose to not have a exception and you do interact, it counts as cheating on the first time it happens and you will be closed and deleted without any chance of reopening! The excuses that you forgot to apply, you didn't know your brother is playing, or any other thing you can think of will not be accepted.

I get deleted coz I can't add the guy/girl to my exception list coz I aint got a clue who it is who uses the same IP as me

So is there going to be a system where I know who the other person will be?(its not like I can attack him or anything)

Originally Posted by xontas

Over the past few rounds we've had a lot of complaints from people that life in the same house and want to play together.

And this just made me giggle

[noah02]

Originally Posted by xontas

All your answers to wakeys questions!

I think we will see a nice drop in players now tbh.

Congrats on finding away to kill off Planetarion

p.s the majority of PA players introduce ppl to PA in schools,uni,army,navy,Air force etc.. etc...
Just incase you didnt know.

The way PA works with the lil amount of galaxys we have nowadays there will be a lot of automatic deletions with no comeback

guess if I am gonna scan or attack someone i best phone around (if i find the ppl with same ip) and ask them for a copy of there history list and to keep a log of all scans for every week.

[Cannon_Fodder]

Your avatars just get worse and worse....

[noah02]

Originally Posted by sniborp

Your avatars just get worse and worse....

There is a reason for that avatar

When I was in the Falklands my Sgt use to call me chucky coz of my hair being light blonde ginger(strawbeery blonde to the ladys and ginger to the blokes) and all over the place un cut (not many hairdressers in the falklands) so ended up as my nickname for a good while after that

I would put one of me but god help us all you dont wanna see that

[Jester]

Originally Posted by xontas

erm........lets not :-)
but thanks for your input

Last round one of my friends was erroneously closed twice for interacting with his ingal housemate. He was reopened both times.

Last round two of my galmates were closed twice, lost 30% roids, had ships taken from them, and then were conclusively closed a week later under very similar conditions.

You'll have to excuse me if I have absolutely no faith in the ability of the MH team to judge what is appropriate behavior and interaction between two planets on the same IP address. We passed the point where 1 IP = 1 person before PA even started, let alone when account-sharing was outlawed.

There are mathematically not enough IP addresses to go around. You're simply villifying and discriminating against the hoardes of people who shock! horrer! live together. It's not like we're stuck in pods playing this game.

People shouldn't be afraid to log in from their friend's house. People shouldn't be afraid to help their friends. But apparantly the MH team only wants PA to be about playing with an alliance full of anonymous internet strangers.

[noah02]

Originally Posted by Jester

stuff

But it wont even be the MH deciding nowadays it will be there programme which will be deleting us left right and centre

[derry]

Originally Posted by Jester

snip

i agree with jester here, shame that the MH team or PA team won't listen anyways writing this pushes away the boredom for like... 1 min tho

[wakey]

The problem would seem Jester is the age old pateam problem of them wanting to be liked. They fail to realise their role isnt there to be liked but to make the game as good as it can be. It seems here that this system is simply being put in place so that they dont have to think about a case and can just say "its the games fault not mine". They should be evaluating each case on its own merits, they should be using common sense and when its deemed to be cheating they should stick to their guns and punish the people rather than looking at ways to appease them

They need to wake up and realise that they wont ever be liked by everyone and they shouldnt be trying to be liked. They arent there to be our friends or for that matter friends with the rest of PAteam

[Jester]

Originally Posted by wakey

They should be evaluating each case on its own merits, they should be using common sense and when its deemed to be cheating they should stick to their guns and punish the people rather than looking at ways to appease them

I don't agree. A lot of the judgment calls lead to blatant shitness (viz. loads of EX getting wrongfully closed, then getting away with account-swapping back into the game later).

They need to wake up and realise that they wont ever be liked by everyone and they shouldnt be trying to be liked. They arent there to be our friends or for that matter friends with the rest of PAteam

I don't think that's the issue at hand at all. I think xontas singlemindedly hates cheating and works on that premise (which, despite his being shit and all, I think is applaudable).

I suppose my vote would be that 'any planets with exceptions should be allowed as much interaction as they want, with a limit of (say) 5 (or so) planets per exception'. With that said there should be no demand that these planets are 'owned' or 'played' by different people.

Yes, it will change the face of PA 'as we know it', but it's hardly the biggest change ever made.

[derry]

Originally Posted by wakey

They need to wake up and realise that they wont ever be liked by everyone and they shouldnt be trying to be liked. They arent there to be our friends or for that matter friends with the rest of PAteam

well, closing real ppl who haven't account shared in any way, just interacted doens't make you liked indeed, but they do punish the wrong ppl then

I suppose my vote would be that 'any planets with exceptions should be allowed as much interaction as they want, with a limit of (say) 5 (or so) planets per exception'. With that said there should be no demand that these planets are 'owned' or 'played' by different people.

this on the other hand, is imo a bit to far :s your almost encouraging (well, atleast those who can't win otherwise ) ppl to cheat now :/
i would in this case go for 2 ppl max (unlimited tho) , and that any extra planet you should mail the MH team AND there should be a chat where all 3 (or more depending how many ppl in the same place want to play) players would (at the same time) meet in a chan with an MH, just for a small talk (well, to answer some question and some other stuff)
It is more work for the MH team though, so they probely won't like it

[Jester]

Originally Posted by derry

this on the other hand, is imo a bit to far :s your almost encouraging (well, atleast those who can't win otherwise ) ppl to cheat now :/

Except it's not cheating if it's allowed. I'll freely admit that it does encourage people to have multiple planets. I can't figure out any better way to do it.

[Squidly]

Err....

I login at both my tech college and at home. Ok, not a problem there. Problem is, out of the 1500 people at this school, I really have no freaking clue who here plays planetarion. So how exactly do I apply for an exception there? and how do I stop myself from being deleted instantly when I really had no idea who the goober was?

*clueless as usual *

[noah02]

Originally Posted by Squidly

Err....

I login at both my tech college and at home. Ok, not a problem there. Problem is, out of the 1500 people at this school, I really have no freaking clue who here plays planetarion. So how exactly do I apply for an exception there? and how do I stop myself from being deleted instantly when I really had no idea who the goober was?

*clueless as usual *

Just have a free account least when you get deleted for some random reason then you wont have been ripped off.

[DeadMan]

How will this system work with buddypacks?
If im in the same gal as my room mate, can't i defend him at all?
Isn't it normal for friends to attack same planet, wave eachother etc. ?

This system will ruin the round for me as i don't have internet at home this summer/fall.
I'm gonna be playing from my own computer but via his connection at his house.

If I understrand this correct I will not be able to play with him at all, so why should I bother playing PA if I can't interact with my friends only becasue we're playing from same IP?

Gotta add that I often don't get this right cos it's not explained good at all. But PA-team never has been good at explaining things.

[xontas]

ok, again........

this discussion is not about IF we need to stop cheating by system X or system Y

i am trying to get you guys to tell me what you think about the settings

i understand the arguments for letting go of IP searching
but i dont agree with it
we catch lots and lots of multi's that way,

i can understand that you get anoyed when you see a friend walk in saying "I GOT CLOSED FOR NO REASON!!!!!"
we dont alowe interaction between accounts from the same ip
if you do you get closed!
its the rules, and we dont go closing people without a valid reason.
and when they lose roids and ships, they got punished for something!, that might be a clue that they DID break the rules!

now, back to the system at hand
its not there to stop cheating.
its there to alowe that defence call from your gf when she is in trouble
but to stop interaction between accounts
basicly, its there to strike a balance between the system and that freak night where you wish you COULD help your gf!!

what i would like to see is people actualy telling me what option they like
thats the last part of it

option 1 to 5 please :-)

[xontas]

Originally Posted by noah02

But it wont even be the MH deciding nowadays it will be there programme which will be deleting us left right and centre

i think you misunderstand our system
if you have a exeption you cant interact!
this means when you try to do something that the rules dont alowe, you get stoped, not closed!

it just tells you that it isnt alowed!

[xontas]

Originally Posted by wakey

The problem would seem Jester is the age old pateam problem of them wanting to be liked. They fail to realise their role isnt there to be liked but to make the game as good as it can be. It seems here that this system is simply being put in place so that they dont have to think about a case and can just say "its the games fault not mine". They should be evaluating each case on its own merits, they should be using common sense and when its deemed to be cheating they should stick to their guns and punish the people rather than looking at ways to appease them

They need to wake up and realise that they wont ever be liked by everyone and they shouldnt be trying to be liked. They arent there to be our friends or for that matter friends with the rest of PAteam

again, no closures will be done on auto
the people that get a exception can play safely without the risk of getting deleted because they broke the rules without knowing (something i without paranormal powers cant tell across IRC to be true)
i reccomend you dont use same gal or alliance, because that would limit you
but you can interact a bit (thats whe we call them exceptions) and thats what we are trying to deside.

now if you chose NOT to get a exeption
then you can interact all you want
but if it breaks the game rules (the limits we are about to set) and you are on the same ip
you get closed
and apealing to us wont help, because it would be cheating!

yes, i am not here to be likes (would be nice tho) i am here to inforce the rules
its a nasty job, but it has to be done
the 400 accounts that got flushed from the last round proof its needed

[wakey]

Originally Posted by xontas

ok, again........

this discussion is not about IF we need to stop cheating by system X or system Y

i am trying to get you guys to tell me what you think about the settings

i understand the arguments for letting go of IP searching
but i dont agree with it
we catch lots and lots of multi's that way,

i can understand that you get anoyed when you see a friend walk in saying "I GOT CLOSED FOR NO REASON!!!!!"
we dont alowe interaction between accounts from the same ip
if you do you get closed!
its the rules, and we dont go closing people without a valid reason.
and when they lose roids and ships, they got punished for something!, that might be a clue that they DID break the rules!

now, back to the system at hand
its not there to stop cheating.
its there to alowe that defence call from your gf when she is in trouble
but to stop interaction between accounts
basicly, its there to strike a balance between the system and that freak night where you wish you COULD help your gf!!

what i would like to see is people actualy telling me what option they like
thats the last part of it

option 1 to 5 please :-)

So your going to go ahead with this idiotic exception system no matter what we say. if you took a second to engange your brain xontas you would quickly understand that such a broad spectrum of events that are considered interaction makes it impossible NOT to interact in such a way, especially if youy play from a shared line that isnt a residential connection. The only way this hardcoded system is viable is if it resets itself in a very short space of time (and im talking hours, not days) in which case the systems pretty much worthless anyway.

If you implement this sytem you are handcuffing a good deal of this games population and are just going to scare them off as well as shut off one of this games primary sources of new players

[xontas]

ok.

we get that you dont like it

but i would like to hear others comment aswell
again, the rules didnt change!, just the way we inforce them
you keep ignoring that fact!

its illegal now to interact with the same ip
AT ALL
this system alowes some interaction and then cuts you off

i dont see the problem

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by xontas

ok.*snip*
i dont see the problem

Me neither. It's Jolt who loses money on leaving players, not me.

No seriously, wakey is correct. The chance to be hitting one of the interaction lines is very high, especially with people unknowingly playing on the same line (university, school, work...).

Also, you ain't catching the kind of multi / acc-sharer you may want to catch. In opposition to your hard-coded, user-hostile, ip-based system they use brains. The ones you want to catch are those which reconnect to gain a new ip for accessing their multi-planet (or to share accounts).

On a different side-note: you won't stop people from cheating with reducing their roids or fleets. That just gives them a hint on what to avoid next time they cheat. If they lose their money they will think twice about it as they won't get back into any relevant game position in the current round as easily as they could when only losing a few ships or roids (which they cannot mine most of the time anyways).

And to be a bit more constructive at the end of my post:
Focus on pattern analysis, if you want to implement a cheater-detection-system, it is far more efficient.

[wakey]

I'm not ignoring any facts xontas, I know interaction from the same IP isnt allowed HOWEVER your taking whats frankly a completly ridiculous definition of whats Interaction. Even if you manage to somehow find every person on your network that plays and apply for an exception so as not to risk getting deleted your offer at max 10 scans on the same galaxy a day by those on your exception list, now due to the lack of targets I could probally pick two random people with scores last round were a million either side of mine and choose 1 single day and we would be probally be pushing the 10 no problem, hey i was doing atleast 30 scans a day, normally even more. Certainly we would be well over the 2 allowed as its unavoidable.

The limits and cut off might at a push work on the attack and defence areas, although even these areas and especially the same galaxy defence one is extreamly restrictive in a none private galaxy round BUT to apply it to scanning is immensly idiotic unless you have some way of magically producing us somthing like 1k+ galaxies so there are so many galaxies we are unlikly to scan the same galaxies

[Squidly]

Option 2... But xontas, if you could answer my message, that'd be nice =p

[Edge]

you guys are taking this multi crap too serious...... sigh

[edmoo]

Originally Posted by xontas

edmoo does have a point...

wow - I feel special.
The problem would not be major, as the chances of planets on a public network interaction (without realising they both use the same network) would be minimal, and certinaly infrequent. perhaps, if there is any doubt, they could just be monitered more longterm for any sign of interaction?

[cypher]

i'm sure this meant ALOT of work to make/code... sadly enough it'll be useless once again.../me sighs

[xontas]

Originally Posted by Squidly

Option 2... But xontas, if you could answer my message, that'd be nice =p

there needs to be a lookup option
or you should be able to ask a admin to check

but we have no process yet so i cant give you a awnser yet
but i will before the round starts

[Phil^]

You know. all of this wouldnt be necessary if people didnt cheat.
Blaming pateam for putting such a system in place is misdirected. You should be blaming those who live to abuse anything in the game for their own advantage.

[xontas]

what i dont get, is that the same people complain that we close people that do the exact same thing as multi's
interact on the same ip
you tell us that we need to find a way to make it possible for 2 people on the same ip to interact
without the change of getting closed & without making multi legal (not easy to do)

ok, good point,

we go to work and come up with a system

and the same people start flaming again?

what DO you want, we hunt multi's but alowe your friends to interact 20 times a week from the same ip
lets be realistic, that would make multi legal
we do need to set limits, and to ALL things that we used to hunt for anyway!
limits set are for everyone from the same ip, multi or not (we are not telepathic!)

so stop flaming the system we came up with, and think WITH us
if you have a suggestion fine
but please no " it sucks becuase of this"
not usefull and not constructive!

this tread is about what settings we want, so i am asking you what setting you want on the system the community suggested?

ok?

lets get on with it

[Desse]

Originally Posted by xontas

what i dont get, is that the same people complain that we close people that do the exact same thing as multi's
interact on the same ip
you tell us that we need to find a way to make it possible for 2 people on the same ip to interact
without the change of getting closed & without making multi legal (not easy to do)

Problem is that you consistently close the players who are innocent and letting the people with good excuses that cheat get away with it.

[xontas]

we dont close without good reson, sometimes there might be a explination for that reson, and that person get reopened.
there is a diference there!

[Heartless]

Originally Posted by Phil^

You know. all of this wouldnt be necessary if people didnt cheat.
Blaming pateam for putting such a system in place is misdirected. You should be blaming those who live to abuse anything in the game for their own advantage.

Don't try to be naive Phil, we both know you aren't.

If people didn't cheat we wouldn't need multihunters. But as pointed out already: The system that is established doesn't prevent people from cheating, at least not the people which cheat on a large scale.

Let us take german Telekom for example, which is Germany's biggest ISP: I simply reconnect and have a new IP, and reconnecting takes only a few seconds. You practically wouldn't catch any German cheater who is partly blessed with a brain with your ip collision detection system (this is just an example). Of course, with a considerably huge amount of reconnects chances are increasing that one gets the same ip again, but still...

My point still stands proven that an ip-based system is user-hostile and inefficient.

[Phil^]

the analysis tool i wrote doesnt rely on direct ip addresses but analyses times and ip ranges as well. you wouldnt be able to avoid that part of it by reconnecting

[xontas]

ok, i shall explain YET AGAIN ???

please read it this time
you get a exception to be protected from being closed for being multi
but the system imposes limits on the amount of interaction

that system will alowe more interaction for the people that use the system, but it will also be limited enough to stop multi's
the system is NOT there to make its possible to play in the same gal and alliance when using the same ip
if you do that you will most likely be very limited!

there are 4000 players in this game and to stop cheating we are saying you can not interact with 1 or 2 of them
why is that such a big problem?