I suggest deleting "farm" accounts when it's obvious that a player has "farm" groups that are used only to campaign influence and fill their "A Team" shows with high influence non-competitive groups then boosting attendance numbers. This would be a hard thing to catch for most cases, but in some, when a player has 25ish slightly different usernames, it's easy to see.

If it doesn't happen it's no big deal. Just wanted to put it out there!

Who does that?

Cire -PM sent.

How do you know they are only filling their A group and not others?

Using them to boost attendance at other shows (normally league shows) is wrong too!

I don't understand what it matters if they are using their b accounts to fill other shows? It's not like they are benefitting from it. Why should a director turn down high influence groups from their shows? It's not like there is a short cut to gaining influence. You sti have to play in some capacity.

If they fill their own show with high influence farm groups they benefit from higher ticket sales.

If they fill other shows with high influence farm groups then the show host benefits from inflated ticket sales as well.

I agree, although I have no control over that. There should be a limit to the number of B accounts.


On the other hand, you can only manage so many groups at once.. and have 20 sub-par accounts is not going to benefit you with farming influence as much as having a good show and accepting other high influence groups.. or even sticking with 1 or 2 good B accounts.

The person in question has a lot of groups, but most of the groups are so low in ranking that I can't see it actually making a difference with farming. I can see a bigger issue if we were allowed to transfer money/influence/points to other people.

Let the other people play the game and do the work for you.

I agree

Seems no matter what is suggested to get influence under control it is immediately shot down lol this is why I suggested the other boost. Who wouldn't die to have states of Orleans at their show, yet who has even heard of them? Lol besides influence it doesn't seem they do much. It seems unrealistic to me that they should drive ticket sales crazy! Is cheating no, is it how the game was intended to work no probably not. Much of the game plays fairly realistic, this is one area to me that seems flawed and like a loop whole but then again it doesn't seem like it's benefited anyone enough to take a title yet that I'm aware of.

I don't think it has.. but just like not competing for 10 seasons and just building up staff and money and then coming out and doing extremely well happens as well.. I suppose in the long run it COULD prove beneficial.. but if someone wants to waste their life on 20 groups and farming for a year or whatever.. I put them in the same boat as those people who boast who great they are doing when it was only because they paid their way to the top.

i suppose--for awhile you had to just to stay IN the game! however we got rid of that it seems for good reason, so....it seems taking off a season or two or as your building staff COULD be a bit more realistic then you've always been in 30th place yet EVERYONE wants to go to a show because of you! lol this is why i thought of the bonus influence in the other thread, seems like a happy medium. the only way it "helps" me now is getting into shows--but a) i dont really have much of a problem with that now so little advantage and b) I am more thinking of the advantage a show sponsor would have having a top 12 corps in attendance (or top 6 or champion etc) which seems pretty reasonable and realistic. This season I offered to help building corps out by looking for invites to shows and I plan on doing that again next season. The added benefit I see is that some of these sleepers might really try to take top 12 or 6 or win...get some action going so they can build influence even more for the next season.

I would just like to say that I think we should be a little easier on what we say about said person(s). I have one b account that I use mainly for influence. I however make sure to fill it's schedule the best I can. But saying someone is "wasting their life" is not really appropriate. I don't like the idea of boosting your own show attendance but it is kinda evened out when the groups also are applied to other director's shows.

What I would primarily like to say is that I would like to ask anybody against the idea to not be so aggressive about it. I understand being upset or angry that someone is competing with an unorthodox strategy that is borderline cheating, but try not to be so, for lack of a better word, MEAN about it. Try not to make it personal, even though names have not been mentioned, because I don't see the person in question as a bad human being outside of this game.

I am not defending the strategy, just promoting a calmer atmosphere.

I was just making a suggestion. I don't really think that's aggressive.

I think it was subsequent posts by others he was referring to

All I meant was that instead of spending hours a day managing a bunch of groups on here, said person(s) should get out and live life.

Years from now they will look back and say.. wait, I spent HOW many hours a week playing that stupid game? lol

I guess we are all in that same boat, but at least I can say I've only been playing about 5 minutes every day managing just 1 group.

saxamatttone I didn't mean you. You are right you were just making a valid suggestion.

Cool