GENERAL

One small thing I wanted to mention, since "freedom of play" has often been used as an argument, which is limited by the limitation of clients that can be used simultaneously:

https://app.ryzom.com/app_forum/index.php?page=topic/view/29543/1

It does not actually have anything directly to do with the topic, but essentially it does. There has been a decision made before against freedom of play, which is limited by artificially restricting the ability to invite into guilds. Since roleplaying is "always optional" and it has been rejected here, I seriously wonder if the argument "freedom" can be used at all.

There is one thing you have to bear in mind, as far as I have understood Ryzom and its history:

The definition of "freedom" is determined by those who write, design and validate the lore in the context of role-playing. This has a direct impact on the game through the game mechanics.

In the same way, the "freedom of the game styles", here we will mention multi-boxing, is determined by those who do not actively participate in the game. One may only graciously express his opinion, someone else decides.

Playing style and role playing have a direct or indirect influence on each other. The question I rather ask myself is: What has priority now? Now I see here 2 parties, which dominate here: The OOC players and the RP players. They try to dictate rules to each other.

At least I can hold on to them:

One..:

Role-playing is a limitation per se. And whoever plays a role play should not expect a sandbox with freedom.
• Role playing restricts the mechanics of the game.

Second:

• Sandboxes are only limited by the possibilities of the game mechanics.

Ryzom is a sandbox, but also and above all a role-playing game. So it is clear that in an MMORPG, role-playing dictates how the mechanics of the game should react. There is no freedom in the sense of "do what you want", but there is freedom in the sense of "you are free to do whatever you want within the framework of the role-play".

Ok that was a long introduction, so that you understand my train of thought. Now for the multiboxing:

At first sight it doesn't make any difference. The game mechanics and modern computers make it possible to run several clients at the same time. Roleplayers can play whole families and OOC players see it as an art of playing and a challenge, although it wasn't originally intended for that. There is no limitation by the roleplaying, but only a limitation of 4 simultaneous clients to keep balance, which is more like a stopgap solution.

If you want that one doesn't walk around with 4 characters anymore, you should

• create an account system that is "multiboxing friendly". That way you can identify the ALTs/Twinks first. You can then create so-called alternative accounts in addition to your main account, which are then allowed for multiboxing.
• Reduce the benefits of multiboxing to the level of a single character. So you can have and control 4,8,10 or 100 clients, but have no advantage over a single character. (As far as I've read now, you do it not to gain an advantage, but as a challenge and as an art form).
• These secondary characters could then be used exclusively for certain activities and would also have to be restricted.
• One could offer half price on these secondary accounts.

Prohibiting alts does not help anything in a system like Ryzom. And allowing it gives the other non-Multiboxers a feeling of inferiority or an in-between is just eyewash. The system should be fundamentally changed. A controlled and official handling of Alts would be more useful.

I don't think Freddy was saying that Atys is or should be Arispotle. I feel like he was pointing out that there are not only different ways to play there are different mindsets on how to make the game enjoyable for the majority. And there is always a choice. Back then there was still quite a few people that didn't agree with the all for one for all mentality but it still worked for us.

People keep bringing up the "pay to win" argument. I'm not sure exactly what is being won here, no one is uber and taking over the entire server. I have an alt. Yesterday I was on for 5 hours and got 1 level in dig because cutlers are jerks. If I'm paying to win, I clearly need a refund. If people with multiple alts were camping everything, hording all the good stuff and being all around general douches; I might feel different about them. But they aren't. They're all decent people and help everyone.

Again the real problem is 3RD PARTY PROGRAMS that allow a player to not do anything but start it up and let it go. I watched someone do this for a good 2 hours one day. The main and 1 alt were digging and getting aggroed. I was close enough to be in sight too. I would have to kill whatever, then I'd rez the 2 and watch them continue digging with out missing a beat. Should I have reported? Yeah, probably but I didn't. To be fair, it made my last levels in forest interesting and they were digging junky mats so what do I really care? BUT that's the thing that needs dealt with, not the people that are actually skilled at running 4 toons.

Yes, homins only join guilds to be able to defeat Aen, Sirgio, Pei and Lixie. RP reasons, friendships, equipment, community, diplomacy, common guild halls and easier communication are completely overestimated. I'm doing bosshunts since 2007 and I'm very frustrated that guilds still exist but I'm working on it. My next step to destroy Atys is to dissolve all guilds, so everyone just logs in to sit in circles on outposts and sing Kumbayah.

The complaint really is not that the hunts destroy the reason to be in a guild or faction ... thats' the stated reason.  The real reason is "I don't like that a mechanism exists that allows smaller guilds and lower level players to interfere with us monoplizing resources.