2,046 accounts banned for third-party currency transactions

    • Mytherceria wrote:

      I have been summoned...
      Shame you cant be summoned to a thread asking about self referral and the constant abuse of your ToS despite being 'summoned' there umpteen times asking for some clarification on why it is condoned. Very telling.
      Midgard
      T8 Fibre, Ore, Hide, Wood & Stone Gatherer
      T8 Gathering Gear Crafter
      T8 Bags & Capes Crafter
    • Midgard wrote:

      Mytherceria wrote:

      I have been summoned...
      Shame you cant be summoned to a thread asking about self referral and the constant abuse of your ToS despite being 'summoned' there umpteen times asking for some clarification on why it is condoned. Very telling.
      Yeah, I'm smirking at this. It's a massively abused system which damages the game, costs them money and alienates the player base.
      [i][u][b]"Best not type too much I may get in trouble"[/b][/u][/i]
    • Midgard wrote:

      So by that logic the police should ignore, to the point of condoning, assault and battery, as murder is far more important. got it.
      Talk about Priority System for crimes :D
      Jokes aside... the RMT problem indeed seems far more pressing right now. Every RMT transaction is a direct hit to SBI's finances, and given the growing number of clearly RMT-esque transactions at the marketplace (the very reason I asked Mytherceria to speak up) the problem is escalating on a daily basis.

      I'm certain that fake referrals will, in time, be addressed as well. It just may be so that it's harder to track and any system detecting these would have to be really bulletproof. Imagine the outcry at SBI if they suddenly started banning players simply because their referral link was used to set-up an account using a suspiciously similar email address.
      One possible scenario - and I believe it will be a worst-case one for many - is that SBI will finally listen to some suggestions and make referral skins account-bound. I'm sure this will royally rile up some skin collectors out there. But if that's what the players want...
      ________________________
      Vexilla regis prodeunt inferni...
    • Loucipher wrote:

      Midgard wrote:

      So by that logic the police should ignore, to the point of condoning, assault and battery, as murder is far more important. got it.
      Talk about Priority System for crimes :D Jokes aside... the RMT problem indeed seems far more pressing right now. Every RMT transaction is a direct hit to SBI's finances, and given the growing number of clearly RMT-esque transactions at the marketplace (the very reason I asked Mytherceria to speak up) the problem is escalating on a daily basis.

      I'm certain that fake referrals will, in time, be addressed as well. It just may be so that it's harder to track and any system detecting these would have to be really bulletproof. Imagine the outcry at SBI if they suddenly started banning players simply because their referral link was used to set-up an account using a suspiciously similar email address.
      One possible scenario - and I believe it will be a worst-case one for many - is that SBI will finally listen to some suggestions and make referral skins account-bound. I'm sure this will royally rile up some skin collectors out there. But if that's what the players want...
      I agree and it is an ideal solution.
    • Loucipher wrote:

      Midgard wrote:

      So by that logic the police should ignore, to the point of condoning, assault and battery, as murder is far more important. got it.
      Talk about Priority System for crimes :D Jokes aside... the RMT problem indeed seems far more pressing right now. Every RMT transaction is a direct hit to SBI's finances, and given the growing number of clearly RMT-esque transactions at the marketplace (the very reason I asked Mytherceria to speak up) the problem is escalating on a daily basis.

      I'm certain that fake referrals will, in time, be addressed as well. It just may be so that it's harder to track and any system detecting these would have to be really bulletproof. Imagine the outcry at SBI if they suddenly started banning players simply because their referral link was used to set-up an account using a suspiciously similar email address.
      One possible scenario - and I believe it will be a worst-case one for many - is that SBI will finally listen to some suggestions and make referral skins account-bound. I'm sure this will royally rile up some skin collectors out there. But if that's what the players want...
      If it would be hard for SBI to track down people who were selling 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance... No comment. Go on trade channel.
    • 4.5.1 Users are prohibited from selling, purchasing, renting, leasing, offering, accepting, disseminating or copying Virtual Benefits, including Virtual Currency, within and/or outside the Game - in whatever form – to/from third parties unless expressly permitted by these Terms and Conditions or the Game Rules. [...]
      I obviously get the point of don't buy from a 3rd party site, or gold seller, but I find the terms, and conditions confusing looking at this from a legal point of view, things i've hear.

      I think I understand this, but it's wording is just confusing, and correct me if im wrong, but compared to other games.

      I remember seeing a warning awhile ago on the login screen, I believe it said something like don't accept currency, or items without anything in return or you risk having your account terminated? So this means that you can't freely give away currency, or for example if you accept a trade from a guild member or friend who turns out to commit fraud you risk having your account terminated?


      An in game-system provided by the Game or by Sandbox Interactive to trade Virtual Benefits of the Game constitutes such an exception.
      This is confusing to me because technically the marketboard, and in-game face to face trade is provided by Sandbox Interactive, and it's part of the game, and it's supposed to be a free economy, but in theory if I posted a item that costs 1 silver for 5000 silver and someone actually buys it that would be illegal, as im mostly an EVE player.
      Definition

      Virtual Benefit: Virtual Benefit means Virtual Currency, Premium Time, Virtual Property, Characters, Character customizations, Character perks, vanity perks, convenience features, game packs, trial packs and other features or perks that can be, as the case may be, earned through gameplay, purchased for real money or virtual currency, awarded by Sandbox Interactive, or otherwise obtained by a User for a Character or Account.

      The acquisition of Virtual Benefits in exchange for any form of consideration other than Virtual Property or Virtual Currency of the Game is expressly prohibited. If the User trades or exchanges Virtual Benefits on a large scale without a comparable value obtained within the Game, then it is assumed that the User violates this rule. The User is entitled to provide counter-evidence.
      Based on this, your allowed to trade as long as it's 100% in-game with silver, but if you are a friendly person who gives away items, or accepts them as a new player, how do you avoid getting your account terminated if someone without your knowledge and beyond your control violated the terms & conditions ex. fraud which resulted in a charge-back, possibly a guild member who frames another for example.

      How about in-game investment services like I saw before I took a break there were people accepting in-game investments with promise of return / payout, I believe because they owned a bunch of city plots or something is that a violation of rules?

      And how about those I saw renting private islands / upgraded islands for a weekly silver fee is this a violation of rules too?

      The whole paragraph kinda confuses me in a TL:DR aspect i'd assume simply don't buy gold, but on a legal aspect I assume that doing stupid things like playing the market board, or just accepting virtual benefits, or items from other players can also get your account terminated?

      No doubt, most players who got banned deserved it ! So good riddance, but im concerned as a player, and for the 1% that may get flagged or do something stupid?
    • Malkalma wrote:

      If it would be hard for SBI to track down people who were selling 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance... No comment. Go on trade channel.
      Tracking down anyone who sells 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance doesn't take a rocket scientist. We are both aware of this fact, and SBI certainly is aware of that as well. Still, does it prove 100% that all the accounts involved belong to one person?
      I am in no way affilliated with SBI or something, so I can't really speak for them here, but I'd be careful banning customers without rock solid evidence. The RMT cases are much easier to get that kind of evidence on, which may well be the reason why they address that issue with an iron fist, while apparently turning a blind eye to fake skin referrals.
      For the record, I am no more pleased than you that some people make it big by breaking the rules, hence I advocate for making these skins untradeable. This will immediately cut this unhealthy practice without the need to call in computer forensic team :)
      ________________________
      Vexilla regis prodeunt inferni...
    • Loucipher wrote:

      Malkalma wrote:

      If it would be hard for SBI to track down people who were selling 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance... No comment. Go on trade channel.
      Tracking down anyone who sells 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance doesn't take a rocket scientist. We are both aware of this fact, and SBI certainly is aware of that as well. Still, does it prove 100% that all the accounts involved belong to one person?I am in no way affilliated with SBI or something, so I can't really speak for them here, but I'd be careful banning customers without rock solid evidence. The RMT cases are much easier to get that kind of evidence on, which may well be the reason why they address that issue with an iron fist, while apparently turning a blind eye to fake skin referrals.
      For the record, I am no more pleased than you that some people make it big by breaking the rules, hence I advocate for making these skins untradeable. This will immediately cut this unhealthy practice without the need to call in computer forensic team :)
      Well they could just get rid of gold / silver and RMT exchange all together, and only do direct gifting, but the big difference between EVE Online, and Albion is if you do happen to get involved with a illicit transaction on EVE you usually don't lose your account compared to some stuff I read awhile ago with Albion being very strict.

      I wasn't aware you could trade skins though I've been out of the game for quite awhile, but assuming that I bought 30 skins and sold them not sure how this works that would be legitimate right?

      Basically I assume SBI is just tracking people via IP address, and Hardware ID possibly through EAC, but also feel like based off some posts i've read in the past that even 1% players who do something stupid like selling a skin for example for 5 billion, and someone buys it when it's not worth that much, and then they lose their account because the person who bought it did something illicit could be a bit much (Im just throwing numbers out there because im not sure how any of the economics work for skins.)

      Would it not be easier for them to like put in a market-place queue for large transactions that fall outside of a normal trade, so basically if an item worth 1000 silver sells for 1 million for example that transaction is held for 30 days until it's determined by SBI that the virtual benefits, or silver did not come from an account that commit fraud? (And if it did come from an illicit source, then the transaction is reveresed and player gets item mailed back?)

      Just keeping an open mind and thinking about the people, most guilty people are likely cheaters, but a few people like myself who like to play with the economics of a game could in theory possibly get into trouble with such a strict agreement.
    • Trisha wrote:

      Well they could just get rid of gold / silver and RMT exchange all together, and only do direct gifting, but the big difference between EVE Online, and Albion is if you do happen to get involved with a illicit transaction on EVE you usually don't lose your account compared to some stuff I read awhile ago with Albion being very strict.
      I wasn't aware you could trade skins though I've been out of the game for quite awhile, but assuming that I bought 30 skins and sold them not sure how this works that would be legitimate right?

      Basically I assume SBI is just tracking people via IP address, and Hardware ID possibly through EAC, but also feel like based off some posts i've read in the past that even 1% players who do something stupid like selling a skin for example for 5 billion, and someone buys it when it's not worth that much, and then they lose their account because the person who bought it did something illicit could be a bit much (Im just throwing numbers out there because im not sure how any of the economics work for skins.)

      Would it not be easier for them to like put in a market-place queue for large transactions that fall outside of a normal trade, so basically if an item worth 1000 silver sells for 1 million for example that transaction is held for 30 days until it's determined by SBI that the virtual benefits, or silver did not come from an account that commit fraud? (And if it did come from an illicit source, then the transaction is reveresed and player gets item mailed back?)

      Just keeping an open mind and thinking about the people, most guilty people are likely cheaters, but a few people like myself who like to play with the economics of a game could in theory possibly get into trouble with such a strict agreement.
      You are raising some valid points in your message above and I understand they come from a honest concern about the wellbeing of the game and its community. In particular, I think that a monitoring/approval system for large transactions is a good idea.

      Well, we were all given the information that the transactions are indeed being monitored. I have myself begun submitting those I found suspicious to the attention of support, as per my communication with Mytherceria. I believe we can all help the team stop this fraudulent behaviour and help SBI save money for improving the game if we keep an eye out for suspicious activity and report accordingly.

      Hopefully all this helps make Albion Online a better, more stable gaming platform for all of us.
      ________________________
      Vexilla regis prodeunt inferni...
    • Loucipher wrote:

      Malkalma wrote:

      If it would be hard for SBI to track down people who were selling 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance... No comment. Go on trade channel.
      Tracking down anyone who sells 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance doesn't take a rocket scientist. We are both aware of this fact, and SBI certainly is aware of that as well. Still, does it prove 100% that all the accounts involved belong to one person?I am in no way affilliated with SBI or something, so I can't really speak for them here, but I'd be careful banning customers without rock solid evidence. The RMT cases are much easier to get that kind of evidence on, which may well be the reason why they address that issue with an iron fist, while apparently turning a blind eye to fake skin referrals.
      For the record, I am no more pleased than you that some people make it big by breaking the rules, hence I advocate for making these skins untradeable. This will immediately cut this unhealthy practice without the need to call in computer forensic team :)
      If it is not just one person, why he has all the skins that every secondary account got? How viable is that 30 people bought their first premium in 1 hour into the new referral season?

      Second player referred a third, third player referred 4th, 4th player referred 5th until 30+

      How viable is that?

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Malkalma ().

    • Loucipher wrote:

      Trisha wrote:

      Well they could just get rid of gold / silver and RMT exchange all together, and only do direct gifting, but the big difference between EVE Online, and Albion is if you do happen to get involved with a illicit transaction on EVE you usually don't lose your account compared to some stuff I read awhile ago with Albion being very strict.
      I wasn't aware you could trade skins though I've been out of the game for quite awhile, but assuming that I bought 30 skins and sold them not sure how this works that would be legitimate right?

      Basically I assume SBI is just tracking people via IP address, and Hardware ID possibly through EAC, but also feel like based off some posts i've read in the past that even 1% players who do something stupid like selling a skin for example for 5 billion, and someone buys it when it's not worth that much, and then they lose their account because the person who bought it did something illicit could be a bit much (Im just throwing numbers out there because im not sure how any of the economics work for skins.)

      Would it not be easier for them to like put in a market-place queue for large transactions that fall outside of a normal trade, so basically if an item worth 1000 silver sells for 1 million for example that transaction is held for 30 days until it's determined by SBI that the virtual benefits, or silver did not come from an account that commit fraud? (And if it did come from an illicit source, then the transaction is reveresed and player gets item mailed back?)

      Just keeping an open mind and thinking about the people, most guilty people are likely cheaters, but a few people like myself who like to play with the economics of a game could in theory possibly get into trouble with such a strict agreement.
      You are raising some valid points in your message above and I understand they come from a honest concern about the wellbeing of the game and its community. In particular, I think that a monitoring/approval system for large transactions is a good idea.
      Well, we were all given the information that the transactions are indeed being monitored. I have myself begun submitting those I found suspicious to the attention of support, as per my communication with Mytherceria. I believe we can all help the team stop this fraudulent behaviour and help SBI save money for improving the game if we keep an eye out for suspicious activity and report accordingly.

      Hopefully all this helps make Albion Online a better, more stable gaming platform for all of us.
      I mean seems like a great idea IMO, if a person wants to sell a Health Potion for a million silver, and it only sales for 1000 silver it's a sandbox totally legit, however to prevent fraud, and illicit RMT through auction house all they have to do is put a restriction on highly priced items to 30 days or 90 days for that matter before giving the silver to the player, and if its flagged as a RMT / fraud transaction from anyone the item is sent back to players mail-box, and silver is deleted by the system / fraudster who commit the illict act banned. I think 90 days is the most a most card issuer allow for a charge-back.

      The issue is keeping SBI from getting hit with Charge-Back fees every single time someone commits fraud right?

      Problem with Albion Online especially being free economy title is a person, friend, or guild member for that matter can use social-engineering to get a player or players banned for any or no reason at all, even a person who buys from an illegal website then pass the silver off to other guild members or people for that matter.

      I like games where I can freely give away items and currency to friends like in EVE, or Warframe, even older games like Rune Scape, and none of us have to worry about losing our accounts.
    • The self referral skins are a gold/silver sink for the game. As it is players spending their own in-game currency to "buy" (self refer) themselves skins. Despite referral bonus and the value of the skins, there still remains the fact that some silver/gold will disappear. Yes the skins will eventually go up in value and smart players will make good profit from this.

      I feel the self-referral is tolerated because there is a global net loss of player gold/silver (gold/silver sink) as part of the deal.

      Plus there current system is less spam heavy and less fake accounts created than the previous which required 30 accounts to log-in.
    • noxmortus wrote:

      The self referral skins are a gold/silver sink for the game. As it is players spending their own in-game currency to "buy" (self refer) themselves skins. Despite referral bonus and the value of the skins, there still remains the fact that some silver/gold will disappear. Yes the skins will eventually go up in value and smart players will make good profit from this.

      I feel the self-referral is tolerated because there is a global net loss of player gold/silver (gold/silver sink) as part of the deal.

      Plus there current system is less spam heavy and less fake accounts created than the previous which required 30 accounts to log-in.
      Lets say I buy gold from the albion website: I have spent euros to get gold. The gold was newly generated ingame.

      Lets say you want to buy gold or premium with silver: you will buy it from me or anyone else that bought gold through the website, or got a promo code, or referred a friend.

      You have less silver and more gold, I have more silver and less gold / euros.

      The amount of silver in the game is the same, so it was not sank, and there is now more gold around.

      In the long term, many people buying gold from the website will lower the gold price ingame. In the other hand, buying premium with silver, silver dropped from monsters and chest, etc, will value gold.

      If I refer a second account, known as self referal, I will either:

      1) pay for premium with silver, in wich case Ive just bought gold from some other player and the amount of silver in the game is the same, but the amount of gold got reduced.

      2) pay for premium with euros, in wich case nothing happens to the silver and gold ingame.

      In both cases, I will get a skin worth roughly more than the price of the premium, wich I will sell for that money or keep for a few months to value it. Either way, the amount of silver in the game is the same.
    • Loucipher wrote:

      Malkalma wrote:

      If it would be hard for SBI to track down people who were selling 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance... No comment. Go on trade channel.
      Tracking down anyone who sells 30 skins 1 hour after maintenance doesn't take a rocket scientist. We are both aware of this fact, and SBI certainly is aware of that as well. Still, does it prove 100% that all the accounts involved belong to one person?I am in no way affilliated with SBI or something, so I can't really speak for them here, but I'd be careful banning customers without rock solid evidence. The RMT cases are much easier to get that kind of evidence on, which may well be the reason why they address that issue with an iron fist, while apparently turning a blind eye to fake skin referrals.
      For the record, I am no more pleased than you that some people make it big by breaking the rules, hence I advocate for making these skins untradeable. This will immediately cut this unhealthy practice without the need to call in computer forensic team :)
      That's what got me with the last referral, in Thetford one guy had over 30 of them, didn't hide the fact shouted it in the market place. Utterly ridiculous.
      [i][u][b]"Best not type too much I may get in trouble"[/b][/u][/i]
    • They basically want you to never accept money from anyone unless you know them. I say fuck that. So much for a sandbox.
      What If someone purchases a ton of gold from a seller, and starts trading it to people. New players even. They'll say thanks, 2 days later, perm banned lol.
      All the while the guy who spent a few bucks is laughing his ass off. Unless you ignore trades that aren't huge.

      Good system. Asking you to never accept anything from strangers is unfair. And also just straight up ridiculous. Good luck enforcing a rule that dumb on a sandbox for your userbase. Go to any city and find beginners, see if they accept it or not. Eh, you don't even need beginners. Go anywhere and start trading.
      Blaming someone if they accept a trade is messed up. Especially when the majority never even know they can be banned for it.

      I realize the severity of this issue to your company, to your finances. But still. It just feels wrong to blame it on accepting a trade, while knowing full well that a rule like that can't be possibly enforced unless you change the trade system. Like runescape did ages ago (see how happy the userbase was when they did that) I believe the majority of players straight up quit.

      The post was edited 1 time, last by Rhodesia ().

    • With that mindset, I assume you never miss out on a "Fell Off A Truck" promotion in real life. I mean, c'mon, if it's free, only a complete loser would skip on it, right?
      Tell you what: if a complete stranger offers you something for free, it's either stolen, has strings attached to it, or it's a scam. Simple as that. It's common knowledge among intelligent human beings out there.

      Besides, there's a rule in T&Cs saying that obtaining in-game benefits without comparable recompense is conaidered RMT. All users have to confirm they understand and agree to abide by the T&Cs when registering their accounts by clicking the relevant field during registration. No one is forced to do that, it's your own choice. Griefing that you have to abide by the rules you expressly agreed on is, well... not very logical, to say the least.
      ________________________
      Vexilla regis prodeunt inferni...
    • Loucipher wrote:

      With that mindset, I assume you never miss out on a "Fell Off A Truck" promotion in real life. I mean, c'mon, if it's free, only a complete loser would skip on it, right?
      Tell you what: if a complete stranger offers you something for free, it's either stolen, has strings attached to it, or it's a scam. Simple as that. It's common knowledge among intelligent human beings out there.

      Besides, there's a rule in T&Cs saying that obtaining in-game benefits without comparable recompense is conaidered RMT. All users have to confirm they understand and agree to abide by the T&Cs when registering their accounts by clicking the relevant field during registration. No one is forced to do that, it's your own choice. Griefing that you have to abide by the rules you expressly agreed on is, well... not very logical, to say the least.
      What? what kind of bollocks is this?
      There's something called being nice. Especially towards new players. Some people enjoy giving money to new players. Not too much so they'd take it for granted, but it's something. I've seen it done countless times, in many MMOs. Albion, Runescape, you name it.
      What about players helping others out? I mean, they're giving you their time. Literally. By your logic, there has to be an ulterior motive behind it. I mean... they didn't ask for compensation, something is off.

      This isn't god damn real life. Stop with the comparisons.
      And TC? Really? No one is talking about albion being in trouble for enforcing an illegal rule or anything like that, TC has nothing to do with this argument.

      Go on and register a new account on OSRS, ride some shitty armor and walk around clueless. Eventually someone will trade you, give you a few hundred k, and leave.
      They don't want your IP, they don't want to be your friend, they don't want you to click on a link.
      If you can't, you'll find enough videos of people acting like newbies and others (strangers) giving them free money. Not to worry though, since they're strangers, i'm sure the money is laced with some type of drug.


      "if a complete stranger offers you something for free, it's either stolen, has strings attached to it, or it's a scam. Simple as that. It's common knowledge among intelligent human beings out there."

      That is the dumbest thing I have read in a good while, I can't take you seriously after saying shit like that.

      The post was edited 2 times, last by Rhodesia ().