Multi-Boxing. Finally. The facts.

"

AintCare wrote:

what are you doing and multiboxing are two separate things... you manually control 2 accounts, multiboxers control one account, the remaining accounts just do what the first one does, it requires a script

This is what I mean about there being many misconceptions, and terms having different meanings. Multiboxing as a term stems from using multiple computers logged into same game (hence multi-box), in more modern games that generally has been adopted for running several clients on same computer, with basicly same effect.

Point is, that running several clients as same person is per definition multiboxing, just that there is a lot of difference between just exploiting logging in toons for extra loot and actually playing multiple characters yourself.

"

valarias wrote:

Level the playing field. That's all we non-multiboxxers ask.

I'm done with this thread till it get's a dev response, just like i am taking a hiatus to see how important issues like this turn out, if GGG moves in a direction parallel to games I dislike, I won't be back, if however it moves diagonally (which it has done thus far) I'll look forward to many years of this game.

There is never a level playing field...

There are people out there that can't play endgame at all since their computers can't handle the disco effects of all the spell effects that's needed to handle endgame content.

Different internet connections and locations in the world will give different amounts of lag, giving a very different playing field for people.

People have different skill levels, meaning that someone like me who main skill is in turnbased strategy will never be able to compete with the best (heck I'd be happy to finally get to get to maps at all)

There is also the amount of time people have to play varying widely, having a few hours to play a day compared to playing 10-12 hour days, or to maybe having a few hours each weekend.

My point is that trying to have things be equal for everyone is a flawed logic. Instead everyone should have same opportunity (which I feel is done well in PoE). The main thing needed for this in regards to multiboxing is a very clear ruling, and punishments/bans on those who break these rules.

Saying that someone is getting an unfair advantage for doing something you could be doing too is really kind of pointless. That would be like me complaining that people make the most powerful builds and get much more stuff because of that, while I like playing more fringe builds and hence don't get as much endgame loot that I could sell for currency.

I dont understand all the fuzz about this. I have programmed games and I have organized competitions over the net, and it's easy..

2 facts:
a) you cannot distinguish between <me and my 3 stupid brothers sitting next to each other and play the game> and <me alone handling 4 physical boxes>.

b) it's easy to check for more than 1 client running on 1 box (be it more than one client on one Windows or more than 1 Windows running on VMs).

2 questions:
a) Do you want to give an advantage to cheaters by forbidding multiboxing (they will still do it without hesitation and have fun) and f*ck the honest players (they either do it and have a bad feeling about it - no fun - or dont do it and experience a disadvantage - no fun as well)?

b) Do you want to give an advantage to players that can afford more than one physical box by disabling more than 1 client per box?

For a) my experience tells me: What you cannot check, should be allowed - otherwise the cheaters get all the fun.
For b) - this is up to the game developer/distributor. MAYBE it's a good idea to give advantages to the richer ppl, these are the ones that can easily spend more money on your game - buying more than 1 version of the game, buying more addons/gimmicks, ..
I'm still undecided on this one.

"

Zalm wrote:

The drivers you use for your mouse require a script too. Doesnt mean the mouse script is automated.

"

valarias wrote:

Level the playing field. That's all we non-multiboxxers ask.

I'm done with this thread till it get's a dev response, just like i am taking a hiatus to see how important issues like this turn out, if GGG moves in a direction parallel to games I dislike, I won't be back, if however it moves diagonally (which it has done thus far) I'll look forward to many years of this game.

If it moves in the direction of saying multiboxing is allowed, where will you go? Will you stay or will you move on to a different game? Just curious.

If they move in a direction where multiboxxing/multilogging has not only the advantage of simply by doing so but is furthered by ingame mechanics, yes I'll simply leave.

"

Caliz wrote:

I dont understand all the fuzz about this. I have programmed games and I have organized competitions over the net, and it's easy..

2 facts:
a) you cannot distinguish between <me and my 3 stupid brothers sitting next to each other and play the game> and <me alone handling 4 physical boxes>.

b) it's easy to check for more than 1 client running on 1 box (be it more than one client on one Windows or more than 1 Windows running on VMs).

2 questions:
a) Do you want to give an advantage to cheaters by forbidding multiboxing (they will still do it without hesitation and have fun) and f*ck the honest players (they either do it and have a bad feeling about it - no fun - or dont do it and experience a disadvantage - no fun as well)?

b) Do you want to give an advantage to players that can afford more than one physical box by disabling more than 1 client per box?

For a) my experience tells me: What you cannot check, should be allowed - otherwise the cheaters get all the fun.
For b) - this is up to the game developer/distributor. MAYBE it's a good idea to give advantages to the richer ppl, these are the ones that can easily spend more money on your game - buying more than 1 version of the game, buying more addons/gimmicks, ..
I'm still undecided on this one.

that's why people have suggested either a negation entirely of the quantity effect, or allowing individuals to use /players x.

"

Caliz wrote:

MAYBE it's a good idea to give advantages to the richer ppl, these are the ones that can easily spend more money on your game - buying more than 1 version of the game, buying more addons/gimmicks

We are trying to keep Pay2Win out of PoE. GGG has said they despise the idea of P2W, so I doubt they want to cater to richer players, though I'm sure they see and understand the benefit if they do....

End of the day, Game is still free, so multiboxing costs the player nothing but a moral dilemma if they had one to begin with.

"

valarias wrote:

If they move in a direction where multiboxxing/multilogging has not only the advantage of simply by doing so but is furthered by ingame mechanics, yes I'll simply leave.

So basically, if they go with multiboxing is ok, you wont stay. As its a way you dont want your gaming companies to go that way...you must have very limited choices in games if you dont play games that allow multiboxing.

"

valarias wrote:

that's why people have suggested either a negation entirely of the quantity effect, or allowing individuals to use /players x.

And thats also why people argue to not do either of these things. They would dissuade people to party for ANY reason. I for one would prefer the players x command at the very least, because then you can still party and get your bonuses at least.

"

Zalm wrote:

"

valarias wrote:

If they move in a direction where multiboxxing/multilogging has not only the advantage of simply by doing so but is furthered by ingame mechanics, yes I'll simply leave.

So basically, if they go with multiboxing is ok, you wont stay. As its a way you dont want your gaming companies to go that way...you must have very limited choices in games if you dont play games that allow multiboxing.

"

valarias wrote:

that's why people have suggested either a negation entirely of the quantity effect, or allowing individuals to use /players x.

And thats also why people argue to not do either of these things. They would dissuade people to party for ANY reason. I for one would prefer the players x command at the very least, because then you can still party and get your bonuses at least.

No i never said that, I said if they move in a direction where multiboxxing has an advantage produced by the game that other players cannot use, then yes I will quit.

I understand that there are limitations to what a company can do, however in this case the answer is quite obvious.

No it wouldn't I'd party with my friends anyways, as I'm sure other people would, infact it would benefit people who don't run full parties but want the loot and other people to play with.

Ok...so you're going to more than likely stick around. I dont think they will restrict who can and cannot multibox if they come out and say they are going to allow it. It seems stupid. Thats like saying they will restrict who can use the forums. Good to see my adversary wont simply run away. You have proven a worthy foe, and I'd hate to see you retreat.

"

valarias wrote:

If they move in a direction where multiboxxing/multilogging has not only the advantage of simply by doing so but is furthered by ingame mechanics, yes I'll simply leave.

Multilogging IS a big issue. Multiboxing not so much. GGG already has several systems in place that really would make multiboxing difficult. I'll explain it so that people might understand a little better.

There's player unit collision. That means that two players can't occupy the same space, they move around each other rather than through each other. In addition to this, there's no targeting system that's conducive to multiboxing. It works in games like WoW because you can tab target to what you want, and then issue an assist command to your other characters. It works in Diablo because you can stack all of your characters right on top of each other. PoE has none of these features.

Let's take a look at what would happen if you tried to multibox PoE. You can't stack your characters, so each character has a slightly different field of vision on screen. This is HUGELY important to a multiboxer. What this means is that if you click to move on your main account, your other accounts click to move to a slightly different location. If you shift right click to attack, your other characters are attacking a slightly different location.

Why is that important? It means within a few movement clicks, your characters are now farther away from each other then when they started. In order to get some semblance of sync back, you'd have to turn off broadcasting, and manually move all of your characters closer together again. You'd have to do this every 3-5 movement clicks at a minimum.

Also, each character would need the same movement speed or these issues become exacerbated. Find a good pair of boots with 15% movement speed? You need five other pairs of boots with 15% movement speed, or those good boots now become a headache that's not worth using. Armor movement penalties? There's another huge headache. Get hit by a cold attack? There's another headache. A character runs into a game object and gets moved off his path? There's another headache. A character dies? Good god, that's a headache you don't want to deal with. THIS IS JUST FOR MOVING.

This also means if you're using a single target spell that not all of your attacks are going to hit, even if you're grouped fairly closely. Some of your characters will be whiffing their attacks.

In order for each character to hit their attacks, you have to be grouped as tightly as the game allows you to be grouped up. This requires CONSTANT MANUAL REPOSITIONING of each of your characters. Every 3-5 movement clicks, you're manually moving five characters out of six. Now, you could use AE attacks to alleviate this issue, but that's not always as efficient.

So, in order to have any degree of efficiency, a multiboxer has to do 5-6 times the work that you do, and gets a 250% item quantity increase as his reward. Someone who's doing 6 times your workload doesn't deserve something extra? 5-6 times the work for 2.5 times the reward? Yeah, multiboxers will ruin PoE.