Multi-Boxing. Finally. The facts.

"

valarias wrote:

3) people quitting because of uneven playing field.

That.

"

valarias wrote:

moreover, incase anyone didn't realize this having multi accounts potentially loses GGG profit, /players x is the best solution.

1) extra servers and bandwidth.

2) storage sales.

3) people quitting because of uneven playing field.

Why will GGG not respond to this? it's becoming not only quite the issue, but one that a developer should ALWAYS respond to.

I think GGG follows suit with other developers in their games that they allow it, but they might not want to. They wont officially announce that they allow it, but allude to it being allowed. Blizzard and Runic and other gaming companies like to make strange and confusing ways to say 'it is allowed, but we dont like it.'

We all know they want to get rid of it, but they arent sure how. Or if they want to lose the player base.

Only thing I don't feel comfortable with is the decisions in which it lastly results.
Do I

- Party up with other players, farm up stuff and need to divide my loot with them?

or

- Do I multi-load and get more benefits in the end?

Clearly People would prefer option 2 if the potential party is a public one.

The reason the IIQ bonus excist is to support group play with actual other players and make it attractive despite the competetive scenario. Maybe even support people making clans to benefit safely in the long term.

So I understand the feelings that this behavior is an abuse to an existing mechanic (not bug/glitch/whatever). The /player X command feels somewhat cheap and unoriginal. It could end up in destroying public groups in the end.

I am thankful that GGG stated already, that they want to fix this issue.
Thou the information on the official forum is still missing
(which kinda stuns me; does Chris need to formalize a speech?).

"

flab wrote:

"

valarias wrote:

moreover, incase anyone didn't realize this having multi accounts potentially loses GGG profit, /players x is the best solution.

1) extra servers and bandwidth.

2) storage sales.

3) people quitting because of uneven playing field.

Why will GGG not respond to this? it's becoming not only quite the issue, but one that a developer should ALWAYS respond to.

I disagree, /players X without changing something fundamentally will only make more people solo, more loot on average and have near zero practical effect (apart from satisfying some people in the short term). It will be the new solo and abusive TRUE multi-boxing will be the replacement, imo.

people already solo, and there would be plenty of instances and bosses where partying is necessary, however as it currently stands people just join lower level parties, enter the area quit the party kill the mobs and open the chests and/or kill the boss.

"

flab wrote:

"

valarias wrote:

moreover, incase anyone didn't realize this having multi accounts potentially loses GGG profit, /players x is the best solution.

1) extra servers and bandwidth.

2) storage sales.

3) people quitting because of uneven playing field.

Why will GGG not respond to this? it's becoming not only quite the issue, but one that a developer should ALWAYS respond to.

I disagree, /players X without changing something fundamentally will only make more people solo, more loot on average and have near zero practical effect (apart from satisfying some people in the short term). It will be the new solo and abusive TRUE multi-boxing will be the replacement, imo.

How is /players any worse then the current situation? I can do the same thing now with just a tiny bit of extra clicking. It's just 5 lemmings and a portal in act 2. The only difference I can see is that everyone would be able to do it.

"

kashakosha wrote:

"

flab wrote:

"

valarias wrote:

moreover, incase anyone didn't realize this having multi accounts potentially loses GGG profit, /players x is the best solution.

1) extra servers and bandwidth.

2) storage sales.

3) people quitting because of uneven playing field.

Why will GGG not respond to this? it's becoming not only quite the issue, but one that a developer should ALWAYS respond to.

I disagree, /players X without changing something fundamentally will only make more people solo, more loot on average and have near zero practical effect (apart from satisfying some people in the short term). It will be the new solo and abusive TRUE multi-boxing will be the replacement, imo.

How is /players any worse then the current situation? I can do the same thing now with just a tiny bit of extra clicking. It's just 5 lemmings and a portal in act 2. The only difference I can see is that everyone would be able to do it.

typically that's why people don't want to happen, because they are multi-boxxers and don't want a level playing field.

If you multibox and have 6 windows open and need to scroll to each window and execute your commands than thats fine, not cheap at all.

Problem is ppl buy software that automates all keystrokes on all instances of the game. My friend multiboxes D3 with the software I will not name. He loads up all 4 clients. He lines up all monks on screen, full screens his main, and every single guy stays in same place and executes off 1 command. IMO this is pretty cheap, I will not multibox as I have pride in my gaming, I hate every kind of cheese going back to atari.

But it is GGG game, They set the foundation of the rules, Just wish a dev could come on and say "EXACTLY" what is cheating and not,

"If you use a program that can send your keystrokes to multiple clients at the exact same time, Is this a bannable offense?"
^
would clear this argument up and free up the forums.

Open challenge to anyone. I will give you 100 GBP (British Pounds) if you are the first person to multibox 6 characters to level 1-80 in hardcore. You cannot lose any one of your chars. You must complete all quests and defeat all act bosses. You must at all times be playing all 6 of your characters. This offer will expire in 1 week and you will have 2 weeks after that to complete the challenge.

You will have to stream this.

This is a serious offer and I am happy to lodge the amount with a trusted 3rd party.

Now I know all of you that think multiboxing is easy mode will jump at this as it is practically money in the bank. After all multiboxing is practically cheating it is so easy.

So c'mon let's see what you have.



====================
(Further rules)

- Must be done on new accounts created especially for the challenge.
- Self found only, obviously swapping between your own 6 accounts is allowed.

.

"

darkinvalid wrote:

If you multibox and have 6 windows open and need to scroll to each window and execute your commands than thats fine, not cheap at all.

Problem is ppl buy software that automates all keystrokes on all instances of the game. My friend multiboxes D3 with the software I will not name. He loads up all 4 clients. He lines up all monks on screen, full screens his main, and every single guy stays in same place and executes off 1 command. IMO this is pretty cheap, I will not multibox as I have pride in my gaming, I hate every kind of cheese going back to atari.

But it is GGG game, They set the foundation of the rules, Just wish a dev could come on and say "EXACTLY" what is cheating and not,

"If you use a program that can send your keystrokes to multiple clients at the exact same time, Is this a bannable offense?"
^
would clear this argument up and free up the forums.

There is no need for automantion. Each of your alt accounts need to pick up 3 glyphs from mudflats and 3 bandit amulets.

It doesn't take shit to multilog or whatever you want to call it.

Play in windowed mode. Hell I can fit 4+ windows on screen at once. My computer is oooold.