Is multiboxing alowed?

So much fail in this thread from people who have never multiboxed.It gives headaches.

Its not even worth discussing with people other then the devs and to that.I got a response from chris a few days ago just to get a idea.

Re: Hi chris i have a simple question for you all i need is Yes/NO
from Chris
on January 3, 2013 11:27 PM


We'll probably make it so that you can only open one copy of the game per computer. We cannot stop people using it on multiple computers.

I don't like multiboxing but because we can't stop it, we have to design the game so that it's less abusable due to it.




Hi chris i have a simple question for you all i need is Yes/NO
to Chris
on January 3, 2013 8:33 PM


Hi, i would like to know if multiboxing in this game will be allowed.Thank you




And in the end the only thing really abusable is the fact of more loot per character.Witch i have no clue why you do get more loot but alas.You also need to spend more so w.e.


In the end i checked forums from people trying to multibox this game and its not easy, due to how character stacking and desynching works out.Its not even remotely worth it if you want more loot your better of stacking Mfind And Quantity

"

Omnivore61 wrote:

Seven false statements and an explosive insult all nice and concise! *clap* *clap* *clap*

Ive been playing online games for over 15 years. I have played most major MMOs, and more F2P MMOs then most people even know exist.

I stated seven simple facts of online gaming.

"

Omnivore61 wrote:

What's sad is to see so many anti-social gamers who really don't care if any of the points they argue are accurate or true, just as long as it satisfies the need to justify their behavior somehow. Guess you just have to get every last little advantage you can eh?

- I'm not an "anti-social" gamer. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion based on what I posted.
- I'm not sure what behavior you think I need to justify. Is choosing to enjoy a game a certain way that doesn't effect other people a "behavior"? What about it needs justifying?
- What advantages are you referring to? I never stated that I multi-box, or that I intend to in this game. Even suggesting that theres an advantage in it shows how ignorant you are about the subject. A multi-boxer in this game would have nothing on a group of separate players.

"

Omnivore61 wrote:

When I was multiboxing in Eve it was more of a power trip thing to be honest, not proud of that today, but at the time I didn't care what kind of impact I had on other players either. Hopefully that means I'm getting a bit more mature in my old age.

Having played Eve Online, I have to assume you never actually played the game. Multi-boxing in Eve does not remotely negatively effect other players, and again, separate players always dominate.

"

Omnivore61 wrote:

Frankly I hope GGG keeps an eye on it, and if it becomes a problem in any way, cracks down on it just as hard as any other form of exploitation.

How exactly is it a form of exploitation? Its doing something that groups of people are already doing, but your doing it less effectively. How is that in any way shape or form an exploit?

Seriously, you appear to be fundamentally ignorant about multi-boxing. You come off like a typical white-knight type who has a perception that its a bad thing, so you spew whatever ignorance you can to come off on the right side. All you actually do however, is continue to spread ignorance, and end up causing more harm then good. People like you effectively keep gamers back from moving past these non existent issues.

"

Magnicon2 wrote:

How exactly is it a form of exploitation? Its doing something that groups of people are already doing, but your doing it less effectively. How is that in any way shape or form an exploit?

But you don't have a group to divide the rewards with, so it can be alot more efficient.

Ahh, I love the arguments from authority in this thread :)

Just want to point out that I have a PhD in Linguistics, so I am the only one here* who can speak authoritatively about lexical semantics, which is what the whole "automation" discussion is about. And what I can tell you about THAT is that words don't have meaning apart from their users and the social contexts they're used in, and that different speech communities use the same words in different ways, and nobody's right and nobody's wrong ;) Basic fallacy that you can settle arguments by looking in the dictionary, since the dictionary is written by some lexicographer or team of lexicographers... fallible human beings... who are doing their best but usually failing to abstract a more-or-less accurate generalization from the soup of usage, which is characterized most prominently by constant variation and change. Not outside the purview of scientific description, but an adequate characterization goes way beyond the scope of what dictionaries provide.

I could also mention that spell check is no use at all in distinguishing homophones, so people should rely less on it if their goal is to produce standard written English :/

As to the multi-boxing question, I found the economic argument the most persuasive :p Every running instance of the game has a real cost to GGG, so every extra instance per player costs them money that they are not getting back in extra MT. Easy to see why they are opposed, or in ethical terms, how it could be seen as thievery (yes, that is another whole semantic debate, which is why I used the hedge "could be seen" ;) )

*Tongue in cheek. For all I know everybody in this thread has published on lexical semantics!

"

Sickness wrote:

"

Magnicon2 wrote:

How exactly is it a form of exploitation? Its doing something that groups of people are already doing, but your doing it less effectively. How is that in any way shape or form an exploit?

But you don't have a group to divide the rewards with, so it can be alot more efficient.

This is why so people think multi-boxing is bad. Their ignorance only allows them to see the advantages of something they can't do.

Multi-boxing may allow more loot, but it already been pointed out numerous times how hard it is to multi-box in PoE, and how easy it will be to die when playing multiple characters.

In the end, the disadvantages out way the advantages. Multi-boxing will be slower and harder than playing solo or even in a group.


Then there is the economy argument, and the cost to GGG. With how few players will be multi-boxing the cost to GGG is completely insignificant. And the games economy won't b effected because again, so few players will be multi-boxing that it would have no effect, the same applies to EVERY OTHER GAME too, multi-boxing has never effected a games economy. And of course since there is no gold in this game and people trade items for items, the "effect" is reduced even further.

man, it was a battle reading all the crap in this thread...

Has the said people here "not in favor" of automation been to a pc gaming store in the past few years? The keyboards an mice are pre packed with the shit.

Its not gonna go away, ya cant prevent it, why piss about it. people multibox its 2013,. hell its common for gamers to have 2 pc's,. its just the way it is.


And let face the facts here, TONS of people love to have 2 accounts. there is just no better way to learn how a game works, and 2 account 90% of the time add to the fun, it could be muti boxing, it could be simple things like exploring the 50% drop ratio.

With that said I see many people loading in 2nd/3rd accounts for better map drops when solo.

Its up to the devs to deal with why people are doing it.

"

Srkandi wrote:

Just want to point out that I have a PhD in Linguistics, so I am the only one here* who can speak authoritatively about lexical semantics, which is what the whole "automation" discussion is about. And what I can tell you about THAT is that words don't have meaning apart from their users and the social contexts they're used in, and that different speech communities use the same words in different ways, and nobody's right and nobody's wrong ;)

The language is English, and there is not a word in the English language that I know of that's officially represented without a majority acceptance of a meaning to the word itself. They may have sub-meanings, they may have different meanings...but they have meanings nonetheless. In context with this argument, the word "automation" would be categorized in computational linguistics and should be treated as such - therefore a meaning is defined and is relevant to the argument. As such, there can be right and wrong usages. Just like anyone else misusing a word.

"

oBLACKIECHANo wrote:

Multi-boxing may allow more loot, but it already been pointed out numerous times how hard it is to multi-box in PoE, and how easy it will be to die when playing multiple characters.

In the end, the disadvantages out way the advantages. Multi-boxing will be slower and harder than playing solo or even in a group.

If you can show that that is true, then fine. I'm just not taking your word for it.

oo come on... multibox? go a head!!!
its not like POE have the same system of drop like D3 (for me D3 Multibox = prem ban ) but in POE go for it... its not like you gona be bether that some team or a good solo player

"

dazed1992 wrote:

We'll probably make it so that you can only open one copy of the game per computer. We cannot stop people using it on multiple computers.

I don't like multiboxing but because we can't stop it, we have to design the game so that it's less abusable due to it.

And this is exactly why I make the posts I do.

I'm 100% supportive of GGG's position in relation to "because we can't stop it, we're going to design around it". That is exactly how you deal with these things, but that's where I feel they need to stop (in most cases).

The first part of the reply just makes no sense in relation to everything GGG has been saying about the game.

The whole selling point of why stash tabs are not a pay-to-win feature is that you can have multiple accounts to use as mules.

Uh oh! See the problem now?

If you can only run one account at a time, how are you going to be able to move your stuff around in the first place?

You can't.

Maybe I have 6 accounts worth of stuff and want to run 6 clients at once to be able to manage everything all at once across them. If I can only access one at a time, then what's the point? It is perceived that stash tabs give an advantage to the people who pay for them (I myself don't feel that way, but that's the justification GGG has given for multi-accounts).

So now, you get into the, "well maybe we'll let you run two at a time, as that should be enough" scenario, but the technical solution for that is no more effective than allowing only one account to be ran at once. People can still mutlibox with two clients, it's more limiting, but it's still doable.

Unless you are counting concurrent IP connections to your server(s), the only way you are able to prevent a "multi-client" is through client side mechanics, which can be easily bypassed.

To someone that knows what they are doing, will GGG be able to tell the difference between someone who is running 10 clients at once vs someone who has 10 computers each running an instance of the game? Nope. They have to rely on (bypassable) client side logic to do so.

What results, is exactly what I've been saying about a lot of other things. You restrict the majority of people in a negative way such that a minority of people who want to get an advantage and don't care about the consequences can and still will, regardless.

What's the point then? Even if this game was P2P, people would still buy multiple accounts and use them. The only thing that changes then is, how much of a risk are they willing to take to not lose that account. Your average joe isn't going to risk the account, but these restrictions put into place aren't for the average joes.

In the case of people who really are "detrimental" to the game, as long as they can make enough money in between losing accounts such that it's worth it, they'll continue to do so.

All the while, everyone else has to deal with the limitations put into place to stop these people, which aren't even going to work in the first place. No one wins, except the people who aren't even "playing" in the first part, but for the most part, they win either way, unless the design is changed such that they don't.