Is multiboxing alowed?

"

Elynole wrote:

But that sets of a chain of events within the application you use for this(or hardware for that matter) that automates that key press across multiple different clients.

There's that misuse of the word again.

"

You're using it for ease-of-use to do something that otherwise, without hardware or software you would have to manually press the keys for each of the additional clients. That's the definition of automation.

Just because something makes life easier doesn't make it automation. Your use of the word automation is wrong, no matter how many times you state it.

"

I'd have to ask my employer if I know automation, they seem to think I do as software automation and data manipulation is the entirety of my job. haha.

Pick up a book on scripting. It'd suit you well.

You're obviously rather oblivious to my history in this game. My name got renamed to OldManWithABot (see signature) for a reason. I was programming before you ever saw a computer.

"

TehHammer wrote:

You're obviously rather oblivious to my history in this game. My name got renamed to OldManWithABot (see signature) for a reason. I was programming before you ever saw a computer.

What would you call the scripting process that happens with the 3rd party application then that allows for multiple key presses from one input? Replication? By what? means of automation. Unless you manually click 6 times, or however many clients you have, then you're automating a form of that process. It doesn't necessarily mean it's a "bot" running in the background doing everything for you, but a part of that process is automated.

A part of my line of work takes input on a data engine, and via scripting, it sends that same input to multiple different outputs. It's an Interface Engine, what it does is it automates thousands of data messages going across from a single point of input to multiple different outputs so that I don't have to manually look at the quarter million messages that cross my system and manually tell it what system to go to. This is the exact same programming logic that happens to replicate those keys. It takes a single point of input and duplicates that input to multiple different output clients so that you don't have to manually do the work yourself for each of those output clients.

"

Elynole wrote:

I'm tired of arguing about this.

Liar.

"

TehHammer wrote:

"

Elynole wrote:

I've yet to hear why you need a 3rd party application if this is completely manually controlled by a player? Because it's not, that's why.

Who says you do? What if I've got 5 wireless receivers on computers all tied to the same keyboard and mouse? Where's the 3rd party application?

Where's the automation?

"

Elynole wrote:

It doesn't necessarily mean it's a "bot" running in the background doing everything for you, but a part of that process is automated.

Do you think pushing a button on the keyboard on one system has no automated processes involved?

"

TehHammer wrote:

Liar.

This is where I stop, as grade school comebacks are something I find rather annoying in intellectual argument.

That's funny. Grade school comebacks.

"

Elynole wrote:

Pick up a book on scripting. It'd suit you well.

You know them well.

You claimed you were done arguing and then continued arguing. I called you out on it.

"

TehHammer wrote:

That's funny. Grade school comebacks.

"

Elynole wrote:

Pick up a book on scripting. It'd suit you well.

You know them well.

Sound advice in comparison with name calling is quite a bit different. At any rate, it seems that we're two coders that have two wildly different opinions on what the definition of automation is. I seem to find that this is when manual labor is not needed to complete the objective task, while - basing this on your botting experience(and I could be wrong) - you define it as automation from the start, even the input portion. While I understand where you're coming from on this point, I feel replication by means of scripting is a form of automation and you do not so we will just have to agree to disagree. I look at them as two different types of automation, but automation nonetheless. You can have scripts that automatically kick off based on a computers internal clock that you never have to tell it to do so. You can also have scripts that automates the direction of the input to multiple different outputs as I've described in earlier posts. I consider both a form of automation, the input and implementation is the difference.

At any rate, again, the ToS will probably be modified as the game grows to accompany more of these issues that arise. At best, we at least agree that it's against the health of the game as you had stated previously with it being cheating.

"

Elynole wrote:

While I understand where you're coming from on this point, I feel replication by means of scripting is a form of automation and you do not

I don't necessarily disagree with this, my point is multiboxing can be done without the use of scripts or any form of automation to replicate keystrokes/mouse movements, therefore that side of the argument is invalid. The reason it is bad is for ethical reasons not because there is some form of automation involved. Like I already asked: Is there automation in one keyboard stroke being sent to one client? (hint, the answer is yes)

First off let me be very clear that I'm not speaking from any kind of authority at all, I'm posting this just as a concerned citizen, as it were, of the PoE community:

I believe we've reached a dangerous point in the discussion. As mature fellow programmers I'm sure each of you by now has a pretty good idea of exactly what can be done at different levels of technical expertise in regards to this subject. I'd really prefer not to enlighten and encourage proponents of multiboxing and botting by inadvertently giving them hints of how to do it effectively.

Perhaps my concerns are misplaced but, in the absence of a moderator warning us to stop, I think it wise if we moderate ourselves.

Thank you,
Yet another old programmer

I have a PM from Chris that quotes:

"

The reason I haven't posted publicly about it recently is that we're still working out our policy. Because multiboxing isn't that different than a party of real players doing the same thing, we obviously have to design the game around it. Having said that, I'd still rather it wasn't happening :P

TL:DR

They don't know but don't really want it. Don't do it.

"

Omnivore61 wrote:

First off let me be very clear that I'm not speaking from any kind of authority at all, I'm posting this just as a concerned citizen, as it were, of the PoE community:

I believe we've reached a dangerous point in the discussion. As mature fellow programmers I'm sure each of you by now has a pretty good idea of exactly what can be done at different levels of technical expertise in regards to this subject. I'd really prefer not to enlighten and encourage proponents of multiboxing and botting by inadvertently giving them hints of how to do it effectively.

Perhaps my concerns are misplaced but, in the absence of a moderator warning us to stop, I think it wise if we moderate ourselves.

Thank you,
Yet another old programmer

Don´t be naive the ones that want to know more about it allready used the search engines.