Having everything on 1 character is a nightmare to manage. (for me at least). Take ff14 as an example. I love the game, but I never got to fully level up everything, simply because it's beyond annoying. Now my main character doesn't have a "sense of identity" when I look at the professions, and classes page, and see bunch of numbers that doesn't mean shit.
If I want to play 2 characters side by side while paying 2 subscriptions, I should be allowed to.
Leave it to the devs to come up with ways to figure out a way to find people who exploit it.
If you disallow two people in the same house from playing, that’s stupid. You are literally telling customers you don’t want them to play and you will piss off a lot of people.
How about preventing multiple accounts from the same payment method? Oh well, I guess I can’t pay for my kids to play, see above.
What exactly do you want AoC to not allow? Don’t say “multi-boxing” because that means 30 different things. If you want them to disallow multiple clients running on one PC, that easy and fair (and not uncommon) but please be specific.
Asking the players how they would prevent multi-boxing is not a valid argument. That is up to the design studios engineering team to determine. The players job is to provide feedback in how the subject matter could be exploited or unfair.
I never said disallow two people in the same house from playing.
I never said prevent multiple accounts from the same payment method.
But since you asked, this is absolutely doable in more modern ways than the archaic ones you mentioned.
Implementing modern security tactics such as host-based IDS or IPS systems are 100% necessary in today's world. If you're unfamiliar with this type of technology, the most known example is something like BattleEye. Obviously for a studio like Intrepid, it would be in their best interest to invest in a proprietary solution for their platform (They've already set it up for scaling and it will need this in the future)
I’m not asking for a solution. I’m asking what you mean. Again, there is no one definition of “multi-boxing”. I’m really growing to hate that term because it is meaningless. Define what you want.
Do you not want two computers running on the same IP connected to the AoC server?
Do you not want two versions of the client on the same PC?
Do you not want people running scripts to run multiple characters?
Do you not want one person owning multiple accounts?
You first gripe about asking a customer for a solution, which I never did. I asked you to define the problem. Then you contradict yourself by giving an unsolicited solution, again without saying what you’re objecting to in the first place.
This is the equivalent of saying, “I want to prevent cheating.” And then someone asks, “Can you clarify what kind of cheating you want to prevent?” Do you complain about not having all the answers, then mention some kind of software.
Please, clarify your position if you want to join the discussion.
0
Options
ZhurkieMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If you disallow two people in the same house from playing, that’s stupid. You are literally telling customers you don’t want them to play and you will piss off a lot of people.
How about preventing multiple accounts from the same payment method? Oh well, I guess I can’t pay for my kids to play, see above.
What exactly do you want AoC to not allow? Don’t say “multi-boxing” because that means 30 different things. If you want them to disallow multiple clients running on one PC, that easy and fair (and not uncommon) but please be specific.
Asking the players how they would prevent multi-boxing is not a valid argument. That is up to the design studios engineering team to determine. The players job is to provide feedback in how the subject matter could be exploited or unfair.
I never said disallow two people in the same house from playing.
I never said prevent multiple accounts from the same payment method.
But since you asked, this is absolutely doable in more modern ways than the archaic ones you mentioned.
Implementing modern security tactics such as host-based IDS or IPS systems are 100% necessary in today's world. If you're unfamiliar with this type of technology, the most known example is something like BattleEye. Obviously for a studio like Intrepid, it would be in their best interest to invest in a proprietary solution for their platform (They've already set it up for scaling and it will need this in the future)
I’m not asking for a solution. I’m asking what you mean. Again, there is no one definition of “multi-boxing”. I’m really growing to hate that term because it is meaningless. Define what you want.
Do you not want two computers running on the same IP connected to the AoC server?
Do you not want two versions of the client on the same PC?
Do you not want people running scripts to run multiple characters?
Do you not want one person owning multiple accounts?
You first gripe about asking a customer for a solution, which I never did. I asked you to define the problem. Then you contradict yourself by giving an unsolicited solution, again without saying what you’re objecting to in the first place.
This is the equivalent of saying, “I want to prevent cheating.” And then someone asks, “Can you clarify what kind of cheating you want to prevent?” Do you complain about not having all the answers, then mention some kind of software.
Please, clarify your position if you want to join the discussion.
Perhaps you just didn't read my original post well enough, it clearly states the kind of multi-boxing I'm referring to in my original post was software based.
"Players driven by software has no place in that vision." - This is referring to demultiplexers/mud clients.
Any type of multi-boxing that can create an advantage in game should not be allowed. Here is a breakdown for those that aren't aware of the types:
The argument to state which one is being referred to doesn't really matter as they both provide advantages to the game through mechanical AND monetary exploitations. However, for the sake of this argument I'm clearly referring to software based multi-boxing per my original comment.
Perhaps your new to how forums work, this "discussion" is not regarding the "type" of multi-boxing so telling someone to "clarify their position" in that regard is an invalid statement, you do not run the forum. The subject of this thread being "Here's How Multi-Boxing Can Be Exploited" which I provided valid points towards in terms of exploitations and a rebuttal to AoC's no P2W concepts.
“I would cut off your head, dwarf, if it stood but a bit higher off the ground.” - Eomer
1
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If you disallow two people in the same house from playing, that’s stupid. You are literally telling customers you don’t want them to play and you will piss off a lot of people.
How about preventing multiple accounts from the same payment method? Oh well, I guess I can’t pay for my kids to play, see above.
What exactly do you want AoC to not allow? Don’t say “multi-boxing” because that means 30 different things. If you want them to disallow multiple clients running on one PC, that easy and fair (and not uncommon) but please be specific.
Asking the players how they would prevent multi-boxing is not a valid argument. That is up to the design studios engineering team to determine. The players job is to provide feedback in how the subject matter could be exploited or unfair.
I never said disallow two people in the same house from playing.
I never said prevent multiple accounts from the same payment method.
But since you asked, this is absolutely doable in more modern ways than the archaic ones you mentioned.
Implementing modern security tactics such as host-based IDS or IPS systems are 100% necessary in today's world. If you're unfamiliar with this type of technology, the most known example is something like BattleEye. Obviously for a studio like Intrepid, it would be in their best interest to invest in a proprietary solution for their platform (They've already set it up for scaling and it will need this in the future)
I’m not asking for a solution. I’m asking what you mean. Again, there is no one definition of “multi-boxing”. I’m really growing to hate that term because it is meaningless. Define what you want.
Do you not want two computers running on the same IP connected to the AoC server?
Do you not want two versions of the client on the same PC?
Do you not want people running scripts to run multiple characters?
Do you not want one person owning multiple accounts?
You first gripe about asking a customer for a solution, which I never did. I asked you to define the problem. Then you contradict yourself by giving an unsolicited solution, again without saying what you’re objecting to in the first place.
This is the equivalent of saying, “I want to prevent cheating.” And then someone asks, “Can you clarify what kind of cheating you want to prevent?” Do you complain about not having all the answers, then mention some kind of software.
Please, clarify your position if you want to join the discussion.
Perhaps you just didn't read my original post well enough, it clearly states the kind of multi-boxing I'm referring to in my original post was software based.
"Players driven by software has no place in that vision." - This is referring to demultiplexers/mud clients.
Any type of multi-boxing that can create an advantage in game should not be allowed. Here is a breakdown for those that aren't aware of the types:
The argument to state which one is being referred to doesn't really matter as they both provide advantages to the game through mechanical AND monetary exploitations. However, for the sake of this argument I'm clearly referring to software based multi-boxing per my original comment.
Perhaps your new to how forums work, this "discussion" is not regarding the "type" of multi-boxing so telling someone to "clarify their position" in that regard is an invalid statement, you do not run the forum. The subject of this thread being "Here's How Multi-Boxing Can Be Exploited" which I provided valid points towards in terms of exploitations and a rebuttal to AoC's no P2W concepts.
Look, newbie, you’ve been on the forums for a couple hours, I’ve been here for years. Get down off your wobbly soapbox with your hypocrisy. You’re the one who clearly struggles to communicate in a written medium.
“Players driven by software” is badly broken English but in the midst of your clumsy rambling I think I’m starting to glean what you’re struggling so badly to say. You don’t want automated bots or scripting. Fortunately, they are already taking a stance against that (Steven himself said it won’t be acceptable) and I don’t see anyone in the community who is asking for this to be done. So I don’t think you’ll get any arguments.
1
Options
ZhurkieMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
If you disallow two people in the same house from playing, that’s stupid. You are literally telling customers you don’t want them to play and you will piss off a lot of people.
How about preventing multiple accounts from the same payment method? Oh well, I guess I can’t pay for my kids to play, see above.
What exactly do you want AoC to not allow? Don’t say “multi-boxing” because that means 30 different things. If you want them to disallow multiple clients running on one PC, that easy and fair (and not uncommon) but please be specific.
Asking the players how they would prevent multi-boxing is not a valid argument. That is up to the design studios engineering team to determine. The players job is to provide feedback in how the subject matter could be exploited or unfair.
I never said disallow two people in the same house from playing.
I never said prevent multiple accounts from the same payment method.
But since you asked, this is absolutely doable in more modern ways than the archaic ones you mentioned.
Implementing modern security tactics such as host-based IDS or IPS systems are 100% necessary in today's world. If you're unfamiliar with this type of technology, the most known example is something like BattleEye. Obviously for a studio like Intrepid, it would be in their best interest to invest in a proprietary solution for their platform (They've already set it up for scaling and it will need this in the future)
I’m not asking for a solution. I’m asking what you mean. Again, there is no one definition of “multi-boxing”. I’m really growing to hate that term because it is meaningless. Define what you want.
Do you not want two computers running on the same IP connected to the AoC server?
Do you not want two versions of the client on the same PC?
Do you not want people running scripts to run multiple characters?
Do you not want one person owning multiple accounts?
You first gripe about asking a customer for a solution, which I never did. I asked you to define the problem. Then you contradict yourself by giving an unsolicited solution, again without saying what you’re objecting to in the first place.
This is the equivalent of saying, “I want to prevent cheating.” And then someone asks, “Can you clarify what kind of cheating you want to prevent?” Do you complain about not having all the answers, then mention some kind of software.
Please, clarify your position if you want to join the discussion.
Perhaps you just didn't read my original post well enough, it clearly states the kind of multi-boxing I'm referring to in my original post was software based.
"Players driven by software has no place in that vision." - This is referring to demultiplexers/mud clients.
Any type of multi-boxing that can create an advantage in game should not be allowed. Here is a breakdown for those that aren't aware of the types:
The argument to state which one is being referred to doesn't really matter as they both provide advantages to the game through mechanical AND monetary exploitations. However, for the sake of this argument I'm clearly referring to software based multi-boxing per my original comment.
Perhaps your new to how forums work, this "discussion" is not regarding the "type" of multi-boxing so telling someone to "clarify their position" in that regard is an invalid statement, you do not run the forum. The subject of this thread being "Here's How Multi-Boxing Can Be Exploited" which I provided valid points towards in terms of exploitations and a rebuttal to AoC's no P2W concepts.
Look, newbie, you’ve been on the forums for a couple hours, I’ve been here for years. Get down off your wobbly soapbox with your hypocrisy. You’re the one who clearly struggles to communicate in a written medium.
“Players driven by software” is badly broken English but in the midst of your clumsy rambling I think I’m starting to glean what you’re struggling so badly to say. You don’t want automated bots or scripting. Fortunately, they are already taking a stance against that (Steven himself said it won’t be acceptable) and I don’t see anyone in the community who is asking for this to be done. So I don’t think you’ll get any arguments.
Yikes, apparently a nerve has been hit. Your initial post was full of negative connotations from the get go yet you sit there and act like you own the forum, who's on the high horse exactly?
I've been a supporter of AoC since I heard about it in 2017 and immediately joined the Discord, just because I haven't been a part of the forums since today does not negate any amount of credibility I have towards this discussion. Take your poor attitude out of this community and save us all please.
Having everything on 1 character is a nightmare to manage. (for me at least). Take ff14 as an example. I love the game, but I never got to fully level up everything, simply because it's beyond annoying. Now my main character doesn't have a "sense of identity" when I look at the professions, and classes page, and see bunch of numbers that doesn't mean shit.
If I want to play 2 characters side by side while paying 2 subscriptions, I should be allowed to.
Leave it to the devs to come up with ways to figure out a way to find people who exploit it.
If you care about sense of identity then you are not supposed to multi-box or accept feeling forced to play an alt.
Again, I disagree.
When I play as an alt, I am still known in game to the people that know me. I am known as a player that plays all of my characters, rather than being known as a single character.
Being known as the collection of characters you play is no less a sense of identity than being known by just one character.
If I do something stupid on a level 1 alt, it reflects on me just as badly as if I had done it on my main. I would actually say people with a full stable of alts that are known to be played by that person has a stronger sense of identity than someone that doesn't play alts often - as the person that doesn't play alts often still has the ability to roll one in order to shake off that identity for a period of time.
The only thing I would like to add is that,
We, the future players, should worry about a bit more in building a good community, than to ask for that PERFECT game. Lots of things come via social interacting or not. But we've experienced botters and multiboxers a thousands times by now.
If they set the rules right, and have a good report system that could be useful too
But you can't expect for the dev team to fix this and answer you in a week, because we don't have a game yet.
This is a good thread, The topic is uncomfortable and it must be discussed.
Have a great day !
Ulf
1
Options
ZhurkieMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Where the hell did you get these terms from, and what does Mux/demux have to do with multiboxing?
You're talking network based signal processing there, my friend.
Just because you aren't versed in the original terminology of the tools doesn't mean I'm wrong. Do some research and you will understand what those are, they are the bases of multi-boxing tools.
I never said "Mux/demux", please reread.
“I would cut off your head, dwarf, if it stood but a bit higher off the ground.” - Eomer
Fun != Pointless
That's what got me addicted to online games as a kid to begin with. Showing off my accomplishments which I invested a great deal of time into!
Acchievements are not fun - they are a way to encourage people to play more of the game, to do things they wouldn't do otherwise because the actual task itself isn't fun enough to do.
I was playing MMO's before achievements in them were a thing. The things I do in a game are the things I enjoy doing. I don't do things because they give an achievement, because why would I? If I enjoy the thing, I'll do it anyway, if I am not going to enjoy it, an achievement isn't going to change that.
"to the people that know me" Either you had to break the immersion and introduce yourself, or you named your alts after your main, like: noani, noaani, noaaani. Which means the characters are just puppets or empty bodies to possess, sounds like subject1 subject2, or slave1 slave2. They don't even have their own identity! I don't know what to say, it just ruins the experience for others(that don't know or care about you) and make people accuse you of boting.
95% of people that play MMO's play them as themselves. The people in my guild know me as me, not as my characters. In that regard, all characters are empty puppets to possess, as they have no personality of character without me.
Basically, I am my identity, and my alts in any given game are all a part of that. They don't need their own identity, because they have my identity.
The only time I have ever been accused of botting was when I was playing with my nephew, who has issues with his hands and is unable to move his character around for long periods of time. Due to this, he often sets himself on to autofollow.
If you and I were in the same group, you wouldn't know if I were multiboxing.
You don't have to do what you don't want to do. The rewards can be just cosmetics like titles and emotes.
Sometimes these cosmetics come along as you do your favorite part of the game, say a profession. When you master a profession, you earn a title proves and reveals to people that you mastered it. It's NOT entirely pointless!
The reward for me is the enjoyment I get out of participating in the content.
If I get an item, the item isn't a reward. The item is a key to additional content that I was not previously well geared enough to take on. This means that the item I got from content is a key to opening up more content, the enjoyment of which is the reward for the whole thing.
If I master a profession, I don't need to prove to people that I have done this. I will tell them that I have mastered it should they have reason to know, and that is all that needs to be communicated.
Also, you are now getting cosmetics and achievements mixed up, the terms are not interchangable.
I think it heavily depends on the MMO design & community, but okay.
MMO community yes, design no.
If you roll on a designated RP server, then you would be expected to RP each character. RP servers are rare though.
0
Options
AtamaMember, Braver of Worlds, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Where the hell did you get these terms from, and what does Mux/demux have to do with multiboxing?
You're talking network based signal processing there, my friend.
Just because you aren't versed in the original terminology of the tools doesn't mean I'm wrong. Do some research and you will understand what those are, they are the bases of multi-boxing tools.
I never said "Mux/demux", please reread.
Demultiplexing is demux. You knew that, right?
And I only asked you for clarification, you immediately started getting defensive and then had the chutzpah to accuse me of being new to message boards (ha!). Great start.
Multi Accounting is not multi boxing. In multiboxing you could do a 40 man raid on your tod with 40 accounts. Having 2 accounts on 2 pcs may be a convenience but it is not multiboxing.
And Steven yesterday said NO to this convenience!
Yes I meant multi-accounting, English isn't my first. 1 person using more than 1 computer is P2W.
There is literally nothing good about it. They should only think about finding a way to allow family members to play. Manually or automatically doesn't matter.
Sounds like you are against multiple accounts on different pc's but alright with botting. Nothing you have said in OP is really a problem since you aren't allowed to bot. Period.
Where the hell did you get these terms from, and what does Mux/demux have to do with multiboxing?
You're talking network based signal processing there, my friend.
Just because you aren't versed in the original terminology of the tools doesn't mean I'm wrong. Do some research and you will understand what those are, they are the bases of multi-boxing tools.
I never said "Mux/demux", please reread.
Demultiplexing has been around since the 1970's that I am aware of, and is the system used to seperate out different phone calls on copper wire when multiple calls are being sent over one physical wire.
If that term has any relation at all to MUD's or MMORPG's there is no reference to it anywhere.
If - and this is a big IF - that is an actual term in relation to multiboxing in an MMO, the fact that Google doesn't know it means you probably shouldn't use it without at least defining it first. All of us have terms in specific fields we could use that others wouldn't know straight away, and in many such cases with myself, are things that Google also has no answers for. This is especially true if we either make up terms of get terms mixed up - one of which I am fairly sure is the case here (and you are unlikely to be able to prove the contrary).
Either way, if you want to participate in discussion, you need to use terms that are either understood by most, or at the VERY least, able to be looked up in the appropriate context.
0
Options
ZhurkieMember, Leader of Men, Kickstarter, Alpha One
Where the hell did you get these terms from, and what does Mux/demux have to do with multiboxing?
You're talking network based signal processing there, my friend.
Just because you aren't versed in the original terminology of the tools doesn't mean I'm wrong. Do some research and you will understand what those are, they are the bases of multi-boxing tools.
I never said "Mux/demux", please reread.
Demultiplexing is demux. You knew that, right?
And I only asked you for clarification, you immediately started getting defensive and then had the chutzpah to accuse me of being new to message boards (ha!). Great start.
I'm very much aware that demux is short for demultiplexer, however, I did not mention mux (Multiplexer) as that is the reverse technology hence why I referenced the entire statement.
Please contribute something to the topic rather than continuously trying to flame people yeah?
Where the hell did you get these terms from, and what does Mux/demux have to do with multiboxing?
You're talking network based signal processing there, my friend.
Just because you aren't versed in the original terminology of the tools doesn't mean I'm wrong. Do some research and you will understand what those are, they are the bases of multi-boxing tools.
I never said "Mux/demux", please reread.
Demultiplexing has been around since the 1970's that I am aware of, and is the system used to seperate out different phone calls on copper wire when multiple calls are being sent over one physical wire.
If that term has any relation at all to MUD's or MMORPG's there is no reference to it anywhere.
If - and this is a big IF - that is an actual term in relation to multiboxing in an MMO, the fact that Google doesn't know it means you probably shouldn't use it without at least defining it first. All of us have terms in specific fields we could use that others wouldn't know straight away, and in many such cases with myself, are things that Google also has no answers for. This is especially true if we either make up terms of get terms mixed up - one of which I am fairly sure is the case here (and you are unlikely to be able to prove the contrary).
Either way, if you want to participate in discussion, you need to use terms that are either understood by most, or at the VERY least, able to be looked up in the appropriate context.
You're definitely semi-correct in your understanding of a demultiplexer but you need to understand the broad range of uses that fall under that category, one being multi-boxing by a "tool" that utilizes demultiplexing such as a keyboard demultiplexer that takes the signal from one keyboard and sends it to multiple PCs, not just separating out phone calls as that's one single example of a demultiplexer.
I'm not referencing some hidden knowledge here, this is all on google but I suppose I should clarify to help in understanding my original reference. Demultiplexing no longer just references hardware based technology and has now advanced into software as well. Media demultiplexing is a thing.
I feel like this has kind of gone off topic from the OPs topic and I don't want to flood the thread. If you want to message me privately we can keep discussing it? I can send you some links for references if you'd like.
“I would cut off your head, dwarf, if it stood but a bit higher off the ground.” - Eomer
I feel like this has kind of gone off topic from the OPs topic and I don't want to flood the thread. If you want to message me privately we can keep discussing it? I can send you some links for references if you'd like.
Staying on topic is overrated - as long as any off topic discussions happen naturally, imo.
My assumption with demultiplex software is something along the lines of Synergy from Symless (rather pedestrian tool for the job, has served me well enough so far but I am debating looking for something else when I do build my new virtualization rig).
I've never seen software like this referred to as a demultiplexer, and even if I had, I would take issue with the name in this context.
In order for a DEmultiplexer to do it's job (separating signals), there really needs to have been some multiplexing involved (taking multiple signals from different origins and combining them to one carrier).
Without multiplexing, demultiplexing can't really exist. Taking information from one keyboard and mouse is not multiplexing, and so taking that input and sending it to multiple computers should not be considered demultiplexing.
If this is not the type of software that you are talking about (even if not the specific program) then maybe I stand to learn something. Feel free to post some links.
On the other hand, if it is this type of software, then it is probably best referred to as a software KVM switch (although that name has just as many inaccuracies, it is a closer approximation to its function).
Hey guys! Great conversation so far, I am against multiboxers/multiaccounters however you wont be able to stop them by removing specific features. As stated earlier they are use to loop holes, yes you may stop a few which simply use programs to auto follow and make it so 1 key push amplifies to all accounts at once (in my opinion that should be bannable but $$$ is more important for WoW).
Someone with knowledge of coding can simply create a program which not only operates outside of the game itself not needing any data to be injected to created automation but can also use image / text recognition through photo samples and use of mini map to receive coordinates and have 'bots' follow you on command and auto attack said target / name, pick up said items.
I believe the best way Ashes of Creation could counter this is by having a simple report feature of 'multiboxer' which you can quickly spam on all the automated 'bots' replicating the original users actions or be sent to an active in-game gm monitoring that server specifically for multiboxers, botters, hackers (yes this is a big task and requires more staff but probably the most effective to prevent abuse of multiboxing).
I understand some people get enjoyment out of multiboxing and having a team which is operated by just them and can solo majority of content from pressing 1-5 but I feel it will really impact not only the games economy through farming high tier spots but can damage pvp as well.
Personally I am planning on getting corrupted quickly by taking out any multiboxer I see.
A lot of good info on the thread. At the end of the day as Steven said bots will exist and hopefully an active GM force on each server helps more than anything.
A lot of good info on the thread. At the end of the day as Steven said bots will exist and hopefully an active GM force on each server helps more than anything.
This is exactly where I am at on the topic. It is nearly impossible to prevent someone from using multiple accounts, whether on the same PC or not. Best way to address the issue is with active GM presence and a way for the community to easily report players.
Comments
If I want to play 2 characters side by side while paying 2 subscriptions, I should be allowed to.
Leave it to the devs to come up with ways to figure out a way to find people who exploit it.
Do you not want two computers running on the same IP connected to the AoC server?
Do you not want two versions of the client on the same PC?
Do you not want people running scripts to run multiple characters?
Do you not want one person owning multiple accounts?
You first gripe about asking a customer for a solution, which I never did. I asked you to define the problem. Then you contradict yourself by giving an unsolicited solution, again without saying what you’re objecting to in the first place.
This is the equivalent of saying, “I want to prevent cheating.” And then someone asks, “Can you clarify what kind of cheating you want to prevent?” Do you complain about not having all the answers, then mention some kind of software.
Please, clarify your position if you want to join the discussion.
Perhaps you just didn't read my original post well enough, it clearly states the kind of multi-boxing I'm referring to in my original post was software based.
"Players driven by software has no place in that vision." - This is referring to demultiplexers/mud clients.
Any type of multi-boxing that can create an advantage in game should not be allowed. Here is a breakdown for those that aren't aware of the types:
Software = Demultiplexers, MUD clients (Automated)
Hardware = Separate physical machines, virtual machines (Manual)
The argument to state which one is being referred to doesn't really matter as they both provide advantages to the game through mechanical AND monetary exploitations. However, for the sake of this argument I'm clearly referring to software based multi-boxing per my original comment.
Perhaps your new to how forums work, this "discussion" is not regarding the "type" of multi-boxing so telling someone to "clarify their position" in that regard is an invalid statement, you do not run the forum. The subject of this thread being "Here's How Multi-Boxing Can Be Exploited" which I provided valid points towards in terms of exploitations and a rebuttal to AoC's no P2W concepts.
“Players driven by software” is badly broken English but in the midst of your clumsy rambling I think I’m starting to glean what you’re struggling so badly to say. You don’t want automated bots or scripting. Fortunately, they are already taking a stance against that (Steven himself said it won’t be acceptable) and I don’t see anyone in the community who is asking for this to be done. So I don’t think you’ll get any arguments.
Yikes, apparently a nerve has been hit. Your initial post was full of negative connotations from the get go yet you sit there and act like you own the forum, who's on the high horse exactly?
I've been a supporter of AoC since I heard about it in 2017 and immediately joined the Discord, just because I haven't been a part of the forums since today does not negate any amount of credibility I have towards this discussion. Take your poor attitude out of this community and save us all please.
https://imgur.com/a/x2aTtdI
I disagree, I think achievements are pointless. Again, I disagree.
When I play as an alt, I am still known in game to the people that know me. I am known as a player that plays all of my characters, rather than being known as a single character.
Being known as the collection of characters you play is no less a sense of identity than being known by just one character.
If I do something stupid on a level 1 alt, it reflects on me just as badly as if I had done it on my main. I would actually say people with a full stable of alts that are known to be played by that person has a stronger sense of identity than someone that doesn't play alts often - as the person that doesn't play alts often still has the ability to roll one in order to shake off that identity for a period of time.
You're talking network based signal processing there, my friend.
We, the future players, should worry about a bit more in building a good community, than to ask for that PERFECT game. Lots of things come via social interacting or not. But we've experienced botters and multiboxers a thousands times by now.
If they set the rules right, and have a good report system that could be useful too
But you can't expect for the dev team to fix this and answer you in a week, because we don't have a game yet.
This is a good thread, The topic is uncomfortable and it must be discussed.
Have a great day !
Ulf
Just because you aren't versed in the original terminology of the tools doesn't mean I'm wrong. Do some research and you will understand what those are, they are the bases of multi-boxing tools.
I never said "Mux/demux", please reread.
I was playing MMO's before achievements in them were a thing. The things I do in a game are the things I enjoy doing. I don't do things because they give an achievement, because why would I? If I enjoy the thing, I'll do it anyway, if I am not going to enjoy it, an achievement isn't going to change that.
95% of people that play MMO's play them as themselves. The people in my guild know me as me, not as my characters. In that regard, all characters are empty puppets to possess, as they have no personality of character without me.
Basically, I am my identity, and my alts in any given game are all a part of that. They don't need their own identity, because they have my identity.
The only time I have ever been accused of botting was when I was playing with my nephew, who has issues with his hands and is unable to move his character around for long periods of time. Due to this, he often sets himself on to autofollow.
If you and I were in the same group, you wouldn't know if I were multiboxing.
If I get an item, the item isn't a reward. The item is a key to additional content that I was not previously well geared enough to take on. This means that the item I got from content is a key to opening up more content, the enjoyment of which is the reward for the whole thing.
If I master a profession, I don't need to prove to people that I have done this. I will tell them that I have mastered it should they have reason to know, and that is all that needs to be communicated.
Also, you are now getting cosmetics and achievements mixed up, the terms are not interchangable. MMO community yes, design no.
If you roll on a designated RP server, then you would be expected to RP each character. RP servers are rare though.
Demultiplexing is demux. You knew that, right?
And I only asked you for clarification, you immediately started getting defensive and then had the chutzpah to accuse me of being new to message boards (ha!). Great start.
Sounds like you are against multiple accounts on different pc's but alright with botting. Nothing you have said in OP is really a problem since you aren't allowed to bot. Period.
Demultiplexing has been around since the 1970's that I am aware of, and is the system used to seperate out different phone calls on copper wire when multiple calls are being sent over one physical wire.
If that term has any relation at all to MUD's or MMORPG's there is no reference to it anywhere.
If - and this is a big IF - that is an actual term in relation to multiboxing in an MMO, the fact that Google doesn't know it means you probably shouldn't use it without at least defining it first. All of us have terms in specific fields we could use that others wouldn't know straight away, and in many such cases with myself, are things that Google also has no answers for. This is especially true if we either make up terms of get terms mixed up - one of which I am fairly sure is the case here (and you are unlikely to be able to prove the contrary).
Either way, if you want to participate in discussion, you need to use terms that are either understood by most, or at the VERY least, able to be looked up in the appropriate context.
I'm very much aware that demux is short for demultiplexer, however, I did not mention mux (Multiplexer) as that is the reverse technology hence why I referenced the entire statement.
Please contribute something to the topic rather than continuously trying to flame people yeah?
You're definitely semi-correct in your understanding of a demultiplexer but you need to understand the broad range of uses that fall under that category, one being multi-boxing by a "tool" that utilizes demultiplexing such as a keyboard demultiplexer that takes the signal from one keyboard and sends it to multiple PCs, not just separating out phone calls as that's one single example of a demultiplexer.
I'm not referencing some hidden knowledge here, this is all on google but I suppose I should clarify to help in understanding my original reference. Demultiplexing no longer just references hardware based technology and has now advanced into software as well. Media demultiplexing is a thing.
I feel like this has kind of gone off topic from the OPs topic and I don't want to flood the thread. If you want to message me privately we can keep discussing it? I can send you some links for references if you'd like.
My assumption with demultiplex software is something along the lines of Synergy from Symless (rather pedestrian tool for the job, has served me well enough so far but I am debating looking for something else when I do build my new virtualization rig).
I've never seen software like this referred to as a demultiplexer, and even if I had, I would take issue with the name in this context.
In order for a DEmultiplexer to do it's job (separating signals), there really needs to have been some multiplexing involved (taking multiple signals from different origins and combining them to one carrier).
Without multiplexing, demultiplexing can't really exist. Taking information from one keyboard and mouse is not multiplexing, and so taking that input and sending it to multiple computers should not be considered demultiplexing.
If this is not the type of software that you are talking about (even if not the specific program) then maybe I stand to learn something. Feel free to post some links.
On the other hand, if it is this type of software, then it is probably best referred to as a software KVM switch (although that name has just as many inaccuracies, it is a closer approximation to its function).
Someone with knowledge of coding can simply create a program which not only operates outside of the game itself not needing any data to be injected to created automation but can also use image / text recognition through photo samples and use of mini map to receive coordinates and have 'bots' follow you on command and auto attack said target / name, pick up said items.
I believe the best way Ashes of Creation could counter this is by having a simple report feature of 'multiboxer' which you can quickly spam on all the automated 'bots' replicating the original users actions or be sent to an active in-game gm monitoring that server specifically for multiboxers, botters, hackers (yes this is a big task and requires more staff but probably the most effective to prevent abuse of multiboxing).
I understand some people get enjoyment out of multiboxing and having a team which is operated by just them and can solo majority of content from pressing 1-5 but I feel it will really impact not only the games economy through farming high tier spots but can damage pvp as well.
Personally I am planning on getting corrupted quickly by taking out any multiboxer I see.
This is exactly where I am at on the topic. It is nearly impossible to prevent someone from using multiple accounts, whether on the same PC or not. Best way to address the issue is with active GM presence and a way for the community to easily report players.