Poll + Bonus Dev Discussion - Multiboxing

1679111225

Comments

  • AlphosNZAlphosNZ Member
    WMC51 wrote: »
    Current Intrepid stance - Players are allowed to own multiple accounts, but may not launch multiple game clients from the same computer. Players may not use any software to automate character actions or mimic keystrokes.

    This is all you can do. There isn't a way to stop it so any rules against it only hurt the people who follow the rules.

    Hell, I say make second accounts cheaper so I can let my wife and kids play. 15 for first, 10 for second, 5 for each additional.

    Wayy to encourage botting haha

    KyfIDdI.png
  • TyrakkelTyrakkel Member
    Adding my opinions to the pile for devs to read, coming from a long-time WoW player.

    Active multiboxing(using one keyboard to click multiple buttons) is harmful to both PvP and economic situations. It is an inherently exploitative way of playing the game. Especially in a competitive environment, it would not take long at all for potential multiboxers to identify mob spawns that can be consistently and easily farmed with as little effort as possible. A recent change to resource nodes in WoW made them persist for a few moments after they are first gathered, allowing other players to gather from the same node--This turned into 20-character multiboxers running around gathering 20x the resource one player could gather. Given the way monster certificates have been advertised, suddenly an entire server needs to be aware of the presence of multiboxers. Have they rotated to farm monsters that you were going to kill, tanking the value of their certificates?

    Having multiple accounts is a much different deal. Sometimes I load up both mine and my partner's WoW accounts on one PC, utilizing multi-passenger mounts to do dailies and other simple content in one go. I bring this up because I recall one solution to this issue being that multiple accounts might be logged in on separate machines. It would be a minor inconvenience if this was a necessary solution to prevent multiboxers, but one I would be willing to live with.
  • SajanimSajanim Member
    My son and I have played MMO's for 20+ years, from the same home, I would hate to see anything that could or would prevent that, Simply because both accounts are from the same IP. I 2 boxed in Everquest for a time, after my daughter quit, but never after that, it was just not fun. I personally have no desire to 2 box, but do want to be able to play with my family members. I think Intrepids stance is a good approach.
    "Time and Tide waits for no man." (Chaucer)
  • palabanapalabana Member
    Just change the words. Intrepid is handling the issue correctly. They have the right stance, they simply did not choose the right words.
  • HuzzHuzz Member
    edited July 29
    Noaani wrote: »
    Huzz wrote: »
    Step one you are certainly using software to achieve any form of success with this style of multi-box
    Basically, the only way you will know that I am multi-boxing is if I tell you that I am.

    Cool, you are in the .00001% of people; that has mastered the art of controlling 3 characters at the same time while using 3 interfaces at the same time. it's actually impressive, not sarcasm, in this case. I would say "good job" you have earned the right to have the in-game advantage based on your real-life skill. once you use a single interface to control the accounts you should be breaking ToS and potentially banned if caught is all I'm saying.. will it be possible to catch you maybe not. but that doesn't mean we should simply allow it.
  • Sajanim wrote: »
    My son and I have played MMO's for 20+ years, from the same home, I would hate to see anything that could or would prevent that, Simply because both accounts are from the same IP. I 2 boxed in Everquest for a time, after my daughter quit, but never after that, it was just not fun. I personally have no desire to 2 box, but do want to be able to play with my family members. I think Intrepids stance is a good approach.

    Some people defending multi-boxing are really overblowing the "People playing from the same household will get banned" game developers are smart people and I trust the Ashes team to figure out a fair and common-sense way to catch people multi-boxing if they decide multi-boxing won't be allowed.

  • Land ownership and multiple accounts creates a grey market
  • Tsukasa wrote: »
    MULTIBOXING IS P2W !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Multi-Boxing provide advantages to the game through mechanical AND monetary exploitations.

    It allows one player to bypass the 1 per account rule for freeholds through PAYING for another account($15/mo) AND computer(+$1500), then trade the required materials to the alt from your main account to build another freehold against the intended design. Preventing other players from taking the land! This can be repeated multiple times!

    Edit: The same exact system was implemented in Archeage Unchained and it failed. People DID use another computers and take great advantage of it. Regardless of how impactful the advantage will be in AoC, it is still considered Pay to Win/Convenience. There is absolutely no reason for it to exist!

    This was only one example.
    Check out my thread below for more:
    Here's How Multi-Boxing Can Be Exploited

    In this instance you dont need another computer. Just a virtual machine. Which is free and realitively easy to setup.
  • edited July 29
    Honestly it wouldnt be a bad idea for marketing and exposure to do some interviews with big streamers on this topic as well simply for discussion. I.e. asmongold, shroud, and summit as previously done. Shows how you gits are handling contested subjects and would help establish good faith. Maybe a mini series of discussing certain topics in length on top of shotgun blast AMAs. Can even engage with their chat as well while conducting it.
  • chuhichuhi Member
    After reading all the whine posts on multiple multiboxing threads, I plan on boxing with three accounts. I love the idea of supporting Steven's dream, while antagonizing the community at the same time.

    It's not that some of you don't have valid concerns, but I believe there is a lot of fear mongering going on, especially when you consider the fact, no one really knows how the Intrepid team plans on tackling these issues.





  • LoyhetaLoyheta Member, Braver of Worlds
    I'm fine with the current restrictions. I'd rather not see any at all but I find it nearly impossible to differentiate one person playing two characters vs two players in the same house playing at the same time.

    My main question is what will they do to people that load two instances from the same pc but switch between while playing?
    Referral Code: KRIFFNYDUZV6L9SF
  • RavudhaRavudha Member
    edited July 29
    I'm happy IS is doing what's feasible to address it.

    To me, saying IS is 'allowing' multiboxing just because they can't prevent it 100% is misleading and unreasonable.
  • MetroMetro Member, Braver of Worlds
    I agree with the current stance.
  • Tsukasa wrote: »
    ^ Look at all these unreasonable comments. :|

    Anyway, I just noticed this. Hopefully it means something for the 34% voters who actually care about the game.
    8557481c0d15ea35c82b2c99dc0fba61.png
    I bet this poll is rigged. I could create new accounts and vote against. Go ask your PI or only allow old accounts.

    It's not rigged. The majority just has a better understanding of the topic. Multiboxing, not botting, doesn't have as much of an impact as people are making it out to have, and it is near impossible to stop.
  • Tsukasa wrote: »
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    ^ Look at all these unreasonable comments. :|

    Anyway, I just noticed this. Hopefully it means something for the 34% voters who actually care about the game.
    8557481c0d15ea35c82b2c99dc0fba61.png
    I bet this poll is rigged. I could create new accounts and vote against. Go ask your PI or only allow old accounts.

    doesn't have as much of an impact as people are making it out to have, and it is near impossible to stop.

    So you admit that IT DOES have an impact.
    And admit that your vote was driven by ignorance and unseriousness.

    Intrepid has a solution in mind to at least minimize it if the majority were against MBoxing, otherwise they wouldn't have made this poll in the first place.

    Umm, no. No matter what Interpid does, there is a way to circumvent it.
  • NamilNamil Member
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    I hope that is the case, and hope they take into consideration the comments. Concerns are nullified if there is an unknown solution that would satisfy them.

    People who disagreed used reasoning.
    People who agreed agreed for personal reasons or lack of solutions or carelessness or assumptions.
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    Mindlessly doing what people tells you will ruin your game; unless the benefit from it, the same people WILL complain later when the results are ugly. People are too unaware ... I don't care anymore.
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    ^ Look at all these unreasonable comments. :|
    Anyway, I just noticed this. Hopefully it means something for the 34% voters who actually care about the game.
    8557481c0d15ea35c82b2c99dc0fba61.png
    I bet this poll is rigged. I could create new accounts and vote against. Go ask your PI or only allow old accounts.
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    Intrepid has a solution in mind to at least minimize it if the majority were against MBoxing, otherwise they wouldn't have made this poll in the first place.

    I hate the fact I'm responding to you again because I was really trying not to.

    Let's be blunt, you have no solution and all I've seen from you is a lot of wailing and disrespect to the community. You are extremely ignorant to any perspective that opposes your own to the point where you're accusing the staff of rigging the poles. Just because you think you have the correct idea doesn't mean that you do, and you are discrediting people's intelligence.

    How can you say anything against people mindlessly following something? You're so oppressive with your ideas that you're gaslighting people into thinking they're doing a disservice to the game by contributing their voice to the discussion because it doesn't align with your own ideals.

    How can you say anyone is being unreasonable when you, yourself are so damn irrational about this entire topic.

    Just because you're digging insanely deep into the phrasing of this dev discussion DOES NOT MEAN they have a solution to this problem which covers ALL eventualities because there just IS NOT one. However, if you do actually have a solution that encompasses everyone and has no redundancy then I will gladly listen to you.

    Please stop or fix the way you're addressing this topic.
  • papabear2009papabear2009 Member
    edited July 29
    Yeah, I don't get it why are people asking others to provide solutions to stop multi-boxing. How the hell are we supposed to know, we're not developers but that doesn't mean you can't point out the problems of letting people multi-box.
  • KarthosKarthos Member, Braver of Worlds
    edited July 29
    Whether you're Pro or anti multiboxing is irrelevant in my opinion.

    What it comes down to is "does multiboxing fit into the spirit of Ashes of Creation?"

    Ashes of Creation takes place within a medieval fantasy setting, blending imagination with cutting-edge graphics. We are putting the word massive back into massively multiplayer with unique and novel mechanics that will bring meaning to player action. Ashes of Creation will incorporate the best parts of traditional MMORPGs with innovative sandbox concepts. You will choose your fate at every opportunity. Questlines will open and close based on the interactions of the players with their world, because this is a world where choice is consequential. Monsters will roam and grow in ferocity as civilization disrupts the natural order of things. From the location of towns to the size of cities, you will determine the landscape of your world. It will be unique in culture, ecology, and economy (taken from the AOC website main page)


    I highlighted what I feel is the very core of what AOC is about, player agency, risk vs reward. Does Multiboxing impact this for you? For other players?

    I do know, in a game that wants to bring back the "massive" in MMORPG, I find it odd that the game will support a system that allows players to circumvent playing with other people and not engage in the community.
    Aq0KG2f.png
  • ^ Very good point Karthos
  • Tsukasa wrote: »
    ^
    Exactly.

    A problem is a problem. You don't accept it just because you THINK devs can't do anything about it.

    I accept it because I don't have a problem with it; I say the devs can't do anything about because they literally can't. They can catch the obvious botters that are already not allowed, but that won't work on someone manually running few account.

    Let's be real, this hate against multiboxers is nothing more than envy.
  • CaerylCaeryl Member
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    ^
    Exactly.

    A problem is a problem. You don't accept it just because you THINK devs can't do anything about it.

    Let's be real, this hate against multiboxers is nothing more than envy.

    Some people say the same thing about players who dislike P2W getting introduced into games because it ruins the game experience of others.

    If you expressly allow multiboxing and paid advantages there, then why not allow players to buy multiple freeholds on one account for cash? Why not let people buy fast travel?
  • papabear2009papabear2009 Member
    edited July 29
    I accept it because I don't have a problem with it; I say the devs can't do anything about because they literally can't. They can catch the obvious botters that are already not allowed, but that won't work on someone manually running few account.

    Let's be real, this hate against multiboxers is nothing more than envy.

    I wouldn't call anything in the development world impossible and Steven said in his AMA stream it would just be hard to do. Hard and impossible aren't the same.

    Also, I can assure you I don't hate anybody.
  • Multiboxing conpletely destroys the economy and if it is allowed in the game you bet your ass im going to hunting down players doing this. No matter the penalty.
  • Stahliboi wrote: »
    Multiboxing conpletely destroys the economy and if it is allowed in the game you bet your ass im going to hunting down players doing this. No matter the penalty.

    Botting destroys the economy not multiboxing.
  • Caeryl wrote: »
    Tsukasa wrote: »
    ^
    Exactly.

    A problem is a problem. You don't accept it just because you THINK devs can't do anything about it.

    Let's be real, this hate against multiboxers is nothing more than envy.

    Some people say the same thing about players who dislike P2W getting introduced into games because it ruins the game experience of others.

    If you expressly allow multiboxing and paid advantages there, then why not allow players to buy multiple freeholds on one account for cash? Why not let people buy fast travel?

    P2W devs design their games to give an advantage to those who pay and generally intentionally inconvenience those who don't. Multiboxing is not designed to inconvenience those who don't do it and reasonable steps are taken to ensure that is don't get out of hand.
Sign In or Register to comment.