Greetings, glorious adventurers! If you're joining in our Alpha One spot testing, please follow the steps here to see all the latest test info on our forums and Discord!
Options
How many players will there be in your home?
Fathym
Member
https://www.strawpoll.me/20692618
With the dev discussion on multi-boxing going on and the results being very mixed I started to think about possible, easy to implement solutions that would work for the majority of players. The most simple and effective way to mitigate that potential for abuse while still allowing family members to play together would be to simply limit the amount of accounts per IP to 2. I feel like, in most cases, only around 2 people in a household will be playing the game so it shouldn't be very limiting but I wanted to make sure with a straw poll before i make a suggestion like this in the dev discussion. Also feel free to to give me feedback if you feel that there are other problems with a solution like this that I am missing.
With the dev discussion on multi-boxing going on and the results being very mixed I started to think about possible, easy to implement solutions that would work for the majority of players. The most simple and effective way to mitigate that potential for abuse while still allowing family members to play together would be to simply limit the amount of accounts per IP to 2. I feel like, in most cases, only around 2 people in a household will be playing the game so it shouldn't be very limiting but I wanted to make sure with a straw poll before i make a suggestion like this in the dev discussion. Also feel free to to give me feedback if you feel that there are other problems with a solution like this that I am missing.
0
Comments
Restricting IP addresses to 2-3 accounts isn't a good way to counter the system as the risk to innocent players is too high.
The best way, in my opinion, to combat multiboxing is by game design. If your system requires constant input to do something, then a user with multiple accounts benefits a lot less from playing many characters at once (of course assuming botting/scripting is banned). Look at BSO's taming for example. If I'm trying to tame a horse in BDO I literally cannot do anything else at the same time, unlike in WoW where I could queue 100 crafts and let it run in the background while I go do something else with an other account.
Ah yes. I brain lapsed and forgot about colleges. There might be a workaround but i dont know enough about networking to figure it out.
As for what you were saying about how to combat multiboxing, i 100% agree in most cases. But there are 3 mechanics already in the game that are still problematic with multiboxing.
1. The family system- multiboxing allows for fast travel.
2. Freeholds- Freeholds are limited and multiboxing lets you buy multiple, causing artificial scarcity
3. Elections-multboxing lets players rig elections.
These are the only 3 things that really worry me.
The fast travel shouldn't be too big of an issue with a sufficient cooldown on the summoning ability.
The freeholds is the only one I agree with really, but, I can't think of any way to realistically combat the situation, so, it is what it is.
You don't even have to multibox to own multiple freeholds. You can play your accounts separately and use your alternate account's freehold on your main. There's absolutely nothing you can do about that short of SSN locking accounts.
Even with cool downs it still gives you a effectively a hearthstone for an extra 15 dollars a month. Possibly multiple hearthstones depending on if the cooldown is seperate for each family member.
For the elections, I garauntee the hardcore guilds will require their guildmates to buy multiple accounts to help win elections on scientific nodes if there isnt a way to design around it.
And that is still completely separate from the multiboxing conversation, and completely unpreventable unless you lock accounts to SSNs, and even then people will find ways to get multiple using the SSNs of people who aren't playing.
There just isn't a realistic way to combat that, at all.
What's mixed is people's interpretation of multiboxing.
I would even go as far to allow multiboxing from the same computer without automated/macro or keystroke mimicking software.
Problem is, since they so easy, multiboxers have been using them for years as well.
And yeah, the results were not mixed. There were three options to chose if you were for some multiboxing, and only one to chose if you were against multiboxing. That one option for if you were against multiboxing has 34% of the vote, while the combined three options that are for multiboxing in various forms have a total of 62% of the vote, and not caring only has 1% (and yes, for some reason this is only equating to 97% - Intrepid need to fix the math on the forum polls).
Even if you just took the single largest option, that would be to allow it as Intrepid had planned, at 49%.
In almost any kind of voting in the world, even just that 49 - 34 would be considered something of a landslide.