It concerns me that Kilsin has actively ignored the desire for discussion around the negatives of multi-boxing, being quick to lock threads down that the discussion arises in and even going so far as ignoring the third highest upvoted post of all time on the Pantheon subreddit while he was a mod there: https://old.reddit.com/r/PantheonMMO/comments/a4mae5/multiboxing_is_antithetical_to_the_spirit_of_mmos/
In that post, it was made clear that there is an overwhelming desire for a no-multi-box server, and not one comment was made on it by Kilsin. He's also alluded that he's multi-boxed himself. I believe that there is a conflict of interest on his behalf when discussing multi-boxing, and I would really like to see new comments from other members of VR's team addressing:
Marginalizing a large portion of the community's concerns and wishes by telling them to engage in a server type they have no desire to play in really isn't a productive recommendation, Hemlock. I would hope that our community as a whole can be better than that in recognizing valid concerns and desires held by fellow players who are wishing to see this game succeed. And that's the point of my original post in this thread: I think there are significant voices that are being ignored by those who should be listening (and then relaying those concerns/wishes to the appropriate people).
Well. From my short experience with the Developers of Pantheon, i am personally assured that they are ignoring very little when it comes to this project. Not even your inflammatory drama filled posts. This game will not be for the masses, but for a nicher type market, one that is even larger than i thought to be honest. When full release comes, i am sure anything that needs to be addressed down the road will be. Until then relax, stop biting your nails and fretting over the state of a game that has not been released.
#trustinpantheon
If VR doesn't succeed in creating a combat system that isn't conducive to multi-boxing, I would wager that there would be a bigger demand for no-box PVE servers than PVP and RP servers combined. It all comes down to knowing your audience. Pantheon has clearly defined game tenets that speak on the importance of player interdependence and social interaction. Telling someone to play on a PVP server (as a solution to this problem) is like telling someone who reserved a table at a steakhouse to go and grab McDonalds as a way to solve the restaurant's problem of running out of steak.
That's what these forums are for, development feedback. This is the time to raise these issues, not to wait for them to become problems. There are legitimate concerns raised around this topic, all that is being asked for is an honest engagement of those concerns by VR's team. That isn't an unreasonable request.
Sicario said:That's what these forums are for, development feedback. This is the time to raise these issues, not to wait for them to become problems. There are legitimate concerns raised around this topic, all that is being asked for is an honest engagement of those concerns by VR's team. That isn't an unreasonable request.
No, actually the time to raise these issues is past. Like many facets of the game the decision has already been made.
They will be open to further discussion once what they have decided is in play (alpha a beta) and we actually get to see if what they have.
This is supposedly a game that's being made for the community, and we're repeatedly reminded that #communitymatters. So, how can you make a statement like that one, saying that the decision has already been made and that the time to raise these issues is past? A large part of the community is asking that these issues are honestly engaged and that a discussion happens around the possibility for the inclusion of no-multi-box servers. These aren't unreasonable things that can't be implemented at this point, and it's baffling that such an attitude is being taken towards other members of the community who have legitimate concerns.
Sicario said:It concerns me that Kilsin has actively ignored the desire for discussion around the negatives of multi-boxing, being quick to lock threads down that the discussion arises in and even going so far as ignoring the third highest upvoted post of all time on the Pantheon subreddit while he was a mod there: https://old.reddit.com/r/PantheonMMO/comments/a4mae5/multiboxing_is_antithetical_to_the_spirit_of_mmos/
In that post, it was made clear that there is an overwhelming desire for a no-multi-box server, and not one comment was made on it by Kilsin. He's also alluded that he's multi-boxed himself. I believe that there is a conflict of interest on his behalf when discussing multi-boxing, and I would really like to see new comments from other members of VR's team addressing:
- The clear concerns the community has around the negative impacts of multi-boxing
- The overwhelming desire outlined in one of the most popular posts of all time on Pantheon's subreddit calling for a no-multi-box server option
Our reaction to multi-boxing is to try something first before we even entertain the idea of artificially restricting it. We want to make combat, especially mid and higher level combat, so tactically intense, with so much going on, so much to do, so much to counter, so many companions to keep alive and the timing of many abilities crucial, that multi-boxing is extremely difficult if not impossible and likely far inferior to having an actual real person in your group."
If someone uses a program to automate boxed characters they will be breaching the guidelines and can be banned.
So typical boxers who legitimately use a second account to box heals or dps etc. are no threat and are typically people who can't group for any given reason (kids asleep and have to run any minute, lunch break and can't commit to a group, don't have long until bed or have to go out, play on off-peak times or countries and can't get a normal group etc.).
Those normal boxers should be no concern to you or anyone else and they usually jump at the chance to join a full group if they can commit the time to it. Those are the boxers that I don't have a problem with, personally as I used to be one playing from Australia in off-peak USA times on USA servers where my ping was 350+ and everyone was asleep.
Sicario said:That's what these forums are for, development feedback. This is the time to raise these issues, not to wait for them to become problems. There are legitimate concerns raised around this topic, all that is being asked for is an honest engagement of those concerns by VR's team. That isn't an unreasonable request.
Kilsin said:The reason I didn't reply is that we have already made our official stance clear, there is nothing more to add.
"10.4 Will multi-boxing be allowed in Pantheon?Our reaction to multi-boxing is to try something first before we even entertain the idea of artificially restricting it. We want to make combat, especially mid and higher level combat, so tactically intense, with so much going on, so much to do, so much to counter, so many companions to keep alive and the timing of many abilities crucial, that multi-boxing is extremely difficult if not impossible and likely far inferior to having an actual real person in your group."
If someone uses a program to automate boxed characters they will be breaching the guidelines and can be banned.
So typical boxers who legitimately use a second account to box heals or dps etc. are no threat and are typically people who can't group for any given reason (kids asleep and have to run any minute, lunch break and can't commit to a group, don't have long until bed or have to go out, play on off-peak times or countries and can't get a normal group etc.).
Those normal boxers should be no concern to you or anyone else and they usually jump at the chance to join a full group if they can commit the time to it. Those are the boxers that I don't have a problem with, personally as I used to be one playing from Australia in off-peak USA times on USA servers where my ping was 350+ and everyone was asleep.
It appears to me that the "official stance" is contingent on the idea that multi-boxing must be properly tested and evaluated before VR can entertain the idea of artificially restricting it. As such, it isn't really fair to imply that boxing will be allowed because we haven't even gotten to the point where any other outcome could be considered. That FAQ excerpt also suggests having a combat system that would make multi-boxing extremely difficult if not impossible. If that goal isn't realized then that excerpt is for naught. I also think it's unfair to categorize "typical/normal boxers" the way you do. I have been playing MMO's for a long time and have encountered more than my fair share of boxers over the years.
A typical boxer, in my experience, is someone who derives satisfaction out of being able to circumvent the need to rely on other players. They are in no hurry to join a regular group, regardless of how much time they have because quite frankly, there is no need to do so. They are content with the idea of tackling content that normally requires multiple players and stockpiling everything that can be acquired. If they can hold down a camp that they are interested in, without the assistance of other real players, they will usually do that. When a single player is responsible for multiple major roles in a group setting, it's highly inefficient for them to let random tagalongs join them. If they can single-handedly accomplish whatever goal they have set for themselves then they are usually hesitant to enlist the help of other real players. It's usually important that they play their entire box set-up together so that all characters remain relatively equal in terms of gear progression, quest progression, and level progression.
As a guild leader, I have seen my fair share of multi-boxing-induced-drama over the years, as well. Whenever an expansion hits, there is usually a focus on leveling up. I have seen time and time again where multi-boxers will go off and do their own thing, disappearing for extended periods of time at launch so that they can progress their "party." While normal players sit around LFG, the boxers continue to advance with minimal downtime. They can maintain their own pace with no outside distraction. They can grind as little or as much as they would like, with no other real person to answer to, ever. With utilities such as the /follow and /macro commands, and a combat system that is purposely stunted in scope (due to the LAS) -- it becomes even easier for someone who may have a mild interest in multi-boxing to take things to the next level and become more of an enthusiast. It becomes a game within a game where players can compute maximum output with minimal keystrokes, where they often design their group composition with that mentality in mind.
Unfortunately, the existence of multi-boxing changed MMO gaming forever, for me. It tainted my views because within a very short period of time, I was able to feel like a demi-god. I was able to do things that were previously impossible with relative ease. I was able to continue progressing without needing to rely on other real players. I wasn't able to tackle everything by myself but the point is that the sense of "player interdependence" had vanished for a huge chunk of content. Setting up a multi-box system felt extremely empowering in a very short period of time compared to the standard power progression curve of advancing a single character. If other people weren't readily available, there was no point in wasting time trying to coordinate something. Instead of going out of my way to message people that I didn't know, I would waste very little time with those kinds of affairs and "always be doing something." That something was always something that was previously inaccessible. I was amazed by how much more I could get done, and how efficient it was to box. The social challenges of relying on other players had disappeared in many ways and the world suddenly became far less dangerous.
A normal boxer, in my experience, and regardless of intention, is something that I consider to be pseudo-P2W. If you can afford a nice boxing set-up and multiple subscriptions per month, the world will open up to you in ways that are exclusive to multi-boxing. You can farm better, travel faster, buff better, and have rez/taunt/heal/teleport/etc on demand. You can access areas that are inaccessible to the average non-boxing player, complete quests that most solo players could never tackle on their own, and most importantly, consume content designed for multiple real players all by your lonesome. I haven't even gotten to the impact that multi-boxing has on open-world competition, but let's just say that I learned very early on that it pays dividends for any/every competitive guild to encourage their members to multi-box if possible. That way, when a contested boss spawns at 3 AM, you can more quickly dispatch it. You can take 18 real players and fill out the rest of the raid with 6 box accounts, usually being buffing/healing classes as they are highly impactful even when not played at 100% capacity.
So there you have a situation where a rival guild might log in with ... 20 real players, but with access to 0 boxed accounts. Even though they have more real players, they aren't in a position to contest the mob. As I mentioned earlier, it's pseudo-P2W. Any advantage that can be leveraged in an open-world game will be leveraged as far as people can take it. This creates a burden for other players, as it once did to me. I learned early on that if I wanted to have a chance of competing for contested raid content, I would need to fully understand the potential of multi-boxing and leverage it as many ways as possible. I was compelled to do this because those things were being done to me. If you want to talk about a demoralizing experience, imagine being that guild of 20 real players that logs in at 3 AM, only to watch 18 players + 6 boxes be able to take down content that is otherwise inaccessible to you. Is that fair? In a game that promotes player interdependence, earned accomplishments, and shared experiences?
I have barely scratched the surface on the type of damage that multi-boxing will rain down on any server. Some folks may be oblivious to what things look like behind the scenes but I know for a fact that the allowance of multi-boxing is antithetical to what this game is supposed to represent. Ben Dean recently promised a sincere commitment to making changes based on community feedback. This thread is a prime example of the demand for no-box servers -- many of us are aware of the "official stance" from VR and are unhappy about it. That's why these threads keep popping up. Personally, I think Pantheon should be anti-boxing in general, on all standard servers, as that stance would be more closely aligned with the spirit and vision of the game that has been advertised. If anybody should be asking for an exception to the official stance, it should be those who plan on multi-boxing. Pantheon shouldn't be the kind of game where you can log in during a lunch break and accomplish something meaningful because of your ability to multi-box. If you don't have time or availability to rely on other players, or have them rely on you, then you should find something that isn't "group-centric" to do.
Kilsin, what's being asked for here is not a change in policy, it's a request for a no-box server. There is absolutely a significant portion of the community that desires such an experience, because no matter how hard the devs try to design combat to be tactically intense, it will not be able to prevent multi-boxing. It's not about performance parity between a box and no-box group of players, the damage is done when the box group can be just efficient enough to lock down content, and there is an extreme incentive to do so in an open-world game with rare drops. That box group doesn't have to split the loot between a full group of players, that person boxing gets to keep it all to themselves. You're also providing very anecdotal "evidence" that boxing won't occur because players will prefer to play with others, that's not true at all. Take a look at EQ or EQ2 where boxers have ample opportunities to play with others but choose to box camp named for rare drops. I know you're a boxer, that's why I'm saying there's a clear conflict of interest here.
There is clear demand for a no-box server, that's what people want a discussion about and want VR to openly engage with in a fair discussion which recognizes the legitimate desires of a significant portion of the community that would love the opportunity to play on a server where boxing isn't allowed. That still allows for people to box on every other server.
Again, the third highest post of all time on the Pantheon subreddit that you helped grow is a post in which there is a clear, adament request for a no-box server. It is absolutely fair for the devs to consider this and to acknowledge that this is a heavily desired thing by the community that's supporting this game.
Sicario, I am sorry but what you’re asking for is not the point of this thread, the point of this thread was to high light the potential issues boxing/botting/perma camping can cause to a game. Right now, on EQ TLP it is a total disaster, part of the issue is the lack of GM involvement on the part of the botting and perma camping that is happening, I don't think we will have a lack of GM support in pantheon, the next issue is the perma camping and locking people out of content/item drops. This is where I would like to see some feedback from VR, how will they deal with this problem? everything I have read so far says the game will be non-instanced, so how are they going to manage the perma camp issues?
There have been some good ideas added to the thread but the only thing I have seen from VR is a copy paste about boxing policy.
It's absolutely pertinent. You mentioned boxing being part of the problem, it certainly is (separate issue than botting, of course, as they are very different things, I'm quite aware of that). The biggest issues I've run across in EQ/EQ2 are boxers who are perma-camping named/drops. Some might be botters, sure, but no one's been able to prove it. Many are legitimate boxers denying content to the rest of the server. So if multi-boxing is a high % of the issue, a no-box server would absolutely help mitigate against this problem, and it's something that has been requested multiple times/has been brought up for discussion multiple times by a significant portion of the community to only have it be sidelined/censored.
Community only matters when it's already in-line with what the current vision is, apparently. I'm open to having my opinion changed on that, though, and that's why I'm requesting acknowledgment by other team members that they're aware that no-box servers are a thing that a significant portion of the community desires.
I'm for boxing because I don't want to play with other people sometime and still want to do something.
I'm againt boxing because I don't like to see one person running around with a mangle of toons trotting behind.
(Yes I'm a hypocrite.)
But if I had to choose, I'd choose No-Boxing everytime. I'd rather be forced to find a group and socialize than have the option to box 3 toons and be a hermit.
I get what Sicario is saying. I wasn't talking about multiboxing in particular in any of my posts, though for some reason Kilsin thought I was. But I would totally agree that a large number of folks want to be free of such things. I'm one of them. My issue here is the same as with botting though. How would you effectively police it? I don't for a second think that VR will be able to effectively police it or even detect it as well as they think, so I'm not sure a rule specific server would even help.
Darck said:I get what Sicario is saying. I wasn't talking about multiboxing in particular in any of my posts, though for some reason Kilsin thought I was. But I would totally agree that a large number of folks want to be free of such things. I'm one of them. My issue here is the same as with botting though. How would you effectively police it? I don't for a second think that VR will be able to effectively police it or even detect it as well as they think, so I'm not sure a rule specific server would even help.
Remove auto follow.
Keno Monster said:Darck said:I get what Sicario is saying. I wasn't talking about multiboxing in particular in any of my posts, though for some reason Kilsin thought I was. But I would totally agree that a large number of folks want to be free of such things. I'm one of them. My issue here is the same as with botting though. How would you effectively police it? I don't for a second think that VR will be able to effectively police it or even detect it as well as they think, so I'm not sure a rule specific server would even help.
Remove auto follow.
This is a suggestion made by people who don't understand the difference between legitimate boxing and (illegitimate) botting.
Removing auto follow only hurts people who legitimately box. Botters don't have any need to use auto follow, it's just a convenience that, if taken away, they could work around. There are plenty of ways to make your bot stick to a target and maintain a specific distance from it.
I am also of the opinion that Auto-Follow or Auto-Run should not exist. Basically anything Auto should not exist even up to and including auto-attack. Those are all tech gimmicks used to decrease game interaction and facilitate a lot of lazy play. Auto-attack itself is one of the big balancing acts between blue bars and melees. If all melees did bigger damage per attack but had to pick the attack or sequence of attacks (one attach choice per 6 second tick with the ability to queue attacks) they wanted to use then it would have much more parity with casters in game play. In the end Auto-attack is really only a mana free dot that can be turned on and off at will. Just design the game without that damage in mind.
Sometimes these things end up being accessibility features. I don't want combat to be an endless sequence of button mashing because I find that boring and it actually takes me out of the immersion, but there are also players who aren't as dexterous for a variety of reasons and auto-attack + ability combat allows them more opportunity to play. I have several friends who can't play certain games simply because of the number of button presses per minute (second) involved in playing them even adequately.
Disscord said:Hi all this topic came from an issue that is happening on the new TLP progression server in EQ. There is some guy that has scripted his group of bots and put them on a permanent 24/7 camp of the pre nerf circlet.
https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/index.php?threads/necro-bot-team-at-cos-camp.258188/
What I want to know, is there going to be hard line policy’s put in place by VR to deal with this type of situation happening in pantheon?
Have you just now realized this? Its been going around for a long time and EQ devs have been doing jack to protect paying customers. TLP is like a pit, draws you in but you leave with discust. The bots running around for Krono's is stupid. This is a monitary gain for those playing on Official on just making cash on the side. Like i said back in 2000 people would pay for cars, houses off the sale of characters. I hope it doesnt happen again.
Crazzie said:Disscord said:Hi all this topic came from an issue that is happening on the new TLP progression server in EQ. There is some guy that has scripted his group of bots and put them on a permanent 24/7 camp of the pre nerf circlet.
https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/index.php?threads/necro-bot-team-at-cos-camp.258188/
What I want to know, is there going to be hard line policy’s put in place by VR to deal with this type of situation happening in pantheon?
Have you just now realized this? Its been going around for a long time and EQ devs have been doing jack to protect paying customers. TLP is like a pit, draws you in but you leave with discust. The bots running around for Krono's is stupid. This is a monitary gain for those playing on Official on just making cash on the side. Like i said back in 2000 people would pay for cars, houses off the sale of characters. I hope it doesnt happen again.
This is because daybreak games is making a straight cash grab, they do not care about the game, they don't care about Everquest, they don't care about the community, they don't care about the integrity of the world, they care about selling currency. They are a basically a venture capitalist investment being run to maximize profits.
I can see the reason to remove auto follow but please remember the harm one can do while trying to do good. Some of the conveniences people want to remove will make it near imposable for people with disabilities to play. My girlfriend has poor vision and as a team we play well but she needs my eyes and auto follow is necessary to keep together. It can also be a hurdle if you try to limit the amount of accounts per person. In my experience while it can work it will likely add extra issues for household that have many player and computers.
Like security solving the problem can at times cause more harm than good. But maybe I have just not witnessed the horrors that the MMO world has become? I have been playing since early EQ and I find it hard to list all the MMOs I have played and other then a few ultra-rare instances in WOW I have yet to see something worth fixing.
I did 2-box some in my later years of playing EQ and never felt the need in any game since. Well unless you count a few key stokes now and again when my girlfriend had to run to the bathroom or something.
All this being said I strongly feel that botting should be not allowed. But again, solving the problem can have huge impact on innocent player.
Chanus said:Keno Monster said:Remove auto follow.
This is a suggestion made by people who don't understand the difference between legitimate boxing and (illegitimate) botting.
Removing auto follow only hurts people who legitimately box. Botters don't have any need to use auto follow, it's just a convenience that, if taken away, they could work around. There are plenty of ways to make your bot stick to a target and maintain a specific distance from it.
It was a joke, mostly. And I'm the botting != boxing champion around here, so trust me, I get it. While there are ways to make single inputs across multiple clients, that would be susceptible to lag and other environmental issues(collision). You also exaggerate how easy it would be to program something if there is no follow method available in the exposed api. Tell us how exactly you get the telemetry necessary to know where another character is?