OFF PANTHEON TOPIC
I AM ON LOCKJAW PROGRESSION SERVER RELIVING THE FUN UNTIL PANTHEON COMES OUT
I LIKE IT NO FTP ...SUBSCRIPTION ONLY....PEEPS EVERYWHERE YOUR LEVEL ...PUTS A SMILE ON YOUR FACE.
I AM RUNNING 3 ACCOUNTS ALL DE MAGES ATM
WAITING FOR KUNARK TO OPEN UP DOWN THE ROAD SO CAN MAKE SOME IKSAR (MONK/SK) TOONS
AND YES MY MAGES ARE DOING WELL, LEVELING SLOWER AND DYING WELL!!!! WEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE...
WHATS FUN IS I WILL BE DOING WHITES AND YELLOWS (NEKTULOS FOREST) AND CONCENTRATING ON DOWNING THOSE AND THEN THIS RED CON
COMES ALONG ....WHO'S YOUR DADDY!!! PETS DEAD... YOU ARE YOU ARE RUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN.....
TOO FUN!!! YES ONE OF MY MAGES ENDS UP A MEATSHIELD WHILE THE OTHERS ZONE OUT...
JUST A COMMENT: THIS IS KIND OF WHAT I WAS SAYING WHEN I POSTED A WHILE BACK IN THE FORUMS FOR BEING ABLE TO SOLO IF YOU WANTED TO
LEVEL EVEN THOUGH PEOPLE CAN SOLO THAT DOESN'T MEAN ITS GONNA BE EASY AND SAFE. THEY HAVE TO ALWAYS BE WATCHING FOR THOSE
INCOMING RED CONS THAT WILL OWN YOU OR A BIG CHORE FOR YOUR GROUP THAT'S EXCITING TO ME. ALSO WHEN YOUR ALWAYS HAVING TO KEEP
MENTAL AWARENESS IT BECOMES MORE OF A CHALLENGE/JOB.....EXCITEMENT.......ANYWAYS GOOD STUFF.
Yes multiboxing exactly what is ruining the progression servers right now. Thanks for bringing this to light here. I hope the Pantheon team will address people running multiple accounts at the same time.
EQ1 Progression servers need to eliminate /follow command and do something about third party software. Have seen atleast 30+ different people running around with 3+ mages on follow.
Do you have a problem with people enjoying themselves? I don't believe I see anyone complaining that you have renewed your EQ1 account and decided to play on the progression server. I also don't see anyone complaining about people who log onto a class and decide to solo instead of LFG. As long as the player is playing the accounts and they are paying and enjoying themselves you have zero say in the way they play the game.
Anasyn said:
Do you have a problem with people enjoying themselves? I don't believe I see anyone complaining that you have renewed your EQ1 account and decided to play on the progression server. I also don't see anyone complaining about people who log onto a class and decide to solo instead of LFG. As long as the player is playing the accounts and they are paying and enjoying themselves you have zero say in the way they play the game.
I agree as long as the player is actually playing all of the accounts. Key binding, software controlled, groups are not good and many are just farmers. But, if a person can box 25 characters by alt-tabbing, then all power to them! :)
Anasyn said:
Do you have a problem with people enjoying themselves? I don't believe I see anyone complaining that you have renewed your EQ1 account and decided to play on the progression server. I also don't see anyone complaining about people who log onto a class and decide to solo instead of LFG. As long as the player is playing the accounts and they are paying and enjoying themselves you have zero say in the way they play the game.
Clearly you have no idea what is going on with the multiboxing on the progression servers.
I play on the progression server every night and I'm enjoying myself. I played in the beta prior to the launch and I also have played on/off on live servers and P99. And I can clearly state that I enjoy the progression servers 100% more then P99 because I can box another account on my second monitor. I Play two accounts one on my primary monitor and another account on my second monitor. I hate boxing in groups and honestly the only reason I'm boxing in the first place is so I can play with my cousin and not out level his character.
People need to stop treating playing more then one character as a witch hunt. I was two/three boxing in EQ1 back in 2002. If I couldn't have boxed my friends accounts their is no way I would have ever been able to camp my last piece of my Epic on my ranger up in the Plane of Hate. When you live overseas and you are constantly deploying for 6-12 months to combat zones it's kind of hard to maintain friendships online let alone stay in good guilds/groups.
List of games I've two boxed in.
EQ1/EQ2/VG/WoW
List of games that I tried to and it wasn't worth the effort or I didn't even try.
Archeage/GW2/Rift/ESO/Aion/Age of Conan
Out of all the MMOs that I've played I've enjoyed the top ones the most. I enjoyed Archeage/GW2/Rift but they all were missing the big things that the above games did well.
It seems the people who are really against boxing are mad because of the people who for example box 6-12 accounts and use programs like ISboxer.
When you say you hate people playing multiple accounts what are your reasons?
1. You hate the guy playing an SK/SHM and doing his own thing.
2. Hate the guy running his own group 3-4 players taking up a camp and every account is not standing up and doing exactly the same thing. The person is actually alt tabbing/using more then one computer but controlling each character/using more then one monitor.
3. Somebody using a program like ISboxer with 3+ characters playing the same race/class and all running around like robots all casting/sitting at the same time.
4. Hate them all?
1. For me I smile when I see somebody boxing a healer. I understand that guy/gal may not have a lot of time to play or just likes to do his/her own thing while leveling slower. This person also becomes an asset later on especially during raids because they can swap to a tank or healer which ever you need on any given night which might make or break a guild/group/raid.
2. I don't really hate to much on the person who runs their own group although I do kind of get jealous when I can't find a group or that person is camping something I'm after. But as long as I can tell they are playing the characters and not using an illegal program I'm ok with the person because they have the skill to pull it off. Boxing is a pain in the butt IMHO even when you are just boxing one extra character let alone 3-6. Especially when they are some characters who are melee/pet class/caster/tank.
3. I don't like programs that essentially play the game for you. Have I tried them out in the past yes. These have been around for a long time and the first time I tried one out I believe was way back in 2002 and I hated it then it felt dirty and I just didn't like using one and preferred alt/tab. I've tried ISboxer out in EQ2 and wasn't a big fan either. Did it work yes but honestly with the MERC system on live in EQ1 and EQ2 it wasn't cool unless you wanted to eventually run your own raids.
4. Have I ran across people who take advantage of programs that run entire raids or camped things and disturbed the flow of the game yes. And in those instances I have disliked the player behind the boxed crew. But for every instance of this I've ran across honest players enjoying themselves without hurting other players ability to enjoy themselves. In fact in games like EQ1 and VG it's always been the opposite. People who played/payed for multiple accounts was the exact reason that other players could enjoy the game.
Extra: If you want to know how people destroy a game try playing Archeage and look at all the characters running around without players behind the keyboard cheating. It's just bad how easily people can cheat and do things in some games it makes me sick. I'll take somebody boxing and paying for another account over the things I've seen in Archeage any day.
I and the people I know only get upset about boxing when it is automated, and since automation is something that is impossible to detect through software (Don't even start with me about how they can detect it, they can't, every company who has tried has failed, including financial juggernaut Blizzard) then that means that it needs to be caught in-game by a real-life person. Let's hope Pantheon can afford to have GM's checking petitions.
Rallyd said:
I and the people I know only get upset about boxing when it is automated, and since automation is something that is impossible to detect through software (Don't even start with me about how they can detect it, they can't, every company who has tried has failed, including financial juggernaut Blizzard) then that means that it needs to be caught in-game by a real-life person. Let's hope Pantheon can afford to have GM's checking petitions.
I suggest you check out Runescape, Rallyd.
Jagex has found a way to identify and ban automated programs within it's largest free to play mmo in the world, so it's great to assume things, but evidence is a much better way of going when basing your claims on something.
What this discussion boils down to is a disagreement on where we collectively want the line drawn. Pragmatically, enforcement of any kind of anti-boxing has costs associated with it. Whoever manages the environment has to supply those resources. Framing this discussion in terms of right and wrong implies harm, and is hackneyed. The problem is that we define harm differently from one person to another. From the perspective of some, they are harmed in that---without multi-boxing---they could not access some parts of the game they feel entitled to. Others feel harmed when the see a bot camping the same 6 hour spawn for two months straight, or when a servers population is artificially inflated by large numbers of multi-boxers diluting the grouping experience. From where I stand this is not really a discussion of right and wrong, but one of expectations. At the end of the day the prevailing perspective will not (with the exception of RMTers) be the deciding factor determining if somebody somewhere goes hungry or not. Your accusation of a "witch hunt" is a terrible, melodramatic, immature miss-characterization of the state of affairs. The Salem witch trials resulted in the deaths of real people. It is more than a stretch to say that VRIs policy decisions will have such far reaching consequences. Though I will play their title regardless of what they decide, that is not to say that I think that one of these policy decisions is as good as all the others.
I prefer the environment found in the P99 community. I think their view is the considered one, and---since it is their ship---they get to decide what those details should be. Anasyn, though you wield your words skillfully, I mean to refute you.
"When you live overseas and you are constantly deploying for 6-12 months to combat zones it's kind of hard to maintain friendships online let alone stay in good guilds/groups."
For the sake of our discussion, let us assume that the above statement is true. Why should it have an impact on VRIs policy? Do you think that your status as a warrior entitles you to special privileges? Perhaps you think that military personnel make up a significant portion of the target demographic for Pantheon, and that failing to adopt your preferred policy will hurt their business. How do you know that other members of the military would agree with your stance? Have you conducted a poll? Please elaborate on your thinking. That the above quote is true does not mean that it necessarily follows that VRI should adopt your policy with regards to multi-boxing.
I refute this idea of hated that you are foisting upon me. You where the first person on this thread to use the word hate. I don't hate anyone who enjoys multi-boxing. Though I have never done it, I can see the appeal, especially in a game like EVE, or EQ. It could even be seen as its own kind of sand-box experience, where the challenge is how far one can stretch his attention before returns diminish. I cast no moral judgements on anyone for the fact that they enjoy multi-boxing. I do, however, have a problem with people who feel that they are above the rules of the community in which they participate. If you want to multi-box there are communities out there that will happily cater to your preference. Don't be upset with P99 for choosing a different path. You've got options brah, so please cut it out with the ad homenims.
You have done an decent job building the case that the option to multi-box adds value to the product... for you. What you have not done is convincingly address the concerns of those in the opposing camp. I see value added in an environment where the player characters around me are not automatons. Perhaps not too far down the road we will be conduction Turing tests using MMOs as a testing platform. Who is the real player? Who is the program? I don't think we are there just yet. It would be cool, but that kind of dynamic NPC environment is way outside the scope of Pantheon's development anyway. If we use Project 1999 Blue as a test case---for the relative market values of our two positions---a no multi-boxing environment is the clear market winner. The other EQemu servers are dead by comparison. I'll admit that my analysis has several flaws. My defense is that I don't have time or wherewithal to conduct the market research needed to bring you more definitive evidence. In other words, I think it is the best available (please don't read as definitive) evidence.
Just so you know that I see the merits in your arguments, I don't see any problem with a separate environment where multi-boxing is allowed. Perhaps in the testing environment, or just on another server with different rules. As for myself, I am only interested in playing long term in an environment where---in so far as it reasonably can be---multi-boxing is prohibited. The model setup for this in the P99 community is an adequate solution to the problem. What say ye to this proposed solution to the dilemma created out of our conflicting expectations Anasyn?
*edited for clarity (no pun intended)
Hypothetical Scenario: I am playing my favourite MMO in the same room with my wife and she is playing the same MMO, this obviously isn't boxing. WAN IP is the same for both pc's how ever.
Carrying on now. I place my character on follow and step out to take the trash out, while I am afk, my wife attacks a monster and requires a heal from my character, she leans over and presses a button. Hold on, she is now boxing.
Is this scenario held in the same light as if someone was always boxing 2 characters?
Celevin I am in complete agreement with you. I find it concerning that the community / lead moderator would support multiboxing. Obviously a line has to be drawn a good start would be prevention of running multiple clients from the same pc, and detection of automation / macro tools. And in response to Anasyn I have served for many years. Their are plenty of good guilds even some extremely hardcore ones that have no issues with this. I have met many friends some of which have even logged in and maintained my accounts while I have been away.
Prominus said:
Celevin I am in complete agreement with you. I find it concerning that the community / lead moderator would support multiboxing. Obviously a line has to be drawn a good start would be prevention of running multiple clients from the same pc, and detection of automation / macro tools. And in response to Anasyn I have served for many years. Their are plenty of good guilds even some extremely hardcore ones that have no issues with this. I have met many friends some of which have even logged in and maintained my accounts while I have been away.
May I ask why you find it concerning? You do realise that multiboxing and botting are two completely different actions?
Multiboxing is completely legitimate and something I and many others have done for years, mainly because I live in Australia and have to play during off-peak time for the bulk of the game populations but it not only allows me to play a very basic version of the game, it helps support the company that created the game with an extra subscription or two.
I can't kill any raid targets or box a dungeon by myself but I can do basic things that would allow me to stay online and enjoy the game I paid for instead of logging off and reducing the population. I am curious as to why that is a problem for others who is has no effect on at all?
Accounts sharing, on the other hand, is against TOS and if caught by most companies, would result in a permanent ban. How do you justify that, yet frown on multiboxing?
I am genuinely interested in your answers mate.
Larrikin said:
Hypothetical Scenario: I am playing my favourite MMO in the same room with my wife and she is playing the same MMO, this obviously isn't boxing. WAN IP is the same for both pc's how ever.
Carrying on now. I place my character on follow and step out to take the trash out, while I am afk, my wife attacks a monster and requires a heal from my character, she leans over and presses a button. Hold on, she is now boxing.
Is this scenario held in the same light as if someone was always boxing 2 characters?
Yes, that is basically boxing, it is nowhere near as efficient as playing a single character in a full group (or even a small group) yet it allows your wife, myself and many others to continue playing in some basic capacity instead of logging off in frustration. :)
The problem these days with boxing is the power of the computers can now run way more accounts at once than 15 years ago, and there are now software to make it so all accounts react instantly to a single key press or mouse click.
Dont get me wrong, i have boxed 2, rarely 3 accounts in eq, and i know the distinction between boxing and botting, but with programs like ISBoxer and others doing the 1 key press, you are not boxing anymore, but botting, as you're no longer swapping between accounts to handle the actions but letting a program do it for you.
It is for this reason I really really need pantheon to not only be aware of the issue, but give serious thought on limiting it to one account played per comp, how ever it may be done.
In a way, boxing is like playing with improved mercenaries (ala EQ). And you get all the benefits, but few or none of the disadvantages. So I can understand why people want to do it (and I understand that for some it may be the only way to play due to playtime etc). I don't care much about people soloing a dungeon or holding a camp all by themselves. But lets face it...for a boxer there is often little reason to include other players (except for being generous). Even if you actually go out to start/join a group, it still means that at least one actual player is going to miss out on the chance to find a group.
I wouldn't outright forbid or ban boxing .But for a game like Pantheon that wants to focus on and encourage group play, boxing should really be discouraged.
This is absolutely nothing personal. I run two accounts, but don't use them at the same time very often, and I have friends who two box all of the time. I also see 5 mages auto-following a 6th character everywhere on the progression servers. One is not so bad for the game, and the latter is definitely bad for the game for more than one reason.
I would rather the boxing be extremely limited by game design, as Brad mentions, the same as soloing which will be difficult yet not impossible. While I understand people who wish to box accounts, as I do EQ on occasion, there can be no doubt as to the negative consequences of allowing boxing to become as common place as it is in EQ. If it is possible for an average to good player to box 3 accounts, whether by key binding, automation, whatever, then how much easier is it for the professional RMT folks? It is a dilemma.
For the questions about multiple family members playing in the same house in regards to p99, they will consider individual requests for a couple of accounts from the same router IP.
@Kilsin - I don't know that Prominus was speaking about this in particular when mentioning "maintaining accounts", but over at Daybreak (soe for some time before that), the 500 in station cash, which gold subs got automatically, now requires a log in once a month and a couple of clicks to receive.
I agree this discussion does boil down to a disagreement. This discussion has been debated already by the community in multiple posts on these forums, EQ1 Reddit, EQ official forums, and a ton of other gaming community sites all over the internet. It’s not a win or lose conversation because you believe what you think is best and I know that I enjoy my gaming experience when I play two accounts when I want. Nobody is going to convince another player they are doing something wrong by two boxing in a game when they are enjoying themselves.
I tried to ask people which type of boxing they dislike if you replied to me which is it? Or do you dislike them all and why?
People have given tons of reasons why they decide to pay for more than one account. People will continue to pay/play for more than one account no matter what others feel because they are enjoying the game.
I could list a ton of reasons why I’ve two boxed in the past and nobody will convince me that it was a bad idea. Like I’ve stated and many others have also that they prefer grouping up with our friends and guild members any day of the week over two boxing.
If this game is going to be more like EQ1/EQ2/VG/WoW and less like GW2/AA/Rift then people will be playing more than one account.
The only way you can prevent people from playing more than one account is to do what P99 is doing or make a game like GW2, Archeage, and Rift. I’d prefer a game more like EQ1, EQ2, Vanguard, or WoW.
I feel as though my post was not read, or not understood by both Anasyn and Kilsin. So far, there has not been one comment in either of their posts to approve or disdain my proposed solution. I will use a different analogy to describe my solution. Think of the segregated environments I described above as different states with different laws, but with travel allowed freely between them (by the players, not their characters). If you don't like the laws in the the state in which you live; you are free to travel (presumable) to another state where the laws are more to your liking. This solutions offers something for everyone does it not? Please respond directly to my question. If you think there is something wrong with it; let's talk about it. Please don't ignore it. It makes it seem like you have some hidden motives that you don't really want the community to examine.
Also let's nix this, "I can't find anyone to group with," argument. Populations on P99 as of late have been plenty sufficient, even during off hours. If you are playing a group friendly class; groups are available no matter where you live. I'll go so far as to offer that off hours are preferable because there is less competition in the contested environment. Let's not shift the onus of responsibility onto the community when we should be bearing it ourselves.
There are obvious problems with trying to police multi-boxing. I'll be the first to admit that advanced AIs may render any such effort utterly fruitless down the road. What I propose is that the EULA on the protected server require users to, in effect, take an oath that they will not multi-box on that server. Include clear language that, in order for such a policy to mean anything, the player-base must necessarily participate in the policing itself. Such a solution is not perfect. Larrikin's hypothetical would fall through the cracks. I think it a reasonable compromise to say that it, and other cases like it, should fall through the cracks. The negative impact of such instances would be negligible relative to the effort required to police them.
There are many in this community who have, by their language, demonstrated that they understand a key components of the initial success of EQ: Its environment demanded that players depend on another to accomplish their goals. Multi-boxing fights directly against this paradigm and is incompatible with it. If this players interdependency is what I value in a product; I am justified in walking away from Pantheon if it fails to provide it. Allowing Mufti-boxers a free hand in a solitary environment probably erodes my expectations enough that I will take my attention elsewhere. Boiled down, this is just the marketplace of ideas at work. If VRI insists that multi-boxers be welcomed with open arms in a solitary environment; I will not be unhappy to stick with p99 indefinitely. VRI is well within it right to do so. I wish them every success (especially considering my sunk costs.)
Characterizing myself, and others who think as I do, as oppressors amounts to nothing more than ad homenim. All we are really doing is voting with our feet. I will grant that our preferred solution is not compatible your values. In a way I feel like Dirty Harry asking his quarry "You have to ask yourself just one question... Do I feel lucky." The marketplace is not a forgiving master. If VRI makes the wrong call on this very important design decision; it may cause the entire endeavor to fail.
I have no crystal ball. I cannot see the future. I may be entirely wrong. If I am wrong; it is my genuine, earnest desire to be enlightened. The arguments as they have been presented so far by the opposing camp in this thread leave me uninspired. Please set aside the ad homenims and the red herrings. If you have a counter proposal; let's hear it. If not; please respond to the solution that I proposed. Demanding that our camp must drop our values because they don't suit your preference is petty, selfish, and a non-starter in this discussion.
*edit changed all instances of lets to let's
I do run three acounts but i do not use any 3 party garbage. I have 2 accounts running on my main pc (alt+tab) and one account on my second box.
First: I like to solo. why because I am a family man and it gives me the opportunity not to let others down if i have to be afk serveral times during the night during my play period...... but i can still attend to family situations/repsonibilities if needed. AKA wife agro, child agro, etc etc.
Second - i don't farm or doing any hordeing camping crapt. i am not trying to be the best at the game. my goals are to have fun in a way the fits with my life time frames or constraints.
Furthermore, I also have several characters that are my group characters. when my family no longer needs my attention then i will jump to my grouping characters.
For me its all about whats going on in my life its not about i am out to screw other players... so that is my two coppers. Its a game!
Players/People should be able to play how they want but also show some professional ethics about what they love especially when playing with others.
Currently i am on Lockjaw. I also got the opportunity to join one of the biggest guilds if not the biggest on the server which is great. I am having alot of fun.
I hope pantheon will let us do some of the same stuff but keep their vision. I don't want it to be Burger King but it would be great to be able to
solo and play multiple accounts if we want.
Lastly - one other thing to mention even though i am soloing x 3 accnts... it seems real slow in leveling , i am dieing all the time, running all the time to zone why because of high level roamers or wrong pulls or whatever....but i am having fun. I love seeing all the bodies everywhere (sub players not necessarily mobs). i love seeing the packed server with everyone running around, i love seeing when i run thru the commons tunnels and see everyone in there, peeps giving out free sows or selling thier goods or just hanging out. I decided to run all the way to the karanas over the weekend with my 3 Dark Eleves...pretty scary waiting to get owned by guards (my invis dropped several times) or some roaming mob and get ported all the way back to my bind spot but I Got to Qeynos binded on the wall then headed to Blackburrow..looked like a war zone. it was a blast. Very enjoyable to check out and explore. i did not stay long time and ended back in oasis. Good times and hope to have alot more!!!!!
Hello Raven8Hawk, welcome to the discussion. There is one line in your post highlighting a point of particular interest to this discussion:
"Players/People should be able to play how they want but also show some professional ethics about what they love especially when playing with others."
I agree that they should. The bottom line is that they don't. If everyone who multi-boxed behaved with professional ethics; I doubt that we would even be having this discussion. I applaud multi-boxing as you describe it in your post. You have made it clear how an anti-boxing policy is harmful to you, and that you personally take great strides not to walk all over the experience of other players in your multi-boxing efforts. The problem is that the public at large cannot reasonably be depended upon to uphold the high standards of ethics that you have ascribed to. Because of this lack, player experiences have been repeatedly walked-all-over across the MMO-verse. I am confident that peers in my camp can supply a litany of anecdotal evidence in this regard. "How do we reign in the masses?" then, becomes the question.
This is accomplished by preventing them from accessing the protected server until they voluntarily agree to abide by the rules of its community. At this point each player will have personally assented to the police actions that their peers will subject them too, and cannot make any substantive complaint when the hammer drops on them for violating their agreement.
"Why can't we allow exceptions for those who multi-box responsibly?" you might ask. The answer to this question lies in certain realities surrounding the complexity of definitions. Allowing exceptions for responsible multi-boxers would require a complex delineation of what is, and is not, responsible. The more complex the definition becomes, the more time police and judges have to spend splitting hairs with the masses. The more time that police and judges have to spend splitting hairs with the masses, the more it costs to pay them for their time. A simple ban of multi-boxing is the cheapest way to get to the kind of environment that I will enjoy. I admit that other solutions exist that would be perfectly acceptable to me, but at some point the costs of policing player behavior outweigh the benefit to be had in player experience. The bottom line is that bottom lines matter in the business world, and a simple ban is the cheapest solution to implement. That is, I think, why P99 has gone this route. If I am wrong; please highlight for me the error in this reasoning.
If VRI has or does come down on the multi-boxer's side of this discussion, I would not regard it as a personal loss. Since my desire to participate in the community as a player would be completely squashed, it might open up an opportunity for me as one of the many policemen that will be needed to implement a more complex set of rules surrounding multi-boxing.
*edit adjusted formatting and spelling for clarity
Sarim said:
In a way, boxing is like playing with improved mercenaries (ala EQ). And you get all the benefits, but few or none of the disadvantages. So I can understand why people want to do it (and I understand that for some it may be the only way to play due to playtime etc). I don't care much about people soloing a dungeon or holding a camp all by themselves. But lets face it...for a boxer there is often little reason to include other players (except for being generous). Even if you actually go out to start/join a group, it still means that at least one actual player is going to miss out on the chance to find a group.
I wouldn't outright forbid or ban boxing .But for a game like Pantheon that wants to focus on and encourage group play, boxing should really be discouraged.
Mercs are automated NPC AI, they played like a bot to help you play by automatically doing everything.
Boxing is completely manual and no where near as good as having an AI bot heal you, you literally have a character auto-follow you around (which gets stuck on every corner, bump and object) just to click a heal button when in trouble by manually moving your mouse to another screen or very quickly alt-tabbing to click the heal on that characters hotbar to save yourself from dying before switching back.
It is not like having a merc play for you at all and this is one of the other big misconceptions my friend. People who don't box do not understand how difficult it really is, you cannot box efficiently or better than a group, which is why any genuine boxer will always drop their boxed group for a real group 9 time out of 10. The feeling when you have been boxing for any length of time and you see a real player looking for the same thing as you is awesome.
@Anasy
In your last post you stated:
"Nobody is going to convince another player they are doing something wrong by two boxing in a game when they are enjoying themselves."
Please do not dismiss the power of reasoned discussion to persuade or dissuade. My mind has been changed many times on many topics over the course my life because of the rational discourse of others. Indeed the pen is mightier than the sword. When you make blanket statements like the above, you are leaving yourself wide open to be contradicted. I can use myself as an example to contradict it. You can protect yourself from such contradiction by narrowing the scope of your statement to something more verifiable i.e.:
"Nobody is going to convince me that I am doing something wrong by two boxing in a game when I am enjoying myself."
The problem with the above statement is that it directly reveals the self centered nature of your position. I'll admit that I am putting words in your mouth (it is a pet peeve of mine when people do this to me.) Please understand that this is the message you are sending, even though it is not the message that you actually typed.
@ Kilsin
In your last post you defined what boxing is and is not. What your argument fails to account for is that effectively policing what a user is doing on the client end is no trivial matter. In a previous post you mention solutions developed by Jagex that prevent the use of automated programs. I am completely in favor of implementing something like this, but with a caveat. Don't be fooled into thinking that their solution is some kind of catch all. History shows that every single security measure ever developed by humanity is eventually defeated. The RMTers out there will use every unit of advantage they are given. Go ahead and open that door just a little bit. You may find through experience that a permissive attitude about multi-boxing is exponentially more costly to police than a simple ban. I admit that this hurts some players who would otherwise do no harm to the community.
I am still hoping for some kind of reply to the solution I presented in my first post on this thread. Perhaps it is best if it doesn't come from you. I would hate for the color of you name to lend an air of officialness to your response, even though I strongly suspect that you have personal views that you would like to share on the matter.