Forums » General Pantheon Discussion

Multi Boxing

This topic has been closed.
    • 428 posts
    February 9, 2016 1:11 PM PST

    I have found a few threads but would be very interested in reading https://www.pantheonrotf.com/forums/topic/1453/multi-toon-system but it seems to not exist anymore.  I know there are a couple of other threads but most are archieved or locked and the few open get side tracked really quick.

     

    Any way we can see that old Archieved copy.  I know the Stance of VR is that boxing will be allowed software to control those bots WILL not be allowed 

    • 428 posts
    February 9, 2016 1:11 PM PST

    Please lets keep it clean and well discussed the last few threads have been very mature no reason to backslide.

    • 71 posts
    February 9, 2016 1:17 PM PST

    My understanding is there won't be an offical rule against multi-boxing toons, but that they are designing the game in a way that it should be difficult to do and is still kind of just frowned upon I suppose? Software to facilitate multi-boxing would be a flat "nope not allowed".

    • 428 posts
    February 9, 2016 1:23 PM PST

    picks86 said:

    My understanding is there won't be an offical rule against multi-boxing toons, but that they are designing the game in a way that it should be difficult to do and is still kind of just frowned upon I suppose? Software to facilitate multi-boxing would be a flat "nope not allowed".

     

    Thats what I got from what I read but that thread was mentioned in all the posts that was closed would be nice to be able to read it.  I almost always have boxxed an auto follow Bard mainly so when my guilds raided we had a critcal class in reserve if we had a no show.

    • 71 posts
    February 9, 2016 1:45 PM PST

    Yeah I'm thinking from a design standpoint they don't want the answer to that situation to be "bring a boxed XYZ class". I'm personally hoping that is the case, but my opinions aren't really relevant to your post :)

    Think this is a hard one for them to answer until we know more about the game design. There are a multitude of variables such as: Would a situation come up where you absolutely need XYZ class to do something? If so, is that just the guild's problem and they need to recruit better? Will gameplay mechanics even allow you to box well enough to not be useless in a group or raid setting? Are there alternative ways to skirt the problem of missing a class? (Read: not giving the same ability to someone else, but just an alternate way to handle the mechanic entirely.)

    • 82 posts
    February 9, 2016 1:46 PM PST

    I dislike multiboxing but there isnt really anything you can do about it.

    • 1434 posts
    February 9, 2016 2:04 PM PST

    picks86 said:

    My understanding is there won't be an offical rule against multi-boxing toons, but that they are designing the game in a way that it should be difficult to do and is still kind of just frowned upon I suppose? Software to facilitate multi-boxing would be a flat "nope not allowed".

    Some frown on it more than others, but you'd think on a forum for a game designed around teamwork, everyone would frown upon it.

    I think what it boils down to is that its too problematic to control. Beyond making the game hard enough that multiboxing is troublesome, there isn't much you can do that cannot be circumvented.

    Theres also the financial impact to consider. A good portion of subs from many oldschool games came from people with multiple accounts.

    • 1714 posts
    February 9, 2016 2:29 PM PST

    If people want to pay for 2 accounts...

    • 71 posts
    February 9, 2016 2:56 PM PST

    Agreed but, and this is just my personal opinion, I consider boxing in most games technically cheating. You are controlling two or more characters to funnel game resources and/or trivialize content design for one person. Subscriptions just delves into the realm of Pay-2-Win because you are buying personal power with money.

    Yes, boxers support old school games like EQ1 but it's simply the lesser of two evils. When the options are to sunset or make your buck off boxers, the answer is obvious. In a game with a healthy player population, boxing is strictly just an accepted form of cheating. 

    • 9115 posts
    February 9, 2016 4:40 PM PST

    This subject never ends well and it has been brought up so many times with an official response given each time, discussing this when the answer is already set only leads to arguments.

    Typing "Boxing" into the search bar produces these 3 results:

    http://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/1952/dual-boxing-the-touchy-subject (Closed)

    http://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/2315/no-boxing-allowed (Closed)

    http://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/1822/multi-boxing/ (Open)

    Our Official Stance:

    Boxing will be allowed, but the way our characters and abilities are set up it will make it very hard. We will not tolerate cheats, gold farmers or botting programs but having multiple accounts to dual box is perfectly fine.

    • 132 posts
    February 9, 2016 5:39 PM PST

    could just leave /follow out of the game. 

     

    • 999 posts
    February 9, 2016 5:41 PM PST

    I'll post my thoughts I had over on MMORPG about the topic.


    Krimzin said:

    Example, I have 2 WoW accounts. I use my max level toon to run my low toon through dungeons, kill rares and whatever else I need. How is that hurting anyone?
    Boxing isn't nearly as big of an issue in WoW due to instanced content. It becomes much more magnified in a static world when a boxed group can clear and monopolize content.

    Raidan said: I get why developers allow boxing - it gives the development team more money - without "cheating." However, I stand with Amsai and wormed and am firmly against boxing. Most that support Pantheon and old school games in general scream they are against pay to win games, but, support multi-boxing, which is completely contradictory.

    Boxing is a subscription based pay-to-win. You are paying extra money for multiple accounts to tackle content, have skills, abilities, etc. that you would not have as one player. It trivializes content, affects communities, and affects grouping - all which are detrimental to a group oriented game. EQlaunch allowed boxing, but boxers were few and far between (thanks dial-up). I'd argue EQlaunch experience won't be recaptured today if boxing is allowed with high-speed internet connections.

    And, if Pantheon is at the point where the population would deem boxing necessary for progression because there's "nothing to do because there are no groups" - then the game is dead already.

    *Edit - But, if classes truly aren't able to be effectively boxed as Kilsin suggested - perhaps it won't be a big deal.


    This post was edited by Raidan at February 9, 2016 5:51 PM PST
    • 208 posts
    February 9, 2016 6:21 PM PST

    Yet another subject you can look to EVE about. It is allowed as long as you don't have one key press do more than one action. There are people with many many accounts, even I have 3. And yet there is no lack of social interaction or group content. I still go on fleet actions and interact with my fellow Corp members, many whom also have multiple accounts, every single night.

    • 63 posts
    February 9, 2016 7:27 PM PST

    The only time two-boxing really hurt a group, IMO, was when a sneaky fella I knew began rolling on loot for each character he'd managed to finagle into a group. Basically, he was rolling with his Shaman and again on his Monk, making his odds 2/5 against the group. Two-boxers should disclose their status to the group so as to even the odds and communicate the potential vulnerabilities such a status brings about.

    I can see both sides of the macro argument, I just personally think there are bigger fish to fry.

    Talv.

    • 671 posts
    February 9, 2016 8:50 PM PST

     

    I have said this numorous times, but with the modern era MMORPGs & wave of oldschool ones coming out, it is time for a modern EULA in the roleplaying arena. (ie: for the role players) 

    Any true believer of Role Playing and of fairplay would not want cheats. Ergo, a more thorough EULA that allows Developers to handle cheaters more quickly, and shut down & ban with more authority.

     

    To get, you have to give.

    Cheater trying to break into Pantheon and make a foothaold, will make VR rich, from all the accounts they will be closing. Free money..! 

     

    One character - One account - (per each computer)

    • 2130 posts
    February 9, 2016 8:59 PM PST

    Hieromonk said:

     

    I have said this numorous times, but with the modern era MMORPGs & wave of oldschool ones coming out, it is time for a modern EULA in the roleplaying arena. (ie: for the role players) 

    Any true believer of Role Playing and of fairplay would not want cheats. Ergo, a more thorough EULA that allows Developers to handle cheaters more quickly, and shut down & ban with more authority.

     

    To get, you have to give.

    Cheater trying to break into Pantheon and make a foothaold, will make VR rich, from all the accounts they will be closing. Free money..! 

     

    One character - One account - (per each computer)

    It is impossible to completely enforce an anti-boxing policy. One character per account? What? Even EQ didn't have ridiculous restrictions like that.

    • 383 posts
    February 9, 2016 9:12 PM PST

    Against boxing, though with my limited knowledge I believe it would take unimaginable resources to control. As long as what the Crusher of Dreams said is true and that boxing will be hard to pull off due to gameplay, then I'm perfectly fine with that. Though I'm sure some will still find a way lol...

    • 671 posts
    February 9, 2016 9:51 PM PST

    Liav said:

    Hieromonk said:

     

    I have said this numorous times, but with the modern era MMORPGs & wave of oldschool ones coming out, it is time for a modern EULA in the roleplaying arena. (ie: for the role players) 

    Any true believer of Role Playing and of fairplay would not want cheats. Ergo, a more thorough EULA that allows Developers to handle cheaters more quickly, and shut down & ban with more authority.

     

    To get, you have to give.

    Cheater trying to break into Pantheon and make a foothaold, will make VR rich, from all the accounts they will be closing. Free money..! 

     

    One character - One account - (per each computer)

    It is impossible to completely enforce an anti-boxing policy. One character per account? What? Even EQ didn't have ridiculous restrictions like that.

     

    I did not say anything about anti-boxing. I multi-box.

     

     

    • 288 posts
    February 10, 2016 12:45 AM PST

    I am totally 100% against boxing, that being said, I know VR cannot possibly check every player all the time.  I would however hope that they can either take a neutral stance on it, by not saying it is perfectly legal, which is really bad IMO, or say that it is illegal, and allow the players to police it themselves.

     

    If VR takes the stance that boxing is legal, even us players won't be able to take action against fellow players for doing it, and that is a problem.

     

    Nobody should say that they should police it, because as Liav said, no company has or ever will be able to stop it.  The players however, can have a huge effect on policing this issue if their hands aren't tied by a legal boxing stance.

    • 3 posts
    February 10, 2016 4:34 AM PST

    I used to be relatively ambivalent towards boxing. However, when Daybeak Games opened up their new classicish progression servers, the servers were dominated by 6 boxers. Honestly, it was ruinous to the legitimacy of the game, and if the game doesn't feel legitimate, the enjoyment factor is lost. I was so disheartened by it that I must admit that I actually tried 6 boxing, which ultimately made the game feel even more worthless.

    They need to make sure there is nothing like autofollow. If we see autofollow in Pantheon, it would be something I'd challenge.

    • 96 posts
    February 10, 2016 5:43 AM PST

    I have been a multiboxer in recent years but I wasn't originally. This type of gamer is okay when the game is not so active.

    I have mainly been a multiboxer due to my schedule and needing the ability to achieve most things by myself. If multiboxing becomes something anyone feels like they have to do to succeed then something is very wrong.

    I really hope from a corporate standpoint, multiboxing is allowed.I also hope the community can prove to be healthy enough to live without it.

     

     

    • 610 posts
    February 10, 2016 5:52 AM PST

    Forelis said:

    I used to be relatively ambivalent towards boxing. However, when Daybeak Games opened up their new classicish progression servers, the servers were dominated by 6 boxers. Honestly, it was ruinous to the legitimacy of the game, and if the game doesn't feel legitimate, the enjoyment factor is lost. I was so disheartened by it that I must admit that I actually tried 6 boxing, which ultimately made the game feel even more worthless.

    They need to make sure there is nothing like autofollow. If we see autofollow in Pantheon, it would be something I'd challenge.

    I have been calling for the removal of /autofollow for years now...taking out 1 command could clear up alot (not all) of this mess

    • 384 posts
    February 10, 2016 6:52 AM PST

    Raidan said:

    I get why developers allow boxing - it gives the development team more money - without "cheating." However, I stand with Amsai and wormed and am firmly against boxing. Most that support Pantheon and old school games in general scream they are against pay to win games, but, support multi-boxing, which is completely contradictory.

    Boxing is a subscription based pay-to-win. You are paying extra money for multiple accounts to tackle content, have skills, abilities, etc. that you would not have as one player. It trivializes content, affects communities, and affects grouping - all which are detrimental to a group oriented game. EQlaunch allowed boxing, but boxers were few and far between (thanks dial-up). I'd argue EQlaunch experience won't be recaptured today if boxing is allowed with high-speed internet connections.

    And, if Pantheon is at the point where the population would deem boxing necessary for progression because there's "nothing to do because there are no groups" - then the game is dead already.

    *Edit - But, if classes truly aren't able to be effectively boxed as Kilsin suggested - perhaps it won't be a big deal.

     

    What Raidan said. :)

    My biggest concern with boxing is that in a game that is community focused you need people to interact with each other. You don't need to do that if you play multiple classes at once. As long as programs that let you to control multiple characters at once aren't allowed I seriously doubt it'll be an issue. But this has come up many times in the past and from all the feedback VR has ever given leads me to believe the players and devs are on the same page with this.

    • 384 posts
    February 10, 2016 6:53 AM PST

    Sevens said:

    I have been calling for the removal of /autofollow for years now...taking out 1 command could clear up alot (not all) of this mess

    Wish we could still "like" posts. :)

    • 308 posts
    February 10, 2016 7:32 AM PST

    Don't allow third party boxxing software.  Some players are good enough to effectively run 3-6 clients on a pc or pcs without using keycloning software, most aren't.  If someone wants to box a group by themselves and aren't disrupting anyone, they should be allowed to.