It still amazes me that so much of the anti-P2W crowd is somehow completely okay with players paying extra for the ability to solo group-content, or think that it's not immersive-breaking to see people running around dungeons with 5 characters on auto-follow taking named/rare mobs from actual groups of players.
Sicario said:It still amazes me that so much of the anti-P2W crowd is somehow completely okay with players paying extra for the ability to solo group-content, or think that it's not immersive-breaking to see people running around dungeons with 5 characters on auto-follow taking named/rare mobs from actual groups of players.
Agreed, everybody can rationalize their hacks as matter of personal preference. Never really had a good experience with a two boxer.
Sicario said:It still amazes me that so much of the anti-P2W crowd is somehow completely okay with players paying extra for the ability to solo group-content, or think that it's not immersive-breaking to see people running around dungeons with 5 characters on auto-follow taking named/rare mobs from actual groups of players.
I'm in that anti-P2W crowd and think there is a big difference between 2boxing, and multiboxing with software to streamline the process. I would argue that a very small part of the anti-p2w crowd supports the level of multiboxing in the latter part of your statement there.
Back in my old EQ days, I did some two boxing, but mainly as a heal/buff/slow bot with a shaman. Never used the box in a group unless it was a guild/friend group and there was nobody else looking to join. Didn't use any software to make it so I didn't have to switch instances. Didn't hold down any non epic related camps. This was mainly after GoD and OoW. I also played at odd times on the server due to working nights back then so that was a contributing factor in me even going the 2box route.
FierinaFuryfist said:I'm in that anti-P2W crowd and think there is a big difference between 2boxing, and multiboxing with software to streamline the process. I would argue that a very small part of the anti-p2w crowd supports the level of multiboxing in the latter part of your statement there.
Back in my old EQ days, I did some two boxing, but mainly as a heal/buff/slow bot with a shaman. Never used the box in a group unless it was a guild/friend group and there was nobody else looking to join. Didn't use any software to make it so I didn't have to switch instances. Didn't hold down any non epic related camps. This was mainly after GoD and OoW. I also played at odd times on the server due to working nights back then so that was a contributing factor in me even going the 2box route.
I appreciate this perspective and respect your position, it's unfortunate that even without the use of 3rd party software, people manually boxing cause the issues I'm referring to. Once people have that advantage over other players, they tend to make use of it. Certainly not all do, but there are absolutely enough (typically the majority) that it negatively impacts servers on a whole as we've seen with quite a few other MMOs historically. And, when it comes down to it, an advantage is an advantage, and all multi-boxers are paying for extra capabilities over other players. That means the ability to solo group content and thus the ability to farm solo and have a market advantage in the economy or easily acquire drops that typically take full groups of players coordinating together to achieve.
Telepath said:
Instead of multiple accounts, should you be able to play more than one character on the same account simultaneously for a $fee?
I like this Idea. Great for a Husband/Wife team. Or kids account.
Multi boxing should not be encouraged, but not necessarily be restricted. (True multi boxing, as in someone playng two characters side by side.)
What should be absolutely restricted is software controlled bots, and bot groups. (OGREBOT, MacroQuest, RedQuest, Etc)
No discounts should be given for multiple accounts.
The content should be challenging and engaging enough that multi boxing would be undesirable to anyone playing the game.
As someone whon (without macros) 2 boxed in EQ including up to raid level (a cleric was very easy) I sincrfely hope that it is not needed in Pantheon.
The reason for multi-boxxing was mostly that some content was very impossible without specific classes - even if you didnt really want to play them. In EQ many classes were threadbare on skills, which meant many people could 2 box at maybe 70-95% eeficiancy with no macros. In vanguard I hope that there is a multiple set of classes viable in each role, and there is enough stuff to do so that in most caaes 2 boxxing become hard or not worth it.
However, I would not outright ban it - I also remember times when played out of peak hours where 2 boxxing was the only option to do anything due to lack of people.
arazons said:The content should be challenging and engaging enough that multi boxing would be undesirable to anyone playing the game.
this. Boxing in EQ was so popular because the combat was sooo slow and classes had so few things to do GCD-wise. so chars could be at 80% efficiency with basically turning on melody, autoattack, casting 1 spell per fight, etc (monk, zerker, warri, cleric, bard, ranger, mage, rogue, etc). in a lot mmorpgs you wouldnt have been able to box a second char.
Nandor said:arazons said:The content should be challenging and engaging enough that multi boxing would be undesirable to anyone playing the game.
this. Boxing in EQ was so popular because the combat was sooo slow and classes had so few things to do GCD-wise. so chars could be at 80% efficiency with basically turning on melody, autoattack, casting 1 spell per fight, etc (monk, zerker, warri, cleric, bard, ranger, mage, rogue, etc). in a lot mmorpgs you wouldnt have been able to box a second char.
People are 5 boxing wow with its much faster pace and ease of soloing. If boxing is not forbiden people will box if it lets them do anything at all better. You dont see near the boxxing in FF14 as wow and has a 2.5sec GCD plays way slower stop saying a slow GDC leads to mass boxing it does not.
I am fine with boxing if you want to box a healer with a dps or what not to help in gathering pass time well your looking for group it is not the boxing that hurts the game its the botting and using add ons to run full groups that hurts the game.
People are 5 boxing wow with its much faster pace and ease of soloing. If boxing is not forbiden people will box if it lets them do anything at all better. You dont see near the boxxing in FF14 as wow and has a 2.5sec GCD plays way slower stop saying a slow GDC leads to mass boxing it does not.
I am fine with boxing if you want to box a healer with a dps or what not to help in gathering pass time well your looking for group it is not the boxing that hurts the game its the botting and using add ons to run full groups that hurts the game.
With the assistance of stuff like isboxer or whtaever other boxing tools. If you had to manually toggle between each client to input spells or movement the gameplay would be incredibly hard to manage beyond even 2 characters. Which is what i hope pantheon will be like, i feel like 2 boxing would take a lot of skill and attention to play correctly in a faster paced environment than what eq had in terms of combat. Automated tools to help with boxing i am completely against but if you tab or toggle between each client and use every ability yourself i dont see it as a bad thing.
torveld said:With the assistance of stuff like isboxer or whtaever other boxing tools. If you had to manually toggle between each client to input spells or movement the gameplay would be incredibly hard to manage beyond even 2 characters. Which is what i hope pantheon will be like, i feel like 2 boxing would take a lot of skill and attention to play correctly in a faster paced environment than what eq had in terms of combat. Automated tools to help with boxing i am completely against but if you tab or toggle between each client and use every ability yourself i dont see it as a bad thing.
That's essentially in line with statements Brad made in the past. He basically said they were going to make combat challenging, and if you could pull off 2-boxing, more power to ya. But you'd likely meet limited success.
Sounds like Joppa is of a different mind....
It should only work with separate accounts per character online with no discounts.
Absolutely no 3rd party button relaying to multiple accounts. I would probably be ok with no boxing at all, but I play mmos with my husband, so any "fix" to make it so there is a complete ban on boxing would adversley effect anyone who wants to play in the same room as someone else like me. Even EQ with their true box coding screws us sometimes. Anytime we spam buttons too fast at the same time it will DC us(found that out the hard way when camping one of our epic drops). And if we are using our laptop for a third account it makes it even more likely to be DC'd. Honestly, I'm not sure how it could be done without messing up the legitimate players who live together and I'm sure they wouldn't want to alienate those customers, so 2 boxing is probably here to stay.
My opinion is the same as it was when people were arguing over it.
Boxxing is paying extra money for an advantage over other players who don't pay as much money.
That shaman you box is an advantage comparable to a buff potion you buy from a cash shop.
That wizard you box is comparable to a teleport potion you buy from a cash shop.
That summoner you box is comparable to a cash-shop mercenary.
I for one feel that my single subscription should afford me all advantages everyone else has.
So, either make multiboxxing with just one account really easy, or stop all multiboxxing with rules and/or difficult game mechanics.
With auto-attack+action bar mechanics, stopping multiboxxing will be very difficult, but I believe that alone is VR's current intention.
BeaverBiscuit. I am trying to keep an open mind on this topic. So this question is intended to give me more clarification of your position not to either agree or disagree.
I assume you have no objection to someone having two accounts if they are not played simultaneously. Certainly VR doesn't since a second account is one of the pledge rewards for some pledges.
So to focus on your statement "my single subscription should afford me all advantages everyone else has".
If I have two paid accounts but do not box I can have twice as many crafters (if we are allowed 10 characters on a server this may not matter - if we are allowed two it will matter a lot). I can have twice as many classes so I can switch to a class a group is advertising for while you may just be able to wait and hope they give up and accept your class as a second choice. I can have characters camped in more places to be closer to where groups may form or to have access to twice the regional margets as you.
So is it a matter of degree? You accept that other people *will* have advantages over you because they pay more you just are arguing to keep those advantages from getting out-of-hand?
dorotea said:BeaverBiscuit. I am trying to keep an open mind on this topic. So this question is intended to give me more clarification of your position not to either agree or disagree.
I assume you have no objection to someone having two accounts if they are not played simultaneously. Certainly VR doesn't since a second account is one of the pledge rewards for some pledges.
So to focus on your statement "my single subscription should afford me all advantages everyone else has".
If I have two paid accounts but do not box I can have twice as many crafters (if we are allowed 10 characters on a server this may not matter - if we are allowed two it will matter a lot). I can have twice as many classes so I can switch to a class a group is advertising for while you may just be able to wait and hope they give up and accept your class as a second choice. I can have characters camped in more places to be closer to where groups may form or to have access to twice the regional margets as you.
So is it a matter of degree? You accept that other people *will* have advantages over you because they pay more you just are arguing to keep those advantages from getting out-of-hand?
I personally don't think the game would be effected very much by any of the scenarios you put forth so I guess I just don't want it out of hand.
The only issue I see from what you said is multiple characters allowing you to cover all professions-it probably hurts crafter interaction. However, I think that allowing people to have multiple characters probably fixxes this at the same time. More characters need more in game products and services.
VR could save us multiple accounts by letting us buy character slots as well.
P.S. Temmi from temtalks made an excellent point long ago that boxxing multiple characters makes for much more in depth rp-you can make your own npcs. So it's not like boxxing is horrible in every way, it's just bad when you are using it for a significant advantage over someone else in a game without a cash shop.
Thanks for the reply.
While having multiple accounts even without boxing clearly gives advantages, I think these are less harmful to other players and to the way VR hopes we will play the game.
History says that a tolerance for boxing leads to an acceptance by the developers of botting. It may be prohibited but it is rarely cracked down on because it is simply too time-consuming to establish that someone reported as a botter isn't simply a boxer.
What can be done is another matter. Banning the playing of two accounts simultaneously on the same computer may or may not be doable but will it deter most of the serious boxers? Banning the use of the same internet connection will clearly make it hard or impossible to play with spouse, children, parents etc.
More and more I come to support the idea of a server or servers with strict anti-boxing rules as worth trying.
