I agree with Feyshtey. Part of the reason boxing was so effective in EQ is because of how simple its mechanics were. If Pantheon is more "technical" as far as the combat goes, I doubt it will be anywhere near as effective.
You could box a Shaman in EQ and trivialize most non-raid content by casting one spell every fight (slow) with an occasional heal thrown to your main. I genuinely hope Pantheon won't be that easy.
You see, some of us actually like the simplistic Everquest style combat.
I grew to resent the constant dance-dance-revolution mechanics being introduced into WoW over the years, and the new games are even worse. Youtube Blade And Soul, or TERA to see what I mean.
I just think we need to enforce a No Boxing policy. P99 does it, and it works great.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfvADznhTQA
I don't think more complex/more engaging inherently means a button mash fest. That's why I mentioned reaction times specifically. If taking an extra 3-5 seconds to switch between 5 boxes means someone is going to die because you cant react to something in combat on all at the same time it pretty much negates the ability to box 5 accounts.
As for what works in P99, I loved playing on that server. For a while. Now it's pretty much a s***-show. If you dont start an alt that can solo to some degree you can't find a group because there really arent that many people playing at lower levels. Which is one of the advantages thats open to a game that allows boxing. When you can't find a group you have a method of muddling thru (at a lower rate of success). This is particularly important the more aged a game is. I'd much prefer this to the common tactic of simplifying the lower levels of the game to retroactively make solo'ing more feasible, which so many games have fallen victim to.
Dulu said:You see, some of us actually like the simplistic Everquest style combat.
I grew to resent the constant dance-dance-revolution mechanics being introduced into WoW over the years, and the new games are even worse. Youtube Blade And Soul, or TERA to see what I mean.
I just think we need to enforce a No Boxing policy. P99 does it, and it works great.
Business 101...if someone will pay 2x or up to 6x for their product on a monthly basis why limit it....P99 is an emulator and doesn't suffer the burden of needing to sustain a population or be profitable... I played P99 for a bit and was a bit let down on the actual population of the game.
I do ask that for the all that is holy not to introduce "Krono" or items in game that buy time to play...this is what really let the botters loose to buy game time with plat they farmed....and while I wasn't a botter, I did 2 box and paid for my accounts with plat vs $$ for about 2 yrs with somewhat minimal effort.
Warben said:Dulu said:You see, some of us actually like the simplistic Everquest style combat.
I grew to resent the constant dance-dance-revolution mechanics being introduced into WoW over the years, and the new games are even worse. Youtube Blade And Soul, or TERA to see what I mean.
I just think we need to enforce a No Boxing policy. P99 does it, and it works great.
Business 101...if someone will pay 2x or up to 6x for their product on a monthly basis why limit it....P99 is an emulator and doesn't suffer the burden of needing to sustain a population or be profitable... I played P99 for a bit and was a bit let down on the actual population of the game.
I do ask that for the all that is holy not to introduce "Krono" or items in game that buy time to play...this is what really let the botters loose to buy game time with plat they farmed....and while I wasn't a botter, I did 2 box and paid for my accounts with plat vs $$ for about 2 yrs with somewhat minimal effort.
Business 101 - how many solo players quit, or were heavily discouraged when they came across a 6-box camping an item they need for a quest/upgrade? How many people do you think quit when that guy back on Phinny was 30-boxing Mages to clear raid content?
Letting people pay for extra accounts may give VR more short-term money, but it permanently damages the integrity of the game, and loses them money long-term.
It's also the definition of pay-to-win, way more than any cash shop can be.
Dulu said:
Business 101 - how many solo players quit, or were heavily discouraged when they came across a 6-box camping an item they need for a quest/upgrade? How many people do you think quit when that guy back on Phinny was 30-boxing Mages to clear raid content?
Letting people pay for extra accounts may give VR more short-term money, but it permanently damages the integrity of the game, and loses them money long-term.
It's also the definition of pay-to-win, way more than any cash shop can be.
I don't personally know of any that quit EQ over that. Probably were some, but the loss of those players was probably financially offset by those that paid monthly for multiple subs. From a strictly business perspective only the dev would really be able to say for sure and know which was more profitable in the long term.
It is a business incentive vs a experience quality incentive in my mind. It'll be interesting to see what they choose. I see no reason why they can't do both though and just have a server or two that doesn't allow or severely limits boxing.
I'll likely box if it is allowed, but I don't want to. I know I'd have more fun, be more social, and become better at my class without it.
Dulu said:Warben said:Dulu said:You see, some of us actually like the simplistic Everquest style combat.
I grew to resent the constant dance-dance-revolution mechanics being introduced into WoW over the years, and the new games are even worse. Youtube Blade And Soul, or TERA to see what I mean.
I just think we need to enforce a No Boxing policy. P99 does it, and it works great.
Business 101...if someone will pay 2x or up to 6x for their product on a monthly basis why limit it....P99 is an emulator and doesn't suffer the burden of needing to sustain a population or be profitable... I played P99 for a bit and was a bit let down on the actual population of the game.
I do ask that for the all that is holy not to introduce "Krono" or items in game that buy time to play...this is what really let the botters loose to buy game time with plat they farmed....and while I wasn't a botter, I did 2 box and paid for my accounts with plat vs $$ for about 2 yrs with somewhat minimal effort.
Business 101 - how many solo players quit, or were heavily discouraged when they came across a 6-box camping an item they need for a quest/upgrade? How many people do you think quit when that guy back on Phinny was 30-boxing Mages to clear raid content?
Letting people pay for extra accounts may give VR more short-term money, but it permanently damages the integrity of the game, and loses them money long-term.
It's also the definition of pay-to-win, way more than any cash shop can be.
I can agree to your points, but disagree that it should be limited on all servers and be a special ruleset server like this thread is intended to discuss.
I will try to box if I can pull it off, but I am also not the scourge of the community either that tries to bulldoze folks, strip mine camps or sell characters. Some folks view my style of play as offensive since I have more than 1 character and I welcome them to be apart of what they enjoy without tossing darts at me about my play style.
Doing this appeals to both types of customers, without alienating either one.
I never noticed boxing quite as much in EQ2 or Vanguard. Outside of very obvious AFK botting crews late at night, that is.
I think more mechanical combat is the answer, and will always be the answer to deter boxing.
Dulu said:Wish we could have a poll.
I guarantee you 90+% of the general population of Pantheon would want NO boxing allowed.
I'd bet my account on it.
If the thread below is any indication, you'd lose that account :)
https://www.pantheonmmo.com/content/forums/topic/1822/multi-boxing
You would have to basically have a gm test if someone was boxing because you can spin up a VM anywhere in the world with a different IP and achieve a work around, or even just be smart enough on your own home network.
the eq servers right now essentially make you only able to run 1 client per machine....how many folks have more than 1 computer..... folks are smart and will always try to find a way to work toward what they want.
Its a resource drain to fight a battle that game design can/should remediate...I hope the game requires me to focus on 1 character so much I cannot box, but if I can I will.
Or just have GM/Guide's recording, and if you're caught boxing, you're permanently banned.
World of Warcraft doesn't have this issue. They've been banning bots for 12 years.
You're not going to catch every single cheater, but if you do catch enough - it'll make it so that many won't want to bother with it. They won't want to risk their account.
I don't think anyone is saying that one person will play 6 characters at the same efficiency level that 6 people would.
I guess a lot of the discussion for or against multiboxing depends on why you are for or against it. The "pay to win" statement has been brought up here in relation to boxing. I think it might help to define "pay to win".
Is it when: a player pays extra, real world, currency in order to gain an in game advantage that other people, who didn't pay the extra currency, won't have?
Is that ^ how we are defining pay to win?
The other question, in relation to the topic: If there was a server where boxing wasn't allowed would it be the most heavily populated server? Would it be overcrowded? What do you think?
@Philo - I honestly don't think most players have ever really thought about boxing at all, many probably don't even know what it is, and a ton of them couldn't care less one way or the other. Providing a server that expressly allowed boxing might make a lot of them take notice just long enough to figure out wtf people were takling about, but beyond that I think they'd just pick a "normal" server because they know normal and don't know boxing.
Feyshtey said:@Philo - I honestly don't think most players have ever really thought about boxing at all, many probably don't even know what it is, and a ton of them couldn't care less one way or the other. Providing a server that expressly allowed boxing might make a lot of them take notice just long enough to figure out wtf people were takling about, but beyond that I think they'd just pick a "normal" server because they know normal and don't know boxing.
I don't think you are giving people who will play this game enough credit. Most people who will play this game have some mmo experience and will have at least heard the term dual boxing or multi boxing even if they haven't done it themselves.
That being said, they might just pick a normal server anyway because they don't feel strongly one way or the other...what if not allowing boxing was normal except on one specific server?
What would be the population on that server compared to others I wonder? A server that specifically banned boxing would likely be more populated than a server that specifically allowed boxing it would seem.
If the norm were no boxing, and there was a ruleset server with boxing, I think that alternate ruleset server would be a very interesting social experiment, but not a quality gameplay success. It's one thing with people who box are dispersed in an overwhelmingly non-boxing community. Any impact (real or percieved) is muted. It's another when the community is overwhelmingly boxers. It's a night and day difference in experience. In that scenario I would probably choose the "normal" servers over the boxing servers, because I like the community of people that want to interact with others, even if I myself will two-box when given the choice.
Feyshtey said:Bot != Boxer.
this one is gonna spiral off topic from rule set options to bot or box or not...so lets buckle up!!
I view botting as using software outside to assist you in clicking buttons or abilities...this is bad to me.
Boxing is playing 2 clients at the same time, and windowing back and forth between those instances to perform all actions by clicking abilities or buttons you create in client by hand..this is acceptable to me.
My personal rule was only load a box if no one is around to join me or I couldn't join someone else.
I do find it interesting how hardline some folks are about the subject.
Feyshtey said:If the norm were no boxing, and there was a ruleset server with boxing, I think that alternate ruleset server would be a very interesting social experiment, but not a quality gameplay success. It's one thing with people who box are dispersed in an overwhelmingly non-boxing community. Any impact (real or percieved) is muted. It's another when the community is overwhelmingly boxers. It's a night and day difference in experience. In that scenario I would probably choose the "normal" servers over the boxing servers, because I like the community of people that want to interact with others, even if I myself will two-box when given the choice.
Agreed, it would be an interesting social experiment.
That leads to the next thought that...if all of us who want to box are put on one server and it ends up ruining the community. Are we ok with smaller groups of boxers spread out throughout the playerbase degrading the community to a lesser extent simply because it is more diluted? It actually ends up effecting many more people that way.
Maybe the answer is yes? Its fine to degrade a lot of players experience a little bit rather than degrade a few players experience a lot? I could be ok with that...just trying to talk it out, seems like a catch 22.