Why multiboxers are killing this game...do something please.

[Sancus]

It is fine to express your opinions on the matter, but do not turn it into a backfiring war, please.

[Tsuniko]

You're implying a major chunk of the AO population cares about PVP here. That's never been true and while it's "better" now for us pvp'ers (because a lot of PVE-only people went to other games over time), it's still mostly a PVE crowd.

As for the idea that those 38 and 50 accounts (2 different multiboxers) are being managed with ISBoxer's screen sectioning options (that are actually also against CCP's rules from what I've been able to read lately) is cute but not realistic.
Next time he's mining in system and I'm online I'll consider recording a bit of it in a cloaky and letting you see the insanity of that claim for yourself. The 38-box guy cleans out full anomaly belts in a -1.0 system with max indexes like a boss.

Funnily enough I don't care so much about the impact in the economy (note that sadly PLEX didn't really go cheaper with multiboxers being "gone", contrary to what most were saying in the forums), I care about having a cleaner local while I'm at home not pvp'ing.. but that's a whole different topic.

P.S. - Don't nitpick my posts. If your only example is EVE (a much more pvp oriented game where pvm is the way to make ships for pvp).. it might be that your argument is just not good enough. We're much more comparable to a game like WoW for the most part. NW was broken way before Multiboxing went big. Again, forum archives. Go there. Read.

You really don't do very thorough research do you:

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=to...41&page=10#274

It's not nitpicking, it's exposing lies within your argument so people don't just believe anything you say at face value.

I was around when NW was broken too, however that still required people to fight on even footing since exploits were available to both sides of the conflict, not just the ones with more money irl.

Also something was done about the exploits, on RK2 half the active leaders of NW were banned for a significant amount of time. Multiboxing: 4 years and counting.

And the "PvP is only a small part of the game so we shouldn't care as much" argument is getting reaaaally old and irrelevant by now, for any game.

[DigitalBath]

You really don't do very thorough research do you:

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=to...41&page=10#274

It's not nitpicking, it's exposing lies within your argument so people don't just believe anything you say at face value.

I was around when NW was broken too, however that still required people to fight on even footing since exploits were available to both sides of the conflict, not just the ones with more money irl.

Also something was done about the exploits, on RK2 half the active leaders of NW were banned for a significant amount of time. Multiboxing: 4 years and counting.

And the "PvP is only a small part of the game so we shouldn't care as much" argument is getting reaaaally old and irrelevant by now, for any game.

What lies?

I say i've seen it because it's been streamed. ISBoxer is still allowed just not with input broadcasting, so he just sets up the screen with 20+ accounts running with only the modules visible.

From your link:
2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played. -> This makes the ISBoxer screen sectioning not possible, something YOU claimed to be possible, not me.

I'm just saying the guys are doing it in a smart enough way to not be easily detectable and get a pass on these checks. I don't multibox in either game so my knowledge of it is purely technical.

Your argument is based upon the fact that ONE game, a much more pvp-centric game with a direct and constant link between pvp and pve (would be equivalent to pvp'ers in AO losing all gear upon death and most good gear being craftable by pvm farmers) banned multiboxing. The company in question is a much larger, more capable company than Funcom. They and WoW are pretty much the two biggest out there in their own genres, with followers far behind.
Your example failed to police multiboxing. It's easy to see that if you actually play in any larger faction in the game.

This means that your one example is flawed. I can give you, as an example, ALMOST EVERY SINGLE OTHER GAME IN THE HISTORY OF MMORPGs not banning multiboxing and even supporting it to some degree, regardless of pvm/pvp culture in it.
Think about that. EVE is not comparable to AO as much as WoW, Rift, etc are. PVP in EVE is present everywhere except when you're docked/offline (and that may change with the coming Citadels). PVP in AO is done only if you're flagged or in designated low-gas areas, much like in similar titles. The only small similarity is that there's ownership over assets located within world that give you benefits. But even then the difference is colossal. In AO you get stats that are helpful but that you can do without for the vast majority of the game's content and even in PVP the difference is fairly small for an otherwise full endgame setup toon.
In EVE Null/WH PVP gets you a home. It gets you content for PVM in all forms (mining, industry, exploration and, ofc.. more pvp). You gain control over the map and massive tactical advantages in things you build there.
In EVE, PVP gets you access to the true endgame (for many.. not really my thing tbh) of Supercarriers.
PVP in AO is a sideshow. Something the majority of people I've known since 2003 on it do for "quick daily xp" and then sod off to do missions/other dailies/farm gear.
I hope this illustrates the massive differences enough for anyone interested. EVE is a great game. AO is a great game. But AO compares better to SWTOR/Rift/WoW than to EVE in almost any capacity.

On a sidenote, like others before you, you're starting to try to attack me and accuse me of lying and whatnot. I'll advise you not to as that's what every single one of these threads escalated to and it ended up on moderation/closing because of such behaviour.
Be constructive. Give actual examples and evidence. Just like I did.

[Tsuniko]

What lies?From your link:
2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played. -> This makes the ISBoxer screen sectioning not possible, something YOU claimed to be possible, not me.

I can understand if English is not your first language, but what this means if that you are not able to modify things IN THE GAME. Modifying what YOU see on your screen by minimising windows or customising resolutions is completely allowed and that's what ISBoxer does.

Your argument is based upon the fact that ONE game, a much more pvp-centric game with a direct and constant link between pvp and pve (would be equivalent to pvp'ers in AO losing all gear upon death and most good gear being craftable by pvm farmers) banned multiboxing. The company in question is a much larger, more capable company than Funcom. They and WoW are pretty much the two biggest out there in their own genres, with followers far behind.
Your example failed to police multiboxing. It's easy to see that if you actually play in any larger faction in the game.

This is the ONE game that has any kind of similarity with AO in terms of holding real-estate using PvP as a primary mechanism. Name me another game that has contestable structures that give large benefits to the organisation/faction that hold them.

This means that your one example is flawed. I can give you, as an example, ALMOST EVERY SINGLE OTHER GAME IN THE HISTORY OF MMORPGs not banning multiboxing and even supporting it to some degree, regardless of pvm/pvp culture in it.

ALMOST EVERY SINGLE OTHER GAME IN THE HISTORY OF MMORPGs have always introduced drawbacks to having multiple characters standing in one place and being controlled via broadcasting. AoE Crowd control being one of the main ones that AO is lacking.

Think about that. EVE is not comparable to AO as much as WoW, Rift, etc are. PVP in EVE is present everywhere except when you're docked/offline (and that may change with the coming Citadels). PVP in AO is done only if you're flagged or in designated low-gas areas, much like in similar titles. The only small similarity is that there's ownership over assets located within world that give you benefits. But even then the difference is colossal. In AO you get stats that are helpful but that you can do without for the vast majority of the game's content and even in PVP the difference is fairly small for an otherwise full endgame setup toon.
In EVE Null/WH PVP gets you a home. It gets you content for PVM in all forms (mining, industry, exploration and, ofc.. more pvp). You gain control over the map and massive tactical advantages in things you build there.
In EVE, PVP gets you access to the true endgame (for many.. not really my thing tbh) of Supercarriers.
PVP in AO is a sideshow. Something the majority of people I've known since 2003 on it do for "quick daily xp" and then sod off to do missions/other dailies/farm gear.
I hope this illustrates the massive differences enough for anyone interested. EVE is a great game. AO is a great game. But AO compares better to SWTOR/Rift/WoW than to EVE in almost any capacity.

Some irrelevant stuff that largely makes the same point as previous paragraph.

On a sidenote, like others before you, you're starting to try to attack me and accuse me of lying and whatnot. I'll advise you not to as that's what every single one of these threads escalated to and it ended up on moderation/closing because of such behaviour.
Be constructive. Give actual examples and evidence. Just like I did.

You did not give actual examples or evidence, you just said what you thought would make your argument stronger.

[DigitalBath]

I can understand if English is not your first language, but what this means if that you are not able to modify things IN THE GAME. Modifying what YOU see on your screen by minimising windows or customising resolutions is completely allowed and that's what ISBoxer does.



This is the ONE game that has any kind of similarity with AO in terms of holding real-estate using PvP as a primary mechanism. Name me another game that has contestable structures that give large benefits to the organisation/faction that hold them.



ALMOST EVERY SINGLE OTHER GAME IN THE HISTORY OF MMORPGs have always introduced drawbacks to having multiple characters standing in one place and being controlled via broadcasting. AoE Crowd control being one of the main ones that AO is lacking.



Some irrelevant stuff that largely makes the same point as previous paragraph.



You did not give actual examples or evidence, you just said what you thought would make your argument stronger.

I gave ample evidence and pointed out where yours is flawed.

My English is fine and I understand what it means. You should re-read the threads where many ask about ISBoxer's video fx being bannable or not and the many confusing replies regarding it to see where your mistake is.

That said, I'm not liking the way the conversation is going regarding the aggressive tone so I'll leave it until you bring something new evidence-wise. You can ignore mine all you want but it doesn't make you right in any way.

[Psikie]

Name me another game that has contestable structures that give large benefits to the organisation/faction that hold them.


ALMOST EVERY SINGLE OTHER GAME IN THE HISTORY OF MMORPGs have always introduced drawbacks to having multiple characters standing in one place and being controlled via broadcasting. AoE Crowd control being one of the main ones that AO is lacking.

You know honestly I could care less about MB. However what I do care about is pvm changes to game being made to suit the whims of pvp players. In fact I have a huge problem with that. Black screen blinds are prime example as you will see below.

As far as "large" benefits, owning towers/land, it just makes it a bit easier to get on alpha symbs without 1-2 endgame items.

I won't go into a lesson on combating MB, although an aoe snare usually does the trick, especially since...

You only need 1-2 toons to fail resistance.
They are always grouped.
You will always get multiple toons in the aoe.
***NT aoe blinds with black screen effect were particularly effective vs MB's***
Oops pvp QQ got rid of that didnt they?

What about having an agent caller in sneak and all targeting the same MB toons 1 at a time?
Oops removing /assist didnt hurt MB at all did it? Since most dont use assist anyway because it requires an extra keystroke instead of just broadcasting TAB.

Do I need to list more examples? How many times does something have to backfire before all this QQ stops?

If you are alone and you see 4-6 agents coming at you, unless your name is Neo, you do what everyone else does in the matrix and run.

[Sleekyz]

PVP in AO was the biggest holding playerbase, so crying its a small thing is false and ignorant
I MB indeed, but I am not against of removal of such thing, because then I again can solo play.

[Psikie]

PVP in AO was the biggest holding playerbase, so crying its a small thing is false and ignorant

Maybe its just the biggest holding playerbase YOU know of. PoRK would disagree and say your statement is false and ignorant. Or better yet at any time of the day take a walk through noob island, subway, totw, foremans, elysium, Mort, PW, ado, Inf. You will see plenty of people milling around teamed.

Now compare those number to the que for BS. Go ahead I'll wait...now isn't math great?

[DarkerThanBlack]

Maybe its just the biggest holding playerbase YOU know of. PoRK would disagree and say your statement is false and ignorant. Or better yet at any time of the day take a walk through noob island, subway, totw, foremans, elysium, Mort, PW, ado, Inf. You will see plenty of people milling around teamed.

Now compare those number to the que for BS. Go ahead I'll wait...now isn't math great?

Your comparison is off since battlestations are more of an xp playing field than a pvp one. If AO had a balanced playfield dedicated to rewarding pvp it'd be a different story. Sleekiez is right that pvpers make the biggest holding playerbase though, that's because pvm gets boring and repetitive very fast. Yes you'll see people pvming everywhere but that's mostly because they're forced to.

[Psikie]

Your comparison is off since battlestations are more of an xp playing field than a pvp one. If AO had a balanced playfield dedicated to rewarding pvp it'd be a different story. Sleekiez is right that pvpers make the biggest holding playerbase though, that's because pvm gets boring and repetitive very fast. Yes you'll see people pvming everywhere but that's mostly because they're forced to.

Oh I see. Just because more people are out pvm everyday that does not mean there are more pvm players. I get it now, we are in bizarro world were everything is reverse.

I dont understand how you guys can flip flop your arguments and on 1 hand say all the pvp players have quit AO because Mb ruins it. Now you are trying to say there are more pvp players than pvm? Whaaat?

If there was a way for the pvp players to avoid all the boring pvm and just pvp they would do it, thats what you are saying correct? Then explain to me why TESTSERVER so empty? Because its not like you cant just go to Auto and lvl up to 220 and get handed 90% of endgame gear and skip all the boring pvm right? /rollseyes

In fact I would CHALLENGE all the pvp forum posters and all your friends/pvp orgmates, to pick a single day of the week and ONLY log onto testserver. Then we can go check the server load from live vs testserver. I think you will be extremely disappointed in your pvp crowd numbers.

Simple solution, dont talk about it, be about it.

[DigitalBath]

It's been made pretty obvious that PVP is smaller than PVM by a big factor in AO in people's choice not to do it. People started being forced into NW PvP, not the other way around.
How? PVM raid bots started making it pretty much required for people to join in PVP attacks/defenses for people to get their PVM-obtainable gear. And it didn't go that well, either.
A bit like the Goon PAP idea but not as well organized. (I'm neutral so I mostly sidestepped 90% of this mess but I had tons of friends from omni/clan complaining about it)

The community vote for updates also has shown that even in the forums, where there's tons of us PVP-oriented folks, PVM is the majority and people prefer PVM to have more content to NW getting fixed (that's why we're getting new PVM content right now!).

[Tsuniko]

There's no reason to not fix something in PvP when it has no bearing on PvM.

[Alves]

Tower Fields are so oldschool and annoying me... only a couple of player fights for that (50-60 clan/omni/neut persons)... Funcom should bring a pvp playfield like cyrodiil in elder scrolls online with pvm Content (it makes so much fun) . Let's fight for Outposts that give each person on here side an advantage not even the Org...

[Psikie]

Funcom should bring a pvp playfield like

LIKE... 4ho, 2ho, Broken Shores, Omni HQ, Tara, Will to fight, or any of the many other places where you dont have 75% suppression gas?

But thats not what you want is it? You want AO to be more like call of duty. Why not just go play call of duty?

[Tsuniko]

there's absolutely no incentive to pvp in those areas

[DarkerThanBlack]

It's been made pretty obvious that PVP is smaller than PVM by a big factor in AO in people's choice not to do it. People started being forced into NW PvP, not the other way around.
How? PVM raid bots started making it pretty much required for people to join in PVP attacks/defenses for people to get their PVM-obtainable gear. And it didn't go that well, either.

I have no idea why you think those didn't go well since they still work fine and nobody was ever really required to join pvp. Players were just rewarded for participating, because where game designers failed players stood up and made pvp somewhat popular and worthwhile. Imagine how dead and depressing this game would have been without notum wars ****ing things up all these years despite low overall activity, and that's coming from someone who has rational dislike for every aspect of notum wars' design. Bot creators literally keep the game alive and not the passionate-about-pvm guy who's trying to solo aztur with his fiftieth obscure twink. Unfortunately there are crazy people who think that pvpers don't deserve anything more than areas where they can aimlessly whack at each other without realizing the fact that the very core of rpg games is to have fun through characters progress, via both pvm and pvp.

To further illustrate my point to people who think AO has enough (or too much) pvp content I will list zones and events that yield any kind of character improving reward (xp, items, credits) through game interaction (killing or questing):

Zones/events dedicated to pvm on RK: ~35 different outdoor areas with mobs and dynabosses, a dozen dungeons (some level locked), 5 different alien play fields, instanced repeatable alien missions, each city as an alien playfield in it's own right, several endgame raids, contless quests and repeatable missions, and so on.
Zones/events open for (not dedicated to) pvp on RK: total of 3... notum wars with temporary and overall negligible stat bonuses reserved for a limited number of characters, camelot which rarely sees pvp because of poor event design and the fact that the most sought after loot is tradable, and battlestations which serve to grind good chunks of xp and vp for a few necessary nanos without any requirement to actually attack another player -at all- (you get better rewards for just sitting there as a gimp than you do for actually coming to pvp, spectacular design). No missions that require direct pvp interaction.
Zones/events dedicated to pvp: none.

Zones/events dedicated to pvm in SL: 6 huge outdoor worlds each with a dozen static dungeons, with two endgame raids and dozens of quests and repeatable missions, and so on.
Zones/events open for (not dedicated to) pvp in SL: none.
Zones/events dedicated to pvp in SL: none.
LoX has only 4 areas and just like SL has absolutely no pvp content.

Conclusion is that this game has easily over a hundred pvm areas and virtually infinite options and only three pvp related events that can reward players for pvping but don't involve or in fact require much if any pvp to begin with because of bad design that never got addressed properly. 99% of the time spent in NW is attacking towers not players, 99% of the time spent at tara is being afk waiting to kill a monster that any endgame character can solo without breaking a sweat. Battlestation pvp is more or less on demand but you end up paying 15€ per month for an unbalanced shooter game with autoaim and bad sync lag, and most of the time you'll run into players who just want the daily xp/vp rewards and don't want anything to do with actual pvp creating a stale pvp environment. Considering one can get rewards from all three of these events without -ever- attacking or being attacked by another player they can be dismissed as actual pvp events or pvp areas. Just like every other area with 75% or lower suppression gas, pvp is an option but not the least bit required. Taking that into consideration AO has zero, absoultely no pvp dedicated content.

This is in fact the biggest reason why AO is running on life support for years. For a game to survive a purely pvm one it would require innovative design (something AO hasn't seen since SL) and challenging opponents which AO has none of, unless you create the challenge yourself by thinking of ways to complete tasks with as little as possible which is only viable for players with too much time on their hands. I can't imagine why players like psikie feel so threatened by pvp as proper design makes pvp and pvm mutually exclusive with each rewarding one's characters in their own right. AO having a healthy pvp aspect would automatically boost pvm activity as well because pvp content attracts significantly more players than pvm does. It's literally something everyone benefits from.

[DigitalBath]

I have no idea why you think those didn't go well since they still work fine and nobody was ever really required to join pvp. Players were just rewarded for participating, because where game designers failed players stood up and made pvp somewhat popular and worthwhile. Imagine how dead and depressing this game would have been without notum wars ****ing things up all these years despite low overall activity, and that's coming from someone who has rational dislike for every aspect of notum wars' design. Bot creators literally keep the game alive and not the passionate-about-pvm guy who's trying to solo aztur with his fiftieth obscure twink. Unfortunately there are crazy people who think that pvpers don't deserve anything more than areas where they can aimlessly whack at each other without realizing the fact that the very core of rpg games is to have fun through characters progress, via both pvm and pvp.

To further illustrate my point to people who think AO has enough (or too much) pvp content I will list zones and events that yield any kind of character improving reward (xp, items, credits) through game interaction (killing or questing):

Zones/events dedicated to pvm on RK: ~35 different outdoor areas with mobs and dynabosses, a dozen dungeons (some level locked), 5 different alien play fields, instanced repeatable alien missions, each city as an alien playfield in it's own right, several endgame raids, contless quests and repeatable missions, and so on.
Zones/events open for (not dedicated to) pvp on RK: total of 3... notum wars with temporary and overall negligible stat bonuses reserved for a limited number of characters, camelot which rarely sees pvp because of poor event design and the fact that the most sought after loot is tradable, and battlestations which serve to grind good chunks of xp and vp for a few necessary nanos without any requirement to actually attack another player -at all- (you get better rewards for just sitting there as a gimp than you do for actually coming to pvp, spectacular design). No missions that require direct pvp interaction.
Zones/events dedicated to pvp: none.

Zones/events dedicated to pvm in SL: 6 huge outdoor worlds each with a dozen static dungeons, with two endgame raids and dozens of quests and repeatable missions, and so on.
Zones/events open for (not dedicated to) pvp in SL: none.
Zones/events dedicated to pvp in SL: none.
LoX has only 4 areas and just like SL has absolutely no pvp content.

Conclusion is that this game has easily over a hundred pvm areas and virtually infinite options and only three pvp related events that can reward players for pvping but don't involve or in fact require much if any pvp to begin with because of bad design that never got addressed properly. 99% of the time spent in NW is attacking towers not players, 99% of the time spent at tara is being afk waiting to kill a monster that any endgame character can solo without breaking a sweat. Battlestation pvp is more or less on demand but you end up paying 15€ per month for an unbalanced shooter game with autoaim and bad sync lag, and most of the time you'll run into players who just want the daily xp/vp rewards and don't want anything to do with actual pvp creating a stale pvp environment. Considering one can get rewards from all three of these events without -ever- attacking or being attacked by another player they can be dismissed as actual pvp events or pvp areas. Just like every other area with 75% or lower suppression gas, pvp is an option but not the least bit required. Taking that into consideration AO has zero, absoultely no pvp dedicated content.

This is in fact the biggest reason why AO is running on life support for years. For a game to survive a purely pvm one it would require innovative design (something AO hasn't seen since SL) and challenging opponents which AO has none of, unless you create the challenge yourself by thinking of ways to complete tasks with as little as possible which is only viable for players with too much time on their hands. I can't imagine why players like psikie feel so threatened by pvp as proper design makes pvp and pvm mutually exclusive with each rewarding one's characters in their own right. AO having a healthy pvp aspect would automatically boost pvm activity as well because pvp content attracts significantly more players than pvm does. It's literally something everyone benefits from.

You're preaching to the choir, dude. I'm not saying PVP shouldn't be looked at, especially from a reward/design perspective. I'm just saying people in this game prefer and have historically preferred PVM to PVP by a large margin.

I deeply appreciate what bot makers have done for the community in terms of orgbots and SOME raidbots. I don't appreciate the way they were run and how strict pvm'ers were treated there, to the point of them leaving the bot altogether (and / or being banned).
Forcing carebears to pvp when they don't enjoy it is stupid.
Forcing hardcore pvp'ers to pvm when they don't enjoy it is stupid.

[DarkerThanBlack]

You're preaching to the choir, dude. I'm not saying PVP shouldn't be looked at, especially from a reward/design perspective. I'm just saying people in this game prefer and have historically preferred PVM to PVP by a large margin.

Of course they preferred pvm over pvp when pvm is the only rewarding content. I didn't mean to preach to the choir, only the first paragraph was a direct reply to you sorry if my wall of text made that unclear. The rest is just putting my thoughts and facts out there because it's disgusting to read ignorant people unjustifiably generalize pvp as something ultimately bad or destructive for the game or it's community when it's the exact opposite.

[Psikie]

there's absolutely no incentive to pvp in those areas

What incentive do you need? I thought the point of pvp was to beat a non pc controlled opponent. I mean what incentive is there for pvp in borealis??? Titles? Well then you can get those in ANY of the areas mentioned above.

See this is where your arguments fall apart. I would bet my account there is more pvp in borealis on a given day than on battle station or in tara. So we are back to the root, which is wanting pvm rewards in pvp. Not a good idea in any stretch of the imagination.

But to show you im reasonable i will throw you a bone. Make pvp kills equal to same xp you get from tradeskills. Does that incentivize you now?

[Awikun]

Psike,
You are mixing up "real pvp" - when both teams/players are expecting it from "moronic gankers" whose only goal is to kill unsuspecting pvm leveling players.

If you want real pvp you can: go to BS, Tara, attack towerfields, duel etc. - thats what "real pvpers" can do all the time.

Sneaking in 2ho, bringing flag to Elysium KH, or attacking during Halloween pvm players who are farming grieefing pumpkinheads is a task for morons and cowards who want to farm kill count and spoil fun of leveling and pvm players...

I do both pvm and pvp characters and they are quite different builds. I like to pvp on characters that are build for pvp and it is up to me when I want to pvp. What I do not like is to be ganked when I am leveling or playing pvm character ...

As for multiboxing it is just plain wrong to allow any multiboxing in pvp. It gives an anfair advantage to player with multibox - period!
Any advice how to deal/fight with multibox is a waste of time because it acknowledges this unfair advantage and tries to reduce it.
This unfair advantage should not exist at all ...