The Multi-box Thread: How it ruins the game.

"

Time2Kill wrote:

multi boxing is just another step in gaming. Adds another "dimension" or playing style to playing a game. Nobody can force a person to limit how many games he has running. I spend allot of my time playing solo. And if I had the ability to run 4 games at once or more fuck ya, why not. Get more loot. Put that loot to use. Start up a clan and gear up people. Get 2 or 3 guys multi boxing, even better.

"

flab wrote:

There's also this:

"While we haven't disclosed figures, we have banned a lot of accounts since we entered Open Beta. While there are limited ways people can actually cheat (maphacks, botting, input proxying across multiple sessions), these do have high impact on the game economy and we're working on improving our detection for these so that the zero-tolerance policy can be felt across the whole game."

What exactly is input proxying across multiple sessions? I can't be sure, it seems a bit ambiguous.

"

dezerus wrote:

"

flab wrote:

There's also this:

"While we haven't disclosed figures, we have banned a lot of accounts since we entered Open Beta. While there are limited ways people can actually cheat (maphacks, botting, input proxying across multiple sessions), these do have high impact on the game economy and we're working on improving our detection for these so that the zero-tolerance policy can be felt across the whole game."

What exactly is input proxying across multiple sessions? I can't be sure, it seems a bit ambiguous.

Some people use 3rd party software to launch several instances of the game on 1 machine. The software captures the keystrokes/mouseclicks and then forwards them to all instances of the game launched. If you make 6 characters using exactly the same build/key layout, you will be controlling all 6 of them at once (they will all move to the same position, use the same skill at the same time, etc), therefore gaining the benefit of IIQ/IIR from multiple players in your party AND not lose any DPS, since all 6 of your guys deal the damage. So with a full party you will be over 300% more efficient than a solo player: every extra player in party - 50% IIQ/IIR/monster health/damage, but since you have 600% extra manpower, you gain the 300% IIQ/IIR AND the monsters are only 50% efficient vs you. And that is what input proxying across multiple sessions is.

Actually this is the way to multibox and the way most people who multibox do it, and it is against the ToS. I don't mind if someone gets a full party of his characters as long as he only uses one to kill stuff, because it actually is more challenging to him. This method not only rewards you MUCH more than solo, but also trivializes the content. Lower the risk, raise the reward.

I honestly do not see the reason why not just remove the IIQ/IIR bonus from extra party members. ARPGs are meant to be farmed solo. Solo should be more efficient because it means you need to build a stronger character, especially in hardcore. Partying is the way to progress safer through areas you are unable to conquer on your own, not to farm better and have an easier time.

"

DatChen wrote:

Bump. ANSWERS GGG! dont go thinking we dont know ur there! silence as usual eh?! dont wana get into bed with your own mess? you allowed multi-boxers and now you dont wana look a fool owning up to the mistake you made!

"

SL4Y3R wrote:

Next, all 6 players do not move in the same direction. This is due to the fact that they can collide with one another. This makes multiboxing incredibly difficult. Since once they're out of formation, they must be manually adjusted back into formation. And no. You don't have 600% the manpower, because this would be under the false assumption that they're all using the EXACT same gear.

"

SL4Y3R wrote:

"

DatChen wrote:

Bump. ANSWERS GGG! dont go thinking we dont know ur there! silence as usual eh?! dont wana get into bed with your own mess? you allowed multi-boxers and now you dont wana look a fool owning up to the mistake you made!

There is still 0 proof multiboxers even exist in any fashion that would make them efficient.

"

SL4Y3R wrote:

There is still 0 proof multiboxers even exist in any fashion that would make them efficient.

"

SL4Y3R wrote:

"

DatChen wrote:

Bump. ANSWERS GGG! dont go thinking we dont know ur there! silence as usual eh?! dont wana get into bed with your own mess? you allowed multi-boxers and now you dont wana look a fool owning up to the mistake you made!

There is still 0 proof multiboxers even exist in any fashion that would make them efficient.