The Multi-box Thread: How it ruins the game.
" One driver can't drive 6 cars simultaneously. It's not how they were designed. |
|
|
my point is someone can afford something you cant afford.
good pc to run multiple account or multiple pcs. i have 5 pcs that can run poe too. again, multiboxing alone isn't cheating. you guys really need to understand this. |
|
" running 6 accounts simultaneously...why? "it's a challenge. It's really hard to do. It gives the game more depth" blah blah blah.. what a load of crap. You run 6 accounts simultaneously in order to gain an advantage over other players. You already understand this. Stop defending cheaters. |
|
|
it's not cheating.
3rd party program is cheating. botting is cheating. multiboxing isn't cheating. altho it's not very effective to manually run multiple toons, some people still do it to play by him/herself. it is one of the play style. Last edited by Dudebag#0222 on Apr 2, 2013, 9:54:34 PM
|
|
" "play style" just another attempt to cloud the fact that multiboxing is cheating. I have 3 computers. Does that mean I can file my taxes 3 times and get 3 refunds? failed logic is no excuse for cheating. multiboxing is cheating. |
|
" That's actually a really good question. Why? Let's look at the spectrum of multiboxing, shall we? Non-Hacker Makes coffee at home. Manually controls five alternate accounts to follow him around. Runs some maps; gets 250% IIQ, but all that manual control slowed him down so much that he took 250% more time than he would solo, plus it was really, really hard to prevent the alts from dying. He doesn't make any more per unit time and ends up being pretty much like everyone else, except more efficient on map expenditures. Dumb Hacker Makes coffee at home. Creates 5 bots that party with him and follow him around. Runs some maps; gets 250% IIQ. Sells proceeds to RMT site. Overthinking Hacker Creates 5 bots that party with him and follow him around. Puts a bot on his main that runs around collecting currency from chests in Fellshrine; gets 250% IIQ. Goes to Starbucks. Comes home, does inventory, sells proceeds to RMT site. Actually Smart Hacker Creates 6 bots that each operate solo, running around collecting currency from chests in Fellshrine; gets 500% IIQ, since each bot past the first is +100. Goes to Starbucks. Comes home, does inventory, sells proceeds to RMT site. * Non-hackers who multibox aren't getting any significant time savings, if they can even pull it off. * The smarter the hacker is, the less likely party play is involved, and the more likely AFK automation is involved. * The dumber a hacker is, the more likely party play is involved, and the less likely AFK automation is involved. Technically, all of these are multiboxing -- one individual logged in simultaneously with multiple accounts on multiple computers. Multiboxing to a hacker is like spawning more Overlords in StarCraft; it allows him to grow his army. The Zerglings to this rush -- the real threat -- is botting. As a side note, I've seen people say "they should allow /players x, it's no different from multiboxing." Maybe no different form the Dumb Hacker example above, but there are still lots of differences, and worst it would give Actually Smart Hackers a powerful tool to amass even more illegitimate wealth (treasure chest bots don't kill anything, but still get party IIQ). When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Apr 2, 2013, 10:11:11 PM
|
|
" Wow there are people that uses mirror neurons, simple logic and are even willing to post in a gaming forum? So in a few hours the world end =( What can never be lent or earned?
Somewhat, that devours everyone and everything: A tree that rush. A bird that sings. It eat bones and smite the hardest stones. Masticate every sword. Shatters every shrine. It defeat mighty kings and carry mountains on lightly wings. What am i? |
|
|
"Non-hackers who multibox aren't getting any significant time savings, if they can even pull it off."
So, the best excuse that MB is 'not' cheating is that it's too hard to do and does not give the user an advantage. Seriously. 40 pages in and that's the best defense of cheating you come up with? Multiboxing allows a single user to simultaneously run 6 accounts in order to maximize the iir and iiq of a multi player game environment. Any reasonable person can understand that this gives the single user an unreasonable advantage over other players within the same environment (community) Clouding the issue with side issues (ie: MB is difficult, complex) does not change the fundamental aspect that Multiboxing gives one user an advantage over other users within the game environment (trading, obviously) People who chose to cheat by multiboxing will argue that it's not "ruining the game". Multibox cheating does impact the game. It affects market obviously. But it also affects the general community too. Players who do not multibox cheat become disenfranchised with the gaming environment and they will leave, often giving the game itself a poor review. Thus, the cheaters have now corrupted the market system AND harmed the game, its designers and the longevity of the game. TL;DR - after 40 pages, lol. Multiboxing is cheating. Last edited by Cambob#4516 on Apr 2, 2013, 10:24:04 PM
|
|
"  If they're not getting an advantage, how is it cheating?Just playing. I know you're both serious and trolling. No, it does not give players a serious IIQ advantage (and parties don't even get an IIR advantage). This is because the time to move the dummy accounts around takes up so much time that it nullifies the party IIQ bonus. The only way to get around the hassle of moving dummy accounts is to use bots to automate their movement. Once you introduce bots, there are far better applications than trying to exploit the party bonus; therefore, no one with bots actually does this (the Dumb and Overthinking Hackers don't actually exist, they just become Actually Smart Hackers). You are chasing something that doesn't even exist. When Stephen Colbert was killed by HYDRA's Project Insight in 2014, the comedy world lost a hero. Since his life model decoy isn't up to the task, please do not mistake my performance as political discussion. I'm just doing what Steve would have wanted. Last edited by ScrotieMcB#2697 on Apr 2, 2013, 11:06:58 PM
|
|
" In most circumstances, almost certainly at this stage, partying likely has no benefit for botting. At some point though it is conceivable that partying becomes more efficient (even if it's unlikely), the reason being resources required for botting. When you start having thin, fake clients or shells with shared data, and the hardware/resources dominate the efficiency (every instance requiring something like djikstra or BFS, a*, bot logic, etc) it is possible that partying could end up being more efficient. It is pretty hard to speculate about the circumstances though. Actual clearing safety or speed may even play into it. |
|
