Auto-follow, is it time for a change?

[prsm]

When auto follow was outlawed in the game, it was due to the fact that it was being greatly abused by a few people!

I am wondering out loud, if maybe we take another look at the rule. Not sure what exactly I am thinking but would like to hear from others. Any thoughts?

[Wombat]

Propose a better system to stop multi-boxing. Not sure what you are wanting to discuss about auto-follow other than it is the best we've had to ensure the end of multi-boxing, which made the game horrible and lame.

[o11c]

If we weaken the rule, there will definitely be some people who start abusing the system again - EVEN IF it is still against the reworded rule.

I'm not sure what is to be gained from changing it, and we definitely still need its protection.

That said, I would be open to an additional rule that explicit forbids multiboxing. Note that the autofollow rule covers some forms of abuse that are not multiboxing.

[Chicka-Maria]

Propose a better system to stop multi-boxing. Not sure what you are wanting to discuss about auto-follow other than it is the best we've had to ensure the end of multi-boxing, which made the game horrible and lame.

+1

Auto follow allows multi boxing...I prefer not to go to the graveyard with a stack of 12 characters especially from the same person. If people want to level they can do it the way it should be ad that's hitting keys not having it on auto while someone else does the work.

Sorry but I vote on keeping it the way it is right now.

regards,

[Jaxad0127]

Adding splash damage to appropriate mobs will help break up those stacks (as they'll all get damaged by each attack). This will make the general auto follow abuse in combat not worth it.

[Nard]

Propose a better system to stop multi-boxing. Not sure what you are wanting to discuss about auto-follow other than it is the best we've had to ensure the end of multi-boxing, which made the game horrible and lame.

Auto follow is completely independent of multi boxing: you can multibox without auto follow, auto-follow without multibox, do both of them. The origin of the problem was that stacks used auto-attack with auto-follow (and often auto-heal too). As auto attack is impossible to detect (it is a server feature or can be easily replaced) by a client one) GHP chose the easy way: forbid auto attack even in cases where it caused no problems to regular players. I may add that now that manaplus is the official client, everyone has access to it.
Attack while auto follow (same IP or not) is would be enough to forbid.

We experienced splash attack in real dimension after o11c introduced it on main server. The negative effects to regular player have already been discussed, so it was removed and abandonned it it's actual form.

[Frost]

Propose a better system to stop multi-boxing. Not sure what you are wanting to discuss about auto-follow other than it is the best we've had to ensure the end of multi-boxing, which made the game horrible and lame.

By "multi-boxing," I assume we're talking about people using automation to control multiple characters at once.
GMs can test for such automation by asking characters to perform equivalent simultaneous tasks in a test. For example, if 3 characters are running together at the same time, the GM could ask that each character run in a different direction at the same time. If the person(s) cannot control the characters independently, then it can be considered "botting," which is against the rules. If they can control the characters independently, that indicates they are not "botting."

Of course, if a GM notices that several characters on a map come from the same IP address, those characters are more likely to be tested. This is also true if some characters use bot-like behavior, like "getting stuck" on drops. Such things can have perfectly innocent explanations, which is why a GM will ask.

Even without the autofollow rule, the only way I know to play multiple characters at once, and not get busted for botting, is to start my tank bashing away at some powerful monster and then move my other character to fight while the first one continues attacking (which does not require interaction.) In other words, I can avoid automation and manually switch windows. That's a really crappy way to multibox.

tl;dr: I think we can separate multi-boxing from auto-follow. The rules against botting applies to stacks of bots. Whether we allow auto-follow is another question.

[Jaxad0127]

We experienced splash attack in real dimension after o11c introduced it on main server. The negative effects to regular player have already been discussed, so it was removed and abandonned it it's actual form.

We'd only have certain mobs splash, and they'd splash appropriately. So the poison skull, for example ,should splash everyone in a few tiles, while the pinkie would only splash on the target tile. Most mobs wouldn't splash at all.

[o11c]

Most mobs wouldn't splash at all.

that makes this completely ineffective as a follow-bot deterrent.

[mistergrey]

On one hand, I don't see a problem with auto-following in more "innocent" contexts. Yet, I am getting a bit sick of people pushing the same issues repetitively, while ignoring logic (not directed at Prsm, btw, just in general).

We started acting against auto-following for a very specific reason - the stacks of players auto-following and attacking began using it as their ultimate excuse. For example, and this one happened to me many times: 4 players are grinding in the graveyard, all following each other, very obviously automated. I go and start a basic botcheck on them (greeting, random question, and if one fails to answer, warn that they have 2 minutes to respond). 3 of them pass (at least 2 were of course the same person), and the 4th fails to. They come back as I'm about to ban them, and protest, using the excuse "But I wasn't even attacking, I just used Follow".

There really is no way to differentiate between the two, in a group of players. This is where logic comes into play - when we became unsure of how to deal with this, the rule was modified to prevent people abusing the rules with an easy excuse. But this cannot just be enforced in groups of stackbotters, or players would be eternally confused. Not to mention the large amount of people who fail to understand how auto-following somebody and ignoring their requests to stop is definitely included as harassment, which we have always been free to act against.

Nard: While I agree that auto-following is not a terrible crime, and while I hate warning people who just use it for harmless fun... the truth is this rule interpretation has been in effect for a long while now. Auto-follow being part of Manaplus does not magically make it okay - in my personal opinion, that feature should have been removed from the client before ever being considered the official client. Of course, it being used for another game as well has an impact there and I respect that - I simply don't see how 4144's choice to keep that feature justifies this coming up over and over again.

Until there is a CLEAR and unmistakable way for GMs to see whether an individual player in a stack is attacking or just following, I am completely against this being allowed at all. I remember just how many took advantage before that came into effect, and don't wish to repeat the experience.

[Nard]

Auto-follow being part of Manaplus does not magically make it okay - in my personal opinion, that feature should have been removed from the client before ever being considered the official client. Of course, it being used for another game as well has an impact there and I respect that - I simply don't see how 4144's choice to keep that feature justifies this coming up over and over again.

The fact that manaplus is now the official client doesn't mean it is ok , it just make the argument that players are inequal fall. Now you should be aware that you cannot attack when you are in follow mode in manaplus which makes attack-follow and heal-follow impossible with this client. Manaplus is not developped only for TMW, who just chose it as official client. There is no reason why TMW would ask to remove harmless client features.
The heart of the problem is not auto-follow, it is client hacking in ways that are against the rules. I could agree with a temporary interdiction of some features like auto-attack and auto-follow, in the terms Frost described them, if there was a longer term reflection about the rules. In my opinion no client should be allowed on main server if it adds features that break the balance; the code should be public and approved by TMWC. I have never found that choosing a solution because it is easy to apply is a good thing for any project, but for a limited time.
What is sure is that there are many situations where auto-follow is harmless and clear and easy to see by GMs and there is no reason to forbid them. They are the only auto-follow situations that you can punish because, as you said it, in a mixed group of fighting players, it is very difficult to see who is using attack-follow and who is not except if fair players suddenly stop moving and attacking. All of us who experienced this period can tell which characters practiced stackbotting, it is very easy to see even with the latest mods you didn't see (because they were tested on Auldsbel), but difficult to proove. What is sure, is that if we dont think to the problem it will never be solved: there are still players who practice individual behind-the-screen-botting and auto-heal, players are inequal on these points.

[mistergrey]

The issue I have with it is simply that there is no way to differentiate it from attack follow with others present (and obviously if a player is using follow or attack-follow, there is someone else involved). I usually would have no problem with it otherwise, but the rules must be consistent for players to understand and follow them.

It is not okay to beg sometimes - anyone who does beg publicly for items/gold risks a GM seeing and warning them, or acting further. The reason this is easy to understand is because there is no loophole, only an action and a consistent reaction. The same applies to botting - there is a procedure, an expected reaction.

The rule we have the most trouble/argument over is the English in public rule, and this is because it is a conditional rule. A player can speak whatever language they like, it is usually only when done in a public area with many others that they will be warned for this. I dislike this, because it often confuses new players who do not speak English, and have seen that it is sometimes okay to speak their native language in various places - but I understand that it has to be that way to be at all fair. It is not easy to mediate a public argument, especially when one or more people are speaking a language the GM does not know - in that sense, this rule is also supposed to protect those players from being misunderstood by a GM at a bad time.

That said, I would not mind so much if there were a very clear rule specifying how auto-following is allowed to be used or not - but this Will cause some confusion at some point.

Nard: I only said the client should not have been chosen as the official client, while it still contains a feature users can be banned for. I understand perfectly why 4144 had no need to remove it. Personally, I don't see that it's a very important, or even very fun feature - I've mostly seen it used to harass players, or as an excuse to claim someone was not using a modified "attack-follow" feature. The only helpful use I've seen for the follow feature was by players having new players follow them, and showing them the way somewhere, which was actually pretty nice.

My only real concern is that, if auto-following is allowed in "normal" circumstances (such as a group of players forming a train in town for fun), I expect it will not be long before a player uses it in a way that is not allowed (such as if they follow a stack who are attacking), and argues that they should not be punished for using a client feature they are allowed to use anywhere else in the game. Such incidents often ended in long-winded forum topics about GM "abuse" in the past, and it's not a pleasant experience for anyone.

[Nard]

Then the rule should be something like: "attack-follow is forbidden. Auto-follow is forbidden in areas were it may be confused with attack-follow; if you use auto-follow in a context where many players attack at the same time, especially in stacks you take the risk to be banned as there is no way to differenciate you from attack-following." Now I repeat that with Manaplus you must break the auto follow to be able to attack.

About English: Maybe the rules could be accompanied by directives such "as speaking another language is streng verboten in Hurnscald , Nivalis, villages, Tulimshar bazaar..." and "when at least a player around cannot understand your language, rules and politeness require you speak english even to insult which, by the way, is forbidden too " wiki and forum would be useful fo that, and manaplus supports inline links in help...

Auto-follow is a feature that is present in many other similar games with no problem. This is the first one where I can see difficulties about it. I am sorry to say that, but the responsibles of this are the (few) developers and users who pushed the rules over the acceptable limits and caused issues and balance breaks in the game, just as if they were outside this project. They were easily identifiable (and probably identified) by any admin at that time. I don't understand why the majority of players would have to deal with the consequences of their error(s).

A lot of manaplus features are not so much fun after you have discovered and practiced them, just as the pink hair fashion has ended. What make a game fun and friendly, along the content and general graphic quality, is the addition of many small fun features like emotes, imitation, follow, unrealistic hair; robes for men and so on, just as you (at least I) usually like a person because of the many little things that make his/her personality, along of course, with the major ones. Auto-follow is not the major quality of manaplus and TMW, but it is a brick that is part of a wall: when it misses you see a hole.
I have not the same experience as you with auto-follow, but I used it many times to drive players who were weaker than me to cindy cage, to explore and recognize the snake mountain caverns and hurnscald mines, to go across the snow hills to blue sage, to get a short sword or simply to drive them to Sagatha... and I was far to be alone to do it.

[Frost]

After reading what GMs have said here, I have changed my mind about auto-follow.

I remember that botstacks used to claim to "be using only autofollow" to avoid getting caught. I now understand how much work (and argument and frustration) that was for GMs.

It's grand to theorize about things, but in the end this is about how to enforce reasonable rules. If those people who are responsible for enforcing the rules tell us they need this tool, and if that tool doesn't break normal gameplay, then let's keep it.

[prsm]

I would like to thank everyone for the feedback here, it never hurts to address rules to ensure that they stay fresh. Even if they remain the same!

Prsm