No more multiboxing???

Got something on your mind about the project? This is the correct place for that.
Forum rules
This forum is for feature requests, content changes additions, anything not a Bug in the software.
Please report all bugs on the Support Forums
User avatar
JackDeth
Novice
Novice
Posts: 119
Joined: Mon Sep 14, 2009 7:18 pm
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Contact:

Re: No more multiboxing???

Post by JackDeth » Sat Oct 02, 2010 2:14 am

Acegi wrote: What if a sibling (or more) and I decide to play TMW at the same time.
My sibling plays by stacking with someone in Australia.
Another sibling plays by stacking with someone else in France.
I'm in a stack with someone in Canada in a different area maybe same map maybe not.

This is a likely scenario that could be misconstrued as multiboxing. Do the GM trust that the players are siblings/friends in the same house? Does a GM/Dev/Admin NEED to know that this person is related? Should you have to reveal private information such as having a younger sister/brothers?

There is no way of knowing for certain unless GMs start making house calls. I trust the GMs I know and for the most part the GMs have been chosen by the players. This doesn't mean I want them to know about my family.
I personally think this rule is crap. I originally started playing this as something my son and I could do together. Now it has become my son and one of my daughters as well. We are on at the same time somewhat frequently. So you're telling me that they look at a report to find out if we are all at the same IP address (which we would be using a router) and we'd get banned for this "multiboxing" thing? That's B.S. It's going to simply discourage family and friends playing together and will alienate many potential long term players.

Sounds to me like democratic/liberal thinking. Let's penalize everyone just to get a handful of abusers. It's this kind of thinking which is the reason we have so many frivilous lawsuits here in the U.S., stupid laws, and why they have to print so many stupid warning labels on products. If a lady who goes through the drivethrough at McDonald's orders a cup of coffee, and then drives away and promptly spills such cup in her lap burning her legs, that's her own stupid fault. But no, she's able to sue McDonalds for not warning her ahead of time that the coffee was hot. So gets a bunch of money and now they are required to print on their cups that "the contents are very hot" and now they also have to tell people at the window to "be careful because it's very hot".

Not $h!t dum8a$$ ! It's coffee!! Duuuuhhhhh......

:shock:
User avatar
Anonymous!!!
Novice
Novice
Posts: 177
Joined: Thu Oct 29, 2009 7:37 am
Location: Hurnscald

Re: No more multiboxing???

Post by Anonymous!!! » Sat Oct 02, 2010 8:19 am

So this means using the follow feature huh?
-Nahem - My Characters in use are:
  • Nahem Image
  • Knetrin Image
  • Nullified Image
Are you up for a CHALLENGE? Yes!
Project Hurnscald
I'm currently attempting to develop an Event Arena and I'm looking for ideas!
User avatar
MadCamel
TMW Adviser
TMW Adviser
Posts: 605
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2009 5:19 am
Location: Catland

Re: No more multiboxing???

Post by MadCamel » Sat Oct 02, 2010 6:47 pm

JackDeth wrote: I personally think this rule is crap. I originally started playing this as something my son and I could do together. Now it has become my son and one of my daughters as well. We are on at the same time somewhat frequently. So you're telling me that they look at a report to find out if we are all at the same IP address (which we would be using a router) and we'd get banned for this "multiboxing" thing? That's B.S. It's going to simply discourage family and friends playing together and will alienate many potential long term players.
You just specified the exact reason why I didn't implement a fully automated system. Great care is being taken to assure friends/family can play together without penalty.
Head of the TMW Illuminati
Arphetic
Novice
Novice
Posts: 183
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 12:51 am

Re: No more multiboxing???

Post by Arphetic » Sat Oct 02, 2010 8:55 pm

Anonymous!!! wrote:So this means using the follow feature huh?
No
bcs86 wrote:This game is a long way from looking like something people could take seriously.
User avatar
Nard
Knight
Knight
Posts: 1113
Joined: Sun Jun 27, 2010 1:45 pm
Location: France, near Paris

Re: No more multiboxing???

Post by Nard » Sun Oct 03, 2010 12:41 am

JackDeth wrote:
Acegi wrote: What if a sibling (or more) and I decide to play TMW at the same time.
My sibling plays by stacking with someone in Australia.
Another sibling plays by stacking with someone else in France.
I'm in a stack with someone in Canada in a different area maybe same map maybe not.

This is a likely scenario that could be misconstrued as multiboxing. Do the GM trust that the players are siblings/friends in the same house? Does a GM/Dev/Admin NEED to know that this person is related? Should you have to reveal private information such as having a younger sister/brothers?

There is no way of knowing for certain unless GMs start making house calls. I trust the GMs I know and for the most part the GMs have been chosen by the players. This doesn't mean I want them to know about my family.
I personally think this rule is crap. I originally started playing this as something my son and I could do together. Now it has become my son and one of my daughters as well. We are on at the same time somewhat frequently. So you're telling me that they look at a report to find out if we are all at the same IP address (which we would be using a router) and we'd get banned for this "multiboxing" thing? That's B.S. It's going to simply discourage family and friends playing together and will alienate many potential long term players.

Sounds to me like democratic/liberal thinking. Let's penalize everyone just to get a handful of abusers. It's this kind of thinking which is the reason we have so many frivilous lawsuits here in the U.S., stupid laws, and why they have to print so many stupid warning labels on products. If a lady who goes through the drivethrough at McDonald's orders a cup of coffee, and then drives away and promptly spills such cup in her lap burning her legs, that's her own stupid fault. But no, she's able to sue McDonalds for not warning her ahead of time that the coffee was hot. So gets a bunch of money and now they are required to print on their cups that "the contents are very hot" and now they also have to tell people at the window to "be careful because it's very hot".

Not $h!t dum8a$$ ! It's coffee!! Duuuuhhhhh......

:shock:
I do agree with JackDeth and Acegi.
First the definition of what "multiboxing" is does not suffer fuzziness and I do not think this is the case actually. The case exposed by Acegi enlightens the point. More, let's say I have to chars A and B on line, I play mainly with A, it is badly wounded, retreats to a near map and gets healed by the second. Is it Multiboxing? If yes, control would need more than one GM. Do the actions of "multiboxing" have to be simultaneous or can they be sequential, and in that case which is the "legal" minimum delay between "fighting" actions of two characters owning to the same person?

Second GM's, who have to apply the rules must have real tools to investigate. IP is definitely not one of them. I have three computers (sometimes four) which share the same IP. If I played from my university about 200 adresses are shared between about more than 1000 computers and more than twice users... The only way to bypass the problem would be to forbid to play more than one char at the same time on a single computer and to test it with mac address as IPv6 is not implemented by providers. If I understood well, this is not the intention uderlying the new rule. More if the policeman role of game masters takes to much time and does not let them play or have fun, TMW may have some difficulties to recruit new ones in the future. Some other online web games (gameforge for example) forbid two or more active players with the same IP, members of a family have to declare, and ask for a special authorization

Third, the new rule seems to have players who can make stacks with their own chars as main targets. Who are they? Newbies, surely not, ordinary players (including me) who may have a few chars, I do not think so. I could though practice a little multiboxing with 2 chars to help one of the two to level up, just the same way as I did with other players I helped. Even with 4144 patch, this requires some gymnastics and does not really disadvantages other players because the possibilities are limited. Players who can play with a lot of chars are mainly those who have been playing for a relatively long time and cannot progress with their main chars because their evolution is blocked in level and in abilities (magic lvl) and the mainframe of TMW evolves slowly. The only possibilities left to them is to make babies and restart the story, organize some "gardenparties" (which can be funfunfun) organize special events (thanks Reid), make war (or love, depending of their players convictions), and discuss on various subjects.Thanks to all of them, if they didn't this game would be boring. Among these, a few of them seem to like fast progression and make use of automation. Although the declared intentions of it's Author and the practices of some of it's users, Manabot is in my sense, a "crime" instigation . There is no need to make a new rule, this is botting; even if player is behind the keyboard. We just need new ways to qualify it and this is not easy :roll: . I have seen even good reputation players botting with this client.
Some of the recent changes in TMW penalize more little or moderate level players as they slow down the progession to a dangerous slow rate (in my opinon) than the higher level ones or long time players who have more means to jump over or bypass the hurdle.I mean particularly the tax and prices raises, The trading of unnecessary items has diminished since and the price of some others is so high that I cannot imagine getting one of them some day. Please do not believe I do not agree with all them, the story has better transitions and better coherency except for Agostine who has been transplanted in a place where he has nothing to do.
If this rule is applied now and as is, there will be for sure, unfairly banned players. and TMW needs them to live.
Mr developpers (thanks to you) please watch also little lvl players who do not speak a lot (even in english), ingame or elsewhere and try to play as they do. Please increase max level to 256, enable magic level 3 even if incomplete.
Please go on with your fertile imagination and let us do new quests like the robberies one where we have to waste
the money we earned with our 2D sweat and let trading and GM's make us spend the remains in unnecessary invasions and candor battles.

We'll never lend my toothbrush to a slime
Nard '77), Nardis(52) & Luxima (54)
sometime playing (fighting? oh no!) together
and
Bernard

Thanks Platyna

P.S: the Mogguns stink! Yesterday Relm smelled my hair and I was ashamed because I could not have a bath after a run for coal.
P.S.2: When I suspect players to bot with manabot, I leave some drops on the ground, If the player doesn't scream, he is botting :mrgreen: ....
"The language of everyday life is clogged with sentiment, and the science of human nature has not advanced so far that we can describe individual sentiment in a clear way." Lancelot Hogben, Mathematics for the Million.
“There are two motives for reading a book; one, that you enjoy it; the other, that you can boast about it.” Bertrand Russell, Conquest of Happiness.
"If you optimize everything, you will always be unhappy." Donald Knuth.
User avatar
Lt. KLAG [24th.KDF]
Novice
Novice
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 7:40 am
Location: [24th KDF] Act.Rank: [IKS PaGH] DrP Off.

Re: No more multiboxing???

Post by Lt. KLAG [24th.KDF] » Mon Oct 04, 2010 8:01 pm

I agree with you buddy ... IPs suck, and don't even trust MAC addresses too much ...
ImageImage
Frost
TMW Adviser
TMW Adviser
Posts: 851
Joined: Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:20 am
Location: California, USA

Re: No more multiboxing???

Post by Frost » Tue Oct 05, 2010 5:22 pm

It's clear that multiple characters -- with different abilities -- working together are more powerful than characters going solo.
Fighting solo as multiple characters is certainly one way to play. Fighting alongside characters from other players is another.

Keeping in mind the caveats already mentioned (eg. can't assume based on IP address), this sounds like a good rule when applied at GM discretion. It seems consistent with the social orientation of the game.

Disclaimers:
I like meeting other people in the game and fighting/questing alongside their characters, so this won't affect me.
In the 4 months I've been playing, I've found GMs to be very fair in how they enforce rules. A "bad" GM would make me more cautious.
I don't drink McDonald's coffee and wouldn't eat silica gel anyway. :mrgreen:
You earn respect by how you live, not by what you demand.
-unknown
User avatar
Lt. KLAG [24th.KDF]
Novice
Novice
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Aug 30, 2010 7:40 am
Location: [24th KDF] Act.Rank: [IKS PaGH] DrP Off.

Re: No more multiboxing???

Post by Lt. KLAG [24th.KDF] » Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:57 pm

Frost wrote:I don't drink McDonald's coffee and wouldn't eat silica gel anyway. :mrgreen:
Hum ... interesting, very interesting ...
Can you expand it some more, please ?
ImageImage
Post Reply