Multiboxing (apology in advance)

Q u o t e:
I have a MB question. And I know this thread is gonna turn into troll city in just a few moments. As I understand from reading about MBing in these threads is that the golden rule is, "one key or mouse click = 1 action." So on my char here I press 4 and I cast frostbolt. Now someone who has 5 instances of WoW open on one comp presses 4 and he gets 5 frostbolts. That would be 1 key press and 5 actions. I haven't read that far into it but I have heard they need some kind of addon or app to broadcast a key to each window. So while I hit 4 I get one and he gets 5. I don't get. I'm sorry Belfy but I had to understand the feelings about this because I had never seen it presented this way.

Here's the thing - that's not 5 actions. It's one action, per character.

It would not be okay, if, for example, you had those macros set up so that you had one button to cast frost nova, wait out the global cooldown, blink, delay for global cooldown, then cast blizzard all in a single button press. That is, of course, several button presses.

So, to expand your definition: 'safe' multi-boxing commands are one button press = one action per character.

If you're curious about the various programs that make multi-boxing possible, your best place to look is the UI & Macro forums.

Good luck!

Q u o t e:
I have yet to see an explanation for this that convincingly shows how this is not automation.

Ah, I believe I can help with this too.

Think of a single key-press as a lever. You pull the lever, and something happens.

Think of multi-boxing as simply attaching 5 levers to a single handle. You're still only pulling one lever, it just affects more than one something.

Now, think of automation as a lever attached to a set of gears and pulleys. You pull the lever, and a whole slew of bits and bobs start working, gears whirring, pulleys spinning. You might pull a lever, but it sets a process in motion that would be impossible with an ordinary pull of the lever if those gears and pulleys were not in place. Automation can apply to a single character just as much as it could with multiple characters.

The point is that the 'something' that occurs spools out without direct human involvement aside from the initial pull of the lever. That is automation. Even if it's only a single extra step.

In multi-boxing, every action taken by those characters has its source in a human command. Each individual action. Thus, it is not automation.

I'd like to help you understand, so please let me know if you desire that I should explain further.

Q u o t e:


Ahhh, thanx. That is indeed the first comprehensive definition I've seen. So, perhaps now you can explain why this isn't either an exploit or a serious form of OP play, especially in a BG.

Please see if you can do so with a focus on one player (with one character) vs. one player (with multiple characters). Because that's where the outrage comes from. Every other form of focus is a form of situational study. Things might happen that way but you would also need to provide data to show that these other situations actually do form a significant block of situations. Behaviorally, the BGs are still one player vs. one player for the most part even when they seem to move about in mobs. They just aren't capable of forming ad hoc groupings on the fly.

Technical hair splitting in the form of a definition or series of definitions that continue to allow one PLAYER to routinely overpower another PLAYER just aren't convincing as answers. We can agree that an exceptional or perhaps highly experienced player is likely to find ways to overcome the multiboxing player but most of us, by definition, are average. And us average folk just can't seem to deal with them in the BGs.

We can agree on something else, perhaps, too. Its actually the BGs that are broken. I really don't want to deny multiboxers access to solo play and the delights they seem to find from multiboxing but I'm also sufficiently tired of routinely being OPed by them in BGs to be willing to push to ban the practice unless a different fix can be found.

I will give you a purely anecdotal example that I have experienced personally, (perhaps because I love facing multi-boxers).

I happen to play a rogue - a class that excels at sowing confusion and disrupting opposing teams. I was facing a team in Warsong Gulch, half of which was composed of a multi-boxer controlling five characters. I encountered the Warlocks individually, and proceeded to sap them to break up his formation. This forced him to maneuver around in an effort to retain cohesion - something a normal player would never have to do.

I continually would delay and harass him in this fashion. I would often manage to kill one of his characters by sapping one of his group, cheap shotting one, gouging one, then blinding another. Even if I failed to land a kill, his characters were so scattered and disorganized by my efforts and the occasional fear, sheep or other CC thrown by a teammate, that fully half of their team was disabled for most of the battle. We won that match very swiftly.

I am not exaggerating when I say that this player would leave battlegrounds when they saw my name on the opposing team list, or after our first encounter in the field.

A unique situation? Perhaps, perhaps not. Knowing how to fight a multi-boxer, and having the tools do so, means that one character can effectively cripple 5 or more. After all, one mind is simply not as efficient at running those five characters once cohesion is lost, or if 2 of his group have been slain, leaving him with characters scattered across the field. Of note, this is not much different from learning how to effectively fight a particular character class or spec. Knowledge is power.

All of the above is irrelevant though. Ultimately, this isn't about what one player can do vs. another (or even 5 others). This is about the number of characters in play. Five characters can defeat 5 characters. 5 player run characters actually have a very substantial advantage over a multi-boxer in most cases. That a single player is controlling them offers limited advantages compared to the disadvantages it can present.

Since battlegrounds are a sealed environment, it is always a question of x players versus x players. How many actual players are behind those characters becomes a non-issue.

Essentially it balances out so well in the end that it functionally isn't much of an advantage at all, and merely becomes a play style choice. As always, we'll continue to monitor multi-boxing and other in-game behaviors.

If this practice should ever present a truly exploitative influence you can be sure that we'll make appropriate policy modifications in response.

Q u o t e:



/yawn

The fact is, however much the BG is designed for grp vs grp play, it truthfully is much more often a case of a motley crew of folks who may or may not have the same activities in mind when they enter.

Farm honor? Capture strategic objectives? "Win" (or lose) as fast as possible to get whatever bonus honor and move on?

So, the essential fact is that more often than not, one player is expecting to deal with folks who are not particularly interested in perfectly coordinated attacks... suddenly coming face to face(s) with a multi-boxed group is a very rude wake up.



I could see the argument rationalizing multiboxing being allowed in BGs making sense if the majority of the time one would expect to face a coordinated group of 5 (or more) but that simply does not happen very often. (I have actually been spending some time in BGs of late and know that what I say is true.)

In fact, if it WERE a commonplace thing to see coordinated groups, folks would see multi-boxing as the free honor as it would in that case be as we all know that a coordinated group of 5 would beat a single player (controlling however many characters they like) every time.

Here's the thing though. That multiboxer queues, and waits, just as a 5-man arena team would (to use an example). They take up the same queue time, and the same number of slots on the opposing team. There is nothing to differentiate them from one of the very common groups of 'pre-made' players, aside from slightly more effective focus fire, and less strategic flexibility in dealing with threats, much greater vulnerability to crowd control and that being 'split' by resurrection is devastating.

The less organized battle ground participants you describe will typically have a much harder time facing that arena team or pre-made than they would a multi-boxer.

Aside from which, occasionally running up against more organized opposition is simply a fact of the battlegrounds. Just as is facing more skilled or more well equipped foes. Factually, while we do our best to structure the queuing system such that players will meet equivalent opponents, there are limitations on that system if we still want to keep the queues at a reasonable length. As a result, sometimes a team will run up against a 'superior' opponent (please note the quotes), and have a greater challenge, whether in the form of a pre-made group, multi-boxer, or merely highly skilled or knowledgeable opponents.

Simply because an opponent is 'superior' does not mean that a 'pug' team isn't able to adapt and overcome. Having a pre-made group or a multi-boxer doesn't even necessarily mean that a given battleground team truly is superior. There are a great many variables to take into account.

Q u o t e:


Then we have an intransigent disagreement. You insist on focusing on the characters rather than the players without further explanation beyond extending character-based explanations (explanations I believe to be challengeable, btw, but its irrelevant here). Why do the players not matter?

Players, as individuals matter.

Here is why characters are more important for the purposes of this discussion though.

What happens when 6 players controlling 6 characters join a battleground? 6 character slots are filled. Then 4 others are filled with 4 other players controlling 4 other characters. Why?

Because battlegrounds are filled on a character for character basis. They are a closed system that only recognizes characters, and wherein characters ideally are matched against other characters.

What happens when 5 players and 1 multiboxer join a battleground? 10 character slots are filled. The results are identical to a situation where each character is controlled by a single player. We can run over the relative merits and disadvantages of multiboxing til the bovines return to their abodes, but factually, that's what we're dealing with:

10 characters vs. 10 characters. The raw ability of those 10 characters to accomplish their goal (winning the battleground) is identical within reasonable assessment of individual class abilities, gear and skill.

Q u o t e:
Either
Change the way BGs are handled to allow premades to be more easily made as iirc the whole reason they were disabled was due to long queues which should have become fairly moot point with the formation of battlegroups for pvp instanced purposes (as this would alter the expectation of one player to face coordinated groups)
Or
Disallow multi-boxing in BGs

I'm not certain that this is relevant. After all, the wait time for each 5 character group is identical.

Remember, the game does not differentiate between a pre-made party, and a party composed of a multi-boxer's characters.

Q u o t e:


They do.

My Blue friend and I cannot have a meaningful discussion if s/he insists on talking about characters and I insist on talking about players UNLESS...

we can establish a useful (for purposes of this discussion) linkage between the two.

So far there just isn't one. We're (hopefully) working on it.

Okay, let's talk about it then =).

Instead of World of Warcraft, let's look at chess to draw a parallel.

What is the factual difference (assuming no time limits on turns) between 5 chess players versus 1 player moving across the boards to play against all 5 of his opponents and 5 players facing across the boards versus another 5? Think of each chess team as a 'character'.

In both cases, you have 10 'characters'. 5 White characters and 5 Black characters, each composed of multiple pieces.

Though, to extend the analogy, the 1 player facing 5 would be forced to make the same move on each board. Not something that 5 individual players would need concern themselves with.

For better or worse, World of Warcraft isn't quite a chess match, but I think the analogy holds.

That being the case, if player is the ultimate concern, then multi-boxers are at a permanent disadvantage. It would, after all, be ridiculous to assess chess around 5 sets of pieces all attacking 1 set of pieces regardless of how they were controlled, would it not?

Q u o t e:
Once again it doesn't address the outrage of being effectively one-shotted by a single player because that player is issuing simultaneous commands to multiple characters. From the point of view of the average player exposed to it, the game mechanics of this are seriously unbalanced.

You appear to be citing theory about the mechanics of game balance and yes, thats pretty much how you try to design games. Almost every time I watch it happen as a practical matter the one multiboxer is hugely OP because the Players in the BGs just don't conform to the intended mechanics for a long list of reasons. Multiboxing is only one of the issues that emerges from this disconnect.

If your players refuse to conform to your intended mechanics does Blizz change the game? I've watched them do it repeatedly...

I think I might see your concern, so, please allow me to ask a question.

What is the objective difference between 1 player directing 5 characters to attack a single target, and the leader of a team slapping an assist train on a target and telling his other 4 teammates to attack a target with him?

A slight gain in efficiency for the single player/set of characters at an extreme cost in flexibility to deal with exterior threats compared to the team of players?

Q u o t e:
How significant the gains/penalties will be may tend to skew towards gains rather than penalties because I'd guess that a multiboxer will tend to have better equipment and a faster internet connection than average but its only a guess.

What I'm gathering here is that you really dislike the idea that a single player can control multiple characters, even if the advantages are questionable at best. (Please note that equipment acquisition for multi-boxers tends to be considerably slower than that of single players. Battlegrounds offer one of the only viable means to acquire items at a reasonable rate, in fact. It is more difficult for them to level trade skills, acquire gold, get badges of justice, they don't generally get to raid at all, tend not to do well in arenas, etc.)

Ultimately, we feel that multiboxing doesn't offer that single player a substantial advantage over a player who can focus his or her efforts on a single character. The single player need only be concerned with progressing one character, can gain gold and items faster, and makes honor at an identical or higher rate.

There are times when it is not to a player's advantage to be in a party, and the single player can pick and choose, the multiboxer must always run all their characters, or risk very inconsistent progression amongst their group, which is undesirable for the playtstyle. The single player can opt to be in a party only when it is to their greatest advantage to do so.

If you still feel that multiboxing deserves a second look, and may not be the best choice for World of Warcraft, please feel free to continue expressing your opinion on our Suggestions forum.

On the other hand, I hope that I am helping you arrive at the conclusion that it is not automation, nor exploitation, but merely an alternative playstyle that some find unpalatable.

Q u o t e:

You've also highlighted the absurd nature of rogue imbalance, with sap spam, blind, cloak, CS/KS, gouge, etc. No other class can disrupt so many other players so often, with on demand nigh-immune mitigation, escape mechanisms, and of course the decision when to leave the relative safety of stealth.

Actually, the rogue method of disrupting multiboxers is grossly inefficient and time intensive =). I was merely relating my own experiences, but as others have pointed out, other classes can enjoy similar advantages, often more easily applied.

Q u o t e:
Mal's a GM. Not a CM. Big difference.

Yup, huge difference!

Q u o t e:
The only reason I care at all is that the multiboxing player has a significant advantage over this player in the BG, the advantages I see can hardly be called questionable. Your reliance (once again) on dragging in other players to create an assertion that the advantages are "questionable at best" is true under your scenario but is outside the scope of the discussion under mine. We aren't resolving the matter of why you seem to feel characters are at least a matter of equal consideration with players in the game dynamics.

From a certain perspective, the strange thing about this stance is that the multiboxing player has the least advantage in a battleground. A battleground is a closed system, the teams are ideally even, the multiboxer is more prone to disruptive assaults from other players, and the numerical advantage is wholly nullified in this scenario.

Q u o t e:
With blizz caving in to pve - pvp it will not be long ( IMO ) that you will see MB against TOS ..

Everyone that is against MB please post in suggestions and remember " squeaky wheel gets the oil "

I wouldn't agree that the 'squeaky wheel gets the grease' because it simply isn't true with regard to these situations.

Every decision is made in the context of what is best for our players and World of Warcraft as a whole. Should it be determined that altering our policies in certain fashions results in a better experience for everyone, then those changes may indeed occur. Such changes will almost certainly not occur merely due to repeated requests however.

Q u o t e:
It was a potshot at rogues, yes. I really dislike their mechanics, my apology.

Understandable. On the other hand, the rogue simply lacks the option to apply CC at range and must get in close. Nearly everything is a trade-off. It's not as though I danced amongst his characters with absolute impunity either =P. Sometimes you get the horns!

Every class is capable of doing things that frustrate someone. I also know how easy it is to let your personal experiences influence your perception of a class or situation as a whole. This may be why there is some animosity toward multiboxers.

Q u o t e:
I guess I don't understand the way multiboxing works - so you fear the leader of these warlocks... won't the rest of them still apply their DoT's when he starts whacking the CoA and Corruption keys? No facing requirement, and presumably before you have them all out of range? I'm guessing they will still follow the discombobulated leader but be fully functional.

Understanding is key, actually, just as understanding what another class or team composition can do is integral to defeating them. There are forums dedicated to multiboxing elsewhere, and to my knowledge it's a pretty friendly community if you show up in the spirit of knowledge and curiosity.

Essentially, I wouldn't be at all surprised if you could have a session of 'ask a multiboxer', and have many of your PvP and practical questions answered.

Q u o t e:
Where they don't, which seems to be the case in most pug BGs, the advantage is overwhelming. Which takes us back to the one player vs. one player scenario...the one you won't address.

Do you want me to address one player with one character facing a multiboxer with multiple characters in a battleground?

Ahh, I see. Okay, we can do that =).

In this situation, the single player will almost certainly have a rough time. After all, it is one one player with one character versus one player with five characters. On the other hand, the other way to express this idea is to say: this is one character versus fully half of the opposing team. Even so, with the right tactics, the single player can do substantial damage and even prevail in some cases due to the limitations that multiboxers face; whereas they'd be virtually certain to lose versus five separate characters controlled by five separate players.

What are the other nine players teamed with that single player doing? How do the multiboxer's five teammates feel about him wasting time dueling with a single opponent?

Also, just as a note, I have seen a handful of threads concerned about how being teamed up with a multiboxer can result in a less effective battleground team.

Q u o t e:


I am as frustrated in trying to get this concept across as you are in asserting that you don't understand it.

I for sure don't understand why that is either.

We just aren't posting about the same things...

I understand that you are frustrated, and I am sorry about that. I thank you for remaining calm, and doing your best to discuss the matter politely and without vitriol.

I also realize that the topic can be upsetting to you, and your restraint is both admirable and appreciated. I'd like nothing more than to arrive at a mutually acceptable conclusion, but I largely suspect that this discussion can be reduced to a difference of opinion.

Q u o t e:
This thread is still going on?

Funny, was just asking that myself.