This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please
enable JavaScript
in your browser.
PTR
Live
The /Follow command disabled in Battlegrounds
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Entropyutd
Multi-Boxers have their panties in a bunch tonight after the /follow command appears to have been disabled in battlegrounds.
Personally I'm lolling it up.
I see multi boxing on a competitive stage as nothing short of cheating, using 3rd party software and several accounts because you simply are not good enough to take down 1 player solo.
Good Riddance.
What are other Wowheaders opinions on this, IMO, awesome improvement?
Post by
TomatoSauce
awesome improvement?
Not for the blind player mentioned in
this
thread.
Post by
skumbananer
I can understand the multi-boxers (who i dont mind), but it really messes with honor bots (which i dont like), so in total i kinda like it.
Multiboxers are several players just run by one player so i dont really count that as cheating. Yes, i get pwned badly by a 5man shammy box...but 5 shammys run by different players pwn me even harder.
As a warrior i can actually, all alone, hurt a 5man multibox in several ways (which i cant at all if i face 5 different players). I wont win, but spellreflect is enourmously powerful against a multibox. So is intimidating shout...and popping all cds and bladestorm as TG fury.
Post by
Entropyutd
awesome improvement?
Not for blind player mentioned in
this
thread.
I am sure there are other methods a blind player can use to navigate.
A slash command isn't going to stop someone that badass anyway.
So it hurts a tiny number of genuine players, but deals a massive blow to exploiters. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one.
Multiboxers are several players just run by one player so i dont really count that as cheating. Yes, i get pwned badly by a 5man shammy box...but 5 shammys run by different players pwn me even harder.
I hear what you are saying, but I just can't see it as anything else but exploiting. Using software to send the same keystroke to several clients. There really isn't a lot of skill, hitting one key which then unleashes an attack x5 on the same target.
I can accept if a well organized group can pull that off, thats fine.
I've even dual boxed myself, 2 manning dungeons and raid content, so I get the concept, I just dislike the clearly exploitative aspect of it.
Post by
EaTCarbS
Bots do not use the /follow command. Anyone who knows even a little bit about them knows this.
Post by
Entropyutd
Bots do not use the /follow command. Anyone who knows even a little bit about them knows this.
Well I guess you should forgive the ignorance of someone who has never thought about cheating and thus has had no need to research the subject.
Post by
Tush
So multi-boxing with Warrio (tank), Priest (healer), Mage (dps), Warlock (dps), Rogue (dps) doesnt need skills at all? I have seen group like this once.
Post by
Entropyutd
So multi-boxing with Warrio (tank), Priest (healer), Mage (dps), Warlock (dps), Rogue (dps) doesnt need skills at all? I have seen group like this once.
Actually not really at all.
You use the 3rd party program, and set up your keybinds accordingly. It's no more complicated than using one toon with modifier macros.
*Edit*
For example You'd just set your 3rd party program to activate the button you use for your AoE HoT spell on the client you use for your healer, so doing so you could on a very basic level have:-
Key 1:- Primary single target attack all open clients.
Key 2:- AoE attack All open clients
Key 3:- Root/Slow client 1, Dot Client 2, AoE HoT Client 3
Post by
lonewolfe31705
Jesus Christ on a popsicle stick. Multiboxing is no way an exploit. I have noticed that the people who get butt hurt over it are the ones who are just upset they can't afford to pay for the accounts, subscriptions, or hardware to do it themselves.
Entropyutd, if multiboxing was an exploit, Blizzard wouldn't have give ALL THE MULTIBOXERS their approval. Just because you don't like running up against one in a random BG once in a blue moon doesn't mean its wrong. IF that were the case, then every warrior is exploiting, and they should all get /deleted.
As for your simplification of multiboxers, comparing it to modifier macros, you are wrong. It takes a lot more than just setting key bindings.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
I think Blizzard's position on multi-boxing (I don't know if they ever stated it this way, but it seems to be how they make decisions) has always been that they don't mind it, but they won't be catering to it specifically. I imagine this change falls in line with that policy. If they felt that having follow active in BG's was detrimental to the game overall, then they were clearly going to change it regardless of the multi-boxing affects. I don't particularly mind multi-boxers, but I do think that they are using a product in a unintended (though not a wrong or inappropriate) way, and so if the product changes to better fit it's intended purpose, they will have to deal with the fact that those changes might make it harder to use the game in unintended ways.
I do feel badly about the blind players who can no longer participate in BG's, But I imagine that the two that were specifically named are the majority of that specific group, and I don't think blizzard will undo major game changes because of 2-3 people who fit into that particular set of circumstances.
Post by
Sunlepard
I sure hope that this was taken out in dungeons as well. Nothing more annoying than healing some dork on follow that does nothing.
Post by
Entropyutd
Jesus Christ on a popsicle stick. Multiboxing is no way an exploit. I have noticed that the people who get butt hurt over it are the ones who are just upset they can't afford to pay for the accounts, subscriptions, or hardware to do it themselves.
That is not true, anyone could try multiboxing using as many toons as they like just by creating multiple trial accounts. Such a wild assumption, everyone who has an issue with cheats/cheap play must just be broke and jealous. Yeah of course they are!
Entropyutd, if multiboxing was an exploit, Blizzard wouldn't have give ALL THE MULTIBOXERS their approval. Just because you don't like running up against one in a random BG once in a blue moon doesn't mean its wrong. IF that were the case, then every warrior is exploiting, and they should all get /deleted.
If you feel warriors are op, that is a balancing issue and not somebody deliberately abusing the system.
For the record Blizzard have never once come out in support of Multiboxers, They have not expressed an opinion one way or the other. Only saying if it doesn't break EULA and has a person operating each account then it is ok. But that could be said about a lot of things.
Lack of interest does not denote approval.
As for your simplification of multiboxers, comparing it to modifier macros, you are wrong. It takes a lot more than just setting key bindings.
Yes it does, a lot of set up is required. I simplified it. Those are the very basics of one popular program.
That aside after setting it up the end product gives you a 1 button push system capable of executing as many commands over as many toons as you deem necessary to beat that one horrible OP warrior.
In the eyes of many it is a cheat, plain and simple. Cheaters always defend their methods though don't they?
I think Blizzard's position on multi-boxing (I don't know if they ever stated it this way, but it seems to be how they make decisions) has always been that they don't mind it, but they won't be catering to it specifically. I imagine this change falls in line with that policy. If they felt that having follow active in BG's was detrimental to the game overall, then they were clearly going to change it regardless of the multi-boxing affects. I don't particularly mind multi-boxers, but I do think that they are using a product in a unintended (though not a wrong or inappropriate) way, and so if the product changes to better fit it's intended purpose, they will have to deal with the fact that those changes might make it harder to use the game in unintended ways.
I do feel badly about the blind players who can no longer participate in BG's, But I imagine that the two that were specifically named are the majority of that specific group, and I don't think blizzard will undo major game changes because of 2-3 people who fit into that particular set of circumstances.
With you all the way on this Elhonna.
The way I see it, /Follow was removed to stop lazy players and follow bots.
Multiboxers got hit badly because essentially they are using pretty similar methods and ethics as lazy players and follow bots.
There is no good reason to use /follow in any instanced event.
Post by
Abashira
I can't use /follow to lead noobs off cliffs anymore? :(
Well that was just the once with my mother. Oh wait, and then there was that time... Okay it's fun to lead noobs off cliffs! :D
Aside from that I hardly ever use it, in BG or outside of BG.
Interestingly the last time I did use /follow in a BG was about three years ago in the eye and someone led me off a cliff. :P
Post by
lankybrit
That aside after setting it up the end product gives you a 1 button push system capable of executing as many commands over as many toons as you deem necessary to beat that one horrible OP warrior.
In the eyes of many it is a cheat, plain and simple. Cheaters always defend their methods though don't they?
The eyes of many don't define whether it's a cheat or not though. Blizzard do. And they say it's not cheating.
What if I were to say that in the eyes of many, using Addons is cheating?
Cheers.
Post by
zobley
I rarely use follow, so it doesn't bother me at all.
I also rarely encounter multiboxers in PvP. I remember an AV game that had an 8-boxer that was destroying people once.....but that's just it....I only remember one example.
Post by
Entropyutd
The eyes of many don't define whether it's a cheat or not though. Blizzard do. And they say it's not cheating.
What if I were to say that in the eyes of many, using Addons is cheating?
Cheers.
No they don't, they say it doesn't breach their EULA.
Lack of interest in a shady practice again does not denote an opinion or condone an action.
Blizzard have a very non committal stance on a lot of issues.
Add-ons, see Blizzard have actually come out and said these are a good thing, show me the posts where Blizzard have said how awesome Multi-Boxers are and what amazing benefits they bring to the community.
Post by
lankybrit
The eyes of many don't define whether it's a cheat or not though. Blizzard do. And they say it's not cheating.
What if I were to say that in the eyes of many, using Addons is cheating?
Cheers.
No they don't, they say it doesn't breach their EULA.
Lack of interest in a shady practice again does not denote an opinion or condone an action.
Blizzard have a very non committal stance on a lot of issues.
Add-ons, see Blizzard have actually come out and said these are a good thing, show me the posts where Blizzard have said how awesome Multi-Boxers are and what amazing benefits they bring to the community.
Again with the hyperbole. In no way is multi-boxing shady at all. One person is paying for multiple accounts, and using /follow to have those characters on different accounts all move together. Nothing shady or underhand about it. Perfectly within the rules and not cheating in any way.
You are saying on one hand, you care about Blizzard's stance (re. addons) but on another hand don't care (re. Multi-boxing).
I believe that certain addons will give you and unfair advantage in the game versus those that don't use it. Isn't that the definition of cheating? But, of course, it doesn't matter, because Blizzard is ok with it.
Cheers.
Post by
Strandvaskeren
I just can't see multiboxing as an exploit.
I actually enjoy meeting multiboxers in bg if they are on the enemy team, I hate when they are on my team. They always draw a crowd so that will be 8-9 enemy toons running around in a bunch, which leaves the enemy outnumbered everywhere else. Just sneak in behind them and retake whatever base/flag they just left and use your teams superior number to dominate in every place where the multiboxer and followers are not.
Post by
ElhonnaDS
It seems that currently, though, Blizzard's stance is that they have no problem with removing functions that multi-boxing depends on, which seems to support the "It's not against the rules, but we're not going to make game decisions around leaving it viable" idea.
Post by
Nathanyal
http://i.wow.joystiq.com/2008/03/13/blue-poster-belfaire-explains-blizzards-stance-on-multiboxing/
In short, he says that the advantages of multiboxing are no different than the advantages offered by normal grouping. Since multiboxers can be damaged, feared and CC'd as easily as separate people playing separate accounts, and since they can't do anything the same amount of characters couldn't do when played by different people, there is no reason to consider it an unfair advantage in PvP or PvE. He also answers quite a few specific questions posed by thread starter and multiboxer Velath that clarify why Blizzard accepts Multiboxing and does not consider it an exploit or an unfair advantage.
For example, he clarifies that using one keyboard to trigger macros on multiple accounts is not exploiting, but using that same keyboard to make a Fireball spell go off whenever it is availible is. Switching between windows or boxes to issue commands? Not exploitation. Using a bot program to make those windows run automatically? Exploit. In short, just like with people running one account, automation of a character via a third party program is Illegal. Setting up shortcuts to use macros or using gaming mice or keyboards (such as those in Adam Holisky's recent series of articles)is legal, and something that has always been fine with Blizzard no matter how many accounts the person in question is playing.
If they're using a third party program to run their multiboxing it is illegal. But not all multiboxers do this. Most of them have the characters in follow and have tons of macros setup. As long as it requires them to press a button of some sort, it's fine. But if the program plays the character for them, it's illegal.
And sure this article if several years old, but it is still their stance on the opinion.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.
© 2017 ZAM Network LLC
