Transmog yourself into an Avenger!
6 blue posts to read before Diablo 3's launch
Cross-realm zones coming soon
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria newsBlue poster Belfaire explains Blizzard's stance on multiboxing
by Daniel Whitcomb 
Mar 13th 2008 at 9:00AM
Multiboxing, the process of one person playing multiple characters on multiple accounts at one time, usually by the use of multiple computers (thus the term) and macros that can be activated on all accounts by the push of a single button, has most recently seen coverage here on WoW with our 2-man Karazhan report. The act of multiboxing is one that has been the subject of some debates, mostly centered around whether or not it violates the EULA. Those in favor of multiboxing can breathe easier today, as Blizzard poster Belfaire has stated in no uncertain terms that Blizzard has no problem with the practice in a post on the customer service forums.
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.
I certainly applaud this stance by Blizzard, even if I don't quite see myself doing the whole multiple rig setup. Admittedly, I am somewhat biased, as back in my Everquest days, I was about the only member of my small guild that didn't multibox, and was always greatly appreciative when someone when bring out their tank and healer multibox team so we didn't have to worry about who was going to fill those roles. Either way, it looks like Multiboxing is here to stay. So the next time you curse that 5-box Elemental Shaman arena team that just Chain Lightning'd you into next week, just remember that you can't call them illegal. However, you can still thank your lucky stars that they weren't Restoration Druids.
Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Cheats, Blizzard, News items, Alts, Forums, Hardware
Reader Comments (Page 4 of 4)
Jennifer Mar 13th 2008 1:51PM
OP: "Multiboxing is the art of playing multiple characters on multiple accounts simultaneously. Multiboxing is typically played via a single user interface (i.e. one keyboard) connected to multiple instances of the game (on one or more computers) and are controlled via actions available in the in-game /macro feature."
Belfaire: "Using a keyboard setup like what you're describing? Not automation.
Setting up a macro with said keyboard that would, for example, automatically press Fireball each time it was available? Automation. "
Belfaire: "Is it sending an identical signal to all client windows or switching between them to send commands? Not automation."
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5288579356&sid=1
Therefore, using " a single user interface (i.e. one keyboard) connected to multiple instances of the game (on one or more computers)" is "Not automation"
Rob Mar 13th 2008 1:59PM
Why would blizz care if they are getting 2,3,4 subscriptions from the same person? The people who 2 manned kara? $150 a month, just in subscription fee. Seriously, get a life people.
Troy Gates Mar 13th 2008 2:15PM
"Why would blizz care if they are getting 2,3,4 subscriptions from the same person? The people who 2 manned kara? $150 a month, just in subscription fee. Seriously, get a life people."
10 people doing Kara = $150 a month. Whats the difference?
Why do people think that Blizzard only supports multi-boxing for the money? I would guess there are fewer than 1000 people that use 5 accts at once. Thats 0.01% of the entire WoW population. Thats pocket change compared to the other 99.99% of the monthly subscriptions.
thush Mar 13th 2008 1:59PM
Just before TBC came out I had a 60 warrior and 60 shaman. I bought a new account and transferred one of them to 2-box. It's not terribly easy if you noob it up like I did using different keyboards and mice, but it was still pretty cool. Most BGs were too hard to do this, I mostly let my resto shammy die and his purpose was to keep my warrior up as long as possible and drop WF/STR and give ES. I'd like to do this again on a single keyboard and mouse setup but I'm too lazy right now. It worked best for leveling, but for PvP just took took much focus to manage both toons. In AV I could kinda hide my shaman back in a crowd and hit a key on the other keyboard to refersh my warrior's earthshield and throw NS/heal and lesser healing waves. It was a bit of an advantage I guess but really no different than today when my wife does the same stuff on her paladin to keep my alive. *shrug*
Jim Mar 13th 2008 2:58PM
Jennifer, you're being obtuse; multi-boxers have a clear advantage in their instantaneous coordination of effort. I'm not decrying it as a game-breaking exploit or the end of WoW as we know it; I'm just calling the blue to task for some pretty arbitrary definitions of "automation."
It feels like there's this tacit understanding that if multi-boxing isn't against the ToS, some of it's aspects might be. So you get all these "Well, what if I did this? Is that against the rules?" posts which seems contrary to the spirit of fair play. It is a game after all, right?
Jennifer Mar 13th 2008 4:49PM
My argument is that the advantage that multiboxers gain is no different than the advantage others gain while grouping. The fact that they choose NOT to group is a deliberate choice. Grouping also has some downsides such as reduced XP, and splitting loot between multiple characters.
In any case, the "advantages" a multiboxer gains is exactly the same as the advantages ANYONE would gain if they partied with the same number of characters. Therefore, the argument that "multiboxers are OP in this, that, and the other thing" is synonymous with "characters who are grouped are OP in this, that and the other thing"
The fact that there is one person behind the computer instead of multiple is irrelevant.
And as for focus fire/synchronized casting -- that can be achieved via coordination, and ANY player can create these macros using the in-game /macro system.
/assist
/cast
Just because people CHOOSE not to make every button macroed in this way (because individual decision making is by far more advantageous), doesn't mean it can't be done. Try looking for "spike teams" in guild wars. They literally measure their server lag before games and practice "jump tests" before entering a battle such that their spellcasts land at the EXACT same instant on their target.
Just because people make a conscious choice NOT to emulate a coordinated spike-style of gameplay doesn't mean it isn't possible. People are just lazy.
Jim Mar 13th 2008 7:11PM
Ok. I'll leave the "advantages" argument aside. Forgive my sarcasm, but the multi-boxer argument is predicated on the idea that there's a slew of obsequious group-seekers who will silently follow my character all around Azeroth letting me divvy up the spoils of any instance to the group as I see fit. If that was the case, then, yes, multi-boxing is just like grouping.
And it's funny you mention Guildwars. IIRC, you can rent henchmen in that game and it doesn't cost $15 extra bucks a month.
I re-read the forum thread and it seems that Blizzard does draw a line by insisting all of the accounts be owned by the same person. I suppose they're trying to preempt the inevitable "Rent-A-70" business (lag aside, there's little difference between multi-boxing to your headless Compy2000 in the closet and some server farm in an RMT sweatshop.)
Blizzard's underlying message: "Controlling multiple characters over a network connection? Not automation as long as the billing address is the same for all of the accounts." Lolwut, indeed.
Jennifer Mar 13th 2008 10:02PM
Sure, if you actually controlled EVERY SINGLE ACTION the henchmen is able to make and they couldn't attack or heal without you specifically pressing a button for each time they wanted to do so, I can see how you can make that association. However, since that isn't the case, Guild wars henchies are nothing like multiboxing.
Furthmore "divvying the spoils" all to yourself would be somewhat counterproductive. As a multiboxers, gearing ALL of my toons EQUALLY is very important to me, since I have to pay for all of the repair bills, all of the training costs, all of the mounts and professions -- I don't want a char in greens and a main in purples. The char in greens will undoubtedly not be able to pull their weight in instances, heroics, or pvp.
Furthermore, you can think of multiboxing like having 4 "pets" like warlock or hunter pets AS LONG AS the pet was always on passive, and there was no such thing as pet "auto cast". You want the pet to cast growl? Press your growl key. Oh, what's this? You want him to swipe? Well you have to press that too. Oh, you want to seduce? Don't forget to push the button. Oh, the seduce broke early and killed your party? Too bad, you should've kept on top of your action bars, learn to play. Go pay your repair bills, run yourself back, and try all over again.
Playing WoW as a multiboxer is nothing like you're describing. Labeling it as easy-mode because your version of multiboxing is mistakenly more like multi-BOTTING is an incorrect premise. If you're gonig through all the trouble of manually (yes, manually -- you do have to press a key to get ANY actions out of your character, or your alts) playing and leveling your characters, by golly you're going to want to gear them, give them professions, and pay for their training/mounts/repair bills.
Magick Mar 13th 2008 9:46PM
If you want to critique multiboxers, you ought to educate yourself on what multiboxing is and what it takes to multibox. There are a number of ignorant and stubborn complaints against multiboxing that appear valid but with a little understanding fail a sanity check.
If you don't like the advantages multiboxers have, it's probably because you either didn't realize the disadvantages associated with multiboxing or you simply ignored them when they were brought (like many that were brought up here).
A good place ot educate yourself is www.dual-boxing.com.
On the discussion of advantages and disadvantages consider:
Advantage: Make money faster with 5 characters.
Disadvantage: Equipping/repairing 5 characters instead of just one.
Advantage: Concentrating firepower on one target instantly.
Disadvantage: Inability to target five separate targets instantly like a group can.
Advantage: Not having to communicate with a party to accomlish a goal and having to rely on them to do as told.
Disadvantage: Having characters forcibly separated from the pack (fear, death, root, cyclone, etc.), and then trying to operate the main group and any and all subgroups separately and simultaneously (consider 5 characters in AV and two getting killed at separate times where 3 are at RH GY fighting, one is at SH GY rezzing, and one is waiting to be ran back to RH GY from SP GY).
Advantage: Having a full group at any moment without having to LFG.
Disadvantage: Multiboxing is expensive in up front costs (hardware and software) and monthly costs (subscriptions, increased utility expenses) and periodic costs (expansion upgrades x 5)
Just a sample. For every advantage there is typically a disadvantage. Though sometimes the is an advantage and no apparent disadvantage but the reverse is equally true as well.
The key to any WOW player's success is to take advantage of his character's abilities (a holy priest will not take on three mobs alone but will become super powerful by pairing up with another character and keeping them buffed and healed). A multiboxer similarly takes advantage of his character's abilities by using them where he can best make use of his skillsets. While I see multiboxers in the small BGs, they don't spend as much time in AV where there is a greater opportunity for his characters to be separated.
And if you want to critique the skills of a multiboxer, get to know him/her. Just as there are some 70s who /meltface with barely a scratch and there are others who can't /meltice with a fireball the same is true of multiboxers. My skills aren't great as a multiboxer but there are some multiboxers who do some amazing things. If you understood the number of key combos the really good multiboxers must learn and master, you'd realize how multiboxing can easily be harder than mastering any single class in WOW. And let's not forget; WOW isn't a difficult game. Try not to be so full of yourselves and think you're the greatest single boxer out there.
Jennifer Mar 14th 2008 12:38PM
"This is like a quarterback throwing 5 footballs at a receiver figuring he'll catch at least one."
Actually, as long as the uber quarterback took up 5 players' spots on a team, leaving the opposing team with a 4 player advantage, I could see how this analogy is accurate. I'm pretty sure, then, that the extra 4 bodies on the opposing team will easily sack the quarterback before he can throw the ball if they have any sort of skill or strategy.
"Or a hunter (not Teh sexy Night Elf Kind, the West Virginia mullet kind) hunting squirrel with a 50mm smooth bore cannon."
As long as he was fighting 5 squirrels with pistols who have the ability to triangulate around him, using line of sight and movement to their advantage. But the hunter might be able to intimidate the squirrels into doing something stupid. Like just standing there right in front of him waiting to be shot while crying "OP! OP! This hunter is OP!" and setting their little squirrel pistols on the ground while they throw a tantrum.
"Yeah you can do it, but its not an accomplishment."
It's a matter of comparison -- battlegrounds, raids, instances, heroics, arenas... they're all capped per CHARACTER, not per PLAYER. So, while your comparisons of 5v1 is accurate for world pvp (which is never fair), I cease to see how it's any more OP than 5 individually played characters ganging up on one poor lowly character.
Of course, in places that actually matter (BGs/arenas/instances/raids), you'll always be facing an equal number of characters on your team and on the opposing team, whether they are single or multi-boxed.
Silverrealm Mar 14th 2008 5:02PM
Well a few people have very passionately defended multi-boxing in what appears to be an effort to dispel rumours. In the comment made to my reply above, I do recall stating that I don't see it as cheating... I'm not sure why the grande effort to defend something that is not in jeopardy to be labelled as 'bad' or 'wrong'.
I give mad props to people who do multibox, they are obviously passionate about the game to dish out that much dough on hardware and subscriptions. Kudos to you.
I think what I said earlier about it being anti-social is still a facotr, maybe not in all cases... but the potential is there.
Still NOT saying it's wrong. Just commenting on the previous suggestions that some multiboxers are elitists that just wanna PWN things. In that case, I don't think it's healthy necessarily or useful!
But if you primarily, or ONLY use multiboxing to benefit your friends and guildies in various ways, again, KUDOS! I personally don't have the money or the patience to bother. The topic at hand however was, "your opinion on multiboxing, and to a lesser extent, if you consider it cheating".
There's my two cents, and I STILL DON'T consider it cheating!
Jennifer Mar 15th 2008 4:22PM
I think you get the heated debate because multiboxers are also sharing their opinions.
It's not necessarily "your opinion on one small facet of multiboxers, particularly those that might have personality flaws that are not limited to multiboxing (i.e. antisociality)"
I'm happy people have taken the time to share their opinions. I'm here to share mine, too, and to educate people so that they can make INFORMED decisions about the TRUTH about multiboxing -- not lumping all of us multiboxers into the antisocial momma's basement nerds that seems to be the prevalent opinion of most who don't care to take the time to see the truth.
It's my job to make sure I'm not descriminated against because of someone else's personality flaws. :)
Silverrealm Mar 17th 2008 7:04PM
It's also evident you want the last word, great representation for dispelling those fantastimical rumours, that multiboxers don't have social issues!
Arcan Genth Mar 18th 2008 1:33PM
"It's also evident you want the last word, great representation for dispelling those fantastimical rumours, that multiboxers don't have social issues!"
Correct me if I'm wrong, but if someone insinuated (or said point-blank) that I had social/mental issues, then responded to every reply with variations of "Well, that's a good point, but it's not entirely valid because you have social/mental issues", I think I would be a bit defensive as well.
Besides, it's not really the getting the last word for the simple sake of getting the last word when you bring a new item or nuance to the conversation each time, as I believe Jennifer has done.