[Discuss] Mouse vs Click Broadcasting [Archive]

Vyndree

10-24-2008, 11:30 PM

Also, Vyndree, Synergy could just as easily send absolute mouse positions rather than relative mouse positions.

Could, but it isn't (or at least, not the way I first used it back when I first started 'boxing on a ghetto laptops&collegecomputers multiboxing "rig"). If you've tried it, you'll find that when "broadcasting mouse", your mouse will relative to its current position -- never in an exact location on your screen. To "sync" it back up again, you just drag the mouse back to a corner of your screen so all mice end up in the same corner...

At least, that's the only version I'm aware of it having. It's been a while, so for all I know it's been updated -- but that's the Synergy I remember.

I don't think your other comment was directed at me, but just in case it was I'll reiterate -- I don't have a problem (personally) with mouse MULTIPLEXING (that is, how you explained it -- you move the mouse, mouse moves the on all screens at the same time) -- I do have a problem with the precedent of clicking on a specific x,y coordinate PARTICULARLY if any decisions are made about that x,y coordinate (i.e. This window is half the size of the other, therefore the x,y coordinates should be half the size on the other window), not because that in and of itself is inherently wrong, but it opens the door for further decision making about x,y coordinates that might not have such innocent intentions. Again, my opinion doesn't mean that it's Blizzard's opinion, but I figured I'd respond in case you were indeed directing that comment at me as well. :P

In essence, I agree with this part of Reythur's comment:

While the use of the mouse to click on point A on screen 1 and point A on screen 2 is a little less questionable than the preceding example, it can still lead to some interesting and questionable uses of it.

I'd personally avoid it until the technology is 1) more well defined and it's limitations established and 2) a better understanding of it's specific intended uses are understood fully.

Dealing with relative movements is much safer than dealing with pinpoints. Relative movements require constant user intervention in order to move ANYWHERE. Pinpoints have the slippery slope, where the actual decision on where to move to and when to actually click once moving are more ambiguous.

The replicator has no knowledge of any software that the clicks are going to.

Neither does this:

/cast Fireball
DELAY 1.5 SECONDS
/cast Fireball
DELAY 1.5 SECONDS
/cast Fireball
But we all know that delays are considered automation by Blizzard rules. At the same time, delays have no knowledge of any software that the macros/delays are being sent to either. Delays are decisionmaking, and while the decisionmaking doesn't have ANY knowledge of what's going on in the software's memory, it's still making computational decisions (i.e. how long to wait, where to click on the x/y coordinates perhaps?) without DIRECT user intervention (pressing every 1.5 seconds and/or physically moving the mouse 250 pixels to the left on one screen and 500 pixels to the left on another screen).

zanthor

10-25-2008, 12:11 AM

Jumping in late here....

Broadcasting a mouse via software is NOT ok IMO. Software is doing the mouse clicking, not the end user. Sure, the end user is telling the software where to click X, Y... but its not the same thing. Its way too close to botting.Say I have a piece of software that duplicates my click from the main client to the alt clients...

This is no different than a hardware multicaster with the exception of the accuracy of the click. You still can't use it to perfectly cast AE spells because camera angle differences will always screw that up.

Anemo

10-25-2008, 02:19 AM

Jumping in late here....

Broadcasting a mouse via software is NOT ok IMO. Software is doing the mouse clicking, not the end user. Sure, the end user is telling the software where to click X, Y... but its not the same thing. Its way too close to botting.

How is that any different to the software doing the key presses?

Personally I can't see any real issue with it as long as it is only sending your mouse click to another window in the same position. As long as this is the case you are controlling everything and having your exact actions mirrored much like key presses.

I think the issue with the minimap ping was that you could have it replicate your click in a relative position to your own. This could be used to factor in different views etc ie you click in the middle of your screen but the other clicks take that and move it 100x and 250y then click. The fact it could also be used with addons so send a mouse click with 0 movement or clicks from your own mouse would have been their main concern.

Probably the best example is people who click skills. You press 1 and you get chain lightning or with a multiplexer you press 1 and 5 clients press 1 to get chain lightning. You click 1 you get chain lightning or you click 1 and get 5 chain lightnings.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 04:29 AM

EDIT: THiIS IS THE ORIGINAL POST IN THE THREAD. IT IS SCREWY BECAUSE THE TIME ON THE SERVER WAS RESET (We were originally "ahead" of time when this was posted)

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11675540596&sid=1&pageNo=3

Perhaps (because I started off on such a wrong foot) I can explain why I am concerned about where the line in the sand is drawn with mouse multiplexing and click replication.

Note: Most multiboxers right now only really use keyboard broadcasting due to the complexities of mouse broadcasting. So if people are confused about multiboxing that might help clear things up -- most of us don't even have to run into this problem.

1) We already know that broadcasting raw mouse signals to multiple computers is OK -- no automation is made and it's just a standard hardware mouse sending signals for all PCs rather than just one PC. The simplest way to envision this is to sync one wireless mouse to 2 or more wireless receivers. So this would be our base scenario, of which software multiboxing attempts to emulate.

2) And they have -- there are several different versions of mouse multiplexers -- not all of them marketed towards multiboxing. In short, all they do is transmit raw mouse signals through your home network (rather than through the air, in the case of a wireless mouse) to multiple PCs on your network. This is pretty much accepted to be acceptable, since no additional functionality exists outside of what standard hardware can do.

3) Click replication is a trickier subject, since we are now moving outside of what standard hardware is capable of. If you think of a mouse as having 3 axis -- X and Y being moving up/down/left/right on your screen, and Z being a mouse keydown and keyup event, then replicating clicks on specific x,y coordinates would be ignoring and/or (I rather hate to use this word) automating the user input on the x,y axis. Still, as an opinion I see this as harmless enough, until you look at the repercussions this sort of precedent could make...

4) If click replication were OK, then software multiboxers with differing resolutions on their various client screens would also want a solution designed for them. Let's take an example and say that one screen is 1000 x 1000 (numbers simplified) and one screen is 500 x 500. When you click on the X,Y coordinate on the larger screen (at 500, 500) then is it acceptable for a program to do the math (i.e. make a logic-based decision) and click on (500 / 2), (500 / 2) = 250, 250?

5) Finally, what about if a person decides that they want to screw around with their UI? Let's say they put "Lightning Bolt" on the standard blizzard UI button #1. But on their alt's screen, they put it on the standard blizzard UI button #5. Is it OK for them, when sending a mouseclick event on the X1,Y1 location of the first screen's "button #1" to send a mouseclick event on the X2, Y2 location of the second screens "button #5"? Those are two seperate and totally unrelated X,Y coordinates that aren't based on simple math like example 4 -- that only tries to determine X,Y locations relative to resolution.

6) If you can make these sort of decisions, what's to stop you from also making decisions about where to click when you're casting a targeted AoE spell? We've already seen that functionality taken away in the accidental bug with Minimap:PingLocation(). From the precedent set in Minimap:PingLocation() you could assume that meant that Blizzard does not wish that you be able to control the location of AoE from the screen of just one client.
For explanation: http://dual-boxing.com/wiki/index.php/Macro:Minimap_Ping

Minimap Ping was used before patch 2.4.2 to allow the use of AoE spells while multiboxing. AoE spells were targetted by clicking on the minimap on 1 client so that the other clients would use this location to cast the AoE spell to. However, this isn't possible anymore in the current WoW client.
And as per WoWWiki: http://www.wowwiki.com/Patch_2.4.2_%28undocumented_changes%29

Minimap:PingLocation(0,0) is now a restricted function to the Blizzard UI only if you are currently targeting area of effect spell.

You see why I'm concerned?

It's not a "simple keypress". If the precedent that the location of the cursor on an X,Y axis can be moved without specific and constant user intervention is made, then it logically follows that both example 4 and 5 (and possibly even 6) would also be OK.

If this would happen, hardware users would clearly be at a marked disadvantage compared to software multiboxers -- when currently we generally even out as neither of us can do something the other cannot.

When I (as a hardware boxer) choose to use my mouse, I first must have all of my screens the same resolution (and my mice the exact same scroll speed) and "re-sync" my mouse's location by dragging it to a corner of the screen until all mice line up. Then, I must (very carefully) move the mouse to the center of the screen, and I will undoubtedly find that one or more screen (via various communication errors) is slightly out-of-sync from the others. There is no way for me to quickly, nor reliably, click on an exact or even near-exact location on my screen.

For reference, I used to click on chat dialogs on all screens at once (for example, to start the bombing of the Dead Scar quest rather than typing /script SelectGossipOption(1)). Often times I would find myself frustrated when a screen (or two) got out-of-sync and I accidentally misclicked on the wrong dialog and ended up flying over the blood elf ships to burn the sails instead.

Regardless of the hardware lag, there's still no way a hardware boxer can send an exact (or even close) mouseclick on a loction without first actually MOVING the mouse (on the x,y axis) to that location on all of their screens,
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11675540596&sid=1&pageNo=3

I'm asking the community for a (courteous) discussion about whether or not they feel that Click broadcasting (sending a mouseclick even to a specific x,y coordinate) is OK or isn't. Keep in mind that in the end, it's always Blizzard's decision, but this is some food for thought.

Feel free to discuss in this thread or the official one, though try not to spam/obfuscate the official thread before we get a blue to look at it. >.< I already had enough problems with clarity in that thread.

olipcs

10-25-2008, 04:50 AM

For me it would be ok, as it still relates to the paradigm:
"one (ingame) action per (mouse-)keypress"

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 04:53 AM

TheBigBB

10-25-2008, 04:53 AM

So let me get this straight. It's possible to click somewhere and have that click broadcasted to the same coordinates on another client?

Crucial

10-25-2008, 04:54 AM

As long as there is no dynamic decision making about where to click based on events in the game then the only difference I can see between mouse broadcasting to multiple computers currently is that the coordinates and button pressed are fixed rather than originating from the pointing device itself. You still have to click or press something to make it happen and there is no automation right?

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 04:55 AM

olipcs

10-25-2008, 04:58 AM

So let me get this straight. It's possible to click somewhere and have that click broadcasted to the same coordinates on another client? Yes! (For example use HotKeyNet)

As long as there is no dynamic decision making about where to click based on events in the game then the only difference I can see between mouse broadcasting to multiple computers currently is that the coordinates and button pressed are fixed rather than originating from the pointing device itself. You still have to click or press something to make it happen and there is no automation right? I second that! As long as there is not a dynamic decision making, I also would consider it ok, but hey, the final decision will make blizzard...
...and for me every outcome would be ok, as mouse-briadcasting is handy, but i use it not very often...

TheBigBB

10-25-2008, 05:06 AM

So let me get this straight. It's possible to click somewhere and have that click broadcasted to the same coordinates on another client?

Anything is POSSIBLE. Whether or not it should be/shouldn't be allowed by the rules is up to Blizzard, I'm just curious what other peoples' thoughts are given the precedent allowing it would set.I am just trying to understand the question perfectly.

Most of the time, mouse positioning on the screen has no in-game functionality, and it serves basically no purpose unless you're actually clicking. There are only a couple of things you can do with mouse broadcasting + click that you normally couldn't: targeted AOE and menu selection. Menu selection seems like a non-issue since it's not affecting gameplay. Targeted AOE works that way because it targets a ground location which can't be specified any other way. However, if you moved your mouse there and clicked on one client and the mouse was broadcasting, I don't see any practical difference from keyboard multicasting. You still targeted something and clicked a button. The automated X.Y movements would just be replicating the movement you made.

olipcs

10-25-2008, 05:07 AM

... and as long as it's done on one PC/client/screen it can be "automated" on the others? ..mainly, yes, this what my instincts say, even if it may be controversy.

btw. you mentioned the minimap-ping-controversay, my opinion on this is:
- blizzard did fix the minimap-pinging-thing, yes
- but: they never said (to my knowledge) that they don't want multiboxer to be able to do something like casting targetet-AoEs, if they specifical say that, i'll stop using it imediate.
- what they simple did, is making the ping-minimap.. not an option to cast such AoEs, but they never said, they changed it because of multiboxing, and we are not allowed to use another approach, or am I wrong?

But to be honest, the answer of blizz will clarify it, and as good multiboxers we will act approriate...

Schwarz

10-25-2008, 05:08 AM

Can someone clarify what dynamic decision making is.

elsegundo

10-25-2008, 05:14 AM

my opinion is that this is fine. there is no automation. with mouse movements in sync, a lot of things would be easier. i am not talking about mapping mouse clicks to action bar buttons because i think those things are easier to do with hotkeys+keyboard broadcasting anyway. but things like changing camera angles (not just turning), placing AoE spells, whether it be healing spells or damage spells, and on-mouse-over commands. actually for on-mouse-overs, i think that having all the slaves "see" the main's mouse pointer would be a much better idea. but then again, this might give multiboxers too much of an advantage. but for the most part, i would love mouse movement broadcasting only for the camera movements. in any case, mouse broadcasting should not be forbidden. the minimap ping function has little to do with this, as it doesnt use mouse broadcasts to perform blizzards, rain of fires, or circle of healings. instead, it ignores where the mouse pointer may be and sets the target of the AoE spell at the location of the main.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 05:17 AM

dynamic decision making

This right here is the part that puts me in a pickle.

Is dynamic decision making nonrelative mouse movements?
Is dynamic decision making a simple mathematical computation to determine scale? (i.e. the center of a 1000x1000 box is 500,500 -- but the center of a 500x500 box is 250,250. So click in each respective "center")
Is dynamic decision making clicking on one predetermined x,y location and another predetermined x1,y1 location on a different screen?

What defines "dynamic"? Because moving the mouse is a conscious decision -- does that make the movement of the mouse on a different screen "dynamic"? Granted, not in the common use of the word dynamic (making decisions based on the state of an object), but in the sense of "making nonrelative movements/decisions of a mouse based on the relative movement of one object (mouse) on your main screen/client" (EDIT: Schwarz beat me on "what is the definition of dynamic decisions" :P I'm too sloooow!)

Freddie

10-25-2008, 05:17 AM

If I understand Blizzard's policy, "one action per window per manual input by the user" refers to an in-game action. It doesn't refer to how much work you have to do with your hands to create the input that triggers the action.

I don't think anybody questions this when it comes to keystrokes. For example, if I bind an action to X, it's one key and one action. If I bind it to Shift-X, it's two keys but it's still one action. If I bind it to Alt-Shift-X, it's three keys but it's still one action. My fingers do three times as much work with the last binding, but it's still just one action because Blizzard (if I understand them correctly) counts actions by what happens in the game.

Assuming I'm correct about that -- please correct me if I'm not -- why should it be different with mouse clicks? If I bind a single in-game action to an action bar button, I have to slide the mouse cursor to that button and click the mouse. My hands do more work than with a single key binding, but it's still just one in-game action.

To answer the question about software. HotkeyNet can click the same in-game coordinates in many windows at once. By default it scales for window size and shape, so the windows can be different sizes and different shapes. The WoWs can be on any number of PC's. They can even be covered (although it works better if the object you're clicking is uncovered.) The only restriction is WoW's in-game resolution setting (not the window size or shape) because Blizzard draws the action bar and other doodads in different relative locations in the window depending on WoW's resolution setting. So if you want to do this with different-size windows, it's best to set all your WoW's to the same resolution and then shrink or stretch the WoW's to the desired size and shape with HotkeyNet or some other third-party program.

olipcs

10-25-2008, 05:36 AM

Is dynamic decision making nonrelative mouse movements?
Is dynamic decision making a simple mathematical computation to determine scale? (i.e. the center of a 1000x1000 box is 500,500 -- but the center of a 500x500 box is 250,250. So click in each respective "center")
Is dynamic decision making clicking on one predetermined x,y location and another predetermined x1,y1 location on a different screen?
in my opinion, this is all not realy 'dynamical' as it is all predifened.

And to give more room of discussion:

"clicking on one predetermined x,y location and another predetermined x1,y1 location on a different screen?"
is for me not much of a diffrence than
'pressing on one predetermind pc a predertimed key and sending another predetermind key to another predetermind pc'
which we all commonly use under the term of 'keymapping' and 'hotstringing'

Ughmahedhurtz

10-25-2008, 05:36 AM

For me it would be ok, as it still relates to the paradigm:
"one action per keypress"

But does that mean you define mouse movement on an x,y axis to not be an action?Regarding the highlighted text; yes, just so. Moving the mouse cursor to a specific location through human input is no different than moving your fingers to the correct keys, IMO. Consider, also, that people using wireless mice or a mouse connected to a USB/PS2 splitter can do mouse/mouseclick broadcasting seamlessly, which negates the entire cursor-movement-via-software argument. You still have to click the button to generate an event on the clients. And before the odd retard makes the "fishing bot" analogy, consider that the current mouseclick-replicating software/hardware makes absolutely no arbitrary or deductive decision about _where_ the cursor click happens; on the contrary, it only replicates human input, just like keyclick replication.

Either way and even if it did click a different spot on different clients, as long as it only clicked once, mouse cursor/click replication still abides by the "one human input = one action output per client" model.

Now, regarding the obvious question you're driving at here, which is whether ClickBoxer (plus InnerSpace) is against the ToS, that's a whole nother discussion and I'd politely suggest we maintain a wide separation between the two. I would think the differences would be blatantly obvious but I'm also a part-time programmer and, as such, have a good understanding of the difference between pre-defined/pre-configured/"dumb" mouseclick replication and programmatically-decided control-aware click positioning, assuming that's even what ClickBoxer does, which I've yet to see anyone prove one way or another (though I'll admit to ignoring those other threads due to blatant idiocy and armchair lawyerism).

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 05:41 AM

that people using wireless mice or a mouse connected to a USB/PS2 splitter can do mouse/mouseclick broadcasting seamlessly, which negates the entire cursor-movement-via-software argument

I don't think it does. I can't just turn my mouse repeater on, look at my main screen, and feel confident that my clicks are all happening in the same position on all of the screens. Because of PC lag, transmission lag, lost packets, whatever -- mice de-sync. In order to make an even REMOTELY reliable mouseclick, I have to trodge through the effort of re-sync'ing all mice by moving it to some corner in my screen, then very carefully and deliberately moving it to the right spot in the screen -- then turning off the repeater and adjusting the mouse on the screens where it de-sync'ed if I want a precise click (for example, on a text option on an NPC).

Software, if it makes the same relative movements (even with more reliability via cross-checking to make sure packets aren't lost or whatnot), is fine by me. Saying "click in this x,y coordinate" is debatable -- I understand the innocent intentions (the user is still moving the mouse on the main screen and still has to click to make it happen!). But it opens a whole nother can of worms -- because (via keybinding) we can change the layout of our UI while still keeping "lightning bolt" on a specific binding -- does that now mean that we can click on a specific (and different) x,y position where the lightningbolt UI button is located even though we actually moved (on our main screen) to a different portion of the screen? We no longer are replicating mouse movements, but reinterpreting them -- something that can't be done in the normal blizzard UI like keybindings.

Souca

10-25-2008, 05:45 AM

I've been thinking a lot about this because of a desire to be able to use targeted AOE more effectively. Just to be clear, this is the scenario I am envisioning for my point. The user clicks a location within the window at position x0, y0. This click is then replicated and scaled to the other clients at locations xN,yN. The scaling is done to handle differences in resolution. I use the term scaling because x and y can be defined in either pixels or percentages; either way you are still with a location relative to the origin of the window.

Can this be done with hardware? I believe this can be done with a tablet and its default drivers. Wacom tablets have a feature to map the resolution of the tablet to an active window instead of the screen resolution. Tablets are absolute positioning devices and do not send movement commands like a mouse does. They deal in 3 dimensions, the normal x and y, and a z value that represents the pressure. Clicks are determined based on a pressure threshold in the driver.

The USB HID standard allows digitizers to send absolute positioning. For reference you can read section 16 of the USB HID usage Table at http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs/Hut1_12.pdf

They define a digitizer as:

Digitizer CA � A device that measures absolute spatial position, typically in two or more dimensions. This is a generic usage; several specialized types of digitizers are distinguished by their attributes.

Section 16.1

Interestingly enough, the XY position is not sent within the Digitizer pages, but in the Generic Desktop page.

Not all digitizer field usages are from the Digitizer usage page. In particular, the usages for X and Y
displacement come from the Generic Desktop page.

Section 16.3.

Section 4 of the specs defines multiple methods of conveying XY coordinates to the computer, including absolute offsets and vector input.

So it is possible for hardware to send an absolute location within its coordinate space. The driver/OS will then convert this into a relative window location and send the event to the application.

Okay, so what does this mean? It means that it *is* indeed possible to send a click to multiple instances with the same in window scaled location when you have multiple resolutions with only hardware. In this scenario you wouldn't be using a mouse, but rather a pointer or digitizer.

In the end, I don't see this being an issue since it provides no guarantee that the characters are facing the same direction or that UI elements are in the same scaled location on all clients. Instead of your action being "Click the mouse", your action is now "Click at the HID location XY".

I hope this makes some sense. Sorry for getting technical, I just wanted to make sure I provided as much info for my theory.

- Souca -

Crucial

10-25-2008, 05:46 AM

We no longer are replicating mouse movements, but reinterpreting them -- something that can't be done in the normal UI like keybindings.Isn't this translation? Similiar to hotstrings?

Lax

10-25-2008, 05:46 AM

For me it would be ok, as it still relates to the paradigm:
"one action per keypress"

But does that mean you define mouse movement on an x,y axis to not be an action?

There's still the action of a keypress (that precedes all GCD arguments). With keyboards, it's simple -- there is no x,y axis. Only a Z axis. But mice have 3 axis -- x,y (movement) and z (keypresses). Are you saying you don't consider the x,y (movement) axis necessary, and as long as it's done on one PC/client/screen it can be "automated" on the others? (I use the word "automate" while kicking myself for not being able to think of any other word that seems to fit)The buttons aren't actually axes, they are buttons ;) x,y are of course axes. If it helps, for purposes of this discussion, if you want to consider movement on an x,y axis to be an action, the software in question can perform the movement on the x,y axis on the other windows, as you do the movements in the repeating window. The demonstration optimizes by only doing it when clicking (though for example, with mouselook you may want it to send the updates when the x,y changes, at least while the button is down).

Freddie

10-25-2008, 05:55 AM

Vyndree, I agree with you that programming software to click at a particular X Y when you press a hotkey is different from the input methods that are permitted by the client itself. If I were in Blizzard's shoes and it was my job to decide if this is okay, I'd use two criteria:

1. If this is forbidden, is there any way to enforce the rule? In other words, can the player's actions be detected? If not, there's no point in making the rule even if Blizzard would like to do so.

2. Can the effect of the programmed X Y click be accomplished by any single normal input through the client? If so, there's no need for a rule against it. If not, then it should probably be forbidden.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 06:28 AM

We no longer are replicating mouse movements, but reinterpreting them -- something that can't be done in the normal UI like keybindings.Isn't this translation? Similiar to hotstrings?

Correct, but "translations" with KEYBOARD keys is already implemented in the blizzard UI via menu->keybindings. Software emulation can do this a bit more elegantly, but regardless, there is no new functionality that can't be done with the standard UI.

There is currently no way -- using standard hardware or the in-game blizzard UI -- to mouse click at one location on one screen, and mouse click on a totally different location on a different screen. In fact, the ability to target AoE spells using the in-game UI (via Minimap:PingLocation) was specifically removed due to players utilizing one in-game click on one client to target spells (via macro) for the rest of their clients (or to even specify the x,y offset of their own aoe targeted spell by themselves).

Souca -- even with Minimap:PingLocation you had the same issue of "I think it's OK because they still don't know what direction I'm facing). The x,y inputs of Minimap:PingLocation were OFFSETS, not absolutes. Therefore, it depended on the facing of your character. However, they still removed the functionality. Just because hardware exists doesn't mean it's OK -- G15s are easy to identify because there are standard ps2 keyboards that don't use out-of-game macro capabilities, but just because a tablet can implement a feature (via hardware), doesn't mean that feature's OK (as demonstrated by the removal of an identical practice, Minimap:PingLocation). It's not something I can say is for sure against the rules, since that particular case was a "stealth nerf" (and I can certainly tell you that I'd LOVE to have this functionality back!), but you can draw your own conclusions.

And Freddie -- I agree -- certain things are OK and certain things aren't, and certainly the intentions of the hardware we use right now has never been nefarious. But at the same time, if you look in my original post you can see the "slippery slope". As for enforcement, I'd assume Blizzard would enforce the rule the same way they would botting -- by detecting whether or not a program that breaks the rules is running while WoW is running. Just because something is undetectable, doesn't mean it shouldn't be against the rules. http://dual-boxing.com/wiki/index.php/GM_Conversations#Undetectable.2C_therefore_allowab le

olipcs

10-25-2008, 06:47 AM

genocyde

10-25-2008, 07:02 AM

Dynamic decision making is possible with in-game UI / macros such as macro conditionals. Deciding which spell to cast based on whether your in combat or not, targeting a friend/enemy, heck I cannot drink a potion if im at full health and thats hardcoded. It's making decisions for me or preventing my decisions. This is imo no different in ANY way from injecting mouse clicks at a specific coordinate set in spirit or principle.

Yet in practice, it is another story. There is nothing in game (that I'm aware of) that supports changing mouse clicking or injecting a mouse click at specific screen coordinates now that the mini-map ping option has been removed.

I'm personally in favor of the "if its not possible to script it in game, it's not legal to script it out of game". After all the second that supporting software becomes a 'requirement' to perform any ability your gaining an advantage over a player that is running strictly WoW. What if that software existed for windows only, what would MAC/Linux users have to say about you being able to perform an action that is simply not available to them.

Edited for content and clarity

Souca

10-25-2008, 07:04 AM

Okay, color me confused. I thought we were discussing the replication of a click onto multiple clients to hit a similar virtual location, a good example being center of screen. I never brought up MiniMap:Ping because it is not what I was hardware theorycrafting about. It worked thorough in game channels to coordinate characters who might not have been played by the same user. I can theorize why it was fixed, but that seems to be a waste of effort. However, equating MiniMap:Ping as equivalent to a one way hardware input device is an unfair comparison. Additionally, its not that tablets could be implemented this way, but rather they are by default. The main thrust of examples I provided was to contrast the examples provided based of the fact that all mouse input is relative and capable of losing sync. Tablets are a standard input device that does not suffer from that issue. Since it seems we have been vetting things based on the basis of it being an emulation of a hardware event, I wanted to clarify that absolute positioning via hardware does exist and is implemented at the same level that relative positioning used by mice is.

Is this acceptable by Blizzard? I have no idea. I stated whether I thought it was a issue, but I hope I didn't imply anything beyond that.

Just wanted to clarify the whole MiniMap:Ping analogy. On other thing to note though, MiniMap:Ping sent in game world coordinate offsets, so it only lost acuracy based on the facing of the characters, not the camera angle. Click replication has no concept of in game coordinates or even that a game is involved.

- Souca -

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 07:50 AM

I agree -- but at the same time they could've just removed the "send this minimap ping to others in my party" aspect and just stuck with the functionality for solo-characters (for example, when this macro worked Suvega used it to target his Mass Dispell directly over his priest for fights like Felmyst, since he didn't want to sit there not healing while waiting for the event to happen so he could click the dispell targeting circle).

If they intended for it to still be used for solo characters (i.e. clicking on a specific location for the purposes of targeting a SINGLE aoe spell), they would have only hotfixed it for the group sense -- instead they removed it entirely (and I think I read somewhere that they mentioned that they wanted the user to actually have to click to target their AoE spells.... Let me see if I can dig that quote up).

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=6440985857&postId=64402474434

Yes, allowing AddOns to target spells via the minimap ping was not intentional and was fixed. AddOns may not directly cast spells or change targeting.

P.S. That thread as a whole ('http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=6440985857&postId=64402474434') is very informative. I'd highly recommend it as a read, since it's relatively close to the subject at hand.

genocyde

10-25-2008, 07:51 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong but mini-map ping was also a terrain click only it had no ability to interact with objects/menus. So technically the ability to click on the screen with an in-game function has never existed save hardware mouse clicks. Therefore you should not be allowed to create mouse clicks at coordinates unless you are tracking mouse movement.

Tracking mouse movement -- The technique of creating a coordinate click by recieving the information from a click you already made should not be allowed. The coordinates you clicked on your screen are not available to any other party and reading them and passing them as such should be a no-no. Now if you want to send mouse clicks to other clients your click should click their screen and your mouse movement should move their cursor (visible or not).

When you press your run forward key on all clones they run where they are facing not where your active window is facing.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 08:16 AM

Jumping in late here....

Broadcasting a mouse via software is NOT ok IMO. Software is doing the mouse clicking, not the end user. Sure, the end user is telling the software where to click X, Y... but its not the same thing. Its way too close to botting.

Sorry to play devil's advocate here. ;) I'm very good at playing devil's advocate.

What about mouse multiplexer emulators like Synergy? Basically sending relative mouse movements to all computers (just like sync'ing one wireless mouse to multiple computers)? Does that fall into the same category? Why or why not?

Souca

10-25-2008, 08:29 AM

I hate to get all semantic and what not, but can people clarify what they mean when they are referring to clicks. In my example, there was no feedback from the system and the mouse pointer would appear at the same relative location on all clients/screens. I specify relative since I allowed different resolutions and a click in the middle of the screen would be in the middle even if the screen was 320x480 on one client and 800x600 on another. In my example I am only talking about mouse/tablet clicks generating clicks on other clients/machines.

I am not talking about clicks in one location going to a different location on another client unless the difference is the byproduct the difference in resolutions. I.e. clicking on the "1" button in the action bar would still click "1" on the other clients assuming the same UI and the same aspect ratio (not widescreen and 4:3).

As for the solo vs multi click intentions of the fix, I only see them stating that they do not want AddOns to cast or target spells and it is inferred that a click should be required to target the spell. I'm exploring a way to may that click multiplex.

- Souca -

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 02:22 PM

Lax

10-25-2008, 05:43 PM

Probably the best example is people who click skills. You press 1 and you get chain lightning or with a multiplexer you press 1 and 5 clients press 1 to get chain lightning. You click 1 you get chain lightning or you click 1 and get 5 chain lightnings. Right -- but if you allow people to send mouseclicks to x,y positions, then the precedent is set for them to click on any x,y position on the screen (or potentially even send one x,y click on one machine and convert it to a x1, y1 location on another screen). The only difference between "clicking on teh ground" and "clicking on the lightning bolt button" is the location of the x,y click -- and since that's movable through UI mods (bartender, macaroon, etc) you can't prevent them from clicking on any x,y coordinate they like (in the center of their screen for mass dispell, for example, which is in direct conflict of the removal of Minimap: PingLocation)If I understand the issue with Minimap PingLocation correctly, it's that this API was not intended to be used for spell targeting, not that Multi-boxers should not be allowed to click on the ground in some fashion. The Blizzard post that the Minimap_Ping is referring to does back this up (and Souca appears to interpret this the same way I do):
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=6440985857&sid=1&pageNo=1

Yes, allowing AddOns to target spells via the minimap ping was not intentional and was fixed. AddOns may not directly cast spells or change targeting. <I think> Slouken is NOT implying that multi-boxers cannot click on the ground to target spells, just that Minimap: PingLocation being used for spell targeting was an unintended bug, and it was therefore fixed. He does specifically say AddOns, which to me would imply just that, you can't download an AddOn that is capable of turning an in-game macro into a way to cast Blizzard. However, with click replication, <I think> the new worldofwarcraft.com thread DOES imply that you CAN replicate clicks anywhere you like, as long as it keeps with the one key to one action rule. Since the demonstration in question is 100% human powered (no delays, no automation, just pure duplication of the user's actions), it should actually be well within the rules to use click replication to do ground spell targeting.

There are caveats to doing this. There is no easy way to guarantee that your screens are all aligned well enough to click on the same location, for example. You can get close, most of the time, but if one session has a hiccup it might be facing elsewhere and the click will be too far off. In order to do it, you would have to manually adjust before clicking. Clicking on UI windows (I said dialogs before but meant any UI window really -- bad choice of wording the first time around) is far more reliable, as long as the window in question is in the same location on all screens.

The question sort of remains as to whether adjusting the mouse position based on resolution is allowed, but this is not done by the software in question at this time (but yes, it could, and without relying on game information -- it would use DirectX API to handle the resolution). The green poster suggests that it should be fine as long as it's not using in-game information, but Reythur's response leaves that question open and of course carries more weight than the green poster.

As far as standard hardware, I think the tablet idea is sound -- in order to work properly for artists to draw, they have to use an absolute x,y. The same is true for touch-screens (except less about artists). I know nothing about the underlying implementation, but these things ARE available and could presumably be multiplexed to other PCs.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 07:37 PM

Yes, Lax. The Minimap Ping is to prevent clicking on the GROUND for area-targeted abilities like Flamestrike, Blizzard, Rain of Fire, etc.

Furthermore, target changes shouldn't be available to addons (/assist and [target=x] is part of the acceptable macro list and therefore excempt). If you look at addons that used to "healbot" for you by choosing who had a debuff to cleanse or whom had the lowest health to heal, you can see how this has changed. Decursive now requires that you click on a specific user's box in order to cleanse that specific person.

So, suffice to say -- targeting using addon key or mouseclicks should be considered a no-no for both helpful and harmful spells.

Now, my "devil's advocate" argument is -- since the UI is modifyable and movable thanks to bar mods, viewports, etc -- how is it possible to prevent a user from making a click to certain UI components if the location of those components is designated by the user. If I click at X,Y (and let's say that's the position of my "Fireball" button), then I move my bars (using a barmod) over to the left and click in that same spot, I could potentially be targeting my Flamestrike spell because I've modified where my normal Blizzard UI buttons are located.

Slouken is NOT implying that multi-boxers cannot click on the ground to target spells,

Actually, he is.

Yes, allowing AddOns to target spells via the minimap ping was not intentional and was fixed. AddOns may not directly cast spells or change targeting.

If you feel he isn't "implying" the same for solo boxers, please find me a quote where it specifies that the rules to solo boxers do not also apply to multiboxers. Solo-boxers may not use any addon, mod, or macro that specifies the target of their AoE-targeted spell. Therefore, multiboxers may not use any addon, mod, or macro that specifies the target of their AoE-targeted spell.

And if multiboxers aren't exempt from soloboxer rules, find me a official quote/rule that says that out-of-game addons are excempt from the rules of in-game macros. The rules to addons apply to out-of-game programs and hardware, much like the macros of the G15, while they carry the CAPABILITY to program delays, may not be used in any way that an in-game macro cannot be used. The rules for in-game macros/addons/mods apply to out-of-game macros/addons/mods. Keyboard multiplexing has been confirmed by GMs, which is why we're allowed to use both software and hardware keypress multiplexers.

Let's take an example: take a solo boxer and let's pretend there's a 3rd party addon for solo-boxers that hooks into WoW and can send mouseclick events to x,y locations. The solo boxer would like to make a macro that casts Mass Dispell. The solo boxer sets up a portion of their UI on this 3rd party addon, with a little button for them to click on that sends a macro:
/cast Mass Dispell
MOUSECLICK X,Y

Regardless of whether the user uses a mouseclick to initiate this macro or not, it's a bad macro. They can mouseclick on the macro all they want -- it doesn't make it any more "right". Let's say they position the button right on their X,Y coordinate and mouseclick on it. Still bad. The macro is telling the mouse WHERE to click -- regardless of whether or not the click was initiated by a keyboard macro or by mouseclicking the macro -- the user didn't actually click on the in-gane floor location that targeted where hte mass dispell was going. It clicked/keypressed on a 3rd party addon, which then sent a addon-based mouseclick to the screen. According to Slouken's quoted macro, that is bad.

Any user (multiboxer or not) can tell you that the actual SPELLCAST of Rain of fire and other targeted spells is not just the keypress on the spell. It's the actual mouseclick that makes the spell. You won't get stuck in a GCD by just pressing the Rain of Fire spell. Nothing happens when you press the Rain of Fire button (except for a funny looking green targeting circle). The GCD, the spell, everything starts when you mouseclick on the location at which you want to cast.

The unfairness also happens because normal users get STUCK in that "green targeting circle" phase when preparing to cast their targeted aoe. Is it fair that multiboxers could potentially do this near-instantaneously (since a computer can issue a keyclick+mouseclick on x,y location) much faster than a human finger(s) can? Is it fair that, for example -- Suvega sitting there with his green targeting circle waits for the right time to mouseclick to remove an effect on Felmyst, while some dude running a 3rd party mod just has to click once and the cast+click happens so fast (thanks to the computer's speed) that he doesn't have to sit there wasting time prepairing and aiming his targeting circle?

It's not up to us to interpret the rules (and claim that these interpretations are "what blue said") or to make inferences based on context ("what blue meant to say", "souken INTENDED to say") -- rules are black and white. If something feels to YOU as gray, consider it bad and ask for clarification of the rules.

Unless Slouken specifically says "I intended to say this..." what YOU or I think about what Slouken said or didn't say is completely irrrelevant and not up to us to interpret. If you like, say "I THINK that Slouken intended to say this..." but don't work in false, leading absolute statements that have no foundation whatsoever. If ever someone quotes me with "Vyndree said 'rules are black and white' but she REALLY meant to say 'gray area won't get you banned'" I'd be pretty upset about someone completely misquoting me, putting words in my mouth, and making up complete counterfactual, agenda-driven statements. Yes, I'm angry about this particular part of your post.

I did you a favor -- I stepped up to the plate and asked blues for a confirmation of the rules because, for whatever personal reason, you can't or won't. Just because you can't/won't take the time to get official statements from the blues doesn't mean you can make things up about what they said. We all have the quote. We're not completely blind. Find me the part where Reythur and Slouken confirms your statements. If you can't find that, and can't go get clarification on your own for whatever reason, then don't allude anything at all. Because honestly, making up statements or pretending that your interpretations are fact is a cold, hard lie.

However, with click replication, the new worldofwarcraft.com thread DOES imply that you CAN replicate clicks anywhere you like
Quote this please. Reythur was very clear that he could not give confirmation of ANY mouse-related behavior, and recommends not to use it until firm rules could be made and the implications of those rules were well known.

Do not put words into the blues' mouth. I've read nothing of the sort. If you want to share your opinion, share your OPINION (and make it clear) -- but I never read a single thing direct from the blues saying "it's ok to replicate clicks" or even "it's ok to replicate clicks as long as the original x,y = the replicated x,y". In fact, the only definitive thing I've heard is "We don't have a definitive answer. Until we do, I[Reythur] recommend not using it"

Read: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11675540596&postId=118283592857&sid=1#55

We're honestly touching upon very questionable grounds here, and I'm wary to provide either a positive or a negative at this point in time.
...
While the use of the mouse to click on point A on screen 1 and point A on screen 2 is a little less questionable than the preceding example, it can still lead to some interesting and questionable uses of it.

I'd personally avoid it until the technology is 1) more well defined and it's limitations established and 2) a better understanding of it's specific intended uses are understood fully.

I understand that this isn't exactly the definitive answer you were looking for, and for that I apologize. However, I'd prefer to abstain from providing a definitive yes or no until more information is available regarding the technology.
LESS QUESTIONABLE != within the rules. It's a relative comparison -- for example, perhaps you could say "gold buying is less questionable than botting". That doesn't make gold buying any more right. It's still against the rules.

I've edited your post (in red) because I feel it is misleading. Please do not spread inaccurate information about blue posts in the future.

Lax

10-25-2008, 07:50 PM

Umm... Slouken very specifically said AddOns, he did not give a general statement about multi-boxing at all in that quote, and I don't think it should be implied that he intended to say anything other than what he very specifically said. That is why I correctly stated, that he did not imply that multi-boxers cannot click. YOU are telling me what he "intended" to say, I am reading his quote verbatim. I am offended that you modified my post to comply with your incorrect interpretation of what he said.

While the use of the mouse to click on point A on screen 1 and point A on screen 2 is a little less questionable than the preceding example, it can still lead to some interesting and questionable uses of it. Indeed, he did say "less questionable" and therefore it is IMPLIED, not explicitly stated, based on his post, that click replication is okay. I'm not the only one who read it as such -- the community MVP did as well. Therefore, it is IMPLIED by the thread, that it is okay. I really don't know where you're getting off editing my post here.

Let's take an example: take a solo boxer and let's pretend there's a 3rd party addon for solo-boxers that hooks into WoW and can send mouseclick events to x,y locations. The solo boxer would like to make a macro that casts Mass Dispell. The solo boxer sets up a portion of their UI on this 3rd party addon, with a little button for them to click on that sends a macro:
/cast Mass Dispell
MOUSECLICK X,Y We're talking about 2 different things, I am talking about replicating a mouse click. A solo boxer is already clicking at X,Y. Someone using Repeater is ALSO clicking at X,Y. Repeater is simply taking that click, and repeating it in the other windows. What you are talking about is making a button that clicks at X,Y regardless of the current position of the mouse or whether it was indeed a click. I did not demonstrate, at any point, clicking on a UI mod that moves the mouse to a position other than the current position of the mouse.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 07:52 PM

Indeed, he did say "less questionable" and therefore it is IMPLIED, not explicitly stated, based on his post, that click replication is okay.

"Gold buying is less questionable than botting"

Am I therefore IMPLYing that gold buying is okay? You can infer it and put words into my mouth all you want, I implied nothing of the sort.

You are walking on very thin ice with me. I do not take well to false representation of official blue posters words.

We're talking about 2 different things, I am talking about replicating a mouse click.

And I'm talking about what? Fluffy bunnies?

I am still talking about the same subject. You are claiming that 1) the blues are OK with click replication. There has been no proof (in fact, if you look at Reythur's post he recommends staying AWAY from it) to support this. You are also claiming that 2) the blues only have issues with the precedent of targeting an AoE using an in-game macro, and since your mouseclicks happen out-of game (and are "the same" as keyclicks -- see point #1) that they are OK. I am saying that the rules for in-game macros/addons also apply to out-of-game macros/addons. We're not talking about ClickBoxer (which is why I seperated this thread from yours). We're not talking about Repeater. We're talking about replicating mouse events in GENERAL.

A solo boxer is already clicking at X,Y. Someone using Repeater is ALSO clicking at X,Y. Repeater is simply taking that click, and repeating it in the other windows. What you are talking about is making a button that clicks at X,Y regardless of the current position of the mouse or whether it was indeed a click. I did not demonstrate, at any point, clicking on a UI mod that moves the mouse to a position other than the current position of the mouse.

Neither did Reythur, he's still talking about 1-to-1 clicks as well.

While the use of the mouse to click on point A on screen 1 and point A on screen 2 is a little less questionable than the preceding example, it can still lead to some interesting and questionable uses of it.

Neither of your points are supported by the blues. The insinuation that they are, is what is making me angry. This is an opinion thread -- you're welcome to share your opinion. What you're not welcome to do is obfuscate opinion with fact -- particularly when the facts you're obfuscating are official blue posters' words and intentions.

snaeb

10-25-2008, 07:59 PM

Indeed, he did say "less questionable" and therefore it is IMPLIED, not explicitly stated, based on his post, that click replication is okay.

"Gold buying is less questionable than botting"

Am I therefore IMPLYing that gold buying is okay? You can infer it and put words into my mouth all you want, I implied nothing of the sort.

You are walking on very thin ice with me. I do not take well to false representation of official blue posters words.

We're talking about 2 different things, I am talking about replicating a mouse click.

And I'm talking about what? Fluffy bunnies?

I am still talking about the same subject. You are claiming that 1) the blues are OK with click replication. There has been no proof (in fact, if you look at Reythur's post he recommends staying AWAY from it) to support this. You are also claiming that 2) the blues only have issues with the precedent of targeting an AoE using an in-game macro, and since your mouseclicks happen out-of game (and are "the same" as keyclicks -- see point #1) that they are OK. I am saying that the rules for in-game macros/addons also apply to out-of-game macros/addons. We're not talking about ClickBoxer (which is why I seperated this thread from yours). We're not talking about Repeater. We're talking about replicating mouse events in GENERAL.

Neither of your points are supported by the blues. The insinuation that they are, is what is making me angry. This is an opinion thread -- you're welcome to share your opinion. What you're not welcome to do is obfuscate opinion with fact -- particularly when the facts you're obfuscating are official blue posters' words and intentions.
Sounds to me like the Blizzard rep was not sure either way. It sounds like you are trying to push this issue into a bigger issue than it really is. I read this thread. You dont use Clickboxer, why are you making a big deal out of it? Why dont you let the folks that use Clickboxer worry about Clickboxer. BTW - I use a program called 'Replicate'. No I dont need you to start a thread on it. I did my own research and I know what it does, therefore I know its fine. You dont speak for me or most of the people in the DB community. The community is much larger than these forums as this is not the only game that people dual box. Seriously though - you are coming off as a whiny stuck up bitch trying to force feed your idea of what is right and wrong to everyone. If you did that dudes post to manipulate what 'he was saying', you should be kicked in the head.

Go have a coke and a smile - stfu.

Suvega

10-25-2008, 08:02 PM

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 08:06 PM

You dont use Clickboxer, why are you making a big deal out of it? Why dont you let the folks that use Clickboxer worry about Clickboxer.

Because what the ClickBoxers do affect the reputation of all multiboxers -- not just ClickBoxers.

This isn't a thread about ClickBoxer. It's a thread about mouse replication. ClickBoxer falls into this bucket -- but as Lax attempts to point out there's capabilities in Keyclone and other products for this as well (or so he claims -- I haven't heard of nonrelative mouse movements on any other products before).

I make a big deal out of it because it's such a complicated problem that the BLUEs can't even give us a definitive answer on whether it's allowed or not. Don't you think that's concerning? The impact of their confirmation of whether or not mouse multiplexing is so vast that it WILL impact all of us multiboxers (and potentially solo boxers who want to utilize clicks for AoE spells, if the impact is wide enough). That's not something to be personally concerned about?

I make a big deal out of Lax's post because it deliberately mis-quotes and mis-guides people about the content of blue posts and their "implications" and what they "meant to say".

EDIT: Thanks Fur. For reference, this is why I care and why I'm personally invested in the interests of multiboxers...

Because I am the primary contributor for this page: http://www.dual-boxing.com/wiki/index.php/GM_Conversations (see http://www.dual-boxing.com/wiki/index.php?title=GM_Conversations&action=history)
Because I was the one who wrote this: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5288579356&sid=1 (which was subsequently stickied here: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=9679803345&sid=1 )
Because I have this sort of impact on the CS forums when multiboxing questions come into play: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=4822936028&postId=47749355076&sid=1#6 ; http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5103678741&postId=52354437225&sid=1#56

I care about my hobby. I care about everyone's account safety. I care about the reputation of multiboxers as a whole. And I most vehemently care that our relationship with Blizzard is not tarnished because we choose to purposely misquote them for our own personal agenas.

As people on this forum already know -- I will be a b*tch when Blizzard and their rules are being tramped on. Take a look at the multitude of account sharing/selling/transferring posts and who's been locking them.

snaeb

10-25-2008, 08:12 PM

Sounds to me like the Blizzard rep was not sure either way. It sounds like you are trying to push this issue into a bigger issue than it really is. I read this thread. You dont use Clickboxer, why are you making a big deal out of it? Why dont you let the folks that use Clickboxer worry about Clickboxer.

Go have a coke and a smile - stfu. Vyndree is without a doubt the public face of multiboxing when it comes to communication directly with Blizzard reps. She has cleared up more possible issues with blizzard than everyone else combined, taking it upon herself to make sure the things we do will not get our accounts banned and at the same time squash the retards that try and make up myths about us.

Looks like you're new here - or trolling under a differnet name to avoid defaming your "main" account here. Whatever the case, consider this your warning. Play nice or GTFO.

EDIT: Damn it Suvega! lol

Ive been multi-boxing games since the late 90's and yeah this thread was worthwhile because for some odd reason certain people feel like they are the voice for everyone. I assure you of one fact, you are not now and never will be the voice of me. None of you. Its pretty obvious from where this has been going she has personal interest in burying this guy and its not right.

I dont play Warcraft but I assume that multiboxing rules are pretty much the same between wow and other mmo's. A better approach would have been emailing customer service to get an answer and then make a sticky thread containing the information. Since you are 'so respected' in the multiboxing community that should have been sufficient. Instead you are trying to push your own agenda and fight with this guy on the forums which doesnt say much for any of you.

Lastly - stop implying you speak for everyone, you dont. We have a voice and if we feel we need to say something, we are capable of registering an account and adding a reply.

I guess what Im trying to say is STFU and email your game's customer service department and stop this soap opera bullshit.

Lax

10-25-2008, 08:13 PM

Look, Vyndree, if you want to argue over random words all day long, I can do it.

I did not put any words in a blue poster's mouth. I said it was implied by the thread, being an aggregation of several posts. At no point did I say that a blue poster explicitly stated that what I'm talking about is 100% legitimate, and in fact I didn't even specify blue or the poster. I am not "falsely interpreting" anyone, in fact based on this thread and the previous threads, I would say you are very much falsely interpreting both me and Souken, and probably a number of other people.

What I am saying about minimap ping is that you are putting words in their mouths, and I see absolutely no backup of your claim that any blue poster said multi-boxers should not be able to manually click on the ground. I quoted the original blue post, which very specifically said ____________ may not do ________. You're adding words into the blanks (multiboxing, to prevent clicking on the GROUND, etc) I am merely regurgitating what he very specifically stated.

I did not say that you are implying that gold buying is okay when you say that it is "less questionable than botting". Personally, I took "less questionable" in this context to be stronger than you did, and so apparently did Cogwheel and Souca, and based on the content of the thread, I read it as implying that it is okay -- particularly given the first response, to the post where you said that ClickBoxer was doing something that it is clearly not, when based on that information he gave a distinctly negative answer, I would say that the new response is not negative, and retracts his earlier statement that it is not okay.

This isn't a thread about ClickBoxer. It's a thread about mouse replication. ClickBoxer falls into this bucket -- but as Lax attempts to point out there's capabilities in Keyclone and other products for this as well (or so he claims -- I haven't heard of nonrelative mouse movements on any other products before). Please quote me, I don't remember specifying that KeyClone has absolute mouse positioning. I don't know the full capabilities of KeyClone. What I said was, I'm surprised this is new to anyone.

I make a big deal out of Lax's post because it deliberately mis-quotes and mis-guides people about the content of blue posts and their "implications" and what they "meant to say". Please see my statement about minimap pings. If you can provide a quote that backs up your position that blues said multi-boxers can't click on the ground, that might help your case. You on the other hand have very clearly misguided people both on here and on worldofwarcraft.com. Pot, meet kettle.

snaeb

10-25-2008, 08:16 PM

snaeb

10-25-2008, 08:18 PM

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 08:20 PM

You need to conduct your 'investigation' in a more appropriate manner if you are going to continue this crusade as everyones guardian and seeker of all that is safe and true. At least act like an adult, thats all Im saying. Right now, I'd say a line was crossed. Dont you think? Stop and ask yourself if this isnt even a little bit about more than dual-boxing.

Why? Are you also saying that "I meant to say" or that I "implied" something? Can you quote it for me?

The 'investigation' is over. It's in Blizzard's hands, and they are telling us "We can't say yes or no" so for now, they (yes, THEY.. I can quote them saying this) "recommend not using it" until they can.

It's not OUR investigation. It's THEIRS. I did my part as the good dual-boxer and brought it to their attention. I did my part for the community by asking Blizzard for their investigation and resolution. And I've done my part by bringing their response back to the community.

Of course, you've done your part of trolling the forums on your first post. And you were warned. I do thank you for sharing your opinion (though it probably would've sufficed to do so privately) about how you recommend that the community you were so barely 2-posts part of should be run. I hope you enjoy your vacation from it.

Anemo

10-25-2008, 08:21 PM

You are both doing the same thing, trying to interpret the blue posts when there is no definitive answer anyway.

Your example of addons that were removed were because of automation, having an addon decide on who to cleanse and to do it for you is automation. In my opinion having your mouse click replicated doesn't appear to be in different in terms of automation than broadcasting a key press.

I don't really see what the real issue is here anyway, click broadcasting doesn't really allow you to do anything you couldn't just click on that screen to activate anyway.

The only problem I can see is sending a click to specific coordinatates and the fact blizzard wouldn't really be able to differentiate between that and replicating a keypress. Even then is there really any advantage at all for this? I'm not sure what I'd ever want 'clicked' in the same spot every time.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 08:23 PM

You are both doing the same thing, trying to interpret the blue posts when there is no definitive answer anyway.

Correct, except the post is about discussion of opinions, and only one has claimed that their opinions are based on official Blizzard facts that don't exist.

I don't have a problem with sharing opinions. I have a problem with making up facts that aren't there, particularly when they potentially deface the words and intentions of the Blizzard poster behind them. Lax is (still) welcome to share his opinions (as is everyone) as long as the facts and official Blizzard comments are not obfuscated while he does so.

I'm not trying to harp the same thing over and over again, but since you mentioned that I just wanted to make it 100% clear what I'm harping about. Your opinions in your post are always welcome (this is a forum, after all), I just want to make sure that my upset is not interpreted as being either a personal vendetta or unfounded. The only thing I'm upset about is the misquotes -- people can agree to disagree based entirely on opinions, that's cool.

Lax

10-25-2008, 08:25 PM

You are both doing the same thing, trying to interpret the blue posts when there is no definitive answer anyway.

Correct, except the post is about discussion of opinions, and only one has claimed that their opinions are based on official Blizzard facts that don't exist.

I don't have a problem with sharing opinions. I have a problem with making up facts that aren't there, particularly when they potentially deface the words and intentions of the Blizzard poster behind them. Lax is (still) welcome to share his opinions (as is everyone) as long as the facts and official Blizzard comments are not obfuscated while he does so.I think you may have missed my post. I have the same problem you have with making up facts that aren't there. Please read it.

Edit: The post is #51 on this thread.

Anemo

10-25-2008, 08:29 PM

The only problem I can see is sending a click to specific coordinatates and the fact blizzard wouldn't really be able to differentiate between that and replicating a keypress. Even then is there really any advantage at all for this? I'm not sure what I'd ever want 'clicked' in the same spot every time. From my POV - it'll "look" like a botting program is calling the shots - not the player.This is the main problem. Even legitimately used mouse replication would appear the same as it is still sending to a specific x/y coordinate, it just happens to be the same coordinate as the original mouse click.

Still, I can't imagine any botting program using mouse clicking or aoe spells which would be blizzards main concern.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 08:42 PM

I think you may have missed my post. I have the same problem you have with making up facts that aren't there. Please read it.

Edit: The post is #51 on this thread.

Sorry, Lax. I was still going on on the offshoot topic that snaed started. As long as blue statements are clear in the future, there need not be any additional flak about it.

Since you've requested I specifically read it, here's my thoughts on your post (#51),

What I am saying about minimap ping is that you are putting words in their mouths, and I see absolutely no backup of your claim that any blue poster said multi-boxers should not be able to manually click on the ground. I quoted the original blue post, which very specifically said ____________ may not do ________. You're adding words into the blanks (multiboxing, to prevent clicking on the GROUND, etc) I am merely regurgitating what he very specifically stated.

I'm not adding words to the blanks -- I'm adding the definition of what MinimapPing DID (or at least used to do before it was fixed, as addressed in that post) in replacement of the term "Minimap:PingLocation". Since the functionality and the term are relatively synonymous, I don't see any false information there. Do you?

I never said a blue poster said MULTI-BOXERS should not be able to manually click on the ground (can you quote me saying this, or just make further claims about what I did/didn't say... or meant to say... or intended to say?). I said that a blue poster claimed that ALL players should not be able to utilize macros/addons to TARGET a spell (which is targeted BY clicking on the ground).

I did not say that you are implying that gold buying is okay when you say that it is "less questionable than botting". Personally, I took "less questionable" in this context to be stronger than you did,

How strong can a term "less questionable" be? It, in and of itself, is a relative comparison. Its strength can't even be measured.

and so apparently did Cogwheel and Souca,
...of whom I've responded -- souca and I ni particular have had a nice little discussion about his interpretations versus mine and we've been quite clear and civil...

and based on the content of the thread, I read it as implying that it is okay -- particularly given the first response,

For clarity, here is the first (I'm assuming you meant BLUE) response in the thread:

Hey Vel,

While I'm not entirely sure about the significant majority of the workings on this program, some of it does indeed sound very questionable.

2) Is making dynamic decisions (based on memory) about the location of a UI action button (in order to click it) bannable?

This really does sound like automation of some form; as always, if it appears to be questionable it's best to just avoid it to prevent any possible issues that may arise with the use of something.

You may be better off inquiring on this issue on our UI/Macro forum where someone with a more technological background may be able to look into the issue for you. While I realize that that forum is generally specifically related to in-game User Interfaces, from other various comments within this thread it appears as if there is something that is related to an outside adjustment (i.e overlay) to the general World of Warcraft User Interface.

I'd personally avoid this as it does appear to be very questionable.

to the post where you said that ClickBoxer was doing something that it is clearly not, when based on that information he gave a distinctly negative answer, I would say that the new response is not negative,

Well, the first response (as you say) was to inaccurate information on a specific product (ClickBoxer). The second (quoted below for clarity) was in response to a general question that involved no specific products.

Why would you assume that two seperate were related when the first was about erroneous features that don't exist in a specific product, and the second was about a general feature?
Reythur clearly quoted the questions he was answering to provide very clear context about his responses, so I see no ambiguity nor alluding that the two questions are directly related to each other just for being in the same thread. In fact, I see the majority of the thread between Reythur's first and second response being clarifications that the first response was actually totally unrelated to ClickBoxer and that a totally different, accurate question remained unanswered.

The question was: is making decisions about where to click in a UI bannable?

The wording of this question unfortunately leads to a large number of possible misunderstandings of what I would like to respond with. =/

Are you making the decision? Or is the software?

We're honestly touching upon very questionable grounds here, and I'm wary to provide either a positive or a negative at this point in time.

Due to the nature of Multi-Boxing (and as you're well aware of, we've deemed Multi-Boxing more than fine) there are always going to be questionable methods of approaching the practice. Replication of a keyboard press is a little less of an issue due to the way it works; however, software making adjustments of mouse placement depending on a number of variables determined by the user leans more towards automation.

While the use of the mouse to click on point A on screen 1 and point A on screen 2 is a little less questionable than the preceding example, it can still lead to some interesting and questionable uses of it.

I'd personally avoid it until the technology is 1) more well defined and it's limitations established and 2) a better understanding of it's specific intended uses are understood fully.

I understand that this isn't exactly the definitive answer you were looking for, and for that I apologize. However, I'd prefer to abstain from providing a definitive yes or no until more information is available regarding the technology.

and retracts his earlier statement that it is not okay.

A retraction would be an update and/or direct conflict of two statements. I see nothing in either of his two posts that contradict each other, nor any sort of update to the first statement present in the second statement.

This is what I see:
Statement #1:

2) Is making dynamic decisions (based on memory) about the location of a UI action button (in order to click it) bannable?
This really does sound like automation of some form
Statement #2:

The question was: is making decisions about where to click in a UI bannable?
The wording of this question unfortunately leads to a large number of possible misunderstandings of what I would like to respond with. =/

Are you making the decision? Or is the software?
...
I understand that this isn't exactly the definitive answer you were looking for...
In actuality, it just looks like something like a FAQ, where a person goes down the line answering various questions. I see no relation other than the fact that both questions were asked and answered in the same thread.

What I'm saying, is saying that your INTERPRETATION or assumptions do not facts make. Stating them as if they were facts, straight from the horse's mouth, is misrepresentation of the blues. Stating them as if they were opinions, on the other hand, would've been perfectly acceptable and the whole conflict could've been avoided.

In final, there need not be additional discussion about what should/shouldn't be said. I think I've made that clear in my editing of your thread, to give you an example. As long as the example is followed in the future, there need not be any additional discussion about what you said/didn't say -- we know you MEANT that it was your opinion (since that's what you keep following up to say, for example, in post #51). But the delivery of the message was not clear. I have since, through edits, made it clear. As long as it stays clear in your future posts, we're cool. Cool?

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 08:54 PM

Ive been multi-boxing games since the late 90's and yeah this thread was worthwhile because for some odd reason certain people feel like they are the voice for everyone. I assure you of one fact, you are not now and never will be the voice of me. None of you. Its pretty obvious from where this has been going she has personal interest in burying this guy and its not right.

Snaeb, you are more than welcome to voice your own opinion and self-represent. I think you're doing an awesome job of accurately representing yourself from what I'm seeing from your posts on this forum. It'd be much like someone choosing to be represented by a governmental party (i.e. democrat, republican) versus independently. In the case of the independent, it is... of course.. up to them to make their own interests known to whatever parties that impact them.

Lastly - stop implying you speak for everyone, you dont. We have a voice and if we feel we need to say something, we are capable of registering an account and adding a reply.

Once again, claims that I'm implying something I haven't been. Quote, please? I have provided evidence on why I feel INVESTED in defending my hobby. Other people happen to share my hobby, and other people happen to share my opinions. I'd imagine that, if I were defending my opinions/interests, and other people have the same opinions/interests, then yes... I'd be defending them too since they (by their own association) have the same needs that I do. If you don't, that's cool. You can defend yourself. You don't play World of Warcraft, but I'm sure you can manage to defend your hobby on whatever games you participate in.

Besides -- if you don't play World of Warcraft, then why get so huffy about my opinions on click replication and how I've taken it to the World of Warcraft official forums? Any ruling that gets made on WoW (if you don't play it) won't really impact you much... would it?

I guess what Im trying to say is STFU and email your game's customer service department and stop this soap opera bullshit.
Uh... so you have your own opinions, your own voice (which you feel the need to spout in this thread), and you want me to stfu and not share my voice? Hmm.... no thanks.

As long as this is an opinion thread, I think everyone should have the right to share their opinions.

Lax

10-25-2008, 08:58 PM

No, not cool at all editing my posts, misquoting Souken and implying that what is paraphrased (edited from "said" because his quote is verbatim and I did not want to imply that his actual quote was incorrect) on the dual-boxing.com wiki is what he specifically said, and meanwhile claiming that I am mis-quoting blues when I spoke about an entire thread. If I could edit your posts, I would do the same to you in response.

What I'm saying, is saying that your INTERPRETATION or assumptions do not facts make. Stating them as if they were facts, straight from the horse's mouth, is misrepresentation of the blues. Stating them as if they were opinions, on the other hand, would've been perfectly acceptable and the whole conflict could've been avoided. Fine. As long as you are going to agree that it is your OPINION that he implied ANYTHING besides AddOns shall NOT have the ability to "directly cast spells or change targeting", and indeed as I said, this does not contain the word CLICK or GROUND and therefore should not be stated that Souken said that YOU MAY NOT CLICK ON THE GROUND. Yes, that would perform the same EFFECT of what happened with Minimap: PingLocation but it is NOT the same thing and should NOT be taken to imply that the EFFECT was what is being prohibited. If the EFFECT is produced by a more legitimate fashion, such as click replication be it hardware or software, in any fashion that they say is okay, granted they did not specify that software movement of the mouse cursor on an absolute basis is okay -- However both CLICKING and MOUSE MOVEMENT are performed by KeyClone, Synergy and other software according to OTHER PEOPLE (in this thread and others), the difference here being ABSOLUTE POSITIONING and on the SAME PC.

If I stated that in a way that you do not agree with, please let me know.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 09:02 PM

If you feel I've said anything ambiguous or just plain wrong, quote it and if others agree with you I'd be happy to edit it, since you lack the moderation ability to do so. I was very clear with what I've edited in your posts. It's in bright red, and none of your text has been deleted.

Fine. As long as you are going to agree that it is your OPINION that he implied ANYTHING besides AddOns shall NOT have the ability to "directly cast spells or change targeting",

Answer me this:
If something cannot be done with an in-game Addon, and hasn't been specifically given an excemption by other rules/blues, does that mean that it can/should be done with out-of-game addons?

That's called LOGIC.

Maybe I'll add an example:
If delays can't be done with in-game Addons and Macros, and hasn't been specifically given an excemption by other rules/blues, does that mean it can/should be done with a G15 macro?

You, my friend, are using semantics to try and dance around and obfuscate the fact that there is indeed solid straight-from-Blizzard-reps proof that allowing a macro/addon (whether ingame or out is irrelevant) to target an AoE-targeted spell (such as Blizzard, Rain of Fire, Mass Dispell) is not something that should be done by in or out-of-game Addon.

Yes, allowing AddOns to target spells via the minimap ping was not intentional and was fixed. AddOns may not directly cast spells or change targeting.
Did he say "in-game Addons" or "Addons"? Did he say "This does not apply to out-of-game addons"? Did he say "this does not apply to multiboxers" or "this only applies to solo boxers"? You can't make interpretations that aren't there. My interpretations are based on logical truths, not implications/interpretations, and are supported by rulings made on similar situations (G15s)

For your information -- that little green circle on an AoE spell? You know, the functionality that was changed by the editing of the Minimap:PingLocation? You know, the thing that normal people click on the ground? That's called TARGETING.

The actual little "ping" sound and action that happens in your minimap still happens. It's just the effect of spell targeting for aoe spells that was removed.

This is the blizzard UI message you get when you attempt to use minimap ping while mid-target of an AoE spell:

A macro script has been blocked from an action only available to the Blizzard UI.

Is an out-of-game macro/addon part of the Blizzard UI? And since you're investment in this thread/forum is via ClickBoxer -- is ClickBoxer part of the Blizzard UI?

P.S. I checked the thread I was referring to when I mentioned you claiming the same functionality exists in Keyclone, and I will admit I made an error. It was actually Zanthor who made that claim. ('http://www.dual-boxing.com/forums/index.php?page=Thread&postID=139147#post139147') And I do believe he was mistaken -- Octopus/Keyclone can make RELATIVE mouse movements, but I don't BELIEVE (and I'll let an expert confirm) whether they can click on specific x,y coordinates (particularly if the windows are different sizes/resolutions).

Lax

10-25-2008, 09:19 PM

Answer me this:
If something cannot be done with an in-game Addon, and hasn't been specifically given an excemption by other rules/blues, does that mean that it can/should be done with out-of-game addons?

That's called LOGIC.

Maybe I'll add an example:
If delays can't be done with in-game Addons and Macros, and hasn't been specifically given an excemption by other rules/blues, does that mean it can/should be done with a G15 macro? I've read posts specifically saying that delays are not allowed, so no.

I would like to see a quote about things being done or not with in-game addons in order to form an opinion on your question.

I don't think it applies to keyboard or mouse replication, because neither is available from in-game addons, and both are user input. You can't make an in-game addon replicate keystrokes on your other characters, after all, so does that mean that keystroke replication shouldn't be allowed? The game won't even allow you to cast a spell without a button down, so you can't just send a message to someone and their addon immediately pick it up and cast a spell. Key replication can be used at the login screen to type the same password for your accounts if you use multiple accounts, but in-game addons cannot be used at the login screen. Thusly, I don't think that INPUT REPLICATION is bound by the ADDON RULES, because input replication is at a higher level than the game is, and I don't think that to say that because an addon cannot click, that your mouse or mouse replicator should not be able to click, would be appropriate. Nor do I think that to say that because an addon cannot press a key for you and have it type into the chat window, that a keyboard or replicator cannot press a key for you, would be appropriate. Rather, user input actions may cause AddOns to perform an action, or do something else in the game (edit: And this is SOLELY due to World of Warcraft interpreting those user inputs and performing the action).

ClickBoxer is not part of the game UI, nor does it directly interface with the game UI. It presses keys when you click a button.

Repeater, again, is replicating user input actions. It does not interface with the game UI, it presses keys when you press a key, or clicks when and where you click. It does the same clicks that are available to your mouse.

When a Blizzard poster talks about AddOns, and I will note the capitalization of the O, I would take that to mean in-game interface AddOns. Anything else would typically not be referred to as an AddOn, to avoid such confusion as in this thread. But, for the purposes of this retarded argument, I will bite. It could very well indeed be taken to mean "anything added on" such as software like ClickBoxer or KeyClone, or hardware like a keyboard or a mouse or a monitor or a joystick or a gamepad. So my keyboard and mouse may not change targeting? How far out of context shall we take AddOns?

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 09:48 PM

I would like to see a quote about things being done or not with in-game addons in order to form an opinion on your question.

I don't think it applies to keyboard or mouse replication, because neither is available from in-game addons, and both are user input.

I'm sorry, I have to laugh at this.

You want me to prove that something is NOT okay? Instead of assuming that everything is OK unless specifically endorsed as "OK" by blizzard? Seems a bit backwards -- normally one assumes that anything not specifically allowed is wrong, unless it is specifically allowed by blizzard. For example, keyboard broadcasting is specifically allowed by Blizzard. That's why we CAN use keyboard multiplexers (and software). Those quotes are here: http://dual-boxing.com/wiki/index.php/GM_Conversations

Lack of a law to forbid something doesn't make it right. However, existence of a law that allows something most definitely makes it right. Another logical example for you.

Anyway, here's what I dug up on such short notice:

Related threads (macros vs addons -- only a person who wants to put wool over their eyes would deny that macros and addons are near-synonymous, since the same /scripts for addons can be written directly into a /macro):

Just don't use the macro keys to do anything a normal wow macro could not do in a single press
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5720292152&sid=1&pageNo=2#27

If you are using the allowed base UI macro functionality and manipulating global cooldowns to make this kind of thing happen, then that's probably fine. After all, many Hunters sequence their shots using macros.

If, on the other hand, you're using a G15, or anything else capable of utilizing macroed 'delays', then that is not okay
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=6214173077&pageNo=1&sid=1#2

As Arrch has described, the general rule is one action (either single ability or allowable in-game macro) per keystroke per account
(emphasis mine) http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=9679739958&pageNo=1&sid=1#6

Just make absolutely certain that you're not making more than one keypress (for the purposes of the word 'keypress' this includes a single key press AND release with no delays), or including delays between key-presses with each action.
Essentially, if you could legally create the command as a functional macro within the default user interface, then it should be okay.
(emphasis mine) http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=8765637958&pageNo=1&sid=1#8

Allow me to set your argument to rest. This:

Add in a 3rd party program. You press ONE button and all 5 screens react. How exactly is that fair/legit? It's not. The ability to control 5 computers at once with 1 single keyboard and 1 single press of a button is automation. The ability to make your characters cast their individual spells and skills at once by pressing 1 button is automation.
Is not automation by our standards. This is why multi-boxing is just fine.
The moment that single keypress initiates a string of actions not normally possible via our base macro system for an individual character, then that is a different matter. It is also a separate offense.
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5288579356&sid=1&pageNo=14#278

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
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=9879768787&sid=1&pageNo=1#13

so hitting 1 key and have it do 1 action in each game window is fine?
Absolutely!
(emphasis mine) http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=8986128815&pageNo=1&sid=1#7

Semantics issue #2:
Software (such as Keyclone, Octopus, etc) to emulate a keyboard multiboxing solution is,
by nature, "3rd party". Is "3rd party software" synonymous with "bot" or "automation"?
Are all types of "3rd party software" bannable?
Likewise, hardware, by nature, is "3rd party". What kinds (or uses) of 3rd party hardware are bannable?
Is it sending an identical signal to all client windows or switching between them to send commands? Not automation.

Is it playing the game for you, or rather, for one of your client windows? Automation.

All hardware is considered neutral as long as its commands and features are not being used to automate gameplay.
(emphasis mine) http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=5288579356&postId=52354469953&sid=1#9
(Before you go on about automation, note that BLIZZARD defines automation as it pertains to WoW. No Blizzard empoyee has claimed that mouse replication or mouse clicks on multiple machines/clients is not automation. Before you claim something isn't automation, I'm going to ask you to quote the blue representative or rule that says so)

If you insist, I'd be happy to start a new thread to ask Blizzard GMs "Are out-of-game macros and addons held by the same rules of conduct as in-game macros and addons?" Although, I'm rather sure of what their response will be. I'd be happy to ask, rather than make MORE ridiculous semantic arguments, if you're still confused. Can you honestly say that you'd be confused about what they'd say, or are you just reaching for any leg to stand on?

In order for mouse replication to be OK, we'd need several criteria to be met:
1) It doesn't break any of the existing rules in the ToU/Eula (or is specifically given an exemption -- INCLUDING this ambiguous rule: "Anything that Blizzard considers contrary to the "essence" of the Program."
2) It doesn't break any future rules as they are updated (since Blizzard can update the ToU/Eula at any time)

Since neither of those two requisites are met, mouse replication is not OK. However, Keyboard multiplexing has 1) been confirmed not to be contrary to the spirit of the game, and 2) been given a specific exemption (by way of official Blizzard posts) to allow it.

http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/legal/termsofuse.html

WHEN RUNNING, THE PROGRAM MAY MONITOR YOUR COMPUTER'S RANDOM ACCESS MEMORY (RAM) AND/OR CPU PROCESSES FOR UNAUTHORIZED THIRD PARTY PROGRAMS RUNNING CONCURRENTLY WITH WORLD OF WARCRAFT. AN "UNAUTHORIZED THIRD PARTY PROGRAM" AS USED HEREIN SHALL BE DEFINED AS ANY THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION ANY "ADDON" OR "MOD," THAT IN BLIZZARD'S SOLE DETERMINATION: (i) ENABLES OR FACILITATES CHEATING OF ANY TYPE; (ii) ALLOWS USERS TO MODIFY OR HACK THE WORLD OF WARCRAFT INTERFACE, ENVIRONMENT, AND/OR EXPERIENCE IN ANY WAY NOT EXPRESSLY AUTHORIZED BY BLIZZARD; OR (iii) INTERCEPTS, "MINES," OR OTHERWISE COLLECTS INFORMATION FROM OR THROUGH THE PROGRAM. IN THE EVENT THAT THE PROGRAM DETECTS AN UNAUTHORIZED THIRD PARTY PROGRAM, BLIZZARD MAY (a) COMMUNICATE INFORMATION BACK TO BLIZZARD, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION YOUR ACCOUNT NAME, DETAILS ABOUT THE UNAUTHORIZED THIRD PARTY PROGRAM DETECTED, AND THE TIME AND DATE THE UNAUTHORIZED THIRD PARTY PROGRAM WAS DETECTED; AND/OR (b) EXERCISE ANY OR ALL OF ITS RIGHTS UNDER SECTION 6 OF THIS AGREEMENT, WITH OR WITHOUT PRIOR NOTICE TO THE USER.
If 3rd party software INCLUDES any "addons" or "mods", I think we can set that argument to rest, no?

EDIT: This page might also be useful: http://us.blizzard.com/support/article.xml?articleId=20224

Lax

10-25-2008, 10:19 PM

You want me to prove that something is NOT okay? Instead of assuming that everything is OK unless specifically endorsed as "OK" by blizzard? Seems a bit backwards -- normally one assumes that anything not specifically allowed is wrong, unless it is specifically allowed by blizzard. For example, keyboard broadcasting is specifically allowed by Blizzard. That's why we CAN use keyboard multiplexers (and software). Those quotes are here: http://dual-boxing.com/wiki/index.php/GM_Conversations You were asking me to form an opinion based on your loose paraphrasing, and I would rather form my opinion on something official.

The majority of your quoted statements were about key replication and not specifically about addons. I do see that you have highlighted the parts where they are specifically talking about key events, and of course not mentioning mouse replication -- it apparently hadn't come to their attention or I am sure they would have addressed it.
If you insist, I'd be happy to start a new thread to ask Blizzard GMs "Are out-of-game macros and addons held by the same rules of conduct as in-game macros and addons?" Although, I'm rather sure of what their response will be. I'd be happy to ask, rather than make MORE ridiculous semantic arguments, if you're still confused. Can you honestly say that you'd be confused about what they'd say, or are you just reaching for any leg to stand on? I think that once again you're avoiding the entire point of my post. The question as stated does not provide any information about the conversation we are having, and is self-serving just like your last thread, in order to get the response from the GM that you want to hear, rather than what is important. The answer to your question would be a very confused "yes." The real question you need to be asking is if, when Souken specified AddOns, he meant it as "in-game AddOns cannot perform this action" or he meant it as "third-party software or hardware of any kind cannot perform this action", and I am likewise rather sure of what the response would be, because he was specifically talking about minimap ping incorrectly performing an additional action. Are YOU just reaching for any leg to stand on?

And yes, I know what minimap pinging is supposed to do. I am not new to the game.
In order for mouse replication to be OK, we'd need several criteria to be met:
1) It doesn't break any of the existing rules in the ToU/Eula (or is specifically given an exemption -- INCLUDING this ambiguous rule: "Anything that Blizzard considers contrary to the "essence" of the Program."
2) It doesn't break any future rules as they are updated (since Blizzard can update the ToU/Eula at any time)

Since neither of those two requisites are met, mouse replication is not OK. However, Keyboard multiplexing has 1) been confirmed not to be contrary to the spirit of the game, and 2) been given a specific exemption (by way of official Blizzard posts) to allow it. If that is your criteria, then have at it. My opinion on the matter is that they would apply the same rules to the mouse as they would to keyboard and for that matter any other input devices -- and I believe from the comments of others that they feel the same way. I would love to be proven wrong, so ask away. As it stands, I see nothing from an official source that would tell me any differently. Oh, and if mouse replication is not allowed, it would sure throw a wrench into the argument (not saying that this argument was yours, just referring to the argument) that Rob would never put a feature in KeyClone that could get you banned from World of Warcraft.

If 3rd party software INCLUDES any "addons" or "mods", I think we can set that argument to rest, no? No. Third-party software, by definition and in the context of Blizzard's EULA or Terms of Service/Terms of Use, means any software not written by Blizzard. So it includes... any software ... at all... including in-game or out of game software "addons" or "mods"... that are not a Blizzard product. You even quoted the rest of the paragraph which explains that it is Blizzard's sole discretion whether any are allowed that do certain things that may be considered "cheating" and so on. Nobody is arguing about that.

zanthor

10-25-2008, 10:56 PM

Solo-boxers may not use any addon, mod, or macro that specifies the target of their AoE-targeted spell. Therefore, multiboxers may not use any addon, mod, or macro that specifies the target of their AoE-targeted spell. This is exactly what should make CLICK BROADCASTING 100% legal and if this discussion was only about CLICK broadcasting instead of being wrapped up in semantics then only the truely blind would disagree.

Lets say I take two copies of wow running on two machines, I set one @ 800x600 and scale the UI so it covers the same relative portions of my display as another client running 1600x1200. I set the other machine to run 1600x1200.

I spend the time to get my mouse speeds matched, so that on the 800x600 machine the mouse moves 1 pixel for every two that the 1600x1200 moves. I disable windows mouse accelleration which has the random effect of speeding your mouse based on velocity, and I hook a single mouse to both using hardware. This system WILL have to be zero'd in a corner from time to time, but not nearly as often as one may think.

So I click at 600x600 on the big screen, this also clicks at 300x300 on the smaller screen...

How does this differ (With the exception of zeroing) from clicking 600x600 and broadcasting 300x300?

Multiboxer Hardware: Moves hand to broadcast mouse, Moves mouse to corner/zero it, Moves to 600x600ISH, Clicks button on broadcast mouse to send click.
Multiboxer Software: Moves Mouse to 600x600ISH, Clicks button on KEYBOARD to broadcast click at current mouse location.
SINGLE PLAYER: Moves Mouse to 600x600ISH, Clicks button on MOUSE to click at current mouse location.

Ok, so the basic rule of thumb is one hardware action = 1 hardware action per client... It sounds to me like click broadcasting via software or hardware are identical in that respect... Having the ability to press the F1 key and broadcast a click to clients at 300,300 or whatever definitely could begin to make me question... That said, the sad truth is I don't think it's possible to identify the source of a click without some serious voodoo-weejee (I could be wrong).

Suribusi

10-25-2008, 11:08 PM

Since I can give my opinion I shall.

I don't have a problem with sharing opinions. I have a problem with making up facts that aren't there, particularly when they potentially deface the words and intentions of the Blizzard poster behind them. Lax is (still) welcome to share his opinions (as is everyone) as long as the facts and official Blizzard comments are not obfuscated while he does so.
This is my exact problem with you Vyndree (in regards to this and similar threads). You say stuff like this here, yet you go right over to wow forums and make up facts that aren't there about a software product you don't even use. I use innerspace as I have stated before, and have been using it for a while. Now I see "my hobby" in jeoprody because you go on some factually inaccurate quest for answers. What am I to you, collateral damage?

You could have handled this more appropriately by getting a clue about what you were talking about first, in a plethora of different ways, before posting on the wow forums. I already have Big Brother ruining my real life and the way I live it, I don't need Big Sister to ruin my virtual hobby. You want to get clarification issues? Go for it, I wish you the best. However, you should get actually get the facts straight before making more posts like the one on wow forums.

***********WARNING, THIS IS SOLELY MY OPINION ALONE.... MY OPINION!.... PLEASE DO NOT EDIT ME!**********

-S

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 11:13 PM

The majority of your quoted statements were about key replication and not specifically about addons. I do see that you have highlighted the parts where they are specifically talking about key events,

Notice, in my post -- I mentioned that key replication WAS confirmed, therefore not a bannable 3rd party "addon"/"program"/"cheat".

and of course not mentioning mouse replication -- it apparently hadn't come to their attention or I am sure they would have addressed it.

I brought it to their attention, and they are still unwilling to address it. Raise some red flags?

If you insist, I'd be happy to start a new thread to ask Blizzard GMs "Are out-of-game macros and addons held by the same rules of conduct as in-game macros and addons?" Although, I'm rather sure of what their response will be. I'd be happy to ask, rather than make MORE ridiculous semantic arguments, if you're still confused. Can you honestly say that you'd be confused about what they'd say, or are you just reaching for any leg to stand on? I think that once again you're avoiding the entire point of my post. The question as stated does not provide any information about the conversation we are having, and is self-serving just like your last thread, in order to get the response from the GM that you want to hear, rather than what is important. The answer to your question would be a very confused "yes." The real question you need to be asking is if, when Souken specified AddOns, he meant it as "in-game AddOns cannot perform this action" or he meant it as "third-party software or hardware of any kind cannot perform this action", and I am likewise rather sure of what the response would be, because he was specifically talking about minimap ping incorrectly performing an additional action.[/quote]

I can ask specifically for Souken, though (since you're rather nitpicky about your interpretations of GM posts and whether the word "Addon" includes ALL addons -- in and out of game) I'd like to ask both. If you require, I will ask in seperate threads or with specific words/phrases as you see fit (since you can't seem to do it yourself). Consider my generosity severely tapped at this point, so make it thorough -- I won't feel very inclined to make this a repeat practice.

In fact -- write out the exact text you'd like me to ask if that will help you. Of course, I have a feeling no matter WHAT the GMs say you're going to "interpret" their words creatively such that they don't satisfy your requirements. You seem to have a double standard -- you can make generalizations about existing GM conversations such that they support your argument (albeit weakly) -- and yet when presented with very solid quotes refuting your argument you nitpick at semantics (i.e. "Addon" doesn't really mean "Addon", it means only IN-GAME addons; "less inclined" can be interpreted "strongly"). It makes absolutely no sense, it's reaching, and it's getting on my nerves. My arguments are based on fact, and if I can't find preexisting fact I put my money where my mouth is (which, for whatever reason you don't) and ask Blizzard.

So, please. Oblige me. Tell me what I need to ask to prove that my interpretation of "Addon" means just that (ALL addons and not just whatever gets dumped int he Interface folders). And if you're still unhappy with the response to your own question and nitpick at the words in the GM's answer, then I can point and say "I told you so".

Are YOU just reaching for any leg to stand on?

My history has always been clear. I utilize existing facts or get the facts myself. You just pick through semantics and don't make any effort of your own to provide adequate facts. Your facts can be based on fuzzy logic, but others must be precise and exacting. You can make assumptions based on "context" and how "strongly" you interpret various phrases, but others cannot draw logical conclusions that "out of game addons" are, indeed, still addons; prohibited addon actions don't apply to multiplexers; mouse multiplexers are exactly the same as keyboard multiplexers, even if they use x,y coordinates rather than relative movements; GMs "mean to say" things that they haven't said; not confirming nor denying that mouse replication is "OK" means that is IS ok.

And, I'll repeat -- whenever I have had issues with my arguments I've gone and gotten confirmation from GMs myself.

What part of my argument is wrong?

In-game rules don't apply to out-of-game rules? Look at the G15 again. I keep bringing it up because it keeps getting ignored. The precedent is set -- in-game rules on /macros apply to out-of-game software drivers for the Logitech G15.

But, fine. You win. I don't have an exact answer for the specific question that you require to be answered before my argument even becomes valid:
For the specific case of Minimap:PingLocation, is "Addon", as it was specifically spoken by GM Slouken, referring to "in-game" Addons (that are located in the Interface\Addons folder)?

But I just forsee you saying something along the lines of....
Well, GM So-And-So isn't GM Slouken, therefore they can't have known what GM Slouken is saying...
Well, even though it applies to out-of-game macros at the time, at the particular point in time GM Slouken was specifically thinking about in-game macros and how long it would take until his lunch break...
Well, Minimap:PingLocation was fixed, therefore there is no way for it to apply to me because I'm not pinging the minimap, I'm clicking on the ground...
Well, they MEANT to say that, given the context, it doesn't include specifically ClickBoxer because that's how I interpret their words...

Sound familiar?

In order for mouse replication to be OK, we'd need several criteria to be met:
1) It doesn't break any of the existing rules in the ToU/Eula (or is specifically given an exemption -- INCLUDING this ambiguous rule: "Anything that Blizzard considers contrary to the "essence" of the Program."
2) It doesn't break any future rules as they are updated (since Blizzard can update the ToU/Eula at any time)

Since neither of those two requisites are met, mouse replication is not OK. However, Keyboard multiplexing has 1) been confirmed not to be contrary to the spirit of the game, and 2) been given a specific exemption (by way of official Blizzard posts) to allow it.

If that is your criteria, then have at it. My opinion on the matter is that they would apply the same rules to the mouse as they would to keyboard and for that matter any other input devices -- and I believe from the comments of others that they feel the same way.
So... my criteria is "following by the rules with 100% clarity", but you have a different opinion? Mice and Keyboard are two different things. If they weren't, keyboards would be able to click AoE targeted spells. They can't. Mice can. Therefore, mice have additional functionality not available to a keyboard. Why? Because they move in 3 different directions -- keydown/keyup, left/right, forward/back.

Therefore, you can't say that everything that applies to keyboards also applies to mice. Keyboards can't do everything that mice do (though mice -- through clicking -- can do everything a keyboard can -- unless you want to argue that you can't click on an on-screen keyboard, in which case mice can't chat)

I would love to be proven wrong, so ask away. As it stands, I see nothing from an official source that would tell me any differently.

You dont' have to be proven WRONG. You have to be proven RIGHT. You don't automatically start "RIGHT" just because you say so. Blizzard has to say so. Right now you're neither -- Blizzard has said neither yes or no. Neither doesn't make you right.

I could say "Heaven is real. It's real until you prove me wrong". That doesn't make Heaven any more real or unreal "just because I say so. Now if God came down and appeared in front of us and say "Yo, guys. I own heaven. I make all the rules. And I say it exists", then sure -- we'd having something going there.

Oh, and if mouse replication is not allowed, it would sure throw a wrench into the argument (not saying that this argument was yours, just referring to the argument) that Rob would never put a feature in KeyClone that could get you banned from World of Warcraft.

That's up to Rob and Keyclone. I, personally, am not involved with Keyclone or Rob (as a developer). I'm full hardware.

That being said, Keyclone has gotten a "sure, it's OK" from GMs. That, at the very least, gives him a one-up from a developer who won't or can't get confirmation from his own product,particularly when his product uses unique (and nonconfirmed) features such as clicking using x,y coordinates in an XML file rather than sending ALL relative movements (left/right, up/down, front/back) at all times. Even RELATIVE movements don't really have a firm confirmation on whether or not it's OK -- look at Fursphere's opinion. He won't use either form.

It's certainly possible that blues are misled, or perhaps that mouse multiplexing is only allowable if it doesn't involve x,y coordinate clicks, or maybe even mouse multiplexing in all forms is fine but they're just not ready to say that yet. What Blizzard says, goes -- and Blizzard says that Keyclone is fine. Until Blizzard says that x,y coordinate click systems are OK, then we can't make the same assumption that it won't get anyone banned.

If 3rd party software INCLUDES any "addons" or "mods", I think we can set that argument to rest, no? No. Third-party software, by definition and in the context of Blizzard's EULA or Terms of Service/Terms of Use, means any software not written by Blizzard. So it includes... any software ... at all... including in-game or out of game software "addons" or "mods"... that are not a Blizzard product. You even quoted the rest of the paragraph which explains that it is Blizzard's sole discretion whether any are allowed that do certain things that may be considered "cheating" and so on. Nobody is arguing about that.

That's, once again, your interpretation. Is "in Blizzard's sole discretion" applied to the wrongness of the software? If all in-game addons are 3rd party software, are all 3rd party programs addons? If all mods are 3rd party software, are all 3rd party programs mods? Is ClickBoxer a addon? Is ClickBoxer a mod? Or is it Blizzard's discretion?

If blizzard says that "addons" may not do something, and all addons are 3rd party programs... does that mean all addons are also in-game?

Once again, I've offered to post on the customer service forum for your rediculous nitpick of the english language. I wonder why all keyclone/octopus/ahk/multiboxing software threads tend to get moved to the UI/Macros forum...? According to you, they're "3rd party programs" that exist on a level outside of the game -- so that makes them neither related to the UI or the Macro system.

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 11:27 PM

This is my exact problem with you Vyndree (in regards to this and similar threads). You say stuff like this here, yet you go right over to wow forums and make up facts that aren't there about a software product you don't even use.

I didn't "make up facts". I was misinformed, yes -- I already admitted that (here, in the previous thread, AND in the WoW forums). The moment I found out I was incorrect, I corrected what I could. When I originally posted, I encouraged others more expert in the product to make edits/changes as necessary. I admitted I wasn't an expert. What do you want me to do -- use a unnecessary product that I (personally) feel has the risk of getting me banned just so that I could ask "hey, will this get me banned"?

I use innerspace as I have stated before, and have been using it for a while. Now I see "my hobby" in jeoprody because you go on some factually inaccurate quest for answers. What am I to you, collateral damage?
If your hobby is "in jeopardy" now, and nothing has changed with its functionality, then it has ALWAYS been "in jeopardy".

If you used a program that could get you banned, and didn't know it could get you banned -- would you want to be informed, from an official source, whether or not you should/shouldn't use it? Are you telling me that I should just shut up and let newbies get drawn into a shiny new product with shiny new features and tell them to QQ and stfu if they end up getting banned thanks to me just sitting in the sidelines going "it's not my problem"? Is that what you honestly want me to do?

Were you trying to hide something and I didn't know that I "spilled the beans"? If you were trying to hide the program from Blizzard attention (and note, I said "if" because I'm not insinuating that you were), then wouldn't it have already been jeopardous?

I mean, if my efforts are so worthless I wonder why I waste so much of my time gathering GM information, making sure every newbie gets advice that won't get them banned, getting GMs to confirm that software multiboxing was OK at ALL, arguing with the multiboxing haters in the wow forums, making sure spammers/haters/botters don't flood the forums with bad advice, making sure the wiki pages are readable and updated with the latest information. Yeah, I do all of this because I enjoy watching people suffer. I enjoy watching people "lose their hobbies" thanks to ME putting THEIR program in jeopardy.

Really? I programmed things that are "gray area" into the program YOU choose to use? Into the program YOU didn't bother to confirm with GMs before using? Into the program YOU decided to trust? I somehow changed it? I somehow added features that will get it banned? I somehow made it more risky just by asking for GMs to confirm whether or not its features are bannable?

You could have handled this more appropriately by getting a clue about what you were talking about first, in a plethora of different ways,

By asking on a locked thread? Hmm.

FYI, I didn't lock it.

before posting on the wow forums. I already have Big Brother ruining my real life and the way I live it, I don't need Big Sister to ruin my virtual hobby. You want to get clarification issues? Go for it, I wish you the best. However, you should get actually get the facts straight before making more posts like the one on wow forums.

If you felt someone who was more expert in the program to ask these questions -- why didn't you tell Lax (or one of his development team if he can't make these posts for whatever reason)? Why didn't you?

When things get posted on a forum that I moderate, it's my responsibility to make sure its inline with our forum rules. If you're one of the early adopters, you had plenty of time to make the program legality known. By the time it arrived on our forums, it was still totally unconfirmed. Bannable programs are not allowed for discussion on our forums. ClickBoxer drew a red flag. I, as a mod, investigated. When it was clear that a decision on legality couldn't be made based on the current GM information and quotes we have at the time, I took matters into my own hands.

Notice: by the time Reythur responded his FIRST time in the thread, I ADMITTED that I had interpreted the program incorrectly. The correct information was there.

Don't blame me for being responsible and wanting Blizzard's opinion. Don't blame me for not becoming an instant-expert on a program whose developer didn't take the responsibility to confirm for himself. Don't blame me because Reythur didn't read the updated sections of the thread, where it's clearly marked what parts of the post were erroneous. Don't blame me because YOU chose to use nonconfirmed software and are now suffering for it (though I can't imagine why you feel anything has changed -- it's as unconfirmed as it has been when we first started out).

***********WARNING, THIS IS SOLELY MY OPINION ALONE.... MY OPINION!.... PLEASE DO NOT EDIT ME!**********

Whenever I edit posts, it's always clearly marked.

I mean, for everyone claiming I'm so incredibly biased, I have to wonder where all of these attacks are coming from, Suribusi...
http://dual-boxing.com/forums/index.php?page=Thread&postID=14227#post14227

Wow, this thread is filled with nothing but miconceptions and FUD. The only person who was remotely close was Wilbur.

Warden is a very intrusive program. On top of doing memory checks in process, it also actively scans out of process for known "bad software" via hashes. The links to Lax's blog is the only reading I would recommend to anyone.

Other miconceptions/FUD clarification:
-Blizzards bannings for 3rd party software are automated, it is when you bitch about your ban that they get human review, or if you get reported and they monitor you (because they don't detect what you are doing with method 1)
-Warden runs scans throughout your whole wow session.
-Warden scans out of process as much as it does in
-Techniques to "defeat" warden are just as wilbur stated, which is more of "faking results". If your client doesn't report warden scan data to their servers you get disconnected.
-Attempts to "defeat" warden are no futile. It is entirely possible if you know wtf you are doing.
-Lax said Greg hollunds book was laughable. (Maybe not exact quote, I think he mentioned it in his blog).
-The only truely successful person at doing so is Lax.
-Yes, call me a fanboi, because I am. Throughout the whole history of warden, there have only been 2 months (scattered about) of detectablility for the isxwow extension using his anti-detection measures.

Here is a closing factual statement: There are only a small handfull of people around here that will every be at or around 0% risk of getting banned. Those people are the ones who employ 100% hardware methods. Anything else is "technically" against the EULA/TOS. Synergy, multibox, keyclone, ahk.... you name it. What the software is used for is irrelevant, it is simply up to blizzards team for what they decide is bannable.

There is a risk using any software here, so if you don't want to get banned, the best option is to take 0% risk. Blizzard will notify you via e-mail letting you know that software you have is bannable, and it will come with either a 72 suspension or a full ban. But it won't say "software x is bad", it will say "you have something to make us do this, so figure out what it is on your own and remove it".

Overrall, the basic goal is to provide a nice medium between risk/reward. Multibox and other apps like it provide a very nice way of controlling multiple characters for minimal risk. With keyclone, it might be a very small amount more (currently). This is the happy medium that a lot of us go with, because we simply can't or don't want to dump extra money into hardware to mitigate the risk..

From all my currently knowledge on the subject I would say that the OP isn't presenting anything of merit. I would also agree with the person who said that AHK and/or AutoIT are more likely targets before something small like keyclone. There are bigger fish to fry, which is why blizzard has a lawsuit with MDY and has scans in place for their app, and not keyclone. It is not worth their time to persue....currently.

-S

So, in November of 2007 you admitted that "anyone using software is taking a risk"... but now it's MY fault that the software YOU use has now put you at risk? Really?

Suribusi

10-25-2008, 11:35 PM

I brought it to their attention, and they are still unwilling to address it. Raise some red flags?
No, not at all. Because the GMs are the bottom rung. They make 0 decisions. All they do is what they are told or allowed to do. It is easy for them to say "no, stay away" because if they end up wrong in the end, they can say "we have changed our policies and this is allowed" or something similar. However, they cannot easily say "yes this is ok" and be wrong, because it is their job on the line. So their "unwilingness to address it" tells me that they don't want to be wrong. Which also makes sense since you cannot provide them with anything but fiction. It is hard to read your posts any more, they are highly ridiculous. You are seeking answers from people who cannot make decisions, on top of providing them with false information from the start and not even bothering to edit the original post to correct yourself for new thread readers. You are being very irresponsible in pursuit of.... whatever it is you trying to accomplish at this point.

-S

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 11:42 PM

Which also makes sense since you cannot provide them with anything but fiction. It is hard to read your posts any more, they are highly ridiculous. You are seeking answers from people who cannot make decisions, on top of providing them with false information from the start and not even bothering to edit the original post to correct yourself for new thread readers. You

Show me. Don't make claims, provide facts.

If you're honestly going to have a feud over "well, she didn't know and PURPOSELY and EVILLY misrepresented the product and then maliciously LEFT THAT INFORMATION ALONE", then I am not going to argue with you. If you read my posts and feel that delusional about them, I'm afraid there is no logic that I can provide you with that will be adequately convincing to remove your bias. We shall agree to disagree.

The fact that GMs cannot provide any yes/no answer proves that the problem is more complex than "oh, it's just the same as keyboard multiplexing". If it were "just the same" it wouldn't be hard to get verification. They don't make decisions, but they certainly can get decisions from teh powers that be. If it were a simple "oh, it's just like broadcasting a keyboard signal" do you honestly think it would be difficult for them to get an answer?

EDIT: Zanthor, I appear to have missed your post in my haste.

I totally agree -- like I've said before I don't think the idea of what ClickBoxer (or other programs that would like to use x,y locations) is inherently bad, I just think it's a slippery slope. The discussion has seemed to degenerate into whether or not it's gray area RIGHT NOW, but yes... the original topic should be brought back (after all, if it stays too long off-track I've been advised to lock it).

You (and some others) have both mentioned that perhaps Blizzard can't confirm/allow click broadcasting because it would obfuscate their detection of botting. In essence, Click casting could be perfectly fine, but because it uses similar methods to botting I/O it could be unwittingly facilitating the anti-detection of bots.

That also makes sense.

Suribusi

10-25-2008, 11:57 PM

Don't blame me for being responsible and wanting Blizzard's opinion. Don't blame me for not becoming an instant-expert on a program whose developer didn't take the responsibility to confirm for himself. Don't blame me because Reythur didn't read the updated sections of the thread, where it's clearly marked what parts of the post were erroneous. Don't blame me because YOU chose to use nonconfirmed software and are now suffering for it (though I can't imagine why you feel anything has changed -- it's as unconfirmed as it has been when we first started out).

You are not responsible for your irresponsible actions because someone who was intelligent didn't do it first. Gotchya.... moving on.

-S

Vyndree

10-25-2008, 11:58 PM

You are not responsible for your irresponsible actions because someone who was intelligent didn't do it first.
Was that what I said? No, I just called out the portions of my actions that were relatively blameless. I did make a mistake. I admitted I made a mistake. I attempted to fix the mistake

EDIT: Notice -- The time between my first post and where I corrected ('http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11675540596&pageNo=2&sid=1#39') that I had been working off of incorrect information was less than an hour. The time between the first poster telling me that I had made a mistake and my response was 20 minutes. How fast do you want me to be?? Keep in mind, I was at work at the time! The time between my postand Reythur's response? Nearly 12 HOURS from my original post, and Reythur responded 11 HOURS after I had posted a correction. The information was there. I even posted a followup after Reythur seemed to misunderstand the context.

However, since it was unintentional... yes. I would very much like not to be blamed for a mistake that I made unintentionally, attempted to fix immediately, and will get bashed for forever. Will it happen? In your case... probably not. But such is taking responsibility for one's actions -- I've made a mistake, innocent as it may be, and I will be thoroughly punished for doing so by fanboi's of the product for all eternity. Ah, c'est la vie.

I've made mistakes in the past (of which you've already mentioned you're aware). I guess that makes me human. I hope not to err in the future, but I have a feeling I can't reliably make that a promise.

A mistake is a mistake. There are more appropriate people who should've been more responsible and talked to Blizzard first. I don't admit I haven't made a mistake, but I also think it, while unintentional, could've been easily prevented. You can continue to lynch me for making such a inconceivable mistake and then correcting my mistake as soon as humanly possible, but it's probably not appropriate for the thread.

Nobody is infallible. Not even self-proclaimed fanboi's. ;)

You can't deny that the moment my error was brought to light, the thread was updated with that information. There are limits to how much I can do. I'm not psychic. I've attempted to repair the mistake to the best of my ability.

I'll have to ask that you either ignore me (because you seem to have a problem with anything that I say/do), or at the very least keep your thoughts to more private avenues. I don't mind, if you need to vent your frustration, that you PM me. I may not respond to particularly scathing comments, but at the very least we won't clutter the thread or continue to break the forum rules. I'm being lenient because I understand that the argument has gotten a bit heated, and hasty reactions are made in states like these.

Lax

10-26-2008, 12:33 AM

The fact that GMs cannot provide any yes/no answer proves that the problem is more complex than "oh, it's just the same as keyboard multiplexing". If it were "just the same" it wouldn't be hard to get verification. They don't make decisions, but they certainly can get decisions from teh powers that be. If it were a simple "oh, it's just like broadcasting a keyboard signal" do you honestly think it would be difficult for them to get an answer?If you hadn't mis-represented the questions to them in the first place, it would be a lot easier to answer your questions. Leave your misconceptions of what ClickBoxer does out of it, and ask about mouse replications.

There are very simple questions to be asked:
1. Is it okay for mouse cursor movements to be replicated, when a human moves the mouse, using relative positioning?
2. Is it okay for mouse cursor movements to be replicated, when a human moves the mouse, using absolute positioning?
2.1 If yes, is it okay to bind specific absolute mouse positioning (say, "move mouse to 300,400") to a key or mouse click?
2.2 If yes, is it okay for absolute mouse positioning to be based on the resolution (say, so an 800x600 window versus 640x480 window can both click in the same location by scale)?
3. Is it okay for mouse clicks to be replicated, when a human clicks the mouse?
3.1 If Yes, does it matter where the click is -- is it okay to click the ground or are only clicks on UI elements okay?
3.2 Is "moving the mouse" one action, and "clicking the mouse" one action, with respect to the "one key per action" rule? -- or is it okay to combine both to have a single key click, for example, "minimap zoom out"

I'm not even going to bother responding to the majority of your post to me, as it is so tangential now it's getting ridiculous. Suffice it to say that I do not see any generosity whatsoever from you. I didn't ask you to make posts claiming ridiculous things about something I wrote, and it sucks that I have to come here and play defense with you spreading FUD on the official forums. I also love that you make assumptions about what I will or will not, or can or cannot do. I'd love to explain it to you sometime, but that time is not now, so I am sorry you feel that way. You can stop berating me for not posting on the customer service forums any time.

But this....

That's, once again, your interpretation. Is "in Blizzard's sole discretion" applied to the wrongness of the software? If all in-game addons are 3rd party software, are all 3rd party programs addons? If all mods are 3rd party software, are all 3rd party programs mods? Is ClickBoxer a addon? Is ClickBoxer a mod? Or is it Blizzard's discretion?

If blizzard says that "addons" may not do something, and all addons are 3rd party programs... does that mean all addons are also in-game?

Once again, I've offered to post on the customer service forum for your rediculous nitpick of the english language. I wonder why all keyclone/octopus/ahk/multiboxing software threads tend to get moved to the UI/Macros forum...? According to you, they're "3rd party programs" that exist on a level outside of the game -- so that makes them neither related to the UI or the Macro system. You will find that my interpretation of the term "third-party software" is the correct interpretation, that's simply what third-party means is "not first-party" and in this case the first party is Blizzard. Software means software. There is no other correct interpretation of "third-party software". Feel free to ask Blizzard what "third-party software" means.

No, not "all 3rd party programs are addons" depending on the context of the word. Is Windows an "addon"? It is third-party software. It doesn't matter what you call ClickBoxer, whether you call it an addon, or a mod, it doesn't really matter. In the end we're talking about a single statement from Shouken, you seem to have conceded that he was most likely talking about in-game AddOns, and yet you want to make this about every single instance of the word "addon" wherever it appears. ClickBoxer (whose positions in XML define where the buttons appear on the screen. When you click one of those buttons, they produce a keystroke. There is nothing more to it, there is no mouse positions in XML about where to click anywhere.) is not an in-game Addon, and could not have used Minimap: PingLocation in the first place, so I don't even know why you're trumpeting on and on about this. And yes, AHK, KeyClone, Octopus, are all third-party programs, and all exist on a level outside of the game. To my knowledge they even work for games other than World of Warcraft, do they not? So how would they be first-party programs, and how are they not outside the game? Why does it matter that they get moved to the UI/Macros forum? Is there a better place for them? I would suggest they are moved there because there isn't a multi-boxing forum, and it's probably more appropriate than the general or technical support forums -- I imagine there's a lot of questions about setting up UI or particularly in-game macros due to these products, so it would make sense to try to put them all in the same place.

I hope your job doesn't involve interpreting the English language, or code. You keep talking about "facts" and "logic" yet you seem to have a firm grasp on neither. I really don't want to be rude to you, so I'm going to stop responding. This is going nowhere, you're getting upset with me over nothing, and I'm getting upset with you because you're so sure you're right about everything and that I must be wrong. I really wonder if you're arguing for the sake of arguing, because you seem to take every single line of my posts, and take it out of context, and say something completely stupid in response. Like the in-game versus out-of-game argument, I am specifically talking about USER INPUT DEVICES and REPLICATING ACTIONS PER USER ACTION and you're wanting to take it out of context and get a GM to say that "out of game addons have the same rules as in game addons". You're even making up things about ClickBoxer, when I have repeatedly stated that it is REPEATER that moves when you move, it clicks when you click. No magic involved here, but just to calm you down, I added in the questions you wanted additional answers on, such as absolute positioning to a specific location other than the current position of your mouse.

Vyndree

10-26-2008, 12:51 AM

My accidental misinterpretation in the first post was unfortunate, yes. But I don't think the CSF reps are dumb enough not to realize when someone says "hey, I made a mistake". I've already started a new thread for additional and non-product-specific questions.

Still working hard on the CSF....

1) What is an "Addon"? Is there a general guideline or document on what Addons can and cannot do?

I would classify an "Addon" as any legitimate addition to the "Addons" folder within the "Interface" folder.

2) Are "Addons" only applicable in-game (i.e. under Interface\Addons) or does the term "Addons" also apply to out-of-game hardware and/or software (G15's, Keyclone software, Voice-To-Text, etc)?

As always, be wary of third-party software (and hardware); but they wouldn't necessarily fit within the term "Addon".

3) In the following post, Slouken (Blizzard poster) makes a comment about Minimap:PingLocation and "Addons"? What is the definition of "Addon" as he mentions in this post? Does it include out-of-game programs?

See my above two answers, and an outside piece of software or hardware changing targets, or casting spells on a certain location on the minimap may be considered exploitation (or hacking).

4) When Souken specified AddOns, he meant it as "in-game AddOns cannot perform this action" or he meant it as "third-party software or hardware of any kind cannot perform this action"?

Generally speaking, if we've disabled the ability for an Addon to do it, we don't want you to do it.

I believe that the rest of your questions follow the same guidelines.

Those of our staff (i.e. Slouken) that post on our UI/Macro forums would more than likely be able to clear this up more for you as they're the ones that deal with these determinations and issues. =)

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11829516406&postId=118283319756&sid=1#2

Lax, I added your questions as soon as I got them, but Reythur was mid-post when I edited my original.

One tiny tidbit as I don't mean to nitpick your post -- If repeater is a prerequisite for multiboxing with ClickBoxer, then ClickBoxer (at least the way I see it) requires Repeater and inherits responsibility for the functions it utilizes.

Much like how Keyclone is bundled with Maximizer -- if anything iffy is going on with Maximizer, then Keyclone is thrown into the boat with it until the Maximizer functionality is removed or clarified.

I'll admit -- this thread was spawned BY the debate going on about ClickBoxer, but was certainly INTENDED to be more general about mouse-clicks. We did rather snowball off-topic and for my part in that, I apologize. I realize you're going on and on about what ClickBoxer does/doesn't do, and I've already stated my opinion that CLICKBOXER doesn't appear to have any nefarious INTENTIONS (which I think we agreed on in the other thread). During the majority of this thread (prior to you bringing up ClickBoxer specifically), I have been largely speaking in general about mouseclicks on x,y locations -- not mouse multiplexing (sending relative movements -- though it has come up in comparison). Just FYI, this thread was not intended to be specifically directed at ClickBoxer -- if it had, I would've left the discussion in the ClickBoxer thread. If Repeater is the one actually doing the clicking then this discussion APPLIES to Repeater, though isn't specifically ABOUT repeater.

I moved this thread because, while the discussion started with ClickBoxer, it certainly brought up additional gray area about mouse multiplexing/click repeating in general.

Lax

10-26-2008, 01:00 AM

ClickBoxer and Repeater are separate and can be used independently of each other. They just require Inner Space.

Also, I would like to point out that Reythur's statement here is ambiguous:

See my above two answers, and an outside piece of software or hardware changing targets, or casting spells on a certain location on the minimap may be considered exploitation (or hacking). We can replicate pressing Tab to change targets, or use a macro that does assist, etc, but my BELIEF is that he meant picking a specific mob without regards to assisting or using the target cycling available via in-game keybinds or macros. "A certain location on the minimap" could be taken to mean minimap coordinates (0,0 to 100,100 sound right? these are percentages across the zone) or non-game, window client coordinates (e.g. mouse cursor position 123,456 on the window). These can both obviously be seriously misinterpreted and it would be a pity to have taken it wrong, but my belief is that he was referring to coordinates only available from the in-game systems, which ClickBoxer nor Repeater are doing.

Vyndree

10-26-2008, 01:06 AM

Also keep in mind this is your exact question as you phrased it to me (I only changed grammatical/capitalization issues) -- the first question (which you quoted) was my interpretation:

4) When Souken specified AddOns, he meant it as "in-game AddOns cannot perform this action" or he meant it as "third-party software or hardware of any kind cannot perform this action"?

Generally speaking, if we've disabled the ability for an Addon to do it, we don't want you to do it.

I believe that the rest of your questions follow the same guidelines.

Since Minimap:PingLocation only really WORKS on the minimap (it is a minimap function), I cant' really say whether Reythur intended that it apply to all in-game coordinates. Actually, I can't really find much value in that response other than my inference (yes, inference) of "If we say 'don't do this SPECIFIC minimap ping with an addon' then you also shouldn't do that same functionality using out-of-game methods". *shrug*

I'm still waiting to see if he'll respond to your questions.

Lax

10-26-2008, 01:22 AM

Well, PingLocation would be used by an Addon to specify exactly where, zone-wide, you would cast a spell. Assuming that manually clicking on the minimap works for spell targeting, the difference is that clicking is always relative to your position (being in the center of the minimap), but using PingLocation is an absolute zone-wide coordinate, and this is why (i believe) it would be considered cheating to use. Performing an actual click, on the minimap, obviously is okay. The question then is, is it okay to replicate that click, at a specific point on the minimap window -- based on your mouse cursor position (with relative movements OR absolute position) -- as opposed to a specific in-game location as would be used with PingLocation.

It's important to understand the difference because one is obviously cheating and the other would appear to reside entirely in the "is mouse replication okay?" gray area.

Vyndree

10-26-2008, 01:26 AM

Assuming that manually clicking on the minimap works for spell targeting, the difference is that clicking is always relative to your position (being in the center of the minimap)

I don't think it does, but I can certainly test it... All I know is in the specific case of MINIMAP:PingLocation, the ping only happened on the little circular minimap, which caused your mid-cast AoE spell to target that location. The actual coordinates fed into Minimap:PingLocation were indeed relative (I recall doing something along the lines of 0,5 ; 5,0 ; -5, 0; 0, -5 on my warlocks to cast my anti-rogue rank1 rain of fires all around my location).

Lax

10-26-2008, 01:28 AM

I don't think it does, but I can certainly test it... All I know is in the specific case of MINIMAP:PingLocation, the ping only happened on the little circular minimap, which caused your mid-cast AoE spell to target that location. The actual coordinates fed into Minimap:PingLocation were indeed relative (I recall doing something along the lines of 0,5 ; 5,0 ; -5, 0; 0, -5 on my warlocks to cast my anti-rogue rank1 rain of fires all around my location). If it was indeed relative then I concede on that, I thought it pinged a specific location. And if it doesn't do it with a manual ping then yeah, it wouldn't matter about replicating clicks on the minimap, and the question would revert back to whether or not it matters where the click is.

Vyndree

10-26-2008, 01:36 AM

Yep, which is why I concede that the question/answer is pretty fail for everything except that specific scenario. >.<

Ughmahedhurtz

10-26-2008, 02:04 AM

In the interests of keeping this discussion factual, I've added my own very specific scenario questions to the thread over on the wow forums. ('http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11675540596&sid=1') To wit:

At the risk of repeating something, we got some good answers on multiboxing keystroke-replication a while back by being very specific with the capabilities possible in some of the software and asking about those specific cases and, with regards to particular mechanics, how they could be inferred to cover some obviously related activities. Anyway, to ensure the continued attention of the TL;DR folks, here are a few basic software click-replication scenarios and whether I believe they should be OK with Blizzard:

##################################################
########## Case 1: Pure dumb clicks. ##########
This is where you have all game clients set to the same aspect ratio, the software can tell the size of the WoW window, and it will simply click <button1/button2/etc.> at approximately the same relative position in the child windows as in the main window. To clarify, let us assume two WoW windows. The main is set to 1600x1200 and the second is set to 800x600, giving both a 1.33~ aspect ratio. The software sees a mouseclick on the main screen at 1000,120. It determines that this click is about 62.5% across and 10% down from 0,0. It calculates that the same relative point on client 2 would be at about 500,60. The software moves the cursor to that point and replicates the same button click as the main client got.

IMO, case 1 would be fine.
------------ Case 1 rationale; skip this if you're bored already ----------
You could set up hardware to do the exact same thing. Further, the most popular software tools in use for the last year or more already have this capability. It does not lend itself to the argument of automation as it makes no intelligent decisions about where to click, when to click or any "conditions" associated with the click. This is also no different than having 5 of the same sized monitors, set to the same resolution and using a wireless mouse to replicate your click (yes, you must zero the mouse every so often if your setup sucks, which is no different than remembering to press a modifier key). I have successfully used both the hardware and software versions of this with almost identical success. With regards to clicking on the ground to target an AoE spell like blizzard/flamestrike, it will work passably with rather involved measures to ensure your alts are close to you, have the same camera angles and are facing the same direction. Any misplacement or movement on the part of your "target" area completely screws the whole thing and makes it such that it just isn't practical for anything but pre-planned, pre-positioned targets. In PVP, it just isn't worth the trouble even putting the spells on your hotbar. (NOTE: spells that have inherent intelligence such as Force of Nature [TREES! RUN!1!] obviously lend themselves more to this as exact positioning is largely irrelevant.)

################################################## ##########
########## Case 2: Pre-programmed click offsets ##########
Same as above, but you can pre-program each client to click offset x,y distance from the main click. This would basically allow you to, with careful planning and execution, set up your clients to cover adjacent and possibly overlapping areas of effect with the targeted AoE spells.

IMO, case 2 would probably be OK as well, as the software still makes no dynamic decisions about where/what to click.
----------- Case 2 rationale --------------
This one is a bit trickier. It's still dumb replication, basically giving you the identical capabilities as Keyclone gives you with keymaps (clicking a different key on a follower than you clicked on your main, including clicking SHIFT+<KEY> even if you only pressed <KEY> on your main) though, technically, alternate keyclicks can be similarly setup by changing keybinds on your alts where mouseclicks cannot be configured to click "offsets." Currently, no software that I know of implements this "offset" click location mechanic, so it's still theorycrafting.

################################################## ########################################
########## Case 3: Intelligent click locations based on in-game UI elements ##########
This is where some piece of software determines the location of an in-game UI element through whatever means available and when the user clicks on a UI element on their main, the alts will click on the same UI element, even if that UI element is in a different spot on the alts.

IMO, this is verboten because this is basically what the current unattended bot software already does for single-client unattended bots.
------------ Case 3 rationale ------------------
There is NO WAY to tell where a UI element is in the game at runtime unless you either examine color/pixel patterns on screen and match them or decompile the process memory space to decode UI information. I cannot imagine any possible implementation of this that wouldn't require actual on-the-fly software knowledge, which puts this method firmly in the "bot/automation" group. No current legitimate multiboxing software has this capability.

================================================
That's the main three examples. The dividing line is knowledge of the client. All current approved multiboxing software (and hardware that does the same thing) has no knowledge of anything in-game. As such, everything they do is purely replication of human events. Mouseclick replication through software is only different from using a wireless mouse paired to <N> receivers in two ways: 1) software does not require you to "zero" the cursors by dragging them to the top-left corner of the screen to guarantee you'll click the same spot, and 2) software will work with multiple clients running on one machine where a hardware mouse requires an individual machine/screen for each cursor.

Considering the vagaries of cursor positioning lag, click duration causing wild/uncontrolled spins of the camera at times and the difficulty of getting 4+ followers to face the same direction with the same camera angles, it is no wonder to me that you don't see multiboxers all rolling up 5x frost mage Improved Blizzard AoE farm groups. Sometimes it works well enough to be worth the trouble but most of the time, it is grossly inefficient due to targeting being 50% or more out of alignment which wastes at least half the spell's channel time. While it is possible to zoom the camera in and point everyone so they're looking at the ground so as to make the click location >90% effective, the neccessary movement of squishies into melee range of enough mobs to get into effective position ensures that you will spend much more time running back to your corpse than looting dead mobs.

I look forward to hearing some more information from the Blizzard folks, though I would certainly understand a certain amount of delay as I'm sure you guys are busy beavers with the xpack coming up in a few weeks.

Regards,
Don

Suribusi

10-26-2008, 02:14 AM

In the interests of keeping this discussion factual, I've added my own very specific scenario questions to the thread over on the wow forums. ('http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=11675540596&sid=1') To wit:

Nice post, I tend to agree with your assessment as well.

Side note: I'm glad this thread has turned around.

-S

olipcs

10-27-2008, 10:14 AM

Ughmahedhurtz ('http://www.dual-boxing.com/forums/index.php?page=User&userID=843'), you nailed it!
I think giving examples, was a very good way to clarify what we're are talking about.
I would see it the same way as you:
Example 1: i'm perfectly ok (and honestly all i would use for clique-healing and maybe aoe-targeting, although i can live without the last)
Example 2: seems ok, because the software doesn't konw anything about any ingame-enviroment, but still is a very 'grey' and should be clarified
Example 3: strictly forbidden

zanthor

10-27-2008, 03:20 PM

I'm dying for an answer from these guys... seriously I'd LOVE to see this sort of software replication.

Vyndree

10-27-2008, 04:08 PM

Me too. I've got a busy week this week at work so I won't be able to drive this much during the day. Does anyone know if the thread has been bumped recently?

Also, can we cross-post in the UI forum since that's where Reythur suggested we post?

Ughmahedhurtz

10-27-2008, 04:47 PM

I'm dying for an answer from these guys... seriously I'd LOVE to see this sort of software replication.We already have case 1 in the form of Octopus and Keyclone. Case 2 doesn't exist as far as I know and, IMO, I doubt I'd ever find a real worthwhile use for it aside from covering a large area with flares with my huntards. Case 3...obvious. :P Or did I miss your point?

Also, can we cross-post in the UI forum since that's where Reythur suggested we post? I would presume so. You might preface the post with a link to the original and the comment that Reythur suggested it as an avenue to possibly more appropriate dev exposure.

olipcs

10-27-2008, 05:48 PM

for your interest: case 1 and 2a (and maybe 2b) also exist within HotKeyNet.

pengwynman

10-28-2008, 08:04 PM

my opinion below this line. correct me if some of my supposed facts are wrong
__________________________

in response to Ugh's post:

1. Pure dumb clicks-- definitely ok imo. as stated, possible with existing hardware/approved software. i'd like to use this to summon 15 trees on the boomkins i'm leveling. :D

2. pre-programmed click offsets-- also ok imo. doesn't use any knowledge of the game interface at all, 1 button/click = 1 predefined action. basically the same as key cloning... you perform 1 action on your end, and the click is sent to each window. the same action on your end can have different results in the game. building on the "you pull 1 handle to move 5 levers" analogy that the blue gave... it's *basically* the same thing-- you pull 1 handle (click your mouse) and 5 levers are moved. in this case, those 5 levers are each in a very large array of levers, and you choose before-hand which lever from each array you want to move.
counter-argument for myself-- you can change key bindings in-game, you can't change "mouse position bindings".

3. Intelligent click locations based on in-game UI elements-- i can't really think of a reason why I would want to use this, but i'll comment anyway. i don't really have a problem with this. you still have a player behind the screen calling the shots, pulling levers. you pull one, 5 levers move. The big difference and the reason why it would be in the grey area is because in this case, you have a helper... you give him a description of the lever you want pulled in each array links the correct levers (instantly - he's a very fast helper). You are still only pulling one lever and only one lever is being pulled in each array, you know what each lever does... but you have a little helper who is running around linking the levers together. blizzard doesn't like little helpers :P

Here is the original quote from Vyn's post:

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