is five boxing pointless atm?

[ebony]

hey so am not having fun atm am stuck in av-ioc not capping many conquest (unless its there time) for the fat loot. and doing lots and lot off dayey quests but i just worked out what am i going to do with all my VP points. as am more into pvp. leveled up 17 level 90's changed from horde to ally to horde to ally. whatever to try and find fun.


most off the bg's are ten men all being in the same place can work and can not work sometimes. (blizzard likes ten man) so i feel more will come. 5v5 arena is a full joke atm.

i feel three boxing the game will open more. (was thinking four but seems pointless)

here some the reasons why.

1) less money to spend on wow.
2) taking five into LFR seems to get a lot off QQ. (not as bad now the loot is random.) taking in three hunters two times not one comment!
3) ten man bg's i win 50% more games with three then five. (from testing might just be luck)
4) guild am in a friends guild now they seem to think its fun with me and i always seem to take 2 chars or 3 chars in the other stuff they do.
5) less lag on my pc.
6) scenarios (thanks to my pony friend)

anyone think of anything else why three boxing in wow will be better then five boxing or any reasons why i you think losing 2 chars will make it worse.

think three casters will work better then five.

[EaTCarbS]

You forgot scenarios. I have honestly been tossing this idea around in my head as well.

[Chivalrous]

I feel like 5 boxing is worth it but I only pve. My comp is mixed and the names are unique and in LFR nobody has ever said anything. I don't think anyone notices. Doing my dailies and such I get noticed, however. The gold from dungeons is good. Extra money from running old raids, plus they're easier (on most bosses.)

but that's just me, I think this is a question you have to decide the answer for yourself on.

[ebony]

You forgot scenarios. I have honestly been tossing this idea around in my head as well.

oh ya i how could i forget them.......

but i been playing hunters most of the day x3 and having a lot of fun. bg's just seem more better with 3 then 5

[heyaz]

4-5 box melee works pretty well in 10-15 man BGs for a lot of us but it depends on your comp, gear, competency level, and the group you get. I never got casters/ranged to work reliably in small battlegrounds, certainly not this expansion (elemental shaman), and even back in Wrath when they were very strong, it was hit or miss. Wasn't until I did an all melee group that there was a chance.

But given your goals I think you can easily accomplish them 3 boxing, save the money and get better performance on your machine. You can do scenarios for your VP, do LFR and BGs under the radar, and have less to deal with.

And no, 4, 5, and even 10 boxing is not pointless. Depends on what you're trying to accomplish.

[Fat Tire]

hey so am not having fun atm am stuck in av-ioc not capping many conquest (unless its there time) for the fat loot. and doing lots and lot off dayey quests but i just worked out what am i going to do with all my VP points. as am more into pvp. leveled up 17 level 90's changed from horde to ally to horde to ally. whatever to try and find fun.


most off the bg's are ten men all being in the same place can work and can not work sometimes. (blizzard likes ten man) so i feel more will come. 5v5 arena is a full joke atm.

i feel three boxing the game will open more. (was thinking four but seems pointless)

here some the reasons why.

1) less money to spend on wow.
2) taking five into LFR seems to get a lot off QQ. (not as bad now the loot is random.) taking in three hunters two times not one comment!
3) ten man bg's i win 50% more games with three then five. (from testing might just be luck)
4) guild am in a friends guild now they seem to think its fun with me and i always seem to take 2 chars or 3 chars in the other stuff they do.
5) less lag on my pc.
6) scenarios (thanks to my pony friend)

anyone think of anything else why three boxing in wow will be better then five boxing or any reasons why i you think losing 2 chars will make it worse.

think three casters will work better then five.

Yes.

Been saying this for 2 years(?) now.

Everything you said in the op is true.

5v5 is dead - need top 10 just for challenger since there are so few teams. Heroics - dead they are not needed at all gear progression wise since scenarios/lfr. Random bgs are all objective based games. When you get killed, you rez or kill player and they rez ad nauseum.

There will be people who say 5 is more powerful than 3(+2) in random bgs, but I disagree. If just killing in randoms while just mashing your aoe abilities was the only metric then I could see the value, but then you see why mass boxing in av/ioc is popular.

Only argument I could see is the one about not having to deal with people in heroics/10mans which is fair point.

[Owltoid]

Five boxing is more viable today than it was pre expansion if for no other reason than challenge modes. I've argued a few times the taking five into a BG is too much (excluding the 40 mans where it doesn't matter). However, 4 seems to be a good balance and I use the fifth to queue dodge. Through queue dodging I can very regularly get AV or IOC which helps me cap conquest for the week (still takes a while but very doable). Once you have gear 4 can truly contribute to all BGs, even 10 mans. At the moment I feel that if we lose a BG it's not necessarily my fault - once I get PvP weapons I know it won't be my fault.

If PvE is your thing than 5 boxing is better than 3 or 4. If PvP is your thing like me, then I still like having the fifth account, though I only BG with four. 3 boxing loses a lot of advantages that come with multiboxing while still suffering from the same disadvantages. With that said, 3 boxing with best gear in PvP will probably still wreak havoc.

[Fat Tire]

Five boxing is more viable today than it was pre expansion if for no other reason than challenge modes.

3 boxing loses a lot of advantages that come with multiboxing while still suffering from the same disadvantages.

I couldn't disagree more. I would be curious on what advantages I lose with only boxing 3 compared to 4 or 5. Given that the other +1 or +2 are not bots.

Top challenge mode rewards are only cosmetic in nature.

[ebony]

Five boxing is more viable today than it was pre expansion if for no other reason than challenge modes. I've argued a few times the taking five into a BG is too much (excluding the 40 mans where it doesn't matter). However, 4 seems to be a good balance and I use the fifth to queue dodge. Through queue dodging I can very regularly get AV or IOC which helps me cap conquest for the week (still takes a while but very doable). Once you have gear 4 can truly contribute to all BGs, even 10 mans. At the moment I feel that if we lose a BG it's not necessarily my fault - once I get PvP weapons I know it won't be my fault.

If PvE is your thing than 5 boxing is better than 3 or 4. If PvP is your thing like me, then I still like having the fifth account, though I only BG with four. 3 boxing loses a lot of advantages that come with multiboxing while still suffering from the same disadvantages. With that said, 3 boxing with best gear in PvP will probably still wreak havoc.

i can not see doing challenge modes i can not really see doing HC's to be fair. the blue gear u get from hc you can get with day quests/3 man dungons.

to do a challenge mode you going to need a mixed or a good group anyway and to be fair my friends list is kinda strong (would i like to do them? hell ya! but i can not do hc's to well) and it would not be hard to find a healer/tank for it. i was thinking about a 4/5th but from my playing today am doing very strong in every game i play even not winning theres not many games i fail on.

as for 4 boxing i don't see the point i feel ill lose out on to much with that extra one.

saying that the only games am failing on is ofc when the other side is a pemade and even then my deathkights in cata used to fail. if there in good gear. and working as a group better. i win or i lose bad with 3.

and to be fair i got 2 places i can bring friends with me. But been in all kinda bg's today and to be fair not much QQ from the other side. won 8/2 games saying with five i was losing 8/2 (anything form av-wsg) i can still about burst down a target.

i work so i don't have a killer lot off time to raid/dungeons (a 2nd mixed group) and still doing them all and pvp its just to much and this cloud be why am stating to hate wow. i do miss av games where five chars would be stronger then only 3 but theres only two bg's in the hole game like this. saying that i just find all my five chars get locked down anyway. (but now we can not que at the same time to play with ten or other pemades to nuke players has ended)


thanks for the stuff i did miss on though.

[Fat Tire]

thanks for the stuff i did miss on though.

Saving that 30 bucks a month from not needing two extra accounts means that your really only paying for one account now.

Also, now that you see that boxing 3 characters works just as well in randoms, you can even do 2v2 and 3v3 to your hearts content or grab a healer for 2+1 for conquest points. Same as 4+1 but constant games and can be easier, imo (I have alot of practice) ymmv.

[Feehza]

I never had so much fun pvp multiboxing since BC.
Yes it depends on the class combination -> Enhancer Shaman are so amazing strong in burst and cc breakers.

Multiboxing in 10mans are tough, but thats not a problem of MOP.

[Owltoid]

I couldn't disagree more. I would be curious on what advantages I lose with only boxing 3 compared to 4 or 5. Given that the other +1 or +2 are not bots.

Top challenge mode rewards are only cosmetic in nature.

With 4-5 toons you have significant burst. With 3 toons that advantage is less while you still have the issue of controlling multiple toons. If your argument is that a 3 boxer plus two solo players is better than a competent 5 boxer, then I'm indifferent. If you think 4 random solo players (not bots) are better than a competent 4 boxer then I disagree. If you're arguing that a three boxer is better than three solo players then I hugely disagree. In other words, 4 toons give you enough focused power to outweigh the many disadvantages of boxing. Three boxing doesn't give you enough and often just being there is a harm to the BG - they would have been better off with three solo players.

With all that said, if one of your three toons is a healer then I switch my stance. A three boxer that has 2 dps and 1 healer may be more helpful than three random players, but that's mostly because the odds are fairly low that one of those random players would be a healer.

Its really hard to make a non rambling argument on an iPhone - sorry

[Lyonheart]

I couldn't disagree more. I would be curious on what advantages I lose with only boxing 3 compared to 4 or 5. Given that the other +1 or +2 are not bots.

Top challenge mode rewards are only cosmetic in nature.

Challenge modes give the most valor as well. IF at some point, farming valor is something a person needs.. there is no faster way to get it then CMs.. IF you can get at least silver.. but even bronze is better than heroics valor.

Remember.. Valor can upgrade any epic you have 2 times.. so I think its always going to be valuable..even if you raid.

[Owltoid]

Can valor upgrade conquest gear? I didn't think it could but I never tried.

[ebony]

Can valor upgrade conquest gear? I didn't think it could but I never tried.

not atm they did yet us do this in cata, so who knows but it did not count for the points to the wep though it would be nice if u clould even if it is to upgrade.

[Fat Tire]

With 4-5 toons you have significant burst. With 3 toons that advantage is less while you still have the issue of controlling multiple toons. If your argument is that a 3 boxer plus two solo players is better than a competent 5 boxer, then I'm indifferent. If you think 4 random solo players (not bots) are better than a competent 4 boxer then I disagree. If you're arguing that a three boxer is better than three solo players then I hugely disagree. In other words, 4 toons give you enough focused power to outweigh the many disadvantages of boxing. Three boxing doesn't give you enough and often just being there is a harm to the BG - they would have been better off with three solo players.

With all that said, if one of your three toons is a healer then I switch my stance. A three boxer that has 2 dps and 1 healer may be more helpful than three random players, but that's mostly because the odds are fairly low that one of those random players would be a healer.

Its really hard to make a non rambling argument on an iPhone - sorry

I could burst one player down with 3 just as easily as 4-5, so I fail to see the point of using extra accounts as overkill. However, most decent players(non random) will use their defensive's or cc anyways to negate the burst.


If you think 4 random solo players (not bots) are better than a competent 4 boxer then I disagree.

Seriously? I think you need to have variables in that statement. What if there 4 solo glad pvpers? There are too many variables in random bgs to determine if having 4-5 is better than 3. No one will convince me otherwise. Not really sure why anyone would argue about if 4-5 is better than 3 in random bgs, when most players look at randoms as part of the journey and not end game.

I was stating that anyone can achieve everything a 4-5 man can do with only 3, including in both pvp and pve and I stated some of the perks associated with only playing three.

[Owltoid]

I said four random players - I suppose a glad could fall into that group, though most often not.

With four toons you can burst before they can use defensive cooldowns.

Do you think a multiboxing group of three is typically stronger than three random players in a BG?

Previously I would of agreed that most thought random BGs where just a stepping stone to other parts of the game. However, after my thread asking when peeps stop farming av for honor it became clear that in reality most multiboxers stop at random BGs, and many times only play 40 mans.

[heyaz]

I could burst one player down with 3 just as easily as 4-5, so I fail to see the point of using extra accounts as overkill. However, most decent players will use their defensive's or cc anyways to negate the burst.

What class are you running where you can burst down a player with 3 just as easily as 4-5? And what about when they use defensive CC's or have a healer?

I run 5x DK and there are people who still take 3-4 globals to kill. When I go up against 5 or more enemies I definitely need that extra burst to quickly eliminate one or more of them or to land a kill despite healing, if killing a healer isn't an immediate option. The other problem is losing a DPS which against as few as 2 other competent dps is often inevitable, a lot of fights I finish off with only 3 DKs left or have to battle rez one or more of them. If you only have 3 dps and one drops in a few seconds due to massive burst, what then? 2 dps is going to kill anything?

[Narij]

When I was gearing my team up at the start of the expanion I would queue with just four. My win rate was very good. I'm not sure how it would go now and I have no desire to enter the battlegrounds until the whole automatic banning issue is addressed. When I want to cap area I do it in 2s running double dks, takes about 1-2 hours to cap.

It seems to me that heroics (first of the day) could be just as effecient using three or five since the speed of the run comes from queue time and the damage.
My main focus is running older raids and those will always be easier the more bodies you have.

[heyaz]

However, after my thread asking when peeps stop farming av for honor it became clear that in reality most multiboxers stop at random BGs, and many times only play 40 mans.

I don't know about most, maybe... Depending on your comp and comfort level you may go into smaller BGs once you have the gear. Most of my time is spent doing either small BGs or world pvp (which I mix in with dallies). I rarely if ever do 40 mans anymore, just isn't fun to me. There are a lot of 10 boxers who stick to 40 mans simply because smaller BGs aren't really a viable option. At the moment 4-5 DKs with or without healer feels almost as good as 4x ret + DK did in wrath and you can definitely do 10 mans once you have gear.

Only ones I have a problem with are AB and SotA. In AB people have a habit of trying to zerg with me and not defending bases I cap, or try to help me kill instead of capping the flag while I deal with endless respawns from the nearby GY or people running in to AOE. SotA I don't like due to being split up on offense and with how easy it is to be kited and/or stuck in combat so far away from the actual objectives on the game. No matter how quickly you farm and kill them you often just get stuck on the beach or somewhere you shouldn't be.

[Fat Tire]

I guess I am just confused.

I have been successful playing just 3 overall and ebony has said that he has seen more success with just 3 in randoms as of late. All I am getting, no way! you need atleast 4-5 in random bgs. Its random bgs ffs, half the population bots them.

Again I am only stating that anyone can achieve everything a 4-5 man can do with only 3, including in both pvp and pve. You can still do challenge modes, just grab two other people. If a person warrants the extra 30$ a month to do challenge modes by themselves then that is their prerogative. No one will convince me that 4-5 is better than 3. I played 4-5 all thru bc/wrath.

[heyaz]

I'm not sure how it would go now and I have no desire to enter the battlegrounds until the whole automatic suspension issue is addressed.

Fixed. No one is getting banned, just 3 hour (or sometimes longer) suspensions. And it's not so constant that you should be avoiding something, if you enjoy it. I've done dozens and dozens of BGs, queueing 5 at a time and have a grand total of two 3-hour suspensions at about 3 or 4am which are just expired when I get up. I'm still working on resolution of the tickets but overall it's not preventing me from doing BGs. Not doing anything wrong.

[heyaz]

I guess I am just confused.

I have been successful playing just 3 overall and ebony has said that he has seen more success with just 3 in randoms. All I am getting, no way! you need atleast 4-5 in random bgs. Its random bgs ffs, half the population bots them.

Then play three. I was just wondering what comp you were doing, as you were bursting people down with only 3 dps... with defensive CD's and healers around?

[Fat Tire]

What class are you running where you can burst down a player with 3 just as easily as 4-5? And what about when they use defensive CC's or have a healer?



I play alot of classes in different combos, its in my profile. If you are referring to randoms then I would say it doesnt matter, randoms are an objective oriented game minus AV/ioc it seems. For example, I would take a fresh lvl 90 in green that guards the node opposed to a fully geared 10x r1 glad who fights on the road.


Then play three

Thanks I have been playing just 3 for over a year now.

[ebony]

Then play three. I was just wondering what comp you were doing, as you were bursting people down with only 3 dps... with defensive CD's and healers around?

am playing 3 hunters and can take on 5 players (goes down to gear) most off my burst was wasted with five as it seems they was already dead. yes with healers it gets a bit worse if the other side has them but that is down to luck i been on the side when i have my own healer pug as there was 4 in a AB! ofc we won.


seems there less bots in randoms then there was! but i still played five and lost more then i do with 3. just seem to get locked down at a GY's with hunters anyway. more of the point was i don't wont to play class x i wont to play a class that works better with 3 then it did with 5.

a hc with 4 blood dk's and a healer takes me (not got great gear) but going off ptr with the gear takes a good 30-45mins. and i get 80 vp. a 3 man dungon takes me 10-20mins a lot easyer and am all dps now if they was five man i probs would say 5 boxing.

[Ellay]

When I first started dual-boxing, it was 2 mages. Just.. 2. and I was a badass. The forums on my server were flooded - screaming for the injustice I was giving them. I added another PC and now had 3, still maintained that oomph. Xzin was also around in this era playing 5 and was a badass tearing it up.

Eventually I went to 4 and made Shamans and.. that's were most of my history is at. I now play 5 and it's awesome for me but the moral of the story is when you are playing more than 1, you're a badass. No single player has the same meta game knowledge you do. You're inherently a... yep you guessed it. Badass.

Also :) face because that's how I roll.

[Shodokan]

The only reason for me to have 5 accounts is the extra professions right now.

I don't even play the game >_> just make gold.

Healing yourself in bgs is nice, but 4 is better for arenas because you can maximize everything. I had more fun dual-boxing to 2400+ than i ever did in 5's.

[Multibocks]

I run 10 for some not so obvious reasons. ;)

[Lyonheart]

I have played at least two accounts since EQ, and when i started, there was no auto follow, they added that not long after. I learned then the advantages of having your own healer and later, your own group. But boxing EQ with a full group was very easy.. i did it via alt tabbing and could do any group content. I did the same thing in DAoC, but I could never 5 box WoW at first, its too fast paced to alt tab. Ellays making boxing shaman popular got my attention and learning about multiboxing software made it EASY to box WoW. I can never have less than 5 accounts for WoW. I could see playing 3 at a time, but i feel incomplete with less than a full group.

[Cyphoner]

I'm running 5 aswell but have been considering reducing it to three for the same reasons as the op, aswell as the scenarios..

One thing i'm sort of curious about though, how many from same guild is required for the guild to earn gold from a dungeon on a weekly basis? If 3 is enough that's it for me, then i'll go with three! :)

[ebony]

I'm running 5 aswell but have been considering reducing it to three for the same reasons as the op, aswell as the scenarios..

One thing i'm sort of curious about though, how many from same guild is required for the guild to earn gold from a dungeon on a weekly basis? If 3 is enough that's it for me, then i'll go with three! :)


It's 3 for 3 man
It's 3 for 5 man
7or8 for a raid.

This was a reson why 3 boxing works just fine for me.

with 3 am winning a good 70% of my games on random bg's.

[MadMilitia]

I gave up on my team like the first two weeks into MoP. I don't like the direction PvE went in and the lore in MoP ranks among the worst I've seen yet in Warcraft.

I only play one character now (my warrior) and purely PvP. I haven't done a single raid or dungeon instance since this expansion began. I've been pondering resubbing a second account just to world farm herbs and sell pots. That bugger made about 6k in gold for flasking/potting up his herbs he got for leveling. Seems much more lucrative than blacksmithing =/

[remanz]

I won't call 5 boxing dead. But I don't think it justifies the money we pay and the time we spent. Assuming you played 5 boxing in previous expansions, now it is the time to slim down. BG , 3 is a decent size. Big enough to make an impact on the outcome of the game. Small enough so there is no Rage since they won't notice you.

[heyaz]

don't think it justifies the money we pay and the time we spent.

Speak for yourself. I'm paying for 10 and the moment and I have no problem justifying it. A bar tab where I live, for one night, costs more than 10 boxing.


Assuming you played 5 boxing in previous expansions, now it is the time to slim down.

WRONG, SIR. WRONG!

Fuck off with that nonsense.

[ebony]

Speak for yourself. I'm paying for 10 and the moment and I have no problem justifying it. A bar tab where I live, for one night, costs more than 10 boxing.



WRONG, SIR. WRONG!

Fuck off with that nonsense.


it was not all about the money never said it was i can pay for 5-10 just don't see the point. av always been into PvP more then pve been playing form wotlk where i was into a mixed pve group that worked. (not sayinn it does not now)

just with five in pvp unless i stay to av-ioc (thats fun but gets boring fast) i car't seem to pull the wight off my group i can find a good group can cc me a lot of the time.

sorry maybe i posted the topic title wrong it is more from a PVP point off view. i can not see going 5v5 arena or ten man bg's where i can win a nulf games to cap out my conquest points. and with the 3 man dungons its seems easyer if i wonnted to play a bit off pve i can them 3 man dungeons are not as easy as u think they be with all dps.


And forgot to say i can play a class i wont to play not a class i have to play to be half good in a bg. and with blizzard still going on about nulfing the hell into burst its just getting worse.

[Khatovar]

I gave up on my team like the first two weeks into MoP. I don't like the direction PvE went in and the lore in MoP ranks among the worst I've seen yet in Warcraft.

I couldn't be happier with PvE. I've been able to do every heroic, but they are hard enough that I can still get wiped if I'm not careful. Questing was far more interesting than Cata's 1-3 quests at a time. I'm not big on lore, but at least I know something's going on, even if I still don't care. Like I said in my blog, I've already played this expansion far longer than I played Cata, so that's a win in my book. Though I'm kinda bummed because if it sucked, I could easily quit and go work on my book or something instead, lol.

[Owltoid]

It doesn't make any sense to me why this expansion is worse, not better, for 5 boxers.

PvE: same things as before except now you also get challenge modes. There are now more options, not less.

PvP: same as before with teams of four blowing peeps up allowing for a solo healer or rolling with 5. Same options as before the expansion, it's just that DKs may not be as good.

If the true question is can DKs do as much as they could in Cata, then maybe they can't. However, in general this expansion is better for five boxers, not worse.

[Owltoid]

it was not all about the money never said it was i can pay for 5-10 just don't see the point. av always been into PvP more then pve been playing form wotlk where i was into a mixed pve group that worked. (not sayinn it does not now)

just with five in pvp unless i stay to av-ioc (thats fun but gets boring fast) i car't seem to pull the wight off my group i can find a good group can cc me a lot of the time.

sorry maybe i posted the topic title wrong it is more from a PVP point off view. i can not see going 5v5 arena or ten man bg's where i can win a nulf games to cap out my conquest points. and with the 3 man dungons its seems easyer if i wonnted to play a bit off pve i can them 3 man dungeons are not as easy as u think they be with all dps.


And forgot to say i can play a class i wont to play not a class i have to play to be half good in a bg. and with blizzard still going on about nulfing the hell into burst its just getting worse.

The nerf hammer threat will always be there - can't build a team while being afraid of it unless something is stupidly overpowered from a solo players point of view. Roll enhancement - they carry their weight. I'm not afraid of any random BG now and I know that if we lose it's very likely because the rest of the team didn't do their job. When they do, easy wins. I capped conquest last week off pure randoms, will do the same next week. In the Jan 1 week I will have PvP weapons at which time it will be as close to god mode as you can get (at least it will with any healing support).

Just stop fighting against the stream and swim with it. Enhance has been proven to work and it's not in a huge danger of getting a nerf.

[Fat Tire]

I won't call 5 boxing dead. But I don't think it justifies the money we pay and the time we spent. Assuming you played 5 boxing in previous expansions, now it is the time to slim down. BG , 3 is a decent size. Big enough to make an impact on the outcome of the game. Small enough so there is no Rage since they won't notice you.

Yup. I went from 5 to 3 over a year ago and it has been nothing but a better overall exp in pvp. Mop has brought scenarios and again the lfr, you can do just as much with 3 as 4-5 minus heroics by yourself pve wise.

Alot of people still drinking the kool-aid though. To each their own. However, its nice to see that others are also seeing the light that the standard 5 is not a requirement and anyone can achieve the same things with 3, along with the added benefits.

[Owltoid]

Drinking the koolaid is a bit strong. We all play to the play style we enjoy (or finances allow). If someone has more fun 3 boxing or 17 boxing, more power to them. However, 5-boxing is far from dead and could easily be considered a better experience in this expansion compared to Cata.

[Fat Tire]

Drinking the koolaid is a bit strong. We all play to the play style we enjoy (or finances allow). If someone has more fun 3 boxing or 17 boxing, more power to them. However, 5-boxing is far from dead and could easily be considered a better experience in this expansion compared to Cata.

I could 100 box or whatever amount I wished to spend, finances have nothing to do with the decision. The op asked if 5-boxing was pointless, not if it was dead and I answered yes. There is nothing a 5 boxer can do that a 3 boxer cant minus the few things I have said in previous posts. I have yet to see a valid argument why 5 boxing is better than 3 though.

If you or others enjoy the play style that 5 offers then so be it, I was only agreeing with Ebony.

[Owltoid]

I could 100 box or whatever amount I wished to spend, finances have nothing to do with the decision. The op asked if 5-boxing was pointless, not if it was dead. I have yet to see a valid argument why 5 boxing is better than 3 though.

Slow down there, Cowboy, I wasn't talking about you with mention of finances. I was simply saying that finances are a limiting factor for some. There is no argument why one is better, just like someone can't prove that multiboxing is better than solo play. It's individual play styles and how peeps want to spend their time. We certainly don't need to list the advantages of three boxing or the advantages of five boxing or the advantages of 17 boxing - we all know them. The question was is 5 boxing dead, not "is FatTire justified 3 boxing when clearly 5 boxing is better?"

5 boxing is not dead, and in comparison to last expansion it has more options. Feel free to make a thread why 3 boxing is the bee's knees.

[Fat Tire]

The question was is 5 boxing dead, not "is FatTire justified 3 boxing when clearly 5 boxing is better?"



Actually little darlin, the question was not if 5 boxing was dead, re read the title and op.

[Owltoid]

Actually little darlin, the question was not if 5 boxing was dead, re read the title and op.

Good point (other than calling a dude little darlin, but whatever floats your boat). It had been a long time since reading the original message which seems much more focused on three boxing than asking if 5 boxing is pointless.

[Fat Tire]

Good point (other than calling a dude little darlin, but whatever floats your boat). It had been a long time since reading the original message which seems much more focused on three boxing than asking if 5 boxing is pointless.

I thought with the use of Cowboy we were adding a western motif to the thread and I was just adding to it. Yes, I believe the reason Ebony made the thread was because he/she had determined that 3 boxing provided him/her the same play style as 5 along with some benefits that come with 3(financial,less qq,same rewards etc) and recently for Ebony more success in bgs.

[Owltoid]

I think (not sure) that Ebony is a she.

I was born and raised in Colorado (Broomfield). Man, I wish I could go back for good but will likely live most of my life on the east coast (job). Go Broncos!

Three boxing sucks. :)

[Lyonheart]

I think (not sure) that Ebony is a she.

I was born and raised in Colorado (Broomfield). Man, I wish I could go back for good but will likely live most of my life on the east coast (job). Go Broncos!

Three boxing sucks. :)

<, From Colorado Springs and live in Virginia..GO BRONCOS!

5 Boxing is the way to go!

[Owltoid]

Obviously if you're three boxing then you're not a true Broncos fan!

[ebony]

I thought with the use of Cowboy we were adding a western motif to the thread and I was just adding to it. Yes, I believe the reason Ebony made the thread was because he/she had determined that 3 boxing provided him/her the same play style as 5 along with some benefits that come with 3(financial,less qq,same rewards etc) and recently for Ebony more success in bgs.


this was the point can i 3 box and it feel right. Will five i lose to much from five boxing.

the other point was am doing better WITH the class i want to play with 3 (all casters no heals), not playing a class i have to because its op ATM.

the other think if u read other topics about the ban waves and what blizzard said to be taking in big groups with other players and not pulling it off then they can temp ban me again and keep telling me to stop going into them "fair play" (they said this to me on a ticket i opened the other day)

i seem to have no prob with 3 at all always top off kb's and good dmg.


two be fair playing anymore then one char feels right :)

[valkry]

4 boxing ftw

[Owltoid]

4 boxing ftw

In PvP, this. Enough to burst, enough to survive, enough solo players to win. I play BGs to win, not top killing blows or damage done. I respect the other players time and realize they're there to win (or bot, which I boot if I recognize).

[Fat Tire]

4 boxing ftw


In PvP, this. Enough to burst, enough to survive, enough solo players to win. I play BGs to win, not top killing blows or damage done.I respect the other players time and realize they're there to win (or bot, which I boot if I recognize).

You guys are right none of that stuff can be done with only three.......

[Owltoid]

I'm guessing in full PvP gear, three is enough to sway a BG. When you're talking about a massive gear advantage and focused fire, randoms will probably get demolished. Satisfied? Still can't be a true Broncos fan with only 3.

[Chivalrous]

Mm kool-aid is great while I 5 box. :) it's fun for me, and probably others. It's all about personal preference.

[Fat Tire]

Still can't be a true Broncos fan with only 3.

I can still be a fan though right? :( I have gone to one game this season(San diego), buddy has season tickets. I used to be a huge colorado sports fan but in general it has lost its luster. A recent poll and I dont have the source on hand said that 80% of pro athletes only think of the games as a job, win or lose. There are only a handful of players who care as much about winning as the most fervent of fans. For the most part I would rather spend my time,insane amounts of beer money and emotions on something like me or my family rather than pre maddonas that couldnt give two shits about me personally unless I am signing their million dollar paychecks. So I am ok with not being a true fan. ;p

[MadMilitia]

I couldn't be happier with PvE. I've been able to do every heroic, but they are hard enough that I can still get wiped if I'm not careful. Questing was far more interesting than Cata's 1-3 quests at a time. I'm not big on lore, but at least I know something's going on, even if I still don't care. Like I said in my blog, I've already played this expansion far longer than I played Cata, so that's a win in my book. Though I'm kinda bummed because if it sucked, I could easily quit and go work on my book or something instead, lol.

I'm not so happy about it. I purchased 5 expansions out of the gate not thinking to try it solo first to see how it was.

I hate scripted events so PvE isn't my cup of tea. Once, not multiple times to grind through gear.

The worst part of it is the dailies and the stupid ground collects. That and every time a new expansion comes up we're in trash gear all over again. It always leaves me feeling like my intelligence has been insulted. Especially the quests!

But that just tells me I'm too old for this. Frankly when I saw the ads for MoP and the scenario leading up to it I thought great, finally an expansion centered on PvP.

Nope, got another who cares villain, attempts to harmonize the factions and just more slapheaded WWE narratives. More of the same basically.

Ok, no more ranting! Haha. I do like the PvP as usual. People say PvP is dead in WoW but warriors are feeling good and so are those mage tears =D

[countdown]

I originally 3 boxed back just after the launch of Wrath. My computer at the time could only handle 3 and still have decent fps. I'm running 5 now and having a blast. Run whatever makes you happy.

[Ualaa]

I can still be a fan though right? :( I have gone to one game this season(San diego), buddy has season tickets. I used to be a huge colorado sports fan but in general it has lost its luster. A recent poll and I dont have the source on hand said that 80% of pro athletes only think of the games as a job, win or lose. There are only a handful of players who care as much about winning as the most fervent of fans. For the most part I would rather spend my time,insane amounts of beer money and emotions on something like me or my family rather than pre maddonas that couldnt give two shits about me personally unless I am signing their million dollar paychecks. So I am ok with not being a true fan. ;p

It's been a few years since the Avalanche won a Stanley Cup...

Good old Sakic, Forsberg, Blake, Roy and company...

[valkry]

You guys are right none of that stuff can be done with only three.......
I never said it couldn't... I just like 4

[heyaz]

I like 5. And 10 soon.

[Chivalrous]

I'm jealous I wanna 10 box! My limited playtime doesn't justify the costs, however. Goodluck :)

[heyaz]

My computers are a bit limited at the moment. At best I can 8 box or so linking up two of my machines. I have 10 fully geared 90s though, all on separate accounts. 5x melee dps 5x healer so... I've got some ideas for em :)

[Shania]

Im not sure if 5 boxing is pointless, I think it comes down to the individual and what they are doing.
Im boxing, my 2nd team, lvl 88 some lvl 89, and loving soloin dungeons with my 1 blood dk, 1 disc priest, 2 ele shammys 1 mage, its fun for me, challenging to box dungeons myself, as I never did that in wrath or even cata at all.

Have not really bg'ed this xpac at all so far, used x2 hunters in normal raids, first 3bosses in MSV and first boss in HOF as we were 1 man short for our guild run a while ago, and so they asked me to bring my other hunter lol.

I was using 9 of my toons for inscripting DMF Cards but they arent worth much now and im back to G capped so I dont need gold atm, and just using my 2nd team for pure solo play, trying to clear dungeons as I level inbetween questing for fun and the challenge, beyond that, I have noidea what I Plan to do, maybe use tank or healer for raids, or play in BGS inbetween main raids...but for now x5 works for me. + my x4 hunters.