http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...e-removed-soon
I don't like the rumour mill but hey if it happens, it's gonna suck.
Printable View
http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...e-removed-soon
I don't like the rumour mill but hey if it happens, it's gonna suck.
Honestly, it sounds like another multiboxer hater who is trolling given the fact that they started the thread, replied three additional times within 15 minutes of creating it, and then have said nothing beyond that for days. The fact that Blizzard would remove both /follow and CTM from the entire game to counter a few minor annoyances, when plenty of solo players use them, seems a bit excessive.
One of the many? There must be less than 10 people, maybe less than 5, who run anywhere near that many accounts. Do I believe that that many accounts is excessive? Yes, but if those 5-10 people are the cause of this, and the rumor(s) are true, then I'd expect Blizzard to put a limit on the amount of accounts that are allowed to be multiboxed at any given time.Quote:
If you've ever had to displeasure of running into one of the many multiboxers who lag out servers with their 40 to even 80+ characters, cheer hard for this.
Also, the amount of multiboxer mis-information in that thread is staggering. It's not like we hide how we play away from the world behind password protected pay-only forums. :confused:
Blizzard has been pretty busy excluding huge segments of players from WoW over the last several years, it honestly would not surprise me if they continue the trend.
Going that far out of their way just to deal with Prepared, though, I'd say is a long shot ... I'd love to meet the "many" multiboxers with 40-80 accounts. To say there might be 5 of those people sounds like a pretty high estimate to me.
However, I will say that CTM is totally not necessary (unless you want to work around no /follow in battlegrounds). We multiboxed WoW before it was added to the game in the first place...
The best part is that even if this were true and it being quite plausibly aimed towards Prep, it would change nothing. He does not even use CTM from what I can tell. His toons are simply always stacked. And ya, I am aware of 4 people that have boxed or 2 that currently are boxing 30+ accounts, so many might be a slight exaggeration
I just blew 500 bucks on expansions and transfers. I sure hope this is just a rumor
saying they said they would tell us if they stop mutiboxing before it happens they know we got xpac already. so to just remove it after peolders is silly.
I been finding out what i can and i know someone that was at blizzcon (playable demo) that said follow was still part of the UI. CTM is not the problem to be fair its ITW and CTM that kinda is the prob how they work togaver like they do (for melee teams). rift has both and both don't work like wow does. i meen follow is hard cored into the game if they can not change a bag? how the hell they going to remove follow (unless they do what they do in bg's that is more of a toon hack then removing follow ;) )
removing click to remove for a few bg bots is probs going to be as useful as removing follow hmmm nope.
As for ctm/itw that is easy just ban the boxers doing it am sure we fucking stop then. (even a gm saying can you not come to bg's and ill stop) the pet is simple just hot-fix it like they did with with the soul trader.
If they is true that blizzard just needs to say what other games say Mutiboxing is not allowed any more in game. a lot of players play 2 accounts though. going around removing all our tools is just silly.
I would think this is as baseless rumor in that Click to Move is a gaming staple. They are likely wholly ignorant of IWT.
I would like to hear from the developers (or product managers) what IWT was created for, like who justified the expense? Is it a development / testing 'pathing' tool that is used for testing and people thought it might be cute for accessibility?
I am sure the waypoint system still exists for development / testing, memories of being able to ride from Kargath flight path to Lothos with a single button was such an achievement. But that should have never been in the game.
I'll let someone else chime in with other details. My brain hurts from the stupid in that linked discussion on MMO-C. "Good multiboxers don't use follow..." /wrists
I've been boxing for years and maybe 3 or 4 times in my life have I seen another boxer in WoW. And never more than 5 toons.
I see hate posts like that and think OK thats the 1 person who ran into a boxer, but how is he convincing the other 99 who've never seen one to follow along?
Thanks for posting that thread. I got a real chuckle out of it.
They won't get rid of either options; follow or click-to-move. The original post never quoted anything from Blizzard officially and was all about someone's hopeful opinion. Follow has been in the game since day one of vanilla and click-to-move was added later to assist people who have disabilities. Blizzard will never alienate a segment of their player base who legitimately require CTM.
As for multiboxing, well, most people have at least one or two accounts and multiboxing as a whole has little impact on others overall gameplay experience. Just more pointless posts with multiboxer rage in my opinion.
Blue or GTFO imo
Found another person claiming that /follow is being removed in Legion. http://www.mmo-champion.com/content/...age=9#comments check the comment by roent(can't figure out how to link directly to the comment on MMO-Champion forums). I'm asking for a source from him because I don't believe it.
The reason they give doesn't even make sense, let alone there not being an actual source.Quote:
Originally Posted by Multibocks
PvP leeches using /follow? Where exactly is this happening? Seeing as /follow was disabled in battlegrounds over two and a half years ago (March 2013), and was never a part of Ashran, it would appear that they're misinformed.Quote:
Probably because a blue poster said they're removing the /follow function. Something to do with PvP leeches.
Still can not get a client download to look in the api.
EDIT: i got the 7.0.1 WoWAPI (blizzard add-on changes) that us addondevs use to work out whats been changed in lines of api changes so i took a peek at the blinding's (KeyMap UI) and follow and ITW are both still in the game form the looks of it. This file has got changes from live so they have been working in it.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...h%20target.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...KeyBinding.jpg
EDIT2
Found click to move code as well that's still in the interface menu.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...sstuff/CTM.jpg
I would not worry and in a few days am sure we get into the game to check this out!
Edit3 found the click menu as well
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...RightClick.jpg
Thanks for the sleuthing Ebony!
Damn it, Ebony! You keep your "research" and "facts" out of this!
I jest, naturally. Cheers for looking that up. ^^
your welcome! i meen it ""might"" not work in-game but seems dum to leave the code there still, but everything else they removed thats going in xpac EG: ghyphs so one would think they would of cleared it up by now.Quote:
Originally Posted by luxlunae
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wubsie
The facts always wins then some MMO-champ mine craft kiddey crying. ((funny how it was not posted on the wow forums))
or though they did remote this emote
Code:%s motions for you to follow.
Just more vomit from MMO-Champion.
I see from time to time that same crowd in game and on boards bitching about class envy ( not having the dough to pay for two accounts ) always complaining incessantly in the hopes that Blizzard gets fed up and takes action. Notice they never quit. It isn't a matter of their experience being made worse. It is their class envy that hurts.
No doubt this is exactly how /follow in BGs got removed. Personally if they really, truly want to stop 80 boxing, want to stop bots, want to stop all the abhorrent shit that goes on with the bots and multiboxing just do the following:
1. Limit /follow to battle net account.
2. Limit the number of characters that can be in any instance of WoW on a battle net account to a total of 5. Or whatever they feel comfy with someone multiboxing.
Getting rid of CTM will never happen as it creates too much overhead figuring out who legitimately needs it and who doesn't. Besides, the number one way to kill botting is to stop creating content around timesinks. Instead create around challenge. Nobody is going to run a bot for something like that.
follow was removed becouse they said many times it was the bot's and there was no real use for anyone (but mutiboxers) needed to follow in PvP. the outside would there is reason in there eyes follow is useful. just saying.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMilitia
and if the lua files was not a nulf i got some in-game stuff.
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...315_025816.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...315_025826.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...315_030108.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...315_030147.jpg
https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/...315_030627.jpg
Quote:
Originally Posted by ebony
They stated that it was held up because multiboxing in BGs was not wanted. According to them. They were alright with breaking our gameplay.
So my point to them is when is multiboxing ok and when isn't it? Get rid of the grey area and let the ruling stand.
I play more than one account because playing one account bores me to tears. It has nothing to do with gaining an advantage on anyone. I actually prefer 3s arena for starters, or 5 man dungeon runs on the hardest setting. I do it for the challenge and diversity which so many games sorely lack by design.
I want for them to set rules on multiboxing so that I know what I can and can't expect. Giving me back /follow and limiting my multiboxing to say, 2 or 3 accounts I'd be alright with that. I guess some would want more so maybe 5 but no more support beyond that.
There are good things and bad things about multiboxing like anything else that can be done with the game. The point is to recognize the good things multiboxing brings to the table and the bad things so that a reasonable decision can be reached.
The problem there, as I see it, is two-fold:Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMilitia
1) You're asking for all parties to the discussion to be rational and logically consistent. There are only two groups that seem to generally meet that criteria: blizzard and multiboxers.
2) Liability. Blizzard won't ever flat out approve or provide rules for it as that would put them somewhat at the mercy of the whiny tits. Thus the "does not violate policy at this time" mantra. The one thing they have clearly defined is what defines a "bot" but again, the kiddies on the forums (usually PVPers) call multiboxers bots so often that you wonder whether there should be a reading comprehension test and psychological evaluation prior to allowing people to zone into a battleground or post on a forum.
I believe that not setting an expectation makes that problem worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ughmahedhurtz
So long as multiboxing remains in the grey area of their product allowances people will show up on forums and complain about it. Soon as it becomes protected and recognized as legitimate way to play their MMO the complaints will cease for the most part.
The reason is I think the whiny tits do have a bone to pick here. Not an absolute one mind. Two characters are hardly an advantage anywhere in the world but 40 characters dropping on a quest zone and wiping out anyone that comes close is quite unfair. It's also not fair to a 15 man raid to have 2/3rds their raid a multiboxer who most likely won't contribute to their win.
There needs to be contrast for us. So that we can one be protected against whiny tits and two, not be lumped in with someone who is really out to destroy the integrity of the game.
Your asking for to much the only rule they could use is the 5 b.net per name and even then its to hard to force they will not say oh you can with five but not anymore.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMilitia
If they tagged follow to b.net or something they might as well take it out. As that's giving boxers only actress to the command
If they "start" setting rules then they will support us. That they do not want to do.
The only thing I can see them doing next is removing follow when tagged for PvP - all I can say is I hope they going to move my 100's off chars to pve realms for free. (This could already be true) with new wpvp hubs around ya....
We been walking on ice for a long time devs say we cool but when we make others life hell its not fair. To be fait solo I never see a boxer much. So I don't feel the problem as big as some make it.
Go make a new character on a PvP realm and see how many times you get ganked by a boxer. I say 0 and yet am farmed all day by a lvl 100 that I can not kill. This is the darkside of PvP.
Easily enforced by not supporting anything beyond that. You want to multibox in BGs? Limited to three accounts. There. You have some semblance of balance restored to the experience while still giving some people the option to play multiple accounts in a BG. As stated I would even be fine with 2 IF they officially supported it. We need the contrast.Quote:
Originally Posted by ebony
Actually untrue. It would benefit both multiboxers and any family-orientated battle net accounts. Obviously the largest benefit there is for us but people who play on the same bnet account who may be for example disabled, may want follow back in BGs for this reason.Quote:
If they tagged follow to b.net or something they might as well take it out. As that's giving boxers only actress to the command
If they "start" setting rules then they will support us. That they do not want to do.
Pretty simple. Limit the number in each bnet account and then allow follow only for accounts on that bnet account. That as far as I can see fixes a lot of problems.
You are also asserting that they do not want to support us. There is no proof of this. All we know is they don't want us going into BGs and in their views, tarnishing the experience by setting up 10+ on 1 encounters.
You're taking it down the wrong road here. Asserting that they do not like us or that what we are doing is automatically a problem is the problem. This is why we need to know officially what is ok and what isn't. So that we aren't guesstimating how thin the ice is we're standing on. There is absolutely no way for us to assert anything until they've told us. So far, all we know is they don't want us in BGs. To what extent they haven't said.Quote:
The only thing I can see them doing next is removing follow when tagged for PvP - all I can say is I hope they going to move my 100's off chars to pve realms for free. (This could already be true) with new wpvp hubs around ya....
We been walking on ice for a long time devs say we cool but when we make others life hell its not fair. To be fait solo I never see a boxer much. So I don't feel the problem as big as some make it.
Go make a new character on a PvP realm and see how many times you get ganked by a boxer. I say 0 and yet am farmed all day by a lvl 100 that I can not kill. This is the darkside of PvP.
Boxing 100 characters and steamrolling capital cities is apparently fine and being told those of us playing 2 accounts will get hit with the same nerf in battlegrounds bothers me. Obviously if we can see the difference so can Blizzard. All they need to do is step up and define the acceptance criteria.
That's interesting. Why is that any different than a gang of people wiping out all the quest NPCs in the crossroads for hours or some 100s camping noobs in the 20-40 zones?Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMilitia
Well first it's different because it isn't 100 characters. The largest warspear raid I've seen for example has been about 40 characters spread out. A full raid. The difference between 40 scattered targets and a block of 100 dense targets is enormous for the performance of the game. At 100 in a block the phasing logic starts to act up so that they can phase in and out disrupting gameplay.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ughmahedhurtz
Then you have the logistics of getting even 10 people game for invading a quest hub for giggles. And then even more keeping them entertained long enough to ruin the day for someone else. I think it can be demonstrated in most examples of griefing that as the number of participants has reduced, the amount of time being griefed has increased. This is due to the fact that multiple people are less likely to wake up the same day wanting to do exactly the same thing. A multiboxer breaks that rule in half. So does a feral druid, coincidentally.
But anyway I think there are clear differences like stated. Not just those two though.
Look, I'll grant you the single obvious case of this 80millionboxer on that derp-vs-derp server. (Incidentally, if you see anyone mention "the spirit of the game" or "flagrant douchebaggery" or something similar, just remind them it's a RPVP server and then ask them if they've spent more than an hour in that server's trade chat.) That said, I have yet to meet someone that has played on PVP servers and hasn't had to deal with the exact opposite of your notion; specifically that it takes a lot less coordination to get 10 people to go camp crossroads than it does to get 4 geared 100s to go kick 'em out. Seriously. And this is the norm. Log in to some of the low-pop servers, create a toon on the minority side and turn on world PVP notifications.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMilitia
My point, circuitous thought it may be, is that griefing is the norm in WoW and it's widespread; this guy is just a very visible example. Again, sample size of two does not a statistic make. ;)
I'll give you some scenarios from just last night.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ughmahedhurtz
One guy decides to try and bladestorm my 5 man group in Tannan. He got crushed obviously but he tried.
Another was griefing some others and I think maybe tried to kill me too by DoT porting up on a wall. There was some back and forth but it didn't last more than 10 minutes.
Then another tried to barrage my team. That didn't end well for him.
I then wiped due to four of them ganging up on me.
Mind these are all 1-3 people attempting to PvP me in the open world. Sometimes it happens that there are six or more of them but it isn't common. I'd say most of the time we're talking 1-3 people with the upper end being 5. The same goes for the camps in Volmar, Spires, Nagrand, etc. And those groups have never stuck around for more than an hour.
I play on Bleeding-Hollow on the Horde side. I've seen the Alliance side so I know how commonplace it is for Alliance players to get stepped on during PvE engagements. That isn't griefing though. Just some casual PvP that ends with a dead ally that comes and loots the corpse when everyone else clears out. It is pretty common for a 20-40 man raid party to have one or two stragglers that want to spend the rest of their day in the zone looking for PvP. What is rare is for the entire raid party to decide to spend the rest of the afternoon doing it.
They don't want to support us this is clear and has been for years. If they set rules then we can start asking for better and more helpful changes + they could not do what they did in bg's so easy.
There is many videos/posts from blizzard saying that mutiboxers go to far and we can lose them a subs. 40+ chars is a joke and with high level chars for £££ levelng them is not even hard like it was. But unreal money and to be fair his been wiped before the lag this xpac has made it worse.
The follow thing in bg's is like beating a dead horse been there 100's of times.
I think this topic is going far off topic /follow is in beta so far. CTM works /thraed
If they remove it kill it for PvP they do. And we can not do anything about it w/o work arounds
Based on what exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by ebony
On Bleeding Hollow Horde side as well and have had the same basic experience. Most people run from me but theres always one or two that come after me with gusto. Not people who hate boxers, I would just up and leave. But people actually feeling challenged by boxers and up for the task, not letting a wipe or two slow them down.Quote:
Originally Posted by MadMilitia
Though almost never see another boxer, its just not common.