Does #4 affect us?
https://www.dual-boxing.com/attachme...tid=1949&stc=1
Printable View
Does #4 affect us?
https://www.dual-boxing.com/attachme...tid=1949&stc=1
Yet another completely unintelligible clause. Blizzard tended to be better at not having such things previously.
Reading it as written implies that even an in game macro would need to be expressly authorised. Yes, they could blanket rule this one.
Which would take you on to Addons. They all need to be expressly authorised too? They could blanket rule this too as you are using a supplied interface to interact with the game, but they should all be considered code, so all of a sudden they are brought into question without the blanket rule.
What about running an Excel spreadsheet of whatever data, as it can be "used in conjunction" and "facilitates other functionality" - which might be some calculated benefit of stat stacking.
Where's the list of of all the Expressly Authorised things, and why does no game company ever provide one that does not consist of a needle in a billion forum posts?
I have tweeted Blizzard cs asking can I use isboxer. I imagine the response will be "Use at your own risk"
well this is aimed at All Batte.net games, and for a random shot in the dark am going to guess that the coinages are due to The new game not owned by blizzard and they wonnted this in for Destiny 2. (that is coming out very soon)
Who knows.
But ya like bob said all addons would = in a ban if they use the new tos on wow, and or addon dev would have to get blizzard to auth the code.... that i don't think will happen.
or we get new ToS or wow in 7.3........ saying boxing is isboxer and boxing is now cheating with any software.
That entire section of the EULA present as early as February 28th, 2015 (according to a Google cache result), and has not been updated since then.
With that said, it's highly unlikely that Blizzard would disallow software-assisted multiboxing without giving their playerbase several months of notice. For EVE, CCP announced their one change to multiplexing with plenty of time for everyone to adapt, and there's no reason that Blizzard wouldn't extend the exact same courtesy to their playerbase.
Blizzard is not oblivious to the fact that the vast majority of players who multibox their game(s) use software to do it—they're not going to sneak a new clause into their Terms of Service, and then just start banning people left and right come patch day.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MiRai
I did have a feeling it did not change for a long time!
any who thanks boss man
Let's go all the way back to 2013.Quote:
Originally Posted by ebony
It's always interesting when the EULA updates because then people actually bother to read it at that time, and this is a typical result/reaction that you find during those updates. Even on reddit someone started a thread about how data mining is now against the EULA, when that same entry has also been in the EULA for a very long time.
Well that's ok then. TBH, I don't read EULA's unless specifically looking for something.
They're mostly a load of unenforceable crap, and essentially boil down to, we have rights of our stuff, you have none, and if you don't like it, we can give you a refund of the purchase price (subscriptions not included).
And yes, I'm the kind of person who clicks on the button and signs up my first spawn. I just wish the bastards would come and pick it up.
I just flew over it and saw that the max Number of Bnet Accounts one Person is allowed to own is 3. i am afraid this could cause some Problems for the Massmultiboxers.
What you're referring to was removed from the North American EULA awhile ago and updated to specify that the limit is for how many accounts can have an active Blizzard Balance on them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flumpumpel
Blizzard Balance is not a bank account. And, while you can register and play on multiple Accounts, you are not allowed to have more than three (3) Accounts with Blizzard Balance.
For some reason, the EU EULA still hasn't been updated in this regard, but it's obvious that you're able to own and operate more than three BNet accounts, in game, at any given time (together or separate), otherwise there would be multiboxers from the EU who would be actioned for it.
just logged to say that before yesterday, it was possible on EU to have more than 3 bnet (assuming 3 have balance on it), but today it is no longer allowed and is a risk to see some accounts closed, if you play on EU with more than 3 bnet. the message you're quoting was there before yesterday, it has been removed.Quote:
Originally Posted by MiRai
this is not true at all how half way though letting users have more then 3 then just stop a ban and what would they do just take a stab in the dark and ban accounts i have like 10 BN there noway to close them down delete them. so saying what your saying blizzard could leave me with 3 accounts that got no games just starter wows and ban my main accounts it would not be in there pocket to email me asking me what i like to keep......Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
i emailed support last time this came up and they said there is noway to delete a BN.net and not to worry about it this is added for some reason that there not talking about to the public (later news was about the BN balance and the D3 AH)
if your stock piling $$$ on BN then that is what there worried about. as there is caps in place and its not a BANK
i would think the other things that could be used to move money around in the black market.
the EULA is clear. it is written 3 bnet max. yes it's rather unfair for EU but I'm not doing the termsQuote:
Originally Posted by ebony
As I said, what I quoted was from the US EULA (my words were "North American") and you can look this up, but the "3 BNet limit" has been written into both EULAs for several years. It was only recently changed in the US EULA because of several blue replies on the US support forum, but the EU has never been updated to reflect that is only related to "Blizzard Balance."Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
Again, like I said, if you were allowed to operate only three Battle.net accounts at any given time, then multiboxers in the EU would have already been actioned as, what I said prior, that statement has been in the EU EULA for several years.
Also, when you create a new account called "throaway" to post and create, what seems to be, fear, one has to wonder who you really are and what the agenda is.
Then go ask on the EU support forum to see what they say. Ebony has already said that she's gotten a reply from support saying that it's only related to Blizzard Balance. Feel free to bring it up with Blizzard, but until then, not a single multiboxer in the EU has been actioned for operating more than three BNet accounts at the same time.Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
EDIT: Just for anyone interested, here's an archived version of the EU EULA from Feb/March 2014.
https://web.archive.org/web/20170110...any/legal/eula
Read it yourself, it's been in the EU EULA for at least 3.5 years at this point, if not longer than that, and has been shown to have zero bearing on actual gameplay in Blizzard's games (i.e. strictly Blizzard/BNet Balance).
oh i just wonnted to add the EU has the only 40 boxer now, that got to 110 with all 40!Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
and he talked to CS a few times and over the years he has had no problems.
like i said nothing new to see here
PS: you already broken the terms not reading them the 1st time cus thats been in for a long long time
let me explain in more detailQuote:
Originally Posted by MiRai
before EULA change yesterday = on EU, 3 bnet acc max; in France unlimited but 3 acc with bnet balance
after EULA change = 3 bnet acc max, in the French EULA they removed yesterday the mention saying you can have more than 3 bnet if only 3 has balance, matching the english EULA. speaks for itself. happened yesterday
Proof, read what the blue Kiemmaki said :
https://eu.battle.net/forums/en/wow/topic/17614983381#post-2
a blue confirmed before the change, that it's not allowed to have more than 3 bnet, regardless of balance
and after the change, it's even more clear that it's not allowed
now will they enforce it, probably not that's the thing
but by having more than 3 bnet acc, you decide to go against the rules
The part you're talking about hasn't changed, and I just linked to an archived version of it, from several years ago, in my last post. I can't find an EULA that is specific to France, do you have a link?Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
As far as I know, Blizzard has a single EU EULA, and for what we're discussing, it's had the exact same wording in it for, at the very least, three and a half years—this isn't something that was added yesterday.
Your evidence tells one story, but the action of Blizzard, for the past several years, has told an entirely different story. This isn't a recent change, and there is zero evidence that any player who operates more than three BNet accounts has, or will, be actioned.Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
As has been pointed out by Ebony, there are large-scale multiboxers in the EU who, by design, have to use more than three BNet accounts to play all of those characters at once. One of these large-scale multiboxers, Pinkskull, is reported on a weekly basis (he even make videos about him talking directly to GMs after being reported).
Beeq is another member of this forum who operates 10 accounts in the EU, and had originally had 10 separate BNet accounts because of the old limit on game time tokens. If I'm not mistaken, he spoke directly to support, multiple times, including one time to split his 10 WoW accounts across 10 separate BNet accounts to circumvent the token limit. Guess what? They obliged! However, after the token limit restriction was lifted, I believe he reverted back to just two BNet accounts, but that was a recent change, and it doesn't change the fact that he was playing from multiple BNet accounts, for an extended period of time, with no repercussion.
So, I have to ask... Why do you think these people haven't had anything happen to them? Do you think that large-scale multiboxers are stealthy and fall under the radar? Somehow I doubt that.
Ultimately, even if this was to be enforced, who exactly is affected by this? Less than 1% of the, already, less than 1% of the playerbase. Regardless, based upon Blizzard's behavior over the past several years, I would need to hear from someone who has actually dealt with this beyond a random blue on the EU forum, because blues get things wrong from time to time, especially when it isn't their department. This would need to be someone who is known by the multiboxing community, and not some random person who shows up out of nowhere to make any claims.
http://eu.blizzard.com/fr-fr/company/legal/eulaQuote:
Originally Posted by MiRai
on chrome you can type cache:http://eu.blizzard.com/fr-fr/company/legal/eula to see the old version
what I said in my last post is what was exactly written and is the official rule, all I said is true, I'm not saying you will be banned, but I wanted to inform you that a detail changed yesterday, which is a fact as proven by wayback machines backups
now you're obviously free to keep having 3 bnet account or not!
This is exactly what we've already been looking at, except in French. That version is not any different than what we've been talking about this entire time.Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
You're clearly missing the point, and maybe it's a language barrier, but what you keep referencing in the EU EULA is not new, it did not appear yesterday, and it has been present in the EU EULA for over three years now—as I've already shown, contrary to what you're saying. Let's focus on this part specifically:Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
It is not new, and it has been there for over three years now. (Again, here's the link to the EU EULA from March 2014)
So, now that we've established that this is something that's been around for several years, why has there not been one single large-scale multiboxer in World of Warcraft, or any 4-boxer in Diablo 3, who plays on EU servers and was banned or suspended, and then cited that "rule" as the reason?
The answer is because it has to do with Blizzard/BNet Balance, and until a ban, suspension, or forced reduction in BNet accounts is handed out by Blizzard, then that's what I'm sticking to. Ebony got an answer from Blizzard EU several years ago stating that it was, in fact, for Blizzard/BNet Balance, but you have a blue stating otherwise. Seeing as no action has been taken against a single player since that was first included into the EULA, I'm leaning toward it being related to Blizzard/BNet Balance. Especially since I've cited two examples of real EU players who: 1) use(d) more than 3 Blizzard/BNet accounts, 2) have had direct account-related contact with Blizzard during that time, with no consequences what-so-ever.
If you, or anyone, want to settle this, then this is easy... Just put in a ticket to Blizzard asking for clarification—ask for the ticket to be elevated to a specialist if need be. Ask if it's related to the financial area of the account, and, if not, then why is there a limit of three accounts? Let them know that the US EULA was changed to reflect that the limit was in reference to Blizzard/BNet Balance, and see what they say. If this is an actual, hard limit, on the number of accounts an EU player can hold, then there has to be a reason other than, "for teh lolz!" There would be an actual administrative, or legal reason for the limit to be in place, otherwise it wouldn't be there, and I'm genuinely curious so that we can put this to rest, once and for all.
I even wrote you a letter to use - https://pastebin.com/L9WNkBrt
However, if everyone is going to use that, it sure is going to look weird if several people just copy and paste it, so change things up if you want.
honestly I think if we make some tickets about this we'll get different answers, meaning that a GM can chose to enforce the tos if he's not cool, but I believe the chance of it happening are low
I wish they would update the text for EU, I see no reason why US could get as many account as they want, and EU can only "officially" have 3
Just want to clear this up. When they say 3 Bnet accounts they're not referring to wow accounts are they? Ie. 1 Bnet account can hold up to 8 wow accounts so this new rule would allow for up to 24 wow accounts (3 bnets) to have balance on them, correct? Also, I really wish theyd change that from 8 to 10.
You're asking for clarification on the End User License Agreement—a legal document that was written as enforceable rules for the account/game. You're the one who is forced to agree to the document, and if it's to be held up to a legal standard, then don't you think Blizzard should be able to provide clarification of the text in that document?Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
A basic, low-level GM cannot "choose" how to interpret the EULA as they please, but if they cannot provide the reasoning then they should elevate the ticket to someone who can, and you, as a player who must agree to the document in order to play their game, are allowed to ask them to do so. Certainly there is someone who works at Blizzard EU who has knowledge for why the text exists in the document, no? Or was the text written by a divine being and we cannot question it?
It's because you can have as many Blizzard/BNet accounts as you want in the EU region. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by throaway
It's 100% clear that, up to this point and for the last 3+ years, Blizzard hasn't taken action against any multiboxers who own and operate more than 3 BNet accounts—most of these players do not hide the fact that they're using more than three Blizzard/BNet accounts at the same time. This would lead us to believe that the text written in the EULA must be a mistake with how it's written (and therefore interpreted). Does it make any sense that Blizzard, for the first 10 years, didn't have that line in the EULA, and then, all of a sudden, inserted that line, but didn't tell anyone that this was going to be a major change moving forward, and that players with more than three Blizzard/BNet accounts would need to contact support ASAP in order to get sorted?
Does that make any sense? No, it certainly doesn't.
I don't know what it takes to convince you, and I honestly don't know what's so difficult about submitting a ticket and asking for clarification. In fact, it's so easy to do that I've gone ahead and done it for you. I don't expect that the US support will be able to help me with a question about the EU EULA, but it's worth a shot because debating this is abso-f'ing-lutely tiresome.
I don't know how many times I have to repeat this in this thread... it's not a new rule. All of my prior replies in this thread have stated this and provided proof that it isn't a new rule—it's been present in the EU EULA for 3+ years and has never been enforced.Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorsbrew
With that said, yes, assuming that Blizzard EU has an actual reason for holding individuals to only three registered BNet accounts, then you can only have up to 24 WoW accounts, which is why I said, in a prior reply, that it would affect < 1% of the already < 1% of the playerbase (outside of D3 4-boxers).
Technically, Battle.net accounts already hold 10 WoW accounts, although they are broken into sections:Quote:
Originally Posted by Thorsbrew
- 8 Retail
- 1 Alpha/Beta
- 1 PTR
Regardless, I do agree that it'd be nice to be able to 10-box from the same BNet account.
In regard to your response to me, chill. I never questioned anything about the rules or it being new or not like the other guy has been. I was just trying to verify this rule applied to Bnet accounts and not individual wow accounts. Sheesh.Quote:
Originally Posted by MiRai
PS: Ok I see I did technically say new rule but I only really skimmed this thread and was just asking that simple question. Excuse me for not reading every response of yours and just commented based on the thread title :)