Why hardware boxing always also is software boxing

[Swaggasauruz]

@Swaggasauruz - your solution is what I would call a true hardware solution. It is mechanical and electrical. Hell, I would try it not because I want to multi-box still, but because it sounds like an awesome "Frankenstein's Monster" kind of project.

@schmonz - I think you are correct. We may think of a switch as a hardware only solution, but it is really just moving the software off of the PC to the external box. It still contains some programming and instruction sets to multiplex the signals. I have no idea if Blizz can detect it or not, but I think they would consider it a violation.

I am no expert, these are just my thoughts.

I considered still going with the Arduinos as it would be a fun project but I ended up going with a USB synchronous switch. As far as I understand it's not possible for Blizzard to differentiate between a keyboard sending an input or a switch sending an input from a keyboard - both events just look like a keypress from an HID.

[nodoze]

Of course they won't be able to detect it from software but they don't need to.

A simple GM observation of your characters all following at once, or interacting at once with an object is all they need to see.

And that will also go for rotations. I guess it's worth seeing to be sure for yourself but yeah.

I considered still going with the Arduinos as it would be a fun project but I ended up going with a USB synchronous switch. As far as I understand it's not possible for Blizzard to differentiate between a keyboard sending an input or a switch sending an input from a keyboard - both events just look like a keypress from an HID.

None of the bans need to be triggered manually via Player Reports nor enforced manually via a in game review by a GM nor do they need to determine/verify the source of the input to make it bannable...

I am pretty sure Blizzard is recording server-side many attributes of your clients connecting and what environment they are connecting from (like what OS name/version, what machine/host name, what internal/external IPs, possibly full netmasks and trace routes, memory/cpu/gpu/vram/etc, things that denote VMs, etc) and also are recording your actions done in game (and likely the inputs and as best they can tell the source of those inputs) with very granular date/time stamps (at least to the millisecond).

It is very doable with the above information to write automated monitoring routines to detect accounts with simultaneous or nearly simultaneous actions and then automatically feed those flagged accounts to automated warn/suspend/ban workflows that require NO human interaction... I know because I do similar things professionally at work for people/clients connecting to our enterprise databases, enterprise applications, and Single Sign On (SSO) infrastructure for compliance & security reasons...

Frankly if I were Blizz I would just stop all the nebulous and halfway statements and just definitively say all interactions that result in 1 human action causing more than 1 action in 1 wow client are prohibited (whether hardware enabled or software enabled) and enable automated scans for that behavior and workflows to stop it and be done with it... Call it the "1-1-1" rule so it is simple/clear and easy to remember. People would then be forced to stagger actions in a reasonable human speed manner per client and that would end all the drama & confusion...

There are ways to try to get around the above but this would stop the vast majority of bots and abuses...

[daviddoran]

IMO Blizzard has always been targeting bots with their changes over the years, and Multiboxing has just been collateral damage. There were some low effort /follow bots in BGs in the past, and blocking that command was their "easy" solution to that problem. The fact that it also broke PvP multiboxing may have been a side benefit, but we will likely never know for sure. Blocking /follow in ALL pvp outside of BGs does seem rather directed at multiboxing, and that aspect of multiboxing has always been one of the most contentious to the non-boxing community.

Blocking software multicasting will definitely kill the fun for many of us, but it also puts a practical upper limit as to how many characters can be utilized at once. Those of us who just want to "play the game" and run our own dungeons should be able to adapt and move on. The "mega boxers" running more than 5 characters are the most affected here. I believe that this was their "easy" solution to getting rid of low effort bots that were using input broadcasting to increase the number of bots they were able to run, by only having one actual "bot" sending the keystrokes to dozens of windows.

I do wish they were able to get rid of the farming bots without affecting us, but it is what it is. I personally already have the spare PCs and monitors, so it's a minimal cost to me to set up a USB multicaster, and redo my macros in game for /follow and /assist, and new keybinds for IWT.

[boxblizzard]

IMO Blizzard has always been targeting bots with their changes over the years, and Multiboxing has just been collateral damage. There were some low effort /follow bots in BGs in the past, and blocking that command was their "easy" solution to that problem. The fact that it also broke PvP multiboxing may have been a side benefit, but we will likely never know for sure. Blocking /follow in ALL pvp outside of BGs does seem rather directed at multiboxing, and that aspect of multiboxing has always been one of the most contentious to the non-boxing community.

Blocking software multicasting will definitely kill the fun for many of us, but it also puts a practical upper limit as to how many characters can be utilized at once. Those of us who just want to "play the game" and run our own dungeons should be able to adapt and move on. The "mega boxers" running more than 5 characters are the most affected here. I believe that this was their "easy" solution to getting rid of low effort bots that were using input broadcasting to increase the number of bots they were able to run, by only having one actual "bot" sending the keystrokes to dozens of windows.

I do wish they were able to get rid of the farming bots without affecting us, but it is what it is. I personally already have the spare PCs and monitors, so it's a minimal cost to me to set up a USB multicaster, and redo my macros in game for /follow and /assist, and new keybinds for IWT.

surely any devices to reproduce those inputs would be classed as software again, firmware? that’s how the community of haters will respond?

it’s a tough cookie, I’ve hung up my 11 accounts for more blue posts or hard evidence what is acceptable or not for the community moving forwards with the new rules.

I am happy to adapt , but it’s a mine field , walking it with a blind fold not knowing what is ok or not. “Software” means a lot of things.

it’s sketchy as hell

[MadMilitia]

IMO Blizzard has always been targeting bots with their changes over the years, and Multiboxing has just been collateral damage. There were some low effort /follow bots in BGs in the past, and blocking that command was their "easy" solution to that problem. The fact that it also broke PvP multiboxing may have been a side benefit, but we will likely never know for sure. Blocking /follow in ALL pvp outside of BGs does seem rather directed at multiboxing, and that aspect of multiboxing has always been one of the most contentious to the non-boxing community.

Blocking software multicasting will definitely kill the fun for many of us, but it also puts a practical upper limit as to how many characters can be utilized at once. Those of us who just want to "play the game" and run our own dungeons should be able to adapt and move on. The "mega boxers" running more than 5 characters are the most affected here. I believe that this was their "easy" solution to getting rid of low effort bots that were using input broadcasting to increase the number of bots they were able to run, by only having one actual "bot" sending the keystrokes to dozens of windows.

I do wish they were able to get rid of the farming bots without affecting us, but it is what it is. I personally already have the spare PCs and monitors, so it's a minimal cost to me to set up a USB multicaster, and redo my macros in game for /follow and /assist, and new keybinds for IWT.

You've got it backwards. The ban on software broadcasting affects M+ and rated PvPers the most. Because you need many more keybinds for movement and cooldowns in that content than you do hyperspawn farming and one shotting players in world PvP.

Hyperspawn farming is rudimentary business and isn't complicated much at all by moving it to hardware.

Farming bots aren't going anywhere. Stop kidding yourself. Bluzzard has always used weasel words when it comes to multiboxing. It's clear that the mask is off to me and they will again in the future close the door on your purchases. Why aren't they being clear now? They don't want to scare away everyone that has more than one account. They will however at their discretion ban dual boxing and multiboxing at a time that is financially convenient for them.

That's reason enough to stop supporting them.

[woloss]

Hyperspawn farming is rudimentary business and isn't complicated much at all by moving it to hardware.

Farming bots aren't going anywhere.

True, standstill possible w/o hardware, even for big scaling boxers. Herb/ore still easy. WPvP, bgs, m+, pretty much dead.
Next step, end of /follow

[jak3676]

I really do wish they would have just said, "we're banning all input broadcasting" as opposed to their current wording about software. Then they could have followed that up with a policy change saying that 1 keystroke can only equal 1 event on only 1 client. I wouldn't have wanted to hear that answer personally, but at least that would be a clearly stated policy with some more detailed understanding the community could get behind - it would give us a good framework to evaluate new ideas against.

As it is right now your minefield analogy seems pretty valid. But I haven't gotten any warnings against my account yet, so this seems like as good a chance as I'll ever have to try to tip toe across the minefield to see what I figure out. Even if all that does is to better define where exactly the mines are so we all no not to do that again, that seems like a worthwhile test.

[Tin]

Some one did post this on distord last night

https://postimg.cc/NLgnSxNN

So this GM says no hardware - voice multiboxing - only manual

[Andreauk]

Some one did post this on distord last night

https://postimg.cc/NLgnSxNN

So this GM says no hardware - voice multiboxing - only manual

This makes sense. It's just the same as the Guild Wars 2/FF14 policy. One action can only activate an ability on one character at a time.

I understand it's gutting to lose boxing, I myself did it since TBC.. but I also value my account so I will only do 2 characters at the most with maual switching. This way it's a big FU to those who think I can't do it anymore, and I can still benefit from double professions and gathering.

People can try all they like to find workarounds, but in the end what is your account worth to you?

[jak3676]

The auto-follow that EMA and other addons use is part of the blizzard API - blizzard put that into the game. If Blizzard decides they don't like it, they'll take it out and the addon won't work anymore. But there's no grey area there - blizzard put in that feature. Why shouldn't we use it?

If EMA was some external software that plugged in through the OS or something similar, I could understand your hesitancy. But its an addon - it can only what blizz allows it to do.

In the history of WoW Blizz has indeed changed their code a few times to break addons from doing what was previously allowed (They just did that with wow classic and a LFG type addon.) But Blizz has never taken any action against an addon user for something like that.