Dual-Boxing PVE

[ShardWarrior]

1 hour ago, tidge said:

A couple of points: In my experience people open-world multi-box because they've landed on this as a "local maximum" on the rewards vs. effort curve. I never seen multi-boxers setting up for (event) Giant Monsters in zones above a certain level because the GMs get harder as the zones level (this was an old effect no longer in play for typical zone GMs). IN other words: no multiboxer is going to waste time in Grandville hunting the Giant Monsters when Atlas Park is available.

 

I see multi-boxers in just about every zone farming ToT and GMs.  They are more prevalent in Atlas, but they are in other zones too.

 

1 hour ago, tidge said:

As for enforcement: It would have to be like every other code-of-conduct element is enforced. How that actually shakes out is up to others, not me. I have no idea how these things are enforced, except when I witness "genericed" characters. I don't expect folks to be actively policing, but if it was a code-of-conduct violation then at least I'd have an expectation of investigation when reported.

 

Again, how do you plan to enforce the rule?  What you are suggesting here is correct in that enforcement is reliant upon others reporting activity that may violate the CoC.  With that said, how are you individually going to determine someone is multi-boxing to report them without knowing for certain if they really are multi-boxing?  Just tossing it over the fence and letting someone else decide is making work for the GMs.  

 

1 hour ago, roleki said:

On the flip side, I ran about 50 SBBs back-to-back with someone who was dual-boxing Masterminds and the way she had everything macro'd and mapped, her 'alt' was more active than all but the most-caffeinated of PUGlies.  Point being, it is possible to multi-box and contribute with both characters, so don't be too hasty to write them off completely.

 

This is not the same thing as SBB and TFs/SFs/Missions are instanced content.  This is not the same as open world multi-boxing.  I sometimes multi-box to solo higher level TFs for badges and such.  That does not impact others in the open world.

[tidge]

1 hour ago, ShardWarrior said:

 

Again, how do you plan to enforce the rule?  What you are suggesting here is correct in that enforcement is reliant upon others reporting activity that may violate the CoC.  With that said, how are you individually going to determine someone is multi-boxing to report them without knowing for certain if they really are multi-boxing?  Just tossing it over the fence and letting someone else decide is making work for the GMs.  

 

If I was a GM I wouldn't share HOW I was enforcing any element of the code-of-conduct.... my "leaving it up to the GMs" is the de facto approach to such things. As for "how to tell if someone is multi-boxing?"... It takes very little insight to see a pattern of the same four global accounts consecutively logging in within seconds of each other to summon Adamastor. The Global Account names are often a dead giveaway, as mentioned above: Neckbeard, N3ckbeard, Neckb3ard, N3ckb3ard, Neckbeard2, etc.

 

If such a thing is coincidence (on multiple days) let the GMs sort it out, if they care.... right now, there is a limit to how much they care, I wish the threshold was lower but it isn't like I could do much of anything under either limit. 

 

 

[ShardWarrior]

52 minutes ago, tidge said:

If I was a GM I wouldn't share HOW I was enforcing any element of the code-of-conduct.... my "leaving it up to the GMs" is the de facto approach to such things. As for "how to tell if someone is multi-boxing?"... It takes very little insight to see a pattern of the same four global accounts consecutively logging in within seconds of each other to summon Adamastor. The Global Account names are often a dead giveaway, as mentioned above: Neckbeard, N3ckbeard, Neckb3ard, N3ckb3ard, Neckbeard2, etc.

 

If such a thing is coincidence (on multiple days) let the GMs sort it out, if they care.... right now, there is a limit to how much they care, I wish the threshold was lower but it isn't like I could do much of anything under either limit. 

 

I was not suggesting GMs should divulge the inner workings of how they monitor everything, only that enforcement of the CoC seems to generally come from reports from players.  It also seems very clear that despite all of the reports and flagrant CoC violations, the violating activity merrily goes on year after year.  My thought was that in order to curtail a behavior, you have to remove the incentive for it.  Unfortunately that could mean others are impacted, however it is pragmatic and there is precedence for it - see removal of converting EMP merits to Reward Merits.  There were a few abusing it, so it was removed for everyone.