That’s not how multiboxing works. If the program uses a different thing based on the situation, that is automation. Multiboxing clones key presses and that’s it. It seems like you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what exactly multiboxing software is. It’s only legal because it just copies what you press. Multiboxers have the pilot (the main account) on /follow, disable the copy for movement (so they don’t run forward when you do) and just copy your damage spells.
whether or not it is or it isnt would have no impact to the conversation. its a distraction
I personal,y don’t care about what is or isn’t officially considered multi boxing or botting People want to multibox? Sure go for it.
I am just enjoying the conversation and seeing the boundaries on how people personally conceptualize the different phenomenon.
He’s asking if multiboxing is botting, or how it’s different. I’m explaining what the program does and why it does not do and can’t do what he’s describing.
Multiboxing is a very specific thing. It’s a simple program that is allowed by Blizzard because it doesn’t automate anything. That’s what we’re trying to say, and why it’s different to botting which isn’t allowed. Multiboxing requires a person to pilot it.
So? That still doesn’t make it pay to win.
you pay more than another player to control 5 characters instead of 1 character. 5 characters are more powerful than 1 character. its the definition of pay to win.
So the second it goes beyond just cloning is when it becomes a bot in your opinion? Do if(else) type statements apply as well or would that fall under macros?
imagine if we all collectively agreed multiboxing is botting. nothing would happen
And? Why are you opposed to a simp,e conversation? I don’t expect anything to happen from talking on the forums, were you?
And you also can’t do what 5 characters individually can do, and you also have limitations a single character doesn’t. Which is why it’s only “P2W” in extremely limited and irrelevant ways.
calm down, i thought you would have something to say
That’s not pay to win LOL
You don’t get anything for your money except another subscription. Go ahead and buy a second sub. The account will be completely empty when you log in. Everything on that account has to be earned via your own efforts and work.
That’s the opposite of pay to win.
Multiboxing is the opposite of pay to win.
1 Like
It’s not just my opinion, it’s the separation and why multiboxing is allowed as it is. If you mean something that checks a status and does two different things based on that status, the modern macro system doesn’t support that and so wouldn’t actually work.
There are however addons that can check things. Usually for buffs. So far, they’re not broken.
Why would I need to calm down? I think you might be projecting there a bit since a few of your responses were to me responding to someone else,
While I agree that pay to win generally lets you skip specific things (like excessive grinds that free players have to do to be on an even footing with paying players in some games), there’s also some games where the sole difference is they pay money to have more power. That’s what Joyson is suggesting multiboxing is, though it is not accurate.
1 Like
projecting what exactly?
you get the ability to replicate your input across more than 1 character, and seeing as how players and characters are not the same, your relative power compared to a player paying less than you per month is directly proportional to how much you pay per month.
Dunno, you are the one assuming someone is upset when they are not and see pretty hostile towards what you consider “irrelevant” conversation, even when it’s not directed at you.
This would only work if two players couldn’t beat a multiboxer, assuming equal gear and player skill. Generally if you CC the pilot, or split the group up (like with an AoE fear) you basically cripple them.
You don’t need to pay to do that.
No, your power is directly proportional to how much you’re willing to grind on each character.
Multiboxing is the opposite of pay to win.
You’re so dumb that you prove the opposite of your claims.
nah its actually not that way because grouping is free