You are assuming the limiting factor is money to spend on boosts. If they have the processing power to run 4 accounts at the same time they also could do 4 boosted accounts.
Yes in a world where the botter has as many computers and processing power as they’d need where the limiting factor was instead money on accounts that would be true.
In reality if they only have 1 account it’s not because they couldn’t afford 4 boosts but because their PC was too much of a potato.
No they won’t, a botter would NEVER even think of buying a 58 boost, even after getting banned because clearly hurp a derp. * craps in hand and throws at wall *
Didn’t you know, EVERYONE on Classic who ever hit 60 bought a mage boost ! But clearly a bot will never buy a 58 boost !
So the issue is blizzard’s poor enforcement of bots, got it.
Always has been. gunshot
What you fail to grasp is its about risk. You’re right that the leveling process is the most dangerous because you have a higher chance of contact, but in TBC that’ll be even less the case for vanilla areas but much more a danger in Outlands because the leveling areas are much more condensed.
Which is exactly why the boost doesn’t make sense for botters. You’d be investing $60 just to skip the low-risk parts of the leveling process and start at the most dangerous time where your account is mostly to get banned.
Botters play a numbers game. They send 10, 20, 30 little bots out into the wild and hope that a decent percentage make it to adulthood, but knowing that some inevitably wont. If your investment in each is 10, that’s not a big hit. If your investment is 70… it starts to get harder to recoup your losses, much less turn a profit.
The boost is happening, no matter how much you complain. It’s happening.
yeah, they’re totally gonna pay $30 to boost 1 bot instead of spending that same $30 on 7 or 8 accounts
lol
The boost is happening, no amount of whining will stop it.
No, leveling is not “dangerous” for bots. Blizzard doesn’t ban botters unless hundreds of players report them, and the average player doesn’t care to follow and watch every single person they come across to see if they’re a bot or not.
That and, I’d assume most bots are leveled by mage dungeon AoE anyway, so it’s a completely null point
Can you tell me the purpose of this thread? Say what you say is true… so what? Whether they buy boosts or don’t buy boosts they are still botters. Whether a 70 bot levelled itself or bought it still exists. The issue isn’t boosts it’s the fact that we don’t ban bots and if we do it’s too late.
BRD Farm won’t really be relevant in TBC though. So this is a fairly bad example, but BRD farm is already rampant in classic with the need to level. However since we can do the math on the benefit of leveling vs boosting that is scaleable… lets use this example.
What is more profitable to a botter? (if we are going with it takes blizz an average of 4 months to catch/ban botter through Warden)
We’ll say they then run for 6 hours a day. The math doesn’t matter much here since it scales evenly anyway. The average cost of 1k gold is ~30 USD based on a quick google search, and the non-boosted bots lose 1 week of play for leveling, the boosted rogue loses 1 day to get 58-60 because we are assuming leveling to 60, and at the high end it looks like pick pocket farming BRD is 70 GPH.
Boosted Rogue: Sub Fee + Boost = $75 Investment to start, +45 for 3 months sub. $120 Total.
42 Hours Per Week
168 Hours Per Month
672 Hours Until Ban (4 Months)
666 Hours @ 60 (Yikes, after losing one day to go 58-60)
666 Hours @ 70 GPH = 46,620 Gold / $30 = $1554 USD - 120 initial investment = $1434
4 Leveled Rogues, $60 Sub Fee to Start + $180 for next 3 months = $240 investment
168 Hours Per Week
672 Hours Per Month
2,688 Hours Until Ban @ 4 Months
68 Hours to Level * 4 Characters = 272 Hours
2416 Hours @ 60
2416 @ 70 GPH = 169,120 Gold / $30 USD = $5,637 - 240 for investment = $5397 profit.
You stated a week to level, but in this math that would be 42 hours. Dungeon boosting proficiently would be 68 hours. So we’ll go with this higher number because its actually realistic.
For the same time investment, running simultaneous accounts is always going to be better than boosting a singular account, it also gives you better redundancy. Sorry man, I don’t buy that any botter is going to actually be interested in boosting.
Exactly.
Four is always greater than one.
This runs on the assumption botters are actually using stolen CCs. Most of them actually aren’t, its a lot easier to get arrested for credit card fraud than it is selling an in game currency. One is illegal, one is a TOS violation with no criminal penalty.
Sure some do steal CCs, but not that majority. Treating it as a given that they aren’t using their own money is disingenuous, as you don’t know this is the case. I’d argue if they are stealing CCs, they still likely wouldn’t be boosting because smaller transactions like a sub fee are less likely to be seen than a $60 boost.
As soon as someone disputes a CC payment, blizzard bans that account. Its pretty quick. Which is also why I doubt CC fraud is as prevalent as is being claimed.
Also, no matter how you want to scale it, more accounts is always going to be more profitable. You can’t just say “Well they’ll just get 4 accounts and 4 boosts”, and then we get to say, “They could just get 16 accounts for the same price and make exponentially more money”.
Four will always be greater than one no matter how much they don’t want to believe it
…and then we get to say “16 boosted accounts make more money than 16 leveled accounts…” and so and so on.
The issues is this: a boosted account makes more money than a leveled account. The $60 investment of a boost is more than compensated for by how much more money the account makes. It doesn’t matter if a botter could make more money by making more leveled accounts because he could also make more boosted accounts to make more money than leveled accounts.
No, the issue is, if your aim is to make gold and sell it for profit. Whatever you would have invested into a boost, is always better invested into more accounts. You get both far more revenue, and way more redundancy. The “Bots will boost argument” doesn’t pan out because of the profit motive of a botter. Not liking boosts is fine, but using this as your reason is flawed.
16 boosted accounts or 64 non boosted.
Stop lying.
If your plan on spending that money it will ALWAYS BE MORE PROFITABLE TO BUY MORE ACCOUNTS.
Math isn’t hard…
Wonder what makes more in 4 months, 16 accounts or 64 accounts??
Math is hard.
You just discredited your own post. If bots can already level to 58/60 in a matter of days, why would they pay $60, or whatever price it might be. In those few days, they could be making gold while leveling. I’m not keen on what gold prices are, frankly it doesn’t matter to me. But if they were to sell their gold they made from leveling, I imagine it would be well worth the few days. And on top of that, they could be net negative if they boosted for however long.
In layman’s terms, boosting just to bot is a waste of money for them, when its already that easy to farm.
Yes, botters will just run 64 non boosted accounts. Only requires a NASA computer!(LOL)
You do realize the people selling mass gold have way more than 1 computer right?
If only it was legal to own more than 1 computer…5Head
Of course botters have more than one computer, and with that in mind, they’d probably buy 64 boosted accounts and make more money because non boosted accounts have to wait days and weeks of levelling/mage boosting while nonboosted accounts make diddly squat.