Thread: Monthly Development Update - 2nd April 2014

  1. #221

    Funcom employee

    Please read this first part carefully.

    DISCLAIMER: I am not stating official Funcom policy, and these are my personal thoughts. I do not represent the official Funcom views on this issue, and the policies on this are mostly not decided by the AO team at all anyway.

    Totally agree. Multi boxing should be banned. Keep multi logging though or many will leave the game.
    From an entirely technical stadpoint, and without saying multilogging/boxing (which are essentially the same thing) is bad or good, I don't really see how you expect to be able to tell the difference. Multiboxing refers to using multiple computers, but you can just as easily "multibox" using a single computer and very similar software, and this is not even taking into account someone just playing several clients at the same time without any software at all.

    I am not going to argue either side in this debate, but there are many reasons most MMOs do not "ban" multiboxing. One such reason being there is no reliable way to "prove" that you are multiboxing without capturing all your network traffic and analyzing it, and even if we did (which would be against many laws in many countries, not to mention the amount of work it would take), someone could circumvent that in about 5 minutes and force us to patch again to detect it. If someone has a reliable technical solution that is not illegal, and can not be trivially circumvented, please let me know and we'll look into it.

    Lets imagine we somehow made a solution where multiboxing was banned, and was detected by the system reliably; Now we have to look at people doing the same thing using only one computer. Should we just disallow/ban playing multiple characters on the same computer? What about bank characters, mules, and so on? If we don't fix the "single computer" issue, we will have the exact same problem as multiboxing; people will still die to gangs controlled by one person.

    If we want to "ban" multiboxing, the only way I see we could accomplish that is to not let any similar accounts log in at the same time. For example if you use the same credit card, have the same name, or the same address, you will not be able to log in those accounts at the same time. We could also make it so that the client does not allow you to run more than one copy on the same machine (to prevent "multiboxing" on the same machine). This solution would of course also prevent you from logging on your mules, banks, and using multilogging in PvE and I really doubt that's what you wanted. Someone could just use fake names and other people's credit cards to get around it anyway.


    It's true that there could be a policy stating multilogging and multiboxing are forbidden in any PvP situation, but this also as many corner cases and problems. We would have to forbid any player controlling more than one character in any PvP situation for this to be a viable policy, and it would have to be investigated on a case by case basis for every PvP encounter. This would end up being a huge amount of customer service time/work, because I'm willing to bet anyone who feels they died "unfairly" will use this in a petition, true or not.
    As I said there are many corner cases as well: What if you're PvEing with your 3 accounts and someone gets you flagged, should you now be banned? How can we tell if you were intending to PvP or not? Does it depend on if you lose or win the fight?
    I'm sure there are a large number of issues that I haven't thought of as well.


    Finally I also want to point out that the people who are staging a "protest" by cancelling, are not really accomplishing anything useful. While I can't and won't speak for management, I doubt they will take into account that some of the lost revenue is from this "protest" when they look at the declining revenue and decide the future direction of the project.
    Last edited by Macrosun; Apr 7th, 2014 at 18:32:39.

  2. #222
    We are the players, not the developers. We pay and you solve the problem! Simple enough!
    Thor Mastablasta Hammersmith - Level 220, AI 30, LE 70 Clan Atrox Nano Technician - Setup
    The Red Brotherhood

    I'm a Nano-Technician, don't ever expect me to fight unbuffed, alone or fair.

    Means: about f'ing time :P
    Satenia: heresy <3
    Znore: Mastablasta <3
    Kinkstaah: I have agro from many mobs ;(
    Madarab: we are aoe class, we are supose to use pistols
    Marxgorm: the NT toolset does not fit into my raiding tactics

  3. #223
    Quote Originally Posted by Mastablasta View Post
    We are the players, not the developers. We pay and you solve the problem! Simple enough!
    And when the problems aren't solved fast enough, we quit

  4. #224

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by Pennypacker View Post
    And when the problems aren't solved fast enough, we quit
    and secretly play froob acct...till urgh comes back we resub ftw!
    "Don't think...feel, it's like a finger pointing towards the moon"

  5. #225
    Quote Originally Posted by Hokutonoken View Post
    and secretly play froob acct...till urgh comes back we resub ftw!
    Pls mate, don't fool them. I doubt they have trackers that track if it's paid or froob, they might think their game is alive and kickin

  6. #226
    Quote Originally Posted by Macrosun View Post
    DISCLAIMER: I am not stating official Funcom policy, and these are my personal thoughts. I do not represent the official Funcom views on this issue, and the policies on this are mostly not decided by the AO team at all anyway.
    Interesting post. I really have nothing else to say except at least thanks for stopping by to provide your thoughts, albeit unofficial
    You can find me at:
    Battlenet @ Marilata#1680
    Steam @ http://steamcommunity.com/id/marilata

  7. #227
    Quote Originally Posted by Traderjill View Post
    Interesting post. I really have nothing else to say except at least thanks for stopping by to provide your thoughts, albeit unofficial
    Please, shouting across the table to the 3 other working there is hard to even make an official stance. I guess they have no say tho, which is even worse.

  8. #228
    Quote Originally Posted by Pennypacker View Post
    Please, shouting across the table to the 3 other working there is hard to even make an official stance. I guess they have no say tho, which is even worse.
    I have no idea what you're saying. I do know that its not Macrosun's job to communicate to us on this topic and helpful insight into what he, as a coder, sees as possible/reasonable/not possible/not reasonable is nice to hear. So rather than shoot the messenger for saying something that some of us didn't want to hear I figured it best to say thanks for the feedback and move on.
    You can find me at:
    Battlenet @ Marilata#1680
    Steam @ http://steamcommunity.com/id/marilata

  9. #229
    Thanks for the feedback Macro. I now have a better understanding of this issue.

  10. #230
    You dont have to make multilogging illegal, but you dont have to encourage players to do it either by
    - allowing them to bind multiple actions to one key
    - giving them ability to /follow and /assist

    On the other hand I did my share of duallogging on BS and I dont think it as gamebreaking as some people are saying.
    What I find gamebreaking however is
    - unbalanced fixer team meep nano,
    - weak towers not boosted for years not being able to defend to single team of players (look at DB drones for inspiration).

  11. #231
    Quote Originally Posted by Macrosun View Post
    ..
    Without having deep backgroud knowledge how the automation softwares work, and partly based on reading suggestions made in the last 6 months, various solutions that might help:

    - Don't allow AO window to take keyboard commands if the window doesn't have focus (and/or demand focus for at least say 0.1 secs for cmds to work). Can be applied to PVP only (25% or lower gas).

    - Disallow multiple connections from same IP address when entering 25% or lower gas. Alternatively, use the "entering busy area" cc mechanic.

    - Greatly increase tower/CT HP, specially below 200. Introduce a team-wide looong cooldown for meeps if executed from 25% or lower gas. Disallow engineer warps *from* 25-% gas.

    Those of the top of my head.

    - - -

    It's nice that someone, even if unofficially, finally gave a comment. Thank you for that. What you don't seem to understand though, is that if you guys cannot find a solution, the NW part of the game is dead. Boxers "won". You can call it a protest or anything you want, but you need to understand that if you take away the NW part of the game from players playing mainly for NW, they don't exactly have much reason to play. For others it depends how important they considered that aspect.

  12. #232
    (╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻ Tryptophy's Avatar
    Quote Originally Posted by Joralf View Post
    I'm not playing this game anymore, but I like to come here and read about what's happening from time to time.. Last time I returned to the game it was in fact these forums that made me want to come back.

    Unfortunately, reading the two latest monthly updates have turned me off AO for at least another game director. Hopefully the next one understands that Enforcers and Shades are not the ones in need of buffing and that there are other things in the game that needs looking in to in stead of the inspect function and profession apocalypse rings.
    I share your opinion in general but to be fair, the enf/shade and ring changes are part of a package of broader changes and we can't expect them to make sense until the whole thing is in place. They might seem OP/silly now but, maybe, perhaps, hopefully with the other changes they won't look so bad.
    General of Nocturnal Fear
    Trypha 220/30/70 Engy | Trypothecary 220/30/69 Doc | Tryptophy 220/30/68 Crat | Trypocalypse 220/30/70 Sold | Tryharder 220/30/68 NT | Trypointy 220/x/x Shade | Peasantry 200/30/69 Keeper | Trycharm 150/20/42 Crat

  13. #233
    Quote Originally Posted by ninst View Post
    - weak towers not boosted for years not being able to defend to single team of players (look at DB drones for inspiration).
    Not being able to defend from single player playing 1 character.

  14. #234
    Quote Originally Posted by Macrosun View Post
    Stuff
    TL;DR : We wont bother trying any solution or coming up with a way to figure this out. Also go ahead and quit coz it wont change our minds.

  15. #235
    Quote Originally Posted by Macrosun View Post
    Please read this first part carefully.

    DISCLAIMER: I am not stating official Funcom policy, and these are my personal thoughts. I do not represent the official Funcom views on this issue, and the policies on this are mostly not decided by the AO team at all anyway.



    From an entirely technical stadpoint, and without saying multilogging/boxing (which are essentially the same thing) is bad or good, I don't really see how you expect to be able to tell the difference. Multiboxing refers to using multiple computers, but you can just as easily "multibox" using a single computer and very similar software, and this is not even taking into account someone just playing several clients at the same time without any software at all.

    I am not going to argue either side in this debate, but there are many reasons most MMOs do not "ban" multiboxing. One such reason being there is no reliable way to "prove" that you are multiboxing without capturing all your network traffic and analyzing it, and even if we did (which would be against many laws in many countries, not to mention the amount of work it would take), someone could circumvent that in about 5 minutes and force us to patch again to detect it. If someone has a reliable technical solution that is not illegal, and can not be trivially circumvented, please let me know and we'll look into it.

    Lets imagine we somehow made a solution where multiboxing was banned, and was detected by the system reliably; Now we have to look at people doing the same thing using only one computer. Should we just disallow/ban playing multiple characters on the same computer? What about bank characters, mules, and so on? If we don't fix the "single computer" issue, we will have the exact same problem as multiboxing; people will still die to gangs controlled by one person.

    If we want to "ban" multiboxing, the only way I see we could accomplish that is to not let any similar accounts log in at the same time. For example if you use the same credit card, have the same name, or the same address, you will not be able to log in those accounts at the same time. We could also make it so that the client does not allow you to run more than one copy on the same machine (to prevent "multiboxing" on the same machine). This solution would of course also prevent you from logging on your mules, banks, and using multilogging in PvE and I really doubt that's what you wanted. Someone could just use fake names and other people's credit cards to get around it anyway.


    It's true that there could be a policy stating multilogging and multiboxing are forbidden in any PvP situation, but this also as many corner cases and problems. We would have to forbid any player controlling more than one character in any PvP situation for this to be a viable policy, and it would have to be investigated on a case by case basis for every PvP encounter. This would end up being a huge amount of customer service time/work, because I'm willing to bet anyone who feels they died "unfairly" will use this in a petition, true or not.
    As I said there are many corner cases as well: What if you're PvEing with your 3 accounts and someone gets you flagged, should you now be banned? How can we tell if you were intending to PvP or not? Does it depend on if you lose or win the fight?
    I'm sure there are a large number of issues that I haven't thought of as well.
    A blanket statement saying multiboxing in 25% or 5% areas is not allowed alone would have been enough to prevent the current situation from even arising. Provided you have a few gm's to enforce the rules in the first few weeks. It's literally less than a handfull of ppl that is causing trouble and it's very easy to spot them. That would give you time to figure out how to solve the problem. Too late now though.


    Quote Originally Posted by Macrosun View Post
    Finally I also want to point out that the people who are staging a "protest" by cancelling, are not really accomplishing anything useful.
    Saves me 50 € a month that I can save up and spend on for instance www.therepopulation.com. It also give me time to enjoy summer and other stuff. Maybe from your pov ppl who are no longer paying customers aren't accomplishing anything. But yours isn't the only one that matters. Funny how I as a customer should have to remind you of that.

    Quote Originally Posted by Macrosun View Post
    While I can't and won't speak for management, I doubt they will take into account that some of the lost revenue is from this "protest" when they look at the declining revenue and decide the future direction of the project.
    And that's been FC's problem for the last 8 years or so. Remember SB+OS and how ppl told you it would ruin NW? Well it did, completely for nearly 3 years. The GD called clan leadership incompetent and whatnot instead of trying to understand the problem. Then you changed your mind and levelled the playfield and NW came to life again inside a month.

    I was probably among the first 5 ppl to fire off an OS and watch the pile of dead bodies left on the ground. First I laughed, but it took me less than ten seconds to figure out the implications it would have at high level wars if combined with omni SB. And I was right. It took you guys THREE years to figure it out.. So why should anyone listen to you? You clearly don't understand the dynamics of the game.

    Now the community is telling you that MB will have a similar impact and at least I can't see any change of attitude from FC. Eventually ppl really do get fed up,.and as far as I am concerned, you don't deserve any more money until you change your attitude.

    The End.

    ps. OT.. sorta. but.. therepop devs have stated that they don't want a system where ppl who only have the balls to attack at 4 am when noone is awake to defend. So I guess I won't be seeing the crowd who's been asserting their right to pve towers at 5 am GMT in repop. :>
    Last edited by Phatkeep; Apr 7th, 2014 at 20:37:56.

  16. #236
    I agree with Masta that we are the players and we pay to play. They are the devs and are paid to find solutions.

    That being said I want to address some of Macrosun's points as to why they can't do it. This is not an attack on Macrosun. This is just a discussion on the points raised.

    Multi-box vs Multi-log - I seriously doubt people are going to be able to run 12+ of the new clients on any single computer. Even dual Titan-Z's would be hard pressed by that. And that will be a $6K video card setup. Most gaming rigs are going to choke on 3 or 4 of the new client. So multi-logging will never be equal to multi-boxing. At least one of the clients has to maintain playable view area at a playable frame rate and extremely low latency for multi-box/logging to be used effectively in PVP. And yes 12 clients controlled by one person is a small example to what people can setup. With true multi-boxing a full raid interface of 36 accounts can be controlled by one person. So I submit that the GPU demands of the new client will be high enough to reduce the single computer scenario to a very small number of people and that should make policing them easier.

    Collecting and examining network traffic - A company can track and collect all traffic entering and interacting with their servers. Specifically when that traffic is coming from software they have licensed to a end user. In this case the client. As long as they are collecting the data at their servers on their private network side of whatever firewall system they have it is all them and generally legal. Their EULA already covers this but if needed it could be expanded to further protect them. So getting the data is really not illegal as long as they do it within their own network. Yes there are limits to this, but it is not as clear cut as collecting is illegal.

    Client only starting one copy - Um hello, this used to be the case many years ago. You literally had to use two computers to control two accounts. The removal of the duplicate copy running check was much welcomed. But it is safe to say it opened the door that has led us to this discussion on the multi-logging front.

    Multi-box software is a 3rd party software and illegal by the EULA terms. It is pretty simple and clear cut. So until the EULA is changed it is technically against the rules. Yes this is a bad spot for us as full enforcement of the EULA would mean stopping click saver, bots, AOIA and all the other tools that interact with AO client or AO Servers. And a monthly update with "it is not bannable" does not release any of us from the EULA we acknowledge/accept every time we run the client.

    Customer service load - This is relativity new tangent on the arguments (open inspect and tracking 3rd party software use for example) that feels like FC telling us that AO is not worth the money/time to invest any customer service into. Beyond the issues I am addressing in this post I find this be troublesome at best. This indicates there is more being discussed at higher levels than we are aware of.

    As for rules when banning would be proper for multi-boxing I will try to give a few:
    -Tara
    -Hot Tower Fields
    -Pande (real and instanced)
    -Battle Station
    -Against any special event content (B-Day raid, Xmas Raid, Halloween GUPH for specific examples)
    Ok that names a few places that would clearly mean multi-box == banned.

    Bank characters and mules - Sorry FC you don't get off saying multi-logging allows this. If you had a proper org item bank, a player account wide bank, and implemented any of the good buffing solutions over the years the need for such secondary accounts would be far less to no needed at all. All things that could have been done in the time AO has been live. FC being lazy does not justify allowing multi-boxing or in this case specifically multi-logging.

    As far as protesting by cancelling - It is the only way to protest that a customer has. Our money speaks for us. When we withhold it, it does impact FC. Since as was said it is not the Dev's that make this policy, then removing the cash that the execs use to line their pockets with makes it a good method of protest. We we stop paying we are saying the game is not worth paying for. So if it goes away no big deal to the protesters.
    Lheann
    President of When I Grow Up

    Lhisa - MA - RK1
    MaxKillz - Enf - RK1
    Namaru - Enf - RK1

    "If you find yourself loosing a fight, your tatics suck."

  17. #237
    Quote Originally Posted by Lheann View Post
    Multi-box vs Multi-log - I seriously doubt people are going to be able to run 12+ of the new clients on any single computer. Even dual Titan-Z's would be hard pressed by that. And that will be a $6K video card setup. Most gaming rigs are going to choke on 3 or 4 of the new client. So multi-logging will never be equal to multi-boxing. At least one of the clients has to maintain playable view area at a playable frame rate and extremely low latency for multi-box/logging to be used effectively in PVP. And yes 12 clients controlled by one person is a small example to what people can setup. With true multi-boxing a full raid interface of 36 accounts can be controlled by one person. So I submit that the GPU demands of the new client will be high enough to reduce the single computer scenario to a very small number of people and that should make policing them easier.
    You've got some really high expectations of the new engine, and some really low expectations of how well it will scale on hardware. Pro Tip: you can turn down the resolution and detail levels of the other clients, since you don't actually need to see them. I could multilog 3 completely maxed out WoW clients at 1920x1080 on a 7950. A 780Ti or 290X should have no problem logging 11 new graphics engines clients at 800x600 with minimum settings and 1 client at normal resolution/settings.

    Quote Originally Posted by Lheann View Post
    Client only starting one copy - Um hello, this used to be the case many years ago. You literally had to use two computers to control two accounts.
    When was that? The only thing I remember was a popup box saying "There's already another instance of Anarchy Online open. Would you still like to open the second instance?"

  18. #238
    Quote Originally Posted by Macrosun View Post
    Stuff
    Props to you for posting this, imo reasons are pretty sound tho i'm not an IT professional.

    Sad to say though, i doubt this will stop anyone complaining, if anything they'll just take apart everything you said and use it against you and FC.

    its a bit of a lose/lose situation really
    ALTS: Alienhunter, Moonglum, Quellist, Quellcrist, Jesharet

  19. #239
    Quote Originally Posted by Esssch View Post
    When was that? The only thing I remember was a popup box saying "There's already another instance of Anarchy Online open. Would you still like to open the second instance?"
    Pre-NW. That check was removed and the warning left somewhere in the 12.x series. I remember it because I had bought a second computer and monitor just to run 2 AO clients for buffing toons and moving stuff around easily. Like I said a very long time ago.
    Lheann
    President of When I Grow Up

    Lhisa - MA - RK1
    MaxKillz - Enf - RK1
    Namaru - Enf - RK1

    "If you find yourself loosing a fight, your tatics suck."

  20. #240
    I support multi-logging in all it's forms.

    But I object to 3rd party software that lets players auto-control multiple toons.

    I know a few other games that can sniff out bot-toons, so it should be possible to distinguish between manual and automatic control.
    I have nothing to hide, but I value my privacy!
    I'm not on facebook, twitter or any other social media.
    I will never reveal my in-game characters or organizations on a public forum.
    If that upsets all the virtual exhibitionists, so be it!

Page 12 of 33 FirstFirst 12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •