I don't need to. DBG's ongoing choice to not do anything about it speaks volumes. Remember, if they didn't want you to use the program, they now have the ability to simply prevent you from logging in to their servers (True Box). This has already been discussed to death in other threads, and if you want to see my arguments please check them out. Don't use the software if you don't feel safe (and there is definitely no guarantee that it is safe). All I'm saying, to anybody new to the discussion, is don't assume that something is "bad" or "wrong" just because a small group of LOUD forum users won't let go of ancient beliefs. Hear it from DBG first. And the only thing DBG have said in the last few years is that "unattended play" is prohibited. Nothing about which software is OK, nothing about what macros or macro software is OK, and apparently nothing about whether intentionally training other players is OK.
sisn t notice this , yeah look funny, but recruit rank or leader rank didn t choked me cause you can have them with /guildstat, but yeah didn t notice the rank on SS
Taken from the official Everquest Rules of Conduct: "11. You will not attempt to interfere with, hack into, or decipher any transmissions to or from the servers running EverQuest." There's no botting software that would not violate this. In there is also a statement that, beside other things, this is not allowed: "o Causing intentional experience loss to other players (deliberately impeding fleeing players by blocking their escape route, intentionally training NPCs on other players, etc.)."
This has been discussed in the other threads. That same rule technically prohibits the tools used by allakhazam.com, eqresource.com, and Magelo. So if you have ever used those websites for quest or item info, you have violated that rule (or benefited from others who violated it). If you have ever used Magelo (as is required by many raid guilds), you have violated that rule. So if (almost) everybody who plays the game is technically in violation of that rule, how relevant is that rule? One of my biggest problems with this thread is the people encouraging the intentional training and griefing of other players (such as offering 0% rezzes). I'm glad you pointed out this rule for all the haters!
Basically, i wouldnt care if a player is boting or not. It s not as easy as by the turn of the millenium to find a group. But in this particular case.... latest expension zone 24/7 3 groups training other peoples (i know them) (that was the one that blew it out) bringing 18 peoples toward zone populaton limits, thus having merco depop thanks to server limitation Seriously he is pushing it too far ok some change now... i saw him loging in the morning only one of his 3 groups is on did he think? did he got a warning? no one knows would anyone care if he was on brother island? i dont think so, mostly only bots there but not that many players as for boxing vs boting, i dont care, just dont spoil other people games,
Well, if I decided to hunt a specific named for hunter or a specific drop(or it was a needed quest mob for progression), then I would be sad if It turned out to be botted indefinitely. As I said before, the camp-concept that most players respect in everquest, is based on the assumption that people move on once they are finished with a specific camp, and botting violates that assumption. Just because a rule isn't enforced doesn't mean it doesn't exist. DBG have limited resources regarding rule enforcement, yet they still have rules. Its one thing to prevent cheaters using the "current version" of cheat-programs, keeping the detection effective against "all versions" is quite resource-draining. There is no enforcement against DDOS'ing the servers either, but I think we can all agree that it does the game no good.
I wonder if you could "trick" bots to accept other things than rezzes, like TLCs or evacs? imagine the possibilities...
So to be clear if you are AFK killing with software or without you could possible be banned based on what Daybreak says. Daybreak has made it clear what can and cannot be used and if you get banned saying that NameAlreadyInUse implied it was authorized probably won't help you. Unless you see Daybreak specifically authorizing any software don't be fooled. https://help.daybreakgames.com/hc/en-us/articles/231115088-EverQuest-AFK-or-Unattended-Gameplay- It is not ok for an account to be played unattended or AFK. If you need to go away for longer than a few seconds please move your character to an empty part of the zone or log out completely. If a character, including any pets or mercs, is found performing actions while the user is away disciplinary action will be taken against the account. Disciplinary action for unattended or AFK gameplay can include, but is not limited to; account warning, account suspension, and account termination (ban). From the TrueBox FAQ https://www.everquest.com/news/true-box-progression-server-faq-phinigel "Doing any of the following on ANY server may result in action being taken against your Daybreak Account: Unattended Gameplay: Any method that lets a character take actions while you’re not at your keyboard. Playing on virtual machines. Any attempt to circumvent the /pickzone timer." From Daybreak Games Terms of Service https://www.daybreakgames.com/terms-of-service?locale=en_US 10. Cheating Maintaining the integrity of the Daybreak Games is extremely important to us. When an end user obtains an unfair advantage by cheating it can ruin the gaming experience for everybody else. You may not disassemble, reverse engineer, or modify any Daybreak Game(s) software in any way. You may not decrypt or modify any data transmitted between the game software and Daybreak’s game servers. You may not develop, share, or use any software, program, macro, or interface that modifies the game play in any way or that gives a user any kind of advantage over other end users, except as expressly authorized by Daybreak. All forms and methods of cheating, including hacks, bots, aimbots, and duping are expressly forbidden. The sale or exchange of accounts, Virtual Items, Virtual Currency, Krono and/or in-game currency for real world money or monetary value is prohibited, except when purchased from Daybreak or otherwise expressly permitted by Daybreak in its sole and absolute discretion. Daybreak reserves the right to suspend or permanently terminate the account of, and restrict access to the Daybreak Games by, any end user that engages in any form of cheating, or that attempts in any way to disable, circumvent, or tamper with any anti-hacking or anti-cheating components or features of any Daybreak Game(s).1
Nobody can play in either of the last two expansions without being a paying customer, who has every bit as much of a right to play in those zones as you do. In fact, if they are playing 18 toons, then they paid DBG 18 times more than you have, and may well be considered a more valuable customer (by DBG, not by me). Contested access to content is a long-time social problem (and feature?) in EQ, which lots of newer games address in various ways (most often by instancing content for each player). EQ does not do this, and we all suffer the effects of limited named spawns in limited zones. But this issue is separate from boxing/botting. Trying to address the problems with EQ's troubled implementation of instancing by banning paying accounts is a bad idea. And just because a rule exists, doesn't mean it should be enforced. I don't want to sound like I have no respect for rules or that I don't follow the rules (I don't use M Q 2 because of the threat of being banned, despite the mistaken implications of @High Voltage above). I just don't think DBG believes "botting" is wrong (like they may have in the past), and I strongly believe that the players who use it as justification to harass and grief other players are acting far worse. By breaking the anti-harassment rules themselves, or encouraging others to do so, they give up any moral high ground in an argument against botting/boxing. In my experience, DBG absolutely does enforce the rules they want to enforce. There is a high number of posts in threads in these forums that are identical to this conversation. Despite all the requests for clarification, from so many players, the ONLY thing DBG does is lock the thread and say that "unattended play is prohibited". If anything, I'm starting to think DBG enjoys watching us banter about what is "OK". I imagine them sitting back laughing, knowing that they already have your $ and could care less what you do in-game.
By Tunare! I agree with half of a sentence that Corwyhn said: "...and if you get banned saying that NameAlreadyInUse implied it was authorized probably won't help you." I'm no DBG employee. One of my points is that DBG's rules are intentionally vague and, in essence, gives them the ability to ban anybody, for any reason (or no reason). If anything, I would love a clarification of the rules. M Q 2 is a very specific program, which is used by lots of players who GMs have had direct contact with in-game, and not banned the players. DBG brags about the ability to detect the software running on your computer and prevent you from logging into their servers, WITHOUT THE NEED TO BAN ANYBODY, and they even use it as a marketing sales pitch. Yet they continue to allow people to do all of the things brought up in these prolific threads. Do what mommy does, or what mommy once said a long time ago? Each player has to decide if you want to be a good little child, forever doing things because you were once told to, or step outside and see what happens when you choose your own fate.
To the OP: I hope you get justice if you were griefed. Getting intentionally trained would be harsh. I haven't actually seen that behavior in many years, but from the posts in this thread encouraging it, I have no doubt it still happens. I just ask that you focus on the real griefing behavior: Training. Or even monopolizing a camp, if you petition it and DBG agrees with you. The fact that a player may (or may not) have 18 accounts is not the crime.
If they didn't think botting was wrong they wouldn't have worded their TOS like that: Its not vaque or anything...
I disagree, because "bot" is not defined. The game itself allows macros and automation (in the form of Socials). So that's OK. Windows, the OS required to play the game, includes all the tools needed to create more complex macros and automation. A lot of these tools are even included for Accessibility, to help handicapped players. Hopefully you don't think those are wrong. So at what point do you subjectively decide automation goes to far and it's not OK? DBG, the only voice that counts, appears to have decided that anything is OK, as long as you are sitting at the computer and responding to /tells. They have also left their rules vague, so we end up swimming in a sea of doubt and worry. And also frustration, as we look at people using the tools and think, "man, if only I had the guts to use those tools too, I could also be having a good time like them!"
Well, Im assuming the botter in question wasn't at the computer 24/7 for months, so according to you, the botter would also be breaking the rules. I read this such that macros defined in windows would also be against the rules if they alter the gameplay, although im sure players with handicap needs are allowed to ask for specific exceptions, they have previously responded to such requests... Someone in this thread defined botting earlier: And this seems to be the common understanding of botting. DBG themselves seems to agree with unattended gameplay being against the rules, as you yourself mentioned.
No. According to me, "assuming" that somebody else is breaking the rules is what is wrong in all of these scenarios. Assuming that a player can define the rules for you is what is wrong. Let DBG make the call and enforce their own rules.
