Bans, Boxers, 3rd party programs, and EQ

Discussion in 'The Veterans' Lounge' started by Cheyana, Apr 4, 2022.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Creative Sparks Quiet One

    what Elvenphox said

    allow generic functions of the toon, don't have to be 100% capability but like 85% is ok, k so example. bards have melody right /melody 1 2 3 4 blah blah blah something like that for each class. could very simply add that to all casters on a patch easy. would be able to have toons setup with hotbuttons to do only what is in the /melody so would have to get creative with the toon

    would make boxing easier and would almost guaranteed that those that use functions for that reason would stop using 3rd party just to do that.

    a lot of my Corsair macro's is to alt tab to a toon and hit a button then alt tab back to the toon I was just on. depending on the toon i went to would give me 30s - 1min between checks.
    Bernel and Cheyana like this.
  2. Creative Sparks Quiet One

    figure a way to make alt+tab obsolete. do like ISBox and have the ability to switch directly to that toon in 1 button push. the crappy part is i suggested this to SoE way back in 2009ish.
    Cheyana likes this.
  3. Cheyana Journeyman

    Hence the comment about the PNP. If people are abusing a program in that manner it's cheating. The same is true of people who don't box or use other programs but spawn camp using pets or mercs. That's done within the game mechanics, but it's still cheating and supposedly against the rules.

    As I said, the problem isn't that there are people using programs, it's that there are people who don't care about the community they're in and don't act with respect towards other players. The add-ons aren't responsible for that, people are. The irony is that the 3rd party programs are easier to catch than the jerks are, so it's easier to just assume that anyone who uses a program and boxes is a jerk (which not all are), and that those who don't are pillars of the EQ community (which not all are!)

    But in the end it isn't about all the justification and self-righteous chest pounding that some folks engage in to rationalize throwing out the baby with the bath water, it's simply economics. Something that the chest pounders refuse to address. Without boxers EQ is a dead game. Someone said above that they know 7 people who box on their server. On the TLPs it's more like 75% of the population who play more than one account and most require some degree of automation.

    Per some people posting, those people are "cheaters" when in fact most are using the programs in a responsible manner and are not harming any other player. For every boxer who abuses automation for their groups there are at least as many (though in my experience more) who don't use automation who do materially harm the game and other players. I'll take an automated boxer over some jerk who comes in and KS's a quest mob that I've spent hours sitting in the camp clearing PHs to spawn. But you know, camp stealing and KSing aren't "cheating" so it's all good, right? And training other players is ok (used to be against the rules, but I guess it's more important to spend time cracking down on someone using a 3rd party program who isn't actually hurting anyone than it is to spend it cracking down on the people (automated or not) who actually are ruining the gaming experience for everyone.

    Call me crazy, but yes, I'll take the so called "cheaters" any day over those people. There are worse things in the gaming world than boxers and automation, and those are more often than not given a free pass. Then there are people, like several I know this week, who are using boxing programs in a benign manner (and have been told by Devs and EQ staff for years that doing so is ok, just don't cross the line) who are punished over trivial technicalities. All in all, I'd rather have most of the boxers I know around than a good many of the so called "good guys" who aren't really so good after all.

    But as others have said, you're never going to convince the anti-boxers that people who box are anything but the Anti-Christ, and visa versa.
  4. mark Augur

    one of the things i love his taking mobs from afk bot armies i dont train them i out dps them,you can charm a mob and out dps the afk bot armiy since there are no camps.
  5. kyong Augur

    Gotta figure a huge number of them aren't paying with their own credit card but using automated play with large groups to farm plat to buy krono from mostly normal players.

    Can Daybreak make Krono one trade then no drop? :)
  6. Sissruukk Rogue One

    I've been pulled over for driving the speed limit on a busy highway. Why? Its called "flow of traffic." My driving the speed limit was actually causing issues with the traffic pattern. While they couldn't ticket me because I was not breaking the law, they did state that "going with the flow" was more advisable because it caused people faster than me from weaving about to avoid me.
    Creative Sparks and Bubbajoebob like this.
  7. Jumbur Improved Familiar

    Im fine with DBG actually enforcing the rules. Paying for multiple accounts shouldn't put anyone above the rules. And no, the game will not sunset without the cheaters(it will hurt them financially though).
    My guess is that they are suspending cheaters rather than banning them. Because they want them to keep playing without cheating, and that DBG is prepared for the cheaters to cancel some of their accounts(but hope they won't cancel them all). The game is perfectly playable without cheats...

    However, I do suspect the cheat detection sometimes have false positives.
    My personal opinion, is that a suspension(or ban) should be followed with a message stating the actual reason for the punishment, so that the player(and tech-support in cooperation) has a way to actually detect those false positives, and maybe improve the cheat detection. This would also ease the minds of the non-cheating demographic that worry about false positives.
    If you think about it, then it is obvious that the cheat-detection is the least tested sub-component of the entire game, as it is debugged without user-input. Ironically it is also the only case where user-input can't be trusted.
    I do hope that their "long investigation-time" is used to actually debug and improve the cheat-detection too, rather than just focusing on the actual suspected cheater...
  8. Zanarnar Augur

    sure, you "go with the flow" and the next cop writes you a ticket because you are now breaking the law. So just like you might get a GM who gives you a pass because he isn't sure its automated or not, the occasional cop does that same (he wasn't looking at his gun, you were going 67 in a 65, there are lots of reasons they give you a pass too, but you can't count on or even expect it.)

    This is a black and white issue. The rules are there for all to see, you break them, you deal with the consequences of your actions. Don't want to risk that? Don't break the rules.

    Speeding is a great example.. when I do it, I am accepting that if I get caught its going to cost me. Whatever I'm trying to get to is worth more to me then the ticket. If your choosing to break the rules of a game, you have to accept that if caught they can and often do take action against you. Don't want to risk that? Don't break the rules.

    For an even better example; I play under Linux most of the time. I accept that I might get caught in a ban wave because I'm using wine+dxvk to enable the game to run. Is this cheating? no, it gives me no advantages in game at all; but it is something they never intended and ARE scanning for. So far I've not had any issues, but I accept that something may happen because I choose to play this way.

    To all those quitting because they can't cheat however they please.. don't let the virtual door hit ya in the bum on the way out.
  9. Sissruukk Rogue One

    OK, lets put it this way then. For all of those that bought chase, krono, task adds, or other things from a box team should be suspended/banned as well. The old, "Gee, officer, I didn't know it was stolen" usually doesn't fly either.
  10. Zanarnar Augur

    fine with me if purchasing things from another player that they acquired by breaking the rules in game is actually against DPG's rules. Can you link that one for me? (also totally ok with me, I don't buy krono from players, or task adds)
  11. Svann2 The Magnificent

    More likely scenario is they programatically watch you and when the program flags you it alerts a gm than can then boop over and watch you with human eyes. Wouldnt take but 2 minutes of the gms time (depending on zone times haha)
  12. Svann2 The Magnificent

    The rule in every state Ive driven is if you are impeding the flow pull over to the right (slow) lane. And yes you can be ticketed for not following that rule. I know many hate that but yes its the law.
  13. BigBillyBob Paris, Illinois - Population: 10,000 rednecks

    juuuust so everyone is clear...when using an additional postscript, or "post-postscript" is PPS (vice PSS).

    I feel like I just made an actual, real contribution to this thread - YW!!!
  14. Sissruukk Rogue One

    There isn't anything in the rules (yet), and they could probably chase down those transactions if they wanted to, but it is a bit hypocritical if you have purchased something from a boxer which is in turn supporting that boxer, yet calling for that boxer's suspension/banning. You personally may not have purchased chase, Krono, or task adds, but there are plenty here calling for bans/suspends that probably have.
    Shanarias likes this.
  15. Sissruukk Rogue One

    I was driving in the right lane when this occurred. It was many years ago, in the state of NJ when I was passing through.
  16. HeatherPurrs Augur


    "But what about all the customers of my guild? Aren't they gonna get suspended/banned too?!?!?"

    The suspensions got the "dealers" asking the hard questions.
  17. Sissruukk Rogue One

    My comments about people buying goods from boxers being suspended/banned isn't going to happen, and we all know that. Theoretically, it could happen, but it won't. I am just pointing out that many people calling for suspends/bans are the very same people that use services offered by box groups.

    Oh, I also want to thank you for my promotion to guild leader in your last post about me and my guild. I am just an officer. I just happen to be the officer on the most, so I am the most visible. But, it still stands, if you have a problem with someone in my guild, you can bring it to me, and we can get it sorted out.
  18. Bernel Augur

    One potential positive of this loss of revenue is that it would force EQ to consider changes to the game so that people don't feel the need to play 6 separate accounts. For that one person that auto-boxes 6 characters, XX players quit because they couldn't find groups, couldn't solo, and they didn't want to box. I don't know what XX is, but I'm sure there are lots of people who quit rather than box. If people can box with automation, that allows them to continue playing and allows EQ to think everything is fine. The bot-boxers are replacing the revenue lost by people who leave. If instead they didn't have replacement revenue from botters, they would try harder to retain their existing customers and gain new ones.

    EQ added mercs, which lots of people really enjoy. The problem is that molo-ing becomes much less effective in the 70's-80's and players are forced to look for alternate solutions, most of which come with a lot of hassles. If instead molo-ing was effective for longer, players could continue playing in a manner they enjoy and wouldn't have to choose between boxing, botting, or quitting.
  19. Maedhros High King

    You guys should really stop worrying about EQ losing revenue by banning cheaters. I'm sure they have done their own calculations and have obviously decided this is the route they want to take.
    My only complaint is that it took this long.
  20. minimind The Village Idiot

    Easy enough.

    This is more like the law saying "It's illegal to drive a vehicle with a flux capacitor" and not naming all the vehicle makes and models with flux capacitors. Daybreak has prohibited certain software capabilities because the know that if a software is banned by name, the name will simply change.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.