Can they really enforce a no-bot server?

Well then it gives the word ignorant a whole new meaning because if you're right then she just admitted is legal on normal servers.

You certainly could use a VPN to connect to a proxy server, but why would you for this? The VPN provides a secure connection between two servers, it does not obscure or change the IP of either end. That is done by the proxy server.

They use VPNs on top of proxy servers to spoof more than just the IP.

A lot of major game companies cross check the windows installation ID number/Hardware ID number of accounts they ban. If say Hardware ID #339 keeps showing up across 30 banned accounts what they will do is ban that person not by their IP but by their Hardware ID/Windows installation #.

I know of three for sure that do it, Blizzard, Arena Net and NC Soft.

Hmmm

There is no admission of legality in that statement, I believe it is case of acknowledging reality that both exist, coupled with the hope that a single client per computer would either eliminate or at least reduce the amount of botting.

Sadly their official stance lately seems to be as long as you are at the keyboard, you are ok. Barring stupid stuff like attacking gm invisible mobs.

It's an arguable one for sure. It could just be acknowledgement but it surely seems like the opposite. I personally have no stake in the outcome so I don't really care which of the two it is, I just think holly really needs to work on thinking before she speaks and her wording. That's the second slip up in as many weeks.

Hmmm

Depends on how it is set up, it is common practice within businesses that have multiple VPN's to apply (source) NAT to traffic that has crossed the VPN, this prevents routing issues when clashing RFC1918 address space is used. Combined with policy based routing and / or multiple entry/exit points, it is then easy to reroute the traffic back out to the internet with a new source IP address, no need for a proxy server at all.

I have no idea if that is how it is done by the VPN service providers, I don't use them ;-).

Hmmm

I can certainly agree with that ;-).

Because look at how low the p99 population is?

It is also free, something that few seem to take into consideration when discussing how popular it is.

Eh. I've got no interest in such a server because I for one do not feel like starting my character (note, singular) over. I have way to much emotional and time investment in her. Of course, I know some people consider characters (Or toons) to just be something that can so easily be thrown away.

For myself, my disinterest lies in the fact that they was (At least until recently) unwilling to even show an interest in the community on the current TLP's. Currently, the RMT botters control the economy of both servers and short of banning them all, they're here to stay sadly. And that is simply because DBG's has allowed it through inaction.

true for every game ever

WoW has massive botting issues, but you have to at least give Blizzard credit in that they at least attempt to do something about it. Now, keep in mind. I love EQ, it has been apart of most of my adult life (Even though I have not played from 2004 until when the TLP opened, it has been in my thoughts). EQ has been the one MMO (With the exception of City of Heroes) that I have held other games to, always sung the highest praises for and have the fondest memories of.

But, during recent times, my faith in the dev team has waned. In 'other' games, there is no distinction between programs that allow boxing and botting. In many cases, the programs are one in the same. DBG specifically allows the use of one program while forbidding the use of the other, which coincidentally, seems to go hand in hand.

So in all fairness, for those who are ignorant on both programs (Because, frankly, there are indeed people such as myself who believe that both programs are interlinked and share many 'features'), such distinction is simply splitting hairs. So that shakes the faith of many who hold SoE/DBG's with such a high regard.

-----------------

Unless of course she means exactly what she says, and actually has a few neurons firing in there - proving she is earning the money she makes as Executive Producer of both EQ and EQ II currently. She is completely responsible for the decisions, both popular and less so, that she makes and the front-facing positions carried out on these servers.

Whether its completely enforceable or not, if DBG makes a few changes in oversight (*and how/why could they not since it is their idea to go forward with the self-described server with a ruleset they just referred to - Kahna's post above is right on.

Not that there won't be ANY, but enough less to make their impact on our gameplay significantly noticeable or in this case, LESS noticeable, which is the desired result.

Basically, it comes down to this:
1) For everything that DBG does to prevent boxing/botting, the boxers/botters can find a way around it.
2) For everything the boxers/botters do to bet around thing, DBG can find a way to block it.
The actual question should be, who is going to be willing to expend the most time and effort?

Considering how amazingly easy it is to bypass this, I would be surprised if they even attempt putting any effort in to prevent boxing.

Well, that's kind of the whole point behind having a "no-box/no-bot" server, isn't it?

They wouldnt even have to make that server if they just implemented a 1 client per computer like alot of other games have. What it does is locks 1 client per computer so if try to load another up it says you have game already running.So those that wanna box will need to get a pc for each acct.Im not a hack tho so not sure if theres a way around that system,prolly is tho these kids these days have a way around everything lol.

Virtualizing additional machines would circumvent that system, but that is already against the ToS.