1 (edited by Blackomen 2012-05-31 08:58:25)

Topic: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

I know this is going to be a hell of a controversial topic, but I feel so strongly about this that it has to be posted.

Edit: Since people are getting the wrong idea here, I'm rephrasing this.

What I am looking for is a way to curb the rampant multi-boxing follow alts in "PVP" not pve. Currently they are being overused, and the only effective counter is to bring even more follow alts. Also they essentially remove the use of dedicated pilots in Remote repair and support. (Which as you can guess is my prefered way to play in pvp these days.

The catch here, is how to do this without affecting the pve side of the game where the follow command is so damn useful. So feel free to offer up ideas, as removing the follow command was all I could come up with.

Oldest player still in the game. Perpetuum for life.
Original Founder of M2S, may it rest in peace. sad
"Hungarian Math" is defined by the dictionary as "Just like normal math, but where each equation ends by dividing the sum by Potato."
-Shoutout to "Stranger Danger" for the "potato" comment.

2 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2012-05-31 07:46:02)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Blackomen wrote:

Flame on.

http://gallery.koroded.net/d/12475-1/flamethrower.jpg
tongue

Blackomen wrote:

Solution? Remove the "follow" command. Now each multi-box account needs to at least be controlled, (Or managed a hell of a lot more.) And this should reduce the sheer volume of people running as many as 5 accounts at once in engagements. (Maybe more, but only seen as many as 5 so far.)

First off Massive NO lol.
why? i have 2 alts not coz i think its cool but coz i must i dont use follow bots in combat most times. I use it for mining & pve. With how bad the auto pilot is at the best of times having the follow command is the next best thing. Not only that but when moving in large number of people (for what ever reason) being able to put a squad mate on follow & take a bring from the keyboard / mouse is way more than just a "handy" thing to do.

its not actually a "follow" button its an approach. So if i can select an object & go "approach" & instead i have to manually guide my mech to that target EVERY time. Need to say how boring that would get?
For a game that requires constant input, removing anything that makes it even more work is bad.

Hate to say it omen but your solution is like handing a Axe to a brain surgeon to use on his next patient. Removing the "Approach" command would not solve follow bots being used pvpers will use 3rd party programs.

What it will do is hurt every one else in the game.

TBH i cant think of any other way or system of movement that could replace what approach does & stop follow bots.

The solution i think could in part maybe be with the interference system & how that works. 

any way if people go into a pvp fight & the enemy are using follow bots here's an idea... ECM the follow bot ???
if you cant manage that basic pvp strategy then perhaps pvp isnt your thing tongue

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Obi Wan Kenobi wrote:
Blackomen wrote:

Flame on.

http://gallery.koroded.net/d/12475-1/flamethrower.jpg
tongue

Blackomen wrote:

Solution? Remove the "follow" command. Now each multi-box account needs to at least be controlled, (Or managed a hell of a lot more.) And this should reduce the sheer volume of people running as many as 5 accounts at once in engagements. (Maybe more, but only seen as many as 5 so far.)

First off Massive NO lol.
why? i have 2 alts not coz i think its cool but coz i must i dont use follow bots in combat most times. I use it for mining & pve. With how bad the auto pilot is at the best of times having the follow command is the next best thing. Not only that but when moving in large number of people (for what ever reason) being able to put a squad mate on follow & take a bring from the keyboard / mouse is way more than just a "handy" thing to do.

its not actually a "follow" button its an approach. So if i can select an object & go "approach" & instead i have to manually guide my mech to that target EVERY time. Need to say how boring that would get?
For a game that requires constant input, removing anything that makes it even more work is bad.

Hate to say it omen but your solution is like handing a Axe to a brain surgeon to use on his next patient. Removing the "Approach" command would not solve follow bots being used pvpers will use 3rd party programs.

What it will do is hurt every one else in the game.

TBH i cant think of any other way or system of movement that could replace what approach does & stop follow bots.

The solution i think could in part maybe be with the interference system & how that works. 

any way if people go into a pvp fight & the enemy are using follow bots here's an idea... ECM the follow bot ???
if you cant manage that basic pvp strategy then perhaps pvp isnt your thing tongue

Ok I'll work my way down from the start, first off as I covered in the previous post, I said it would have negative issues associated with it, such as mining and hauling, these are things "I do not want to change" as both you, me and everyone else in the game can agree that you need a bare minimum of 2 accounts to do "most" activities at any kind of "sensible" rate. Especially mining, where it's actually a requirement rather than a choice.

Next, interference does help. but doesn't solve the issue, then you have third party programs, yes this would also be an issue, but short of actual hacks (Injection and such) all they would do is slightly simplify it, and would not be able to match a follow command.

Now as to your "solution" of a ECM'ing the follow bot, you do realize just how pointless that solution was right? Your either doing one of two things, first your using your bot to ECM the follow bot while the guys main bot kills your bot. Or second, you yourself are using a follow bot to counter his follow bot. (Circular logic ftw.) You may want to think of this a bit more, and do we really want to compare which of us has more pvp experience/knowledge? You know better than that Obi.

It's not that I "want" to remove the follow command, it's that I want a solution to rampant multi-boxing "IN PVP" and I honestly could not come up with a better solution, feel free to offer up one if you have it. I don't want to be forced to multi-box even more to be competitive down the road. And it seems the multi-boxing pvp only increases over time. (It will be even easier with the new expansion as the game will be more GPU based than CPU.)

Oldest player still in the game. Perpetuum for life.
Original Founder of M2S, may it rest in peace. sad
"Hungarian Math" is defined by the dictionary as "Just like normal math, but where each equation ends by dividing the sum by Potato."
-Shoutout to "Stranger Danger" for the "potato" comment.

4 (edited by Eta Carinea 2012-05-31 08:21:40)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Maybe some follow penalty can be added to combat based bot's and the industrials or even just the haulers can be placed into follow mode with no penalty, Something like a drastically increased lock time on all combat bots in the follow chain.

PS Edit Changed many spelling mistakes

5 (edited by Blackomen 2012-05-31 08:22:50)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Eta Carinea wrote:

maybe some follow penalty can be added to combat based bot's and the industrials or even just the haulers can be placed into follow mode with no penalty, Somehting like a drastcilly increased lock time on all combat bots in the follow chain.

While I like your thinking here, the issue is that most follow bots are industrial bots, sporting RR's, Nexuses, remote sensor boosters, and energy transfers.

Perhaps if it was based on mods fit...

Oldest player still in the game. Perpetuum for life.
Original Founder of M2S, may it rest in peace. sad
"Hungarian Math" is defined by the dictionary as "Just like normal math, but where each equation ends by dividing the sum by Potato."
-Shoutout to "Stranger Danger" for the "potato" comment.

6 (edited by Blackomen 2012-05-31 09:16:47)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Ok an idea fewer people will freak out about. (Rightfully so, removing follow would annoy everyone including me.) How about no modules being active while in follow and for a short time after using follow? This won't affect haulers, won't affect miners, but will have a drastic effect in pvp.

It doesn't prevent people from multi-boxing, but it will sure reduce the mass volumes of follow alts per player as long as the module delay is long enough after stopping follow..

Oldest player still in the game. Perpetuum for life.
Original Founder of M2S, may it rest in peace. sad
"Hungarian Math" is defined by the dictionary as "Just like normal math, but where each equation ends by dividing the sum by Potato."
-Shoutout to "Stranger Danger" for the "potato" comment.

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

+1

8 (edited by Blackomen 2012-05-31 09:22:56)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Eta Carinea wrote:

+1

Guess a found a method where "everyone" won't want to stone me to death over. tongue
I admit it, my previous idea on the follow command was a bad one, you can stop sending me hatemail now.

Oldest player still in the game. Perpetuum for life.
Original Founder of M2S, may it rest in peace. sad
"Hungarian Math" is defined by the dictionary as "Just like normal math, but where each equation ends by dividing the sum by Potato."
-Shoutout to "Stranger Danger" for the "potato" comment.

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

I just want to quickly point out to all devs i am not sending any hatemail to Blackomen wink

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

A few people mentioned to me Nexus mod alts and the effect it would have, a proposed fix to this is to change my previous solution of preventing module use while moving, to simply prevent locking while in follow, this way you can still have a NEXUS alt, without allowing direct bonuses via modules.

Been in a fierce discussion on TS about this and others have made some very valid points, such as this reducing player accounts (Something the game doesn't need at current pop.) And the fact that the number of people using more than 2 accounts in pvp atm is rather low percentage wise. (Although almost everyone now uses 2.)

I'm just aiming to find a solution down the road when this does become a bigger issue, and I think larger diminishing returns on multiple accounts is the way to go.

I really want more people's opinions on this.

Oldest player still in the game. Perpetuum for life.
Original Founder of M2S, may it rest in peace. sad
"Hungarian Math" is defined by the dictionary as "Just like normal math, but where each equation ends by dividing the sum by Potato."
-Shoutout to "Stranger Danger" for the "potato" comment.

11 (edited by Burial 2012-05-31 10:01:06)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

I agree with Blackomen on this one. It is a big issue. I think the people who argue about it are the ones using multiple alts in PVP.

- Easy solution but easily breakable would be to allow only one instance of the game per computer.
- Make the interference way more powerful. If a person is literally few meters(or following) then the interferance should be very high, but drop dramatically. That too would only fix a little bit.

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

I just feel, week in a battle, because I cant use just 1 account.

But I know that and I am live with that, if you find a solution for it ok, but here is a solution, if anybody dont have many account then live with one and use it and accept it thats all.

I will be happy if anybody can think a good solution for it in game mechanics.

Energy to Earth!

18.01.2014. [12:57:58] <BeastmodeGuNs> after that i remembered all those warning about 1v1 you lol, and i found out why xD

13 (edited by Kanogi 2012-05-31 11:27:37)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

This is only a problem because of low pop, and i think any solution will hurt more than it gain.

Just my opinion

And yes i multibox in pvp, because i feel its more challenging and more satisfying when it works, but its also a big pain in the *** when i have to use any tps, and when the terrain is full of plants and small openings

[05:36:51] <Lemon> i hate you... just so you know

[15:05:49] <Ville> I have to admit, that was pretty fu**ing pimp ^^
                           http://www.perp-kill.net/related/749

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

-1 to restrict 1 account per com
-1 to any restrictions for multiwindows

My idea would be to increase the complexity of robot control: more buttons, more warfare parameters, moe control. This will cause that pilot will have to concentrate on his bot all time, instead to send commands to alts.

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Alexadar wrote:

-1 to restrict 1 account per com
-1 to any restrictions for multiwindows

My idea would be to increase the complexity of robot control: more buttons, more warfare parameters, moe control. This will cause that pilot will have to concentrate on his bot all time, instead to send commands to alts.

+1,

But you must understand alex that players want to have own fleet of 10 bots and go in pvp alone... lol

just rofl!

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Joystick support FTW

Have a productive day, runner!
R.I.P. Chenoa, you'll never be forgotten.
DEV Zoom: Line, sorry, I was away for christmas.
http://perp-kill.net/?m=view&id=252086

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Rabus0 wrote:

But you must understand alex that players want to have own fleet of 10 bots and go in pvp alone... lol
just rofl!

I glad that they want.

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Alexadar wrote:
Rabus0 wrote:

But you must understand alex that players want to have own fleet of 10 bots and go in pvp alone... lol
just rofl!

I glad that they want.

HAHAHAHAHHAA

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

im not a huge fan of multiboxing but i also have 3 accounts. the support follow bots mostly will not make it up to a dedicated support player. the might be able to tag along but in a fight you will not have the time to react to a lot with them.

they pay double so they get more. do they get double? no they dont. so i see not that big of a problem with this.

in pvp i mostly run a detector bot as multiboxing. sometimes i stick that one at my combat char. i see no reason why the detector should turn off in follow mode...

the more accounts ppl multibox the more is their efficiency going down.
just for example. if you ecm half of their 5 follow bots just once, most of them will not be able to relock and resume their support just because they are buisy fighting.

play 10 get only 3. not a bad ratio... and after you are done you just kill all the follow bots as well...

im not a friend of these ppl. but i see less problems with it. if ppl want to spend that much money, hell why not...

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

My 2 Cents-

I am huge mutli-boxer as i am sure you all are aware. I for the vast majority of times run multiple accounts in order to challenge my self as running a single client is to dull and slow for my tastes.

However i tend not to be running drone clients that auto follow and are cap stable just auto running there support modules. This type of follow boting i can understand but i do enjoy the challenge of playing my kain in tandem with my ictus or any of my other accounts i am currently running.

Undefeated 2013
"Even alone you probably are one of the best" - Khader Khan
"Lemon the 1 man army .... also know as: THE TERMINATOR!" - Obi Wan
"There are people who are just better then you at doing many things at one time, some are far better then myself, far better." -Merkle

21 (edited by Sundial 2012-05-31 15:30:26)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

good thread Blackomen, I really like the penalties to follow bots idea alot!

If people want to manually control thats fine with me, but I find myself considering fits / setups that don't include a follow bot less and less these days. This is a real problem (increases the barrier of entry for new players, they shouldn't feel required to have multiple accounts to compete in PvP) and we need to find a solution.

Looking forward to new players and new conflicts.

22 (edited by Obi Wan Kenobi 2012-05-31 15:40:31)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Blackomen wrote:

Now as to your "solution" of a ECM'ing the follow bot, you do realize just how pointless that solution was right? Your either doing one of two things, first your using your bot to ECM the follow bot while the guys main bot kills your bot. Or second, you yourself are using a follow bot to counter his follow bot. (Circular logic ftw.) You may want to think of this a bit more, and do we really want to compare which of us has more pvp experience/knowledge? You know better than that Obi.


So ECM is only any good for 1 mech at a time? your argument is only valid for small gangs at best. But what about 20 v 20? or 50 v 50?
TBH i dont care what size a gang is.

The removal of the "Approach" would do far more damage than good. Just coz some might have a problem with follow bots doesnt mean a core game mechanic needs to be removed.

Adapt or die ?


Also pulling out the "ive been playing this game longer than you card" big_smile ok thats cool.
But this isnt my first rodeo smile


edit:

It would also seem that multi boxing happens now more than it did with a bigger population. Small population means you must do more your self.
just  a thought tho not true for all situations & persons (looks at lemon)

True Pros make a Podcast to influence the Devs minds, 
The rest of you guys are Hacks tongue

PS. I got my Highways & stopped playing b4 they came in & have never used them! ...... Irony much ? tongue

23 (edited by Crepitus 2012-05-31 15:43:40)

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Blackomen wrote:

I know this is going to be a hell of a controversial topic, but I feel so strongly about this that it has to be posted.

Edit: Since people are getting the wrong idea here, I'm rephrasing this.

What I am looking for is a way to curb the rampant multi-boxing follow alts in "PVP" not pve. Currently they are being overused, and the only effective counter is to bring even more follow alts. Also they essentially remove the use of dedicated pilots in Remote repair and support. (Which as you can guess is my prefered way to play in pvp these days.

The catch here, is how to do this without affecting the pve side of the game where the follow command is so damn useful. So feel free to offer up ideas, as removing the follow command was all I could come up with.

I think you're missing the biggest point:  The DEVs have 0 incentive to do this for a number of reasons, just off the top of my head here are a few: 

1.) It's more money the way it is.  A *LOT* more.  Almost no one is PvPing with only one account, including M2S.

2.) It allows a smaller group of people to compete with a larger one, for proof check the board so nerfing this would run even more people out of the game and discourage some people from even trying it.

3.) It does not remove dedicated pilots for support or remote rep, a dedicated pilot is always going to be far more effective/efficient than a follow bot because they can manuever/switch/prioritize targets faster than someone switching screens/clients.  A follow bot can be brought down fast by keep their lock broken/suppressed which is dramatically more effective against a follow bot than a dedicated pilot for the same reasons already mentioned.

4.) More bots on the field = more targets = more fun

5.) It limits variety in playstyles and choices for game play since there are some things you need support to do and dedicated support pilots are rare because it's boring and doesn't show on the kill boards and is even more behind the scenes than an ewar pilot who is also shafted.

I'd guess the majority of the player base either doesn't care or likes it the way it is.

$.02

EDIT:

TL;DR: Playing more than one account already has some substantial built in disadvantages, an equal # of dedicated players of all bots will always be better than an equally skilled/geared player trying to control multiple accounts at once because of the focus necessary to PvP well.

Population graphs

<GM Synapse> please don't abuse our fresh players before blowing them up. And for god sakes, don't do that after it!

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Bottom line, smaller groups of people are easier to manage; so even if the mechanic was somehow changed, its still more likely that 5 people will run 15 bots, instead of trying to bring 15 people. If the population increases, then it will be 15 people bringing 45 bots.

Re: Finding a solution to multi-boxing pvp

Arga wrote:

Bottom line, smaller groups of people are easier to manage; so even if the mechanic was somehow changed, its still more likely that 5 people will run 15 bots, instead of trying to bring 15 people. If the population increases, then it will be 15 people bringing 45 bots.

+1

The issue won't go away with higher pop. It could infact get worse..