Deathwalker Plans 26 Boxing WoW
- Thread starter Sam DeathWalker_foh
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
I was thinking about this last night heh. He seems to consistantly be a few years behind everyone else when it comes to pvp.Jubee said:
Erronius
<WoW Guild Officer>
- 17,319
- 44,963
Yeah knew I had seen it.
Warhammer Forums - Search Results
My guess is that from what I"ve read, they are looking to prohibit scripting. Sam might have been interested at one point, dunno if that scripting part turned him off, and not sure what else you could use...I didn"t think things like keyclone would fall under that definition but I could be wrong.
And when you think about it, Sam Deathwalker could be the answer to Warhammer"s potential population problem, at least on one server. Give Sam free reign and have him go Disorder. Publicize it. Guaranteed more than a few people would roll Order to have a chance at him.
Warhammer Forums - Search Results
My guess is that from what I"ve read, they are looking to prohibit scripting. Sam might have been interested at one point, dunno if that scripting part turned him off, and not sure what else you could use...I didn"t think things like keyclone would fall under that definition but I could be wrong.
And when you think about it, Sam Deathwalker could be the answer to Warhammer"s potential population problem, at least on one server. Give Sam free reign and have him go Disorder. Publicize it. Guaranteed more than a few people would roll Order to have a chance at him.
Erronius
<WoW Guild Officer>
- 17,319
- 44,963
Guess their search IDs aren"t persistant (my assumption with the original link), search still works. Link is to the thread, but he posts fairly far in. Easier to just to search for Deathwalker on the site and go from there. Were this not the shaw, could have simply edited my post.
Especially funny is this gem:"I spent well over $15,000 on equipment and have 24 seperate accounts that I pay full price for. Again do you seriously expect that you SHOULD be able to beat someone who spends 24 TIMES the amount of money to play the game as you do."
Good "ol Sam.
Do you think Multiboxing should be allowed in WAR? - Warhammer Forums
Especially funny is this gem:"I spent well over $15,000 on equipment and have 24 seperate accounts that I pay full price for. Again do you seriously expect that you SHOULD be able to beat someone who spends 24 TIMES the amount of money to play the game as you do."
Good "ol Sam.
Do you think Multiboxing should be allowed in WAR? - Warhammer Forums
Jait
Molten Core Raider
- 5,035
- 5,317
Sam set himself up with the retarded racing analogy. By his logic, "He who spends the most money will almost always win.". It"s been proven wrong again, and again in racing and many other sports. The problem here though is with MMO"s it"s quite often true. And I think the majority of players believe their video-games are much closer to a sport than just pure entertainment.
And that"s where the major problem lies. If a game allows 1 person to play 24 accounts as effectively as 24 thinking individuals, that game needs to change, and fast. Or the rules need to prohibit it. This isn"t a case where the majority have a near equal opportunity to meet Sam"s standards of running a frigging army.
2-boxing? I think the majority can achieve that. In EQ the majority can probably achieve 4-boxing. If a game is going to allow multiple accounts, I think it should be aimed at a limit most anyone can achieve (if they wanted to), or at least enough people where it wouldn"t be seen as "cheating". Even if the word is misused here in lieu of "unfair".
But the bottom line is these companies want to make money, it"s their purpose to create rules that help that. If 10,000 accounts quit over Sam, they"ll ban anything above 2-boxing; or ban it altogether if that"s what keeps the most paying accounts active. So, as long as it doesn"t cost them more accounts than they"re gaining why would they even care? They"re not looking to be the trailblazer on MMO Morality. Their job is to make money and keep folks entertained.
The main reason gold farmers exist in every game is because they pay. MMO companys only take as much action as needed. They ban the account, the farmer buys a new one. The next simple step...ban the IP? But why bother? They don"t make any money off of their internet sub. That"s why no MMO game to date has bothered taking any further steps than to ban the account. I"ve had multiple Devs including some pretty high-ups joke with me about how many accounts per month these farmers sub to, and how many new boxes they sell when they mass-ban accounts. They"ve found a way to exploit the farmers, and good for them. It"s all factored into the cost of doing business. But it does cost you if/when you buy your gold
Okay, enough fucking rambling. I meant only to point out that, no, it"s not cheating. But it"s not entirely fair either, but let the game decide. Our choice is who to sub to, not to inflict our twisted sense of morality upon video-games. But these companies damn well know the limits on how to keep people playing.
And that"s where the major problem lies. If a game allows 1 person to play 24 accounts as effectively as 24 thinking individuals, that game needs to change, and fast. Or the rules need to prohibit it. This isn"t a case where the majority have a near equal opportunity to meet Sam"s standards of running a frigging army.
2-boxing? I think the majority can achieve that. In EQ the majority can probably achieve 4-boxing. If a game is going to allow multiple accounts, I think it should be aimed at a limit most anyone can achieve (if they wanted to), or at least enough people where it wouldn"t be seen as "cheating". Even if the word is misused here in lieu of "unfair".
But the bottom line is these companies want to make money, it"s their purpose to create rules that help that. If 10,000 accounts quit over Sam, they"ll ban anything above 2-boxing; or ban it altogether if that"s what keeps the most paying accounts active. So, as long as it doesn"t cost them more accounts than they"re gaining why would they even care? They"re not looking to be the trailblazer on MMO Morality. Their job is to make money and keep folks entertained.
The main reason gold farmers exist in every game is because they pay. MMO companys only take as much action as needed. They ban the account, the farmer buys a new one. The next simple step...ban the IP? But why bother? They don"t make any money off of their internet sub. That"s why no MMO game to date has bothered taking any further steps than to ban the account. I"ve had multiple Devs including some pretty high-ups joke with me about how many accounts per month these farmers sub to, and how many new boxes they sell when they mass-ban accounts. They"ve found a way to exploit the farmers, and good for them. It"s all factored into the cost of doing business. But it does cost you if/when you buy your gold
Okay, enough fucking rambling. I meant only to point out that, no, it"s not cheating. But it"s not entirely fair either, but let the game decide. Our choice is who to sub to, not to inflict our twisted sense of morality upon video-games. But these companies damn well know the limits on how to keep people playing.
25 real people will destroy a 25 boxer so fast its not funny.
A problem they have with pure hardware boxers like me is that how can you prove it? I just say I am more then one person lol ...
If they want to stop boxing just eliminate autofollow, end of story.
A problem they have with pure hardware boxers like me is that how can you prove it? I just say I am more then one person lol ...
If they want to stop boxing just eliminate autofollow, end of story.
