PvE multiboxing

[Magian]

But you see, you have just contributed more to the argument. Just appealing to the rules says nothing. Therefore you have much more of an argument. It adds to the assumption that the rules are what the rules are.

[Uzephi]

He gave more than just quoting the rules. It would cause more people wanting to multibox as "others are doing it." Then the 'minority' would slowly become the 'majority.' Multiboxing on retail is so niche and barely anyone does it as it requires to pay for all the accounts and not many people would want to pay more than they already are. Add in the free aspect of it and you will have troves of people multiboxing. This would be counterproductive for the 'blizzlike' experience. In my play from 2006-2010 I only encountered three multiboxers in PvP and one in PvE. If we allow it here on a private server, I am sure I would see at least one a day. This would skew the economy, and make content trivial and remove the MMO of the MMORPG... The key word is "Massively Multiplayer" if you multibox, it isn't multiplayer anymore and you should just play Diablo or SC2....

[Magian]

Actually it is mutiplayer when multiboxing or it wouldn't skew the economy.

What it does do is change the challenge of the content and allow one player to run things they otherwise couldn't solo or with just one character. There is an inherent advantage to that. If this is the reason the Devs made the ruling they did, it seems fair to me. It does change the game from the experience of running through the content requiring teamwork and specialized roles from other players.

Now with that out of the way. I hope you guys bring more to the argument rather than just repeating each other and the rules. In all fariness stating your point of view is fine. If you want to contribute to the argument, it would be nice to see something new to what has already been said and appeals to what is already assumed doesn't add a single thing.

[Uzephi]

Actually it is mutiplayer when multiboxing or it wouldn't skew the economy.

How is playing with yourself multiplayer? You boxing would be one player. Do I have to define multiplayer for you? And, yes, it would skew the economy. You apparently didn't take into account what I stated about you getting ALL the loot to yourself. One person, it not being spread out to four other people (9 for UBRS and 39 if you want to try 40 boxing raids). You would be getting 5, 10 or 40 times the loot as everyone else depending on how serious you are at boxing. That would put you at a huge advantage over the other players.

Now with that out of the way. I hope you guys bring more to the argument rather than just repeating each other and the rules. In all fariness stating your point of view is fine. If you want to contribute to the argument, it would be nice to see something new to what has already been said and appeals to what is already assumed doesn't add a single thing.

You haven't acknowledged or brought any insightful arguments to our points. You haven't contributed either. All I see you saying is "it won't skew the economy";"It is multiplayer." You bring no reason to your opinion on how it wouldn't and how one player playing alone would be considered multiplayer.

Another point brought up in another failed multibox thread: Other servers allow it. Obviously, other servers aren't doing as well as Nost, so that point is invalid as this server is doing just fine without boxers. So, how about you bring something to the table that would make sense and not just state something without a coherent reason behind it.

Edit: Definition of player and multiplayer and you would see someone multiboxing isn't multiplayer. As a single player by definition is a 'person' thus multiplayer would be multiple 'persons' and not just one playing multiple characters.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/player
player
/ˈpleɪə/
noun
1.
a person who participates in or is skilled at some game or sport
2.
a person who plays a game or sport professionally
3.
a person who plays a musical instrument
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/multiplayer
multiplayer
/ˈmʌltɪˌpleɪə/
noun
1.
a mode of play involving more than one player at one time in a computer or video game

[Magian]

How is Multiboxing multiplaying?

Multiboxing is playing with an advantage. It skews the economy. Therefore by definition there are interactions with other players. Economy implies this.

What you imply is that single character play is better for the reasons you've posted. I have not contested your reasons. I am inclined to agree.

To repeat what I said for the apparent need for clarity: "Actually it is mutiplayer when multiboxing or it wouldn't skew the economy." What this means in the latter part is that the skewing of the economy is proof that it is multiplaying. Note: I didn't say it won't skew the economy as you have misquoted me.

My point that I brought up earlier in the thread is that some of the rules are too strict regarding having alts on follow or running alts through dungeons or even raids. This is allowed everywhere but Nost. Note: I am not saying or implying that software to multibox as the OP suggest would be good.

The definition of player does not exclude playing a game with multiple characters. What you are arguing is preference as if it is fact. It is a fact that it is preferred by a majority but it is not the definition of how to play itself.

The definition of multiplayer also doesn't touch upon number of characters or other restrictions that are made rule here and elsewhere.

There seems to be many assumptions based on preference that misguide quite a few into thinking that they are a definition or a fact or something with which to appeal. This type of argument is called preaching to the choir and it gets no where.

[Uzephi]

Player ≠ character. So multiplayer and multicharacter are not equal as well. You play by yourself and you are solo playing. You play with others and you are multi playing. Is english your native language?

Running alts through dungeons? You do know on retail it wasn't heard of for everyone having two accounts. If you were arguing running a friend through, yes, that was done on retail, I have done and had that done countless times at low levels during BC and wrath. Running yourself isn't blizzlike. Everyone I knew that had a second account wasn't theirs. It was usually a friend's or family member's account that they ran through an instance. I have never seen someone run themselves on a live server.

I will state again, helping someone else is okay, helping yourself isn't 'blizzlike.'

[Magian]

Player ≠ character. So multiplayer and multicharacter are not equal as well. You play by yourself and you are solo playing. You play with others and you are multi playing. Is english your native language?

I don't know what makes you think there is any contention here in this regard. There is conflation on the part of those opposed to the multiboxing in this thread and you are also guilty of this. The conflation is saying that multiboxing isn't multiplayer and yet at the same time saying that they affect an economy. That contradicts itself. MMO as in many players interacting and a player in an MMO with multiple characters being used simultaenously does fall under that category. That is a playstyle that falls under a genre of game. It is multiplayer and it is an advantage that we all seem to agree isn't fair aside from the OP. So, as you can see it is possible to multibox in a multiplayer game. I don't see how you think you have an opposing argument to this when you agree that multiboxers affect the economy.

You can resort to straw man arguments all you want. It won't help validate any of your points.

Running alts through dungeons? You do know on retail it wasn't heard of for everyone having two accounts. If you were arguing running a friend through, yes, that was done on retail, I have done and had that done countless times at low levels during BC and wrath. Running yourself isn't blizzlike. Everyone I knew that had a second account wasn't theirs. It was usually a friend's or family member's account that they ran through an instance. I have never seen someone run themselves on a live server.

I will state again, helping someone else is okay, helping yourself isn't 'blizzlike.'

Wrong. It was blizzlike to run alts. There is no contention with this at all. What is not blizzlike is the rule of perma ban for doing so.

Again, you are arguing based on preference. It just so happens this preference is ruled by the Devs to be bannable if broken. Hence the reason for this and other suggestion threads.