Boxing

[wrxBRAH]

Originally Posted by HippoNipple [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I understand people saying they want the 2 boxing because they want to play a group class, and their schedule may not permit enough time to find a group every time they log on, but thats something they just need to deal with. It's Everquest and thats how it is. This population is about as healthy as it can be right now as far as enough people playing without it being too overcrowded.

The people that would actually use boxing for good would be small compared to the annoyance of boxing from the hardcore players. The last thing we need is 2 people trying to clear Fear or Hate while boxing when there would be an entire guild wanting the opportunity.

For the few that can only log on for a half hour, guess what Everquest isn't for you, its not an instant gratification game. I understand wishing you had more time or wanting changes made so it can fit your play style but for the rest of the people who can play it more often, it can't change to a boxing game. There are downsides and upsides to both arguments, but the argument against boxing is way more legit and sound as far as the community as a whole.

Are you seriously that selfish? Just because you enjoy playing your classic one way doesnt mean everyone else has to share your style of play. Because I dont have 5hrs to spend nightly lfg or play a class thats group oriented, I have to take 3 years to get to level 50? Get off your high horse.

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The proof is is the pudding, so to speak. P99 is THE most successful EQEMU server, ever. PEQ's population always hovers in the 300's it seems - at peak - and that population includes all the boxed accounts. And there's nothing really wrong with PEQ...except for the ability to attract new players...and I think boxing has a LOT to do with that.

I've also said once boxing is allowed, it becomes required in order to compete. MOTD: Bring your boxed "whatever" to the next raid, because we have more important things to worry about with the availability our live players.

This becomes even more true through Kunark and Velious, with the increased difficulty of encounters.

All in all, if it ain't broke...why fix it? The population continues to grow, we are nearing 1000+ at peak. I remember the days we were hollering at each other every time it broke 200. Which really wasn't all that long ago...six or seven months, maybe. When Kunark releases, I'll bet we more than double our current peak.

P99 is the most succesful server because Rogean did a damn good job of advertising it on other forums and believe it or not most old school eqers prefer pve to pvp and want to have that nostalgic feeling. Playing on this server is your best chance at getting that.

The anti boxers are unwilling to compromise (threats to quit) whereas the boxing crowd will continue to follow the server rules and play but keep pushing the boxing topic.

[Humerox]

Originally Posted by wrxBRAH [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Are you seriously that selfish? Just because you enjoy playing your classic one way doesnt mean everyone else has to share your style of play. Because I dont have 5hrs to spend nightly lfg or play a class thats group oriented, I have to take 3 years to get to level 50? Get off your high horse.



P99 is the most succesful server because Rogean did a damn good job of advertising it on other forums and believe it or not most old school eqers prefer pve to pvp and want to have that nostalgic feeling. Playing on this server is your best chance at getting that.

The anti boxers are unwilling to compromise (threats to quit) whereas the boxing crowd will continue to follow the server rules and play but keep pushing the boxing topic.

It's not about selfishness brah. My classic means finding others to play with.The boxing crowd can play by themselves when there's no one around. Also, like I said before, quitting is only a threat when it means something...which it doesn't. No one except me gives a shit whether I play or not.

Boxing only reduces dependence on community. I play alts all across the spectrum, and when I have trouble finding a group on one, I go to another. Make more friends, for god's sake, lol.

You won't change my mind about it being detrimental to server health. It's soloing on steroids.

[wrxBRAH]

Originally Posted by Humerox [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

It's not about selfishness brah. My classic means finding others to play with.The boxing crowd can play by themselves when there's no one around. Also, like I said before, quitting is only a threat when it means something...which it doesn't. No one except me gives a shit whether I play or not.

Boxing only reduces dependence on community. I play alts all across the spectrum, and when I have trouble finding a group on one, I go to another. Make more friends, for god's sake, lol.

You won't change my mind about it being detrimental to server health. It's soloing on steroids.

When you join a high end guild/raiding guild, your dependence on anyone outside that guild is very low and in some humongous guilds, its next to none.

Perhaps we should limit guild sizes to 12 as well? Ok shitty example but come on just because boxing is available doesnt mean everyone is going to start boxing.

I could box because I have an ip exemption for my brother but I dont. I see a ton of other people boxing as Im leveling and it doesnt bother me one bit. There are plenty of mobs/camps to go around. I think people overreact when it comes to boxing a bit because of what happened in later expansions.

[pinedepain]

To reduce the 2-boxers population, one idea (out of many I guess), would be to only allow one MAC adress per IP.

But I think no code lines in the EQClient send the MAC adress to the server. So It's fucked up [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]. So, the next solution would be the following :

- Create a lilttle program (in Java to avoid any OS compatibility issues) with a login/password/connection-button layout. Log in this new program with your account informations then launch EQ. If the server recognize that you're already logged with your little MAC program, then it allows you to log in, if not, it kicks you.

Considering that your "wife" plays on another comp, this tricks wouldn't annoy the playing experience at all for anyone (except for 2-boxers).

Of course, you could bypass this if you have 2 comp or with many other solutions I won't give here for the sanity of this thread hehe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.].

In anyway, I think it would reduce (maybe greatly?) the 2-boxers population.

What does the dev team think about this?

[Itchybottom]

Originally Posted by pinedepain [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To reduce the 2-boxers population, one idea (out of many I guess), would be to only allow one MAC adress per IP.

But I think no code lines in the EQClient send the MAC adress to the server. So It's fucked up [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]. So, the next solution would be the following :

- Create a lilttle program (in Java to avoid any OS compatibility issues) with a login/password/connection-button layout. Log in this new program with your account informations then launch EQ. If the server recognize that you're already logged with your little MAC program, then it allows you to log in, if not, it kicks you.

Considering that your "wife" plays on another comp, this tricks wouldn't annoy the playing experience at all for anyone (except for 2-boxers).

Of course, you could bypass this if you have 2 comp or with many other solutions I won't give here for the sanity of this thread hehe [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.].

In anyway, I think it would reduce (maybe greatly?) the 2-boxers population.

What does the dev team think about this?

So wait, you think all routers send MAC address over the wire?

[pinedepain]

not the routers, but the computers. They would send their ethernet/wifi card mac adress.

For exemple on Linux you can see them using the following command :
ifconfig | egrep HW | tr -s ' ' | cut -d ' ' -f 1,5

[Itchybottom]

Originally Posted by pinedepain [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

not the routers, but the computers. They would send their ethernet/wifi card mac adress.

For exemple on Linux you can see them using the following command : ifconfig | egrep HW

And what about people running EverQuest in a virtual machine? You can also spoof your MAC address per outbound connection without much modification to ipfw or iptables scripts. In windows, you could run a registry import to fake it, too. It's just exported from the registry entry to userland as a WMI link. It's not uncommon for people to have multiple computers, either.

I think the idea of third-party tools to play on Project1999 has been discussed and denied. One would have to make it opensource, for trust sake, which leads to easier methodology of defeating it.

And not to nitpick, but you really don't need full regex for that ifconfig line (or any at all), grep would have been fine and a better cross-platform example.

[pinedepain]

Originally Posted by Itchybottom [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

And what about people running EverQuest in a virtual machine? You can also spoof your MAC address per outbound connection without much modification to ipfw or iptables scripts. In windows, you could run a registry import to fake it, too. It's just exported from the registry entry to userland as a WMI link. It's not uncommon for people to have multiple computers, either.

I think the idea of third-party tools to play on Project1999 has been discussed and denied. One would have to make it opensource, for trust sake, which leads to easier methodology of defeating it.

And not to nitpick, but you really don't need full regex for that ifconfig line (or any at all), grep would have been fine and a better cross-platform example.

Wow, sorry not to be an expert in regex, lol, It seems I offended you! But please, feel free to show me a simple regex line to output the mac adress, It interests me. (Truly)

Anyway, I think discussing the 2-boxing thing do not lead to anything if devs don't want to introduce a 3rd party soft and want to keep the current rule. Because : what can we do to change things if we can't change anything?

PS : As I said in my first post, there are many ways to bypass this.

[Bones]

Originally Posted by wrxBRAH [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

just because boxing is available doesnt mean everyone is going to start boxing.

Why not?

[KnuckleSangwich]

Originally Posted by Bones [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Why not?

Because many people like myself hate boxing even if I have the option. It is distracting to me and takes the fun out of playing my main character.

Just something I prefer not to do. I'd rather solo and be fully focused or group with real people and socialize a bit.