-
Posts
165 -
Joined
-
Last visited
TallBarr.2184's Achievements
-
Give us option to unlearn masteries
TallBarr.2184 replied to TallBarr.2184's topic in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
I would pay 5000 gems to unlearn Raven attunement- 52 replies
-
- 11
-
Give us option to unlearn masteries
TallBarr.2184 replied to TallBarr.2184's topic in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
I wish, but i need the icebrood saga ones and alot of them are connected to drms and stuff, which i rather not touch. Id rather be able to pay a fee to unlearn a mastery and use those points.- 52 replies
-
- 13
-
Low on mastery points and would gladly unlearn some masteries i dont want
- 52 replies
-
- 36
-
Discussion on Policy: Dual or Multi-Boxing.
TallBarr.2184 replied to System's topic in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
@SystemAny chance we can revisit this policy, would be so much fun running around with multiple accounts in wvw, bored of pve. Should be allowed as long as you play actively, so much potential, cheers -
BOTS in pvp - a source of frustration and stress
TallBarr.2184 replied to Vishnok.7059's topic in Player vs. Player
If its anets bots they should tell us. Not doing anything looks worse. -
Discussion on Policy: Dual or Multi-Boxing.
TallBarr.2184 replied to System's topic in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Allow multiboxing in world vs world if: -Accounts are on the same server-Map is not queued-Must play actively-No macros-Is responsive -
Discussion on Policy: Dual or Multi-Boxing.
TallBarr.2184 replied to System's topic in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
If any dev writes in this thread i will eat a sock -
Discussion on Policy: Dual or Multi-Boxing.
TallBarr.2184 replied to System's topic in Guild Wars 2 Discussion
Allow multiboxing in world vs world if: -Accounts are on the same server-Map is not queued-Must play actively-No macros-Is responsive -
Why didnt you just leave the match then
-
If you had read the post one of the policy changes i suggested was not allowing multiboxing on queued maps That sounds great. But then again it doesn’t. How does the system know that you have a ‘multi boxed’ account open when the map queues? Would you have to register your accounts as ‘linked’ to prevent them from being involved in the same matchup? Or the same map? Where are the preventative measures to prevent the potential abuse? - How would they know, and how could you be prevented from having them on a matched server.. You offer no controls. Of course, a developer could check.. yes.. from reports. But nothing identifies you or the account as a multiboxer for people. Sooo many things are ‘at your word’ for this game. I get it. But that doesn’t mean we have to say it’s fine nor that it’s OK by Anet in these modes.Can i put accounts on different servers now? - yesWould i be in trouble if anet found out - yes Policy i suggested: Can i put accounts on different servers now? - yesWould i be in trouble if anet found out - yes What identifies a multiboxer in openworld? multiboxing is allowed in openworld, same rules would apply there as in wvw.
-
Just because there are rules doesnt mean some people wont break them. I could go in game now and say the gamer word, the likeliness of me not getting banned is small, but the likeliness fo me getting banned is high. Just like with all policies the risk of me getting banned is higher if i breach them. Its illegal to steal, people still steal things.
-
If you had read the post one of the policy changes i suggested was not allowing multiboxing on queued maps That sounds great. But then again it doesn’t. How does the system know that you have a ‘multi boxed’ account open when the map queues? Would you have to register your accounts as ‘linked’ to prevent them from being involved in the same matchup? Or the same map? Where are the preventative measures to prevent the potential abuse?-
-
Imagine 100 multiboxers with 800 accounts, your argument is extreme because the likelihood of that even happening is about zero. If you read the post one of the new policy points would be accounts must be played actively. I'm not sure but knowing how most multiboxers play i would say sitting afk with necros doesnt cut it. I'm on a full server and even on primetime not all servers are full and 1 of the policy points i suggested would be not allowing multiboxing if the border is queued. I know that eotm doesnt reward pips, but i stated that you could do some of the dailies there. All i am saying is that people will abuse it. Some say some still do it even to this day.People will always break rules no matter the context. If people breach it they should get banned simple as that. My point is the current policy of flat out "NOT ALLOWED AT ALL" is not good. People who afk or do whatever will continue to do so whatever the policy would be, changing it would just allow legitimate players to activate. It would not affect people who abuse because they already do it.
-
Imagine 100 multiboxers with 800 accounts, your argument is extreme because the likelihood of that even happening is about zero. If you read the post one of the new policy points would be accounts must be played actively. I'm not sure but knowing how most multiboxers play i would say sitting afk with necros doesnt cut it. I'm on a full server and even on primetime not all servers are full and 1 of the policy points i suggested would be not allowing multiboxing if the border is queued. I know that eotm doesnt reward pips, but i stated that you could do some of the dailies there.