RateMyServer Ragnarok Community

RateMyServer.Net => Server Discussion => Topic started by: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 01:43 PM

Title: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 01:43 PM
There are servers where such a ban applies.
This is done by the owners ostensibly to stimulate the game in the party. But don't you think it's just stupid?
Now many people have powerful PC to run a virtual machine and a proxy for the second window, have a second laptop and alternative connection from the phone.
I want to try to play on one server, now it has a hundred plus players, but there is such a ban. But I do not believe that people there do not circumvent this ban, so if I play by its rules, I will be in a disadvantaged position with cheaters. And cheaters are definitely there.

There is even a rule on the server that you can write to the admin and lie that you are playing from the same IP with your brother or grandfather, and then you will be officially allowed two windows, it's just stupid.

I urge the admins of these servers to reconsider their ban, maybe just disable the  auto-follow, and that's it.
What do you think about it? Waiting for an answers

Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Nova on Jun 20, 2022, 02:25 PM
Quote from: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 01:43 PM
There are servers where such a ban applies.
This is done by the owners ostensibly to stimulate the game in the party. But don't you think it's just stupid?
Now many people have powerful PC to run a virtual machine and a proxy for the second window, have a second laptop and alternative connection from the phone.
I want to try to play on one server, now it has a hundred plus players, but there is such a ban. But I do not believe that people there do not circumvent this ban, so if I play by its rules, I will be in a disadvantaged position with cheaters. And cheaters are definitely there.

There is even a rule on the server that you can write to the admin and lie that you are playing from the same IP with your brother or grandfather, and then you will be officially allowed two windows, it's just stupid.

I urge the admins of these servers to reconsider their ban, maybe just disable the  auto-follow, and that's it.
What do you think about it? Waiting for an answers

Just don't multiclient. They don't want that there (in OathRO).
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 03:33 PM
Nova
You must have read everything I said inattentively
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 20, 2022, 03:46 PM
Quote from: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 01:43 PM
There are servers where such a ban applies.
This is done by the owners ostensibly to stimulate the game in the party. But don't you think it's just stupid?
Now many people have powerful PC to run a virtual machine and a proxy for the second window, have a second laptop and alternative connection from the phone.
I want to try to play on one server, now it has a hundred plus players, but there is such a ban. But I do not believe that people there do not circumvent this ban, so if I play by its rules, I will be in a disadvantaged position with cheaters. And cheaters are definitely there.

There is even a rule on the server that you can write to the admin and lie that you are playing from the same IP with your brother or grandfather, and then you will be officially allowed two windows, it's just stupid.

I urge the admins of these servers to reconsider their ban, maybe just disable the  auto-follow, and that's it.
What do you think about it? Waiting for an answers


If you're talking about Oath (which I'm 90% sure you are), all it does when a player says that there is someone is in the same household as them, means we're not going to immediately start interrogating you when we see two of the same IP on at once; because they just told us to expect that. So it'd be redundant to interrogate them.
It doesn't mean that we just look the other way. Actually, I'd argue that it does the opposite. Anyone who tells us that is on my immediate watch list to make sure they are genuinely playing as two people. At all times.
There have been instances where both accounts are genuinely owned by two people, but one or the other logs into both at the same time, or the other one is conveniently AFK or "sleeping" for any period of time and is getting leeched. These are all no-nos. As the rule on the server states, if it looks, works or acts like multi-clienting, we're going to assume it is, and punish accordingly. Players who play in the same household at the same time as their partner are strongly encouraged to log off if they're going to be away in the field for more than a few minutes and especially so if they're playing in a party together.


Multi-clienting is usually fairly obvious. No one can reliably play on two (or more) accounts actively for a prolonged period of time at every second of play. Everyone simply plays better controlling one character than they would with two. Nobody is going to fool an entire server for long where everyone reports even the tiniest suspicious thing. Some people report other people for multi-clienting because they notice two characters are just too buddy-buddy with each other and get a gut feeling, and sometimes they are right. So even if someone was able to actively play well on two characters, they'd still get caught, because they are still not behaving as a normal duo who should be out socializing with other people because RO at its core is a social game. Many of the actual duos (or even trios) who play on the server actually split off time from time and are playing at the same time in two completely different parties, socializing, actively playing, etc.

Many people have tried and many of them have failed. The amount of multi-client bans is easily in the triple digits by this point. Some of them thought we'd just look the other way by saying they play with a family or friend in the same household, but it simply isn't the case.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Playtester on Jun 20, 2022, 05:07 PM
I like the rule as it support partying.

Most people will obey such a rules as they wouldn't want to risk all their progress when they are found it.
Even if the staff doesn't programmatically enforce it, just having such a rule is usually more than enough.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 05:55 PM
Sairek Ceareste
to begin with, thank you as the admin of the continuing to work server.
What I meant, in my opinion, such prohibitions are stupid, because they simply cannot work for everyone. Anyone who wants to circumvent this ban will easily circumvent it.
If such a ban is in effect, then it is on the contrary more pleasant for the cheater to get an advantage over other law-abiding.
Moreover, it can't even be called a cheat, you don't need to be a software expert for this.

Example. My second acc Sage putting an enchant on my other character. for 30 minutes. And I can even quit the game, 30 minutes is a long time. Or how do you prove that my grandfather does not like to help his grandson? )
Or as I said, it can be a second computer with a different IP or from a virtual machine and proxy, and my Priest will Heal, Buff and then Warp in the dungeon. And he will be waiting for me in town, you will not be able to prove anything even theoretically if there is another IP. In 2022 it's very easy.

At the same time, allowing for example two open windows at the same time on one IP would be a fair competitive move, because it would be an equal position for everyone and I can not think that the other player gets an advantage over me very simply right now.
I suggest you just think about it, anyway, for the MVP or Bio Lab 3 you will have to play with real people party.
And probably you can disable auto-following programmatically, then it will be difficult to provide full-fledged support on many maps without real players party.
I would like to try your server, but the potential inequality puts me off.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: distilled1 on Jun 20, 2022, 06:13 PM
I think you make a decent point, OldPoring.

With a rule in place, like Playtester said, it's already enough to deter many people from attempting to multi-client. Also having this rule can create a community for such a server which attracts the types of players who don't want to multi-client. Furthermore, not everyone wants to bother setting up virtual operating systems or using two devices to play RO, or bother getting a VPN, or whatever else.

That said, the RO community overall is rampant with players who do not care about the journey, the adventure, the roleplaying, etc, etc, but instead strive to get ahead of others as quickly and as efficiently as possible, even to the point of lying, manipulating, and cheating to get ahead. The RO community overall always been like this.
It's because of this that I don't even bother playing RO anymore, but if I did, I'd at least want auto-following disabled. I still can't get over playing OriginsRO years ago and seeing how many people happily multi-cliented their way from level 1 to 99 with their personal train of characters following eachother. It was legitimately soulless and ruined the experience.
The auto-follow feature does little for legitimate players, but it potentially helps multi-clienting abusers a LOT.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 06:30 PM
Quote from: distilled1 on Jun 20, 2022, 06:13 PM
That said, the RO community overall is rampant with players who do not care about the journey, the adventure, the roleplaying, etc, etc, but instead strive to get ahead of others as quickly and as efficiently as possible, even to the point of lying, manipulating, and cheating to get ahead. The RO community overall always been like this.
Absolutely. I've known this game and this people for a long time. roleplaying is good for some, but 90% of RO is grind, grind and grind, especially on the x1-1.5 rating. And if it's so easy to get an advantage over others, they will do it. It's better when you know that everyone has equal opportunities at least.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Oathkeeper on Jun 20, 2022, 09:32 PM
Quote from: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 05:55 PM
Sairek Ceareste
to begin with, thank you as the admin of the continuing to work server.
What I meant, in my opinion, such prohibitions are stupid, because they simply cannot work for everyone. Anyone who wants to circumvent this ban will easily circumvent it.
If such a ban is in effect, then it is on the contrary more pleasant for the cheater to get an advantage over other law-abiding.
Moreover, it can't even be called a cheat, you don't need to be a software expert for this.

Example. My second acc Sage putting an enchant on my other character. for 30 minutes. And I can even quit the game, 30 minutes is a long time. Or how do you prove that my grandfather does not like to help his grandson? )
Or as I said, it can be a second computer with a different IP or from a virtual machine and proxy, and my Priest will Heal, Buff and then Warp in the dungeon. And he will be waiting for me in town, you will not be able to prove anything even theoretically if there is another IP. In 2022 it's very easy.

At the same time, allowing for example two open windows at the same time on one IP would be a fair competitive move, because it would be an equal position for everyone and I can not think that the other player gets an advantage over me very simply right now.
I suggest you just think about it, anyway, for the MVP or Bio Lab 3 you will have to play with real people party.
And probably you can disable auto-following programmatically, then it will be difficult to provide full-fledged support on many maps without real players party.
I would like to try your server, but the potential inequality puts me off.

We've had a pretty strong intolerance against attempts to multiclient. While the technology has evolved to mask it, it is still largely detectable by means we've set up in the backend. Of course, I won't go into those, but I strongly believe that the community aspect is the thing that breathes life into an MMO and once you start providing means to erode that community, the server will slowly die off. People are given the opportunity to send a message to the staff that they intend to play with a relative in the same household. We actually keep a close eye on these people to ensure that their claim was in good faith. However, we also know that for some individuals, this is a way for them to bond with their significant other or children and the last thing we want to do is strip that opportunity from them. So at risk of letting a few people slip past the rule, we rather provide that opportunity of a safe place for people to gather and enjoy a game.

At this point we've banned nearly 100 people for dual clienting. Some have remade their characters and now adhere to the rules, others don't respect the rule and have moved on. However, we do remain vigilant and the community is quick to point out individuals suspected of violating the rule. The rule is enforced not only by staff but reinforced by the members of the community.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
It's stupid.

A lot of people dislike 24/7 socialisation and I honestly think of wonderful things like "lets brew and need 12 people for it" or the guild that has a "friend or friends" who barely play but are good to log a warper/endower occasionally (My guild literally has an army of barely active but willing to support friends) which tips things in a horribly unbalanced direction.

Lack of partying is a symptom of older servers/aged playerbase; they get gear they don't need to party at low levels. Players get burned out so they don't make new chars (which happens irregardless of multiclient/no multis).

Later content tips the game heavily toward soloing. I won't talk about linkers, we all know the deal.

I'm a HP main at heart, I play it when I want parties and on no server ever have I ever had to BEG to party my priest. I don't play no multi servers because frankly I value not having to be around people too often, and I see a lot of horrible priests blaming multiclients for parties rejecting them. (btw I kind of love the dynamic of seeing players shun priests that want to half afk and building a blacklist, but I'm also a jerk because it means more parties for me on priest when they do that).

A lot of the "parties are destroyed by leeching" is more about a lot of that kind of play not being fun. Very few people enjoy priesting for a pure melee for long. Low level play is only fun if you're in a group screaming on voice at each other. There are flaws in the game, multiclienting isn't it.

My preferred solution to the problems people talk about, is to encourage and reward partying. Exp boosts in a group, Hunting quests that are shared to partymates (so long as everyone is a unique player) and my biggest gripe of all, take away the grindiness of hunting consumables so there's more time for actual party play. Nothing feels worse than saying "nah, not today I gotta hunt stems".

Partying has tons of issues in RO, but I think blaming multiclienting is a very lazy and narrowminded placement of blame.

No, I don't feel bad about anything I just said.


I respect what Oath does though, that's why I don't play there. Don't enter people's houses to break their rules - if you don't like it, find something that caters to you.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: distilled1 on Jun 20, 2022, 11:55 PM
Wow. Time to rip into Xellie I guess. What a load of crap.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
A lot of people dislike 24/7 socialisation
No one said you had to socialize 24/7. Just when you want the most efficient party you should have to because it's a MMORPG and meant to be a social genre.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
things like "lets brew and need 12 people for it"
You mean the way the game was meant to be originally? Wow. You realize that if a group of individuals is required to make the best potions, because people can't multi-client, everyone is still on the same playing field, right? There's nothing wrong with the best potions being more difficult to make than they would be from a spoiled multi-clienter's perspective. Just means they'll be used more sparingly by everyone.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
or the guild that has a "friend or friends" who barely play but are good to log a warper/endower occasionally (My guild literally has an army of barely active but willing to support friends) which tips things in a horribly unbalanced direction.
Sure you do. The reality is that players who have lost that much interest in RO aren't going to jump on at a moment's notice, every 30 minutes, to warp or endow others. They'll be playing something or doing another hobby they are actually interested in. Nice bad faith argument.
Besides, can still do that without multi-clienting by switching to your priest/sage, or having a friend switch to their priest/sage for you. This issue has absolutely nothing to do with multi-clienting. If you're against people abusing that aspect of the game, you should be advocating for literally one character per IP address (I'd be down with that personally).

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
Lack of partying is a symptom of older servers/aged playerbase;
Not the case. I've seen plenty of older players prefer partying when they don't feel the need to multi-clienting just to be on par. It's very liberating and fun.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
Later content tips the game heavily toward soloing.
Only when you can multi-client. No one is soloing endless tower and sealed shrine. No one is hunting any MVP that can use Earthquake to 1 shot them except maybe an Asura spamming monk, but that's actually a map/class design issue allowing them to portal in, spam the skill, then tp away. Not a multi-client issue.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
I'm a HP main at heart, I play it when I want parties and on no server ever have I ever had to BEG to party my priest.
So only priests should be able to experience fun parties? A social game mechanic the game was built around? Oh yeah cool multi-player game philosophy. "Hey let's play some D&D but every class has to solo except if you duo with a Cleric." Another bad faith argument from a priest no less.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
I don't play no multi servers because frankly I value not having to be around people too often
Well again, there's your problem. You're playing the wrong game genre then aren't you? You don't have to socialize "24/7". You can go chill, craft, quest, spam dead branches, etc, do your own thing while in the game but doing the more difficult content and leveling to 99 should require partying in a good MMORPG.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
and I see a lot of horrible priests blaming multiclients for parties rejecting them. (btw I kind of love the dynamic of seeing players shun priests that want to half afk and building a blacklist, but I'm also a jerk because it means more parties for me on priest when they do that).
Oh right cause the internet isn't yet tired of hearing Xellie fluff up her "mad priesting skills". I think you should go make another obvious priest guide to show us all the things we totally wouldn't have been able to figure out.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
There are flaws in the game, multiclienting isn't it.
It's definitely one of the major flaws. The original game had a subscription fee per account for a good reason.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
My preferred solution to the problems people talk about, is to encourage and reward partying. Exp boosts in a group, Hunting quests that are shared to partymates (so long as everyone is a unique player)
It's a good idea to limit party exp boosts to unique players, yes, but it doesn't need to completely replace multi-clienting, because many other problems arise when people can multi-client. The exp boosts work great alongside banning multi-clienting.

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
Partying has tons of issues in RO, but I think blaming multiclienting is a very lazy and narrowminded placement of blame.
Yeah partying has some issues in RO, but banning multi-clienting helps to encourage people to play together, literally alleviating one of the most prominent issues in most RO servers where people don't play together because it's more efficient to solo with yourself. What is "lazy and narrowminded" about that? Do you not understand this very basic player psychology?

Quote from: Xellie on Jun 20, 2022, 10:21 PM
No, I don't feel bad about anything I just said.
You probably should. You're an anti-social person playing a social video game genre and saying you don't enjoy socializing, and assuming no one else wants to.
You couldn't be more wrong about many of your bad faith arguments.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Butt Force on Jun 21, 2022, 12:16 AM
Ah, yes!  Rolls-on-server-with-ruleset-he-doesn't-like guy.  Good to see you, old friend.  Glad you're still doing your thing.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: CryingBabies on Jun 21, 2022, 01:17 AM
HeY, LoOk At Me MoM! I'Ve GoT TwO HaNdS, So i wIlL PlAy 2 RaGnArOk cLiEntS!

I bet you want @autoloot as well, don't ya champ? Imagine if you were an octopus, how many clients would you play at the same time?

Oh, I dream with that server. A server full of zombie characters controlled by the Master Multi-Tasker. Beautiful. I want to play on that server!!!!

Also please, SP iteMs FoR SaLe On NPCS!!!!  /omg

Baby boy can't follow the rules, so he comes cry on RMS.

muah, muah!  /sob






Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 21, 2022, 07:14 AM
Quote from: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 05:55 PM
Sairek Ceareste
to begin with, thank you as the admin of the continuing to work server.
What I meant, in my opinion, such prohibitions are stupid, because they simply cannot work for everyone. Anyone who wants to circumvent this ban will easily circumvent it.
If such a ban is in effect, then it is on the contrary more pleasant for the cheater to get an advantage over other law-abiding.
Moreover, it can't even be called a cheat, you don't need to be a software expert for this.

Example. My second acc Sage putting an enchant on my other character. for 30 minutes. And I can even quit the game, 30 minutes is a long time. Or how do you prove that my grandfather does not like to help his grandson? )
Or as I said, it can be a second computer with a different IP or from a virtual machine and proxy, and my Priest will Heal, Buff and then Warp in the dungeon. And he will be waiting for me in town, you will not be able to prove anything even theoretically if there is another IP. In 2022 it's very easy.

At the same time, allowing for example two open windows at the same time on one IP would be a fair competitive move, because it would be an equal position for everyone and I can not think that the other player gets an advantage over me very simply right now.
I suggest you just think about it, anyway, for the MVP or Bio Lab 3 you will have to play with real people party.
And probably you can disable auto-following programmatically, then it will be difficult to provide full-fledged support on many maps without real players party.
I would like to try your server, but the potential inequality puts me off.


I'm not an admin, just a moderator, but thank you. /heh

Like I said, it is easier to get away with some things more than others, but logs exist. If for any reason we become suspicious of someone, then look into their history, and see them logging in and endowing their own character, well, you get banned and just lost everything. A lot of people wouldn't want to entertain that risk as the risk outweighs the reward. Someone who managed to reach level 99 early on in the server's life and was playing around 8+ hours a day got punished for doing just that and lost everything. Most people who want endows ask for it in #trade chat and other sages can make an economy off of that -- something that I don't believe would be possible if multi-clienting was allowed. At least I never saw it in servers that allowed it very often.

As far as sitting-as-a-Priest-in-town thing goes, again, as our rules states, if it looks, works and acts like multi-clienting, we ban for it. The rules specifically are designed in regards to multi-clienting that we don't need to proof without a doubt someone is multi-clienting, just enough evidence within a reasonable doubt. If we can get direct proof, great, but if it is extremely suspicious, we will 'ere on the side of caution. As you said, it is easy to obfuscate that it looks like two different people by changing IPs or using a virtual machine. People have tried that and we still found them out because the 30+ people who may be active in town will all wonder why this priest that is otherwise AFK in town is only actively buffing this one character over and over again and ignoring the rest after an extended period of time and will report it because they find it suspicious -- and so would we. Again, it is very difficult to actively play as two or more characters at the same time for an extended period, no matter how far someone tries to obfuscate the data. The life of a city priest on Oath can have little to no down time. At some point, it becomes easier to just play one character anyways than trying to multi-client and keep up a legitimate appearance. The "reward" for cheating this way isn't worth the risk and effort for the vast majority.

Somebody else tried setting up a network and it ended up with 11 of their accounts full of characters reasonably high-leveled characters and millions and millions of zeny in total accumulated net-worth going down the drain as one thing tipped us off after weeks of us being suspicious and the whole thing crumbled. Hundreds of hours of cheating to get ahead gone to waste and all voided. They didn't come back to try again. Is it worth the risk?

Finally, as Oathkeeper said, there's back-end things we can see as well. There's more than just someone's IP and play patterns that gives multi-clienting away that we can look into, and our tools and security will only improve over time. I'm not gonna claim we catch everyone 100%, because it's probably not true and no security is perfect, but it is the same on every other server, or hell, game out there, no matter what you do or how tight your security is.


As far as servers and equality goes, I'd argue that no server is safe from inequality, multi-clienting or not for one reason or another. Whether it be exploits used, corrupt administration, duping, RMT under the hood, pay 2 win/cash shop, etc. Ultimately I suggest you try to find a server that just looks good and trustworthy to you with a good history and go for it, but even that isn't a guarantee. All I can say is that we try our best to make sure that the server is as fair, safe and fun for everyone as much as possible, for free. Everyone on the staff at our server loves the game and we want it to be the best we can make it be, which is why we volunteer our free time to the project and why Oathkeeper pays for the server's upkeep out of pocket.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Rayeth on Jun 21, 2022, 08:40 AM
Multi-client is the reason why people get too ahead of the game and why there is no sense of community on most RO servers nowadays. The argument of game has been "dying" for over a decade now, and I believe it will be "dying" for a decade more, since I see no replacement for it on the market, since there is no effort to make one because they allow things such as multi-client... don't even get me started with bots. If you break simple rule as multi client then you wont hesitate to bot as well.

This is about giving yourself an unfair advantage and invalidating the existence of many classes. It's about social interaction; the point of MMOs is to interact with other players.  Players who choose to abuse this are playing in their own bubble, treating our beloved MMO as a fully solo experience while reaping the benefits of party mechanics. Don't give me that "you can do it too so its fair!" garbage...you know there is absolutely no challenge involved, only tedium for alt+tabbing and maybe 20 hours tops to leech your priest to a respectable level.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Insomnia2000 on Jun 21, 2022, 09:17 AM
I'll say this every time I see "no multi client" mentioned. Why are server owners insistent on blocking multi-client rather than fixing broken mechanics that necessitate multi-client? Is it because the second a server tries to fix said broken mechanic, players go "no! too custom!" and leave? I really doubt it. Blocking multi-client does nothing to address the issue except for add work for staff members to police people that are trying to get around broken gameplay mechanics.

Look at what was mentioned in this thread already

Why are these things things to begin with? Is it really socializing/partying if a sage is active in your party performing a singular endow on you once every 30 minutes? No, it isn't. It's no wonder endows are multi-cliented.

Instead of saying "Endows are okay as long as you have a legitimate sage that comes into contact with you once every 30 minutes, but not okay if you're logging on a second character once every 30 minutes." We should be saying "something is not correct with the way endows work, what can we do to address it?"

Either you dislike the way that the above functions and put some effort and thought into fixing it or you are okay with the above and leave it alone. Banning multi-client is the worst of both worlds: leaving a broken mechanic in place and banning players who try to make the broken mechanic not so crappy to deal with.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: yC on Jun 21, 2022, 12:58 PM
Sigh .. that is one of the thing that official server is supposed to give you and due to the lack of players in private servers there has to be ways to serve as workaround.

In a perfect world, the game is designed for multi-players and thus promote activities that you will need each other to keep the game growing when more people are pulled in to take different routes.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 21, 2022, 01:16 PM
Quote from: Insomnia2000 on Jun 21, 2022, 09:17 AM
I'll say this every time I see "no multi client" mentioned. Why are server owners insistent on blocking multi-client rather than fixing broken mechanics that necessitate multi-client? Is it because the second a server tries to fix said broken mechanic, players go "no! too custom!" and leave? I really doubt it. Blocking multi-client does nothing to address the issue except for add work for staff members to police people that are trying to get around broken gameplay mechanics.

Look at what was mentioned in this thread already

  • "My second acc Sage putting an enchant on my other character. for 30 minutes. And I can even quit the game, 30 minutes is a long time." - OldPoring
  • "lets brew and need 12 people for it" - Xellie
  • "log a warper/endower occasionally" - Xellie


Why are these things things to begin with? Is it really socializing/partying if a sage is active in your party performing a singular endow on you once every 30 minutes? No, it isn't. It's no wonder endows are multi-cliented.

Instead of saying "Endows are okay as long as you have a legitimate sage that comes into contact with you once every 30 minutes, but not okay if you're logging on a second character once every 30 minutes." We should be saying "something is not correct with the way endows work, what can we do to address it?"

Either you dislike the way that the above functions and put some effort and thought into fixing it or you are okay with the above and leave it alone. Banning multi-client is the worst of both worlds: leaving a broken mechanic in place and banning players who try to make the broken mechanic not so crappy to deal with.


In OathRO, Sages can create consumable scrolls, which also serve to endow the user's weapon so people can have a consumable item to endow with. So you don't actually need to tag along with an endow sage in the party or do log-out tactics. Again, it is something they can use to create an economy with or if you own one, just make some scrolls to store for yourself. That way it's like smuggling an endow sage into your pockets. Legally!

As for warps, most people can just ask for a warp in town and people will provide one. Whether you wanna tip them a few zeny for it or not is usually up to you. I made an easy 100k just playing city priest for a day. They'll usually buff you too. No need to risk multi-clienting for that. Y'know, people helping other people. I know it's rare for a server that allows multi-clienting to receive that help, but it's pretty common on our server.


I can't comment on guild brewing though because I'm not in a guild other than my own private one for inter-dimensional account storage. The actual players would know much better than I about that experience.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: distilled1 on Jun 21, 2022, 10:47 PM
Quote from: Insomnia2000 on Jun 21, 2022, 09:17 AM
Blocking multi-client does nothing to address the issue
What exactly is "the issue" in your mind, aside from "NOOOOOOO! I have to actually interact with other people and can't get everything I want by soloing! SAVE ME, FINAL FANTASY XIV!"

Quote from: Insomnia2000 on Jun 21, 2022, 09:17 AM
Look at what was mentioned in this thread already

  • "My second acc Sage putting an enchant on my other character. for 30 minutes. And I can even quit the game, 30 minutes is a long time." - OldPoring
This can't be done when multi-clienting is disabled, but it can be easily abused when multi-clienting is ALLOWED. So you're not making a good point for multi-clienting.
You just pissed all over your own argument.

Quote from: Insomnia2000 on Jun 21, 2022, 09:17 AM

  • "lets brew and need 12 people for it" - Xellie
Not a "blocked multi-clienting" issue. More of a "spoiled multi-clienter perspective" issue. People who got too used to getting literally everything solo.
First of all, you don't need 12 people to brew. Maybe 4-5 people or whatever the real, non-exaggerated number is for the most brew efficiency possible. This doesn't mean you have to make them that way, and unique players coming together to be more efficient or to succeed is what MMORPGs are about. Don't like it? Wrong game genre for you then. Not even an issue. It's meant to be this way.

Quote from: Insomnia2000 on Jun 21, 2022, 09:17 AM

  • "log a warper/endower occasionally" - Xellie
Also not "blocked multi-clienting" issue as I already mentioned. Everyone has 9 character slots by default. Your buddy can still swap to their sage/priest and buff you then swap back when multi-clienting is blocked. But yeah I agree that the sage should have to stick around for such a great buff to remain in effect or it should have a much lower buff duration like priest skills. This doesn't mean multi-clienting is good for MMORPGs. It's god-awful.

The point of MMORPGs is to reward players who group up and help eachother out.
There's been an evergrowing trend among modern MMORPG design for decades now which encourages and rewards solo play. It's literally why modern MMORPGs suck so hard compared to older ones.
They're soulless and akin to binge watching a very mediocre anime while pressing a few buttons between cutscenes.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Butt Force on Jun 21, 2022, 11:00 PM
Meanwhile, on no-multiclient servers: thriving economies and adventuring parties, buzzing with the kind of activity that can only come from support jobs being a main option.

This was the one thing J's mouth-foaming sociopathic rage was right to breathe fire all over.

Plus it eliminates all that s*** about WELL MY SERVER HAS 2000 PLAYERS AND GRAVITY STOLE IT FROM ME!!!  There hasn't been a 4-digit unique player count server in literal decades.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Ralgondo on Jun 22, 2022, 03:09 AM
I wouldn't say it's stupid, some people want to play the game a certain way, that's fine.

However, expectation vs. reality is another story...

Like you said, the reason always cited is this party oriented gameplay idea, but it never happens. In fact, ironically the classes which thrive the most on no-multiclient servers are solo classes. Classes who don't need help getting reborn. Another consequence is that most classes / builds in the game become inaccessible. Without the option to use multi-clients to create less popular or niche builds, you're more or less stuck with the staple class and their most staple builds. If you want to get into a party (which rarely happens) you need to be a priest, or one of the most essential classes like wizard. Other than that you're not needed so most people won't bother playing with you. No multi-client servers end up just being a bunch of priests, archers, and mages. A couple unlucky people buy into the idea about there being all these parties and make the tragic mistake of trying to make a character who cannot solo level. They spam the discord channels and global chats for a few weeks looking for groups and eventually quit. Also, on multi-client enabled servers I see no less partying, people solo because they have to, and party when they can. Partying always happens for MVPs, higher end maps, and even on some lower tier maps just because people want to socialize sometimes. But there's at least options if you want to make certain classes, builds, etc.

That being said, the game was meant to be played solo and multi-client does allow for a lot of progression solo that wouldn't be otherwise possible. I don't blame people for being against multi-client but I have never yet to see this fantasy RO world they are talking about.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: charlielovesu on Jun 22, 2022, 04:34 AM
This will never get one solid response from the community. We are all divided on the issues of multi-clienting. I'll try to give my insight and non-biased opinions and look at things objectively from what I've seen as both player and owner:

Upside of disallowing dual clienting is the game is definitely more geared towards how it was INTENDED to be played. You were never intended to do everything yourself.

However, as game knowledge improved over the years players just realized they could dual everything. This is not a dual client issue, this is a fundamental game design issue with RO itself. And you can't argue against that. The game is amazing, but it has its flaws and this is amongst the most glaring.


That said, when you actively make the decision to restrict dual clienting you are now ARTIFICIALLY limiting players. They are not actually restricted in game knowledge, you've just put a bandage on a gaping wound. It's a hotfix, but doesn't actually solve the problem.


The problem is the gap between dual clienting and not dual clienting is often extremely massive because of how the game is designed.

I've played servers that are 1x, no dual client and its a blast! its fun to struggle a bit and have to consider other aspects. And for all the people that enjoy that primarily, I get it.

However, in my experience it only servers to limit players artificially when they could otherwise do content. There could be significantly harder content they know how to accomplish if they could just dual client. But they can't.

And despite what ANY server owner will tell you, no population holds up today to justify limiting players in such a way. No dual clients works if you have the players to sustain the alternative. If i can't dual client the content great, but you better have the players to back it up that i can find at will when I want to do said content.

Do any servers have this population? no. not even. close. You will not have a party going on at all times where you wantand when you want. You can form guilds sure, but finding enough people who also have the right classes or are willing to log someone else's character to do said content, is just not feasible.


As such, I'm firmly in the camp that dual-clienting is a necessary evil in the modern era.


In a perfect world, we'd go back to 2004. When the game was at its peak. no dual clients. we all just get to play with each other at our 1x rates and the game sustains itself as it meant to be.

However, the player base is all split up now. and that just doesn't happen.


That said as well I feel its very important that any server takes measures to limit the need for dual clienting at a minimum. If you just take the base game, and leave dual clienting its a pretty miserable experience. Many core necessities simply mean dual clienting. move speed, buffs, warps, etc.

The game works without duals on these things, if you have players. But without players it becomes a suffering experience.


Now, this is also subjective. The game works even without all the buffs, warps etc. you can still play. its just significantly more tedious and grindy. But people forget that its also not necessarily bad either. Most of RO is the journey and not the destination. As such, a longer grind is generally good. But you have to find players who share that mindset, and most dont. Most players are in to get their nostalgia kick and feel like a true end game fantasy is within reach in a reasonable amount of time.


so the TLDR is I feel dual-clienting is a necessary evil, but in a perfect world we wouldn't need it. I won't argue with any server own who feels a need to ban it as my perspective is entirely subjective. I just disagree with the idea that banning duals rather than discourage dual clienting or lessen the need for it is the way to go.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Playtester on Jun 22, 2022, 05:12 AM
Well, you can always do both, disallow multi-clienting AND fix issues with party play not being fun such as reducing the endow duration.

How strong the party play on a server is strongly depends on the mindset of players, though. Disallowing multi-clienting does not exclusively attract party-loving people but also competitive people.

From my experience you find more party play on a server without competitive people, such as servers with only around 10 players, regardless of whether that server allows multi-clienting or not.

Though it still bothers me when I party with someone and then he plays with around with his alts while in party with me. So I still rather have it disallowed.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Insomnia2000 on Jun 22, 2022, 08:37 AM
Quote from: distilled1 on Jun 21, 2022, 10:47 PM
What exactly is "the issue" in your mind, aside from "NOOOOOOO! I have to actually interact with other people and can't get everything I want by soloing! SAVE ME, FINAL FANTASY XIV!"

The issue is exactly as you've described further in your post at the end.  I absolutely believe people should benefit from continued partying and interaction. I do not agree with getting all benefits by soloing and multi-clienting.

Quote from: distilled1 on Jun 21, 2022, 10:47 PM
The point of MMORPGs is to reward players who group up and help eachother out.
There's been an evergrowing trend among modern MMORPG design for decades now which encourages and rewards solo play.

The problem is the way that vanilla RO is designed is *not* to reward players for grouping up and continuing to helping each other out. You can try to force player behaviour that way by saying "only one client" but the game just isn't designed to reward people for grouping up over time. It's almost there, but not quite imo. There certainly is inter-class balance where one class rewards the other, but you need to make sure that the interaction continues (reward continued playing together) and isn't a "one and done" situation.

Example: You have a skill like sage's endow that is designed to help a party member out massively by giving the player potentially 2x damage. However, the way it's designed is not rewarding to have the sage be around you once the interaction is complete. One interaction per 30 minutes is not rewarding people who group up. It's rewarding to come across a sage, but not to party with one.

The correct solution to the example (in my opinion) would be to address the way sage interacts with party members via endow. Come up with a solution that rewards someone for continuing to party with a sage and do not reward someone for just hopping on sage (friend or multi-client) for just a moment to endow and log off.

This applies to more than just endow, but endow is a very easy example of where the game's design does not reward the player for partying up and continuing to play and interact with that person. Blocking multi-client does nothing to address the root problem of why people feel like they need to multi-client.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: distilled1 on Jun 22, 2022, 09:15 AM
Quote from: Playtester on Jun 22, 2022, 05:12 AM
Well, you can always do both, disallow multi-clienting AND fix issues with party play not being fun such as reducing the endow duration.
This.

Pretty much everyone knows that the default vanilla Ragnarok Online game is flawed when it comes to ideal class balance.
Ideally, every single class available should be equally desired by a party of other players. Should be equally as beneficial to have as every other class without every class becoming homogenized and feeling like they have the exact same playstyles.
But allowing multi-clienting won't fix this issue, so I'm not sure why irrelevant discussion about class balance is even being brought up when the subject is regarding disabled multi-clienting.

Disabling multi-clienting alone does not harm a community. It creates a better sense of community where every player is playing with one character at a time, giving everyone a better sense of immersion and adventure, and creating a benefit to partying.
It's not immersive to see one player controlling 2, 3, or 4 characters at a time, and when players see that happening, they're more inclined to follow that example and multi-client themselves, because obviously the one man army doesn't need help conquering the world's challenges, and neither do you if you copy the multi-clienter. No reason to interact anymore.
Maybe there should be a custom ninja skill similar to Naruto's kage bunshin no jutsu if certain players want the look of having cloned themselves so bad.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: MaybeImWrong on Jun 22, 2022, 06:35 PM
Quote from: Butt Force on Jun 21, 2022, 11:00 PM
Meanwhile, on no-multiclient servers: thriving economies and adventuring parties, buzzing with the kind of activity that can only come from support jobs being a main option.

This was the one thing J's mouth-foaming sociopathic rage was right to breathe fire all over.

Plus it eliminates all that s*** about WELL MY SERVER HAS 2000 PLAYERS AND GRAVITY STOLE IT FROM ME!!!  There hasn't been a 4-digit unique player count server in literal decades.


he didn't know s***. Unless you police the server constantly 24/7 and follow each player, there is no way to really stop multi-clienting.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Aeroskye on Jun 24, 2022, 12:21 AM
No, it's not. I saw oRO, one of the best servers out there die at its core only because they had dual clients tbh. It takes the soul away from RO. If the server didn't die out right from the start, it most definitely will eventually end due to multiclient.

Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: neethree on Jun 24, 2022, 04:35 PM
No one's mentioned the middle ground yet? How about dual clienting, as in only two clients.
I think it's a nice enough balance of modern QOL for a small population vs encouraging party play without having one-man-armies. Kinda like how arealoot is to autoloot.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: OldPoring on Jun 24, 2022, 06:23 PM
Quote from: Aeroskye on Jun 24, 2022, 12:21 AM
No, it's not. I saw oRO, one of the best servers out there die at its core only because they had dual clients tbh. It takes the soul away from RO. If the server didn't die out right from the start, it most definitely will eventually end due to multiclient.
If you're talking about OriginsRO, then it was the most lively server I knew. in addition, it was is European, for me ping from the USA is a little frustrating. About 800 players were displayed on the server, so about 400-500 real persons, I usually played no more than 3 chars at the same time, in auto follow with priest and hunter or priest only for warp and buff/heal, sage waited in place for endow,
and it died only because of the Gravity attack (or by another decision of their administration), but definitely not because it was unpopular!
You can even say the opposite - OriginsRO could never have become so popular if it had forbidden a multi client ))

Quote from: neethree on Jun 24, 2022, 04:35 PM
No one's mentioned the middle ground yet? How about dual clienting, as in only two clients.
I think it's a nice enough balance of modern QOL for a small population vs encouraging party play without having one-man-armies. Kinda like how arealoot is to autoloot.
I almost suggested it. Two windows without any restrictions on one IP. This is convenient at least for transferring money and things between merchants without mail. Yes, if there is no NPC healer on the server, it's just stupid to forbid multi client, anyway, ro nerds will make themselves a priest and you will not be able to do anything about it. Make an automatic temporary ban of the character when opening the third window. And programmatically disable auto-following, if possible - then it will be an equivalent position for everyone on the server and the cheaters will not have an advantage over "honest fools".
----------------------
English is not my language, when I created this, it was more correct not "to ban", but not "to forbid".
Maybe the moderator can replace the "ban" in the topic name with a "forbid"?
it is impossible to forbid what can be used easy. Old ro players know all the tricks.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 25, 2022, 11:03 AM
Quote from: OldPoring on Jun 24, 2022, 06:23 PM
If you're talking about OriginsRO, then it was the most lively server I knew. in addition, it was is European, for me ping from the USA is a little frustrating. About 800 players were displayed on the server, so about 400-500 real persons, I usually played no more than 3 chars at the same time, in auto follow with priest and hunter or priest only for warp and buff/heal, sage waited in place for endow,
and it died only because of the Gravity attack (or by another decision of their administration), but definitely not because it was unpopular!
You can even say the opposite - OriginsRO could never have become so popular if it had forbidden a multi client ))
I almost suggested it. Two windows without any restrictions on one IP. This is convenient at least for transferring money and things between merchants without mail. Yes, if there is no NPC healer on the server, it's just stupid to forbid multi client, anyway, ro nerds will make themselves a priest and you will not be able to do anything about it. Make an automatic temporary ban of the character when opening the third window. And programmatically disable auto-following, if possible - then it will be an equivalent position for everyone on the server and the cheaters will not have an advantage over "honest fools".
----------------------
English is not my language, when I created this, it was more correct not "to ban", but not "to forbid".
Maybe the moderator can replace the "ban" in the topic name with a "forbid"?
it is impossible to forbid what can be used easy. Old ro players know all the tricks.

I don't know if it was 400~500 people. Combined with vendors, and the fact I saw some people using at least 2 people, usually 3 or more though (at a minimum, their "main, a priest, and then a soul linker -- sometimes a bard on top of all that), and I'd wager the actual population was around the 250ish area. I was guilty of having up to 5 characters on at a time in Origins myself (the 5th character being another character I was leeching).


The wording choice is fine. It is forbidden, and we ban for it. That said, fun is subjective. Some people enjoy multi-clienting, and some people wish it wasn't a thing. And until the rabid bear came in, there was plenty of low-rate servers to choose from that offered both options to whoever desired it.

Some of those servers are reviving with a rebranding, if starting all over again fresh on them is a thing you don't mind. So there will be choices again soon. Taking down private servers is a hopeless game of whack-a-mole, after all.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: LumpiaWrapper on Jun 25, 2022, 05:56 PM
Quote from: OldPoring on Jun 24, 2022, 06:23 PM
If you're talking about OriginsRO, then it was the most lively server I knew. in addition, it was is European, for me ping from the USA is a little frustrating. About 800 players were displayed on the server, so about 400-500 real persons, I usually played no more than 3 chars at the same time, in auto follow with priest and hunter or priest only for warp and buff/heal, sage waited in place for endow,
and it died only because of the Gravity attack (or by another decision of their administration), but definitely not because it was unpopular!
You can even say the opposite - OriginsRO could never have become so popular if it had forbidden a multi client ))
I almost suggested it. Two windows without any restrictions on one IP. This is convenient at least for transferring money and things between merchants without mail. Yes, if there is no NPC healer on the server, it's just stupid to forbid multi client, anyway, ro nerds will make themselves a priest and you will not be able to do anything about it. Make an automatic temporary ban of the character when opening the third window. And programmatically disable auto-following, if possible - then it will be an equivalent position for everyone on the server and the cheaters will not have an advantage over "honest fools".
----------------------
English is not my language, when I created this, it was more correct not "to ban", but not "to forbid".
Maybe the moderator can replace the "ban" in the topic name with a "forbid"?
it is impossible to forbid what can be used easy. Old ro players know all the tricks.
damn origins have 400-500 real players? wow i very doubt that since i always seen a train of slave following one dude and sometimes 2-3 slaves endowing and buffing one person.
the only time i seen a single client player is 3 times.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Styx on Jun 26, 2022, 05:29 PM
Origins was up from 2013 till lately. I was there from almost scratch. I am pretty sure they always did have a decent active and unique playerbase present. Something I never saw on any English language based pserver for that period of time. Don't underestimate me, I have played more then 160 servers including and officials as well. Where I do have many disagreements with Xellie, though we don't know each other at all and we have completely different approaches, my agreements with Xellie are more. This player can't be ignored so easy.
Any way, most important detail form Origins regarding direct gameplay: They did use pre-renewal mechanics where most servers will use Renewal mechanics and that doesn't work out very well on a pre-renewal based server and Irvine is gone so far I know. Maybe he wasn't the best around, maybe he was just in for the money but he did own a smooth running pre-renewal client and for my experience only Origins came close to such an achievement.

The issue of multiclient is a never ending discussion. However, if it is a server rule you take it or leave it. It makes no sense to argue about it. Maybe it will work out for this server to get and mantain a decent playerbase with such an approach.
I wouldn't even think about joining such a server for several reasons not even mentioned in this topic. It is very easy to accomplish several accounts on different IP's, it's 2022 meanwhile. Then even if they could detect and ban it succesfull. It still would mean one or two very good organized groups will own the server completely. There is no way a single player can beat such a group ever with multiclient. Sure, some efforts can be reached and that is exactly where the fun is for lone wolfs. Though without multiclient they are doomed and it would be stupid to waste your time on such a server. Partyplay you can encourage because it will bring fun to play it like that but I doubt you can make this entertaiment happen by force. Many players couldn't even effort depend on partyplay because they are limited in time and don't want to be a depending 24/7 slave for partyplay. Most just want to have fun playing a game. That's what it is, just a game to have fun, not religion or something like that.

Then again, this server does give it a try in this one client only direction, so give them a shot. If it will work for a majority, that will be oke for me.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Xellie on Jun 27, 2022, 01:06 AM
Quote from: distilled1 on Jun 20, 2022, 11:55 PM
Wow. Time to rip into Xellie I guess. What a load of crap.
No one said you had to socialize 24/7. Just when you want the most efficient party you should have to because it's a MMORPG and meant to be a social genre.
You mean the way the game was meant to be originally? Wow. You realize that if a group of individuals is required to make the best potions, because people can't multi-client, everyone is still on the same playing field, right? There's nothing wrong with the best potions being more difficult to make than they would be from a spoiled multi-clienter's perspective. Just means they'll be used more sparingly by everyone.
Sure you do. The reality is that players who have lost that much interest in RO aren't going to jump on at a moment's notice, every 30 minutes, to warp or endow others. They'll be playing something or doing another hobby they are actually interested in. Nice bad faith argument.
Besides, can still do that without multi-clienting by switching to your priest/sage, or having a friend switch to their priest/sage for you. This issue has absolutely nothing to do with multi-clienting. If you're against people abusing that aspect of the game, you should be advocating for literally one character per IP address (I'd be down with that personally).
Not the case. I've seen plenty of older players prefer partying when they don't feel the need to multi-clienting just to be on par. It's very liberating and fun.
Only when you can multi-client. No one is soloing endless tower and sealed shrine. No one is hunting any MVP that can use Earthquake to 1 shot them except maybe an Asura spamming monk, but that's actually a map/class design issue allowing them to portal in, spam the skill, then tp away. Not a multi-client issue.
So only priests should be able to experience fun parties? A social game mechanic the game was built around? Oh yeah cool multi-player game philosophy. "Hey let's play some D&D but every class has to solo except if you duo with a Cleric." Another bad faith argument from a priest no less.
Well again, there's your problem. You're playing the wrong game genre then aren't you? You don't have to socialize "24/7". You can go chill, craft, quest, spam dead branches, etc, do your own thing while in the game but doing the more difficult content and leveling to 99 should require partying in a good MMORPG.
Oh right cause the internet isn't yet tired of hearing Xellie fluff up her "mad priesting skills". I think you should go make another obvious priest guide to show us all the things we totally wouldn't have been able to figure out.
It's definitely one of the major flaws. The original game had a subscription fee per account for a good reason.
It's a good idea to limit party exp boosts to unique players, yes, but it doesn't need to completely replace multi-clienting, because many other problems arise when people can multi-client. The exp boosts work great alongside banning multi-clienting.
Yeah partying has some issues in RO, but banning multi-clienting helps to encourage people to play together, literally alleviating one of the most prominent issues in most RO servers where people don't play together because it's more efficient to solo with yourself. What is "lazy and narrowminded" about that? Do you not understand this very basic player psychology?
You probably should. You're an anti-social person playing a social video game genre and saying you don't enjoy socializing, and assuming no one else wants to.
You couldn't be more wrong about many of your bad faith arguments.

You're wrong, I'm lazy. Your post is riddled with personal attacks over facts. There will be no response.


Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Xellie on Jun 27, 2022, 01:19 AM
Quote from: Insomnia2000 on Jun 21, 2022, 09:17 AM
[/list]

Why are these things things to begin with? Is it really socializing/partying if a sage is active in your party performing a singular endow on you once every 30 minutes? No, it isn't. It's no wonder endows are multi-cliented.

Instead of saying "Endows are okay as long as you have a legitimate sage that comes into contact with you once every 30 minutes, but not okay if you're logging on a second character once every 30 minutes." We should be saying "something is not correct with the way endows work, what can we do to address it?"

Either you dislike the way that the above functions and put some effort and thought into fixing it or you are okay with the above and leave it alone. Banning multi-client is the worst of both worlds: leaving a broken mechanic in place and banning players who try to make the broken mechanic not so crappy to deal with.

I'll stand by the meat of what I was pointing out. RO is designed in ways that it blows multiclienting into being almost necessary, and if you don't, it moves into unfun mechanics. Linkers, sage endows, there's some other class that usually comes to mind, I can't think what it oh yeah marionette control good fun gameplay amazingly engaging much button pressing wow.

Speaking of brewing, material requirements being almost doubled by not using MC (anyone wanna MC for me overnight?) + lack of buffs pulls players into hunting over creation or hunting over partying. Because playing without materials isn't actually that fun. Nobody is gonna party to hunt... stems? It's the consumption of time into grinding things on non viable party maps that are the biggest killer IMO.

Multiclienting, for the information of those that don't know, was made legal very, very early on in the game's life. I can remember the exact patch, because I had lobbied the iRO produce the week before to allow it, because not multiclienting was leading to people editing their clients and finding worse things like... true sight edits. It was before trans. (I'm here with my laptop dual clienting, these people are finding cheats, this is dumb, please end it)

Regardless of the reasoning of them not being able to prevent cheats (and a valid reason since private servers can) the point here is purely that:

Unless these things are addressed in concerns about multiclient, there's no reason to regard it as a good thing to ban them. People can't talk about Gravity's intentions unless having actually sat around a table with them (I have  - yes this is a weird flex - and sometimes they were clueless about how the game is played anyway) and even then, some skills and classes make you question the very concept of single client play anyway.

I'd love to see the game altered to provide a solo client experience that is enjoyable, and viable. But I never see mention of any fixes to any of the things raised - and perhaps at that point the game would be altered so far, it wouldn't be the vanilla experience people think early RO was.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 27, 2022, 12:44 PM
Quote from: Xellie on Jun 27, 2022, 01:19 AM

    I'll stand by the meat of what I was pointing out. RO is designed in ways that it blows multiclienting into being almost necessary, and if you don't, it moves into unfun mechanics. Linkers, sage endows, there's some other class that usually comes to mind, I can't think what it oh yeah marionette control good fun gameplay amazingly engaging much button pressing wow.

    Speaking of brewing, material requirements being almost doubled by not using MC (anyone wanna MC for me overnight?) + lack of buffs pulls players into hunting over creation or hunting over partying. Because playing without materials isn't actually that fun. Nobody is gonna party to hunt... stems? It's the consumption of time into grinding things on non viable party maps that are the biggest killer IMO.

    Multiclienting, for the information of those that don't know, was made legal very, very early on in the game's life. I can remember the exact patch, because I had lobbied the iRO produce the week before to allow it, because not multiclienting was leading to people editing their clients and finding worse things like... true sight edits. It was before trans. (I'm here with my laptop dual clienting, these people are finding cheats, this is dumb, please end it)

    Regardless of the reasoning of them not being able to prevent cheats (and a valid reason since private servers can) the point here is purely that:

    • it was allowed VERY early on
    • and then a lot of the later game was either built to use that fact (paying for 2 subs for more $$$)
    • or issues that should have been fixed in a single player environment were not fixed.

    Unless these things are addressed in concerns about multiclient, there's no reason to regard it as a good thing to ban them. People can't talk about Gravity's intentions unless having actually sat around a table with them (I have  - yes this is a weird flex - and sometimes they were clueless about how the game is played anyway) and even then, some skills and classes make you question the very concept of single client play anyway.

    I'd love to see the game altered to provide a solo client experience that is enjoyable, and viable. But I never see mention of any fixes to any of the things raised - and perhaps at that point the game would be altered so far, it wouldn't be the vanilla experience people think early RO was.


Plenty people have succeeded here so far without it being necessary, though. So is it necessary?

I guess multiclient can make some grind less laborious sure, but fun is subjective, so I don't feel that argument holds water.

For me for example, I got a baby mage (not wizard) to level 99. The first person to not only get a first-class to 99, but the first person to get a baby to level 99 at the same time. Some people don't find locking yourself to a baby first class fun, but I do, because I like that challenge, even if it is hell of a grind.

Some people are doing "hardcore baby novice perma death" runs. Where they can't trade, buy from NPCs, or use storage, and if they die, they delete the character. I don't find that fun. Those people do.

I don't find WoE fun. Some people do.



In other words, the argument really shouldn't be if banning multi-client makes the game impossible to play, because well, people are playing on OathRO without it just fine (granted the server has some changes for quality of life that makes one-client play less annoying, like reducing resting down time). The argument is does banning multi-client make the game not fun.

That answer is subjective, because fun is subjective, and so the answer will change based on a person-by-person basis. I personally say it's not bad, considering I like actually being able to interact with people and I like chilling on just on one toon without having to spam the alt-tab button constantly, and like actually having to play some classes instead of just leeching them up levels. Some people don't like that sort of thing, and that's okay too, but then OathRO probably isn't the server for them, and that's completely fine. The glory of private servers is that if one option doesn't fit you, there's a hundred other options that might.

The ultimate goal of a game existing isn't if it's possible to easily reach maxed out everything efficiently. The goal of a game should be that you can have fun with it, first and foremost before anything else. A game that can be played, but isn't fun, is not a good game that holds much value in my opinion. If the goal is to reach maxed out everything super easily, then you may as well play a super highrate, in my opinion.

Our goal with the server is to keep it somewhat nostalgic, but also fresh and new. Through this, we hope to try and re-live that fresh RO feel people first had 20 years ago, before the game was "solved". People can theory-craft builds again, go on new adventures they haven't seen before, and they can experience that with the rest of the community. We're trying to craft a journey, because to us, that is fun and that is our goal. It would not be much of a journey or experience if people just multi-cliented and powered through everything and quests via sheer number of toons instead of experiencing them with other people, and it's very hard to balance gameplay to someone who multi-clients two accounts, versus someone who decides to multi-client a dozen toons for a full party. You can't really balance for that. At that point, people who don't have the best hardware or internet, or simply don't want to do that are going to fall behind extremely hard and have difficulty playing. But again, some people will value that and have fun with it, and some won't, and they should probably find a different server if it's not what they're looking for.  But I would definitely argue it's not "wrong".

Ultimately, if something is unfun and balanced badly, then our goal is to make it less bad and more fun, but super rewarding things should still be hard so they still have that high value to them. Getting card drops after all would be far less exciting if they just dropped like nothing, but there is also a thing as "too rare". The stress of farming things like stems can easily be fixed by just giving more mobs, even in later content, stem drops, so you're gaining stems whilst doing something else that isn't just killing low level mobs for hours on end all day. We've already done this for witch star sand by expanding the drop to other mobs (some mobs being custom) as just one example.
We've also given alchemists a new platinum skill that allows mobs they defeat to have a chance to drop an alchemy materials, just for them being them, so they're rewarded by just playing, no matter where they are. It isn't much, but it alleviates that frustration a little bit.

Stuff like this helps chip away the grind to feel more manageable, but doesn't invalidate the value and reward of someone who goes hard into it. Releasing the tension at certain frustration points the original game has without outright removing the challenge helps keep the game from becoming annoying and keeps it being fun as the player feels like their time is being rewarded for the amount of work they are putting in.


Again, needing to rest is fine, but having to rest for 3+ minutes straight without HP/SP items or a support duo isn't difficult or challenging; it's just annoying, especially when you're just starting out fresh. However, having moments of downtime and having to resource manage your HP/SP is still an extremely important game element to have, so removing it entirely is out of the question.
Reducing the HP/SP wait time reduces the frustration and the "requirement" of multi-clienting with an acolyte auto following you, or even having a duo in the first place.

These are the kind of changes we're making on the server, aside from the custom content, of course.[/list]
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Xellie on Jun 27, 2022, 01:00 PM
I'm not gonna say it to be mean, but there's a reason I don't play Oath.

And that is because I hate being forced into social interaction

"But why are you playing an MMO then?"

I didn't say no interaction!

Anyway, I like that you're solving some of the things - but I'd like to know how me, someone who likes to play assassin, is going to be wanted in parties without playing a mobber that any class can do that. Some classes are just literally designed to play alone. They get hit by a huge disparity or left behind in comparison to groups (that's the choice of playing alone, but takes the class out of being wanted).

There's also... what do you do when new/low level players/new char players dry up? People who are stuck without parties in the "unfun" section of the game (I don't find much below around level 85 to be fun because of burnout I guess).

There are a lot of things that multiclienting solve that I just wanna see answers to.

Also I'm 100% accepting that it's a playstyle people might like or prefer. I don't really nostalgia seek for that era, I've done kicking rocks so I can kick bigger rocks to death, multiple times, on 1x without multi. I've never made a b**** slave priest. I just level things solo until I reach engaging party level (thana/bio/nid/thor) but anything before that (to party) is boring af to me.  (Fyi soloing to me really is just running my HP in town for warps and endowing myself, I never do the autofollow train because walking is frustrating and boring to me. Idk how the multi client train people do it. I'd be bored in 3 mins and I find it... inefficient.)

tbh, it gets dull after a while - hence each to their own. That is the point, right?

But I'll full stand my ground against anyone who says multiclient is the reason partying dies. Cuz it's not. There's a plethora of issues that cause that to happen and blaming multiclients is lazy and poorly thought out.

(btw honest opinion on the alchemist plat skill - that's great but people who play other classes need to take them materials to get their items made too. So unless they make an alche (time drain) they will drain time on mats. Just a thought. It's a good direction you're going in tho :) )
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Playtester on Jun 27, 2022, 01:34 PM
Xellie, I want to point out that on official servers no multi-clienting was mostly enforced by the game being P2P. Not many people could afford to pay more than $15 a month to play a game, and thus most people didn't multiclient and there were many many people looking for priests to party with.

Assassin are good mobbers in parties because they have high flee and thus are not stopped when attacked most of the time. They can also take the role of tank in most regions.

Also a server with mostly party-loving players usually wouldn't mind even partying up with new players. If there's no multiclienting, you can also remove some restrictions such as Exp share limit which makes it even easier to party (this is what I'd do if I made a server, keep the rates at 1x but Exp Share without limit, but admittedly I didn't see any other server do that yet).

But as said this does not depend so much on if multi-clienting is allowed or not, but rather on how competitive a server is. No competition means that all players just play for fun.

And it can be fun to party up with a new player and show him around. Or just go to some easier regions where you need the drops in (such as hunting Stems as you mentioned).

I feel like many RO players are just purely competitive and never really experience how it is like to just party for fun.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Styx on Jun 27, 2022, 03:50 PM
Quote from: Playtester on Jun 27, 2022, 01:34 PM
Xellie, I want to point out that on official servers no multi-clienting was mostly enforced by the game being P2P. Not many people could afford to pay more than $15 a month to play a game, and thus most people didn't multiclient and there were many many people looking for priests to party with.

Well, you are completely wrong here Playtester, there was only a short delay in offering multiclient from Gravity and that was only because they had problems in that time to secure the connection to do so. Internet wasn't quite stable as it is today. There wasn't much of payment required either by that time. Actually, Gravity learned in time from pservers how to collect the money for this game.
So, the game was designed on purpose for multiclient and if you pay attention to follow the thoughts from Minsoo Lee, head designer from gravity in the early days. He would never choose a direction to exclude players for any reason. His approach was entertainment and bend anything in that direction. This even might going beyond what you could imagine but give it some attention. You have skills enough, eliminate the decision, free your mind. Minsoo left somewhere after 10.2 and the game slowly degraded afterwards and when finally Renewal came it was all a different game at once. So, seek out history, it is there just to retrieve and find out what the designers had in mind. Then again, it is free for everyone to seek a different direction to make this game work and maybe it will work today with just one client only, I doubt it will work because the game was never designed for that purpose and you probably have to tweak it sooner or later heavily getting it working in that direction, even Origins did so. That doesn't mean a new idea couldn't work out well. It's their call. Then don't try to humiliate Xellie, with fake facts. Do your research seriously.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 27, 2022, 04:18 PM
Quote from: Xellie on Jun 27, 2022, 01:00 PM
I'm not gonna say it to be mean, but there's a reason I don't play Oath.

And that is because I hate being forced into social interaction

"But why are you playing an MMO then?"

I didn't say no interaction!

Anyway, I like that you're solving some of the things - but I'd like to know how me, someone who likes to play assassin, is going to be wanted in parties without playing a mobber that any class can do that. Some classes are just literally designed to play alone. They get hit by a huge disparity or left behind in comparison to groups (that's the choice of playing alone, but takes the class out of being wanted).

There's also... what do you do when new/low level players/new char players dry up? People who are stuck without parties in the "unfun" section of the game (I don't find much below around level 85 to be fun because of burnout I guess).

There are a lot of things that multiclienting solve that I just wanna see answers to.

Also I'm 100% accepting that it's a playstyle people might like or prefer. I don't really nostalgia seek for that era, I've done kicking rocks so I can kick bigger rocks to death, multiple times, on 1x without multi. I've never made a b**** slave priest. I just level things solo until I reach engaging party level (thana/bio/nid/thor) but anything before that (to party) is boring af to me.  (Fyi soloing to me really is just running my HP in town for warps and endowing myself, I never do the autofollow train because walking is frustrating and boring to me. Idk how the multi client train people do it. I'd be bored in 3 mins and I find it... inefficient.)

tbh, it gets dull after a while - hence each to their own. That is the point, right?

But I'll full stand my ground against anyone who says multiclient is the reason partying dies. Cuz it's not. There's a plethora of issues that cause that to happen and blaming multiclients is lazy and poorly thought out.

(btw honest opinion on the alchemist plat skill - that's great but people who play other classes need to take them materials to get their items made too. So unless they make an alche (time drain) they will drain time on mats. Just a thought. It's a good direction you're going in tho :) )


On official servers, being able to multi-client back in the subscription model was basically pay to win. The more money you had to spend, the more advantage you had. If the game was designed for that, well, that kinda sucks, because not everyone can afford that. Kind of like why current official RO is garbage. You aren't able to get the full experience if you're not ripping out your credit card; and just being able to brute force your way through everything isn't very rewarding in my opinion, either.

But either way, you are not being forced into social interaction on OathRO. You can play solo just fine -- I do it; I'm a mostly solo player. I'm probably far more behind than other people, but I only play a few hours of RO a week except for that time I pushed for level 99 baby mage in 16 days. Now I play even less than before since I had a tornado roll through my city last month; understandably, that has caused my life priorities to shift a fair bit. We've made dungeons and custom mobs and dungeons to cater to solo/small parties, and I believe the Payon Catacombs that will be coming very soon will also cater towards that too, for players in the mid-game range. There's plenty of solo players on the server who are actually more ahead in a lot of things than even the people who live in parties; probably because they are getting several times more loot for only a smaller portion of less EXP.

That said, I still want to focus on the solo/small party experience even more as well, but on a more grander, adventure-esque scale, which isn't really in RO (from my experience anyway).



I've been personally drafting up a huge self-contained quest line that probably won't see the light of day for a long time where the player goes to investigate a city that had been destroyed by a plague; but now, despite the city being quarantined and its destruction, is having the plague that once destroyed it, somehow transcending through time itself into the present day.
To stop the plague, the player will need to travel back through the city's history in its final year through the four seasons back and forth, as well as investigate its ruins in the present day, in an attempt to investigate how the plague happened, what the cause is, and find out how to stop it before it wreaks havoc both in the past as well as the present.

I want the max party size to be only 2~3 people because investigating an entire quest line with up to 12 people seems weird and the entire premise is to do the investigation but incognito style anyways. Solo or a small group could get away with it, but not a dozen adventurers suddenly popping up out of the blue. Also, there will be an NPC that will be helping them (ideally through mercenary AI) that will be supporting them through some combat sections, so that will help make it easier to balance, even if a player goes in solo (assuming I can get it all to work together).

Basically, I want to make solo(ish) content that feels and plays like small party content, with dialogue choices so it makes it feel like the NPCs you are with are genuine people, and have it be very roleplay heavy where your choices can affect details of how things play out. I want it to be more than just sending you on an errand to do something alone, as the main NPCs will genuinely accompany you since you are all invested into this thing together.
That isn't going to be very easy to make of course. However, I'll also be able to make the same maps and basically recycle them five-ish times with changing things here and there, with the seasons and time change helping differentiate them all cosmetically, so it's not totally out of impossibility. I'm even making some custom music for this thing that hopefully sound good to people.


That said, I have still yet to learn how to make maps for RO (one of the staff is able to teach me if I ask), but I'd rather make the story first and then plot out mapping ideas afterwards, because from my time of making maps in Mirror's Edge, and even in writing itself, I've learned that making something can be like laying down cement, and it's very hard to remove or change something after you've already built the world around without affecting the entire thing. It can be very easy to make the mistake of just making something, have a better idea days or weeks later after you've already built everything else around that initial idea, and then get stuck in a loop where you're constantly changing things to accommodate and making no progress; potentially making everything worse than if you had just let the cement settle instead of ripping it apart.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Xellie on Jun 27, 2022, 04:41 PM
Quote from: Playtester on Jun 27, 2022, 01:34 PM
Xellie, I want to point out that on official servers no multi-clienting was mostly enforced by the game being P2P. Not many people could afford to pay more than $15 a month to play a game, and thus most people didn't multiclient and there were many many people looking for priests to party with.

Assassin are good mobbers in parties because they have high flee and thus are not stopped when attacked most of the time. They can also take the role of tank in most regions.

Also a server with mostly party-loving players usually wouldn't mind even partying up with new players. If there's no multiclienting, you can also remove some restrictions such as Exp share limit which makes it even easier to party (this is what I'd do if I made a server, keep the rates at 1x but Exp Share without limit, but admittedly I didn't see any other server do that yet).

But as said this does not depend so much on if multi-clienting is allowed or not, but rather on how competitive a server is. No competition means that all players just play for fun.

And it can be fun to party up with a new player and show him around. Or just go to some easier regions where you need the drops in (such as hunting Stems as you mentioned).

I feel like many RO players are just purely competitive and never really experience how it is like to just party for fun.

mobbing is boring. Exclusively mobbing is boring. Any class can mob if they have good ping. Walking isn't fun gameplay. It might be fun once or twice, or trying to mow your friends down while laughing at them on voice (until they get mad) - but you can't seriously tell me that making class just to mob is fun and not dumb minmaxery.

Wanting to do gameplay that is more than walk in circles for 3 hours, or just clicking one skill isn't about not playing for fun... it's about being over that repetitiveness.

There is nothing more boring for a priest (IMO) than just following around an assassin and healing and buffing them occasionally - the only good priest + thing parties are with wizards (no bragi), sometimes hunters. Everything else is buffbot roleplay, until you reach levels like bio3.

It's not about wanting to level fast... I'd do thana/thor/bio even if the exp was nuked to 0.5% of normal, it's about changing up the gameplay from the norm, and using all your hotkeys, or at least half your keyboard. Fun doesn't have to be epic levels of casual.

Try playing league of legends or dota for "fun" the same way people talk about "fun" in RO and see what happens.

New players can't depend on the off-chance of someone being bored enough to search newbie maps to find someone to help. idk about anyone else, I used to do that a lot, and most the time you spend more time looking for a newbie!  When the population is 90% over 90, the older players and the newbies (as few and far between as they come) have a hard time crossing paths. It's for that reason you need to send veterans to newb maps to hunt materials. I can't stress how important the cross interaction of veterans and new players is.

re: multiclient and the fee; no, a LOT of people I knew had hexed their client to run a second one. Especially for shenanigans like farming LoD. And if you balance the game around college student age spending, I'm not sure that's a good plan for anyone, even gravity.



If I dare mention my proposed solution to the actual problems I see caused by multiclient, it basically involves limiting clients on specific maps. Any map with an MVP or next to an MVP should be limited to no more than 2 clients. Same for dungeons. Have w/e you like in town or on maps like goats. There are half way solutions to everything, but if this was a problem I was addressing, it would be focused purely on partying, because I feel that multiclient prevalence is a symptom, not a cause. 

Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Styx on Jun 28, 2022, 03:39 PM
Quote from: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 27, 2022, 04:18 PM

On official servers, being able to multi-client back in the subscription model was basically pay to win. The more money you had to spend, the more advantage you had. If the game was designed for that, well, that kinda sucks, because not everyone can afford that. Kind of like why current official RO is garbage. You aren't able to get the full experience if you're not ripping out your credit card; and just being able to brute force your way through everything isn't very rewarding in my opinion, either.

You should do serious research also. When exactly did Gravity start to ask a payment to play this game in a way it really made a difference direction P2P or P2W? You will learn it was quite possible to have mutliple accounts for free for many, many years. Then developpers were just busy just programming and offering services to attract players. Here is the problem, they never designed it in a way for just using a single account. That would even be ridiculous seen the differences and ability's certain classes have. That was also a major concern from developpers, they monitored how many players did choose a certain main class and they tried to put influence on those numbers getting it more equal by programming the game.

The money machine came much, much later.

So, whatever the reason to force using just one account, which is just an idea to try, maybe brilliant, maybe not but no way the source for it can be that Gravity did have P2P or P2W system from scratch. They didn't and that happened many, many years later.
For instance. as an investor I wouldn't even consider to invest a dime in such an idea, because it is excluding potential players and the idea is to attract players, any player. Not all investors want to be super rich in no time at all, in fact most will like a more steady idea with a long future and keeping options open as much as possible.

Having said that, the official Ragnarok is currently based in Russia these days? How long will that sustain?

Maybe it is time to put pressure and crowd funding could very well make it possible to snatch that license, and meanwhile secure a license for a spin-off project that offers pre-renewal, even for free. Why not? Young players now eventually will in majority earn enough money for official Renewal and maybe it even could learn Gravity to drop the agressive P2W model.

If you would think I am supporting Xellie, I am not! In fact I do believe we don't even like each other that much because of the different approaches we have but we do share a very vital thing. We both like this game. Over the decades, I am pretty sure we did manage to team up in some sort of party on occasion and beat the s*** out of most. Because there is no discussion about what would be efficient, just do your job in that situation. Then I have more eye for the players fooling around in circles and somehow still like to play the game. Even on Origins, such players were massive around 2021. Most were playing with max 3 accounts but there was no real future for them in development, outplayed by organized groups and the Origins system but still they never did give up anyway because they just liked the game but with just one account  possible, I doubt they will ever join such a server.

If you have a headache, shoot your head off, problem solved. It's just a tunnel vision, showing the lack of imagination and ability for solutions, to my opinion.


Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 28, 2022, 04:53 PM
Quote from: Styx on Jun 28, 2022, 03:39 PM
You should do serious research also. When exactly did Gravity start to ask a payment to play this game in a way it really made a difference direction P2P or P2W? You will learn it was quite possible to have mutliple accounts for free for many, many years. Then developpers were just busy just programming and offering services to attract players. Here is the problem, they never designed it in a way for just using a single account. That would even be ridiculous seen the differences and ability's certain classes have. That was also a major concern from developpers, they monitored how many players did choose a certain main class and they tried to put influence on those numbers getting it more equal by programming the game.

The money machine came much, much later.

So, whatever the reason to force using just one account, which is just an idea to try, maybe brilliant, maybe not but no way the source for it can be that Gravity did have P2P or P2W system from scratch. They didn't and that happened many, many years later.
For instance. as an investor I wouldn't even consider to invest a dime in such an idea, because it is excluding potential players and the idea is to attract players, any player. Not all investors want to be super rich in no time at all, in fact most will like a more steady idea with a long future and keeping options open as much as possible.

Having said that, the official Ragnarok is currently based in Russia these days? How long will that sustain?

Maybe it is time to put pressure and crowd funding could very well make it possible to snatch that license, and meanwhile secure a license for a spin-off project that offers pre-renewal, even for free. Why not? Young players now eventually will in majority earn enough money for official Renewal and maybe it even could learn Gravity to drop the agressive P2W model.

If you would think I am supporting Xellie, I am not! In fact I do believe we don't even like each other that much because of the different approaches we have but we do share a very vital thing. We both like this game. Over the decades, I am pretty sure we did manage to team up in some sort of party on occasion and beat the s*** out of most. Because there is no discussion about what would be efficient, just do your job in that situation. Then I have more eye for the players fooling around in circles and somehow still like to play the game. Even on Origins, such players were massive around 2021. Most were playing with max 3 accounts but there was no real future for them in development, outplayed by organized groups and the Origins system but still they never did give up anyway because they just liked the game but with just one account  possible, I doubt they will ever join such a server.

If you have a headache, shoot your head off, problem solved. It's just a tunnel vision, showing the lack of imagination and ability for solutions, to my opinion.

Back then if you had low end hardware that couldn't run more client at once, and someone else did, and had multiple computers, therefore, they could run more clients then you, then is that not having an advantage? Doesn't matter if the company is receiving the money or not.

Why should someone be able to farm six times better than someone else just because they have multiple computers who can run the game? Back in 2007, I could run two instances of the game at a good choppy 20 FPS -- sometimes. Any more than two and it was pretty much unplayable. This meant any server that allowed multi-clienting put me at a huge disadvantage.

Now, this isn't usually an issue now because the game is 20 years old, but while it is more rare, people still have weaker hardware that can't run multiple instances of the game well, whether they are only able to afford work laptops or what-have-you. Someone's potential in game shouldn't be limited by their financial situation in my opinion; or hell, just doesn't want to run as many characters physically possible, because the less you use, the more of a disadvantage you are putting yourself in. I don't want to farm on two or three characters in separate parties at once whilst juggling a dozen clients for the maximum gains to be "competitive". That sounds far more stressful than just... y'know, finding a party to me.


Again though, it's kind of moot. There's plenty of servers that allow multi-clienting. Some people like that, some people don't. Arguing semantics about it is like arguing which color is the best, or what type of music genre is the best, or what is the best Final Fantasy.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Xellie on Jun 28, 2022, 05:46 PM
Quote from: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 28, 2022, 04:53 PM
Back then if you had low end hardware that couldn't run more client at once, and someone else did, and had multiple computers, therefore, they could run more clients then you, then is that not having an advantage? Doesn't matter if the company is receiving the money or not.

Why should someone be able to farm six times better than someone else just because they have multiple computers who can run the game? Back in 2007, I could run two instances of the game at a good choppy 20 FPS -- sometimes. Any more than two and it was pretty much unplayable. This meant any server that allowed multi-clienting put me at a huge disadvantage.

Now, this isn't usually an issue now because the game is 20 years old, but while it is more rare, people still have weaker hardware that can't run multiple instances of the game well, whether they are only able to afford work laptops or what-have-you. Someone's potential in game shouldn't be limited by their financial situation in my opinion; or hell, just doesn't want to run as many characters physically possible, because the less you use, the more of a disadvantage you are putting yourself in. I don't want to farm on two or three characters in separate parties at once whilst juggling a dozen clients for the maximum gains to be "competitive". That sounds far more stressful than just... y'know, finding a party to me.


Again though, it's kind of moot. There's plenty of servers that allow multi-clienting. Some people like that, some people don't. Arguing semantics about it is like arguing which color is the best, or what type of music genre is the best, or what is the best Final Fantasy.

Despite being who/what I am, I've never used multi clients to farm outside of having a warp slave/endow because it's highly inefficient and slow. I laugh my donkey off at the people who do it on origins too since flying around even without buffs yields more. I literally tested it against myself and then competed against a guildmember who swore by it. It's not good.

It doesn't put you at a disadvantage at all! The real party will beat the guy multiclienting at an MVP. Multiclient farming unless you're a pure warp slave multiclient literally slows you down. Link slaves? Just get a friend who is playing XIV or something to log a linker and hit you with it every 5 mins. People constantly talk about these advantages but I'm yet to have them spelled out to me. Just vague examples of "farming with more clients" - when my own experience tells me multiclient trains are bad, slow and frustrating.

The only issue I have ever considered with it, is the one guy who runs a bard/dancer in 6 parties at once. That's pretty stupid. Actually it is very stupid.

The rest of the time I just use it as a workaround for odd timezone shenanigans (hence the preference for warp fly spam farming). It's hard to find consistent parties if you don't have a consistent schedule.

So, in good faith, (aside of the bard/dancer in 67 parties) what is the advantage? Give me examples, do you have comparisons? Have you done the science?
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: MaybeImWrong on Jun 28, 2022, 08:20 PM
Quote from: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 28, 2022, 04:53 PM
Back then if you had low end hardware that couldn't run more client at once, and someone else did, and had multiple computers, therefore, they could run more clients then you, then is that not having an advantage? Doesn't matter if the company is receiving the money or not.

Why should someone be able to farm six times better than someone else just because they have multiple computers who can run the game? Back in 2007, I could run two instances of the game at a good choppy 20 FPS -- sometimes. Any more than two and it was pretty much unplayable. This meant any server that allowed multi-clienting put me at a huge disadvantage.

Now, this isn't usually an issue now because the game is 20 years old, but while it is more rare, people still have weaker hardware that can't run multiple instances of the game well, whether they are only able to afford work laptops or what-have-you. Someone's potential in game shouldn't be limited by their financial situation in my opinion; or hell, just doesn't want to run as many characters physically possible, because the less you use, the more of a disadvantage you are putting yourself in. I don't want to farm on two or three characters in separate parties at once whilst juggling a dozen clients for the maximum gains to be "competitive". That sounds far more stressful than just... y'know, finding a party to me.


Again though, it's kind of moot. There's plenty of servers that allow multi-clienting. Some people like that, some people don't. Arguing semantics about it is like arguing which color is the best, or what type of music genre is the best, or what is the best Final Fantasy.


In 2003 we ran 4 clients on our PCs, with accelerated graphics cards and it worked just fine. Granted you might have not had the hardware, but some of us did and we paid for multiple accounts. I am talking about iRO here I don't really know what region you played but it was a huge thing for WoE. Gravity gladly took our money and let us do it. Just saying. I played iRO from 2002 till 2009ish before renewal on the chaos server. We had a team of 10 people, and probably around 30+ accounts.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: asmrislife on Jun 29, 2022, 06:54 AM
its good but its stupid when its not enforced or it doesnt cover multi device
and i remember i was playing this server with that rule and one of their official server streamer accidentally streamed himself multi clienting and got banned lol
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 30, 2022, 12:28 PM
Quote from: Xellie on Jun 28, 2022, 05:46 PM
Despite being who/what I am, I've never used multi clients to farm outside of having a warp slave/endow because it's highly inefficient and slow. I laugh my donkey off at the people who do it on origins too since flying around even without buffs yields more. I literally tested it against myself and then competed against a guildmember who swore by it. It's not good.

It doesn't put you at a disadvantage at all! The real party will beat the guy multiclienting at an MVP. Multiclient farming unless you're a pure warp slave multiclient literally slows you down. Link slaves? Just get a friend who is playing XIV or something to log a linker and hit you with it every 5 mins. People constantly talk about these advantages but I'm yet to have them spelled out to me. Just vague examples of "farming with more clients" - when my own experience tells me multiclient trains are bad, slow and frustrating.

The only issue I have ever considered with it, is the one guy who runs a bard/dancer in 6 parties at once. That's pretty stupid. Actually it is very stupid.

The rest of the time I just use it as a workaround for odd timezone shenanigans (hence the preference for warp fly spam farming). It's hard to find consistent parties if you don't have a consistent schedule.

So, in good faith, (aside of the bard/dancer in 67 parties) what is the advantage? Give me examples, do you have comparisons? Have you done the science?



It depends on the server, but for some servers that have party bonuses, most definitely. You get more total exp just for the people you have in the party in those servers, even if the difference is only 5% more per member or something like that.

I usually don't do it for long, but for servers that require marriage and have no adoption NPC, I would have instances of making 12 character parties to help farm zeny fast and level them all up to 70+ so I could splurge all the money to have them marry just so I can make my baby characters that I actually wanted to play, lmao.

Usually my farming method is to have one party farm zeny in Amatsu dungeon while another one is leveling using auto attack build with an archer on geographers or something for other toons to double-dip killing things for exp, then shift one party to Amatsu dungeon to farm Apple of Archers, Firelock cards, iron, star crumbs and white herbs to sell/use for later. Once both parties are easily sustainable, both parties shift into Amatsu dungeon for farming zeny. Once the merchant becomes an alchemist and gets a homunculus, they're pretty much off AFKing on their own for future brewing needs, and I only need to touch them to feed the homonculus or nudge them if there's an AFK timer.


It costs 14 million zeny just to make six baby characters (including costs of the marriage materials, wedding rings, etc) and twelve level 70+ characters to get married. It's rough. /sob

It is a grind I'd love to skip, but sadly spending literally days begging in town just to get one character adopted with random couples, much less multiple adoptions, is even slower than just farming the zeny and character levels to make babies most of the time when multi-clienting is a thing. With how difficult and expensive it is to have the option to copulate, I'm surprised that the Rune Midgard population hasn't gone extinct yet.


I'm not sure if there's a more efficient way to farm (there probably definitely is), but I'm not interested in doing that. My way is to "speed run" getting married couples and the zeny for them as soon as possible so I can finally play my smols. Praise to any server that puts in an adoption NPC.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: OldPoring on Jul 01, 2022, 08:47 PM
I agree that it is farming with a train of slaves that is inefficient. The best strategy has always been kill+wing+kill+wing. No need to exaggerate that everyone necessarily drives trains on servers with a permitted multiclient. Only long self-casts are effective, like blessing agi, sagŠµ enchant, linker spirit and warps/heals.
Quote from: Sairek Ceareste on Jun 25, 2022, 11:03 AM
I don't know if it was 400~500 people. Combined with vendors, and the fact I saw some people using at least 2 people, usually 3 or more though (at a minimum, their "main, a priest, and then a soul linker -- sometimes a bard on top of all that), and I'd wager the actual population was around the 250ish area. I was guilty of having up to 5 characters on at a time in Origins myself (the 5th character being another character I was leeching).
No, no, no. On Origins there was a section = players + auto vendors. The maximum that I remember was about 1100 players (with slaves) and 2000 auto vendors.
And I think, and no one will argue with this, the two most populated and popular servers of recent years were Origins and Talon - both with a permitted multiclient. So about what is more in demand among most players, may to draw a conclusion in the direction of the multi client
Quote from: Styx on Jun 26, 2022, 05:29 PM
if it is a server rule you take it or leave it. It makes no sense to argue about it. Maybe it will work out for this server to get and mantain a decent playerbase with such an approach.
I wouldn't even think about joining such a server for several reasons not even mentioned in this topic. It is very easy to accomplish several accounts on different IP's, it's 2022 meanwhile. Then even if they could detect and ban it succesfull. It still would mean one or two very good organized groups will own the server completely. There is no way a single player can beat such a group ever with multiclient. Sure, some efforts can be reached and that is exactly where the fun is for lone wolfs. Though without multiclient they are doomed and it would be stupid to waste your time on such a server. Partyplay you can encourage because it will bring fun to play it like that but I doubt you can make this entertaiment happen by force. Many players couldn't even effort depend on partyplay because they are limited in time and don't want to be a depending 24/7 slave for partyplay. Most just want to have fun playing a game. That's what it is, just a game to have fun, not religion or something like that.

Then again, this server does give it a try in this one client only direction, so give them a shot. If it will work for a majority, that will be oke for me.
Very well said. I just want to say again why I began this topic. My argument is that it cannot be executed. As I have already given examples: a Priest is sitting in the town or on location with an original IP. And another player runs by and starts pestering "Why are you sitting here? Why are you buff/heal/warp him?". To which the logical answer will follow "It's none of your business!"

I'm already an old Poring and I don't want permanent "fellowship" from RO. Moreover, as I said, English is not my native language. I just love gameplay of RO, and by and large, I only need a good economy from the community - this requires a large population.
But at the same time, I would like all players to have equal opportunities. Forbidening a multiclient will not achieve this, it is simply impossible to control, especially with a large population.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Holy Acolyte Kikuri on Jul 26, 2022, 10:31 AM
The private server community has always been about different ideologies clashing and coexisting with each other. The beauty of RO is how well servers can be a reflection of their owner(s)'s personal preferences. Of course, if someone doesn't agree with the type of gameplay experience one server provides, it's extremely easy to try your hand at another one. Or, in some cases, find the effort and motivation to build your own server.

All this to say, I don't see what calling multiclient stupid does for anyone. Servers that want to disallow a gameplay system have every right to do so. There is a significant playerbase that enjoys multi-client being banned, and that is why the no multi-client servers have been successful. In the same vein, historically servers that allowed multi-client have been very successful as well. There are people who play RO for lots of different reasons. Some people are very strong minded about a particular feature and that is make or break for them - and others seem to be totally indifferent about it.

On the topic of multi-client moderation being imperfect, therefore it's stupid to enforce: this doesn't make any logical sense. To use an analogy, Windows isn't perfect at catching viruses. Does this mean that their efforts to make operating systems resilient to viruses is in vain? Of course not, it means they have to keep improving their code and whatnot. A server that bans multi-clienters may not be perfect, but I'm sure as competent moderation staff accumulate more and more skill at detecting users violating rules, they'll grow more adept at dealing with them.

Progress takes time and effort. I can't speak on all private servers, but Oath does, in my opinion, have some of the most professional staff I've ever experienced on any private server. I don't play there much personally (I like 3x - 10x rates), but If there was any staff I'd trust to enforce their own rules proficiently and impartially, it would absolutely be them.

So no, banning multi-client isn't stupid. It's the flavor of RO that some servers want to provide, and it happens to be a tasty flavor to a lot of players currently. The owners should be praised for sticking to their vision and working hard to uphold the standards of their server. If enough people disagree with the trends of the most populated servers of the low rates, then now is the perfect time to rally dissenting opinions into action and make a new server that bucks those trends.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: OrcLordDaddy on Aug 27, 2022, 09:51 AM
I personally like the idea of having only 1 client allowed but at the same time I always want to have a pure forger on the servers I play, and almost all of them never implement the Mercenary system to be able to level the character up and always come up with the excuse of "bUt It's a GuIlD EfFoRt To lEvEl sUcH ChArAcTeRs", which is nothing but utter s*** along the lines of "if you're homeless, just buy a house".

So for me having Dual Client enabled solely to have my merchant / pure forger is very important.
That's Dual Client = 2 clients.
Not infinite clients.
Title: Re: Is banning a multi-client stupid?
Post by: Prussian on Oct 14, 2022, 07:46 AM
Quote from: OldPoring on Jun 20, 2022, 01:43 PM
I want to try to play on one server, now it has a hundred plus players, but there is such a ban. But I do not believe that people there do not circumvent this ban, so if I play by its rules, I will be in a disadvantaged position with cheaters. And cheaters are definitely there.

So your argument for cheating is that... other people might be doing it? /hmm

Shouldn't rules be followed regardless, and not ignored and invalidated when you suspect an infractor might be getting an edge on you?