Dear Blizzard CS,

Who can appropriately answer this?

I have submitted my question via e-mail but did not feel I received a satisfactory response.

First some background:

I recently got into multi-boxing via software keypress multicasting which emulates having a kvm keyboard multicaster.

From what I've researched hardware based multi-boxing has been 100% cleared to be within the TOS, you press 1 key on the keyboard and the same scancode reaches all computers and therefore each WoW client. Through macros (watching for modifiers) and creative placement of spells on the hotbar and keybindings using this method got the job done. Say you pressed the number "4" and the scancode for the number 4 would arrive at all computers via the kvm multicaster. So on your hotbar you'd have either same spells or different spells that were of similar cast time for "4". No problem there. You could cast 3 fireballs and 2 shadow bolts if you had 3 mages and 2 warlocks.

Now enter the "software multicasters"..."AHK", "Keyclone", "Octopus", etc. They take a single keypress and deliver a single keypress to multiple WoW clients...so far so good...however now these programs are allowing keypress logic in WHICH client gets a keypress and what keypress arrives at the client. So if you had an ability like warlock fear you'd only want to use one fear at a time from each warlock, instead of mentally keeping track of which warlock used their fear and then mapping separate keys to each warlock's fear ability the software multicasters are allowing "round robin" type of functionality where you press one key and it sends that key to only one wow client. Another troubling feature is the key maps that are able to be done. For example, say I'm lazy and want to just set up my "4" button to cast 3 firebolts and 2 shadowbolts, but on one mage firebolt is "4", on another mage it's "#" on my third mage it's "7", shadow bolt on my first warlock is "2" and shadow bolt on my second warlock is "1". The keymaps allow you to press "4" but on your keyboard but deliver the keys "#", "7", "2" & "1" to the other 4 wow clients. The case has been made at the dual-boxing site that it's still "1 keypress and 1 key delivered to each wow client" so it must be legal but I have concern that it might not be and don't want to risk my wow accounts.

So my question to Customer Service is not whether software multiboxing is legit or not...nor to endorse or not endorse particular keyboard multicast software but to clarify what "1 keypress 1 action" means exactly, does 1 keypress still apply when 5 different keys are fed into 5 different wow clients and whether round robin is also acceptable where the software is deciding which wow client gets the keypress (in hardware you'd have to switch a kvm switch or get creative with keymappings and most of all you'd have to THINK).

I request this info because I don't want to lose the 70's that I've enjoyed levelling up and enjoy playing and the future 5 teams I'm going to work on. I'm seriously considering hardware multi-boxing at this point because of these unanswered questions and the uncertainty of whether these software clients are crossing the line. I take the rules seriously and want to make sure I'm operating within them.

Thank you

I think, from what I know, that using software to send the keypress to every window is allowed. When you get into pressing '1' and have that transmit '1,' '3,' and '9' then you are getting into an area that is a little too close to automation for my liking.

Btw,

/castsequence Fear,,
/castsequence ,Fear,
/castsequence ,,Fear

This isn't automating anything, and as such is likely fine. Having your pressing of the 4 send a different character to each client is no different then you organizing your action bars so that the spells you want used at the same time are in the same location.

In addition, there is nothing wrong with sending a key stroke to only one client instead of all of them. The idea of 1 stroke, 1 action is that nothing is being automated. You aren't hitting one button, and it casts fireball on your mage, then casts fireball again on your same mage, then casts fire blast. Since you have to be at your keyboard entering every command, it should be fine.

Personally, I'm trying to get a job so I can set up multiple PCs. Software emulation has a lag to it that I find very very annoying.

---

Q u o t e:
Personally, I'm trying to get a job so I can set up multiple PCs. Software emulation has a lag to it that I find very very annoying.

---

I haven't had any problems running 2 clients on my Mac Book Pro. I use CloneKeys to send the keystrokes and macros for my Priest who is auto following my mage. I do turn the video settings down when I do this though.

---

Q u o t e:


I haven't had any problems running 2 clients on my Mac Book Pro. I use CloneKeys to send the keystrokes and macros for my Priest who is auto following my mage. I do turn the video settings down when I do this though.

---

I really didn't want to shell out the money for anything while I was only testing on a trial account, so I tried it with AutoHotKey. I ended up getting a, roughly, one third of a second delay, give or take. Doesn't sound like much, but it was causing problems.

---

Q u o t e:


I really didn't want to shell out the money for anything while I was only testing on a trial account, so I tried it with AutoHotKey. I ended up getting a, roughly, one third of a second delay, give or take. Doesn't sound like much, but it was causing problems.

---

AutoHotKey kind of sucks, and unless I'm wrong I'm pretty sure it just sends a keystroke, tabs over and sends it again, then tabs back. CloneKeys is the OSX version of KeyClone and is free. Unfortunately, I don't know what, if any, free options are available for Windows. I can say that CloneKeys doesn't have any lag, and I get my casts started at exactly the same time.

Now, I don't try to use more then 2 at a time, so it may be worse if you start to add more then 2 programs.

---

Q u o t e:


AutoHotKey kind of sucks, and unless I'm wrong I'm pretty sure it just sends a keystroke, tabs over and sends it again, then tabs back. CloneKeys is the OSX version of KeyClone and is free. Unfortunately, I don't know what, if any, free options are available for Windows. I can say that CloneKeys doesn't have any lag, and I get my casts started at exactly the same time.

Now, I don't try to use more then 2 at a time, so it may be worse if you start to add more then 2 programs.

---

=/ Key Clone cost $20 iirc.

Maybe I can afford a mac mini if I sell my laptop.

---

Q u o t e:
Totally legit.

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=3168405460&pageNo=1&sid=1#9

---

Thank you Belfaire, I appreciate the quick response but the link you provided appears to be about multi-boxing in general and I know that it's legit, my concerns are that the key pressed on the main client is not the same key arriving at the other wow clients and the software is also deciding to hand out input or withhold input to other wow clients based on a round robin list, the user is no longer in control in that respect. I would really love this to be clear to me so that I can either continue to software multibox or drop it and wait to afford the hardware needed to hardware multibox because I find multiboxing a lot of fun and don't want to jeopardize my accounts.

Thank you

---

Q u o t e:


Thank you Belfaire, I appreciate the quick response but the link you provided appears to be about multi-boxing in general and I know that it's legit, my concerns are that the key pressed on the main client is not the same key arriving at the other wow clients and the software is also deciding to hand out input or withhold input to other wow clients based on a round robin list, the user is no longer in control in that respect. I would really love this to be clear to me so that I can either continue to software multibox or drop it and wait to afford the hardware needed to hardware multibox because I find multiboxing a lot of fun and don't want to jeopardize my accounts.

Thank you

---

It's fine. Nothing is being automated. The user is in control if they are able to set up the round robin list, and it isn't any different then manually clicking the action bar in the client you want to use the spell in (which I do when I don't want both characters to cast something).

The line is automation, and no automation is being done. You press a button, actions are performed by characters in game. As long as you manually trigger every action performed, you are fine.

---

Q u o t e:



It's fine. Nothing is being automated. The user is in control if they are able to set up the round robin list, and it isn't any different then manually clicking the action bar in the client you want to use the spell in (which I do when I don't want both characters to cast something).

The line is automation, and no automation is being done. You press a button, actions are performed by characters in game. As long as you manually trigger every action performed, you are fine.

---

See, that's the thing. What key is being pressed is being chosen by the program. Also, what window receives what key is also being sorted out by the program. It might be user defined, but so are many of the instructions bots use to run. It just seems like the program is actually automating what key is being sent to what program.

---

Q u o t e:


See, that's the thing. What key is being pressed is being chosen by the program. Also, what window receives what key is also being sorted out by the program. It might be user defined, but so are many of the instructions bots use to run. It just seems like the program is actually automating what key is being sent to what program.

---

The automation that is a no no is you pressing a key, and your program running your character to a mob, executing multiple spells and abilities, etc all from the one press. The program is not automating anything in the example given. It is sending different output to each client, but it is doing it upon a manually entered input for every output sent.

The same goes for sending it to only some clients. It's not sending it to all of them, and it may be deciding which ones based on user input, but the output being sent is done so as a direct result of manual input.

By that same logic, the use of the program is bad because it is automatically sending output to all clients. If you have it send a different key to each client to cast a spell, it's no different then sending the same key and having all the spells in the same spot on your action bar.

---

Q u o t e:
...The user is in control if they are able to set up the round robin list...

---

Respectfully, isn't this kind of like saying that a bot author should be allowed to bot because they put the lines of code in to bot so they are in control?

I don't believe something like this could be macro'd in-game and not easily done in hardware either, you could press a kvm button to choose input but why not just use a separate key binding and then you, the player are choosing when to fire a particular spell on each toon. Seems very much that with a Round Robin list the software is choosing for you of which client to pipe input to.

---

Q u o t e:


The automation that is a no no is you pressing a key, and your program running your character to a mob, executing multiple spells and abilities, etc all from the one press. The program is not automating anything in the example given. It is sending different output to each client, but it is doing it upon a manually entered input for every output sent.

The same goes for sending it to only some clients. It's not sending it to all of them, and it may be deciding which ones based on user input, but the output being sent is done so as a direct result of manual input.

By that same logic, the use of the program is bad because it is automatically sending output to all clients. If you have it send a different key to each client to cast a spell, it's no different then sending the same key and having all the spells in the same spot on your action bar.

---

Good points.

I still think it sits on the verge of gray.

---

Q u o t e:

Respectfully, isn't this kind of like saying that a bot author should be allowed to bot because they put the lines of code in to bot so they are in control?

---

No, because a bot does not require user input to execute each command, these programs do. Is it really that hard for you to understand the difference between a bot (which you can leave running while you go to work and it continues to execute commands) and these programs that do not automate game play?

---

Q u o t e:
I don't believe something like this could be macro'd in-game and not easily done in hardware either, you could press a kvm button to choose input but why not just use a separate key binding and then you, the player are choosing when to fire a particular spell on each toon. Seems very much that with a Round Robin list the software is choosing for you of which client to pipe input to.

---

It doesn't matter if it is deciding which clients to send its output to. The output is only sent upon receiving input from a user. It is not automated. You do know what automation is right? This is fine, the GMs have told you that it's fine.

---

Q u o t e:
No, because a bot does not require user input to execute each command, these programs do. Is it really that hard for you to understand the difference between a bot (which you can leave running while you go to work and it continues to execute commands) and these programs that do not automate game play?

It doesn't matter if it is deciding which clients to send its output to. The output is only sent upon receiving input from a user. It is not automated. You do know what automation is right? This is fine, the GMs have told you that it's fine.

---

Actually I have to disagree, the CS agent pointed me to a discussion about multi-boxing itself which was not my question, I know multi-boxing is legit and I personally multi-box and enjoy multi-boxing.

My 2 questions are whether the user programming a list of clients to allow or deny input to (via third party software) is legit or not and having software carry out those instructions rather than the user decide at keypress time of which client to fire the spell on and also whether it's ok to program in transmuted keypresses that are otherwise almost impossible to imitate with hardware multi-boxing (again in third party software).

---

Q u o t e:


Actually I have to disagree, the CS agent pointed me to a discussion about multi-boxing itself which was not my question, I know multi-boxing is legit and I personally multi-box and enjoy multi-boxing.

My 2 questions are whether the user programming a list of clients to allow or deny input to (via third party software) is legit or not and having software carry out those instructions rather than the user decide at keypress time of which client to fire the spell on and also whether it's ok to program in transmuted keypresses that are otherwise almost impossible to imitate with hardware multi-boxing (again in third party software).

---

The post he directed you to states:

---

Q u o t e:
Multiply Boxing while not common, has been done in many MMO's, and as long as you steer clear of using Third Party Programs to automate the game play it is a perfectly legitimate practice.

---

The answer is right there. Neither of the situations you mentioned are automating game play. In both cases, user input is provided and output is sent as a direct result. The program cannot run without a user there to provide input. A bot can. A bot is automated. The post he provided does apply to your question as does his answer.

---

Q u o t e:
KeyClone

---

Thanks for the tip.

I had been looking at doing some *nix wizardry to achieve this - I'd used such stuff a few years ago when I was a sysadmin to Sun Clusters which had anywhere between 4 and 10 nodes per cluster. Typing 'reboot' into one window and have it execute on 10 machines at once was such a godsend, it's the sort of functionality that's been annoying me via it's absence ever since I left that job.

I got my 2nd account last week, and wasn't that enthusiastic about getting a multiplexer just for my two computers - I have no desire to get any more accounts. This tip is wonderful, thanks again :)

P.S. The product name's probably been mentioned before by the multi-boxers who've been by here - my apologies for not noticing it earlier.