Stan

Changes to Multiboxing in Battle for Azeroth

40 posts in this topic

k2lR9EU.jpg

The /follow command will not work in combat with War Mode enabled in Battle for Azeroth.

Simply put, if a multiboxer enables War Mode and enters combat, they won't be able to follow you with the /follow macro. The change somewhat cripples the ability of multiboxers to chase players and bring them down in World PvP.

Datamined Global Strings

  • ERR_INVALID_FOLLOW_PVP_COMBAT - You can't use follow while engaged in PVP combat.
  • ERR_INVALID_FOLLOW_TARGET_PVP_COMBAT - You can't follow a player who is engaged in PVP combat.

What's Multiboxing?

Multiboxing is a term used to denote one user playing multiple accounts simultaneously, with the help of software, macros, and various scripts. Blizzard's stance on multiboxing is pretty clear. They are perfectly fine with that, so long as the player is in direct control of all characters, they consider multiboxing to be an alternative playstyle.

What's your stance on multiboxing? Has a multiboxer ever ruined your gameplay experience or are you a multiboxer yourself? Let us know in the comments!

Finally, here are some blue posts dealing with the subject of multiboxing.

Blizzard LogoBlizzard (Source)

“From a certain perspective, the strange thing about this stance is that the multiboxing player has the least advantage in a battleground. A battleground is a closed system, the teams are ideally even, the multiboxer is more prone to disruptive assaults from other players, and the numerical advantage is wholly nullified in this scenario.”

Malkorix, Blizzard Poster

This issue has been discussed to death on the World of Warcraft forums. If we change our stance regarding multi-boxing, you'll know it.

Daxxarri – Community Manager 12/5/2012

The decision to allow multiboxing has much to do with a person's ability to be registered to multiple accounts. If we did not allow it, you would only be able to have one World of Warcraft account, ever. That would cause a number of complications that we sometimes still see today, due to a misunderstanding of our policies, but the issue would be exacerbated greatly if we were to limit things to a single license per user. 
Once the determination was made the allow a person to have multiple WoW licenses registered to a single Battle.net or even multiple licenses under the same name, how many becomes entirely irrelevant. 

Two, ten or thirty, or more, the rules still apply. As long as the person registered to the account is the one in direct control of those characters, it is not against our policies to do so.

Vrakthris – Support Forum Agent 6/29/2012

Tom Chilton: [Laughs] Well, we actually are perfectly content to endorse multi-boxing to some reasonable degree. If a person wants to go out and buy a second account and power-level themselves, we’re okay with that.

Patently false. All accounts should be allowed to be played as they see fit provided that they’re playing within our policies. In cases of mulitboxing, all accounts involved are playing the same as any other account, only simultaneously.

-Belfaire, Blizzard Poster

Semantics issue #3:
Does multiboxing give a player an in-game advantage? 
“Yes–and so does grouping.”
Therefore, can multiboxing be considered an exploit? 
“No. We consider it be an alternative playstyle; not everyone can do it, but if a person is willing to devote the concentration and capital to such a venture–legitimately–we’re perfectly fine with it. Five multiboxed accounts can be feared and CCed just like five solo accounts.

-Belfaire, Blizzard Poster

“I think I might see your concern, so, please allow me to ask a question.

What is the objective difference between 1 player directing 5 characters to attack a single target, and the leader of a team slapping an assist train on a target and telling his other 4 teammates to attack a target with him?

A slight gain in efficiency for the single player/set of characters at an extreme cost in flexibility to deal with exterior threats compared to the team of players?”

Malkorix, Blizzard Poster

“Instead of World of Warcraft, let’s look at chess to draw a parallel.

What is the factual difference (assuming no time limits on turns) between 5 chess players versus 1 player moving across the boards to play against all 5 of his opponents and 5 players facing across the boards versus another 5? Think of each chess team as a ‘character’.

In both cases, you have 10 ‘characters’. 5 White characters and 5 Black characters, each composed of multiple pieces.

Though, to extend the analogy, the 1 player facing 5 would be forced to make the same move on each board. Not something that 5 individual players would need concern themselves with.

For better or worse, World of Warcraft isn’t quite a chess match, but I think the analogy holds.

That being the case, if player is the ultimate concern, then multi-boxers are at a permanent disadvantage. It would, after all, be ridiculous to assess chess around 5 sets of pieces all attacking 1 set of pieces regardless of how they were controlled, would it not?”

Malkorix, Blizzard Poster

“Players, as individuals matter.

Here is why characters are more important for the purposes of this discussion though.

What happens when 6 players controlling 6 characters join a battleground? 6 character slots are filled. Then 4 others are filled with 4 other players controlling 4 other characters. Why?

Because battlegrounds are filled on a character for character basis. They are a closed system that only recognizes characters, and wherein characters ideally are matched against other characters.

What happens when 5 players and 1 multiboxer join a battleground? 10 character slots are filled. The results are identical to a situation where each character is controlled by a single player. We can run over the relative merits and disadvantages of multiboxing til the bovines return to their abodes, but factually, that’s what we’re dealing with:

10 characters vs. 10 characters. The raw ability of those 10 characters to accomplish their goal (winning the battleground) is identical within reasonable assessment of individual class abilities, gear and skill.”

Malkorix, Blizzard Poster

“Here’s the thing though. That multiboxer queues, and waits, just as a 5-man arena team would (to use an example). They take up the same queue time, and the same number of slots on the opposing team. There is nothing to differentiate them from one of the very common groups of ‘pre-made’ players, aside from slightly more effective focus fire, and less strategic flexibility in dealing with threats, much greater vulnerability to crowd control and that being ‘split’ by resurrection is devastating.

The less organized battle ground participants you describe will typically have a much harder time facing that arena team or pre-made than they would a multi-boxer.

Aside from which, occasionally running up against more organized opposition is simply a fact of the battlegrounds. Just as is facing more skilled or more well equipped foes. Factually, while we do our best to structure the queuing system such that players will meet equivalent opponents, there are limitations on that system if we still want to keep the queues at a reasonable length. As a result, sometimes a team will run up against a ‘superior’ opponent (please note the quotes), and have a greater challenge, whether in the form of a pre-made group, multi-boxer, or merely highly skilled or knowledgeable opponents.

Simply because an opponent is ‘superior’ does not mean that a ‘pug’ team isn’t able to adapt and overcome. Having a pre-made group or a multi-boxer doesn’t even necessarily mean that a given battleground team truly is superior. There are a great many variables to take into account.”

Malkorix, Blizzard Poster

“I will give you a purely anecdotal example that I have experienced personally, (perhaps because I love facing multi-boxers).

I happen to play a rogue – a class that excels at sowing confusion and disrupting opposing teams. I was facing a team in Warsong Gulch, half of which was composed of a multi-boxer controlling five characters. I encountered the Warlocks individually, and proceeded to sap them to break up his formation. This forced him to maneuver around in an effort to retain cohesion – something a normal player would never have to do.

I continually would delay and harass him in this fashion. I would often manage to kill one of his characters by sapping one of his group, cheap shotting one, gouging one, then blinding another. Even if I failed to land a kill, his characters were so scattered and disorganized by my efforts and the occasional fear, sheep or other CC thrown by a teammate, that fully half of their team was disabled for most of the battle. We won that match very swiftly.

I am not exaggerating when I say that this player would leave battlegrounds when they saw my name on the opposing team list, or after our first encounter in the field.

A unique situation? Perhaps, perhaps not. Knowing how to fight a multi-boxer, and having the tools do so, means that one character can effectively cripple 5 or more. After all, one mind is simply not as efficient at running those five characters once cohesion is lost, or if 2 of his group have been slain, leaving him with characters scattered across the field. Of note, this is not much different from learning how to effectively fight a particular character class or spec. Knowledge is power.

All of the above is irrelevant though. Ultimately, this isn’t about what one player can do vs. another (or even 5 others). This is about the number of characters in play. Five characters can defeat 5 characters. 5 player run characters actually have a very substantial advantage over a multi-boxer in most cases. That a single player is controlling them offers limited advantages compared to the disadvantages it can present.
Since battlegrounds are a sealed environment, it is always a question of x players versus x players. How many actual players are behind those characters becomes a non-issue.

Essentially it balances out so well in the end that it functionally isn’t much of an advantage at all, and merely becomes a play style choice. As always, we’ll continue to monitor multi-boxing and other in-game behaviors.

If this practice should ever present a truly exploitative influence you can be sure that we’ll make appropriate policy modifications in response.”

Malkorix, Blizzard Poster

“Think of a single key-press as a lever. You pull the lever, and something happens.

Think of multi-boxing as simply attaching 5 levers to a single handle. You’re still only pulling one lever, it just affects more than one something.

Now, think of automation as a lever attached to a set of gears and pulleys. You pull the lever, and a whole slew of bits and bobs start working, gears whirring, pulleys spinning. You might pull a lever, but it sets a process in motion that would be impossible with an ordinary pull of the lever if those gears and pulleys were not in place. Automation can apply to a single character just as much as it could with multiple characters.

The point is that the ‘something’ that occurs spools out without direct human involvement aside from the initial pull of the lever. That is automation. Even if it’s only a single extra step.

In multi-boxing, every action taken by those characters has its source in a human command. Each individual action. Thus, it is not automation.”

Malkorix, Blizzard Poster

“We have drawn a line. You’re talking about automated behavior. Multiboxing is not automated. There is no automation. There is no great advantage, there is no illicit behavior, there is no overwhelming benefit, there is no automation.”

Belfaire, Blizzard Poster

“Allow me to set your argument to rest. This:
Add in a 3rd party program. You press ONE button and all 5 screens react. How exactly is that fair/legit? It’s not. The ability to control 5 computers at once with 1 single keyboard and 1 single press of a button is automation. The ability to make your characters cast their individual spells and skills at once by pressing 1 button is automation. 
Is not automation by our standards. This is why multi-boxing is just fine.
The moment that single keypress initiates a string of actions not normally possible via our base macro system for an individual character, then that is a different matter. It is also a separate offense.

Multi-boxing, currently, is not a violation of our policies.
That is all.”

Malkatorix, Blizzard Poster

(Source)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that will put a stop to that one 'person' on my server with 12 Blood DKs that likes to hang out at the PvP WQs... Lots of fun being blood drained by 12 characters at once, really likely to survive it.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 " They are perfectly fine with that, so long as the player is in direct control of all characters"

 

If this is the case why did Combat Rotations like Soapbox get banned? You still had to drive/have direct control of your character. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, z3rocool said:

 " They are perfectly fine with that, so long as the player is in direct control of all characters"

 

If this is the case why did Combat Rotations like Soapbox get banned? You still had to drive/have direct control of your character. 

Because /as the name implies/ it's an automated bot. Broadcasting keys pressed in real time to all accounts isn't that sort of automation. With a combat rotations bot, you don't have to do anything, whereas multiboxing software like ISBoxer only allows you to issue commands to all accounts.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Stan said:

Because /as the name implies/ it's an automated bot. Broadcasting keys you press to other account isn't that sort of automation.

No, it was an automated rotation, not a bot, a bot simply did tasks while you were AFK which is not player controlled, a combat rotation just did rotations while you drive the character and do all other tasks manually, whats the difference from a person that multi boxes and spams one key?

Honor Buddy was a full out bot

Soapbox was a Combat rotation that automated spellcasting

Multi-box automates other characters while you semi control one of them

GSE Macros allow spamming of spells through macros which is also a semi-form of automation




very different things

Edited by z3rocool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, z3rocool said:

No, it was an automated rotation, not a bot, a bot simply did tasks while you were AFK which is not player controlled, a combat rotation just did rotations while you drive the character and do all other tasks manually, whats the difference from a person that multi boxes and spams one key?

Honor Buddy was a bot

Soapbox was a Combat rotation

two very different things

You need to adopt a more holistic approach to botting. At the end of the day, it does not matter whether you use a bot that allows you to go fully AFK, or the semi-afk combat rotation that automatically casts your rotation while you still need to move. It's all third-party software that gives unfair advantage, that's why both got cracked down.

Multiboxing is different, profiles for combat rotation bots are programmed to maximize your output even if you suck, whereas multiboxing software is just there to duplicate keystrokes and most of the functionality comes down to in-game macros. As simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Stan said:

You need to adopt a more holistic approach to botting. At the end of the day, it does not matter whether you use a bot that allows you go fully AFK, or combat rotation that automatically casts your rotation while you still need to move. It's all third-party software that gives unfair advantage, that's why it got targeted.

 

You think Multi-boxing with a 3rd party software doesn't give you advantages when farming or completing tasks? 

Also, I really don't think Soapbox gave an unfair advantage. Player made choices when it comes to rotations are more optimal since all combat is situational something a program that Soapbox couldn't predict. I think programs like that helped people with disabilities play the game, not everyone could be a 19-year rockstar with catlike reflexes and disability-free, does that mean we should shun those people? 

Edited by z3rocool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, z3rocool said:

You think Multi-boxing with a 3rd party software doesn't give you advantages when farming or completing tasks? 
Also, I really don't think Soapbox gave an unfair advantage and player made choices when it comes to rotations are more optimal since all combat is situational. I think programs like that helped people with disabilities play the game, not everyone could be a 19-year rockstar with catlike reflexes and disability-free, does that mean we should shun those people? 

I can't really think of any significant advantages to multiboxing software in PvE off the top of my head. Sure, you can run your own 5-man dungeons, but how does it differ from being in a regular group? The only advantage you get is in World PvP and that will be a thing of the past in BfA. As with your second question /not really sure if you're trolling, but/ let's apply the same logic globally and leave out players with disabilities. Herb gathering and mining is tedious and frustrating and bots in general help you spend more time with your family? 😄 So the use of third-party software that automatizes gameplay is justified and you get the best of both worlds?...not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Stan said:

I can't really think of any advantages to multiboxing software in PvE off the top of my head. Sure, you can run your own 5-man dungeons, but how does it differ from being in a regular group? The only advantage you get is in World PvP and that will be a thing of the past in BfA. As with your second question /not really sure if you're trolling, but/ let's apply the same logic globally and leave out players with disabilities. Herb gathering and mining is tedious and frustrating and bots help you spend more time with your family? 😄 So the use of third-party software that automatizes gameplay is justified?...not.

The whole bases of WOW are built on 3rd party tools, add-ons, and software to make gameplayer easier and more enjoyable for players... The game is 15 years old and is not destroyed by someone using an automated combat rotation,  Multi-box or Macros. There are different degrees of automation out there it's just a matter of what Blizzard calls the gray area today, who knows what they plan to call it tomorrow. 

I honestly care less about the old Honorbuddy bot, automated rotations, multi-boxing or Macros, those people enjoyed the game the way they liked it and it didn't affect my gameplay any. In fact, I have not seen any change in pace in the game since they have done away with HonorBuddy and Automated Combat Rotations last year. The balance is exactly the same in game and economically in game.  

Edited by z3rocool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@z3rocool soapbox made decisions for you based on it's surroundings/conditions, multiboxing software/macros do not. You can set up very elaborate rotations but they are still stupid. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Stan said:

 As with your second question /not really sure if you're trolling, but/ let's apply the same logic globally and leave out players with disabilities.

 

It wasn't really a question it was a statement. I could literally out PVP any automated combat rotation simply because I know the automated rotation could never predict my manual rotation towards it, the only thing it could do was counter me with CC instantly, but it could never outplay me. This may not be the case for everyone but this game is not solely based on PVP, its majority PVE based. They could have simply just banned any type of 3rd party software in PVP no matter what it was, should it be Multi-Boxing, Macros, and/or Combat Rotations giving a totally even playing field for the already poor PVP experience. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Jabberie said:

@z3rocool soapbox made decisions for you based on it's surroundings/conditions, multiboxing software/macros do not. You can set up very elaborate rotations but they are still stupid. 

Right, I know how it works, but you're seeing past the point here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, z3rocool said:

Right, I know how it works, but you're seeing past the point here.

No, you're not seeing the point at all. Spamming one button isn't the problem. Having a 3rd party program decide in a combat situation what to do based on information gathered beyond the normal means of the game is. 

 

Maybe give me an example comparing soapbox/similar bots to multiboxing might help me understand you're point of view on this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Jabberie said:

No, you're not seeing the point at all. Spamming one button isn't the problem. Having a 3rd party program decide in a combat situation what to do based on information gathered beyond the normal means of the game is. 

 

Maybe give me an example comparing soapbox/similar bots to multiboxing might help me understand you're point of view on this. 

We already know the difference between them, but maybe you need to go over the conversations a few more times to see the point. There is no need to keep retyping the point that is clearly already there. If you can't see if maybe it flew over your head and you should move on from the conversation. 

Edited by z3rocool

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If this is the case why did Combat Rotations like Soapbox get banned? You still had to drive/have direct control of your character. 

 

What other point did you have?

Edited by Jabberie

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, I will be a bit cynical about this and say: They simply keep multi-boxing available and allowed because you have to pay for your 5 and more accounts ;-) Revenue, baby :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Caeren said:

Well, I will be a bit cynical about this and say: They simply keep multi-boxing available and allowed because you have to pay for your 5 and more accounts 😉 Revenue, baby 🙂

Don't think the small handful of multi-boxers makes much of a difference, they probably make up for 0.0000000001% of the wow population. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, z3rocool said:

Don't think the small handful of multi-boxers makes much of a difference, they probably make up for 0.0000000001% of the wow population. 

still its closest u get to a pay to win situation. should be handled well so it wont turn out to be a full on pay to win !

but as others said right now multiboxers dont win much ! nothing that matters really

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stan said:

I can't really think of any significant advantages to multiboxing software in PvE off the top of my head. Sure, you can run your own 5-man dungeons, but how does it differ from being in a regular group?

I've seen Alex and Loz from FatbossTV multibox their daily AP/Leggo grind. I'd say that cutting the time investment for five chars down to one is somewhat significant. That being said, they were WF race mythic raiders, so I guess it's a very niche application.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

giphy.gif

 

 

LOL, Actually I really don't care because I don't PVP

Edited by multiboxing
more info
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, z3rocool said:

 " They are perfectly fine with that, so long as the player is in direct control of all characters"

 

If this is the case why did Combat Rotations like Soapbox get banned? You still had to drive/have direct control of your character. 

Because with combat rotation bots you are not in direct control.  The bot did some of the work, pressed some of the buttons.  With mutliboxing you do all of the work, every button press you direct, albeit over multiple accounts at once.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder what the guy who spent $80,000 on his server shutdown PVP setup is feeling right about now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, z3rocool said:

No, it was an automated rotation, not a bot, a bot simply did tasks while you were AFK which is not player controlled, a combat rotation just did rotations while you drive the character and do all other tasks manually, whats the difference from a person that multi boxes and spams one key?

Honor Buddy was a full out bot

Soapbox was a Combat rotation that automated spellcasting

Multi-box automates other characters while you semi control one of them

GSE Macros allow spamming of spells through macros which is also a semi-form of automation




very different things

 

I've been following this for awhile and I want to clear things up. Let's go with an example of why GSE is NOT in the same league as Soapbox. We'll consider how a spec is played optimally. To start we'll go with elemental shamans.

Elemental shamans have a rather simple but strict priority system. Cast earth shock at max maelstrom. Very simple right?

Well how does GSE deal with something like this?

GSE simply casts whatever you include, in a specific always-the-same order. You can tell it to cast 1-n lightning bolts before earth shock but it's going to be the same 1-n you specified regardless of the circumstances. 9/10 times when earth shock does get cast it won't be at max maelstrom or worse, it will have been at max maelstrom for a minute losing huge amounts of DPS.

Obviously GSE makes it possible to play a spec if you just started playing it but that's where it ends. It's training wheels for new players or a crutch for multiboxing but is in no way optimal. Soapbox on the other hand was used by high end guilds for its efficiency. 

 

Oh and nothing in multiboxing traditional tools equate to automation. Me pressing 'forward' on one client and having it repeat to three other clients isn't automation. This is like saying if we're playing a game of horseshoes I throw 2 instead of one that somehow I automated something. It's an illogical way of looking at this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Stan said:

Because /as the name implies/ it's an automated bot. Broadcasting keys pressed in real time to all accounts isn't that sort of automation. With a combat rotations bot, you don't have to do anything, whereas multiboxing software like ISBoxer only allows you to issue commands to all accounts.

Thank you for clarifying how exactly multiboxing is different to botting, in this and your following discussion.

But even though i now fully understand how different they are, they dont feel different to me personally.
In my eyes when it comes to PvP it is a fight of "PLAYER" against "PLAYER". So when there is a multiboxer attacking someone it is a 1v1, just the multiboxer has a serious advantage of more character doing his commands. Getting a group of 5 together to defend against one of those people, controlling 5 charcters, makes it obviously easy to overcome him, since he spams the same shit on all. But it is still One player. You just needed to get people together and coordinate, to oppose one guy. I think that is not fair.

And in my previous experience with multiboxers, they ALWAYS played as trolls that annoy single players. By the time you get a group to fight that troll, he is gone. Annoying someone else somewhere else.

My honest opinion is, a Person should always just be able what he himself can control. if he presses a key, it is a command to control one character. Software shouldnt be able to broadcast it. Instead he should press a key for EACH COMMAND that is executed in game.

I know broadcasting is not directly botting, but still, even if it is not the execution of automated behavior, it's still automating the keypress in real-time for additional characters. hence making it still a "form of botting" in my eyes, automation is automation.

Edited by Lawrenz
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Lawrenz said:

I know broadcasting is not directly botting, but still, even if it is not the execution of automated behavior, it's still automating the keypress in real-time for additional characters. hence making it still a "form of botting" in my eyes, automation is automation.

I know it's your opinion and I'm being gentle when I tell you that mental gymnastics are being performed to reach this conclusion. Really apply the same logic to anything else. Is a singer broadcasting to two locations automating his singing? If I have one person on the phone and invite another via conference am I only talking to the first and automating my voice to the second? If I go to a forum and tag something to land in two threads am I automating my posts?

You want that broadcasting be seen as a form of automation for reasons obvious to your post. You hate multiboxers because one or more of them trolled you in game. I get that and maybe something should be hands off policy for multiboxers in the world (unless attacked because that would be bullshit). I'd rather that then painting with wide and miscalculated brush strokes such as this sweeping follow restriction in wPvP. 

PS: I've been on board with PvP restrictions in wPvP for multiboxers long before the 30-40 man boxer was a thing. I stated as such years and years ago on the general forums about how they could flag concurrent accounts on an IP to disable wPvP. So Blizzard could have fixed this years ago but chose not to. Instead we get this late and bad change to the game that required no thinking. 

And if you want to know why it's a bad idea wPvP is a give and usually take contest. Disabling follow is going to be an abused mechanic in the coming months. To the extent anyone who uses /follow or commands like that are going to have to turn off wPvP because people will just continue to abuse the mechanic. Thinking someone who routinely smacks you and vanishes for giggles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By Starym
      We're back from the weekend and that means hotfixes! Today we have more solutions for Warlocks on mountainsides, dungeon issues, including faction-wide attunement to Siege of Boralus and King's Rest, a lot of Darkmoon cards got major buffs (and one got nerfed), the NPC for mercenaries who wish to fight for the opposite faction has moved to the new zones, Legion assaults have returned and a lot more.
      August 20 (source)
      Azerite Powers
      Fixed an issue where Dagger in the Back failed to stack properly when applied by multiple users. Character Services
      Players who faction transfer should now get a more informative message on how to continue the War Campaign on their new faction. Classes
      Warlock Demonology The Summon Vilefiend and Nether Portal talents will no longer sometimes fail to work when cast on steep terrain. Creatures and NPCs
      Fixed a bug that caused some enemies in the Drustvar Crimson Forest to be untargetable by players. Rikati at The Four Stingers will now sell his wares, including his famous Snake on a Stick, to members of the Alliance.  
      Dungeons
      Unlocking Siege of Boralus as a Horde player now unlocks the dungeon for all Horde characters on that account. Unlocking Kings' Rest as an Alliance player now unlocks the dungeon for all Alliance characters on that account. Freehold Irontide Enforcer's Shattering Toss will no longer wipe threat from the tank. Shrine of the Storm Vol’zith the Whisperer Fixed a bug that caused players to sometimes become stuck with Grasp of the Sunken City. Items
      Fixed an issue where Darkmoon Deck: Blockades was providing far less Stamina and Health than intended. Fixed an issue where Darkmoon Deck: Squalls was dealing less damage than intended. Its effective damage has been increased by approximately 300%. Fixed an issue where Darkmoon Deck: Fathoms  would not trigger for Marksmanship or Beast Mastery hunters. Reduced the damage of Darkmoon Deck: Fathoms by 9%. Player versus Player
      Sergeant Wilson has travelled to The Mugambala and will offer Mercenary Contracts to members of the Horde that wish to fight for the Alliance. Nassar has travelled to Hook Point and will offer Mercenary Contracts to members of the Alliance that wish to fight for the Horde. Quests
      Fixed multiple bugs that made it very difficult to bomb targets successfully on “Swab This!”. Fixed a bug causing Third Telemancer Syranel to evade player attacks on “Grand Theft Telemancy”. Players should now reliably get credit for taking the ferry for "The Ashvane Trading Company”. Horde players should now properly be able to see the Stolen Supplies for "Plunder and Provisions". World
      Legion Assaults have returned to the Broken Isles. Previous Patch 8.0.1 Hotfixes
      August 17 August 16 August 15
    • By Starym
      We have the very first developer Q&A session with Ion Hazzikostas coming this Thursday, August 23rd! You can ask your questions over Twitter with the usual #WarcraftQA hashtag, and you can bet there will be plenty of Azerite and Heart of Azeroth questions to be had. With the slightly shaky launch of BfA (at least compared to Legion's) there will probably be a lot of interest in what happened there as well as the usual look at what's ahead and presumably a big PvP focus as well. We'll hopefully also get a discussion on the story aspect of the expansion, with the huge hubbub we had over the Sylvanas short and Saurfang cinematic, as it would be great to hear some in-depth opinions from the Game Director himself.
      Q&A (source)
      Join us live on Twitch.tv/Warcraft Thursday, August 23, at 11:00 a.m. PDT, as we sit down with Game Director Ion Hazzikostas for our next live developer Q&A, where he’ll be answering your World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth questions.
      You can submit your questions here in this thread or on Twitter by using the hashtag #WarcraftQA.
      As a reminder, please keep your questions short (40 words or less) so that we can get to as many questions as possible. We look forward to you joining us live on Tuesday!
    • By Starym
      We're 4 for 4 in this first week of Battle for Azeroth and as we head into the weekend we see Azerite armor outer ring requirements reduced on the Heart of Azeroth, Affliction Warlock Deathbolt fixes, Conquest removals until PvP Season 1 starts, Brewmaster PvP fixes/nerfs, the removal of two belt enchant from PvP, and a bit fewer fixes for professions and quests than usual.
      August 17 (source)
      Azerite Gear
      Substantially lowered the Heart of Azeroth level required to activate the outer ring of Azerite armor obtained from World Quests and Mythic dungeons. Classes
      Warlock Affliction Deathbolt will now correctly deal increased damage if cast immediately after casting Unstable Affliction. Creatures and NPCs
      Slickspill should be much easier to loot now. Items
      Fixed an issue where 'Bygone Bee' Almanac's cooldown or duration would be affected too much when hitting multiple enemies. Player versus Player
      Sources of Conquest such as the World PvP Call to Arms quests, PvP Island Expeditions, Skirmish, and Battleground queues will award Honor until Battle for Azeroth: Arena Season 1 starts. Players who currently have Conquest will have the currency converted to Honor once they log in. Miniaturized Plasma Shield and Personal Space Amplifier engineering belt enchants can no longer be used in Arenas and Rated Battlegrounds. Fierce Gladiator is once again available to players who have earned the Fierce Gladiator: Legion Season 5 achievement. The War Mode Air Supply Drops in Tiragarde Sound should no longer fall in unreachable locations. Monk Brewmaster Incendiary Brew now adheres to line of sight restrictions. Double Barrel will no longer stun targets multiple times per Keg Smash cast. Professions
      Cooking Fixed a bug that prevented Pandaria Banquets from granting the intended skill levels to Pandaria Cooking and Way of the Grill. Quests
      Fixed a bug that caused the miners to not respawn as intended for “A Shot at the Dark Iron”. Fixed a bug where missions required to unlock hubs on the other continent were expiring quickly. Riding Macaw is no longer unfriendly to Horde for the world quest "Swab This!". Hexlord Raal is now reliably present to offer “Pa'ku, Master of Winds”. “The Lord Admiral's Lament" and "Bloodied Sentinel's Glaive" can now be turned in to Kayla Mills World
      Flight paths unlocked through missions should now reliably appear as valid destinations on the flight map. Previous Patch 8.0.1 Hotfixes
      August 16 August 15 August 14
    • By Stan
      Game files contain a male character model named "ThinHuman" with various customization options. The model provides a good example of how Kul Tiran Humans would look if they weren't all chubby.
      Blizzard probably uses the character model to generate NPCs for the outdoor world, same thing we've seen with the Lightforged Draenei on Argus before they have been added as an Allied Race. It would be really cool to see this as a customization option for Kul Tiran Humans, what do you think? Here's an overview of all "ThinHuman" customization options:
      Skin Color

      Faces

      Hair Color

      Hair Style

       
      Beard

    • By Starym
      The fall season of 2018's Arena World Championship is bringing two new BfA arenas to the table, Mugambala and Hook Point, set in Zandalar and Boralus, respectively. 6 cups await this season, with each bringing a $10,000 prize pool and a whole bunch of AWC points, so check out the full schedule and requirements to join in the competition:
      Arena Fall Season (source)
      The Arena World Championship is a 3v3 tournament that takes place in the iconic battlegrounds of Azeroth. In this Fall Season, we are introducing Mugambala and Hook Point, two asymmetrical arenas which were released in the Battle for Azeroth expansion.
      Mugambala is set in Zandalar, a region that was once a part of ancient Kalimdor and the birthplace of troll civilization. This arena features an upper level, and a lower level with a large pillar in the middle. Hook Point is an area in Boralus, where only the bravest battle for the right to call themselves true Kul Tirans! It features four pillars for players to dance around—one with a shark hanging from it—and two smaller pillars. This season, there are six Cups up for grabs—three in North American and three in Europe—each with a prize pool of $10,000 and an increased amount of AWC points on offer, more than any season this year!
      No Arena ranking is required for teams of three to four people to sign up. Once you are deemed eligible to compete, you will have access to the Tournament Realm, where you and your teammates will have the ability to create whatever class, talent, and gear combinations you see fit, to practice taking down all who oppose you! If you think you have what it takes, sign up here, and check out the table below for the cutoff times for each of the Fall Season Cups.
      Remember, the top three point-earners of the year from North America and Europe will earn a spot at the Arena World Championship Global Finals at BlizzCon, where they will fight on the biggest WoW esports stage of the year for their share of the $280,000 prize pool.
      If you’re coming back to World of Warcraft for Battle for Azeroth and want to see how the pros handle the new PvP talent system, join us! The Top 8 from each Cup in North America and Europe will be broadcast live on Twitch. Watch as the greatest heroes from across North America and Europe adapt to the changes—it might give you some tips and tricks for your own Arena adventures!
      AWC Fall Season Schedule
      Event Signups Close Play Begins Top 8 Broadcasts EU Cup #1 September 3
      (18:00 CEST) September 12 September 14 & 16
      (19:00 CEST) NA Cup#1 September 3
      (18:00 CEST) September 12 September 15 & 16
      (19:00 CEST) EU Cup #2 September 17
      (18:00 CEST) September 26 September 28 & 30
      (10:00 CEST) NA Cup #2 September 17
      (18:00 CEST) September 26 September 29 & 30
      (19:00 CEST) EU Cup #3 September 24
      (18:00 CEST) October 3 October 5 & 7 
      (19:00 CEST) NA Cup #3 September 24
      (18:00 CEST) October 3 October 6 & 7
      (19:00 CEST) Check out the Warcraft Esports site for current standings, the global broadcast schedule, and the latest news about AWC, and follow @Warcraft for all things Battle for Azeroth!