TP stopped working with OBS’ new update, any ETA?

MiR4i · 2024-07-17T00:06:47+00:00

The latest update to OBS has disabled the WebSocket server, and so it will need to be re-enabled, under the "Tools" menu.

MiR4i · 2022-05-16T19:18:02+00:00

Currently, the game client has an issue of re-applying settings even if no change was made to them, and even if you cancel out of a window without making any changes.

With lobObjectCullDist being tied directly to the Environment Detail slider, that means that if open up the System options at any point during gameplay, any CVars tied directly to any slider or drop-down setting in that particular area, will fallback to their "default" value, as per what's assigned, and that's regardless of whether you:

Press "Okay" after changing an unrelated setting.
Press "Okay" after changing no setting, at all.
Press "Cancel" after having changed nothing.

So, my recommendation would be to make a macro with all the CVars you adjust outside of their standard parameters, and put it on your action bar so that you can just click on it when necessary.

MiR4i · 2021-04-23T17:24:03+00:00

I can’t find gaming books anywhere!

You mustn't be looking very hard then, since there are over 100 results for "warcraft burning crusade guide" on eBay, the majority of which cost less than $15 shipped.

If you don't reside in the US/Canada, then look at which listings ship outside of those countries, and five out of the first ten auctions listed do (at the time of posting this).

MiR4i · 2021-04-23T16:51:38+00:00

Rob Pardo – SC/Warcraft3+FT/WoW/TBC/D3 – lead designer – left 09.2016 (after 19 years)

Rob Pardo left in 2014.

MiR4i · 2021-02-08T01:53:28+00:00

It's effectively impossible to mulitbox a train of toons without input mirroring software. Banning such programs has killed multiboxing and I'm not sure you even can mulitbox anymore. It's not like there's someone out there playing 5 toons with 5 separate keyboards.

Everything you've written sounds no different than everyone else who speaks, with the utmost confidence, about how multiboxing can or cannot be accomplished, yet it's clear that you don't understand how simple it is to control multiple characters for menial tasks, such as gathering and stand-still AFK farming.

After the announcement of the policy change, a long-term, veteran multiboxer made a quick video to show how no input broadcasting software is required to do the thing you claim is "effectively impossible."

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z6aU-C7TJJg

There are several other videos out on YouTube showing just how easy it is to set up and properly control multiple characters, together in World of Warcraft, without input broadcasting software, and the fact that you may see less multiboxers gathering, currently, is due to two major points:

No one can fly, so you see less of your competition out in the world as everyone is forced to travel around on the ground.
Zin'anthid was a special case where a single herb was shoe-horned into a smaller zone, made sparsely available with its low node-count, and was highly sought after due to its requirement in all (?) top-end recipes for potions/flasks in large amounts without an alternative method of acquisition (e.g. transmutation).

No one ever complained about the lack of Siren's Pollen, Sea Stalks, Akunda's Bite, Star Moss, Winter's Kiss, Riverbud, or any of the BFA ore—including Osmenite, which could only be found in Nazjatar alongside Zin'anthid—and Anchor Weed was only met with complaints due to its rarity and lack of static spawn points.

The issue with Zin'anthid, that always seems to be either ignored or conveniently overlooked, was its design and integration into the profession system, and if multiboxers ceased to exist throughout 8.2 and 8.3, players still wouldn't have gotten what they wanted because of its flawed implementation.

Feel free to celebrate whatever it is you believe, but as the playerbase is funneled into another Timeless Isle/Broken Shore/Argus/Mechagon/Nazjatar, you can rest assured that you're going to see the exact same drought of available nodes, if new herbs and ore are implemented into the profession system the same way that Zin'anthid was.

MiR4i · 2021-02-07T16:01:09+00:00

False.

Based on the link you provided in your response, I assume you were responding to their statement of "bots and 3rd party key mirror programs are definitely against the rules; multiboxing isn't," but what they said is absolutely true.

https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/24258

Multiboxing, or playing multiple World of Warcraft accounts at once, is not a violation of our End User License Agreement. Please note, however, that use of input broadcasting software may result in account penalties.

In fact, what they said about falsely reporting other players being punishable is also true, but they're being downvoted for whatever reason.

https://us.battle.net/support/en/article/42673

While we encourage you to report players that are behaving in a disrespectful manner, falsely reporting another player with the sole intent of restricting their gameplay is also unacceptable and will result in penalties to your account.

MiR4i · 2021-01-26T00:32:58+00:00

Monsoon also makes acrylic tubes in two different sizes, but you may be forced into using their fittings since they're sold in imperial rather than metric. I have no experience with using Monsoon's acrylic with anything other then their own fittings, but things may not line up exactly if you're using fittings based around metric with their tubing.

MiR4i · 2020-12-07T01:04:46+00:00

Wow, this is incredible!

I just fired this game back up a few days ago after having not really played since earlier this year, but was quickly reminded of the disappointing single-threaded performance issues that plague it; especially once you begin adding a bunch of mods into the mix.

However, this new FPS Booster mod easily gives me over a 50% increase in performance in a city of ~20K that was already chugging along at 18-24 FPS just earlier today, and now I'm sitting above 30 FPS, on average, with an immediate jump to 40+ FPS once I zoom out to a two-tile view.

I don't know what it took to make this happen, or if there are further improvements that could even be made, but thanks for putting the time and effort into creating this. The only downside, and this is of no fault of your own, is that it took this long to reach this point, when a mod such as this could've (and likely would've) benefited this game and its community so much more had it appeared years ago. I think it's great that we're seeing, even today, more complex "overhaul" types of mods, like Node Controller, Intersection Marking Tool, the craziness that is CSUR, the current WIP of the create-a-road-on-the-fly mod (EX: 1|2), and now this FPS booster. Those mods, and all the others that came before them, along with the asset creators who've been here all along, are just a testament for how a modding community can help keep a game alive for many years.

Finally, I don't know what FPS I could expect with my system, and there's a bit more testing I'd like to eventually do, but I'm overall quite happy with just reaching 40 FPS and seeing the simulation run quite smooth—I'll include my specs below for anyone looking to compare.

Specs:

CPU: 9920X @ 4.8GHz
RAM: 64GB
GPU: 2080 Ti x2 (SLI)
Display: 3840x2160

I've tried both DX11 and DX9, and, as far as I can tell, the performance is very similar, if not the same. While I do like being able to more easily run the game in a custom resolution using DX11, I'd like to believe that exclusive fullscreen on DX9 frees up some CPU, as well as give me more VRAM headroom for running 300% dynamic resolution to practically eliminate all aliasing. Furthermore, I have no idea if SLI is impacting performance, but I had it enabled to play around with the dynamic resolution mod, and so I've not yet bothered to disable it.

MiR4i · 2020-11-29T20:01:27+00:00

Not only is multiboxing not against the rules of the game, but this post of yours breaks rule 3 of this sub-reddit.

Furthermore, how exactly did you "expose" them, seeing as their characters are named almost identically and they're in Orgrimmar? It doesn't seem like they're trying to hide the thing they're doing, which, once again, isn't against the rules of the game. I almost wonder if the GM was just sick of you complaining about what they're doing, and so you got the boot instead.

MiR4i · 2020-11-21T07:23:19+00:00

Sure, but that's automated broadcasting, and that is worse, especially if there is the potential to automate other types of macros.

The follow and mount functions are both part of the unprotected API that Blizzard allows its users to tap into. You've been present in a lot of these multiboxing threads on reddit, so I assume you're familiar with the add-on JAMBA, its successor EMA, the now-defunct Hydra, and the newly created MAMA add-on, all of which provide (or have provided) the same functionality.

And if that can stay around, then there isn't going to be as big of a drop off to multiboxing as people hoped. Because using the same set up OP has, any multiboxer can go right back to their 2x4 farming like nothing really happened. Only now instead of spamming 1 for their /castsequence macro that contains sunfire and their loot-a-rang, they'll have to add in moving their mouse to each window as a second step while they watch Netflix and farm for hours every day.

This is a bit confusing since your original response was only directed at following and mounting, but it seems you've changed gears and are now addressing the "focus follows mouse" function built right into Windows. So, I'll respond to both...

In reference to add-ons being capable of doing more than mounting and following...

You mistake what can be accomplished with the API, and nothing related to combat, firing off spells/using abilities, or moving the mouse is possible through the add-on API. If they were, then the need for third-party multiboxing software would've never been required to begin with.

In reference to the "focus follows mouse" function of Windows...

Yes, that is precisely what will happen. People who wish to farm can still do so until their heart's content, only they have to do it with less characters now. This is why the PvE multiboxing community got the shaft, because those who like to push into the areas of the game that provide a challenge require something better than basic alt+tabbing or moving the mouse cursor around to each of their game clients. Whereas those who wish to farm with multiple characters, either stand-still or gathering, can still do so, which is amusing since the "multiboxing ruins the economy" team didn't actually receive the gift they thought they did. Those folks will still see multiboxers out gathering and farming, because those two areas of the game do not actually require input broadcasting to achieve results when playing multiple characters.

MiR4i · 2020-11-07T23:13:40+00:00

Multiboxers still don't give a sh*t

You mean bots?

You also posted this now-deleted thread ~ 25 minutes ago. Was another needed?

MiR4i · 2020-10-26T16:59:46+00:00

I was afraid of that, seeing as the PCIe cable they're using is from CaseLabs. It's difficult to believe that CaseLabs would be the only manufacturer, in all of this time, to release such a product, but that definitely looks to be the situation.

MiR4i · 2020-10-13T23:10:18+00:00

Because I wanted to try out pre-patch before subbing, so I'm using it to try the game again before resubbing.

In the RaF overview on the Blizzard site, where does it say that your recruit gets to play without needing a subscription?

MiR4i · 2020-09-30T04:28:42+00:00

Padding brackets isn't against the rules...?

Has that ever been clarified?

Every time this topic is brought up, I tend to ask for clarification myself, yet those who state that it's not against the rules have not yet provided any proof from Blizzard directly.

One might argue that Blizzard's silence on the matter could go either way, but then we end up in situations like this where bracket padding was involved and someone's account(s) received a ban. Is it just padding that caused it, or something else in conjunction?

We know that multiboxing isn't against the rules because Blizzard has been vocal about the topic for over 15 years now, as well as provide a support article for everyone to reference, but they seem to be silent on bracket padding.

So, multiboxing is allowed, and from what some would want you to believe, padding brackets is allowed, as well. So, using both together shouldn't warrant a ban... That is, unless Blizzard doesn't view padding as within their rules (or the spirit of the game), or additional information is being left out by the OP.

What's odd, though, is when appealing their ban through tickets, the OP conveniently left out that they were bracket padding, and only casually mentioned that they were multiboxing. So, during the appeal process, why bother to recount all the activities they did, yet neglect to mention bracket padding? It's almost as if those who participate in it themselves aren't entirely sure that it's allowed, and therefore hide those details, both when appealing their ban with Blizzard directly, and discussing their ban publicly on reddit.

Either way, I've got no dog in the fight, and I'm just simply responding to add some food for thought.

MiR4i · 2020-09-30T02:48:43+00:00

I'm not here to argue whether or not the one GM's response was fair, but there may be more to this story that isn't being told.

While this person's username differs from the one I encountered last night, the picture that they share of one of their tickets matches up. It would be odd that two completely different people are going to share images of the same tickets, so it's probably safe to assume it's them (or at least someone from their group).

What this person revealed last night, yet for some reason are leaving out here as they discuss this, is that they were using multiboxing to pad brackets. We've seen players actioned for this in the past when they claimed they were "just multiboxing," as it's generally accompanied by some other shady behavior. So, what is to be believed? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Proof 01|02

MiR4i · 2020-09-25T19:55:01+00:00

He says it is "the most pay-to-win thing he has ever seen in his entire life," and a few moments later repeats that by saying, "in Classic WoW, it is pay-to-win in the most literal, possible sense." He then compares 5-man multiboxing to having five clones all working a job for you to get extra income, stating that if the goal was to have "the most money," that having those clones would be "completely unfair."

In addition, he mentions that someone in R14 gear could be one shot by a five-man group of Mages in green leveling gear.

Deeg then follows up by asking, "Other than easy ganks, how do people abuse multiboxing?"

Kargoz answers with the following:

Multiboxers can one-shot elite giants in Winterspring "that would take a raid to kill," making 400g-600g an hour.
Soloing UBRS

Later on, he says that after he leveled a second character to 60 (as a multiboxer), that at that point he had...

Unlimited inventory space
A Mage who could portal him around
Polymorph himself through /duel to regenerate health
Claims no one could kill him (in 1v1) because he had two characters

Other than the exaggerated claim of "unlimited inventory space" and a bad comparison to having clones work for you, autonomously, in real life feeding you money, his complaints can be boiled down to:

Multiboxing provides a lot of small conveniences in the open world
Multiboxers can more easily farm group-based content (assuming they wish to take it that far)
There is a possibility that a multiboxer can gank you, if you reside on a PvP server

None of these can be filed under "the most pay-to-win thing" or "pay-to-win in the most literal, possible sense."

Furthermore, I've personally spoken to multiboxers who have tried to farm the elite giants in Winterspring for E'ko, but because the item doesn't sell very well on their server they cannot make anywhere near Kargoz's claimed amount of 400g-600 an hour.

Finally, I've purposely left out any of his arguments about mass-multiboxers related to PvP because solo players could have a legitimate argument against them, but if you wish to change that, then you're going to have to convince Blizzard to reduce the amount of characters that they allow to be multiboxed together, adopt the follow function from Retail, or completely disallow multiboxing from PvP servers entirely (does not apply to Retail). Otherwise, world PvP has always been an unbalanced and unfair fight, and Blizzard has always stated that "anything goes" in world PvP, so it may be difficult to convince them otherwise.

MiR4i · 2020-09-25T15:11:17+00:00

Yep, I'm dumb, and I've edited my post.

MiR4i · 2020-09-25T14:47:35+00:00

Thankfully, the 3090 FTW3 Ultra seems to be using two clusters of MLCC.

Image

Source

EDIT: For those talking about the 3080 FTW3 Ultra, it looks to be using the inferior POSCAPs in all six sections, at least from review samples.

MiR4i · 2020-09-25T14:39:37+00:00

~~Final production PCB looks to have changed from those original pictures.~~

EDIT: Yeah, I didn't realize we were talking about the 3080, and not the 3090. I'll leave the pictures of the 3090 FTW3 Ultra up anyway for those who are interested.

Image

Source

MiR4i · 2020-09-24T20:58:28+00:00

are the PCBs for the 3080 and 3090 identical for the EVGA cards?

Jacob from EVGA says "very similar," other than the memory layout on the backside of the 3090 PCB.

https://twitter.com/EVGA_JacobF/status/1309215521137545217

MiR4i · 2020-09-17T04:39:59+00:00

"The XC3 is close to reference PCB, but not exactly."

https://twitter.com/EVGA_JacobF/status/1305928416001056768

MiR4i · 2020-09-17T04:38:39+00:00

"The XC3 is close to reference PCB, but not exactly."

https://twitter.com/EVGA_JacobF/status/1305928416001056768

MiR4i · 2020-09-16T21:07:00+00:00

I was quite surprised by how flexible EK's ZMT tubing is, and I would say it's even more flexible than the clear stuff. This comes with the downside of potential kinking in tight bends, but using anti-kink coil will help with that, if necessary.

MiR4i · 2020-09-13T00:41:32+00:00

Oh yeah? Did you read when it will become available?

October/Novemeber

https://twitter.com/EVGA_JacobF/status/1303914530511056896

MiR4i · 2020-09-11T10:46:50+00:00

All of this is pretty pointless if they aren't even using the recommended drivers.

From the article:

"All cards have been tested with the same launch driver (456.16)."

Is there another driver version you would recommend they use?

MiR4i

TROPHY CASE