Question - EQBC or Dannet?

[Scroterly]

I've been using EQBC from the start but I've recently seen (noticed) some useful things that are Dannet specific. Is there a reason or particular benefit to running one rather than the other?

Thanks.

~S

 

[arcreactorkc]

From my perspective Dannet has been easier to use and takes basically no set up or configuration.

 

[Sic]

Dannet has been the default for a while now.

Many scripts are going to want dannet to get information from other toons.

Dannet or actors innately has stuff that eqbc doesn't, but eqbc has traditionally little easier to do some things.

I personally use both.

If you don't have a preference I suggest using dannet

 

[Scroterly]

My only preference is to be able to use as many useful scripts and macro's as possible. If that means dannet then that's fine. But you said some things are easier with dannet; is that easier for users or developers?
I'm a CWTN/Sic and RGMercs user. Outside of that I'd like to use the auto-mission scripts and anything else that makes things simpler.

 

[Sic]

My only preference is to be able to use as many useful scripts and macro's as possible. If that means dannet then that's fine. But you said some things are easier with dannet; is that easier for users or developers?
I'm a CWTN/Sic and RGMercs user. Outside of that I'd like to use the auto-mission scripts and anything else that makes things simpler.

Many of those things use dannet (which is a reason dannet is the default), plus mostly outside automatically loaded and usable without having to run a server and setup a bunch of stuff

 

[Darkwynd3]

There's also MQRemote which uses the actors subsystem Sic mentioned. Its pretty new so I don't think any public automation is currently using it but I could be wrong. This is an aside - not a suggestion or recommendation.

For simplicity, in October of 2026, chances are your life will be easiest and most anything you want to use, will use and work with Dannet.