These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Assembly Hall

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[proposal] ban the use of ISboxer

First post
Author
Michael Loney
Skullspace Industries
#41 - 2013-05-17 17:07:03 UTC
From what I understand, IsBoxer can be used on multiple machines to run multiple accounts per machine.

What happens if someone uses another program to 'goof' the data being sent over the network?

Is there protection against that?

Could that be automated via some packet record and playback function?

Is it something that all the EvE clients can detect?

Besides that a quick look at the IsBoxer site has this...

http://isboxer.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=3399

This guide shows you how to get more hot-keys that normally allowed by the EvE client as well as one keystroke doing multiple different actions across multiple accounts. ie activate weapons on two accounts and painters on one other while cap draining with a fourth, all with a single keystroke.

So then ...

Quote:
An exceedingly complex G15 macro which would effectively automate gameplay, such as mining, without a need for the player to be present at his keyboard would be against the EULA, regardless of whether the player utilizing said macro is sitting at his keyboard at the time!


At what point does having 4,5,6 accounts doing integrated and complicated tasks cross this line?

This is why IsBoxer should be banned, it allows you to not just copy keystrokes but send multiple commands to multiple clients with minimal keystrokes using macros that are not possible with the normal EvE client.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#42 - 2013-05-17 20:33:01 UTC
Beast Branded wrote:
I said nothing about Automation.

I Said that I believe that (based from CCP's own EULA), ISBoxer and programs similar to it does if fact Facilitate the Process of multi-boxing to a degree far beyond the capabilities of other normal Multi-boxing techniques. it allows one person to make isk at an impossible rate.

Yes one person is giving manual commands, that not what i believe is the issue, I believe it's when that one command automatically goes to multiple (many) clients, that's a problem. CCP Soundwave said it best eve is about the interactions of the players. in eve people are meant to play/work together not by them-selves acting as a one man navy.

BUT.......

Hexor V wrote:
Quote:
Hello there,

To make a long story short, automation of gameplay is not permitted; players must be manually issuing the commands to control their character(s) at all times.

Our stance on programs such as Synergy and hardware/software combination such as the G15 keyboard is that they can be legitimately used as long as gameplay isn't automated. Synergy allows you to move your mouse cursor to multiple different monitors which are hooked up to different computers and we do not have any qualms with players using the program for this purpose. If Synergy was used in some way to control your accounts for you without a need for you to be at your keyboard, then that would not be allowed, but I am not aware of such a functionality with this program. If Synergy is used in conjunction with some other program to automate gameplay, it would not be permitted. G15 "macros" which allow you to group different commands into one keypress are allowed. For example, setting your G1 key to press F1, F2, F3 and so on for you with one key press is allowed (although this specific command is not as useful as it was before now that we have weapon grouping).

An exceedingly complex G15 macro which would effectively automate gameplay, such as mining, without a need for the player to be present at his keyboard would be against the EULA, regardless of whether the player utilizing said macro is sitting at his keyboard at the time!

Lastly, multiboxing is allowed, and programs designed for multiboxing in mind which allow a player to manually issue the same command to multiple game clients at the same time are allowed. In the same vein as what has been stated above, the player must be manually sending the commands; if a program is automating those commands for you, then it would be considered a breach of our EULA.

I hope this clears up this matter.

Best regards,
Senior GM Lelouch
EVE Online Customer Support



Thanks Hexer and Sir Marksalot

cheating or not it should still be evaluated IMO

If a CSM, GM, or DEV can validate that old statement and/or formally ammendends their EULA... then this issue IMO is resolved.. This eve after all... And we all want more isk


That GM post was made a couple of weeks before Fanfest, so it's not an old statement.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#43 - 2013-05-17 20:47:41 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Hey look guys, I can save you all the internet lawyering and point out (again) that CCP have explicitly ruled any software that repeats user input as ok.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Hexor V
Galactic Terran Command
#44 - 2013-05-17 23:09:11 UTC
Beast Branded wrote:
I said nothing about Automation.

I Said that I believe that (based from CCP's own EULA), ISBoxer and programs similar to it does if fact Facilitate the Process of multi-boxing to a degree far beyond the capabilities of other normal Multi-boxing techniques. it allows one person to make isk at an impossible rate.

Yes one person is giving manual commands, that not what i believe is the issue, I believe it's when that one command automatically goes to multiple (many) clients, that's a problem. CCP Soundwave said it best eve is about the interactions of the players. in eve people are meant to play/work together not by them-selves acting as a one man navy.

BUT.......

Hexor V wrote:
Quote:
BIG BLOCK OF TEXT I AM NOT QUOTING AGAIN



Thanks Hexer and Sir Marksalot

cheating or not it should still be evaluated IMO

If a CSM, GM, or DEV can validate that old statement and/or formally ammendends their EULA... then this issue IMO is resolved.. This eve after all... And we all want more isk


" it allows one person to make isk at an impossible rate."
This is not true in the slightest. Take however many accounts are in question and that is exactly how much isk that many accounts with that many people logged in can make. In-fact multi-boxing may DECREASE the amount of isk earned if you calculate in setup times, relogging, having to fix desyncs, etc. So, that is a total fallacy and I have to assume you are talking out of your @SS here because if you have actually used the software you wouldn't be claiming the things you are.

CCP has in the past, both distant and recent, stated this is okay which you even quoted me from. So, please don't try to tell me what CCP thinks without a solid quote that definitely answers a question. CCP said eve is about x. That answers NOTHING. Leleouch has literally stated multiboxing software is acceptable. That should be enough... I doubt it will be, so please drone on and let's see where the big bad users of technology touched you.
Beast Branded
OGB Investment Solutons
#45 - 2013-05-18 00:53:06 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
^ i like these guys :)

It would be virtually impossible for any person, to try an operate multiple accounts in a way this software allows...

http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1291641&page=10#274 that comment was from 2010....

I'll be honest I don't have a particular stand on this... This at this point, actually, it's not about allowed or not (anymore). Even though it's allowed it still violates the EULA.

My point, now, is to see the current input from people who can change the ruling. You guys have you're own opinion and I value that. no matter which side people are on wheither it's right or wrong. *snip* Removed exploit referance. ISD Ezwal.

this is eve after all

o7
Khanh'rhh
Sparkle Motion.
#46 - 2013-05-18 01:02:40 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Beast Branded wrote:
My point, now, is to see the current input from people who can change the ruling. You guys have you're own opinion and I value that. no matter which side people are on wheither it's right or wrong. *snip* Removed exploit referance. ISD Ezwal.

In years past, alts were banned as they were seen as an unfair advantage. Of course, what happened was people got good at hiding it and so only the people who broke the rules got the reward.
In years past, any form of RMT was banned, as it was seen as an unfair advantage. Of course, what happened was people got good at hiding it and so only the people who broke the rules got the reward.

The solutions to both of these was to legitimise the practice (legal alts and PLEX respectably) which made it fair for everyone.

The same applies here - outlaw using ISBoxer to do legit multiboxing and instead only the people who know how to avoid detection (and I can think of 5 ways just off the top of my head) will get the advantage of it.

Or, just use logic and see why it's silly to ban what is essentially just clicking the same button in more than one window.

edit: ISBoxer was outlawed until someone proved they could walk right around the ruling as written by just taping the keys together on his keyboard. At that point CCP got the point.

"Do not touch anything unnecessarily. Beware of pretty girls in dance halls and parks who may be spies, as well as bicycles, revolvers, uniforms, arms, dead horses, and men lying on roads -- they are not there accidentally." -Soviet infantry manual,

Sir Marksalot
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#47 - 2013-05-18 02:17:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Sir Marksalot
Beast Branded wrote:


"Edited by: GM Lelouch on 18/02/2013 08:29:22"


e: I didn't see it at first either, but there you go~
Strom Crendraven
The H8teful Eight
#48 - 2013-05-18 04:12:40 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Michael Loney wrote:
From what I understand, IsBoxer can be used on multiple machines to run multiple accounts per machine.

What happens if someone uses another program to 'goof' the data being sent over the network?

Is there protection against that?

Could that be automated via some packet record and playback function?

Is it something that all the EvE clients can detect?

Besides that a quick look at the IsBoxer site has this...

http://isboxer.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=21&t=3399

This guide shows you how to get more hot-keys that normally allowed by the EvE client as well as one keystroke doing multiple different actions across multiple accounts. ie activate weapons on two accounts and painters on one other while cap draining with a fourth, all with a single keystroke.

So then ...

Quote:
An exceedingly complex G15 macro which would effectively automate gameplay, such as mining, without a need for the player to be present at his keyboard would be against the EULA, regardless of whether the player utilizing said macro is sitting at his keyboard at the time!


At what point does having 4,5,6 accounts doing integrated and complicated tasks cross this line?

This is why IsBoxer should be banned, it allows you to not just copy keystrokes but send multiple commands to multiple clients with minimal keystrokes using macros that are not possible with the normal EvE client.


IsBoxer can and is often used with the ability to duplicate commands to different accounts turned off. I use IsBoxer to simply organize and see different windows for my alt accounts. I still have to move the mouse to different windows or make that window primary to issue any commands. If I am running three accounts I have to activate F1 three times to get my accounts to do whatever F1 is while in control of that accounts screen. It is because the program can be used like this that I say *Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal
I have no problems with the people who use the program in other ways as long as that use falls within the limits CCP has set.
Loney
CyberDyne R-D
Artificial Intellagence
#49 - 2013-05-18 04:40:15 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
safrrr wrote:
with the use of isboxer, even if the accounts were paid for, they most probably were still just farming isk and sold it for real life money.

Beast Branded wrote:
that (based from CCP's own EULA), ISBoxer and programs similar to it does if fact Facilitate the Process of multi-boxing to a degree far beyond the capabilities of other normal Multi-boxing techniques.

Ellen Thrace wrote:
IS Boxer is by it's own principal a violation of the EULA. It facilitates actions that lead to the acquisition at accelerated rate.

Khanh'rhh wrote:
outlaw using ISBoxer to do legit multiboxing and instead only the people who know how to avoid detection (and I can think of 5 ways just off the top of my head) will get the advantage of it.

Ace Uoweme wrote:
Isbox and other macro (yes they are macro programs) multibox software are a bane to MMOs as they allow so many players to act in unison with 1 click. No one cares if it's 2 or 3 accounts, it's the 40+ variety that is the problem.

safrrr, Beast Branded, Ellen Thrace, Khanh'rhh, Ace Uoweme, Vertisce Soritenshi and any others I may have missed!

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal
I would like you to define "NORMAL MULTI-BOXING TECHNIQUES" as I already know you can't cause it a subjective term. Meaning how you "THINK" it should be does not make it right. So please stop wasting everyone's time about stuff CCP has already put many man hours into and determined it is authorized and does not break the rules.

Thanks

Edit* added some pics for those that can't comprehend what ISBOXER (and other similar software) really does. It just makes things look more pretty. (This is and example of a triple screen setup I found with roughly 26-29 accounts it seems).

Before ISBOXER: [img]http://s22.postimg.org/rgfpprxt9/beforeisboxer.jpg[/img]

After ISBOXER: [img]http://s22.postimg.org/u98x9sy5p/afterisboxer.jpg[/img]

MultiBoxing: [img]http://s21.postimg.org/54cuz9sdf/multiboxing.jpg[/img]

Enjoy!

"it allows one person to make isk at an accelerated rate"

Also, NO, your wrong yet again! It allows 1 person that pays for 80 accounts to make isk 80x faster than U with 1 account! It simple math... not a game violation!

Hope that helps

+ Monthly Meetup - DC / VA / MD Area - Pass The Word +

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=508844

Beast Branded
OGB Investment Solutons
#50 - 2013-05-18 07:59:49 UTC
Sir Marksalot wrote:
Beast Branded wrote:


"Edited by: GM Lelouch on 18/02/2013 08:29:22"


e: I didn't see it at first either, but there you go~


HA you very right.. OK i'm done thank you again sir mix-a-lot.. either way i have to go get me some CoolBig smileLol
Askulf Joringer
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#51 - 2013-05-18 13:27:20 UTC
+1 Is boxer is utter bull ****.

It's a 3rd party program that grats a rather significant advantage compared to players who do not utilize it. If that's not against the eula, then I don't know what is.
dark heartt
#52 - 2013-05-18 14:29:25 UTC
Askulf Joringer wrote:
+1 Is boxer is utter bull ****.

It's a 3rd party program that grats a rather significant advantage compared to players who do not utilize it. If that's not against the eula, then I don't know what is.


Have you used it? If not then you don't know what advantages or disadvantages it provides beyond your bias. And also, if you read the thread you will see a post from a senior GM that clearly states it's not against the EULA.
Theia Matova
Dominance Theory
#53 - 2013-05-18 14:50:42 UTC
Seeing those screenshots and seeing lot of alts online. I wonder how many actual players EVE actually has. I usually have 2 characters open at one time myself. If there are many people that keep more 10 open at the time. The honest and real active player count for eve is very little. What is told to us anyway.

Anyway EVE even its harsh and cold place should be even for everyone. Now when multibox miners **** the mineral prices it takes it out from everyone else or when multibox gankers hotdrop / gate camp.

If CCP lets this continue it will make it even more harder for new people take steps in game and when they realize they have to pay and fly 2-3 characters to even have slightest chance in eve they simply quit.

I could perhaps still understand if you used isboxer for 3~ accounts but when it comes 5+ or 10 I could simply cry.
samualvimes
Brothers At Arms
#54 - 2013-05-18 18:58:50 UTC
Although I don't like the idea of ISboxer it doesn't actually allow a player to make more isk PER ACCOUNT than anyone else. Each account can still make the same isk per hour as an individual account.

Tl:DR it's OK

If you've never tried PvP in EvE it's quite possible you've missed out on one of the greatest rushes available in modern gaming.

Evei Shard
Shard Industries
#55 - 2013-05-19 17:46:38 UTC
If CCP were to ban isboxer, I wonder how many hours would pass before the same people posting in this thread would be posting in a new thread asking CCP to ban multi-boxing, or to make it impossible to have more than one client open at a time.
Not many, I'd wager.

Profit favors the prepared

Hexor V
Galactic Terran Command
#56 - 2013-05-20 02:36:14 UTC
Evei Shard wrote:
If CCP were to ban isboxer, I wonder how many hours would pass before the same people posting in this thread would be posting in a new thread asking CCP to ban multi-boxing, or to make it impossible to have more than one client open at a time.
Not many, I'd wager.


I've seen that post in Features and Ideas before. Usually coming from the same idiots who have zero understanding of both in-game and real life economics. Most certainly the types of people who directly correlate government taxes to a personal attack from a government official.
DSpite Culhach
#57 - 2013-05-22 13:13:27 UTC
When you have a player doing this sort of thing with 80 accounts, does it not mess with the market mechanics of PLEX sales? after all, that player isn't playing by paying with real cash, he must be PLEX'ing those accounts, so he's taking out 80 PLEX'es of of the market each month that normally would be paid for by normal players.

Does'nt this system raise PLEX prices on the market? Or does CCP just keep it balanced with other tricks?

I apparently have no idea what I'm doing.

Hexor V
Galactic Terran Command
#58 - 2013-05-22 14:09:40 UTC
DSpite Culhach wrote:
When you have a player doing this sort of thing with 80 accounts, does it not mess with the market mechanics of PLEX sales? after all, that player isn't playing by paying with real cash, he must be PLEX'ing those accounts, so he's taking out 80 PLEX'es of of the market each month that normally would be paid for by normal players.

Does'nt this system raise PLEX prices on the market? Or does CCP just keep it balanced with other tricks?


Supply and demand is not a trick. It is Economics 101.
Gurrrr Yotosala
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#59 - 2013-05-22 16:39:18 UTC
I'll just add my 2 scents in this conversation. I've been playing games for a very long time and this is a conversation which seems to come back every few years.

I define a macro as any button or keybind which allows you do do multiples actions at once. This definition is somewhat broad and it should be. In the right hands, macros are extremely powerful tools.

Propagating a command most certainly fall within the scope of this definition. For me, denying this is playing on words. Right now, in Québec, we have a commission inquiring on collusion. For me, it's the same exact thing, peoples denying the obvious truth and trying to rephrase it so that they can keep going with their everyday business. You can say it however you want, IS Boxer is a form of macroing.

And before you go asking, I do have 2 accounts. It does require quite a bit more micromanagement to run even 2 accounts without using IS Boxer. I don't think that a single player could reasonably manage more then 2 or 3 accounts without a program like IS Boxer. Beyond that, macros are almost without question required.
Michael Loney
Skullspace Industries
#60 - 2013-05-22 17:03:40 UTC
Having 80 accounts under one thumb is a form of digital slavery.

Normally those 80 people will want their cut instead of funneling it all to one player.

I understand that CCP has allowed the use of Isboxer because it does cater to the few players that run that many accounts.

I understand that money is good.

I understand that this topic will never see a GM or DEV post due to the volatile nature of the content.


What I DON'T understand is how and / or why ISboxer is not advertised by CCP.

Heck, CCP should buy ISboxer and integrate it into the game client is if it so handy !

My Gaming keyboard supports advanced macros that are very close to breaking the EULA, so I do not use them for fear of my account. Why do I have to watch my step with my hardware when I could be running 20-30 accounts raking it back for only me?