These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

97 Account Multiboxing. Better Believe It.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
TharOkha
0asis Group
#81 - 2013-10-21 13:25:30 UTC  |  Edited by: TharOkha
Captain Africa
GRIM MARCH
#82 - 2013-10-21 14:06:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Captain Africa
...... Had I gotten EVE before a wife, I'd have PLEX'ed CCP into the fortune 500.


LMFAO!
Thorn Galen
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse
The Curatores Veritatis Auxiliary
#83 - 2013-10-21 14:13:53 UTC
I don't know.....

I see this and I think really mostly trickery.

I see no other worth, no other reason.

COO - Bene Gesserit Chapterhouse  CEO - Sanctuary Pact Alliance
Nam Dnilb
Universal Frog
#84 - 2013-10-21 14:36:40 UTC
Everybody: "Nin-ty-sev-en ACCOUNTS!?!? \o/ hurf-blurf"

There's only 50 in that picture, people.
Tollen Gallen
Glory of Reprisal Enterprise
#85 - 2013-10-21 14:45:09 UTC
Nam Dnilb wrote:
Everybody: "Nin-ty-sev-en ACCOUNTS!?!? \o/ hurf-blurf"

There's only 50 in that picture, people.



LOL you counted them.

Zimmy Zeta - I f*cking love martinis. the original ones, with gin, not that vodka martini crap. Your old Friends can use me for 7 days, free!!!
Jaxo Enaka
State War Academy
Caldari State
#86 - 2013-10-21 15:00:53 UTC
This a video of him undocking prior to ice mining.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kvM1Dsk3sDs


You can see other videos he has released also.
Nam Dnilb
Universal Frog
#87 - 2013-10-21 15:02:07 UTC
Tollen Gallen wrote:
Nam Dnilb wrote:
Everybody: "Nin-ty-sev-en ACCOUNTS!?!? \o/ hurf-blurf"

There's only 50 in that picture, people.



LOL you counted them.


On my fingers!
Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#88 - 2013-10-21 15:15:37 UTC
embrel wrote:
It's clear: make mining less fun!
he had sooo much fun mining with 1 account that he thought he could maximise his fun by having a few accounts more.
on a more serious note: what would happen to the EVEconomy if such hardcore-multiboxers were inexistent?
for CCP it's a win. I guess also for us less mining-addicted players as we get to have cheaper resources.
Without them I guess CCP would have to increase mining yields.


I'm surprised CCP doesn't have some sort of offering to lower the cost per account if you were to activate 10 or more accounts at the same to encourage more of this.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#89 - 2013-10-21 15:17:33 UTC
I see it as a waste of computer resources to accomplish this.

Apart from that, holy hell.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#90 - 2013-10-21 15:20:48 UTC
Caviar Liberta wrote:
embrel wrote:
It's clear: make mining less fun!
he had sooo much fun mining with 1 account that he thought he could maximise his fun by having a few accounts more.
on a more serious note: what would happen to the EVEconomy if such hardcore-multiboxers were inexistent?
for CCP it's a win. I guess also for us less mining-addicted players as we get to have cheaper resources.
Without them I guess CCP would have to increase mining yields.


I'm surprised CCP doesn't have some sort of offering to lower the cost per account if you were to activate 10 or more accounts at the same to encourage more of this.

Why would they do that? Right now they make more cash.
Honestly, the bit I'm surprised about is that they haven't made their own multiboxing software built in, wor working with isboxer. People pay $50/year for innerspace (the thing that makes isboxer work), CCP could either develop a native way for the client to do this, or work in partnership with isboxer, and rake in some extra cash from the multiboxers, while encouraging more multiboxers to go mental with accounts.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
TharOkha
0asis Group
#91 - 2013-10-21 16:24:48 UTC
i dont know why all the cry here.
-lets just say that one company has one CNC machine
-the other one invested in 97 CNCs

The first one is complaining about how much that son-of-a-b"tch earns every month.

CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#92 - 2013-10-21 16:29:30 UTC
stoicfaux wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
I have a feeling eventually the Rule-Hammer is going to come down on this BS sometime within the next year.

More likely that CCP will simply change ice mechanics to make mass isoboxing less practical/efficient/fun.




That has most indeed backfired, did it not ? Lol

Mayhaps there should be a limit of, say, 10 ships in any belt, anywhere, at one time. If 10 are present, the belt simply cannot be warped to. This also would lead to possibilities of hi-jacking high sec belts with non-mining ships. I don't know. I haven't really thought about it till now. More evil minds than mine can figure something out I'm sure. Twisted

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Gogela
Epic Ganking Time
CODE.
#93 - 2013-10-21 16:30:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Gogela
It sucks to lose a spaceship. Can you imagine how hilarious it would be to lose 97?

I'm surprised there aren't a bunch of Goons hunting this guy for the "torrent of tears" potential alone... Pirate

Signatures should be used responsibly...
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#94 - 2013-10-21 16:31:26 UTC
TharOkha wrote:
i dont know why all the cry here.
-lets just say that one company has one CNC machine
-the other one invested in 97 CNCs

The first one is complaining about how much that son-of-a-b"tch earns every month.




The problem I have is this: are we playing a Sci-Fi simulator or a Real Life simulator. These folks are turning it into a corrupt operation just like in Real Life, which, imho, is rather unimaginative and uninspiring.

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Mr M
Sebiestor Tribe
#95 - 2013-10-21 17:01:02 UTC
I have no experience in multiboxing so how many clients can you run on one computer? Ten? In that case the person have ten coputers running. He's probably buying plex but he still have to pay for the hardware and the electricity bill and what I know no energy companies takes ISK (or bitcoins).

Share your experience

Write for the EVE Tribune

www.eve-tribune.com
TharOkha
0asis Group
#96 - 2013-10-21 17:03:19 UTC  |  Edited by: TharOkha
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
TharOkha wrote:
i dont know why all the cry here.
-lets just say that one company has one CNC machine
-the other one invested in 97 CNCs

The first one is complaining about how much that son-of-a-b"tch earns every month.




The problem I have is this: are we playing a Sci-Fi simulator or a Real Life simulator. These folks are turning it into a corrupt operation just like in Real Life, which, imho, is rather unimaginative and uninspiring.


Thats your moral red line, not a problem. You can do this as well. Some folk making a ***load of isk in his sandbox because he build a better castle than you. You dont like corruption in EVE, some other guy dont like null sec rental programs (which can be also found in RL). its just a different point of view.

Either he:
-invested in 97 accounts with real cash. he is stupid, but he deserve those isks for the effort (and ofc money).
-or he PLEXed them so he is one of the reasons, why there is 600m per PLEX already. In this case he is not stupid at all. All he needs to do is mine enough ore to pay 97 PLEX. Every isk above that is his and i think he can earn tens of bilions a month.

btw: If i would be a Mittani, i would order to my hive to do this too and PLEX price would skyrocket to Amarrian heavens, while sitting on enormous amount of ore/ice.

CODE. Venture hunt contest in a nutshell
Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#97 - 2013-10-21 17:10:40 UTC
And there I was thinking the whole point of eve is "Play how you want".

I always forget, it is "play how I play, otherwise I will be a sad panda"

Anyway, if he likes doing it, then its cool. I have no idea why people undock, but I hear it is quite a thing these days.

Fluffy Bunny Pic!

Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#98 - 2013-10-21 17:16:47 UTC
Little Dragon Khamez wrote:
Herzog Wolfhammer wrote:
CCP is making money off these maxers. Who knows what's behind this. Could be anything from e-peen to aspergers.


And if they are not caught in RMT or botting, they're clean.


If we want something done about this, we'll have to do it ourselves.



He might be plexing every single account and playing for free.



Perhaps.

I can stare at a wall for free too.

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
stoicfaux
#99 - 2013-10-21 19:12:39 UTC
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
stoicfaux wrote:
Krixtal Icefluxor wrote:
I have a feeling eventually the Rule-Hammer is going to come down on this BS sometime within the next year.

More likely that CCP will simply change ice mechanics to make mass isoboxing less practical/efficient/fun.




That has most indeed backfired, did it not ? Lol

Mayhaps there should be a limit of, say, 10 ships in any belt, anywhere, at one time. If 10 are present, the belt simply cannot be warped to. This also would lead to possibilities of hi-jacking high sec belts with non-mining ships. I don't know. I haven't really thought about it till now. More evil minds than mine can figure something out I'm sure. Twisted

Yes, this iteration backfired. However, the limitation of mass-multi-boxing is the multi-tasking ability of the human. In this case, all 97 ice miners are doing the same predictable repeated set of actions. So the next iteration could:

* break up the ice fields into many smaller fields that can only support a smaller number of miners, i.e. 97 ice miners trying to mine only 5 mack's worth of ice would be inefficient.

* increase the "complexity" of the action so that "unique" decisions need to be made on a per ship basis, i.e. sending the same commands to all 97 ships wouldn't work.

* spreading out the ice fields, requiring more travel and scanning.

or something else.

CCP has options for when/if they consider extreme multi-boxing a problem. I wouldn't be too worried. Highly amused, yes, but worried? Not so much.

Pon Farr Memorial: once every 7 years, all the carebears in high-sec must PvP or they will be temp-banned.
ElQuirko
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#100 - 2013-10-21 19:17:32 UTC
When/where? My, uhh, friend wants to know. Also does anyone have any spare smartbombs?

Dodixie > Hek