These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

ISBoxer: pay to win in eve?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#41 - 2014-06-23 06:44:09 UTC
The only problem with multiboxed fleets is not enough people running them.

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#42 - 2014-06-23 07:13:01 UTC
1) I hate ISboxers

2) It is not cheating, I just hate them because I can

3) There is do or do not, there is no "win"

4) Everyone can do it, so it is a level playing field

5) If you don't like them, kill them, simple

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Tebizla
#43 - 2014-06-23 07:17:00 UTC
This thread ... Dat dead horse ... zomg.

Obviously not a forum / spy / market alt ...
Acac Sunflyier
The Ascended Academy
#44 - 2014-06-23 08:10:51 UTC
Ha Jokes on the OP; only way to win at Eve is not to play
Mithandra
B.O.P Supplication For Glorious
Dracarys.
#45 - 2014-06-23 11:21:20 UTC
Hit petition button

Detail complaint

hit send

wait for reply.


I'm neither for or against ISBOXER because it currently has NOT been banned by CCP.

The OP has said that people using ISbomber fleets have forced a change in fleet doctrine in 0.0. How is that a bad thing?


I'll tell you what really frosts my windshield though. A group of guys getting together, working as a team, getting kills and having fun. How very dare they.

I mean... really. The interaction, the conversation, the ribbing, the mass panic on TS when something untoward happens. How very uncouth, unsanitary, and un evelike,

(Please be aware that there may be a small measure of sarcasm in the above post. I'll leave it up to you dear reader to identify where)



Eve is the dark haired, totally hot emo gothchild of the gaming community
Elmonky
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#46 - 2014-06-23 11:44:32 UTC
How do you win a game that has:

No end goal
Respawning and therefore unlimited resources
Reasons
A fiscal equivalent of Dogecoins that cannot be sold without being banned forever
Stuff
Is bigger than nearly all of the things
a skill queue that takes ACTUAL years of your life to complete fully.




How??!


And as to ISBoxing - I've never seen it in action in Eve (although I have seen Isboxing alts in local) and from previous experience i have only ever seen them in the Game-That-Must-Not-Be-Named and they were bots and they ruined stuff. So yes i agree i would hate to be splattered all over StaticBackdrop#0119. That being said unless you are in WH I can think of at least 3 things you could do NOT to get fingerbanged by bombers.


Could we possibly not have another of these ''I hate stuff I can't afford/utilise easily'' threads.
Zotken Mikakka
Memes and Shitstack Emporium
Goonswarm Federation
#47 - 2014-06-23 11:55:57 UTC
I multibox...
I know its weakness....
Some people dont know how it works and complain...
but when you mine or "just use " 2 accounts its no issue?

-
if ccp doesn't like multiboxing - then the only way is to have 1 account per IP
-> and even thn you can fake ips and use hardware to mimic what is done by software now..

the software isn't the issue, its the ability to log in with multiple accounts ¨*
so remember what you're asking here, and think carefully

so lets all wait for the day, that ccp forces a few thousand accounts into the corner. because only a select group has 'just one account'
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#48 - 2014-06-23 12:00:27 UTC
J'Poll wrote:
Tauranon wrote:
J'Poll wrote:


You are yet another whiner about ISB.

It's allowed, deal with it.


Some of us would very definately like that changed, and it is not whining to point that out.


Are you then also going to whine to CCP to visit all their subs to see if they didn't do this:

http://forums.riftgame.com/attachments/pvp-warfronts/12520-stop-multiboxing-least-pvp-eve_multiboxing_1.jpg

p.s. that's exactly what ISB does, only on a software level.


I'd be perfectly ok if they banned duplicated input, no matter what the source. You'll have to live with the fact that some of us don't want it in the game.
Bland Inquisitor
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#49 - 2014-06-23 12:12:39 UTC
End of the day this is an MMO. EvE already has a problem with people compensating the need to have dependency on other players with alts, ask any Null-Sec FC how many accounts they have active to run their ops. Main, Cyno Alt, Titan alt, 3-4 eyes in key systems. This factor alone prices out the ability for people like myself to be an effective FC these days, the infrastructure that used to be in place is just not as effective as doing it all yourself.

And now, whole fleets are being run by single players? Its a dark path eve is headed down, is all I'm saying. If we didn't have to build trust with others, build a team up within our corps and/or alliances a great deal of gameplay will be lost.
Tauranon
Weeesearch
CAStabouts
#50 - 2014-06-23 12:13:42 UTC
Zotken Mikakka wrote:
I multibox...
I know its weakness....
Some people dont know how it works and complain...
but when you mine or "just use " 2 accounts its no issue?

-
if ccp doesn't like multiboxing - then the only way is to have 1 account per IP
-> and even thn you can fake ips and use hardware to mimic what is done by software now..

the software isn't the issue, its the ability to log in with multiple accounts ¨*
so remember what you're asking here, and think carefully

so lets all wait for the day, that ccp forces a few thousand accounts into the corner. because only a select group has 'just one account'



Repeated input != 2 accounts.
Alastair Ormand
Mine all the things
#51 - 2014-06-23 12:18:32 UTC
Multiboxers in your system? Move to another damn system. There's literally thousands to choose from, lots of them in high sec.

I discourage running with scissors.
Intar Medris
KarmaFleet University
#52 - 2014-06-23 12:21:01 UTC
45thtiger 0109 wrote:
Bland Inquisitor wrote:
many of us have witnessed the increasing number of isboxer bomber squads in EvE. At first it was mining fleets, now its bombing runs, the underlying problem for me is an activity that should involve an entire fleet of people is being done (often more effectively) with a single person.



Is it cheating?

Its 3rd party software that enables you to essentially macro multiple characters in eve to duplicate and/or follow a lead pilot. Sounds like cheating to me. However I can understand why CCP wouldn't mind this, after all its one person paying 10x the amount that others are, financially that person is worth 10 other players.



then, is it Pay to Win?

Competitive games only do well when your on a level playing field. As soon as a person can legitimately buy their way into a positions in which he/she has an edge over opponents, its game over. Being able to purchase ISK with money, is counter balanced by being able to buy game time with ISK. For every plex a player sells, another player can play for free.

This is not the case for ISBoxing, if a player spends 10x more than his counter-parts he gains an advantage that is not offset. This then is paying to win.



Will CCP do anything about it?

I really hope so, short term it may mean more money generated by these individuals for CCP. However its essentially dominating the bomber/blops gameplay and removing that content essentially for 9 other players.

ISBoxer bombing runs have become so much of a problem in nullsec that the entire null-sec doctrine scene has changed. Essentially killing the use of anything larger than cruiser hulls in fear of bombs. T3 doctrines, ishtars and the like are all anti-bomber oriented. The problem here is, the higher efficiency ratio of bombing runs done with perfect timing via this 3rd party program has skewed the impact and effectiveness of an area of the game.

Unfortunately I believe this will lead to a bomb nerf, either towards bombers themselves or in the form of counter-measures. The problem with this is, it will be to combat ISBoxer standards, anyone unable to perform at the impossible perfectly timed commands of a computer program will be hit much harder and it will kill of a section of the game for many normal players.

What do you think EvE-0?

Bland Inquisitor



There is nothing CCP can do about ISBoxer and it is not against the EULA agreement.

Here is what I got from the ISBoxer site please read it and understand what they are saying.



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.


The thing about EULAs is that they can be changed, and at any time the developer sees fit. CCP could decide to ban the use Multiboxing software tomorrow. ISboxer and similar software to it need to go. They do provide an unfair advantage to the players using them.

I try to be nice and mind my business just shooting lasers at rocks. There is just way too many asshats in New Eden for that to happen.
Bland Inquisitor
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#53 - 2014-06-23 12:35:43 UTC
Intar Medris wrote:

They do provide an unfair advantage to the players using them.


Not to mention that you have to purchase a license to run this software. Its expensive, $150 for the accounts per month and a further $150 for software licenses.

Even in that "other mmo can cannot be named" they cracked down on isboxing, to quote one of their GM's

" Multiboxing in battlegrounds has been a long-fought battle within the community, as the effect of multiboxers in those situations is considered unfavorable by many. When we were looking to make a change to disable a command used by bots, which would benefit the game as a whole, we were ok with it also resulting in multiboxing in battlegrounds also going away due to the poor experience it can create for others."

End of the day, poor experience will cost CCP more than a guy running 10 accounts. Even Blizzard can see this xD
Barzai Mekhar
True Confusion
#54 - 2014-06-23 12:51:21 UTC
Intar Medris wrote:
The thing about EULAs is that they can be changed, and at any time the developer sees fit. CCP could decide to ban the use Multiboxing software tomorrow. ISboxer and similar software to it need to go. They do provide an unfair advantage to the players using them.


The thing about changing EULAs to redefine "accepted gameplay"- It's a great way to alienate your playerbase and get a reputation for being unreliable. Even in "that other game" they didn't have the balls to outright ban multiboxers but rather made it technically unfeasible by removing some rarely-used modes of movement; hoewever,given that EVEs menu based movement system is part of its vore experience, that road is blocked as well.
Akrasjel Lanate
Immemorial Coalescence Administration
Immemorial Coalescence
#55 - 2014-06-23 12:58:24 UTC
This a problem that need solving... even if some claim it's not an issue.

CEO of Lanate Industries

Citizen of Solitude
Prince Kobol
#56 - 2014-06-23 13:00:47 UTC
Tell me what the difference is between 10 guys flying one ship each or 1 guy multi boxing 10 ships?

The only difference I know off is that it is easier to kill the 1 guy multi boxing 10 ships then 10 guys flying one ship each.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#57 - 2014-06-23 13:02:44 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
This a problem that need solving... even if some claim it's not an issue.


Kill them all

Put their twitching corpses on spikes as a warning to others

Take advantage of the weaknesses inherent in their system

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Solecist Project
#58 - 2014-06-23 13:04:11 UTC
This **** again.

No, is not boxer.
Me no wear underpants.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Elmonky
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2014-06-23 13:44:08 UTC
here is an idea:



If only there was some sort of in game faction of players that were doing their utmost to ensure thsat players are at keyboard and are not botting. If only that same faction could perhaps to approached, contracted, roleplayed or downright paid to hunt and destroy ISboxers... who let's be honest - Are REALLY DIFFICULT to miss seeing how they flood local with generic named characters such as

BobhasVD
JonhasVD
SuehasVD


etc etc ad nauseam


If only such a thing existed.


the benefits :

You can weed out the bots from the humans
CONTENT IS CREATED
Wrecks
Profit
The mighty ISboxing player is humbled by sheer numbers of people willing to gank them in the face


Downsides :
Nope *tumbleweed*




Is that a bandwagon I see rolling passed in the sandbox?
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#60 - 2014-06-23 13:45:58 UTC
Elmonky wrote:

If only there was some sort of in game faction of players that were doing their utmost to ensure thsat players are at keyboard and are not botting. If only that same faction could perhaps to approached, contracted, roleplayed or downright paid to hunt and destroy ISboxers...


I dont like to say "I told them so.."

Oh wait yes I do

I told them so

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann