These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

BAN ISBOXER ALREADY CCP

First post
Author
Lelob
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#1 - 2014-10-23 12:30:15 UTC
Ok, so apparently it has gotten to the point where:

- incursions isboxer multi-boxers absolutely destroy gangs of players in highsec
- isboxing bombers pose a greater threat then actual gangs of bombers in nullsec
- people in gangs doing WH cap escalations are at a disadvantage to 1 person who can happily multi-box C5/C6 capital escalations (Try it without isboxer)
-1 person can happily multibox an entire logistics wing more efficiently then a gang of people working together
-systems like Rancer have been completely changed by multiboxers
-suicide gankers using isboxer can happily gank high-value targets with incredible ease that would be impossible without a gang

In essence, isboxer gives players using it an incredible advantage over those not using it and has in many cases totally changed the way the game is played. (IE: pvpers in nullsec being on the look-out for people like odell who are multiboxing bombers)

From EVE EULA:

CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct

Your continued access to the System and license to play the Game is subject to proper conduct. Without limiting CCP's rights to control the Game environment, and the conduct of the players within that environment, CCP prohibits the following practices that CCP has determined detract from the overall user experience of the users playing the Game.

You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System.
You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.

I bolded the part that needs to be said. ISboxer is a macro program that allows 1 person to basically become an entire gang, often to the point where they are more effective then most player-based gangs. Get rid of it already.
King Fu Hostile
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#2 - 2014-10-23 12:33:28 UTC
Fully supported & inb4 the same old tired defenses
Arya Regnar
Darwins Right Hand
#3 - 2014-10-23 12:51:41 UTC
As a guy who has over 10 high SP characters I am ok with this.

Isboxer is a plague.

EvE-Mail me if you need anything.

Donnachadh
United Allegiance of Undesirables
#4 - 2014-10-23 13:06:41 UTC
+1
Lugh Crow-Slave
#5 - 2014-10-23 13:19:58 UTC  |  Edited by: Lugh Crow-Slave
Not sure this really needs a ban after taking the time to look up all what it does it just helps people use multiple accounts on the same machine rather then needing several machines/monsters if anything it helps level the field for people who have less RL money
Mark Hadden
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2014-10-23 13:20:01 UTC
yep. ban isbotters.
full support.
Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#7 - 2014-10-23 13:49:00 UTC
I don't isbox, and only have 2 active accounts with more than 5m sp. This thread looks like people whining about people having more RL money than them.

(Let the hate commence)
Zmikund
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2014-10-23 13:57:12 UTC
Kaerakh wrote:
I don't isbox, and only have 2 active accounts with more than 5m sp. This thread looks like people whining about people having more RL money than them.

(Let the hate commence)

this post looks like someone who has no sence for fairness ...
Herrin Asura
Covert Operations Agency
#9 - 2014-10-23 13:59:07 UTC
Kaerakh wrote:
I don't isbox, and only have 2 active accounts with more than 5m sp. This thread looks like people whining about people having more RL money than them.

(Let the hate commence)


Troll.

Lelob wrote:
Ok, so apparently it has gotten to the point where: .......


+1

I too do not believe CCP will do anything on the subject because of Subscription numbers.
Valkin Mordirc
#10 - 2014-10-23 14:02:46 UTC
Zmikund wrote:
Kaerakh wrote:
I don't isbox, and only have 2 active accounts with more than 5m sp. This thread looks like people whining about people having more RL money than them.

(Let the hate commence)

this post looks like someone who has no sence for fairness ...



I am usually one of the 'EVE isn't fair deal with it.' crowd.


However...The ability to buy unfairness that is in your favor, because you happen to have a better job then somebody else. Is probably out of the line and CCP could at least come up with a compromise that fixes the issue.

The bomber nerf coming soon, is not the fix to the problem it only hurts actually bomber fleets made of real people. And only makes a minor problem for the Isboxers.


#DeleteTheWeak
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#11 - 2014-10-23 14:04:55 UTC
CCP has defined by precedent what happens when one group gains an advantage.

They do not remove that advantage. They instead give it to everyone.*

Obviously, they aren't going to give everyone high end gaming rigs, with multiple monitors.
But then, in order to effectively control multiple clients, they do not need to.

All they simply need to do, is have the clients capable of being controlled by a master account.
Each still being paid for individually, and requiring micromanagement for things such as ship fittings and skills.

But all capable of following simple orders, as well as basic tactics.

To use an old expression, if you can't beat them, join them.



*Citing the change to local chat, where standings had been added for everyone in response to one group's effective work-a-round that gave them the ability.
Mark Hadden
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2014-10-23 14:08:44 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:

To use an old expression, if you can't beat them, join them.


CCP can beat them very well. first 30 day ban, permaban at second attempt.
Gwailar
Doomheim
#13 - 2014-10-23 14:09:30 UTC
Yes. +1

"Mmmmm. PoonWaffles."   --Mittens the Cat

Leonard Nimoy II
Doomheim
#14 - 2014-10-23 14:16:49 UTC
+1 to this, yes plz.
Nikk Narrel
Moonlit Bonsai
#15 - 2014-10-23 14:18:35 UTC
Mark Hadden wrote:
Nikk Narrel wrote:

To use an old expression, if you can't beat them, join them.


CCP can beat them very well. first 30 day ban, permaban at second attempt.

That assumes they have a motive to punish holders of multiple accounts.

Considering some of the past promotions to encourage second accounts, if not additional to that, I do not believe that will happen.

CCP wants you to have multiple accounts, which begs the point of their being significantly less useful if not online at the same time.

Some people may be using a third party tool for this, which lets CCP enjoy the added income while not seeming to encourage any negative emergent game play.
But unless CCP wants to be seen as catering for players able to afford high end rigs, they will add in the ability for all.

ISBOXER just makes it easier for some. You can still do it without that software.
Rayzilla Zaraki
Yin Jian Enterprises
#16 - 2014-10-23 14:23:40 UTC
I used to agree with CCPs view on ISBoxer, this is a sandbox after all. That, and being someone who runs three accounts, I thought I'd be hypocritical.

However, I run those three on three separate machines varying in quality from pretty darn good to boat anchor. I also have three monitors, three keyboards and three mouses. I put my combat guy on the good machine, the back up combat guy on the OK machine and the logistics/salvage/hauler guy on the boat anchor. I adapted tactics and fits to keep NPC fire o n the first two, thus saving the third.

I have seen up to 10 toons sitting on a gate camp capable on insta-locking and destroying a cloaked ship coming into the gate in the split second it decloaks before gating. They also go into the ice fields with an Orca, and Archon and 8 Skiffs all controlled by one player, one one machine giving a single direction that mirrors onto all ships. They clear fields in 30 to 45 minutes.

CCP doesn't allow the use of marcos (right?). How is ISBoxer different? I would even say it is worse than macros and scripts. How is it more harmful if I click one button and my ship does three things off that one click than to have one click control 10 ships?

I understand CCP wanting to work with and support the various third parties out there that create tools for the Eve players, but ISBoxer creates such a ridiculously huge advantage that it needs to be banned or somehow restricted.

Gate campers are just Carebears with anger issues.

Ghaustyl Kathix
Rising Thunder
#17 - 2014-10-23 14:26:50 UTC
Nikk Narrel wrote:
ISBOXER just makes it easier for some. You can still do it without that software.
It's the way it makes it easier. Bomber gangs, for example, can't really be multiboxed without ISBoxer, and it makes bombing runs far more efficient and artificially so. For applications like incursions and suicide ganks, I agree, it really doesn't make much of a difference. But it gives a massive organizational advantage for null-sec bombing runs, so much so that it badly limits the diversity of fleets in null-sec (and the proposed cloak changes just make ISBoxer the only way these bombing runs will work the same way).
Phoenix Jones
Small-Arms Fire
#18 - 2014-10-23 14:29:53 UTC
You'd have to ban them all, not just isboxer.

Took a quick look for alternatives to isboxer, it ain't alone, it's just the perferred one for eve.

Get rid of it if possible.

Plus 1

Yaay!!!!

Kaerakh
Obscure Joke Implied
#19 - 2014-10-23 14:31:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Kaerakh
Zmikund wrote:
Kaerakh wrote:
I don't isbox, and only have 2 active accounts with more than 5m sp. This thread looks like people whining about people having more RL money than them.

(Let the hate commence)

this post looks like someone who has no sence for fairness ...


The game is unfair. If you're looking for preorganized fights go back to counterstrike or WoW.

And as for the other comments, it's pretty laughable to say CCP should give your computer components to compete. I play with a single monitor, but I don't complain when I hear corpmates or other people talk about doing stuff on their other monitors.

To take my previous example a step further; if my monitor was only capable of 1024x768, and you had a 1920x1080 monitor. Would that give me grounds to complaint hat you have an unfair advantage? Technically yes, but that's not CCP's responsibility. That's my responsibility.

Oh and before any of you say that completely unrealistic and ridiculous, you should all look up a game called StarCraft(by no means a small unheard of obscure game). Blizzard(by no means a small unheard of obscure developer) purposefully restricted the resolution of the game because of that scenario. Because it was seen as an unfair advantage. Whoop de doo, deal with it. Nothing's fair about getting snagged by your lonesome by a 20 man fleet. That's the game, get over it. If I want to spend money on out of game hardware and software to give myself an advantage, that's my prerogative. If I want a new fancy saitek joystick for Elite Dangerous and you can't afford to get one well f***ing tough nuts.
Mark Hadden
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#20 - 2014-10-23 14:35:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Mark Hadden
Nikk Narrel wrote:

ISBOXER just makes it easier for some. You can still do it without that software.


well if you can do same things withut ISBOTTER then CCP could as well ban them, right?

I'm not generally against multiboxing, I'm against botting personal fleets of 1 by 3rd party ISBOTTER software,
as even explicitely prohibited by Eve EULA (read Lelobs post), CCP just isnt enforcing their own policies
for sake of additional isbotter subscriptions, this is sad.
123Next page