These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Update regarding Multiboxing and input automation

First post First post First post
Author
Mechanic Hotz
Doomheim
#821 - 2014-11-25 22:37:27 UTC
I think it should be allowed seen as its been legal so far and your paying for your accounts legally
ashley Eoner
#822 - 2014-11-25 22:38:03 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Technical question.. If I train 10 parrots to repeat by voice the commands I give and each one is interpretated by a voice recognition software controlling one computer.. how would that classify? I mean.. besides "sick"

Under CCP's broad ruling that would be illegal too.. Apparently it would also be illegal for you to use multiple computers and keyboards to tell your fleet to do the same thing.



So what happens when CCP's connections is being DDoSed or doing it's usual lag at random late hours and all my commands arrive at the server at the same time? From the server's perspective it'd look like I'm using a repeater but in reality all I did was alt tab through a bunch of windows quickly.
Kagura Nikon
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#823 - 2014-11-25 22:39:59 UTC
ashley Eoner wrote:
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Technical question.. If I train 10 parrots to repeat by voice the commands I give and each one is interpretated by a voice recognition software controlling one computer.. how would that classify? I mean.. besides "sick"

Under CCP's broad ruling that would be illegal too.. Apparently it would also be illegal for you to use multiple computers and keyboards to tell your fleet to do the same thing.



Somehow I dobut the parrots would be so precise to be detectable :P

"If brute force does not solve your problem....  then you are  surely not using enough!"

Paynus Maiassus
Capital Munitions
Capital Interstellar Group
#824 - 2014-11-25 22:40:17 UTC
I'm very pleased with this.

I'm very impressed.

I'm very surprised. I'd love to know the math behind the decision and how much the math impacted the decision. We all know that while it certainly wasn't doom and gloom, CCP's financials weren't the greatest last year. With competition on the horizon, and with the Phoebe changes likely resulting in fewer cyno alts, I was sure that CCP was listening to the community's complaining about ISBoxer, but would not be able to afford to risk a sudden drop in subscriptions due to lost ISBoxer alts.

I figured the day would come for ISBoxer to go away, but I was certain the day would not come particularly soon.

I really wonder what made them up and do it. Was it seriously just a reaction to community concerns? Did they just up and decide to take a financial hit to make the game better? Or is there some complex math involving drop in PLEX prices creating more alts that would offset lost ISBoxer accounts yada yada?

I'm just really curious. But in any event, bravo CCP. Good riddance ISBoxers.
Marlona Sky
State War Academy
Caldari State
#825 - 2014-11-25 22:40:50 UTC
Am I too late to drink in the tears or are they all gone?
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers
#826 - 2014-11-25 22:41:59 UTC  |  Edited by: ShadowandLight
Dear CCP, Multiboxing is a huge challenge and time investment, taken on by those who love your game. Don't hurt the dedicated players who have poured countless hours into EVE by banning multiboxing.

Input duplication vs multiboxing
Edit: a clarification for those trying to walk the line between multiboxing and input duplication. I realize ccp is banning input duplication, but I think that the other capabilities of isboxer and similar software, as soon as the mob gets worked up over it, will ensure that owning 2 accounts is "unfair". The main purpose of isboxer is input duplication, allowing you to control multiple accounts as if one person. Removing that feature is a huge blow and on the path to a complete removal of management of alts with any efficiency.


Side Question, is all this about CCP trying to stop ganking???

1st let me say that I have multiboxed in EVE for as long as I can remember, probably it's one of the main reasons I've stayed interested in the same game outside of the increasing diminishing larger scale PVP fights.

Please read the probably too long letter below. I love Eve and all its challenges. There are many dedicated people like myself who love the game and that's why we have multiple accounts and have spent countless hours trying to become competent in multiboxing.

To me, Multiboxing is an end game level content. I spend hours.. weeks learning about the various task I'm going to undertake (recently it's been incursions or bombing), designing and testing fits, dying in horrible fire's while adapting to try and overcome the challenge.

Unlike some, I choose to pay for my accounts with cash. Yes, all my alts I pay for with cash and have never plexed my accounts. Eve is a hobby of mine, like RC planes, model training sets, golfing or any other hobby. I've designed, built and continue to upgrade 2 very high end computers so that my multi boxing experience is smoother and faster, especially as Eve's clients get better graphics or I engage in content with more and more people.

This policy doesn't just hurt the people with dozens of miners, the guy with 50 proteus accounts in wormhole space, the multi boxing haulers or any specific niche. It hurts everyone in EVE.

If this policy is enforced to appease the vocal minority, it's end result will hurt everyone. If you wanted an alt to help you salvage or run missions faster, if you wanted a 2nd hauler to get your minerals moved around the ever larger New Eden... The example are nearly endless.

Mineral pricing, ship and module costs, invention success all will get more expensive, hurting the already fragile industry.

Yes, I am sure to the average player seeing someone with 10 mining accounts when you can barely afford one hulk is annoying and frustrating. However that is part of the same reason that the person your being angry at starred another account and learned how to run 2 accounts at once, then learned how to afford that account. They saw someone else with "more" and instead of pounding on the desk declaring how unfair the world is, they decided to adapt and become better, faster and more efficient themselves.

You see I can't help but detect some level of "it's not fair" attitude among some here who are against multi boxing. I see a thread of complaints bordering on "if I can't do it because of x, y or z you can't do it either."

Star Citizen is an example. I'm not going to spend thousands of dollars in that game, for many reasons, but I appreciate those who do. They are paying the company for better ships and items, helping that company and in turn improving their game experience. Except like Eve and multiboxing it's a fair playing field. Anyone could start a 2nd or 10 alts, all that's stopping them is money and learning the skill to control them effectively.

I feel this policy is extremely short sited. It will cost the players a tremendous amount, it will hurt the bottom line of CCP needlessly and instead placates a group of people who will surely move on to the next pitch fork issue like how unfair of an advantage officer modules are because they can't afford them.

But all that aside, your hurting the dedicated players like myself who aim to be better and more challenged in EVE. We are all extremely dedicated and loyal players, who have stayed in EVE because we love the challenge of the game and want to be ever improving in it. We've spent way more time invested into EVE partly because of our ability to multi box, have spent an enormous amount of money on our hobby which we didn't spend with another game (even the people with only 1 or 2 mining alts or ratters are vital to your game).

The call for people to remove "input duplication" (soon multiboxing all together im sure) is a case of mob mentality from people who don't understand the benefits they are gaining from it, the effort and time people put into it or how much it has helped keep CCP afloat all these years.

Multiboxers are already finding work adounds

Regarding work arounds we are already finding solutions with even adding any features to isboxer or similar software.

See this post I made

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5245761#post5245761

Gathering some good quotes!
Destiny Corrupted wrote:
Kaliba Mort wrote:
You are already prohibited from using macros! If you can't constrain yourself from using macros in a game, perhaps your account should be banned sooner rather than later. And no, this has nothing to do with any keyboard.

In that case, I'd like to report myself for immediate removal from the game. Apparently, I've been breaking the law for the past ten years by binding the F1-F8 keys to a pair of thumb buttons on my mouse in order to save myself from the pain of my carpal tunnel claw hand by reaching for the buttons on my keyboard.

Teckos Pech
Patriotic Tendencies
Goonswarm Federation
#827 - 2014-11-25 22:42:53 UTC
ashley Eoner wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Angela Daemonic wrote:
Ohh when all these is boxers rage quit and plex prices drop... I will be in heaven.

Indeed, very quickly the volume on PLEX sales will increase again sharply due to the lower prices... however this time it will not be fueled by people that don't care if the price is too high.

Keep dreaming.


Forgotten N Forsaken wrote:
THANK YOU CCP. ABOUT TIME I.S BOXERS GOT BANNED. WOOOTT!!!!!!
You're dreaming. There's so many ways to hide it from CCP's eyes it'll still be abused. Hell Blizzard with their millions spent on warden can't even stop basic hackers and multibox programs.

If you really want them stopped then I hope you're prepared to have your system compromised by CCP so they can scan every aspect and control what you can and cannot run.


Actually, PLEX prices have already dropped. Prices are now around 880 million down from well north of 950 million. Will it stay low? Or resume its upwards trend...hard to say, I'm inclined to think the trend will resume.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online

Orzsebet
Alcoholocaust.
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#828 - 2014-11-25 22:43:05 UTC
Looks like CCP is fixing the plex prices, Lol
Mendeli Vium
The Terrifying League Of Dog Fort
Goonswarm Federation
#829 - 2014-11-25 22:43:09 UTC
so if i understand correctly i can use IS Boxer to tile clients on my comp but not activate mods or navigate with it ?
Jared Noan
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#830 - 2014-11-25 22:43:33 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:


This includes, but isn’t limited to:

• Activation and control of ships and modules
• Navigation and movement within the EVE universe
• Movement of assets and items within the EVE universe
• Interaction with other characters

Examples of allowed Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are actions taken that do not have an impact on the EVE universe and are carried out for convenience:



Reading into this, fleet warping could be considered a banable offence.

You want to take out the lawyer talk, so will I.
Jessica Duranin
Doomheim
#831 - 2014-11-25 22:43:38 UTC
Kagura Nikon wrote:
Technical question.. If I train 10 parrots to repeat by voice the commands I give and each one is interpretated by a voice recognition software controlling one computer.. how would that classify? I mean.. besides "sick"

It doesn't matter HOW you break the EULA.... Roll
You could also tape together a bunch of computer mouses (mice?) - the result would be the same.
Jason Xado
Doomheim
#832 - 2014-11-25 22:44:10 UTC
While I can't say I agree with CCP's decision in this regards, I do understand it and I do respect it.

I will miss the ice mining, but it appears to be time to lay off my "employees" and go find something else worthwhile to do within New Eden.
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#833 - 2014-11-25 22:44:41 UTC
Eugene Kerner wrote:

You should have hust changed the the way cloaking works back to how it used to be.
IS-boxing Battleship is a totally different thing as IS boxing stealth bombers that do not decloak each other.
I genuinly do not care about 30 man Skiff fleets that are operated by one guy tbh. They harm noone and should not have a


1. X battleships doing the same is just as powerful. maybe not as safe as bombers but still
2. 30miners *definitely* have an impact on the ore/mineral prices for others. market is demand and supply. and those isboxed miners can fill a lot of demand.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#834 - 2014-11-25 22:47:02 UTC
seeing how many people "will unsub their isbotter accounts", the problem got out of whack on a more serious level than I've thought.
Good on getting rid of all those botters, CCP.
Martin Corwin
Corwin's Corsairs
#835 - 2014-11-25 22:47:28 UTC
Finally. Thank you for this <3
ashley Eoner
#836 - 2014-11-25 22:48:36 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:
Ranger 1 wrote:
Angela Daemonic wrote:
Ohh when all these is boxers rage quit and plex prices drop... I will be in heaven.

Indeed, very quickly the volume on PLEX sales will increase again sharply due to the lower prices... however this time it will not be fueled by people that don't care if the price is too high.

Keep dreaming.


Forgotten N Forsaken wrote:
THANK YOU CCP. ABOUT TIME I.S BOXERS GOT BANNED. WOOOTT!!!!!!
You're dreaming. There's so many ways to hide it from CCP's eyes it'll still be abused. Hell Blizzard with their millions spent on warden can't even stop basic hackers and multibox programs.

If you really want them stopped then I hope you're prepared to have your system compromised by CCP so they can scan every aspect and control what you can and cannot run.


Actually, PLEX prices have already dropped. Prices are now around 880 million down from well north of 950 million. Will it stay low? Or resume its upwards trend...hard to say, I'm inclined to think the trend will resume.

PLex prices have dropped many times over the last few months. When people were complaining about plex being +900 I was still buying them for 830 (bought 4 the day of one thread).

I personally haven't paid more then 900m for a plex even when people were trying to push the prices higher. Right now I see most areas are still +920. The reality is there's a small group of really rich people who are pushing the market up and the constant complainers are only helping them...


Godren Storm
Mecha Enterprises Fleet
Federation Uprising
#837 - 2014-11-25 22:49:18 UTC
Fleet Warp would fall under these guidelines. Also the signing of drones to another player would fall under this outline. One account broadcasting a single action to more than one accounts. Food for thought.
ashley Eoner
#838 - 2014-11-25 22:49:36 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Jared Noan wrote:
CCP Falcon wrote:


This includes, but isn’t limited to:

• Activation and control of ships and modules
• Navigation and movement within the EVE universe
• Movement of assets and items within the EVE universe
• Interaction with other characters

Examples of allowed Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are actions taken that do not have an impact on the EVE universe and are carried out for convenience:



Reading into this, fleet warping could be considered a banable offence.

You want to take out the lawyer talk, so will I.

Yes fleet warp and more will be technically bannable under this rule change.


This is illegal too right?
https://sites.google.com/site/khromtor/home

He is using hardware to duplicate an input. Hell at this point of definition it could be considered illegal to use alt tab to rapidly issue commands.
Moonlit Raid
State War Academy
Caldari State
#839 - 2014-11-25 22:50:55 UTC
Excellent decision CCP for the betterment of EVE.

If brute force isn't working, you're just not using enough.

Please Note: Any advice given comes with the caveat that nothing will be suitable for every situation.

Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#840 - 2014-11-25 22:50:59 UTC
Godren Storm wrote:
Fleet Warp would fall under these guidelines. Also the signing of drones to another player would fall under this outline. One account broadcasting a single action to more than one accounts. Food for thought.


using 3rd party software for input broadcast is now bannable, no drone assign, no fleet warp no other ingame mechanic. CCP was clear about what they ban for.