These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Can we have ISBOX back ?

First post
Author
Prince Kobol
#61 - 2016-12-02 20:29:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
Jason Coralin wrote:
Prince Kobol wrote:
[quote=Jason Coralin]

Solo mining using how many ships?



I solo mined with 10 procurers and one command ship in Providence. It was a lot of fun and I could hold my own against many aggressors. I probably lost more than I won, but at least I didn't have to go run and hide

But the groups I was fighting didn't like the fact that one person had the audacity to think solo fighting was OK, so they whined to CCP and the rules were changed.

Is what it is. Life goes on. Yada yada yada.



Its not so much that you were able to fight them off, it is was because you were able to fight them off using a 3rd party tool.

That 3rd party tool gave you an advantage.

That is the problem, not just with ISboxer, but any 3rd party tool that gives somebody in game a distinct advantage is wrong and should be banned.

If you were able to do the same without any 3rd party then good on you and I applaud you, so would everybody else.

The problem as people keep saying is that a 3rd party tool, something which is paid for, something which is not available to all, something which is external to the game, gave you a distinct advantage over other players.

I see no difference between ISboxer and a botting tool. Both give players an advantage they otherwise would not have as they circumvent in game design.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#62 - 2016-12-02 21:01:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Rroff
Prince Kobol wrote:

Its not so much that you were able to fight them off, it is was because you were able to fight them off using a 3rd party tool.

That 3rd party tool gave you an advantage.

That is the problem, not just with ISboxer, but any 3rd party tool that gives somebody in game a distinct advantage is wrong and should be banned.

If you were able to do the same without any 3rd party then good on you and I applaud you, so would everybody else.

The problem as people keep saying is that a 3rd party tool, something which is paid for, something which is not available to all, something which is external to the game, gave you a distinct advantage over other players.

I see no difference between ISboxer and a botting tool. Both give players an advantage they otherwise would not have as they circumvent in game design.


This is something I have somewhat mixed opinions on - there are a lot of groups in the game who like nothing better than ganging up on helpless victims :D been a few times I've been able to defend myself due to running multiple accounts (I don't and haven't used software like isboxer or any input broadcasting) whereas with just the one character and one ship I'd have been unable to do much more than be a victim - joining a corp somewhat is a solution there but that has its own complexities i.e. sometimes you just can't find a corp that has similar interests and people active at the same time as you to do stuff.

End of the day though I don't support the use of external software to give people an edge ingame whether that is input automation in eve or an aimbot in an FPS game or whatever.
Lulu Lunette
Savage Moon Society
#63 - 2016-12-02 21:06:35 UTC
Quote:
Can we have ISBOX back?


No.

@lunettelulu7

Jason Coralin
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#64 - 2016-12-02 21:12:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Jason Coralin
Rroff wrote:
[quote=Prince Kobol]

End of the day though I don't support the use of external software to give people an edge ingame whether that is input automation in eve or an aimbot in an FPS game or whatever.


How is ISBoxer giving an advantage? One account is still one account.

1 player running 10 accounts doesn't have an advantage over a group with 10 players?

How is ISBoxer giving an advantage?

By that logic groups should be illegal as they give the group an advantage over solo players.

Why is the group allowed to have the advantage, but the solo player is left out in the cold?

Once again, it boils down to CCP not wanting solo players in the game. At least not wanting solo players that can actually defend themselves against groups.
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#65 - 2016-12-02 21:34:47 UTC
Quote:
Why is the group allowed to have the advantage, but the solo player is left out in the cold?
Once again, it boils down to CCP not wanting solo players in the game. At lease not wanting solo players that can actually defend themselves against groups.


And there you go again...

The solo player is at slight disadvantage against a group in physically entering orders to the accounts.
However, the solo player is at an advantage against the group in that the solo player doesn't need to issue commands to Those that might not follow the commands, in other words, there's no chance of conflicting orders/ or responses.

Now have the solo player with her 10 accounts group with others and their 10 accounts and all using the broadcasting tech. The tech has become a force multiplier. Pair this with a tactic that encourages alpha strikes, and you get what finally put the nail in the coffin for broadcasting in EvE. It wasn't mining, it was single pilot gank fleets unstealthing and bombing multiple others. What can you do the counter that??

Cloak + Bombs + single point of guidance = OP.

Interfering with mining was just a consequence - good or bad depends on your POV.

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."

Jason Coralin
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#66 - 2016-12-02 21:36:42 UTC
Eve use to be the greatest MMORTS on the market. Now it is just another MMORPG.
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#67 - 2016-12-02 21:39:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Gadget Helmsdottir
Jason Coralin wrote:
Eve use to be the greatest MMORTS on the market. Now it is just another MMORPG.


Gotcha.

Civ VI dropped recently. Go play that.

Edit:
Oh wait, you said RTS...

Yeah, that's never been EvE per se. There are elements, but EvE is the whole shebang: Tactics, Strategy, Pilotics, RP, Economics, building, and Breaking you name it - all elements that makes EvE a great game.

But EvE is a game, not a simulator - no matter what tongue-in-cheek rhetoric that goes around. Being fair isn't really necessary for players in terms of skill or creativity, but being fair is necessary for the tools available. Broadcasting tech messed up that balance.

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."

Jason Coralin
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#68 - 2016-12-02 21:41:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Jason Coralin
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:
Jason Coralin wrote:
Eve use to be the greatest MMORTS on the market. Now it is just another MMORPG.


Gotcha.

Civ VI dropped recently. Go play that.

--Gadget


Oh, I stopped playing Eve a long time ago.

This thread just interested me.

I would return in a heartbeat if CCP stopped treating solo players as second class citizens. Still the best game ever made, even with all the solo hatred.
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#69 - 2016-12-02 21:48:16 UTC
Jason Coralin wrote:
Gadget Helmsdottir wrote:
Jason Coralin wrote:
Eve use to be the greatest MMORTS on the market. Now it is just another MMORPG.


Gotcha.

Civ VI dropped recently. Go play that.

--Gadget


Oh, I stopped playing Eve a long time ago.

This thread just interested me.

I would return in a heartbeat if CCP stopped putting groups above solo players.


Well since the core design is based on the group, enjoy the vacay.

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."

PopeUrban
El Expedicion
Flames of Exile
#70 - 2016-12-02 22:59:02 UTC  |  Edited by: PopeUrban
Jason Coralin wrote:
Rroff wrote:
[quote=Prince Kobol]

End of the day though I don't support the use of external software to give people an edge ingame whether that is input automation in eve or an aimbot in an FPS game or whatever.


How is ISBoxer giving an advantage? One account is still one account.

1 player running 10 accounts doesn't have an advantage over a group with 10 players?

How is ISBoxer giving an advantage?

By that logic groups should be illegal as they give the group an advantage over solo players.

Why is the group allowed to have the advantage, but the solo player is left out in the cold?

Once again, it boils down to CCP not wanting solo players in the game. At least not wanting solo players that can actually defend themselves against groups.


Because it allows that one player to efficiently operate as if he were ten.

I double box EVE, always have, and I can tell you that having to control two accounts manually in combat is remarkably less efficient than having done them with key broadcasting.

With broadcasting, I was functionally MORE efficient than two players. Without it, I am functionally far less efficient than two players. Thus, my multiboxing is actually balanced now that I can't keyclone. Two pilots are probably going to be better at running two ships in a fight than I am going to be at running two ships.

Broadcasting enables, especially in a game with few obstructions that is largely based on targeted follow commands, a single player to efficiently function as a fleet of any size, provided he can run the clients, with no additional control lag or difficulty. You anchor the fleet on a single vessel. You control that vessel. You keyclone your modules. You are now piloting one giant ship with pieces that might get shot off.

That one guy running ten accounts is ABSOLUTELY advantaged versus ten individuals. Now multiply the one guy by ten, and you have 100 ships on the field.

You tell me with a straight face that you don't think a hundred ships controlled by ten people is a massive advantage compared to a hundred ships run by one person each and I have a couple slowcat fleet nerfs to show you.
Mara Pahrdi
The Order of Anoyia
#71 - 2016-12-02 23:31:21 UTC
2Sonas1Cup wrote:
...and everyones enjoyment...

Think again.

Remove standings and insurance.

Avaelica Kuershin
Paper Cats
#72 - 2016-12-03 02:59:36 UTC
Jason Coralin wrote:


I would return in a heartbeat if CCP stopped treating solo players as second class citizens. Still the best game ever made, even with all the solo hatred.


Funny thing is that I am usually flying solo and I don't seem to be hated or second class.
There are activities which are just better in groups ( as long as the FC is relaxed Cool )
Toobo
Project Fruit House
#73 - 2016-12-03 03:56:49 UTC
Serafiel wrote:
Toobo wrote:
EVE, for a game that has such good multiboxing potentials, should really offer more flexible options to manage multiple accounts.


What you dont seem to understand, is that CCP does NOT want people to multibox, and does NOT want 60 thousand online, half of which are being run by 10 thousand guys like you.

And neither do we, legit players.



I'm not sure that is true as a blanket statement. Maybe CCP (and whatever other 'legit' players are) do not want one dude with 10~20 accounts running a fleet. But I don't think CCP has problem with a player is running a roaming toon, while gate camping with a fleet on another account, while being logged on in Jita/Amarr/Rens/Dodixie for market updates, and while having a hauler alt hauling stuff, while another alt is lighting cynos and helping his alliance move around, etc, etc.

What you defined is a very specific and narrow case of multiboxing, for which ISBoxer excelled, and that type of one man army thing may not be so great for game in PVP balance wise, I can completely agree that's something to be looked at.

But the above scenario I mentioned, which is pretty much what I mainly do with my multiple accounts - doing many different things in different places, is that really 'bad for the game'? or is that something 'CCP/legit players don't want'?

What I said above can be done without ISBoxer sure, and I do it without ISBoxer now, but ISBoxer's other functions that people do not talk about much was to have windows/interfaces displayed in customized format, it had very easy to set up multi window switching setup wizard, etc, that allowed you to monitor and switch between clients very easily.

Now, if they were all in the same fleet, flying 10~20 bombers and key broacasting to coordiate and alpha the opposition off with perfectly synced shot - sure, that's probably not good for game balance. But in the scenario I mentioned, having multiple pilots in multiple places doing different things - is that also what you 'legit' player does not want?

Notice that the discussion has 'moved on' a bit here. The OP specifically asked for 'key broadcasting' to come back, to which even former ISBoxer users came here and said 'no'. But there's another voice here that suggest some other functionalities of ISBoxer didn't really 'break' the game and feel that banning such specific uses is just restrictive.

So taking key broadcast away, and when you look at 'multiboxing' from a more general POV, not in really narrow and specific use case of fleet fights, is there really a problem?

Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!

mkint
#74 - 2016-12-03 04:51:18 UTC  |  Edited by: mkint
OP wrote:

I wish they'd still let me cheat

Maxim 6. If violence wasn’t your last resort, you failed to resort to enough of it.

Brokk Witgenstein
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#75 - 2016-12-03 06:44:34 UTC
When multiboxing 16 toons, 1 is a player character and the other 15 are essentially NPCs -- flawless in their coordination and execution, devoid of any characteristic that differentiate them.

I for one do not enjoy competing against NPCs-- it's not what makes EvE great. How would you feel when 15 NPCs started stripmining your belt? (or, 15 navy omen bots neatly anchored on FC and shot the primary all at the same time?).

It's kind of like voting in a democracy: why should 1 guy have 16 votes while I have only one? Because he's got better hardware to pull it off? Multiboxing is not helping the solo player -- it is in fact the nemesis of the real solo player. (same goes for alts by the way, but as long as there's a real player behind the console it doesn't come off as cheating. So that's okay then I guess).

Bottom line: what we want, are real players. Not bots. So no, you can't have your ISBox back.
Wanda Fayne
#76 - 2016-12-03 10:17:34 UTC
Would it be less enjoyable to play poker against one person who held 5 hands
than to play against 5 different people?

The odds of winning are the same.
But the experience of it is not.

"your comments just confirms this whole idea is totally pathetic" -Lan Wang-

  • - "hub humping station gamey neutral logi warspam wankery" -Ralph King-Griffin-
Prince Kobol
#77 - 2016-12-03 10:55:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Prince Kobol
Toobo wrote:
Serafiel wrote:
Toobo wrote:
EVE, for a game that has such good multiboxing potentials, should really offer more flexible options to manage multiple accounts.


What you dont seem to understand, is that CCP does NOT want people to multibox, and does NOT want 60 thousand online, half of which are being run by 10 thousand guys like you.

And neither do we, legit players.



I'm not sure that is true as a blanket statement. Maybe CCP (and whatever other 'legit' players are) do not want one dude with 10~20 accounts running a fleet. But I don't think CCP has problem with a player is running a roaming toon, while gate camping with a fleet on another account, while being logged on in Jita/Amarr/Rens/Dodixie for market updates, and while having a hauler alt hauling stuff, while another alt is lighting cynos and helping his alliance move around, etc, etc.

What you defined is a very specific and narrow case of multiboxing, for which ISBoxer excelled, and that type of one man army thing may not be so great for game in PVP balance wise, I can completely agree that's something to be looked at.

But the above scenario I mentioned, which is pretty much what I mainly do with my multiple accounts - doing many different things in different places, is that really 'bad for the game'? or is that something 'CCP/legit players don't want'?

What I said above can be done without ISBoxer sure, and I do it without ISBoxer now, but ISBoxer's other functions that people do not talk about much was to have windows/interfaces displayed in customized format, it had very easy to set up multi window switching setup wizard, etc, that allowed you to monitor and switch between clients very easily.

Now, if they were all in the same fleet, flying 10~20 bombers and key broacasting to coordiate and alpha the opposition off with perfectly synced shot - sure, that's probably not good for game balance. But in the scenario I mentioned, having multiple pilots in multiple places doing different things - is that also what you 'legit' player does not want?

Notice that the discussion has 'moved on' a bit here. The OP specifically asked for 'key broadcasting' to come back, to which even former ISBoxer users came here and said 'no'. But there's another voice here that suggest some other functionalities of ISBoxer didn't really 'break' the game and feel that banning such specific uses is just restrictive.

So taking key broadcast away, and when you look at 'multiboxing' from a more general POV, not in really narrow and specific use case of fleet fights, is there really a problem?




I guess we're talking about overlays. So example I have 3 screens, with a 3rd party tool I can create a custom single screen which contains elements from the 3 original screens thus enabling me to control all 3 ships from one screen with a layout of my choosing.

Now with this there is no broadcasting involved. Everything still has to be done manually, the only difference is that you have a custom overlay which makes what you have on screen more efficient.

This is especially handy if you do not have a dedicated monitor per client or you don't have a massive monitor where you can multiple clients windowed one on screen without them looking like postage stamps.

I fully accept that it is very helpful.

I guess the problem lies in, can CCP detect the difference between this setup and somebody doing the same but using multi key broadcasting as well.
Jaxon Grylls
Institute of Archaeology
#78 - 2016-12-03 12:21:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Jaxon Grylls
Jason Coralin wrote:
Once again, it boils down to CCP not wanting solo players in the game. At least not wanting solo players that can actually defend themselves against groups.

Then learn to do so. I mine in lo-sec and I am very aware of the dangers. If I see what I consider a threat I run, no point losing my barge from having a stiff neck.

It does seem as if this is turning into a one-sided conversation. You obviously can't see the objection to a single player using an exploit to gain unfair advantage in the game. As I said earlier I'm a solo player for all the reasons given by others in this thread. Security and control. It's my subscription and I see no reason to use my money to stroke the ego of someone else in one of the megacorps. I am what many would consider a failure in the game but playing solo has given me a lot of fun and satisfaction over more than 10 years. There was even an alliance, CIC, that catered for solo minded players that also wanted to have a group that they could join in with if they wished. Voluntary and non-controlling. I do wish I could find an alliance with the same objectives these days.

You on the other hand seem to want to have your cake and eat it. I.e. all the safety of being a single player but with all the perks of being in a group. CCP have rightly decided IMO that that is not the way they wish to have the game played and have blocked players from taking advantage of something that gives then an unfair advantage. You may as well have "golden ammo". It's the same sort of thing.
xxxTRUSTxxx
Galactic Rangers
#79 - 2016-12-03 12:35:29 UTC
2Sonas1Cup wrote:


Maybe just maybe it's time to stop



yes it is,, so please stop already Roll

No to your stupid request. no to ISboxer and key broadcasting of any kind, should never have been allowed in the first place.
Toobo
Project Fruit House
#80 - 2016-12-03 12:41:55 UTC
Prince Kobol - yes you get what I mean heh. It's exactly that type of customisation that is unfortunately sacrificed as a collateral casualty to CCP's strict ban on key broadcasting and third party tools like ISBoxer. I can understand the reasoning, I mean from CCP's point of view it's muh easier and hassle free to just say "don't use ISBoxer" instead of making a big list of what is ok and wha is not, and dealing each incident case by case. Just as it was with the carpet bombing of ALL IWI bankers when they banned gambling, it is a business decision I can understand, but pretty sh1t as any carpet bombing is. To catch a few rats, and to avoid headaches and save cost, many other things which are pretty banal or non game breaking are sacrificed.

From technical POV I'm not so sure, as I imagine it would be much easier for CCP to detect someone using key broadcasting than omeone using overlays. But they do take the easiest/cheapest way to police things, and when they do that they also take out some things which could be neat for some players without being game breaking. I always complain about such things, but people always come back with the same answer that a blanket ban is an easy way for CCP as a company. Fair enough, but with each such blanket measures there will always be innocent casualties, and it all adds up in the end. :p

Cheers Love! The cavalry's here!