These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Petition - Full ban of multi boxing programs which duplicate clicks.

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#141 - 2013-02-14 04:30:34 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
sYnc Vir wrote:
Edit. I removed some stuff because it would just be showing off for the person in question. However, given how ISBoxer is legal. I will state, that why drop the logi from the program? It can hand non mirrored ships you know. Not all your toons have to be in the drake. [/i]

Time for a multiboxing Caracal/Scythe fleet.


Watch list and repeater regions are your friends.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#142 - 2013-02-14 04:33:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Bienator II
i see it this way: the fact that input duplication is even CONSIDERED to be used from players shows that some game mechanics are far to simple, repetitive, illogical or allow linear profit scaling with the number of participants.

if you mine in real life you are not 10x as efficient if you send 10x as much personnel into a mine... just to pick mining as example. (stacking penalty on asteroids would be the quick fix for mining at least)

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#143 - 2013-02-14 04:35:25 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
i see it this way: the fact that input duplication is even CONSIDERED to be used from players shows that some game mechanics are far to simple, repetitive, illogical or allow linear profit scaling with the number of participants.

if you mine in real life you are not 10x as efficient if you send 10x as much personal into a mine... just to pick mining as example. (stacking penalty on asteroids would be the quick fix for mining at least)


Except it hurt legit player just as much...
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#144 - 2013-02-14 04:35:50 UTC
Bienator II wrote:
i see it this way: the fact that input duplication is even CONSIDERED to be used from players shows that some game mechanics are far to simple, repetitive, illogical or allow linear profit scaling with the number of participants.

if you mine in real life you are not 10x as efficient if you send 10x as much personal into a mine... just to pick mining as example. (stacking penalty on asteroids would be the quick fix for mining at least)

You mean personnel, right? (Miners).

That said, a great way to multibox mining is to use ice, the amazing highsec product that never runs out ever. For ore, you do in fact have to move more in highsec.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
GreenSeed
#145 - 2013-02-14 05:03:30 UTC
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Thalen Draganos wrote:


ISBoxer command duplication is very very different. That is taking one command at a time and duplicating it to multiple clients. Not through automation but through duplication.

ISBoxer just makes the job of running multiple accounts more practical. not necessarily easier (have any of you complainers looked in to the preparation required?). There is nothing wrong with that.



How is a software analysing your input and replication them for you to X other clients at the same time not an automation? If there was only a duplication of command, you clicking the lock button to lock a roid for example would only cause the eve client to tell you you are already targetting that roid. The automation make sure all the separate command are sent to the right instance of the client running instead of all at the same one as would happen if the multiboxer software was opnly making an exact duplicate of the input you did.

Unless you ahve a way to send command to a software without first telling the computer to start interfacing to that instance instead of the one you were previously focusing on.



those two things are wrong.

multiboxing software that modifies input based on game states via something like OCR is automation.... thing is, you wont find any multiboxing software that does that. so, if you think that's what boxing software does, you need to step away from this discussion right now, because you are basing your argument in incorrect information.

the only thing multiboxing software will do is allow you to tell which clients receive the input, and to switch the clients that will receive the input... you have to make an input telling the software to do so. even making inputs happen in order to different clients must come from individual hardware events. such as hitting F1 and making drake 1 fire, F1 again, making drake 2 fire, etc. each requires a hardware event.

there are many more complex methods of controlling other clients, but no one uses them in eve, because you don't have to. from the moment you realize that the interactions in game can be done using only the Overview, you can just zoom out the view and never look at your ship again. all you need is the overview, sort it by name or type, and all overviews become duplicates, regardless of your distance to the objects.

in fact, the only feature people use of multiboxing software is broadcasting, unlike wow where the dynamic environment makes broadcasting completely impossible. EVE is incredible easy to replicate on all instances, say you have 20 drakes, so long all of them target at the same speed, cycle weapons at the same speed, fire at the same range, fly at the same speed, all the ui are pixel perfect copies of each other, and stay close together by orbiting the same anchor (by using a fleet option im sure 90% of the people in this thread don't know about, called "Regroup fleet"). they will work just like if you were flying one drake.

either download the damn thing and try it or shut up, don't make boxing software to be something its not, just to make an argument.

also the argument of accelerated income is the same idiocy of a wow player crying because 5 shamans detonated his por character with 5 lavabursts... so long as the software doesn't make each instance more powerful than any other instance, then its fine. one miner mining 10m/h, compared to a boxer mining 10m/h times 6 accounts, its still 10x6, it not 60m. if the software made one account do that, then yeah we have a problem, but as it is, it does nothing but exalt how in eve everything increases linearly. don't hate the player, hate the game.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#146 - 2013-02-14 05:17:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
GreenSeed wrote:
so long as the software doesn't make each instance more powerful than any other instance, then its fine. one miner mining 10m/h, compared to a boxer mining 10m/h times 6 accounts, its still 10x6, it not 60m. if the software made one account do that, then yeah we have a problem, but as it is, it does nothing but exalt how in eve everything increases linearly. don't hate the player, hate the game.

You are of course excluding the case where the (bot) miner mines 10, maybe 20 hours a day (if they're dumb and/or want to donate 317 billion worth of raw ice to a space-important organization) whereas a normal player would collapse after trying that for a week, let alone a month or more.

Since you mention isk/hr, and usually bots have lower isk/hour than people do...

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
GreenSeed
#147 - 2013-02-14 05:23:32 UTC  |  Edited by: GreenSeed
Alavaria Fera wrote:
GreenSeed wrote:
so long as the software doesn't make each instance more powerful than any other instance, then its fine. one miner mining 10m/h, compared to a boxer mining 10m/h times 6 accounts, its still 10x6, it not 60m. if the software made one account do that, then yeah we have a problem, but as it is, it does nothing but exalt how in eve everything increases linearly. don't hate the player, hate the game.

You are of course excluding the case where the (bot) miner mines 10, maybe 20 hours a day (if they're dumb and/or want to donate 317 billion worth of raw ice to a space-important organization) whereas a normal player would collapse after trying that for a week, let alone a month or more.

Since you mention isk/hr, and usually bots have lower isk/hour than people do...


what bot miner?

a boxer is not a bot... he is there mining just like any other miner and will get bored after 2 hours just like any other miner. do you even know what we are talking about here?
Nikodiemus
Ganja Clade
Shadow Cartel
#148 - 2013-02-14 05:40:54 UTC
Is there any evidence that supports the notion that players with many clients using them simultaneously adversely affects the gameplay of others?

I would be one to acknowledge the fact that the player either 1- paying for all the accounts or 2 - plexing all the accounts hurts eve in one way or another but that is another matter in itself. Does his use of his paid for products hurt others who also pay in a lesser amount?
GreenSeed
#149 - 2013-02-14 05:45:00 UTC
ohhhh... yes...

finally someone said it.

making a distinction between accounts and players. linking, all accounts to the player that plays them. this is even worse than limiting the clients to one, or connections from the same IP to one.



do you have an idea of how many people just went for supporting this so called "ban" to hating it with passion? thank you for making my job easier.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#150 - 2013-02-14 06:17:42 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
Frostys Virpio wrote:
Thalen Draganos wrote:


ISBoxer command duplication is very very different. That is taking one command at a time and duplicating it to multiple clients. Not through automation but through duplication.

ISBoxer just makes the job of running multiple accounts more practical. not necessarily easier (have any of you complainers looked in to the preparation required?). There is nothing wrong with that.



How is a software analysing your input and replication them for you to X other clients at the same time not an automation? If there was only a duplication of command, you clicking the lock button to lock a roid for example would only cause the eve client to tell you you are already targetting that roid. The automation make sure all the separate command are sent to the right instance of the client running instead of all at the same one as would happen if the multiboxer software was opnly making an exact duplicate of the input you did.

Unless you ahve a way to send command to a software without first telling the computer to start interfacing to that instance instead of the one you were previously focusing on.



those two things are wrong.

multiboxing software that modifies input based on game states via something like OCR is automation.... thing is, you wont find any multiboxing software that does that. so, if you think that's what boxing software does, you need to step away from this discussion right now, because you are basing your argument in incorrect information.

the only thing multiboxing software will do is allow you to tell which clients receive the input, and to switch the clients that will receive the input... you have to make an input telling the software to do so. even making inputs happen in order to different clients must come from individual hardware events. such as hitting F1 and making drake 1 fire, F1 again, making drake 2 fire, etc. each requires a hardware event.

there are many more complex methods of controlling other clients, but no one uses them in eve, because you don't have to. from the moment you realize that the interactions in game can be done using only the Overview, you can just zoom out the view and never look at your ship again. all you need is the overview, sort it by name or type, and all overviews become duplicates, regardless of your distance to the objects.

in fact, the only feature people use of multiboxing software is broadcasting, unlike wow where the dynamic environment makes broadcasting completely impossible. EVE is incredible easy to replicate on all instances, say you have 20 drakes, so long all of them target at the same speed, cycle weapons at the same speed, fire at the same range, fly at the same speed, all the ui are pixel perfect copies of each other, and stay close together by orbiting the same anchor (by using a fleet option im sure 90% of the people in this thread don't know about, called "Regroup fleet"). they will work just like if you were flying one drake.

either download the damn thing and try it or shut up, don't make boxing software to be something its not, just to make an argument.

also the argument of accelerated income is the same idiocy of a wow player crying because 5 shamans detonated his por character with 5 lavabursts... so long as the software doesn't make each instance more powerful than any other instance, then its fine. one miner mining 10m/h, compared to a boxer mining 10m/h times 6 accounts, its still 10x6, it not 60m. if the software made one account do that, then yeah we have a problem, but as it is, it does nothing but exalt how in eve everything increases linearly. don't hate the player, hate the game.


Seriously, tell me how a software can send a command to 30 instance of another software running at the same time without any automation. If it's not automated for you, each insatnce of EVE will require it's independant input since you can't have all the overview active at the same time. The OS does not support interaction with more than 1 software at the same time unless a serie of action was launched to run in an automated way which would let you take action on a second one.
Thalen Draganos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#151 - 2013-02-14 13:05:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Thalen Draganos
Mara Rinn wrote:


What if I get my software to program a macro key on my keyboard to emit the appropriate series of keystrokes to change the order for me?

What about the following keystroke macro:


  1. Shift+Down
  2. Ctrl+C (or Command+C for Mac users)
  3. Alt+Tab
  4. Enter
  5. Tab
  6. Paste
  7. Enter
  8. Alt+Tab
  9. Down


This keystroke macro will copy the current line of text from one window, switch to the other window, open up the market order, alter the order, switch back to the text window, then move the cursor to the next line (the next invocation of the macro will copy that line, rinse repeat).

Is this automation or not?





Your example demonstrates the confusion.

Compare your example to what ISBoxer does:
Each command is executed by a humans input.


  1. Entered Command: Shift+Down
  2. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  3. Entered Command: Cntrl+C
  4. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  5. Entered Command: Alt+Tab
  6. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  7. Entered Command: Enter
  8. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  9. Entered Command: Tab
  10. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  11. Entered Command: Paste
  12. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  13. Entered Command: Enter
  14. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  15. Entered Command: Alt+Tab
  16. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  17. Entered Command: Down
  18. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.



As you can see each individual command is manually entered. It is then duplicated to all 5 of the other instances of the same program. Your, so called, example is of automation. Not command duplication. The difference is that every individual command is entered manually from the start. ISBoxer does not excecute a list of commands from one human input command. As a matter of fact, the people that created and control how ISBoxer is used, expressly forbid the use of automation software (a.k.a. bots) in conjunction with their product. It is a subscription product and if you are caught you are no longer able to subscribe to their services.
A little more research on the part of the complainers might have revealed that but, I know. :effort:
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#152 - 2013-02-14 14:07:52 UTC
Kal Mindar wrote:
Without that piece of software, no one could control a 30 man mining fleet on their own and have a great deal of efficiency or lack of risk.


You are wrong. As long as you stick to ice (the usual material mined also by ISBoxer owners) you can happily manually setup 30 ships doing it with totally competitive efficiency.

EvE Online portal | EvE markets tutorials
Klymer
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#153 - 2013-02-14 14:51:59 UTC
Thalen Draganos wrote:
Mara Rinn wrote:


What if I get my software to program a macro key on my keyboard to emit the appropriate series of keystrokes to change the order for me?

What about the following keystroke macro:


  1. Shift+Down
  2. Ctrl+C (or Command+C for Mac users)
  3. Alt+Tab
  4. Enter
  5. Tab
  6. Paste
  7. Enter
  8. Alt+Tab
  9. Down


This keystroke macro will copy the current line of text from one window, switch to the other window, open up the market order, alter the order, switch back to the text window, then move the cursor to the next line (the next invocation of the macro will copy that line, rinse repeat).

Is this automation or not?





Your example demonstrates the confusion.

Compare your example to what ISBoxer does:
Each command is executed by a humans input.


  1. Entered Command: Shift+Down
  2. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  3. Entered Command: Cntrl+C
  4. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  5. Entered Command: Alt+Tab
  6. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  7. Entered Command: Enter
  8. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  9. Entered Command: Tab
  10. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  11. Entered Command: Paste
  12. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  13. Entered Command: Enter
  14. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  15. Entered Command: Alt+Tab
  16. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.
  17. Entered Command: Down
  18. Repeats command to 5 other instances of the same program.



As you can see each individual command is manually entered. It is then duplicated to all 5 of the other instances of the same program. Your, so called, example is of automation. Not command duplication. The difference is that every individual command is entered manually from the start. ISBoxer does not excecute a list of commands from one human input command. As a matter of fact, the people that created and control how ISBoxer is used, expressly forbid the use of automation software (a.k.a. bots) in conjunction with their product. It is a subscription product and if you are caught you are no longer able to subscribe to their services.
A little more research on the part of the complainers might have revealed that but, I know. :effort:


This needs to be said again as it's exactly what ISBoxer does, it BROADCASTS keyboard and mouse commands to multiple clients. There is no automation of functions or creation of macro's or anything like that, you have to physically press a key or move the mouse for something to happen.

I also find it absolutely hilarious that this thread was started while CCP is running their new Sidekick promotion.
LHA Tarawa
Pator Tech School
Minmatar Republic
#154 - 2013-02-14 15:01:51 UTC
Kal Mindar wrote:
Lady Ayeipsia wrote:
http://technabob.com/blog/2010/04/11/eve-multi-boxing-rig/

Copy and paste the link. With large sums of money or spare equipment, you don't need a program to multi-box. Would you ban the above also simply because you can't do it?



Umm. No. My problem is with a program that takes 1 click and duplicates it 30 times. Again, why should they be allowed to warp all 30 hulks let's say, back to a pos with 1 click. How does this reinforce the main theme of action vs. consequence that this game is underpinned by?



This is a poor argument since he could create a fleet structure where he wing warps all 30 hulks at once, even without input duplication software.

A better argument would be "Why can his 30 suicide gank skips lock my orca with one mouse click, activate all guns with one click, and turn me into a pod, with one mouse click?" or "Why can he move ore from 30 ore holds to enormous container with one mouse click-drag instead of 30?"
alex Harierian
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#155 - 2013-02-14 16:44:16 UTC
Very interesting topic. I've wondered about this and now I'm going to have to try this when I get home. Would save me a lot of clicking.

Using this method I can:
Undock 1 client from the station, warp it to a belt, lock a target, enable the miners, when the cargo is full dock up, unload the cargo to the station. Rinse and repeat.

Of course, all the while in the background, isboxer can automatically record and send those same actions to as many clients as I want w/o me having to interact with them.

Going to speed up my isk/hr tremendously vs having to manually switch between clients.
GreenSeed
#156 - 2013-02-14 19:45:49 UTC
The biggest problem is actually people thinking that Isboxer or any other boxing software "enables" multiboxing... that's just not true. multiboxing es enabled by the way Windows handles hardware events.

say you have one window with focus, Windows then sends the input to that window trough directx, the way multiboxing works is by telling Windows to keep all windows in focus, and to send the hardware inputs trough directx to all windows. or a specific set of windows based on PID. Isboxer doesn't do that... its Windows the one doing it.

you can actually multibox with the powershell console windows7 has.Blink

and on IOS and linux? broadcasting is an integral part of the way the GUI works... in fact programs like Isboxer borrow a lot of ideas from linux, that's how the broadcasting can be used across multiple PCs. (feature that's baseline on linux/IOS)

and Melikor Tissant , my 4 year old pc can run 10 clients at 60fps. the only thing that can create problems are the damn dust clouds, so i avoid them like the plague.

all isboxer provides is a neat way of managing window space. instead of keeping all the windowed client windows stacked around the desktop, you can have them all organized in a grid. and a way of keeping presets, for instance one for mining, one for missions, and another for 4 clients, other for 6, 2, etc. it also allows to turn broadcasting off, so you can play EVE like god intended it. or having different broadcasting groups, so you don't turn off the Gang links on your orca while you turn on the strips. not that i ever mine anymore since i discovered that using the "View planetary Command center" button on the PI windows effectively syncs the planetary views across all clients.

another problem is people thinking that broadcasting is automation.... please just download isboxer or any other of the hundreds of broadcasting software's around, some of them freeware and just see for yourself...

and if you don't want to understand how ONE key press can be split into many recipients at the software level, while still being one key press, then its ok. CCP, Blizzard, SOE, and many other companies do understand it. now im pretty sure some individuals don't like it, CCP streggs always struck me as an overly zealous individual, and im sure that's no coincidence given the position he was given. but cool heads prevail, and logic is, as it often is, self evident.
Thalen Draganos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#157 - 2013-02-14 19:51:46 UTC
There still seems to be some major confusion here.

From Wikipedia:
Quote:
Multiboxing is a term used mostly in MMORPGs to refer to playing as multiple separate characters simultaneously. This can either be achieved by using multiple separate machines to run the game or by running multiple separate instances of the game.


Eli Green wrote:
Hammer Borne wrote:

Section 6.A.3 of the Eula:

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.


Basically saying that an account owner can not use anything to increase the profit or acquisitions more so than any other player would be capable of. What it does not say is that you can not use more than one character or account at the same time.

From the ISBoxer wiki itself:
Quote:
ISBoxer does not provide any automation, autofire, botting, hacks or other cheating functionality. Top MMORPG publishers including Blizzard Entertainment, Trion Worlds, Sony Online Entertainment, CCP, Turbine, NCSoft and others all allow multiboxing with ISBoxer.


From merriam-webster.com:
[quote]Definition of AUTOMATION

1 : the technique of making an apparatus, a process, or a system operate automatically

2 : the state of being operated automatically

3 : automatically controlled operation of an apparatus, process, or system by mechanical or electronic devices that take the place of human labor


All of this arguing over what is what should end right here. I don't see how it could be any more clear.
Xenuria
#158 - 2013-02-14 20:20:35 UTC
Dante Uisen wrote:
Kal Mindar wrote:
Any program that allows 1 player to operate 30 characters, even just for movement, should not be allowed. Why are they allowed to hit 1 button and insta warp 30 characters to safety instead of dealing with the consequences of not being able to manually move them all in time to prevent a gank.


Yes, fleet warp should be a banable offense.


Darn you beat me too it.

CSM 12 Candidate
Thalen Draganos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#159 - 2013-02-14 20:23:03 UTC
To add to my above post:

Do you people realize just how many people run multiple accounts simultaneously (a.k.a. multibox)?
A lot!
Imagine if you got your way and people were only able to run one account at a time from each computer. Or worse yet, from the same IP address.
Do you realize that would mean, at the very least, a couple hundred thousand USD per month income cut?
Now, if you ran a business, would you be willing to take that kind of hit on your income from your flagship product just because of some whiny people who refuse to understand that running multiple accounts on multiple computers, or even one computer which is not all that expensive if you took time to look, is not against the rules?

Of course not.
Get over it ffs.
Thalen Draganos
State War Academy
Caldari State
#160 - 2013-02-14 20:25:59 UTC
Me Goon and me understand dis. Why you not understand dis?