These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#221 - 2013-02-18 01:22:10 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:

But no matter how fast you are in terms of Actions Per Minute, you still can't press the same key in 30 clients instantaneously without some form of power amplification (i.e.: keystroke broadcasting).


Well, of course. But the end result of a guy broadcasting 30 keystrokes and a guy manually ALT tabbing like a pro is the same, isn't it? Both affect the economy in the same way, both pay the same number of subs, both will i.e. mine ice at the same speed. How can CCP even discern the two? I am fairly sure they don't have a software that correlates 30 accounts to their actions instant by instant.
dark heartt
#222 - 2013-02-18 02:08:17 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
I'd say it's about even. 1 person running 20 accounts won't be nearly as effective as 20 people running 1 account each.


This is pretty much the end of that argument. While I was in RvB there was a guy who ran a 4 account multibox setup (Hi SG-1 Team) to 'solo' and we took him out with 3 guys who were working together on comms. There is no 'power advantage' to multiboxing unless you are talking about mining, and lets face it, there is more than enough to go around with that.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#223 - 2013-02-18 02:34:38 UTC
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Well, of course. But the end result of a guy broadcasting 30 keystrokes and a guy manually ALT tabbing like a pro is the same, isn't it? Both affect the economy in the same way, both pay the same number of subs, both will i.e. mine ice at the same speed. How can CCP even discern the two? I am fairly sure they don't have a software that correlates 30 accounts to their actions instant by instant.


How many people would give up ice mining if they had to emit all those keystrokes manually for every ship in their fleet instead of using the aid of a keystroke replicator?

So no, the end result is not the same. The value of ice harvesting work is determined by the people willing to do that work for the least ISK per hour of lasers on ice. Someone with a keystroke replicator is probably happy to maintain that fleet of 40 mackinaws since it only takes one click-and-drag every few minutes to get the ice into the Orca. If that person had to do that 40 times over each cycle, I imagine they might not want to keep doing that low paying work.

The other end of your argument is: it impacts the economy the same way whether I harvest ice for an hour or 18 hours. So would a player why not automate their fleet and just mine for 4 hours a day, every day? That's no more time than any other player might spend. It would save the player the effort of continually clicking the mouse and pressing buttons on the keyboard. That player's characters would still mine ice at the same speed as that other guy, so what's wrong with using a bot?

My argument here is that using a bot is a power amplification tool: I exert some effort, then the machine amplifies that effort to give me far greater gains than my input would otherwise have earned. The same applies to keystroke broadcasters: I exert some effort, then the machine amplifies that effort.
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#224 - 2013-02-18 02:42:32 UTC
dark heartt wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
I'd say it's about even. 1 person running 20 accounts won't be nearly as effective as 20 people running 1 account each.


This is pretty much the end of that argument. While I was in RvB there was a guy who ran a 4 account multibox setup (Hi SG-1 Team) to 'solo' and we took him out with 3 guys who were working together on comms. There is no 'power advantage' to multiboxing unless you are talking about mining, and lets face it, there is more than enough to go around with that.


I'd like to hear more of this story. Was his problem simply lack of combat experience? Poorly skilled pilots? Poorly fitted ships?
Klymer
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#225 - 2013-02-18 02:49:16 UTC
The key point your either missing or ignoring Mara is that botting removes human interaction from the game once it's setup and running where as multiboxing does not. Multiboxing actually increases the amount of interaction on the players part once it's up and running because they have to manage more accounts at one time. The botter on the other hand can launch their bot and then go off to work or school or whatever and leave their system completely unattended and the bot will continue to 'play' the game for them.
Nova Oden
Zebra Corp
Goonswarm Federation
#226 - 2013-02-18 03:16:01 UTC
Kal Mindar wrote:
With the recent news of the Eve-uni multi box botting scandal, I think it is time to ban multi box programs.
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. A click is a click and any program that duplicates one is not following the spirit of action vs. consequence that this amazing game is based upon.


I, Kal Mindar, deem that multi boxing programs are a EULA breaking form of automation that undermines the integrity of this game.


Edit:
This is pretty sad. I have never seen such a lack of reading comprehension in my life. I started this thread to petition against ONE thing only and that was Duplication of clicks via a 3rd party program.
From there, you guys have talked about fleet warp being duplication? Really? An in game feature is 3rd party software?
Ban multi boxing? Are you kidding? No one said anything about one person being able to control multiple accounts.
OP is just mad/poor/idiot/etc..... I use 4 accounts to play this game, I multi box, I have plenty of $ thank you for isboxer or more accounts.

Give your collective heads a shake. This thread is about a program doing the work that a person should have to do in order to keep the playing field even. Eve central fine. Spreadsheets fine. Pyfa fine. None of these perform in game clicks for players. You have to understand clicks are what sets the tempo for how long it takes to do things. Automate any part of it and it undermines the level playing field that must be there. Anyway, some really great posts for both sides of the discussion. Just too bad so many people seem to have missed some simple points to keep this thread on topic. Hopefully CCP got some good player input and can use it to continue making this game freaking amazing.

I love you all.

Fly safe o7.

Kal

agreed but as i triple box but im on 3 diff monitors at the same time!
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor
#227 - 2013-02-18 03:42:07 UTC
Klymer wrote:
Multiboxing actually increases the amount of interaction on the players part once it's up and running because they have to manage more accounts at one time.


That is true for people who are manually multiboxing. For people who are using, say, ISBoxer, the interaction is with one client only. The others receive clones of their commands. The purpose of ISBoxer is to reduce the amount of interaction required.

The advantage of botting is that the effort you spend buys you returns over time. The advantage of keystroke broadcasting is that the effort you spend buys you returns in place. The bot turns your one keystroke into 60 over a period of time. The broadcaster turns your one keystroke into 60 over a number of clients.

To me the difference between "Elite Miner Bot" and ISBoxer is splitting hairs. They both provide mechanical aid. To date, CCP disagrees with me and has decided that the mechanical advantage over time is bad, but the mechanical advantage over concurrent clients is acceptable.

So according to CCP, training my cycling team on steroids is bad, but doping their blood to carry more oxygen on race day is okay.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#228 - 2013-02-18 05:43:25 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
dark heartt wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
I'd say it's about even. 1 person running 20 accounts won't be nearly as effective as 20 people running 1 account each.


This is pretty much the end of that argument. While I was in RvB there was a guy who ran a 4 account multibox setup (Hi SG-1 Team) to 'solo' and we took him out with 3 guys who were working together on comms. There is no 'power advantage' to multiboxing unless you are talking about mining, and lets face it, there is more than enough to go around with that.


I'd like to hear more of this story. Was his problem simply lack of combat experience? Poorly skilled pilots? Poorly fitted ships?


4 accounts are all doing the exact same thing. 3 people playing 1 account each are coordinating their movements against the 4 accounts that are doing the exact same thing.

This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.

Klymer
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#229 - 2013-02-18 05:58:13 UTC
Mara,

As much as you or any others would like it to be, "mechanical aid" isn't the issue. The fact that you believe there's only a hairs difference between botting and using a multiboxing app is further proof that you don't understand the fundamental difference between them and why lots of game companies, no use trying to single CCP out like they are doing something bad, don't have issues with using multiboxing software packages while banning the use of bots.

Your steroids versus doping comment is completely irrelevant regarding the issue at hand and I think your use of it to in some way demonize CCP and it's policies is inappropriate.


Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#230 - 2013-02-18 06:06:04 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Grimpak wrote:
let's put this in a way where semantics can't get in the way:

botting is automation
multiboxing is duplication


Let's put this in a way where the semantics can't get in the way:

botting is power amplification by allowing acquisition of in-game resources beyond the potential of a human player.

duplication is power amplification by allowing in-game performance beyond the potential of a human player. Duplication can be achieved by software or hardware, as ZK has shown.

1 player controlling 20 ships is capable of more decisive combat outcomes than 20 players controlling 1 ship each: it's hard to rep through alpha strike, as opposed to 20 shots arriving over a 3 second period, allowing the logistics pilots to keep the target alive through each salvo.

When ice harvesting, it is quite possible to run a fleet of 40 ships without any form of power amplification. The upper limit for a single human is probably 150 ships, allowing 2 seconds for handling each ship's ice harvester cycle. Of course you could simply run each ship until the hold is full, so you only have to act when the ship needs to warp to station, warp to belt, target ice and start harvester: this lifts the maximum number of ships that a single human can handle to whatever the sol node can handle.

One established limit for Starcraft is about 300 actions per minute: 5 actions per second. Translating to an ice harvesting operation, you'd be hard pressed to make those 5 actions count for anything: there are limits to how quickly the game responds to instructions, and there are limits to how quickly the application can become responsive once you Alt+Tab to the game. But assuming there are no limits, the actions required for running a large fleet are simply Alt+Tab, click+drag. That's 150 mining ships handled per minute, with a cycle time of 3 minutes, giving a hypothetical maximum fleet size of about 450 ships that a human could conceivably control without any form of power amplification beyond a computer capable of running that many clients, or enough computers running that many clients, with keyboard sharing software such as Synergy (without keystroke broadcasting complied in) or Teleport. But I doubt even the keenest Starcraft player would manage to spend three hours harvesting ice at that rate without burning out, getting bored or simply suffering joint strain.

Arguing that action broadcasting doesn't amplify the power of a single player is nonsensical: if ISBoxer didn't make it easier to run 7 clients at once, why would you pay for it? What does this tell you about power amplification? It tells you that the level of power amplification afforded by ISBoxer is worth $50/yr (approximately 4 months worth of subscription). If it wasn't providing an advantage, people wouldn't be paying for it.

I still don't see a problem because there are still humans behind every action that is made when you multibox, unlike botting. and that's all that matters to CCP, and quite a good number of people, specially when you consider the fact that since every action is made by a human, it means that it's prone to error, adaptation and the fact that the human still needs to stop somewhile to eat/sleep/WC, unlike botting where you automate all the process and pretty much gain stuff for zero effort, sometimes faster than what if it was manipulated by humans.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right

Ken 1138
State War Academy
Caldari State
#231 - 2013-02-18 06:47:02 UTC
Kal Mindar wrote:
With the recent news of the Eve-uni multi box botting scandal, I think it is time to ban multi box programs.
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. A click is a click and any program that duplicates one is not following the spirit of action vs. consequence that this amazing game is based upon.


I, Kal Mindar, deem that multi boxing programs are a EULA breaking form of automation that undermines the integrity of this game.


Edit:
This is pretty sad. I have never seen such a lack of reading comprehension in my life. I started this thread to petition against ONE thing only and that was Duplication of clicks via a 3rd party program.
From there, you guys have talked about fleet warp being duplication? Really? An in game feature is 3rd party software?
Ban multi boxing? Are you kidding? No one said anything about one person being able to control multiple accounts.
OP is just mad/poor/idiot/etc..... I use 4 accounts to play this game, I multi box, I have plenty of $ thank you for isboxer or more accounts.

Give your collective heads a shake. This thread is about a program doing the work that a person should have to do in order to keep the playing field even. Eve central fine. Spreadsheets fine. Pyfa fine. None of these perform in game clicks for players. You have to understand clicks are what sets the tempo for how long it takes to do things. Automate any part of it and it undermines the level playing field that must be there. Anyway, some really great posts for both sides of the discussion. Just too bad so many people seem to have missed some simple points to keep this thread on topic. Hopefully CCP got some good player input and can use it to continue making this game freaking amazing.

I love you all.

Fly safe o7.

Kal



I agree with you 100% even your edit. I've always hated botting and automation. What's next? A program in FPS games to aim and shoot for them...............wait.
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
#232 - 2013-02-18 08:26:12 UTC
Mara Rinn wrote:
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:
Well, of course. But the end result of a guy broadcasting 30 keystrokes and a guy manually ALT tabbing like a pro is the same, isn't it? Both affect the economy in the same way, both pay the same number of subs, both will i.e. mine ice at the same speed. How can CCP even discern the two? I am fairly sure they don't have a software that correlates 30 accounts to their actions instant by instant.


How many people would give up ice mining if they had to emit all those keystrokes manually for every ship in their fleet instead of using the aid of a keystroke replicator?


They'd switch to botting and be done with it.

Those using a "replicator" are sticking to a less convenient and less cheap setup than botters, the next path of least resistance leads to botting.
Mag's
Azn Empire
#233 - 2013-02-18 11:12:10 UTC  |  Edited by: Mag's
Ken 1138 wrote:
Kal Mindar wrote:
stuff....



I agree with you 100% even your edit. I've always hated botting and automation. What's next? A program in FPS games to aim and shoot for them...............wait.
Except progs to help you multibox are duplicating. It's not botting or automation.
Also your link with FPS and aim bots is ridiculous, for that fact.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.

Stonecrusher Mortlock
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#234 - 2013-02-18 16:32:51 UTC
Edited by: GM Lelouch on 23/04/2010 15:52:45
Hello there,

To make a long story short, automation of gameplay is not permitted; players must be manually issuing the commands to control their character(s) at all times.

Our stance on programs such as Synergy and hardware/software combination such as the G15 keyboard is that they can be legitimately used as long as gameplay isn't automated. Synergy allows you to move your mouse cursor to multiple different monitors which are hooked up to different computers and we do not have any qualms with players using the program for this purpose. If Synergy was used in some way to control your accounts for you without a need for you to be at your keyboard, then that would not be allowed, but I am not aware of such a functionality with this program. If Synergy is used in conjunction with some other program to automate gameplay, it would not be permitted. G15 "macros" which allow you to group different commands into one keypress are allowed. For example, setting your G1 key to press F1, F2, F3 and so on for you with one key press is allowed (although this specific command is not as useful as it was before now that we have weapon grouping).

An exceedingly complex G15 macro which would effectively automate gameplay, such as mining, without a need for the player to be present at his keyboard would be against the EULA, regardless of whether the player utilizing said macro is sitting at his keyboard at the time!

Lastly, 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.

I hope this clears up this matter.

Best regards,
Senior GM Lelouch
EVE Online Customer Support



Good luck with your thread....

http://community.eveonline.com/ingameboard.asp?a=topic&threadID=1291641&page=10#274
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#235 - 2013-02-18 16:45:20 UTC
Kate stark wrote:
no, you explained how the profit is not different.
whether one person owns all 20 accounts, or 20 people own the 20 accounts is irrelevant.

profit per account is the only thing that does mean anything. the reason people detest botting is it's because isk while you are physically not playing the game. that's not even remotely similar to multiboxing.

that is completely wrong. a miner mining with 20 accounts is earning profits at EXACTLY the same rate as 20 miners handling 20 accounts. because multiboxing does NOT make your cycles shorter or your yield higher. why do people think otherwise? honestly, please explain it to me. i don't understand why people think this.

do you even know what multiboxing is? the more i read of your post the less i think you do understand what it is...



Uh what? 1 miner controlling 20 accounts is going to make more isk than 20 miners each handling 1 account. PER CLICK even.

Not cycle.... but PER CLICK. That is where the argument comes from.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Grimpak
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#236 - 2013-02-18 18:02:45 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
no, you explained how the profit is not different.
whether one person owns all 20 accounts, or 20 people own the 20 accounts is irrelevant.

profit per account is the only thing that does mean anything. the reason people detest botting is it's because isk while you are physically not playing the game. that's not even remotely similar to multiboxing.

that is completely wrong. a miner mining with 20 accounts is earning profits at EXACTLY the same rate as 20 miners handling 20 accounts. because multiboxing does NOT make your cycles shorter or your yield higher. why do people think otherwise? honestly, please explain it to me. i don't understand why people think this.

do you even know what multiboxing is? the more i read of your post the less i think you do understand what it is...



Uh what? 1 miner controlling 20 accounts is going to make more isk than 20 miners each handling 1 account. PER CLICK even.

Not cycle.... but PER CLICK. That is where the argument comes from.

oh but that's the wondrous thing about duplication. you see, considering that your click must be sent to 20 accounts, that means that there are 1 click that is duplicated 20 times, meaning, in the end, there are 21 clicks.

[img]http://eve-files.com/sig/grimpak[/img]

[quote]The more I know about humans, the more I love animals.[/quote] ain't that right

Kate stark
#237 - 2013-02-18 18:06:40 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
no, you explained how the profit is not different.
whether one person owns all 20 accounts, or 20 people own the 20 accounts is irrelevant.

profit per account is the only thing that does mean anything. the reason people detest botting is it's because isk while you are physically not playing the game. that's not even remotely similar to multiboxing.

that is completely wrong. a miner mining with 20 accounts is earning profits at EXACTLY the same rate as 20 miners handling 20 accounts. because multiboxing does NOT make your cycles shorter or your yield higher. why do people think otherwise? honestly, please explain it to me. i don't understand why people think this.

do you even know what multiboxing is? the more i read of your post the less i think you do understand what it is...



Uh what? 1 miner controlling 20 accounts is going to make more isk than 20 miners each handling 1 account. PER CLICK even.

Not cycle.... but PER CLICK. That is where the argument comes from.


and that makes you generate more isk than 20 people controling 20 accounts... how?

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#238 - 2013-02-18 19:08:46 UTC
Kate stark wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
no, you explained how the profit is not different.
whether one person owns all 20 accounts, or 20 people own the 20 accounts is irrelevant.

profit per account is the only thing that does mean anything. the reason people detest botting is it's because isk while you are physically not playing the game. that's not even remotely similar to multiboxing.

that is completely wrong. a miner mining with 20 accounts is earning profits at EXACTLY the same rate as 20 miners handling 20 accounts. because multiboxing does NOT make your cycles shorter or your yield higher. why do people think otherwise? honestly, please explain it to me. i don't understand why people think this.

do you even know what multiboxing is? the more i read of your post the less i think you do understand what it is...



Uh what? 1 miner controlling 20 accounts is going to make more isk than 20 miners each handling 1 account. PER CLICK even.

Not cycle.... but PER CLICK. That is where the argument comes from.


and that makes you generate more isk than 20 people controling 20 accounts... how?



1 person netting the profits of 20 accounts mining? Imagine it takes 20 accounts to get $1000, and you compare splitting it between 20 people, or 1 person (both have equal costs yes I know) but it only costs say... $915 to run the plex for all 20 accounts combined. You have 20 shares of profit split equally versus those 20 shares given to 1 person.

The 1 person gets more isk at the end of the day. Simple math really.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#239 - 2013-02-18 19:11:04 UTC
Grimpak wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
no, you explained how the profit is not different.
whether one person owns all 20 accounts, or 20 people own the 20 accounts is irrelevant.

profit per account is the only thing that does mean anything. the reason people detest botting is it's because isk while you are physically not playing the game. that's not even remotely similar to multiboxing.

that is completely wrong. a miner mining with 20 accounts is earning profits at EXACTLY the same rate as 20 miners handling 20 accounts. because multiboxing does NOT make your cycles shorter or your yield higher. why do people think otherwise? honestly, please explain it to me. i don't understand why people think this.

do you even know what multiboxing is? the more i read of your post the less i think you do understand what it is...



Uh what? 1 miner controlling 20 accounts is going to make more isk than 20 miners each handling 1 account. PER CLICK even.

Not cycle.... but PER CLICK. That is where the argument comes from.

oh but that's the wondrous thing about duplication. you see, considering that your click must be sent to 20 accounts, that means that there are 1 click that is duplicated 20 times, meaning, in the end, there are 21 clicks.



That is saying that the other 20 actions were then "botted". Since they were "duplicated" and "automated" as opposed to being done manually. If that's the stance you want to take, go for it.

The argument here is isboxer helping per click, not per second. That's the grey area CCP can't distinguish or enforce.

It is also the problem, hence the petition.

This post has been signed by Murk Paradox and no other accounts, alternate or otherwise. Any other post claiming to be this holder's is subject to being banned at the discretion of the GM Team as it would violate the TOS in regards to impersonation. Signed, Murk Paradox. In triplicate.

Kate stark
#240 - 2013-02-18 19:16:16 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Kate stark wrote:
no, you explained how the profit is not different.
whether one person owns all 20 accounts, or 20 people own the 20 accounts is irrelevant.

profit per account is the only thing that does mean anything. the reason people detest botting is it's because isk while you are physically not playing the game. that's not even remotely similar to multiboxing.

that is completely wrong. a miner mining with 20 accounts is earning profits at EXACTLY the same rate as 20 miners handling 20 accounts. because multiboxing does NOT make your cycles shorter or your yield higher. why do people think otherwise? honestly, please explain it to me. i don't understand why people think this.

do you even know what multiboxing is? the more i read of your post the less i think you do understand what it is...



Uh what? 1 miner controlling 20 accounts is going to make more isk than 20 miners each handling 1 account. PER CLICK even.

Not cycle.... but PER CLICK. That is where the argument comes from.


and that makes you generate more isk than 20 people controling 20 accounts... how?



1 person netting the profits of 20 accounts mining? Imagine it takes 20 accounts to get $1000, and you compare splitting it between 20 people, or 1 person (both have equal costs yes I know) but it only costs say... $915 to run the plex for all 20 accounts combined. You have 20 shares of profit split equally versus those 20 shares given to 1 person.

The 1 person gets more isk at the end of the day. Simple math really.


except you still haven't answered my question. how has more isk been generated?

tip: it hasn't.

Yay, this account hasn't had its signature banned. or its account, if you're reading this.