These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Prekaz
The Exchange Collective
Solyaris Chtonium
#461 - 2013-03-05 22:12:36 UTC
Honestly, debating whether or not isboxer is a violation of the current rules is idiotic. It has been stated that, at present, it is not considered to be.

What is worth debating is whether or not that policy should be changed so that it is no longer considered to be legitimate play.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#462 - 2013-03-05 22:13:31 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
What if it did? Would that qualify as breaking the eula?

What if isboxer could lower the amount of time it took 5 accounts to acquire ingame resources faster than without?


Then it would be bannable, but it doesn't, so your "What if" theory holds no weight.



So that's saying its a matter of burden of proof? Or is it a matter of not enforcing it (due to isboxer having other uses not involving replacation/automation)?

You know, as well as I, that speaking in absolutes is folly, careful =P

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.
Dave stark
#463 - 2013-03-05 22:13:56 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
So if I had 5 accounts, and with only clicking 1 account at a time it took say 15 minutes to perform 1 cycle, yes, just 1 cycle, of whatever resource you want to use, and then I used isboxer to do the same exact thing and was able to get the same amount of resources from those same 5 accounts within 13 minutes, you would say that was equal, longer, or shorter amount of time to gain the equal amount of resources?

Mathematically proving, using a clock, to acquire resources faster using a program you say does not break the eula, right? That's what you're saying we need to do?


i'm laughing.
because you're not describing multiboxing.

however, obviously a program that somehow makes your modules cycle faster (assuming a module is being used to acquire something) isn't even close to multiboxing, that's just flat out hacking the game in some way. obviously that's bannable. how do you even need me to answer that?
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#464 - 2013-03-05 22:14:05 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Totalrx wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
[quote=Mara Rinn]

except, it doesn't let him acquire ingame resources faster than normal gameplay.


Depends on how you look at it


no it doesn't. multiboxing simply doesn't make you generate more of anything faster than normal gameplay. that's why it's allowed.



So 13 is equal less or more than 15? You did not answer the question.

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.
Dave stark
#465 - 2013-03-05 22:14:43 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Totalrx wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
[quote=Mara Rinn]

except, it doesn't let him acquire ingame resources faster than normal gameplay.


Depends on how you look at it


no it doesn't. multiboxing simply doesn't make you generate more of anything faster than normal gameplay. that's why it's allowed.



So 13 is equal less or more than 15? You did not answer the question.


you posted while i was typing that reply, patience good sir.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#466 - 2013-03-05 22:14:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Murk Paradox
Dave Stark wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
So if I had 5 accounts, and with only clicking 1 account at a time it took say 15 minutes to perform 1 cycle, yes, just 1 cycle, of whatever resource you want to use, and then I used isboxer to do the same exact thing and was able to get the same amount of resources from those same 5 accounts within 13 minutes, you would say that was equal, longer, or shorter amount of time to gain the equal amount of resources?

Mathematically proving, using a clock, to acquire resources faster using a program you say does not break the eula, right? That's what you're saying we need to do?


i'm laughing.
because you're not describing multiboxing.
however, obviously a program that somehow makes your modules cycle faster (assuming a module is being used to acquire something) isn't even close to multiboxing, that's just flat out hacking the game in some way. obviously that's bannable. how do you even need me to answer that?



Multiboxing has nothing to do with cycle times or rates. Are you really that obtuse intentionally?

I italicized the important part for this question.... if you don't think isboxer is for multiple accounts on one machine... WTF are you doing in here posting at all?

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.
Dave stark
#467 - 2013-03-05 22:16:14 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
So if I had 5 accounts, and with only clicking 1 account at a time it took say 15 minutes to perform 1 cycle, yes, just 1 cycle, of whatever resource you want to use, and then I used isboxer to do the same exact thing and was able to get the same amount of resources from those same 5 accounts within 13 minutes, you would say that was equal, longer, or shorter amount of time to gain the equal amount of resources?

Mathematically proving, using a clock, to acquire resources faster using a program you say does not break the eula, right? That's what you're saying we need to do?


i'm laughing.
because you're not describing multiboxing.

however, obviously a program that somehow makes your modules cycle faster (assuming a module is being used to acquire something) isn't even close to multiboxing, that's just flat out hacking the game in some way. obviously that's bannable. how do you even need me to answer that?



Multiboxing has nothing to do with cycle times or rates. Are you really that obtuse intentionally?



considering the statement "multiboxing has nothing to do with cycle times or rates" is true, yes i'm doing it intentionally.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#468 - 2013-03-05 22:17:11 UTC
Totalrx wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
[quote=Mara Rinn]

except, it doesn't let him acquire ingame resources faster than normal gameplay.


Depends on how you look at it

Without a mechanical device or a 3rd party program to allow replication of commands across multiple boxes, how fast would that player be able to acquire resources if they had to manually command each ship on each box?

This is a very grey area.



It's actually very black & white. With out a mechanical device or 3rd party program, 5 players would still aquire those resources at the same speed as the 1 guy using 5 accounts on ISboxer, in most cases the 5 seperate people are even more efficient so the argument of aquiring resources at a faster rate than normal gameplay isn't something that can be applied here. The persons individual income is increased, but when you take in to account that it's across multiple accounts the effective income remains the same.

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.
Dave stark
#469 - 2013-03-05 22:17:45 UTC
Murk Paradox wrote:
I italicized the important part for this question.... if you don't think isboxer is for multiaccounts on one machine... WTF are you doing in here posting at all?


what? i still fail to see how isoboxer changes 15 in to 13.

please don't say something extremely dumb like "a multiboxer has a booster alt" please. even you aren't that ******* ********.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#470 - 2013-03-05 22:19:37 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I italicized the important part for this question.... if you don't think isboxer is for multiaccounts on one machine... WTF are you doing in here posting at all?


what? i still fail to see how isoboxer changes 15 in to 13.

please don't say something extremely dumb like "a multiboxer has a booster alt" please. even you aren't that ******* ********.



It's a matter of 1 person controlling 5 accounts, and the time it takes to account for clicks, load times, align times, etc. Think of it as a race.

Both people have 5 accounts. 1 has isboxer. 1 doesn't. The race is to undock, mine 1 full cycle for equal amount of ore, and dock back up.

What side would win?

The isboxer side would win, wouldn't you agree?

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.
Dave stark
#471 - 2013-03-05 22:22:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Murk Paradox wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I italicized the important part for this question.... if you don't think isboxer is for multiaccounts on one machine... WTF are you doing in here posting at all?


what? i still fail to see how isoboxer changes 15 in to 13.

please don't say something extremely dumb like "a multiboxer has a booster alt" please. even you aren't that ******* ********.



It's a matter of 1 person controlling 5 accounts, and the time it takes to account for clicks, load times, align times, etc. Think of it as a race.

Both people have 5 accounts. 1 has isboxer. 1 doesn't. The race is to undock, mine 1 full cycle for equal amount of ore, and dock back up.

What side would win?

The isboxer side would win, wouldn't you agree?


no, because each miner would spend equal amounts of time mining, acquiring equal amounts of ore each cycle.
over the same period of man hours, both scenarios generate equal resources.

all you're illustrating is the difference in length of one gaming session between a staggered start and a unified start (unified, is that the right phrase?) anyway. the rate of resource acquisition is the same between both groups.

tl;dr a race has nothing to do with this.
Totalrx
NA No Assholes
#472 - 2013-03-05 22:28:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Totalrx
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Totalrx wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
[quote=Mara Rinn]

except, it doesn't let him acquire ingame resources faster than normal gameplay.


Depends on how you look at it

Without a mechanical device or a 3rd party program to allow replication of commands across multiple boxes, how fast would that player be able to acquire resources if they had to manually command each ship on each box?

This is a very grey area.



It's actually very black & white. With out a mechanical device or 3rd party program, 5 players would still aquire those resources at the same speed as the 1 guy using 5 accounts on ISboxer, in most cases the 5 seperate people are even more efficient so the argument of aquiring resources at a faster rate than normal gameplay isn't something that can be applied here. The persons individual income is increased, but when you take in to account that it's across multiple accounts the effective income remains the same.


True, but taking your 5 person analogy:

We're not talking about 5 people. We're talking about ONE person controlling five ships on five accounts on five different computers. Would that one person mining be able to click 5 individual mice as fast as ISBoxer or a mechanical set up could replicate the clicks to give the commands?

If not, then the multiboxer program or mechanical set up would be achieving faster returns (NOT faster cycle times). 15 minutes and 5 seconds the manual way and only 15 minutes the replicated way. The yield would be the same. Of course, we're talking about a matter of a few seconds.

So some guy takes 1 second to command 5 ships to warp to a belt using ISBoxer or a mechanical rig.
If it took him 1 second to click each mouse, it would take him five seconds.

All cycle timers on his ships would still take the same amount of time. It would just be how quickly they could be activated (all at the same time or one by one).

So, it's not automating anything. The player cannot walk away and it do anything for them. They have to initiate the command. The program or mechanical rig replicates that across the other systems running the other accounts.

I really don't see a problem with it since it's not automating anything.

BUT I can see the point of those opposing it since it is allowing a person to simultaneously control multiple ships with the same command without having to switch to each one of those accounts to do it.

Eating my popcorn and watching this one play out Twisted
Dave stark
#473 - 2013-03-05 22:32:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Dave Stark
Totalrx wrote:
We're not talking about 5 people. We're talking about ONE person controlling five ships on five accounts on five different computers. Would that one person mining be able to click 5 individual mice as fast as ISBoxer or a mechanical set up could replicate the clicks to give the commands?


i see your problem; you misunderstand the term "normal gameplay".

in short, it doesn't matter if 5 account freda is slower than 5 account freddie with isoboxer.
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#474 - 2013-03-05 22:49:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Mallak Azaria
Totalrx wrote:


True, but taking your 5 person analogy:

We're not talking about 5 people. We're talking about ONE person controlling five ships on five accounts on five different computers. Would that one person mining be able to click 5 individual mice as fast as ISBoxer or a mechanical set up could replicate the clicks to give the commands?

If not, then the multiboxer program or mechanical set up would be achieving faster returns (NOT faster cycle times). 15 minutes and 5 seconds the manual way and only 15 minutes the replicated way. The yield would be the same. Of course, we're talking about a matter of a few seconds.


If a person is controlling 5 accounts on different computers, they're doing it wrong anyway. My PC for the most part is 7 years old now & runs 5 easily. Put them all in windowed mode & multiboxing can only get simpler (in theory, the setup actually takes a lot of time) with ISboxer.

Now for the sake of the argument, 5 paid accounts is 5 paid accounts regardless of how many people are controlling them. A person multiboxing is not achieving faster returns as the effective income remains the same in the best of cases. In most cases 5 people running 1 account each working together are making more than the multiboxer. If the multiboxer crossed in to the realm of accelerated gameplay which is clearly defined then he would simply be botting, such as what 'John' from E-UNI was doing.

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.
AndromacheDarkstar
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#475 - 2013-03-06 11:35:57 UTC
Dark Reignz wrote:
AndromacheDarkstar wrote:


It would take a **** tonne of accounts out of the game


AndromacheDarkstar wrote:


it really isnt that widespread.


You seems to contradict yourself there bro. Even if they did ban multiboxing, no one is stopping you from paying for the accounts. You'll have to get used to controlling each one manually.

"Adapt or Die" bro.

/Signed Petition



your right i made a pretty ******** contradiction there, i htink the effects multiboxing has cause a relatively smal amount of harm to a small amount of people but to take it out of the game would remove a huge amount of accounts whuch are paid for one way or another which would ultimately be detrimental.

Also i dont multi box for the record, never have done but i dont have a problem with people doing it. Its actuallty led to some pretty good fights in the past
Sayf ulMulk
Royal Starlancers
#476 - 2013-03-06 17:07:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Sayf ulMulk
Well i dunno since i petitioned it with CCP and got response from senior GM. He told me its not ok as of 16 April 2012. So if someone is using replicating program for mining and get reported good luck. Basicaly copying keystrokes with a program to another client violates A2 A3 and the last part of the post.

I cant obviously post whole conversation but the EULA is here:

6. CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct
2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
3. 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.
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/eula.asp


EVE Online TERMS OF SERVICE

21. You will not attempt to decipher, hack into or interfere with any transmissions to or from the EVE Online servers, nor will you try to create or use any third party add-ons, extras or tools for the game.
http://community.eveonline.com/pnp/terms.asp

While your intentions are almost certainly not malevolent, the key issue here is outlined in this excerpt from our EULA;

You may not use your own or any third-party software, (snip) ... 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.
Murk Paradox
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#477 - 2013-03-06 18:49:03 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
Dave Stark wrote:
Murk Paradox wrote:
I italicized the important part for this question.... if you don't think isboxer is for multiaccounts on one machine... WTF are you doing in here posting at all?


what? i still fail to see how isoboxer changes 15 in to 13.

please don't say something extremely dumb like "a multiboxer has a booster alt" please. even you aren't that ******* ********.



It's a matter of 1 person controlling 5 accounts, and the time it takes to account for clicks, load times, align times, etc. Think of it as a race.

Both people have 5 accounts. 1 has isboxer. 1 doesn't. The race is to undock, mine 1 full cycle for equal amount of ore, and dock back up.

What side would win?

The isboxer side would win, wouldn't you agree?


no, because each miner would spend equal amounts of time mining, acquiring equal amounts of ore each cycle.
over the same period of man hours, both scenarios generate equal resources.

all you're illustrating is the difference in length of one gaming session between a staggered start and a unified start (unified, is that the right phrase?) anyway. the rate of resource acquisition is the same between both groups.

tl;dr a race has nothing to do with this.



Uh, yes it does. That's what isboxer allows you to accomplish. The player gains benefit from using the software over the player that does not.

Strange that you don't agree with that. Since you even included "man hours" which is what isboxer actually lowers. The man hours of 1 person controlling all the accounts.

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
#478 - 2013-03-06 18:52:04 UTC
Dave Stark wrote:
Totalrx wrote:
We're not talking about 5 people. We're talking about ONE person controlling five ships on five accounts on five different computers. Would that one person mining be able to click 5 individual mice as fast as ISBoxer or a mechanical set up could replicate the clicks to give the commands?


i see your problem; you misunderstand the term "normal gameplay".

in short, it doesn't matter if 5 account freda is slower than 5 account freddie with isoboxer.



Since the eula does in fact state "at a faster rate" yes it does. Since Freddie is gaining resources faster than Freda by using software as an advantage. See how "easy" the eula is? ISboxer isn't allowing for "normal" gameplay since it is doing the work for you, you are in fact only controlling 1 account, the other 4 are controlled by the program. A 3rd party program.

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.
Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#479 - 2013-03-06 20:16:06 UTC
CCP has already made specific statements concerning this, and while they admit it is a grey area in the EULA they are currently allowing it's use.

As it's CCP's call on how to interpret their own EULA that pretty much ends this conversation.

If they change their interpretation in the future that's up to them, and again this whole discussion will be moot.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#480 - 2013-03-06 20:45:41 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Suvetar
After further considering and having deleted *literally pages* of off-topic posts, straw-man arguments, trolls and bait, I'm just going to leave this locked.

I will forward this thread to CCP and ask if they will make an official post to state their position so we can all just move on with our lives, eh ?

Thanks.

[b]ISD Suvetar Captain/Commando Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department[/b]