These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Multiboxingsoftware... Y ?

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#61 - 2013-03-06 03:32:27 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
Razefummel wrote:
Tippia wrote:
...

You're so hung up on the use of software that you miss the obvious: they want players playing the game, not bots. They don't want automation. That's all there is to it.



Wait. Thats the Point. It IS automation if i setup an 40 Char-Miningfleet with BOTH of that Programs. Just because 1 Account used by an Player didn´t make it less automated.

Think about it.


there's only one thing you make clear, that your conception of what automation is happens to be wrong. and its impossible to have a conversation if we don't agree on the definitions of the things we are discussing.

now i know that different languages can lead to slightly different concepts, that's why clarification is often needed when translating. but even so, automation has a strict definition on all languages, that cannot be expanded, and there's no possible way to argue with. automatic is defined as a process that starts with no human input. end of story.

if i have a doorbell that rings every time someone stands on the doormat, then its automatic.

if i have a standard doorbell and someone rings it, then its not automated.

if i have a standard doorbell with its wires split into 20 copper pairs each leading to 20 different bells, and then someone rings it making 20 different bells ring... it is NOT automated.

a process cant go from "manual" to "automatic" based on the number of processes one interaction starts, it only changes to "automatic" if no interaction is needed.


if you cant, or decide to not accept that definition of automation, then your problem is not with players multiboxing, your problem is with logic. and i don't thing anyone here can help you with that.


Stop being pedantic, it only marginalizes the point you're trying too hard to make.

I am not an alt of Chribba.
GreenSeed
#62 - 2013-03-06 03:32:27 UTC
you don't need multiboxing software to multibox, broadcasting is a feature of directX.
Razefummel
Unknown Dimension
#63 - 2013-03-06 04:15:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Razefummel
GreenSeed wrote:
...
now i know that different languages can lead to slightly different concepts, that's why clarification is often needed when translating. but even so, automation has a strict definition on all languages, that cannot be expanded, and there's no possible way to argue with. automatic is defined as a process that starts with no human input. end of story.
...

Every Automation needs Human Inputs:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation
If there is no Human wich gives Materials or Programming to it it wil also don´t work. And that Guy wich will run the Programm or stop it for Maintance is also an Human as far as i know.

Bad Example...

GreenSeed wrote:
...
if i have a doorbell that rings every time someone stands on the doormat, then its automatic.

if i have a standard doorbell and someone rings it, then its not automated.

if i have a standard doorbell with its wires split into 20 copper pairs each leading to 20 different bells, and then someone rings it making 20 different bells ring... it is NOT automated.
...


But your Argumentation here is that you have ONE Button with that you are able to ring at 20 other Houses as well if you push the Button at Number 1 in Street instead of ringing at everyone of them.

If you uses that Picture, than you have to see every Client as an different House and you have it. The Timeadvantage of both Systems included.

250.000 Skillpunkte gratis zum Start:

Buddyinvite

Unknown Dimension Forum
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#64 - 2013-03-06 04:33:02 UTC
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Stop being pedantic, it only marginalizes the point you're trying too hard to make.

This. Is. General Discussion !!!

There is no need for a point, only fancy posts.

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 ?
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade
Ghost Legion.
#65 - 2013-03-06 08:56:46 UTC
After reading this thread, just for sh!ts and giggles, Im logging in my five rattlesnakes and going missioning.

Dont you just love ISBoxer and the video feeds feature.

Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head.
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#66 - 2013-03-06 16:39:08 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Multiboxing incursions versus manual clicking each UI

Multiboxing mining versus manual clicking each UI

Multiboxing missions versus manual clicking each UI

Multiboxing ratting versus manual clicking each UI

Multiboxing moving your characters from system to system versus manual clicking each UI

Multiboxing blob fleet actions versus manual clicking each UI

Can't see it helping with station trading, exploration/scanning, or fights where your multiple accounts are using many various types of ships.

You couldn't just come up with this on your own? Some examples are from this very thread.


The example was for how multiboxing gives an advantage over a team of people working together, which actually gives greater coordination. Please, tell me all about how a team of people working together is less efficient than 1 person multiboxing the same amount of accounts.


Whoops, guess I didn't understand the assignment. I thought the thread was about whether software-assisted multiboxing is substantially easier than manually multiboxing (i.e. basically the same as botting).

Incursions and blob fleet actions would be more efficient (no way to split DPS), the rest not so much. Downside, of course, being that one mistimed power surge takes out a lot more ships.

I am not an alt of Chribba.
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
B.L.U.E L.A.S.E.R.
#67 - 2013-03-06 16:41:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Bizzaro Stormy MurphDog wrote:
Stop being pedantic, it only marginalizes the point you're trying too hard to make.

This. Is. General Discussion !!!

There is no need for a point, only fancy posts.


Damnit, your write. Highsec needs a buff to protect it from the blue donut nullbears who all live in their parents basements and grief the awesome carebears that keep EVE alive by bumping their utterly defenseless freighters. Also, walking in stations.

I am not an alt of Chribba.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#68 - 2013-03-06 16:55:06 UTC
Razefummel wrote:
Every Automation needs Human Inputs:
No. Automation needs rules and initialisation. It does not need input. Once started, it needs no input because the automation takes care of it all.
Multiboxing needs input — continuously — or it does nothing.

So no, you are still confusing the use of software with automation. The two are not the same thing. Multiboxing does not automate anything because nothing happens without a person directing the clients to perform that action at that time.

Quote:
But your Argumentation here is that you have ONE Button with that you are able to ring at 20 other Houses as well if you push the Button at Number 1 in Street instead of ringing at everyone of them.
No, he's argumentation is that the buttons are not automated because they don't perform any action of their own accord.

You are essentially arguing that my vacuum cleaner is automated because I'm not manually cranking the fans that suck up the dust, and that it is therefore functionally identical to my Roomba, never mind that I have to manually perform every action that makes that vacuum actually clean up — turning it on, dragging it around my home, pointing it at dust, scare the bejesus out of the cat — whereas the Roomba cleans my apartment when I'm not even on the same continent. If you can't see the difference, may I suggest a good ophthalmologist?
Overseer Aliena
Lord of Wars
#69 - 2013-03-06 17:10:07 UTC
If anyone needs a tl;dr of the conversation so far here it is in video format. Now if you don't mind I have to get back to my ice mining operation
Razefummel
Unknown Dimension
#70 - 2013-03-06 17:10:41 UTC
Tippia wrote:
...

Quote:
But your Argumentation here is that you have ONE Button with that you are able to ring at 20 other Houses as well if you push the Button at Number 1 in Street instead of ringing at everyone of them.
No, he's argumentation is that the buttons are not automated because they don't perform any action of their own accord.
...


Razefummel wrote:
...
But your Argumentation here is that you have ONE Button with that you are able to ring at 20 other Houses as well if you push the Button at Number 1 in Street instead of ringing at everyone of them

If you uses that Picture, than you have to see every Client as an different House and you have it. The Timeadvantage of both Systems included.


Didn´t fit that Sentence in your Arguementation or why din´t you quote it fully?

Its an difference between ringing 20 Bells with 20 Buttons or ring 20 Bells with 1 Button. And THATS the Point. If you don´t be able to use 20 Buttons on your own, maybe you shoudln´t.

Just to asume the Mainpoint of this Discusion.

250.000 Skillpunkte gratis zum Start:

Buddyinvite

Unknown Dimension Forum
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#71 - 2013-03-06 17:13:17 UTC
Razefummel wrote:
Its an difference between ringing 20 Bells with 20 Buttons or ring 20 Bells with 1 Button. And THATS the Point. If you don´t be able to use 20 Buttons on your own, maybe you shoudln´t.
No, the point is that the difference makes no difference. What matters is if they're automated or not, and they aren't. It's as simple as that.
Notorious Fellon
#72 - 2013-03-06 17:17:34 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Razefummel wrote:
Its an difference between ringing 20 Bells with 20 Buttons or ring 20 Bells with 1 Button. And THATS the Point. If you don´t be able to use 20 Buttons on your own, maybe you shoudln´t.
No, the point is that the difference makes no difference. What matters is if they're automated or not, and they aren't. It's as simple as that.



No, it isn't. Splitting hairs doesn't change the fact that pushing one button to move 20 ships is faster and more efficient than doing so individually. Label it all you want. Try to redefine all the words in every sentence to suit your needs all you want. It does not change the increase in efficiency, and thus the advantage. Nor does it change people's opinions on whether or not it is fair to do.

Crime, it is not a "career", it is a lifestyle.
Razefummel
Unknown Dimension
#73 - 2013-03-06 17:21:02 UTC
Tippia wrote:
...
No, the point is that the difference makes no difference.
...

Is my english realy that bad or is it just nonsense?

Tippia wrote:
...
What matters is if they're automated or not, and they aren't. It's as simple as that.


The 1st one is NOT... the other 19 ARE automated by Software. No Software and the Chars all together will do nothing just like as you would remove bottingsoftware. Same thing. Software used to move Characters. Its as simple as THAT.

250.000 Skillpunkte gratis zum Start:

Buddyinvite

Unknown Dimension Forum
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#74 - 2013-03-06 17:21:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Notorious Fellon wrote:
No, it isn't. Splitting hairs doesn't change the fact that pushing one button to move 20 ships is faster and more efficient than doing so individually. Label it all you want.
Ok. I choose to label it as multiboxing — something fundamentally different from automation and thus explicitly allowed by the devs.

The decrease in efficiency compared to 20 ships, each piloted individually, just means it doesn't even fall afoul of the “increased speed” clause.

And yes, it really is that simple: no automation = does not matter.

Razefummel wrote:
Is my english realy that bad or is it just nonsense?
Your English is bad.

Quote:
The 1st one is NOT... the other 19 ARE automated by Software.
Nope. They're not automated at all, which makes them completely different from bots.
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa
The Perfect Harvesting Experience
#75 - 2013-03-06 17:36:56 UTC
My theory is that someone with multiboxing software is using it to create all these topics simultaneously.
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#76 - 2013-03-06 17:59:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Arduemont
People using clients to use multiple instances of Eve to do the exactly the same thing are no harm. In fact, they gain no benefit from it at all.

If you can use 1 character to get 10m per hour mining, then you can use 10 to get 100m per hour. So obviously they're earning more right? Wrong. That's still just 10m per character. Each character requires a ship, clone upgrades, a sub cost, ammo for ships, skillbooks, ships etc, etc. No matter how many accounts you use it will never help you pay for plex or give you any advantage over someone using a single account. You sure as hell can't use it to PvP. I've heard of people trying. They die in a fire.

If they're willing to pay CCP for 10 accounts then more fool them. It's their own stupidity. But CCP get an income out of it and no one else is hurt, so stop complaining. Over all the multi-boxers have a beneficial effect on Eve because they are paying CCP more money. Money that is re-invested into our expansions.

Razefummel wrote:

The 1st one is NOT... the other 19 ARE automated by Software. No Software and the Chars all together will do nothing just like as you would remove bottingsoftware. Same thing. Software used to move Characters. Its as simple as THAT.


By that logic one person using one ship is having their character automated. Your not moving the ship, the driver software for your mouse is converting it into information that the Eve client can use. Without that software, you can't even move one ship. So, we should ban mouse drivers... Might as well get rid of mouses whilst we're at it...

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Razefummel
Unknown Dimension
#77 - 2013-03-06 18:29:01 UTC
Arduemont wrote:
...

By that logic one person using one ship is having their character automated. Your not moving the ship, the driver software for your mouse is converting it into information that the Eve client can use. Without that software, you can't even move one ship. So, we should ban mouse drivers... Might as well get rid of mouses whilst we're at it...


Thats ridiculous.

The Difference between your "Mousedriver"-Example and Multiboxsoftware is the fact, that your whole PC wouldn´t work without it, and so your Eve Clients in general wouldn´t work. Without that third party Software it all will work fine just with the small difference that you have to "ring all Bells manualy", if you can do it... do so.

250.000 Skillpunkte gratis zum Start:

Buddyinvite

Unknown Dimension Forum
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#78 - 2013-03-06 18:31:09 UTC
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa wrote:
My theory is that someone with multiboxing software is using it to create all these topics simultaneously.

Multiboxing internet browsers? That doesn't work, there aren't 10 new threads at once or ten replies at once ... or are there.

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 ?
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa
The Perfect Harvesting Experience
#79 - 2013-03-06 18:33:30 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Shan'Talasha Mea'Questa wrote:
My theory is that someone with multiboxing software is using it to create all these topics simultaneously.

Multiboxing internet browsers? That doesn't work, there aren't 10 new threads at once or ten replies at once ... or are there.


I never claimed it was hard work.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#80 - 2013-03-06 18:36:45 UTC
Razefummel wrote:
Thats ridiculous.
No it's not.

If you insist that “automation” has nothing to do with actual automation and with the control being reliant on some piece of software, then mouse drivers most certainly qualify. They offer the exact same kind of “automation” as input broadcasting does (and on a rather similar level of the OS).

…which only shows that your incorrect definition of automation is, well, incorrect.

Anyway, the fact remains: no, multiboxing isn't automation in any sense of the word since there is no independence of action, and yes, it really is as simple as that. No amount of redefining the word to mean what you wish it would rather than what it actually does makes botters (something the devs disallow) out of multiboxers (something the devs allow).