These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Eve MultiBoxing allowed : An nice game for cheaters ?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#41 - 2013-06-20 22:24:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Miilla
Arduemont wrote:
Miilla wrote:
Lara Dantreb wrote:
parallelization of actions = multiboxing
serialization of actions = botting

if you mine 2 hours with 12 characters and ISBoxer, it's legit
if you mine 24 hours with 1 botting character, it's forbidden.

result : more or less same mining amount.

With ISBoxer you pay for 12 accounts
With a bot one account is enough

hence why multiboxing is allowed and why boting is not : BUCKS in CCP pocket


Somebody who gets it.

Given that CCP has a director who is 1) bankrupt in debt and 2) associated with the Russian Mafia..


Ofcourse CCP accepts cheating as legit. It pays his debt of and that is what it is about. Anybody who thinks multi boxing is not cheating is just lying to themselves, of course it is cheating but it pays CCP. Any business that depends on multi account owners is sure in for a rough ride when they do something wrong, it is pure butt hurt on their accounts. One customer loss equates to multiple account losses, that pays, ofcourse they will give in to them. TO make sure that money still flows.

Eve is dying, why? Just look at the market, "EXCLUSIVE LIMITED EDITION FLOODING THE MARKET SHIPS AND ITEMS" and "TOURNAMENT PLAYING CARDS", whats next? Team Fortress 2 Hats?

Eve died long ago, it is on life support, and so is CCP.

They give in to the biggest whine, and they only want money, only an idiot thinks otherwise, if that means beating this donkey some more, fine, as long as it drops ISK.


It's not cheating. If they want to pay for 12 accounts they are just getting 12 accounts worth of stuff. Each of those accounts has to use the ISK, so it's really the same as running 1 account in terms of profit per account. I don't even know why they do it, but I don't care that they do. Those 12 accounts have exactly the same impact on you as 12 players running 1 account each, there is literally no difference.

As for Eve is dying... seriously? Eve broke its concurrent user record only a month or so ago and has been growing faster than ever before over the last year.



SO which part of doing an action on N number of accounts "mirrored / echoed automatically aided by a program" over my single handedly sitting at hte computer manual input on the same N accounts without the aid of a program thus not having an AIDED advantage is not cheating?

Colour me pink and covered in feathers, I actually have a Masters in automation, so please, don't insult my intelligence You maybe stupid and fool yourself with your repeated lines, but please don't assume everybody else is.

Perhaps I should write an input automation program that has semantic prediction qualities?

Would you call that cheatin? After all it is just echoing my thoughts of gameplay right?
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#42 - 2013-06-20 22:34:59 UTC
Miilla wrote:

SO which part of doing an action on N number of accounts "mirrored / echoed automatically aided by a program" over my single handedly sitting at hte computer manual input on the same N accounts without the aid of a program thus not having an AIDED advantage is not cheating?


All of it is not cheating. If one man is mining, and gets 5m per hour, then that is 5m per account. He has to use that 5 mil for everything that account needs and does. If one person uses 12 accounts to mine and earns 60m per hour he is earning 5m per account. Each account has needs. That 60 mil worth of minerals he mined is being added to the economy and is in no way different to 60m of minerals being added to the economy by 12 people. He can't plex all those accounts. He is running 12 of them. Doesn't matter if the mouse clicks are echoed. The difference is, the person is actually clicking, it's not being done for them. I personally think multiboxing like that is straight up idiotic, because they don't get any advantage. The difference between us is, I don't care if they do it because it doesn't affect me in the slightest. If they want to pay 12 times the amount to CCP for essentially the same thing then they can go ahead.

How is that software any different to this?

http://technabob.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/eve_multiboxing_1.jpg

Miilla wrote:
Colour me pink and covered in feathers, I actually have a Masters in automation, so please, don't insult my intelligence You maybe stupid and fool yourself with your repeated lines, but please don't assume everybody else is.

Perhaps I should write an input automation program that has semantic prediction qualities?

Would you call that cheatin? After all it is just echoing my thoughts of gameplay right?


"I have a masters". So does everyone and their mother. I have one for a start. I am also a certified Java programmer. All of which is completely irrelevant. For someone claiming to have a masters, you really are pretty stupid.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Vexidious
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#43 - 2013-06-20 22:36:42 UTC
Paladin Amarr wrote:
Transmaritanus wrote:
The software isn't breaking the game or altering the code, or pulling ISK out of thin air, it's letting you multibox more efficiently.

Don't be mad you can't focus on more than one thing at a time. It takes intelligence.


Inteligence that this players dont have, since they need software to do this for they.

Maybe this softwares are altering the code, but it changes game memory the same way any peek poke memory software like cheat engine, where you can make your ship invunerabel or worse. How can it is not cheat ?

And yes, if I buy this kind of software I will make 1B mining like this "pro" players some of you like to say, for me they are realy nobs.

And if you guys think this is not cheat, so why you dont ask CCP to allow any type of things like client code changes, bots, etc ? Probably already done it.


I'm just not sure...


...if you are a skilled troll, or are simply clueless.
GreenSeed
#44 - 2013-06-20 22:36:52 UTC  |  Edited by: GreenSeed
Miilla wrote:


SO which part of doing an action on N number of accounts "mirrored / echoed automatically aided by a program" over my single handedly sitting at hte computer manual input on the same N accounts without the aid of a program thus not having an AIDED advantage is not cheating?

Colour me pink and covered in feathers, I actually have a Masters in automation, so please, don't insult my intelligence You maybe stupid and fool yourself with your repeated lines, but please don't assume everybody else is.

Perhaps I should write an input automation program that has semantic prediction qualities?

Would you call that cheatin? After all it is just echoing my thoughts of gameplay right?




its not cheating because for the broadcast to happen the player has to make the input.

before you try to understand that, please understand that this is logic, you cant disagree with logic, unless you are crazy.
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#45 - 2013-06-20 22:37:24 UTC
Mummy he called me a cheater! Quick, call him anti patriotic!

Sounds familiar.... hmmm oh yes... Herman Goring.
GreenSeed
#46 - 2013-06-20 22:38:41 UTC
Miilla wrote:
Mummy he called me a cheater! Quick, call him anti patriotic!

Sounds familiar.... hmmm oh yes... Herman Goring.

annnndddd, he did it.

Goodwin's law.
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#47 - 2013-06-20 22:39:27 UTC  |  Edited by: Miilla
GreenSeed wrote:
Miilla wrote:


SO which part of doing an action on N number of accounts "mirrored / echoed automatically aided by a program" over my single handedly sitting at hte computer manual input on the same N accounts without the aid of a program thus not having an AIDED advantage is not cheating?

Colour me pink and covered in feathers, I actually have a Masters in automation, so please, don't insult my intelligence You maybe stupid and fool yourself with your repeated lines, but please don't assume everybody else is.

Perhaps I should write an input automation program that has semantic prediction qualities?

Would you call that cheatin? After all it is just echoing my thoughts of gameplay right?




it not cheating because for the broadcast to happen the player has to make the input.

before you try to understand that, please understand that this is logic, you cant disagree with logic, unless you are crazy.


1 Input..... becomes AUTOMATIC input into N inputs per client

Legitimate player.. 1 input equals 1 input if they want N clients they have to do N inputs.

If you can't see that, then your lying to yourself, I don't care if your lying to me, I know you are, but your dellusional and cant even see that your lying to yourself, well, not my problem, somebody pays for my game time, thats their problem, when that dries up, it becomes CCPs problem.

You see, I can smell bu ll sh it when I smell it, and you stink of it.

You gain an input advantage, if you can't see that, well your eyesight and stupidity is not my problem.

1) Liars have to have a good memory
2) Have to make more lies to make their past lies be true.
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#48 - 2013-06-20 22:42:33 UTC  |  Edited by: Arduemont
Miilla wrote:
GreenSeed wrote:
Miilla wrote:


SO which part of doing an action on N number of accounts "mirrored / echoed automatically aided by a program" over my single handedly sitting at hte computer manual input on the same N accounts without the aid of a program thus not having an AIDED advantage is not cheating?

Colour me pink and covered in feathers, I actually have a Masters in automation, so please, don't insult my intelligence You maybe stupid and fool yourself with your repeated lines, but please don't assume everybody else is.

Perhaps I should write an input automation program that has semantic prediction qualities?

Would you call that cheatin? After all it is just echoing my thoughts of gameplay right?




it not cheating because for the broadcast to happen the player has to make the input.

before you try to understand that, please understand that this is logic, you cant disagree with logic, unless you are crazy.


1 Input..... becomes AUTOMATIC input into N inputs per client

Legitimate player.. 1 input equals 1 input if they want N clients they have to do N inputs.

If you can't see that, then your lying to yourself, I don't care if your lying to me, I know you are, but your dellusional and cant even see that your lying to yourself, well, not my problem, somebody pays for my game time, thats their problem, when that dries up, it becomes CCPs problem.

You see, I can smell bu ll sh it when I smell it, and you stink of it.

You gain an input advantage, if you can't see that, well your eyesight and stupidity is not my problem.


Everyone who plays Eve uses automation to play. The drivers for your mouse and keyboard are automation. Give it a rest. There is only one thing that counts in this argument about a GAME. And that is, "is it unfair to other players?" and the answer is always no. Because it doesn't affect you.

The only delusion here is your delusion that anyone cares what you think. CCP have declared that it's not cheating, and they make the rules. It's not unfair to you or any other player so what are you complaining about?

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
GreenSeed
#49 - 2013-06-20 22:42:43 UTC
Miilla wrote:
GreenSeed wrote:
Miilla wrote:


SO which part of doing an action on N number of accounts "mirrored / echoed automatically aided by a program" over my single handedly sitting at hte computer manual input on the same N accounts without the aid of a program thus not having an AIDED advantage is not cheating?

Colour me pink and covered in feathers, I actually have a Masters in automation, so please, don't insult my intelligence You maybe stupid and fool yourself with your repeated lines, but please don't assume everybody else is.

Perhaps I should write an input automation program that has semantic prediction qualities?

Would you call that cheatin? After all it is just echoing my thoughts of gameplay right?




it not cheating because for the broadcast to happen the player has to make the input.

before you try to understand that, please understand that this is logic, you cant disagree with logic, unless you are crazy.


1 Input..... becomes AUTOMATIC input into N inputs per client

Legitimate player.. 1 input equals 1 input if they want N clients they have to do N inputs.

If you can't see that, then your lying to yourself, I don't care if your lying to me, I know you are, but your dellusional and cant even see that your lying to yourself, well, not my problem, somebody pays for my game time, thats their problem, when that dries up, it becomes CCPs problem.

You see, I can smell bu ll **** when I smell it, and you stink of it.

your entire argument is based around this idea,"a happens, then x, y and z occurs." which is false.


stop arguing with facts please.
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#50 - 2013-06-20 22:42:58 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
Miilla wrote:
Mummy he called me a cheater! Quick, call him anti patriotic!

Sounds familiar.... hmmm oh yes... Herman Goring.

annnndddd, he did it.

Goodwin's law.



Can't argue with truths except with untruths.
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#51 - 2013-06-20 22:43:59 UTC  |  Edited by: Miilla
GreenSeed wrote:
Miilla wrote:
GreenSeed wrote:
Miilla wrote:


SO which part of doing an action on N number of accounts "mirrored / echoed automatically aided by a program" over my single handedly sitting at hte computer manual input on the same N accounts without the aid of a program thus not having an AIDED advantage is not cheating?

Colour me pink and covered in feathers, I actually have a Masters in automation, so please, don't insult my intelligence You maybe stupid and fool yourself with your repeated lines, but please don't assume everybody else is.

Perhaps I should write an input automation program that has semantic prediction qualities?

Would you call that cheatin? After all it is just echoing my thoughts of gameplay right?




it not cheating because for the broadcast to happen the player has to make the input.

before you try to understand that, please understand that this is logic, you cant disagree with logic, unless you are crazy.


1 Input..... becomes AUTOMATIC input into N inputs per client

Legitimate player.. 1 input equals 1 input if they want N clients they have to do N inputs.

If you can't see that, then your lying to yourself, I don't care if your lying to me, I know you are, but your dellusional and cant even see that your lying to yourself, well, not my problem, somebody pays for my game time, thats their problem, when that dries up, it becomes CCPs problem.

You see, I can smell bu ll **** when I smell it, and you stink of it.

your entire argument is based around this idea,"a happens, then x, y and z occurs." which is false.


stop arguing with facts please.



Want me to write it in first order predicate logic? Because it WILL evaluate to True, its a Tautology (I will give you a few minutes to google that), what you are arguing with is what we call an "Absurdity" in Mathematics.
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#52 - 2013-06-20 22:45:22 UTC
Miilla wrote:


Want me to write it in first order predicate logic? Because it WILL evaluate to True, its a Tautology.


Using vague stupid technical terms doesn't make your argument stronger.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

― Albert Einstein

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#53 - 2013-06-20 22:46:34 UTC
Arduemont wrote:
Miilla wrote:


Want me to write it in first order predicate logic? Because it WILL evaluate to True, its a Tautology.


Using vague stupid technical terms doesn't make your argument stronger.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

― Albert Einstein


It is not 1) vague, in fact it will be very well defined, mathematically, a branch known as Discrete mathematics, and 2) it is not an argument , it is a provable statement, you can even do the math yourself, it is first year first semester bachelors math.
GreenSeed
#54 - 2013-06-20 22:47:02 UTC
whats false is your idea that broadcasting mirrors the action on every client after it "records" in on the first client for fucks sake, i feel like im talking to a thirteen year old.

if that were the way multiboxing worked you could have a case, but it isn't, broadcasting works on the same way wiring one light switch to 50 lights would work.
Arduemont
Rotten Legion
#55 - 2013-06-20 22:47:53 UTC
Miilla wrote:
Arduemont wrote:
Miilla wrote:


Want me to write it in first order predicate logic? Because it WILL evaluate to True, its a Tautology.


Using vague stupid technical terms doesn't make your argument stronger.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

― Albert Einstein


It is not 1) vague, in fact it will be very well defined, mathematically, a branch known as Discrete mathematics, and 2) it is not an argument , it is a provable statement, you can even do the math yourself, it is first year first semester bachelors math.


The fact of the matter is, this bullshit makes no difference. Multiboxers don't affect you in any way, and CCP have declared them to be not cheating. You have literally no reason to argue against their use.

"In the age of information, ignorance is a choice." www.stateofwar.co.nf
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#56 - 2013-06-20 22:48:46 UTC
GreenSeed wrote:
whats false is your idea that broadcasting mirrors the action on every client after it "records" in on the first client for fucks sake, i feel like im talking to a thirteen year old.

if that were the way multiboxing worked you could have a case, but it isn't, broadcasting works on the same way wiring one light switch to 50 lights would work.



I can see you are really passionate about defending your use of software aids to make you play ummm better than others.

So is that an admission that they are better than you and thus the need for software aids looks like it to me.

Carry on then.
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#57 - 2013-06-20 22:50:06 UTC
Arduemont wrote:
Miilla wrote:
Arduemont wrote:
Miilla wrote:


Want me to write it in first order predicate logic? Because it WILL evaluate to True, its a Tautology.


Using vague stupid technical terms doesn't make your argument stronger.

“If you can't explain it to a six year old, you don't understand it yourself.”

― Albert Einstein


It is not 1) vague, in fact it will be very well defined, mathematically, a branch known as Discrete mathematics, and 2) it is not an argument , it is a provable statement, you can even do the math yourself, it is first year first semester bachelors math.


The fact of the matter is, this bullshit makes no difference. Multiboxers don't affect you in any way, and CCP have declared them to be not cheating. You have literally no reason to argue against their use.


They dont affect us, so if they drop a 10 boxed client onto me, it wont affact me, okey dokie... interesting...

I am very sure it would affect me.
Thorleifer
Yeti Cave
#58 - 2013-06-20 22:50:50 UTC
Paladin Amarr wrote:
I would like to say something about what I think its the worse problem in eve, cheaters.

I know that at last CCP starts to do something agains cheaters, banishing bots and warp to 0. But there is still some job to do if they want to make this game free of cheaters, and they dont need to do much, just be reasonable with the rules.

What I think is an cheat, an software that interact with the game reading memory information, seting memory variables, sending keys to game interruptions ( macros ), etc. All to get advantage for who use it in detriment for who play normally.

The worse thing here is that some cheater programs are allowed buy the currently rules of ccp like softwares multiboxing ex: ISBoxer. As it is allowed peaple use it a lot making the life of honest players miserable. And the argument to allow such software and that its not cheat just because the player "needs to interact with the game" ?

So if I use an cheat just to get 1B per second mining, get my ship imortal, its allowed because I am playing the game and interacting ? This is not argument, ccp needs to revew it.

Well, my opinion :

What is Cheating : softwares that interact with the game directly to get advantage, no exception.

What is not cheating: softewares that interact with the game indirectly using apis made for it, ex: Web sites and softwares that use information extracted from eve api. Just it.

I hear from peaple that systems with lots of asteroid belts cant be explored anymore, just because multi-boxers players came everyday with 50 retrievers and mine all asteroids in an few minutes. Players that create trial accounts and using cheat get it registred buying Plex with out any enforce. Pvp players that using this softwares can camp in an gate with 50 tornados and kill everyone. And much more.

When this game will favore the honest players ???


Show me on this doll where the multi boxer touched you.
matt areo
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#59 - 2013-06-20 22:51:26 UTC
there is a very large multiboxer in my system (100+ accounts) and he mines out ice belts in minutes. so a few corp mates and i reported some of his bots and him. ccp replied saying they wont ban him because he is buy them thousands of dollars worth a year, so he is still there
Miilla
Hulkageddon Orphanage
#60 - 2013-06-20 22:51:30 UTC
Thorleifer wrote:
Paladin Amarr wrote:
I would like to say something about what I think its the worse problem in eve, cheaters.

I know that at last CCP starts to do something agains cheaters, banishing bots and warp to 0. But there is still some job to do if they want to make this game free of cheaters, and they dont need to do much, just be reasonable with the rules.

What I think is an cheat, an software that interact with the game reading memory information, seting memory variables, sending keys to game interruptions ( macros ), etc. All to get advantage for who use it in detriment for who play normally.

The worse thing here is that some cheater programs are allowed buy the currently rules of ccp like softwares multiboxing ex: ISBoxer. As it is allowed peaple use it a lot making the life of honest players miserable. And the argument to allow such software and that its not cheat just because the player "needs to interact with the game" ?

So if I use an cheat just to get 1B per second mining, get my ship imortal, its allowed because I am playing the game and interacting ? This is not argument, ccp needs to revew it.

Well, my opinion :

What is Cheating : softwares that interact with the game directly to get advantage, no exception.

What is not cheating: softewares that interact with the game indirectly using apis made for it, ex: Web sites and softwares that use information extracted from eve api. Just it.

I hear from peaple that systems with lots of asteroid belts cant be explored anymore, just because multi-boxers players came everyday with 50 retrievers and mine all asteroids in an few minutes. Players that create trial accounts and using cheat get it registred buying Plex with out any enforce. Pvp players that using this softwares can camp in an gate with 50 tornados and kill everyone. And much more.

When this game will favore the honest players ???


Show me on this doll where the multi boxer touched you.


In the wormhole.