These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Isboxer, why is it allowed?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Optimo Sebiestor
The New Eden School of trade
Organization of Skill Extracting Corporations
#381 - 2014-03-25 10:27:31 UTC
Easy to see who the users of isobox is in this thread..
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#382 - 2014-03-25 10:29:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Robert Caldera wrote:
no, this isnt, otherwise it wouldnt work.
Sure it is. It doesn't have to generate anything in order to work. After all, it's just a broadcaster, not a bot.

Quote:
you dont click all your clients
…but that's not what the automation rule is interested in. It only cares about whether or not you are the source for the client input or if it is something that software (or hardware for that matter) has generated on its own.

Quote:
not exact same result.
20 accounts doing the work of 20 accounts does the work of 20 accounts. So it's all the same thing.

Quote:
you can try to twist it any way you like, automation is automation
…in a way that break the EULA only if violates CCP's definition of automation. Simple input broadcasting does not.
You don't get to define the terms CCP use to set up their rules. If you are unfamiliar with the terms they use, you can ask them. When asked about multiboxing, they made it crystal clear that it does not count as automation. You can inject all kinds of alternate interpretations but all of them are 100% irrelevant and screaming them over and over again will not change this simple fact.

Divine Entervention wrote:
If the software does nothing
…which no-one ever said. Are you really going to dive head-long down the fallacy path once again?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#383 - 2014-03-25 10:30:29 UTC
Optimo Sebiestor wrote:
Easy to see who the users of isobox is in this thread..

Not particularly, no. I'm guessing that some of the complainer really wish they were users, though, because it sounds a lot like sour grapes.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#384 - 2014-03-25 10:31:48 UTC
Optimo Sebiestor wrote:
Easy to see who the users of isobox is in this thread..


No it isnt.

But well done for keeping me feeling justified in hating all Sebiestors.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#385 - 2014-03-25 10:33:07 UTC
Optimo Sebiestor wrote:
Easy to see who the users of isobox is in this thread..
You mean nobody? Since isobox is a soundproofed box.

If you mean isboxer, yes it is. It's easy to see who has absolutely no idea what it does or how it works too.

And in both cases, it doesn't matter. CCP have already ruled on isboxer deeming it within the EULA, as long as what you are doing with it is within the EULA (so you can't use it to mass spam for example).

As for the big "why isboxer, but no bots", because bots are hundreds of times more efficient, much larger scale, can be used with 0 input from the user and are more often than not used to source RMT. For that reason CCP, being well within their right to do so, have deemed bots illegal and isboxer legal. As I said before, if you don't like it, quit.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#386 - 2014-03-25 10:33:50 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Sure it is. It doesn't have to generate anything in order to work. After all, it's just a broadcaster, not a bot.

a ratting bot is not a bot either, its screen reader and clicker, right? You got the idea.

Tippia wrote:
but that's not what the automation rule is interested in. It only cares about whether or not you are the source for the client input or if it is something that software (or hardware for that matter) has generated on its own.

automation is well defined regardless how CCP redefined it.
Point is, they allow it in their game for profit, its their game and their right.

Tippia wrote:
20 accounts doing the work of 20 accounts does the work of 20 accounts. So it's all the same thing.

I think I already replied to this, which you ignore for a good reason.

Tippia wrote:
in a way that break the EULA only if violates CCP's definition of automation. Simple input broadcasting does not.

I'm not argueing about something breaking EULA or not, I'm argueing about CCP allowing tools in game which qualify for automation according to its well known definition and metrics.
Dusty Meg
Echelon Research
Goonswarm Federation
#387 - 2014-03-25 10:35:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Dusty Meg
So answer me this everyone. Have you used Eve-Central or any of those types of 3rd party websites. Cose guess what according to you they break the EULA. And CCP have said before that its a grey area. Cache scraping is technically against the EULA but CCP have said atm that it is ok to use but may change later. And in all fairness they make me more ISK then someone who doesnt use them, so should they be banned too?

And actually botting is generating clicks from nothing. IsBoxer actually has to have a click to do something it wont do things without a human activation each time it does something.

Creater of the EVE animated influence map http://www.youtube.com/user/DustMityEVE
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#388 - 2014-03-25 10:35:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
baltec1 wrote:
http://technabob.com/blog/2010/04/11/eve-multi-boxing-rig/
This more or less.


Yeah, and as a result of that, this clarification from CCP on reversing their ban:

Quote:
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


Emphasis added.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#389 - 2014-03-25 10:39:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Robert Caldera wrote:
a ratting bot is not a bot either, its screen reader and clicker, right?
…which means it generates input (and interprets output) on its own, which is against the rules, and which in every way differs from software broadcasting player input 1:1.

Quote:
automation is well defined regardless how CCP redefined it.
…and in CCP's game, only CCP's definition applies towards interpreting CCP's rules.

Quote:
I think I already replied to this
You sure did. What you failed to do was to demonstrate that it provides an advantage or accelerates the acquisition of anything compared to normal gameplay. The reason you failed to do so is because it doesn't — in fact, it can't because it is normal gameplay across all those 20 accounts.

Hence why 20 accounts doing the work of 20 accounts only ever do the work of 20 accounts, and why it's all the same no matter how they're controlled. 20 @ 20 = 20.

Quote:
I'm argueing about CCP allowing tools in game which qualify for automation according to its well known definition and metrics.
…and that's a pointless argument because no definition other than CCP's own matters.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#390 - 2014-03-25 10:44:15 UTC
Robert Caldera wrote:

a ratting bot is not a bot either, its screen reader and clicker, right? You got the idea.



Yes it is. It allows you to walk away from the keyboard and needs no input.
Anubis Sith
JPG Industries
#391 - 2014-03-25 10:50:48 UTC
Hi Tippia,

I used to look forward to your posts on the forums; considered you one of the most intelligent posters these forums have; not anymore....

Could you be so kind as to explain to myself and the rest of the internet the following::

Player A has 5 accounts (you used 5 accounts in a previous post).
This player uses ISBoxer.

Player B also has 5 accounts.
This payer does NOT use ISBoxer.

Player A presses a key, clicks a mouse, whatever.... all 5 clients respond INSTANTLY.

Player B has to press the key at minimum 5 times; further more Player B also has to either Alt-Tab (if playing Clients on a single PC) or physically move and navigate 5 sets of keyboard/mice.

So, because I am clearly lacking any form of intelligence, how is using ISBoxer not an ADVANTAGE of those who do not use it?

Quote:

20 accounts doing the work of 20 accounts does the work of 20 accounts. So it's all the same thing.



Quote:
…but that's not what the automation rule is interested in.


Nice argument..... so when it comes to speeding while driving... if I am driving Car X I get a fine, but if I am driving Car Y I do not get a fine... cause you know... quoted you above... "...but that's not what speeding rule is interested in..."


Quote:
…in a way that break the EULA only if violates CCP's definition of automation. Simple input broadcasting does not.


This you are actually correct; but unless I have completely misunderstood the OP; this was never a discussion about breaking the EULA, cause surely CCP are more then capable of monitoring and enforcing their own rules.. amiright?

But if people feel in some way or the other hard-done-by; then they are within their rights to vote with their wallets and leave... and from what I have seen in this game and well... every other game where using something like ISBoxer provides a clear and undeniable advantage in gameplay.... people have and do indeed vote with their wallets and leave...


So as history have proven time and time again, the greater community of gamers do not support multiboxing, then the ignorant forum posters, fanboi's and ccp are welcome to bury their heads in the sand....

But it is not a matter of IF, but rather WHEN.....
Good players WILL LEAVE... and EVE will be left with null-sec powerbloc blobbers, high-sec ganking cowards and zombie ISBoxer ghost fleets...

What an swesome game!!!
Bring it on already... cant wait! ;)




Every bully walking the face of the earth needs your fear to survice.   Without your fear, they are nothing.    Inside of each bully is a pathetic, sad, pitiful shell of a human beingm who seeks out people they feel they can intimidate and control
I Riven I
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#392 - 2014-03-25 10:53:44 UTC  |  Edited by: I Riven I
IMO

I think ISBOX should be allowed (as is), because you are paying for those accounts, and you are playing those accounts, you do ALL actions on those accounts, theres absolutely no automation which you didnt command yourself.


While BOTs, and ALL SORTS OF MACROs, and automation, where you arent on the keyboard and it keeps sending commands to the server for you, should be banned.

Just as it is right now.

So in other words the system is working as intended.


End.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#393 - 2014-03-25 10:56:38 UTC
Anubis Sith wrote:
Regurgitated guff


All of your questions have been answered.

I don't see why he should lower himself to answering them again.

I am asking nicely, stop trolling Tippia.

His answers make sense. If you disagree thats fine, there's no need to be an ass constantly at him for it.

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#394 - 2014-03-25 11:01:42 UTC
Anubis Sith wrote:
Hi Tippia,

I used to look forward to your posts on the forums; considered you one of the most intelligent posters these forums have; not anymore....

Could you be so kind as to explain to myself and the rest of the internet the following::

Player A has 5 accounts (you used 5 accounts in a previous post).
This player uses ISBoxer.

Player B also has 5 accounts.
This payer does NOT use ISBoxer.

Player A presses a key, clicks a mouse, whatever.... all 5 clients respond INSTANTLY.

Player B has to press the key at minimum 5 times; further more Player B also has to either Alt-Tab (if playing Clients on a single PC) or physically move and navigate 5 sets of keyboard/mice.

So, because I am clearly lacking any form of intelligence, how is using ISBoxer not an ADVANTAGE of those who do not use it?

Quote:
20 accounts doing the work of 20 accounts does the work of 20 accounts. So it's all the same thing.
What Tippia means is that 5 characters played through isboxer and 5 characters played by 5 people are the same. If you ignore who is playing with what character, and look at it from a raw characters:world point of view, isboxer characters are no more efficient, and are in fact usually less efficient than a regular character, since you can't individually control them very easily.

Bots are different. Each bot character is controlled individually and responds instantly to changes, so they are far more efficient than any player could possibly be.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Salvos Rhoska
#395 - 2014-03-25 11:02:39 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
I am asking nicely, stop trolling Tippia..


lol

PvE v PvP <> Old School Exploration <> CODE Licenses <> CODE Special Agent
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#396 - 2014-03-25 11:06:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
Tippia wrote:
…which means it generates input (and interprets output) on its own, which is against the rules, and which in every way differs from software broadcasting player input 1:1.

isbox generates input as well. You click once, generate a WM_CLICK to one specific window, isbox reads this message and generates x other similar messages to windows you dont even see or control. It is replicating and consequently generating input.

Tippia wrote:
and in CCP's game, only CCP's definition applies towards interpreting CCP's rules.

sure, this is what I'm saying. they might allow ratting bots, they might allow isbox, whatever they want.

Tippia wrote:
What you failed to do was to demonstrate that it provides an advantage or accelerates the acquisition of anything

sure I did. go back and read it again.

Tippia wrote:
and that's a pointless argument because no definition other than CCP's own matters.

its not an argument, its my opinion I express on these forums CCP allows tools, which would qualify for automation everywhere else, for profit. You cant deny that, all you can do is reiterating on your stupid EULAs and how CCP allows it, which doesnt matter for me personally at all, like for many other players as well. Point is made and it stands, contested only by your strawman arguments.
Nooodlzs
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#397 - 2014-03-25 11:08:00 UTC
I hope you guys do realise that these large isboxed fleets of miners are also being botted on top of the isboxing software.




Try bumping them.
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#398 - 2014-03-25 11:08:01 UTC
Anubis Sith wrote:
But it is not a matter of IF, but rather WHEN.....
Good players WILL LEAVE... and EVE will be left with null-sec powerbloc blobbers, high-sec ganking cowards and zombie ISBoxer ghost fleets...


ISBoxer has been around for a long time already.

When are all the good players going to leave?

I don't have any interest in using ISBoxer. Running multiples of multiple accounts seems to much like a second job and not gaming anymore, but I don't see a mass exodus of players as a result of it's use.

Perhaps there are players who have already left, or players that refuse to join because of ISBoxer use, but the decision as to whether that is good or bad for the game is not for us. That's CCPs decision and they've already ruled that software like ISBoxer are allowed.

The consequences of that are for them to wear.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#399 - 2014-03-25 11:08:02 UTC
Salvos Rhoska wrote:
Ramona McCandless wrote:
I am asking nicely, stop trolling Tippia..
lol
Oh look, Tippias newest fan.

Need we prepare ourselves for your inane rambling followed by your shrieking of "stonewalling, spinning, SABOTAGE!", or are you going to behave this time?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Dusty Meg
Echelon Research
Goonswarm Federation
#400 - 2014-03-25 11:08:16 UTC
Anubis Sith wrote:

So as history have proven time and time again, the greater community of gamers do not support multiboxing, then the ignorant forum posters, fanboi's and ccp are welcome to bury their heads in the sand....




As I hit cancel instead of Post ill try and remember what I just typed.

You dont talk for the "Greater community of gamers" you talk for yourself. These forums seem to draw in the people who think that they are talking about the "Greater community of gamers" but infact their talking with a small vocal minority of the "Greater community of gamers". I talk to many gamers who branch over many MMOs many of which you can use Isboxer and guess what they dont think its a problem only you and a few vocal minorities.

If you are going for the fact that it gives an unfair advantage then maybe Eve-central or evemon or ISK per hour, should be banned cose guess what they give me an advantage. CCP has decided not to ban them at the current time, this may change if the programs were to do anything else or be modified but as they currently havnt then people are free to use them.

In terms of all the people who say the Alt-Tab slows people down, well guess what ive used Isboxer for mining and I havnt used it for mining. When I have the account spread out over all 3 monitors then I was mining at the same speed, I just used Isboxer to rearrange all the account's onto a single monitor to make ease of use on my computer.

Creater of the EVE animated influence map http://www.youtube.com/user/DustMityEVE