These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

The ISBoxer Saga

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Dave Stark
#21 - 2014-10-11 10:01:30 UTC
Isboxer is just another thing for people to whine about it.

there's absolutely nothing wrong with it, hence why it hasn't been banned.

fun fact; even if those 20 pilots were piloted by 20 guys not 1 guy, you'd have still got your **** pushed in.
Elsa Hayes
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#22 - 2014-10-11 10:28:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Elsa Hayes
EvE online a massive alt player online game where you are told you are playing with thousands of other player when in reality you are just playing with the same couple of hundred guys and their thousands of alts.

Not sure if it is beneficial to a game when out of 30k logged in accounts less than 10k actually represent individual humans.

When a noob these days looks for a corp he can´t judge activity by numbers of accounts in corp, he can´t even judge activity by numbers of accounts logged in. There are literally hundreds of corps out there with 3-50 members that are only played by 1 to 10 actual humans with each having numerous alts.

Only just recently I saw something very stupid in local, a fleet of SteveX1 through SteveX18 (name does not exist , just an example) getting ready for a massive solo mining op...... If thats not sad what is?

It´s like Bobby and his 10 imaginary friends fantasizing about having a great social life.
Dave Stark
#23 - 2014-10-11 10:43:17 UTC
Elsa Hayes wrote:
EvE online a massive alt player online game where you are told you are playing with thousands of other player when in reality you are just playing with the same couple of hundred guys and their thousands of alts.

Not sure if it is beneficial to a game when out of 30k logged in accounts less than 10k actually represent individual humans.

When a noob these days looks for a corp he can´t judge activity by numbers of accounts in corp, he can´t even judge activity by numbers of accounts logged in. There are literally hundreds of corps out there with 3-50 members that are only played by 1 to 10 actual humans with each having numerous alts.

Only just recently I saw something very stupid in local, a fleet of SteveX1 through SteveX18 (name does not exist , just an example) getting ready for a massive solo mining op...... If thats not sad what is?

It´s like Bobby and his 10 imaginary friends fantasizing about having a great social life.


yeah must be sad being able to actually have orca boosts when you need them, not on some one else's timetable.
actually having enough people to do *something* etc...

not to mention, you're simply assuming they're all owned by 1 person. when a friend of mine started his trial account he named his characters using the same naming convention as me.
Optimo Sebiestor
The New Eden School of trade
Organization of Skill Extracting Corporations
#24 - 2014-10-11 10:50:05 UTC
Nothing beats killing an ISboxer :)
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#25 - 2014-10-11 11:04:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Dalto Bane
Empty Post

Drops Mic
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2014-10-11 11:05:43 UTC
Khema Fera wrote:
Solecist Project wrote:
*knockknock*

Excuse me, but what is the point here exactly?


You need to understand a few very important things here.... please.

1. This topic is a dead horse.
1a. A dead horse remains dead, no matter how much you beat it. It doesn't work that way anyway.

2. There are tons of threads about this already, which share the end this one will have.

3. CCP's ruling is clear. Why do you believe this here will change anything,
compared to the multitude of other threads like this one?

4. What would you say does it tell about people when they create threads like these?



Thank you for taking your time and answering these actually relevant questions.

Hehe. You shouldn't pull a J'Poll :p
This thread is actually semi-unique.. I haven't seen a thread supporting multiboxers for a while.


Thank you Khema, and if at least some are able to see that I am trying to give a different perspective on this "dead horse" then it is serving its purpose.

I find it unfortunate that Soles can't reply to one thread without giving a disparaging remark, but, then again, it does not surprise me in the least.

Drops Mic
Renegade Heart
Doomheim
#27 - 2014-10-11 11:08:21 UTC
ISBoxer fleets would never make me leave the game. I see it as no different than dealing with a fleet of 100 players. If you can't win a fight, then you try to avoid it. Avoiding fights can be fun in itself. And if it helps CCP get more money to make the game better then what is the problem?

Some carebears like to cry about it though I guess.
Solecist Project
#28 - 2014-10-11 11:12:51 UTC  |  Edited by: Solecist Project
Dalto Bane wrote:
Thank you Khema, and if at least some are able to see that I am trying to give a different perspective on this "dead horse" then it is serving its purpose.

I find it unfortunate that Soles can't reply to one thread without giving a disparaging remark, but, then again, it does not surprise me in the least.
It doesn't surprise me that you are unwilling to address my points ...
... even though they weren't questions, as stated later on, which is kind of irrelevant though.

I was replying properly ...
... you're the one who refuses to do it. :)


Here, I'll write it down for you again ...
... in a modified manner.



1. This topic is a dead horse.
1a. A dead horse remains dead, no matter how much you beat it. It doesn't work that way anyway.

Why do you feel the need to create a new one?




2. There are tons of threads about this already, which share the end this one will have.

Why do you think this one will end differently?



3. CCP's ruling is clear. Why do you believe this here will change anything,
compared to the multitude of other threads like this one?


4. What would you say does it tell about people when they create threads like these?




Thank you for your cooperation!

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2014-10-11 11:17:10 UTC
Those against ISOboxer are just e-honor idiots who think the game has some code of chivalry or bushido, yet looking at anything from jita local (double your isk) to barge ganking (crappy ships, low tank on types blow up to dirt cheap ships even when used in numbers) to can flipping to ninja salvagers (those two seem dead mostly)...that's honorable? There is no "good fight" in eve, its about how and what you do to defeat the other guy, good fight is when you enjoy it and if it requires you to out number the other guy....then you obviously enjoy defeating them and watch their rage on the forums.

ISOboxer isn't AFK (as in Away from Keyboard, barely able to pass the Turing Test) AI system so you don't need to be at the computer, its a program that copies multiple clicks across the same account while sitting at the computer. It mimics input and lets you utilize multiple copies of the same ship, same build, same design set up across many accounts. No different than having 12 guys who all do the same task of locking the same ship and hitting F1 or one guy hitting F1 using ISO. Botting is the ability to walk away from keyboard and the program does the work for you, ISO just divides the work while sitting at the desk to a dozen drones.

Most rage is about how you lost, plain and simple. First paragraph said how and what you do to defeat the other guy regardless of honor/right or wrong/ethics as its just blowing up the other guy first, even if its one guy with 12 accounts or 12 guys with one account. If its ganking a freighter and it blows up...someone or some group is enjoying how they play eve.
Andski
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#30 - 2014-10-11 11:31:03 UTC
If they're actually implementing a stealth nerf to cloaking by making cloaked ships decloak each other, it really won't affect bombers one bit. People did bombing runs before Crucible.

Twitter: @EVEAndski

"It's easy to speak for the silent majority. They rarely object to what you put into their mouths."    - Abrazzar
Thatt Guy
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#31 - 2014-10-11 11:48:07 UTC
Andski wrote:
If they're actually implementing a stealth nerf to cloaking by making cloaked ships decloak each other, it really won't affect bombers one bit. People did bombing runs before Crucible.


Link Dev post confirming this isn't just a bug please

Haters gonna hate, Trolls gonna troll.
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2014-10-11 12:06:20 UTC
I don't want to anyone to see this as the typical ISBoxer thread, where the only comments from the ones that are in support of/ impartial is "CCP allows it, end of story.". We have all seen it, time and time again. If enough people voice an opinion to ban programs like ISBoxer, CCP could very well change their stance. They have done so on an number of mechanics.

I want to educate the players out there that are forming their opinions on half truths,fallacies, and speculation surroundiing multiboxers. I want to give them something more than the tired answers they have gotten in the past.

I have decided not to bore anyone to death with a story, but to sum my up my use of ISBoxer like this. I did not become a multiboxer out of some desire to roam around in a 20 man Alphafleet. My use of ISBoxer and the fact that I log multiple accounts was out of necessity to enjoy the game.

WHAT?! See, unfortunately when it started, it was because I lacked the sufficient hardware to run two accounts simultaneously, but for anyone who plays for long enough, it becomes extremely difficult from a logistical standpoint to depend on others to light cynos, scout, etc. What many don't know about ISBoxer specifically, is that it decreases the load on graphics cards by throttling you FPS on the background client, therefore reducing heating issues, which was largely my issue.

The reason I continued to sub additional accounts after I went full-on gaming rig is that I moved to an area where the only ISP available was a satellite provider. I call this period of my life, "Internet Purgatory". The problem that arose with my new provider is that there is a 1-2 second delay on my ping. Just enough to still connect and play Eve, even with a multitude of clients, but nearly impossible to use TS for voice comms, or staying with fleet, as it takes 2-3 seconds longer to jump gates.

What does all that have to do with ISBoxer? When 10 out of 10 guest arrive at a party late, they are on time. I am sure some of you won't understand, but my alts became my fleetmates for a long time so that I was able to continue to enjoy this game.

Not all multiboxers who use ISBoxer do so out of want, but need. Not all multiboxers are bad because they are unwilling, or unable to play with you, nor do they deserve the persecution that some of you th

Drops Mic
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#33 - 2014-10-11 12:27:25 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
Dalto Bane wrote:
Thank you Khema, and if at least some are able to see that I am trying to give a different perspective on this "dead horse" then it is serving its purpose.

I find it unfortunate that Soles can't reply to one thread without giving a disparaging remark, but, then again, it does not surprise me in the least.
It doesn't surprise me that you are unwilling to address my points ...
... even though they weren't questions, as stated later on, which is kind of irrelevant though.

I was replying properly ...
... you're the one who refuses to do it. :)


Here, I'll write it down for you again ...
... in a modified manner...........................................




1. This topic is a dead horse.
1a. A dead horse remains dead, no matter how much you beat it. It doesn't work that way anyway.

Why do you feel the need to create a new one?
Because, the side that supports placing a ban on programs that are similar to ISBoxer are continually applying pressure for their cause by associating anything they can to ISBoxer to paint it, and multiboxers in a bad light, thus increasing that negative visibility in the eyes of CCP without any educated retort from the opposing side, other than, "CCP said its fine."




2. There are tons of threads about this already, which share the end this one will have.

Why do you think this one will end differently?
I don't assume that it will end differently, but I can control the context of the thread until it reaches it conclusion, in hopes to educate the player base that has only heard one side of the story.



3. CCP's ruling is clear. Why do you believe this here will change anything,
compared to the multitude of other threads like this one?
There isn't a thread quite like this one. Well, many of the threads that address this issue are in threads that have nothing to do with multiboxing or ISBoxer until the spin doctors come in and make it a stealth ban ISBoxer thread.


4. What would you say does it tell about people when they create threads like these?
As with the previous answer I gave in your third question, I do not associate this thread with the "other threads like these" since most are created by off topic post that make it about ISBoxer and multiboxing.

I am not going to pretend that you won't find fault in my answers, Sole. I just want you to know that I do respect you and your opinions, even on the validity of this thread. I appreciate you input thus far.





Drops Mic
Solecist Project
#34 - 2014-10-11 12:42:35 UTC
Veeerryyyy good answers! (:

Keep it up! :)

Also ... I'm Sol.

You can call me Solstice if you want, that's fine too. :)


Regarding 1:
I do not believe that players can influence this by words. I do know though how players
can influence this by actions ... which is a completely different matter.

We need to remember that those who scream usually do nothing else.


Getting rid of ISBoxer completely is damn easy ...
... but it involves actual effort ...
... so I wouldn't worry about the unlit lightbulbs who keep crying about it.


That being said ... Reality applies: Opinions are irrelevant. *shrugs*

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
cecil b d'milf
Perkone
Caldari State
#35 - 2014-10-11 13:00:27 UTC
I Love Boobies wrote:
CCP will never ban ISBoxer because people who use it have many alts, and that means more money in CCPs pocket, especially with the number of active players has been dwindling in the past year or so. ISBoxer helps makes the subscription numbers look better.


Does it though ? I always wondered about this. It's fair to say that a large majority of accounts in 20 man ISBox fleets will plexed. If they all (plexed ISB accounts) disappeared tomorrow CCP would get no less money, plex sellers would just get less isk, and probably wouldn't even notice the tiny bit less they were getting.

Sincerely, have I missed something here ?
Pookoko
Sigma Sagittarii Inc.
#36 - 2014-10-11 13:44:41 UTC
I don't particularly agree that the 'ban ISBoxers' hordes need to hear the other side of the story, or that it will do any good.

The argument that ISBoxer is sometimes used out of pure practical necessity rather than to gain any 'upper hand' in game play is a valid one, but it doesn't matter if if use of ISBoxer is out of want or out of need.

Because IMHO, what people should get into their head is that ISBoxer can be used to gain gaming advantage AND it is fine that way, and they can complain, moan and whine but they will not take this perceived 'advantage' away from the other player's hands.

I say this because I think any advantage that can be gained through ISBoxer is in the field of usability of the gaming interface. Interface is just a tool and if anybody has a way of using it more efficiently then all power to him/her and it is not game breaking, but it is actually enhancing the game play experience.

The real game play is in player's creativity and organisational skills.

It's like if I'm playing chess, it doesn't make it 'unfair' that I use my robot arm to move my pawn or grab my rook with my fat toes instead of my hand. What matters is how I analyse the board and what moves I have planned.

If EvE was an action game and we have to press F1 each time per shot and I was using my robot fingers to press F1 1,000 times per minute to get 1,000 shots off per minute then yes, my robot finger should probably be banned. But eve is not like that.

My use of robot arm/fingers/toes whatever is for convenience only, and it doesn't matter whether I'm using my robot arm is out of want or out of need.
Solecist Project
#37 - 2014-10-11 14:30:43 UTC
Poo ... I'm not sure "practical necessity" and "gaining an upper hand"
aren't actually the same thing in most cases when it comes to EVE ONLINE.

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia
Pookoko
Sigma Sagittarii Inc.
#38 - 2014-10-11 14:33:57 UTC
I stopped reading after you called me a 'Poo'! :(

anyways, I guess what I meant was more like 'out of game necessity' as the OP mentioned, such as bad internet connections/optimising graphic cards performance and etc. IN game, of course, practical advantage is indeed gaming advantage.
Jarod Garamonde
Jolly Codgers
Get Off My Lawn
#39 - 2014-10-11 14:55:31 UTC
ISBoxer is really just a more advanced version of when my little brother used to select 2 Player on Tecmo Bowl so he could win.
(to be fair, the computer cheated, hardcore, in that game)

That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right...

    [#savethelance]
Solecist Project
#40 - 2014-10-11 15:35:27 UTC
Pookoko wrote:
I stopped reading after you called me a 'Poo'! :(

anyways, I guess what I meant was more like 'out of game necessity' as the OP mentioned, such as bad internet connections/optimising graphic cards performance and etc. IN game, of course, practical advantage is indeed gaming advantage.
Aww, I meant that in a cute way! :(

Don't you know Winnie? :/


*hugs* <3 :(

That ringing in your ears you're experiencing right now is the last gasping breathe of a dying inner ear as it got thoroughly PULVERISED by the point roaring over your head at supersonic speeds. - Tippia