These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#101 - 2014-10-12 19:47:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Angeal MacNova wrote:
Rosewalker wrote:

CCP's Third Pary Policies wrote:

We do not endorse or condone the use of any third party applications or other software that modifies the client or otherwise confers an unfair benefit to players. We may, in our discretion, tolerate the use of applications or other software that simply enhance player enjoyment in a way that maintains fair gameplay. For instance, the use of programs that provide in-game overlays (Mumble, Teamspeak) and the multiboxing application is not something we plan to actively police at this time. However, if any third party application or other software is used to gain any unfair advantage, or for purposes beyond its intended use, or if the application or other software violates other parts of the EULA, we may fully enforce our rights to prohibit such use, including player bans. Please use such third party applications or other software at your own risk.


We've been going over this point for years now. It's well established. ISBoxer violates the EULA on the grounds of client modification, but CCP is not going to enforce the EULA on this point.

In other words, Mag's, stop being such a sore winner. You are getting your wish. ISBoxer is here to stay.



It also violates it on grounds that it is a 3rd party program that does give a player an unfair benefit over other players.


Me owning a 100 tower personal reaction farm is an unfair benefit over basically 99% of you, lets ban that aswell.

Also lol, ISboxer doesn't modify the client.

Damnit now I am jealous

I will now join MOA just to shoot your structures, I am so jealous of your advantage over me

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 ?
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#102 - 2014-10-12 20:01:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Commentus Nolen
Deleted
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#103 - 2014-10-12 20:22:56 UTC
Commentus Nolen wrote:
Dalto Bane wrote:
Commentus Nolen wrote:
[quote]CCP goes through such lengths to promote alt creation, the use of third party programs and even starts nerfing certain game mechanics in order to keep the third party program available to players.


I keep seeing this response being posted about nerfing but no one lists any examples. Why is that?Roll


This was originally brought up in a thread that concerned cloaked ships are uncloaking each other on SISI. Opposition to ISBoxer chose this as a catalyst to derail the thread, believing this to be a nerf to multiboxing SB fleets and in turn, into a ban ISBoxer thread, without even knowing if this is indeed the mechanic is indeed a change that will come to TQ, or a bug in the SISI cloaking mechanic.



Apologizes Commentus, that second part was not directed toward you, just included with my reply for the masses. I should have done a better job of making that a bit more clear than I did. As far as the reply, I just wanted to explain why this topic was brought up. o7

Drops Mic
Mallak Azaria
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#104 - 2014-10-12 20:45:31 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Mallak Azaria wrote:
Angeal MacNova wrote:
Rosewalker wrote:

CCP's Third Pary Policies wrote:

We do not endorse or condone the use of any third party applications or other software that modifies the client or otherwise confers an unfair benefit to players. We may, in our discretion, tolerate the use of applications or other software that simply enhance player enjoyment in a way that maintains fair gameplay. For instance, the use of programs that provide in-game overlays (Mumble, Teamspeak) and the multiboxing application is not something we plan to actively police at this time. However, if any third party application or other software is used to gain any unfair advantage, or for purposes beyond its intended use, or if the application or other software violates other parts of the EULA, we may fully enforce our rights to prohibit such use, including player bans. Please use such third party applications or other software at your own risk.


We've been going over this point for years now. It's well established. ISBoxer violates the EULA on the grounds of client modification, but CCP is not going to enforce the EULA on this point.

In other words, Mag's, stop being such a sore winner. You are getting your wish. ISBoxer is here to stay.



It also violates it on grounds that it is a 3rd party program that does give a player an unfair benefit over other players.


Me owning a 100 tower personal reaction farm is an unfair benefit over basically 99% of you, lets ban that aswell.

Also lol, ISboxer doesn't modify the client.

Damnit now I am jealous

I will now join MOA just to shoot your structures, I am so jealous of your advantage over me


Why do that when you can just make threads asking CCP to ban it?

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.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#105 - 2014-10-12 21:08:48 UTC  |  Edited by: Alavaria Fera
Because the likihood of that succeeding is not worth the effort.

Unlike with isboxer threads

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 ?
Mag's
Azn Empire
#106 - 2014-10-12 21:30:14 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Because the likihood of that succeeding is not worth the effort.

Unlike with isboxer threads
Just lie about it. The anti ISBoxer crowd seem quite adept at just that.

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Solecist Project
#107 - 2014-10-12 21:46:44 UTC
The loudest part of the crowd against ISBoxer are the ones ...
... who can not deal with the fact that others are better than them.


The fairbears.
I coined a new term.


CCP ... ban these instead.


Thanks!

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
Mag's
Azn Empire
#108 - 2014-10-12 21:49:56 UTC
Solecist Project wrote:
The fairbears.
I coined a new term.
This made me chuckle. Lol <3

Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the Lions will ignore you in the Savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless.
Crakachunky
Elite Mining Services
#109 - 2014-10-12 22:16:07 UTC
should not be allowed
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#110 - 2014-10-12 23:52:26 UTC  |  Edited by: Dalto Bane
I am going to step out of my position on this topic for this post and throw the players that are opposed to ISBoxer a bone.

How does one defeat the dreaded ISBoxer in all its forms?

Everywhere
Do research if you find a person you suspect of being an ISBoxer. There is a routine, and you could give the person a very hard punch in the face. It has been said in this thread, and I will reiterate, losing a lot of ships because of a simple mistake is very easy to make with someone who is essentially multitasking through ISBoxer, and once they are flustered, their fleet will failscade hard under an attack. ECM, Bubbles too!!

High Sec

The ISBoxers who graze High Security space usually come in the form of Miners. When mining, they will usually be anchored to one character. Well, I won't go into details, but a few bumps aren't deemed harassment if you know what I mean.

Low Sec

You probably won't find many ISBoxers in Low Security space, but when you do, they will most likely be Max Damage Torp Bomber, Structure Grinding Ships, long range sniper fits. Basically the alpha volley types that sit on gates. They will typically be the exact same fit. Scan one and you got the fit for all. The easiest way to give this guy a bad day is ECM. I will explain why at the end of this post.

Null Sec and Beyond

The majority of ISBoxers here out side of Sites are, you guessed it, Stealth Bombers. I won't lie to you, these are the hardest to go up against, but not because of ISBoxer, just because you don't know where they are. They also do not require a lock to hit you with their most powerful weapon, and that payload is area of effect.

The weakest link in this ISBoxer fleet is ISBoxer program itself along with cloaking. You see, a normal bombing run typically goes like this-Position the fleet so that target is between fleet and celestial/warp-out ping, Approach target, decloak/drop bombs, fleet warp to celestial/bookmark while cloaking... That cloaking while warp thing is a fickle pickle, when one client decides to react just a little late to the broadcast key that was pressed, then all of a sudden 8 bombers are decloaked while 4 are still cloaked. At that point, the ISBoxer must individually move out of range of his other decloaked bombers, and cloak each one seperately, because, unfortunately if he tries to broadcast to cloak up again, he will decloak his cloaked ships, and that will most likely fail, etc, etc.. *facepalm ---- BUBBLES also, dictor bubbles fuxor up everything----

Anywho, going back to ECM. Much like the cloaked, decloak fiasco I just described, stopping the cycle of a few ships in an ISBoxer fleet is devastating, because the ISBoxer has to manually try to recycle his guns for every ship that is no longer firing, because, he can not broadcast to all clients (doing so would stop the guns that are still firing). You completely throw his entire fleet off by using a few ECM boats... If I had a dislike for ISBoxer/Multiboxing, I would not want them to be banned at all. With the tactics and information that I just gave in this post, I would actively look for these fleets and curbstomp them for their "cheating" as some of you say. That is the sweet science of vengence, not banning them with such a weakness that could be exploited.

Drops Mic
Angeal MacNova
Holefood Inc.
Warriors of the Blood God
#111 - 2014-10-13 00:20:25 UTC
Mallak Azaria wrote:


Me owning a 100 tower personal reaction farm is an unfair benefit over basically 99% of you, lets ban that aswell.

Also lol, ISboxer doesn't modify the client.


You owning all that is obtainable within the confines of the game. No third party program required. The key phrase that you missed is the use of a 3rd party program to gain an unfair advantage.

The advantage that programs like ISBoxer brings is just plain blatantly obvious to anyone with any common sense.

http://www.projectvaulderie.com/goodnight-sweet-prince/

http://www.projectvaulderie.com/the-untold-story/

CCP's true, butthurt, colors.

Because those who can't do themselves keep others from doing too.
45thtiger 0109
Pan-Intergalatic Business Community
#112 - 2014-10-13 00:29:01 UTC
Ocih wrote:
ISBoxer is about risk management.

I have 4 accounts and I do so for the same reason. While I don't ISBox on principal I do understand why it's here. I'd like to see EVE without ISBox but I'm no fool. The game favors the under handed too much and as long as that's the case people will want to keep mandatory mechanics in a tight circle and there is no tighter a circle than just me.



Wait until Windows 10 comes out then you do not need ISBOXER anymore because it will become standard to have multiple
windows on the screen.

ISBOXER will them become redundant may by

**You Have to take the good with the bad and the bad with the good.

Welcome to EvE OnLiNe**
Decian Cor
Stronghelm Corporation
Solyaris Chtonium
#113 - 2014-10-13 01:28:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Decian Cor
I'm rather divided on the topic.

On the one hand, I think that it gives people an unfair advantage in the terms of more reward/profit/capability for less effort. I realize that it is deemed as legal by CCP and anybody COULD use it if they wanted to. But I still think the mechanic in itself gives an unfair advantage, especially when you consider the casual and new player like myself who just logs on for a goodfight.

On the other hand, I wouldn't get juicy kill mails like the five incursion running Nightmares we managed to grab because some baffoon who was (ISkboxxing) was tra-lalaing through Syndicate with all his shinies like a moron. Those instances make me not mind as much.

I'm aware of it, but I choose not to use it, and that's my choice just like it is anybody else's. If you wanna be THAT GUY, go ahead.

All that said, I don't even really like the idea of cyno alts, multiboxxing for scouts, etc. My personal opinion is that it should be one account login per IP, and you have one screen to play on and are dependent upon teamwork (go figure, that's what corps and alliances are for!!)...but that'd probably **** off all the introverts in the sandbox.

[u]Unfiltered for the masses.[/u]

http://imgur.com/mzSl1Ie
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#114 - 2014-10-13 01:46:54 UTC
If you think banning multi-boxing tools will stop people:
https://sites.google.com/site/khromtor/_/rsrc/1300193073723/home/closeup2.jpg
Decian Cor
Stronghelm Corporation
Solyaris Chtonium
#115 - 2014-10-13 01:52:15 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
If you think banning multi-boxing tools will stop people:
https://sites.google.com/site/khromtor/_/rsrc/1300193073723/home/closeup2.jpg



That is quite honestly repulsive. Please, take it away.

[u]Unfiltered for the masses.[/u]

http://imgur.com/mzSl1Ie
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#116 - 2014-10-13 01:54:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Dalto Bane
Tau Cabalander wrote:
If you think banning multi-boxing tools will stop people:
https://sites.google.com/site/khromtor/_/rsrc/1300193073723/home/closeup2.jpg


Ole' Khromtor! I was waiting for this picture to be linked, Big smile

I do hope that some of you will read the backstory of this multiboxing legend. In the face of adversity, he would not be denied!

https://sites.google.com/site/khromtor/oldrigs

Decian Cor wrote:
I'm rather divided on the topic.

On the one hand, I think that it gives people an unfair advantage in the terms of more reward/profit/capability for less effort. I realize that it is deemed as legal by CCP and anybody COULD use it if they wanted to. But I still think the mechanic in itself gives an unfair advantage, especially when you consider the casual and new player like myself who just logs on for a goodfight.

On the other hand, I wouldn't get juicy kill mails like the five incursion running Nightmares we managed to grab because some baffoon who was (ISkboxxing) was tra-lalaing through Syndicate with all his shinies like a moron. Those instances make me not mind as much.

I'm aware of it, but I choose not to use it, and that's my choice just like it is anybody else's. If you wanna be THAT GUY, go ahead.

All that said, I don't even really like the idea of cyno alts, multiboxxing for scouts, etc. My personal opinion is that it should be one account login per IP, and you have one screen to play on and are dependent upon teamwork (go figure, that's what corps and alliances are for!!)...but that'd probably **** off all the introverts in the sandbox.


I appreciate your input Decian!

As you can see, even some of my friends, and alliance mates are not fond of ISBoxer. Truth be told, recently the topic was brought up in a shared channel with players I have flown with for years and a few shared their opinions, and to sum it up, what they said was not very nice in regards to the topic of ISBoxers. Whether they were aware that I was one of the targets of their discussion, I don't know. I don't hide the fact that I use it, or that I multibox. I do protect the extent of my multiboxing/ISBoxer ways.

They are entitled to their views, as I am mine. As far as my alliance is concerned, I have vastly more fun flying with them than any alt, so it is not worth defending ISBoxer/multiboxing for the sake of good relations to guys I enjoy the game with.

Drops Mic
ashley Eoner
#117 - 2014-10-13 02:17:28 UTC
Dalto Bane wrote:
I am going to step out of my position on this topic for this post and throw the players that are opposed to ISBoxer a bone.

How does one defeat the dreaded ISBoxer in all its forms?

Everywhere
Do research if you find a person you suspect of being an ISBoxer. There is a routine, and you could give the person a very hard punch in the face. It has been said in this thread, and I will reiterate, losing a lot of ships because of a simple mistake is very easy to make with someone who is essentially multitasking through ISBoxer, and once they are flustered, their fleet will failscade hard under an attack. ECM, Bubbles too!!

High Sec

The ISBoxers who graze High Security space usually come in the form of Miners. When mining, they will usually be anchored to one character. Well, I won't go into details, but a few bumps aren't deemed harassment if you know what I mean.

Low Sec

You probably won't find many ISBoxers in Low Security space, but when you do, they will most likely be Max Damage Torp Bomber, Structure Grinding Ships, long range sniper fits. Basically the alpha volley types that sit on gates. They will typically be the exact same fit. Scan one and you got the fit for all. The easiest way to give this guy a bad day is ECM. I will explain why at the end of this post.

Null Sec and Beyond

The majority of ISBoxers here out side of Sites are, you guessed it, Stealth Bombers. I won't lie to you, these are the hardest to go up against, but not because of ISBoxer, just because you don't know where they are. They also do not require a lock to hit you with their most powerful weapon, and that payload is area of effect.

The weakest link in this ISBoxer fleet is ISBoxer program itself along with cloaking. You see, a normal bombing run typically goes like this-Position the fleet so that target is between fleet and celestial/warp-out ping, Approach target, decloak/drop bombs, fleet warp to celestial/bookmark while cloaking... That cloaking while warp thing is a fickle pickle, when one client decides to react just a little late to the broadcast key that was pressed, then all of a sudden 8 bombers are decloaked while 4 are still cloaked. At that point, the ISBoxer must individually move out of range of his other decloaked bombers, and cloak each one seperately, because, unfortunately if he tries to broadcast to cloak up again, he will decloak his cloaked ships, and that will most likely fail, etc, etc.. *facepalm ---- BUBBLES also, dictor bubbles fuxor up everything----

Anywho, going back to ECM. Much like the cloaked, decloak fiasco I just described, stopping the cycle of a few ships in an ISBoxer fleet is devastating, because the ISBoxer has to manually try to recycle his guns for every ship that is no longer firing, because, he can not broadcast to all clients (doing so would stop the guns that are still firing). You completely throw his entire fleet off by using a few ECM boats... If I had a dislike for ISBoxer/Multiboxing, I would not want them to be banned at all. With the tactics and information that I just gave in this post, I would actively look for these fleets and curbstomp them for their "cheating" as some of you say. That is the sweet science of vengence, not banning them with such a weakness that could be exploited.
This man knows of what he speaks of.

Know your enemy and you'll quickly realize that multiboxed fleets have severe vulnerabilities that can usually be easily exploited.
Agondray
Avenger Mercenaries
VOID Intergalactic Forces
#118 - 2014-10-13 02:59:32 UTC
DaReaper wrote:
Edited note: misread the op's position, so i'm just going to address this to all the stupid isboxer threads:

As of right now ISBoxer is perfectly legal. CCP has said its legal. If you think thats wrong file a damn petition. Threads on the matter are pointless.

I repeat

CCP SAYS ITS LEGAL

So it doesn;t matter what you or anyone else says. God (CCP) has spoken.

/thread


CCP has double standards, they say its legal but when petitioned they also say that all but 1 of the accounts are considered bots.

"Sarcasm is the Recourse of a weak mind." -Dr. Smith
Decian Cor
Stronghelm Corporation
Solyaris Chtonium
#119 - 2014-10-13 03:04:19 UTC
Dalto Bane wrote:
Tau Cabalander wrote:
If you think banning multi-boxing tools will stop people:
https://sites.google.com/site/khromtor/_/rsrc/1300193073723/home/closeup2.jpg


Ole' Khromtor! I was waiting for this picture to be linked, Big smile

I do hope that some of you will read the backstory of this multiboxing legend. In the face of adversity, he would not be denied!

https://sites.google.com/site/khromtor/oldrigs

Decian Cor wrote:
I'm rather divided on the topic.

On the one hand, I think that it gives people an unfair advantage in the terms of more reward/profit/capability for less effort. I realize that it is deemed as legal by CCP and anybody COULD use it if they wanted to. But I still think the mechanic in itself gives an unfair advantage, especially when you consider the casual and new player like myself who just logs on for a goodfight.

On the other hand, I wouldn't get juicy kill mails like the five incursion running Nightmares we managed to grab because some baffoon who was (ISkboxxing) was tra-lalaing through Syndicate with all his shinies like a moron. Those instances make me not mind as much.

I'm aware of it, but I choose not to use it, and that's my choice just like it is anybody else's. If you wanna be THAT GUY, go ahead.

All that said, I don't even really like the idea of cyno alts, multiboxxing for scouts, etc. My personal opinion is that it should be one account login per IP, and you have one screen to play on and are dependent upon teamwork (go figure, that's what corps and alliances are for!!)...but that'd probably **** off all the introverts in the sandbox.


I appreciate your input Decian!

As you can see, even some of my friends, and alliance mates are not fond of ISBoxer. Truth be told, recently the topic was brought up in a shared channel with players I have flown with for years and a few shared their opinions, and to sum it up, what they said was not very nice in regards to the topic of ISBoxers. Whether they were aware that I was one of the targets of their discussion, I don't know. I don't hide the fact that I use it, or that I multibox. I do protect the extent of my multiboxing/ISBoxer ways.

They are entitled to their views, as I am mine. As far as my alliance is concerned, I have vastly more fun flying with them than any alt, so it is not worth defending ISBoxer/multiboxing for the sake of good relations to guys I enjoy the game with.


Thanks! I try to look at things from both sides of the fence to form the most reasonable and objective opinion.

I realize that some people like that crazy guy you linked above shovel out a lot of money for this game and put a lot into running their multiple accounts, and good on them for such dedication to a task! Though I'd at least like to see some sort of limitations on the whole thing. Not everybody can afford all that jerry rigging or has a system that can handle it.

Every strategy, even the borderline cheating ones, have their own flaws and vulnerabilities. statements like "just learn to counter it" (while oh-so insightful) fail to address the root issue of an in-game advantage that is not really worked for due to commands to a single account being replicated by third-party software to apply to many.

But, that's just my humble newb opinion!


[u]Unfiltered for the masses.[/u]

http://imgur.com/mzSl1Ie
Rosewalker
Khumaak Flying Circus
#120 - 2014-10-13 03:43:01 UTC
Okay, for everyone who is complaining about ISBoxer breaking the EULA, please remember that CCP has given ISBoxer dispensation from parts of the EULA. This time, I am going to quote the entire section on Client Modification from the Third Party Policies. In this section, please remember that "the multiboxing application" refers to ISBoxer.

Third Pary Policies wrote:

Client modification

Client modification is strictly prohibited, as per our EULA:

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.


As well as 9.C:

You may not reverse engineer, disassemble or decompile, or attempt to reverse engineer or derive source code from, all or any portion of the Software, or from any information accessible through the System (including, without limitation, data packets transmitted to and from the System over the Internet), or anything incorporated therein, or analyze, decipher, "sniff" or derive code (or attempt to do any of the foregoing) from any packet stream transmitted to or from the System, whether encrypted or not, or permit any third party to do any of the same, and you hereby expressly waive any legal rights you may have to do so. If the Software and/or the System contains license management technology, you may not circumvent or disable that technology.

We do not endorse or condone the use of any third party applications or other software that modifies the client or otherwise confers an unfair benefit to players. We may, in our discretion, tolerate the use of applications or other software that simply enhance player enjoyment in a way that maintains fair gameplay. For instance, the use of programs that provide in-game overlays (Mumble, Teamspeak) and the multiboxing application is not something we plan to actively police at this time. However, if any third party application or other software is used to gain any unfair advantage, or for purposes beyond its intended use, or if the application or other software violates other parts of the EULA, we may fully enforce our rights to prohibit such use, including player bans. Please use such third party applications or other software at your own risk.


So for anyone arguing that ISBoxer breaks the EULA on these grounds, CCP has considered the argument and found, "no harm, no foul". So please, if you want to argue against ISBoxer, please come up with other arguments. Personally, I think that CCP should just start designing and balancing the game with ISBoxer in mind.

The Nosy Gamer - CCP Random: "hehe, falls under the category: nice try, but no. ;)"