Player Features and Ideas Discussion

We were having an open discussing on Isboxer at the EVE subreddit, and I thought I'd share some of the ideas that came forward for better visibility.

Opinions were diverse, from regular multiboxers swearing by it's ability to tile different clients in order to avoid tabbing out, to average users balking at the idea of an MMO that drives you to "play with yourself" (and/or paying multiple accounts). Isboxers retorted that boxing is not quite as simple as it seems, as it's easy for one client to get out of sync, and the ability to react regular players have give them the edge in most scenarios. A middle ground were both met was that a problem was it's a problem that certain activities are so linear and simple, that a single person cloning commands to dozens of clients can actually compete with living, playing souls. Mining, bombing runs, and to a minor extent certain alpha doctrines, were the biggest culprits.

Isboxing is fine. That many of the game's activites are so linear that they can be isboxed is not. Multiboxing should be an alternative playstyle, not the logical progression for some careers. (I'm looking at you, mining) If any activity, from mining through bombing, is simple enough that a multiboxer can be even close to the same ballpark as an equal number of living souls, it needs to go back to the drawing board. (Jokes about solving a captcha before launching a bomb were done.)

It's 2014. Games have kept pushing the envelope in mechanics, and players expect to be engaged in what they do. Christ, even Mass Effect 2's little minigame was miles ahead of anything EVE mining has to offer. Staring at modules cycling is not going to cut it. Fix that, and multiboxing won't be a problem. This doesn't mean they should get rid of AFK mining. A lot of people enjoy it and it's a legitimate playstyle, but there should be an option open for people who want to mine actively. You can have both coexist.

Here's an example: Keep current mechanics intact. Up pops an optional mining minigame whose results shave time off your harvester cycles. It should be something that tests both user decision-making and speed, scaled so average people who use it actively can match 3-4 inactive ships, and crazy godlike 200 APM dudes can rival big multiboxers. It would essentially translate the advantage combat gives to EVE's human players into the one activity where it's completely absent, turning multiboxing into a choice of playstyle (do I want to watch netflix while I mine, or do I want to interact with the game to make it go faster?), not something people are driven into by sheer boredom. You also could try to multibox the minigame, but like in combat, you would never get close in efficiency to matching a single player focusing his attention on a single instance. But hey, if you're the hardest of the hardcore multiboxers, there's something to chew on.

I presume you like the "watching modules cycle" minigame better?

No but clicking dots is worse. Why not make mining into proper gameplay with mechanics and mini professions, maybe partially connected to exploration, maybe more to indy, whatever just not another click click click bing! your laser magically extracted 10% more ore! keep clicking!

And if you want to sarcastically comment on somebody's preferences of current state mining you should really spend few minutes to search through forums because maybe, just maybe everything that could be posted on that subject already was. In many places.

Yeah "proper gameplay" is also a minigame, as in being a game within a larger framework. You're arguing for the same thing. I didn't exactly say mining should be turned into kandy krush. Stop being a curmudgeon.

Ouch!

That comet idea sounds amazing, but also complex to implement. What I propose is something simpler, a stopgap measure that won't require changes in underlying code in order to make the game more enjoyable. I agree with you though. In the long run, if devs are incapable or unwilling to update 10-year-old core mechanics, the game is going to die.

What I more find more worrying then anything is that CCP have had years to sort out the pos code yet here we are in 2014 still talking about it.

You can not have both at the same time: getting new features and renovated code.

One could argue that we've gotten neither, though that isn't entirely fair. I think CCP started working on refurbishing their code in ernest circa 2011 - the same time we started having age old bugs and interface issues fixed. To be fair, eve has gotten quite a bit better since then.

It's not an "isboxer is bad" thread, it's a "game play that can be isboxed is bad" thread. Many years ago I heard a phrase that went something like this:

"Rather than trying to fight gameplay automation (bots and macros), remove the tedious elements of gameplay that players seek to automate."

It was in the context of another game, but I think it holds true here as well.