These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Update regarding Multiboxing and input automation

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#721 - 2014-11-25 21:04:20 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
If you are uncertain about your Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing use-case, please get in contact with us, as we would prefer to work with members of the community to come to an amicable resolution.

What category should we petition under?

As I previously posted, I'm uncertain what "Input Broadcasting" and "Input Multiplexing" mean; are they the same thing?

I can't find any useful answer via Google either.
Apo Lamperouge
#722 - 2014-11-25 21:04:22 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if thousands of illegal multibox miners suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. I am confident something awesome has happened.


I've got a bad feeling about this.

Sometimes a knife right through your heart is exactly what you need.
Paranoid Loyd
#723 - 2014-11-25 21:04:50 UTC
Aequitae wrote:
As a small time multiboxer using 2-3 pilots at most, I am not happy with the changes.
I feel it takes away something from the game that I like to do on a small scale, because it's the only way I feel I can achieve some things in say lowsec without a bloody link-alt.

For me, this is a reason to reconsider paying my 9 accounts with actual cash. (No I don't multibox to plex)

Lrn2Read

"There is only one authority in this game, and that my friend is violence. The supreme authority upon which all other authority is derived." ISD Max Trix

Fix the Prospect!
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#724 - 2014-11-25 21:05:35 UTC
Valterra Craven wrote:

I don't think it bans macros since macros can be used to do things on one account and I believe the rules are structured in a way that it only matters when a macro sends commands to more than one client.

Macro's are already banned as botting and have been since EVE started I believe. Catching simple short macro's is obviously a fairly hard job for CCP to do, but it doesn't change it being banned already.
Please Turn
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#725 - 2014-11-25 21:05:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Please Turn
Utari Onzo wrote:
Please Turn wrote:


Well, it does and it doesn't. There is more than one angle from which one should look at this topic. At a first glance, the common approach - "somebody has to pay for that PLEX with real money(at a higher price than the subscription price)" indicates that it doesn't, hence CCP shouldn't care. In this case, Astroyka is wrong, and this move will hurt CCP(short term) more than he realizes.

However, as most things in life, everything is a matter of balance. As I see it, PLEX'ing the accounts(I'm speaking about using a PLEX for subscription) is getting out of hands right now. Is just so easy for too many people(they can all do it simultaneously) to AFK "print" ISK by ratting(Ishtar, Dominix - looking at you right now), to AFK gather resources and so on. Broadcasting commands were(are) a big factor in allowing this type of "game play"(not the only factor, that's for sure).

What most people don't put into this equation is the loss in "potential" long term subscribers due to newbies quitting once they start noticing all the 20+ nerds accounts(which are so common these days) floating around against whom they feel like having zero chances of competing(and who could blame them).

Last thought, Eve should be about playing Eve for the sake of Eve not for the sake of PLEX'ing your account(s) and maybe making some money out of it(RMT ). All I can say about this change is that I'm glad they finally push it through and that I'm a little sad it took them so long to do it(let's hope I'm not speaking too soon and they won't go back on their word(again)).


You missed the even biggest part of the PLEX equation. The plex reselled (the one who gives CCP the monies)

I am one of these. I use plex to get enough isk to buy a shiney. I don't resell plex to have that isk sitting in my account. The higher the plex ISK price goes, the less plex I need to buy from CCP to buy my shiney. The lower the plex price, the more I buy to get that same amount of isk. Too low, and I don't bother buying plex and farm instead.

In general, PLEX supply has been fairly steady for years. It's the demand end that's been having problems. I very much doubt CCP will lose real £££ ($$$/whatever) from loss of plex subcribers on this basis. If plex demand falls, isk value falls, meaning I need to buy more to get my stuff.


Well, I didn't miss it at all. I just feel(felt) it wasn't relevant in this case(percent wise of total revenue).

I doubt the fluctuation in the average number of purchased PLEX (you buying more PLEX when the price is lower, buying less when the price is higher is kind of balanced by more people having an incentive to buy PLEX when the price is high or not having one when the price is low) is comparable with the fluctuation in the average number of directly paid subscriptions(which has a cascade effect - would people prefer to play a dead game(no growth in the number of undocked players willing to interact with the others undocked players) or one that feels alive and vibrant).

And just to be on the safe side, since I somehow feel that you might have misread my post. Short term, there will be a hit, long term, in my view at least, this is wonderful news.

Join TheTuskers, travel to exotic distant lands, meet exciting unusual people and ... kill them!
Petrified
Old and Petrified Syndication
#726 - 2014-11-25 21:07:14 UTC
Interesting. Mining might actually become profitable for the little guy again.

Cloaking is the closest thing to a "Pause Game" button one can get while in space.

Support better localization for the Japanese Community.
Annah Sun-Scape
Temet Nosce Ex Astra
#727 - 2014-11-25 21:07:59 UTC
\o/ TIME TO DUST MY MINERS \o/
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#728 - 2014-11-25 21:08:04 UTC
I shall ignore the irony of some of the massive null blocs gloating over the ban of ISBoxer since I know a lot of multibox miners who supply them. X-Post from a twit-longer sent to CCP Seagull:

I will admit I am slightly annoyed at the lack of communication between CCP and the Multiboxing community, and the fact that CCP Falcon directly lied to said community, but I will abide by your ruling. I will unsub my toons as there are currently a grey area the size of a Titan that CCP has not explored regarding ISBoxer. If you address these issues in the Dev Blog or later down the line, I will reconsider resubbing.

I do have to ask, however, what your definition of "impact in eve" is. A miner multiboxing 40+ accounts can have a major impact in the industry of an alliance, be it big or small, by undercutting regular single-toon miners. A VG runner with 10 clients (such as myself) can sink a market by hoarding LP and then dumping it when he has around 10m LP on each toon (about 11b raw isk if he sells in on the CONCORD LP channel, or skywards of 3k ISK/LP if he is a manufacturer).

Then there are my friends in WH space that multibox WH sites. What do they do if they get dropped by a gank fleet? Do they not fight back? Are they allowed to fight back? What happens to them?

For the ganking aspect of EVE, as I've said countless times before, if you're in a freighter with cargo expanders hauling 15b worth of stuff on autopilot AFK, you will get popped. Doesn't matter too much if it's an ISBoxer with 10 Talos, a fleet with an ISBoxer boxing 3-4, or just regular people who hang out together.

If CCP wanted to ban ISBoxer's broadcasting to multiple clients, a simpler way to put it would have been "Using ISBoxer for anything other than window rearrangement and VideoFX placement is banned".

If CCP wants to sit down with an ISBoxer to figure out what parts of ISBoxer are now considered automation and whats not in order to fix their wording, I am happy to help.

Until next time, fly safe!

P.S. No, you can't have my stuff and I am not 100% quitting EVE. I'd like to thank CCP for the opportunity to multibox EVE.
CCP Falcon
#729 - 2014-11-25 21:08:08 UTC
Tau Cabalander wrote:
CCP Falcon wrote:
If you are uncertain about your Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing use-case, please get in contact with us, as we would prefer to work with members of the community to come to an amicable resolution.

What category should we petition under?

As I previously posted, I'm uncertain what "Input Broadcasting" and "Input Multiplexing" mean; are they the same thing?

I can't find any useful answer via Google either.


EULA would be a good catergory Smile

CCP Falcon || EVE Universe Community Manager || @CCP_Falcon

Happy Birthday To FAWLTY7! <3
Cyrus Doul
kotitekoinen sissijuusto
#730 - 2014-11-25 21:11:37 UTC
irion felpamy wrote:
Cyrus Doul wrote:
I isbox 5 accounts and i do still pay for the game with CC, and have to buy plex to sell all the time to make isk, 6 years into this game and I'm still terrible

Also for the love of god people. when someone isboxes and gets enough to run 20 accounts. that IS 20 SUBS WORTH OF MONEY! its actually more as month to month is 15 dollars for a total of 300 a month. where plex is 20 dollars for a total of 400 a month. CCP makes more off isboxers then they do you.


This is the saddest thing I have ever heard I will assume its a troll just to cheer myself up.


No, not a troll. In college i used to play this game a lot, only had 2 then three accounts, but paid for by spending my weekends not studying for the classes i was taking (B+ student, cept for math that was like Q-) and getting plex when they were like 300 million.

Now i work like 60 hours a week and make enough that converting an hour of real work to isk > amount of isk i can make in an hour unless i get an officer or something. Leaves me time for doing things like stalking our JF's with the dread fleet and all that, 12 hour long weekend tower bash fleets. You know, the fun stuff.

Don't ban isboxer, ban PLEX :) Im just going to set up isboxer to hot key f3 to next character. f1 and f2 start the gun, f3 rotates though. I can press 3 buttons five times in a second or two and its not replicating clicks!
virm pasuul
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#731 - 2014-11-25 21:11:41 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
I shall ignore the irony of some of the massive null blocs gloating over the ban of ISBoxer since I know a lot of multibox miners who supply them. X-Post from a twit-longer sent to CCP Seagull:

I will admit I am slightly annoyed at the lack of communication between CCP and the Multiboxing community, and the fact that CCP Falcon directly lied to said community, but I will abide by your ruling. I will unsub my toons as there are currently a grey area the size of a Titan that CCP has not explored regarding ISBoxer. If you address these issues in the Dev Blog or later down the line, I will reconsider resubbing.

I do have to ask, however, what your definition of "impact in eve" is. A miner multiboxing 40+ accounts can have a major impact in the industry of an alliance, be it big or small, by undercutting regular single-toon miners. A VG runner with 10 clients (such as myself) can sink a market by hoarding LP and then dumping it when he has around 10m LP on each toon (about 11b raw isk if he sells in on the CONCORD LP channel, or skywards of 3k ISK/LP if he is a manufacturer).

Then there are my friends in WH space that multibox WH sites. What do they do if they get dropped by a gank fleet? Do they not fight back? Are they allowed to fight back? What happens to them?

For the ganking aspect of EVE, as I've said countless times before, if you're in a freighter with cargo expanders hauling 15b worth of stuff on autopilot AFK, you will get popped. Doesn't matter too much if it's an ISBoxer with 10 Talos, a fleet with an ISBoxer boxing 3-4, or just regular people who hang out together.

If CCP wanted to ban ISBoxer's broadcasting to multiple clients, a simpler way to put it would have been "Using ISBoxer for anything other than window rearrangement and VideoFX placement is banned".

If CCP wants to sit down with an ISBoxer to figure out what parts of ISBoxer are now considered automation and whats not in order to fix their wording, I am happy to help.

Until next time, fly safe!

P.S. No, you can't have my stuff and I am not 100% quitting EVE. I'd like to thank CCP for the opportunity to multibox EVE.


From your post it's difficult to work out which side of the fence you sit on.
You start off seeming to critcize the change.
You then go on to make a load of points illustrating why the change is a good thing for Eve.
Could you clarify please?
xLiaosx
RHP Mining Company
Federation of Respect Honor Passion Alliance.
#732 - 2014-11-25 21:13:30 UTC
R.I.P. EVE
Utari Onzo
Escalated.
OnlyFleets.
#733 - 2014-11-25 21:13:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Utari Onzo
Nolak Ataru wrote:


If CCP wanted to ban ISBoxer's broadcasting to multiple clients, a simpler way to put it would have been "Using ISBoxer for anything other than window rearrangement and VideoFX placement is banned".

If CCP wants to sit down with an ISBoxer to figure out what parts of ISBoxer are now considered automation and whats not in order to fix their wording, I am happy to help.

Until next time, fly safe!

P.S. No, you can't have my stuff and I am not 100% quitting EVE. I'd like to thank CCP for the opportunity to multibox EVE.


Read the first post, then re-read it again. Do it slowly. It actually really does say "Using ISBoxer for anything other than window rearrangement and VideoFX placement is banned" if you bother to follow the points.

Multiboxing is OK. Using ISBoxer to rearrange windows/log in to eve etc is explicitly stated as OK. Using ISBoxer to broadcast across multiple clients is NOT OK. It says it in the OP. Seriously.

CCP Falcon wrote:
Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing of actions with consequences in the EVE universe, are prohibited and will be policed in the same manner as Input Automation.

This includes, but isn’t limited to:

• Activation and control of ships and modules
• Navigation and movement within the EVE universe
• Movement of assets and items within the EVE universe
• Interaction with other characters

Examples of allowed Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are actions taken that do not have an impact on the EVE universe and are carried out for convenience:

• EVE Online client settings
• Window positions and arrangements (of the EVE Online client in your operating system’s desktop environment)
• The login process

"Face the enemy as a solid wall For faith is your armor And through it, the enemy will find no breach Wrap your arms around the enemy For faith is your fire And with it, burn away his evil"
JitaRandom 1114422443
Doomheim
#734 - 2014-11-25 21:13:49 UTC
About time! Will promote a healthier game!

Ranger 1
Ranger Corp
Vae. Victis.
#735 - 2014-11-25 21:15:29 UTC
Please Turn wrote:
Utari Onzo wrote:
Please Turn wrote:


Well, it does and it doesn't. There is more than one angle from which one should look at this topic. At a first glance, the common approach - "somebody has to pay for that PLEX with real money(at a higher price than the subscription price)" indicates that it doesn't, hence CCP shouldn't care. In this case, Astroyka is wrong, and this move will hurt CCP(short term) more than he realizes.

However, as most things in life, everything is a matter of balance. As I see it, PLEX'ing the accounts(I'm speaking about using a PLEX for subscription) is getting out of hands right now. Is just so easy for too many people(they can all do it simultaneously) to AFK "print" ISK by ratting(Ishtar, Dominix - looking at you right now), to AFK gather resources and so on. Broadcasting commands were(are) a big factor in allowing this type of "game play"(not the only factor, that's for sure).

What most people don't put into this equation is the loss in "potential" long term subscribers due to newbies quitting once they start noticing all the 20+ nerds accounts(which are so common these days) floating around against whom they feel like having zero chances of competing(and who could blame them).

Last thought, Eve should be about playing Eve for the sake of Eve not for the sake of PLEX'ing your account(s) and maybe making some money out of it(RMT ). All I can say about this change is that I'm glad they finally push it through and that I'm a little sad it took them so long to do it(let's hope I'm not speaking too soon and they won't go back on their word(again)).


You missed the even biggest part of the PLEX equation. The plex reselled (the one who gives CCP the monies)

I am one of these. I use plex to get enough isk to buy a shiney. I don't resell plex to have that isk sitting in my account. The higher the plex ISK price goes, the less plex I need to buy from CCP to buy my shiney. The lower the plex price, the more I buy to get that same amount of isk. Too low, and I don't bother buying plex and farm instead.

In general, PLEX supply has been fairly steady for years. It's the demand end that's been having problems. I very much doubt CCP will lose real £££ ($$$/whatever) from loss of plex subcribers on this basis. If plex demand falls, isk value falls, meaning I need to buy more to get my stuff.


Well, I didn't miss it at all. I just feel(felt) it wasn't relevant in this case(percent wise of total revenue).

I doubt the fluctuation in the average number of purchased PLEX (you buying more PLEX when the price is lower, buying less when the price is higher is kind of balanced by more people having an incentive to buy PLEX when the price is high or not having one when the price is low) is comparable with the fluctuation in the average number of directly paid subscriptions(which has a cascade effect - would people prefer to play a dead game(no growth in the number of undocked players willing to interact with the others undocked players) or one that feels alive and vibrant).

And just to be on the safe side, since I somehow feel that you might have misread my post. Short term, there will be a hit, long term, in my view at least, this is wonderful news.


PLEX prices will drop as demand from the people who currently don't care how high the price is will lessen in the short term.

Once PLEX prices drop, people that DO care how high the price became will begin reactivating accounts. This number will obviously be far larger than the number of multi box accounts lost.

The more PLEX that change hands (usually a symptom of healthy moderate prices) the more actual cash CCP makes.

View the latest EVE Online developments and other game related news and gameplay by visiting Ranger 1 Presents: Virtual Realms.
Stygian Soul
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#736 - 2014-11-25 21:16:44 UTC
Breaking down what a miner actually does that does and does not require broadcasting

1: undock (broadcast)
2: Squad warp to belt/bookmark (not a broadcast)
3: Launch drones (broadcast)
4: assist drones to overwatch (broadcast)
5: regroup command (not a broadcast)
6: cycle through each ship to put a laser on a different rock (not a broadcast)
7: jetcan ore or drag to an existing can (broadcast)
8: Squad warp out to POS when done (not a broadcast)
9: Dock when needed (broadcast)

So for mining the only difference will be:
I'll have to dock and undock each ship manually
Launch and assist drones on each ship manually
jetcan the ore from each ship manually

This isn't really that much more difficult to do, and if it means I make more on my harvest and pay less for my plexes because of all the people that quit, then so be it, can't say I'm pleased though. I just don't see how any of this should be a bannable offense.

Now for PvP
Gate camp:

1: squad warp to gate (not a broadcast)
2: launch drones (broadcast)
3: Assist drones (broadcast)
4: Manually go through and fix all the drones that didn't propery launch or assist (not a broadcast)
5: Activate various perma-running modules (broadcast)
6: Manually go through and fix all the modules that didn't properly activate (not a broadcast)

I can still do this manually, it just adds set up time. Bannable offense? meh.

Rapid deployment, giving chase through gates, and maneuvering were already difficult and prone to problems even with broadcasting, now it is more or less out of the question.

non-drone based pvp is also more or less out of the question, except perhaps capitals where you can have more breathing room between clicks (except for jumping in and out could get tricky, perhaps jump them in one at a time and get it set up)

So bombers nerfed out of existence, these were the focus of most of the calls for the nerfbat, so success there.

Suicide catalysts nerfed out of existence, lesser extent than the bombers, but no love lost there.

Multibox miners: Inconvenienced with a very heavy handed ban threat for attempting to save a little time and a lot of clicks.
Take that you exploiting evil multiboxer, if this doesn't work we will try...THE COMFY CHAIR!!!!

-Soul

I and many of my corp-mates multi-box mine, rat, and/or pvp.
When a roam comes through and sees mackinaws and skiffs, their faces turn to delight as they warp in.
There is nothing more satisfying than wiping that smug off their faces with a drone swarm of death.
Mr Omniblivion
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#737 - 2014-11-25 21:17:44 UTC
Bakuhz wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
RoAnnon wrote:
Mr Omniblivion wrote:
This is ironic but the logical change next to be made is to nerf afk cloaking.

Sure, that's logical, since an AFK cloaked pilot has absolutely no way to interact with the game at all... perfect sense there... Roll


CCP is directly nerfing the force projection that one player can have affect on others in Eve.

What do you think afk cloaking is?

Pirate



one player one account stop crying about AFK cloaking and learn to deal with it!!
If you have not found a way by now to counter such things maybe farmville is your thing?
any case blizzard might listen to tears of this magnitude!

Pirate



Confirming that all of our afk cloaking accounts are actually individual people that stare at the computer all day waiting for the opportune moment to hotdrop people.
Angry Ganker
Caprica 1
#738 - 2014-11-25 21:18:28 UTC
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if thousands of illegal multibox miners suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. I am confident something awesome has happened.


actually -

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if thousands of illegal multibox loyalalon gankers suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced and the universe shuddered as it appears CODE just lost.
Stygian Soul
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#739 - 2014-11-25 21:20:22 UTC
Angry Ganker wrote:
Ima Wreckyou wrote:
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if thousands of illegal multibox miners suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced. I am confident something awesome has happened.


actually -

I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if thousands of illegal multibox loyalalon gankers suddenly cried out in terror, and were suddenly silenced and the universe shuddered as it appears CODE just lost.


Doesn't it actually mean that CODE won? Mission Accomplished and all that?
Eugene Kerner
TunDraGon
Goonswarm Federation
#740 - 2014-11-25 21:20:47 UTC
CCP Falcon wrote:
Playing with multiple accounts at the same time has a long history within EVE Online, and has always been permitted. There are various ways to do it, and since there’s been a lot of discussion surrounding what is and isn’t allowed, we’d like to clarify a few terms and exactly how the EULA and our Policies must be interpreted and how some things are shifting.

Over the last few weeks we have gone through an internal review process to clarify what exactly the EULA and ToS require in terms of input automation, input multiplexing and input broadcasting. This is the result of that review process and an outline of how we will interpret things going forward.

Firstly we’d like to go over a few terms.

Multiboxing

Multiboxing refers to playing as multiple separate characters, simultaneously, across a number of accounts, either by using multiple computers to run the game, or by using a number of instances of EVE on a single computer.

Uses for multiboxing range from scouts in PvP to gang boosting, support and ECM alts, as well as extra characters for hauling, mining and many other applications. Based on our EULA and Policies we would like to clarify that multiboxing is allowed.

Input Automation

Input Automation refers to actions that are commonly also referred to as botting or macroing. This term is used to describe, but is not limited to, the automation of actions which have consequences in the EVE universe.

Input Broadcasting & Input Multiplexing

Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing refer to the multiplication of inputs, actions and events to multiple instances of the game.

Going Forward

As of 15th of March 2013 we have been policing input automation based on a two-strike policy

• 1st strike for input automation is a 30 day ban
• 2nd strike for input automation is a permanent ban

Input Automation remains strictly prohibited, and is policed under our suspension and ban policy.

Based on the discussion in this area and our will to be more clear and concise with the community regarding this part of our rules, we have decided to also apply this two-strike policy to prohibited forms of Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing as of January 1st 2015.

We would like to add, however, that we will not be taking action retroactively and will only be policing this policy as of January 1st, 2015.

Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing of actions with consequences in the EVE universe, are prohibited and will be policed in the same manner as Input Automation.

This includes, but isn’t limited to:

• Activation and control of ships and modules
• Navigation and movement within the EVE universe
• Movement of assets and items within the EVE universe
• Interaction with other characters

Examples of allowed Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are actions taken that do not have an impact on the EVE universe and are carried out for convenience:

• EVE Online client settings
• Window positions and arrangements (of the EVE Online client in your operating system’s desktop environment)
• The login process

NOTE: Please keep in mind that using the same password for multiple accounts as well as storing your password in a third party tool or script which helps you to automate the login process can increase the risk of account theft and hacking drastically. It is strongly recommended that you do not engage in this type of activity.

We are closely monitoring all game events for suspicious activity suggesting illicit behaviors, including Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing.

We would like to clarify that it does not matter how Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are being done, whether through use of software or modified hardware. Our only concern is regarding how it is being used in the EVE universe.

If you are uncertain about your Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing use-case, please get in contact with us, as we would prefer to work with members of the community to come to an amicable resolution. We will also follow up this statement with further clarifications if needed, based on questions and concerns from the community.

TL:DR :

Starting from 01.01.2015 the use of Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing is limited to activities which do not impact the Eve universe. For more details please refer to the entirety of this announcement.

You should have hust changed the the way cloaking works back to how it used to be.
IS-boxing Battleship is a totally different thing as IS boxing stealth bombers that do not decloak each other.
I genuinly do not care about 30 man Skiff fleets that are operated by one guy tbh. They harm noone and should not have a
Quote:
large
influx on ressource-prices.
I see some very angry costumers that invested a small fortune on their home setups coming right up.
Well...if you think it helps the game...

TunDraGon is recruiting! "Also, your boobs [:o] "   CCP Eterne, 2012 "When in doubt...make a diȼk joke." Robin Williams - RIP