EVE General Discussion

See here is somebody who does not grasp the concept of opportunity cost and that his "free time"--i.e. leisure--is actually worth something (it is in fact worth his hourly wage rate). For example, if it takes a single player with a single account 20 hours to earn enough isk to get that PLEX that implies he values his time at $1/hour. Granted, he might really, really enjoy that grinding...but then it isn't really grinding for him and somebody that finds ratting, missions, and (urk) mining that much fun....might need to see a doctor.

Having derped an entire fleet on multiple occasions (and friends have as well), I can say that there is no way multiboxing is 100% safe.

One example: Running incursions. 8 nm, 2 guardians. Niarja spawns, jams one logi, heavy spawn shoots the other. You have a very, very small window of opportunity to un-mess your situation. This is one instance where public fleets have an advantage as they can lock each other with spare highslot reps much easier and with much less danger of shooting each other than a VG boxer. They also don't have to deal with multitasking 10 separate accounts and staying alive.

Yes, that is precisely what Mike wrote. See, I'll quote it again:

You're failing to take into account the literal hours of effort that goes into setting up ISBoxer and making sure nothing is off by a single pixel. ISBoxer is not something you can "plug and play". Any variation in your windows or settings will cause problems with anything you do. If we take the hours taken to set up ISBoxer and "convert" it into raw hours of experience and playtime for each player, then we'd probably see the gap narrow by a significant margin.

It doesn't, at least not from the link I found. There are also cracks available for KC, as well as cracks for ISBoxer, though I didn't crack it.

E: EVE has always had a slight P2W part to it, as explained earlier in the thread. Nice ninja-edit.

Let me clarify, I'm quite happy with CCP's decision. In this case its looking more and more like they got it exactly right. Basiclly, I agree with you.

For those who are using it to acquire isk and not run PvP fleets, I'd like to see the numbers to see was all I was saying (and not very well). That we probably wont is likely due to customer confidentiality and that is understandable.

Interesting, based on the comments about the discussion of ISBoxer in the CSM minutes, I found this:



The notion that ISBoxer has been explicitly sanctioned by CCP appears to be quite false. The notion that CCP was tolerating ISBoxer and similar programs appears to be more accurate.

There are more factors involved than just this broadcasting change, and I devised this plan of consolidation over the cost of medical clones. The main factor being the type of gameplay I'm involved in, which is subcap fleets in null. With the organization named under my avatar.

There's no need for me to bring more than two characters on an outing. I could do three, without being a detriment to my fleet, but that's pushing it and it's fine to just bring one.

I'm not upset by this change regarding broadcasting, it doesn't affect me. I play clients manually.

But while I was out today in fleet, scrambling to duplicate my commands on two characters, it occurred to me that the support I receive for multiple characters (and multiple subscriptions) is basically zero. From CCP.

Along with my recent loss of love for the game over my medical clone costs thread which received -no- feedback from CCP, and realizing that I'm in a big group now, and don't need to field a complete fleet composition on my own, I decided the proper thing to do as a customer (albeit a demanding one) in a situation like this is to pull back my support. That's just how this exchange works--you pay for what you like, and you keep paying if it's what you want.

I will continue my plan of consolidating characters onto just a few accounts, from each having an account of their own. The simple fact is I don't receive enough support for CCP in the client for this to continue being fun.

That's basically it. I want more support for these extra accounts that I maintain. Support in the client, so I don't have to resort to ISBoxer to function as a small gang, which I've paid to be.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you just said I'm not allowed to multibox because someone else can't figure it out in 30 seconds? I'd like to quote Mark Twain right now: "Censorship is telling a man he can't have a steak just because a baby can't chew it."

There is no inherent barrier to multiboxing other than a willingness to start trying. If we follow your logic, nobody could PVP, WH, indy, incursion, or do anything because one person "may" not be good at it.

If you consider the amount of support that multiboxing receives, compared to the portion of subscriptions beyond 1 per player, the lack thereof is appalling. And that's the CCP who makes an announcement like this one, with no thoughts to provide alternatives to multiboxers. They'll run Power of 2 promotions, though. Do you realize the hoops everyone jumps through to get more than one character into the game? Hardware and software, including peripherals.

CCP will gladly accept an additional subscription, so let's stop pretending that multiboxing in EVE is some kind of abomination.

You should consider this the straw that breaks the camel's back, CCP. This trend is alarming. You should be going the other way, developing more support and adding multibox quality of life things, for a large portion of your player base.

Disproportionate. Neglectful. You've had it too easy.