These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Single IP Single Account

Author
James Baboli
Warp to Pharmacy
#61 - 2014-12-01 07:36:57 UTC
Zan Shiro wrote:
James Baboli wrote:
[quote=Zan Shiro]I feel sorry for those who will lack the tools I used to make the isk needed to make the amount of isk I can as easily as I can with unsupported multi-boxing.



there are those who have read and understood what ccp is doing here. If only to keep on doing what they do with changes to not be banned (not up to speed on this saga but as I recall last I heard this only hits some not all of isboxer features). I am sure they will fill some of that void.

Almost impossible to make the 25b/hr I can pull running on mental auto-pilot without the is-boxer functions I use for this and which will be banned, meaning the officer smartbombs and so on aren't as easy to acquire for the manually boxed ships and so on.

Talking more,

Flying crazier,

And drinking more

Making battleships worth the warp

Anthar Thebess
#62 - 2014-12-01 08:29:52 UTC
Sorry but now.
First of all , people have many accounts , it is to late for setting this up.
Remember also that each account = $ to CCP, they are not maintaining eve servers just for "fun". They are doing this to earn money.

Current solution , at "forbidding" isboxer abuse will already solve many issues.
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#63 - 2014-12-01 08:37:56 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Kevin Tumatauenga wrote:
As I proposed the 1 person 1 account idea is not only against the ones who exploiting multiboxing pvps, im frankly ask ccp to expand more features and playing styles to different roles. "The vast majority will do the opposite", I'd avoid generalizing. You dont know the exact number anyway. I dont think there is only 1 or 2 players doing it, its way more than that, check the amount of ghosts names in local chats/afks at stargates you will know! And what other different activities are you referring to? there are solutions if each role fits in.

For the cyno, this is why EVE online is a MMORPG, it requires interacting with others. Why do you think you can just take a shortcut by logging on your own alt and make your life easy without socializing with others, you are losing the the concept of MULTIPLAYER, you can ask a corp/alliance mate, even a rookie from newbie channel, and chances could be making a new friends. If i'm you ill role play everything the best i can to socialize. And why did CCP designed the cyno as it is, it wants you to interact with corp mates like that, it is designed in that way, and now you crying that how inconvenient it is for you if you dont use an alt.

Yeah, indeed people use more than 1 character to pvp, thats why i said you can have many characters slots. BTW i have no idea what 'Multiboxing in the ways of predator666 and thelikes' is, i cant find it on google. and who said you can split roles like that, nobody said 1 charcater cant have different roles, whenever you character fits the role the fleets then simply use it, booster skills most FCs have obviously, scouting could be a part of your intel or your intercept characters. whatever activities you mentioned above there are more than 2 roles 1 character can fit with extra features added, i think its viable and more interesting.

I do not socialize when it comes to things that cost me months and enormous amounts of ISK and effort to achieve. MMO or not, socializing is not the solution to everything in any game and most things are done more efficiently and outright better if you do them on your own. Some people in my alliance (and many other groups) don't even know how to cyno correctly, among them veteran players; do you really believe that I want to socialize with these people and put my belongings in their hands? That's not going to happen. I don't care about rookies unless they show clear signs of being able to become a proper EVE player, and most do not show these signs at all as they are all ruined by Angry Bird, Farmville and other similar "games".

You also fall in this category as you could not even find out who predator666 is. Granted, I typed it wrong and it should be "predator 666" but Google corrects that for you and the EVENews24 entry at the bottom answers your question comprehensively. Just for you, here's the video that demonstrates his capabilities and that shows what you want to take out of the game. I should not make it harder than it already is, right?Roll. With that in mind and your disgusting focus on socializing: Do you want to say that people like predator 666 should bring a friend along who just sits in the booster ship in a safe spot and dwindles fingers while they watch dscan every now and then? Is it that what you think of when you say socializing?
Furthermore, why should I socialize more than absolutely necessary with people on the far bottom end of the education scale, on the far bottom end of the measure scale "How do I come by in EVE", on the far top end of the scale "I want stuff now and without doing anything for it!"? Basically any new player for EVE falls in these categories and many older players have an unhealthy tendency to fall down into that hole. Many people don't want to scout targets anymore, sit in space on a gate, do PVE or other things to provoke fights, who don't want to help the alliance by doing "boring" stuff like market and contracts to provide tools or logistics. Instead, you find more and more people like this one; people who just want an easy way to do things, who don't appreciate the work of others, who wait for pings to log in, have an action quicky and then log back off. Why should I do anything beyond the absolute necessary with them when I can do it without hassle, unnecessary discussions, complaints and other "social stuff" on my own, therefore, be far better off and don't have to stress myself and ruin my gameplay? How can these "players" make my game "more interesting", how you call it? Mind, more interesting does not mean to me saving some sorry back of a newbie/veteran who is not capable of judging things and situations properly and then cries for help in local or on TS; that is the exact opposite of "more interesting", it is irritating.
I fill many roles because I detest having to focus on one thing; focusing on one thing is unnatural and goes against human nature. That is why Rivr can do many things in EVE (PVE, market, exploration, missions, scanning, contracts, scouting, fly most ships the game has in store, PVP in most ships the game has in store, ...), that is why my alts can do many things in EVE and not just one thing. Which connects me directly to your cyno example: Why should I have to wait for other people in my alliance/corp to be online and in the mood for providing me a service? When I need cynos, I need them right now in a place that I deem adequate, not someone else.
What CCP wants is of little to no concern to me. I play the game how I think it should be played -- and that is not the Ego-shooter it turns into and that CCP seems to be after. EVE for me is far more than a shooter in space and I will not play along with the idea to turn EVE into a mere shooter.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.

Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#64 - 2014-12-01 17:38:16 UTC
Kevin Tumatauenga wrote:
Elena Thiesant wrote:
Kevin Tumatauenga wrote:
The server should also restrict one IP address to one account only.


So when you have multiple people all with their own separate accounts on the other side of a proxy/NAT (say a hotel or university dorm), only one of them should be allowed to play at a time?

Or would you look at the IP that the computer says it has, rather than the IP that the server sees? In that case everyone using an internal 192.168.* or 10.* network is screwed.

Ignoring all the other arguments, your suggestion is technically infeasible due to the way the internet works.


How often do you have full of EVE pilots sitting together playing eve in 1 room? AND I SAID you can use other methods to achieve 1 person 1 account.


Outside of incarceration of all individuals playing Eve, having them given only 1 account, all of the computers having unique internet access points (unique IP), no methods of paying for extra account and daily checks through the logs that the computer has only used a single account?

Nope. Go ahead, come up with things, there will be a workaround or a major flaw found within 5 minutes.
Antillie Sa'Kan
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#65 - 2014-12-01 18:30:46 UTC  |  Edited by: Antillie Sa'Kan
So if you have two (or more) people in the same house (and thus sharing an IP) that play EVE they can't both play at the same time? And then there are ISP level mega proxies, corporate proxies, college campus proxies, and carrier grade NAT (a big thing in Europe btw).

And what do you do when IPv6 hits widespread adoption and everyone has a bazillion IPs for each room in their home? You can't go based on ranges due to the lack of enforcement of RFC 5375. And RFC 4941 will make it impossible to really track the IP to EVE account relationship on a one to one basis. And RFC 3633 will also make this sort of thing almost impossible all by itself. So good luck with that one.

Also, depending on how the EVE servers handle initial TCP sequence number randomization and SYN timeouts, implementing any type of IP based session count restrictions could make the EVE servers incredibly vulnerable to certain types of DoS attacks.

I don't think the OP is aware of just how easy it is to appear to come from several different IPs when doing things on the internet. Anyone can setup a farm of super cheap proxy servers in the Amazon cloud and make themselves look like 20+ different IPs. It gets even more fun when you start using VPN services and things like Tor.

I would also like to know how the OP plans to get around multiple EVE clients running on one box under ESXi. VMs with full hardware acceleration for DirectX 3d rendering have been around for a while now. ESXi is free, RAM is cheap, and EVE is not a very demanding game to run for the CPU or GPU. Go go VM cluster based mining fleet.

Please don't make suggestions about highly technical things that you don't understand. It just shows engineers like me how little you actually know about computers.


TLDR;
As a professional network engineer I don't think the OP understands how monumentally stupid and impractical it would be to limit each client IP to one EVE account or one active EVE game session.
Gadget Helmsdottir
Gadget's Workshop
#66 - 2014-12-02 03:02:49 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
So if you have two (or more) people in the same house (and thus sharing an IP) that play EVE they can't both play at the same time? And then there are ISP level mega proxies, corporate proxies, college campus proxies, and carrier grade NAT (a big thing in Europe btw).

And what do you do when IPv6 hits widespread adoption and everyone has a bazillion IPs for each room in their home? You can't go based on ranges due to the lack of enforcement of RFC 5375. And RFC 4941 will make it impossible to really track the IP to EVE account relationship on a one to one basis. And RFC 3633 will also make this sort of thing almost impossible all by itself. So good luck with that one.

Also, depending on how the EVE servers handle initial TCP sequence number randomization and SYN timeouts, implementing any type of IP based session count restrictions could make the EVE servers incredibly vulnerable to certain types of DoS attacks.

I don't think the OP is aware of just how easy it is to appear to come from several different IPs when doing things on the internet. Anyone can setup a farm of super cheap proxy servers in the Amazon cloud and make themselves look like 20+ different IPs. It gets even more fun when you start using VPN services and things like Tor.

I would also like to know how the OP plans to get around multiple EVE clients running on one box under ESXi. VMs with full hardware acceleration for DirectX 3d rendering have been around for a while now. ESXi is free, RAM is cheap, and EVE is not a very demanding game to run for the CPU or GPU. Go go VM cluster based mining fleet.

Please don't make suggestions about highly technical things that you don't understand. It just shows engineers like me how little you actually know about computers.


TLDR;
As a professional network engineer I don't think the OP understands how monumentally stupid and impractical it would be to limit each client IP to one EVE account or one active EVE game session.


Sweetie...
I get that you're trying to help, but endless technobabble is just going to go over his head. Not that you were incorrect, but there's a bit more to explanations than pure facts. Delivery is key.
I mean, you could have written that entire response in Sanskrit, and though it would have been technically correct, it would have also been unreadable to all but a few specialists.

Know your audience, dear.

--Gadget

Work smarter, not harder. --Scrooge McDuck, an eminent old-Earth economist

Given an hour to save New Eden, how would respected scientist, Albertus Eisenstein compose his thoughts? "Fifty-five minutes to define the problem; save the galaxy in five."

Koebmand
Silverflames
#67 - 2014-12-02 04:06:48 UTC
There is no way CCP can enforce a 1 computer 1 online account thing.

The only thing such a rule would do is hurt people who don't break the rule, putting them at a disadvantage over those who just gets around it. Which is the same as rewarding people for breaking a rule that can not possible be enforced.
Caleb Seremshur
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#68 - 2014-12-02 06:04:48 UTC
The rule is not to use isboxer or any equivalent program to multibox for gross advantage over other ie flying a fleet of 20 alpha thrasher to kill other ships in one hit. When controlled by a single character.

That's also why they didn't just specify isboxer. It's about tackling a problem that whilr it generated a lot of extra accounts for EVE the long term effects would have been many single account players unsubbing because they can't compete with the already borderline illegal automated processes.

I've always advocated the death of alts and now we see it coming from the EULA. One more knife in the throat for people subverting the population at large.
Anhenka
Native Freshfood
Minmatar Republic
#69 - 2014-12-02 06:09:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Anhenka
Caleb Seremshur wrote:

I've always advocated the death of alts and now we see it coming from the EULA. One more knife in the throat for people subverting the population at large.


I agree, people need to conform to the alt standards of the EVE population at large.

What are you waiting for? Go get yourself an alt.

You do understand that the majority of players have alt accounts, right?

Stop subverting the population at large you counterculture hipster!
Takashi Jin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2014-12-02 06:33:30 UTC
This is a bad idea. CCP just got finished addressing specifically the question of whether multiboxing is ok or not (it is ok.. in case you missed it) But your plan means that there will be some who have enough money for multiple internet providership.. or even the purchasing multipile IPs from the same provider. You will be allowing only the rich to multibox now? and what happens when the guys come over with their computers on the weekend for a session of eve together where we can comminicate in the same room during an op. CCP have sold many on the idea that multiple accounts are good because they can support each other; I see nothing wrong with that.
Aplysia Vejun
Children of Agasul
#71 - 2014-12-02 07:20:54 UTC
Most people don't want to lose their pay to win. And CCP needs the money from the subs. End of discussion
Kevin Tumatauenga
State War Academy
Caldari State
#72 - 2014-12-02 08:20:28 UTC
Aplysia Vejun wrote:
Most people don't want to lose their pay to win. And CCP needs the money from the subs. End of discussion


yup, i totaly agree. ill unsub and find something else i guess.
Adrie Atticus
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#73 - 2014-12-02 10:37:47 UTC
Kevin Tumatauenga wrote:
Aplysia Vejun wrote:
Most people don't want to lose their pay to win. And CCP needs the money from the subs. End of discussion


yup, i totaly agree. ill unsub and find something else i guess.


Enjoy your real life!
Rosira
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#74 - 2014-12-02 11:04:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Rosira
Kevin Tumatauenga wrote:

Benefits:
1. Providing fair competition in PVP for both sides.
2. Reinforcing the idea of MMORPG, making each role more important and challenging to play by adding more contents, playing styles and game features.
3. Force players to be more sociable, eg, have to ask for a proper tank or salvager for DEDs for extra safety and incomes.
4. Reduce unnecessary calculations at the server end which reduce lag and time dilation.
5. Reduce scammers/personal assualters because they will get their mains banned too.
6. (Not sure if this one is a benefit) Corps can stop worrying about spies, they can view all corps members' mains/alts through APIs, on the other hand a true spy can hide even deeper with all his characters.


1. PVP is all about killing the other side, being fair in battle means your making harder for your side to win
2. Not really sure how this is tied to forcing people to only play one account given how skills work your could after X time to X role compently. its just easier to have X role done by X Account while N role is done by another
3. Forcing players to do thing that they don't want to is never a good idea ~ MMO it maybe but many people are happy without having to deal with other people (who until proven otherwise have a tendency to be idiots)
4. 1000s of players in system will do it with or without a Single account lock.


Quote:

After hours of research, I have finally found the solution, theres a game called Star Citizen. Space Sim/FPS. A game really deserved the MMORPG title, that every player involved will actually role play their character. I've done with arguing with you guys, you want keep rolling your 2-3 alt accounts then keep it up.


Let us know when Star Citizen actually has something worth playing...
Also if you find that everyone is Playing their "role" or not



Also when the Game Providers actively encourage you to have Multiple accounts with Specials on starting a new one periodically it cant be a bad thing
Rosira
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#75 - 2014-12-02 11:10:31 UTC  |  Edited by: Rosira
*%$ Double Post
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#76 - 2014-12-02 11:34:28 UTC
Kevin Tumatauenga wrote:
Aplysia Vejun wrote:
Most people don't want to lose their pay to win. And CCP needs the money from the subs. End of discussion


yup, i totaly agree. ill unsub and find something else i guess.

Bye.

o7
SemperFidelis Shi
SemperFidelis Corporation
#77 - 2014-12-02 11:47:26 UTC
Kevin Tumatauenga wrote:
If this idea applies, weather or not a player will choose to use VPN to bypass will completely reply on that player's morale.

Morale? In EVE? Big smile

On a different note, it will be a huge advantage for those that know how to use a VPN. As for the rest... well
Haywoud Jablomi
Vay Mining Corporation
#78 - 2014-12-02 12:56:46 UTC
Ok so I only read the first page. All I can say is "get over it."

There is no justification to limiting multiboxing, especially if its not automated.

Also where exactly do you get the idea this isnt fair? You can do the same thing. Shell out the money or plex. This isn't unfair game play. You are complaining that someone is putting more work into the game than you are and you want to penalize them.

WTF is wrong with you.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? Yes; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP should be completely avoided" "However if you train cloak, you can avoid it all you want." (Modified)

Corraidhin Farsaidh
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#79 - 2014-12-02 13:03:08 UTC
I would imagine that a multi-boxer (no matter how skilled) is going to be in a world of pain against an equal number of organized individual pilots. I have no problem with multi-boxing (just isboxer but that's sorted shortly). Limiting one account to one IP is never going to work though since mulitple people in the same building (students for a start) could be using the same connection and therefore IP.
Gawain Edmond
Khanid Bureau of Industry
#80 - 2014-12-02 13:47:41 UTC
Antillie Sa'Kan wrote:
So if you have two (or more) people in the same house (and thus sharing an IP) that play EVE they can't both play at the same time? And then there are ISP level mega proxies, corporate proxies, college campus proxies, and carrier grade NAT (a big thing in Europe btw).

And what do you do when IPv6 hits widespread adoption and everyone has a bazillion IPs for each room in their home? You can't go based on ranges due to the lack of enforcement of RFC 5375. And RFC 4941 will make it impossible to really track the IP to EVE account relationship on a one to one basis. And RFC 3633 will also make this sort of thing almost impossible all by itself. So good luck with that one.

Also, depending on how the EVE servers handle initial TCP sequence number randomization and SYN timeouts, implementing any type of IP based session count restrictions could make the EVE servers incredibly vulnerable to certain types of DoS attacks.

I don't think the OP is aware of just how easy it is to appear to come from several different IPs when doing things on the internet. Anyone can setup a farm of super cheap proxy servers in the Amazon cloud and make themselves look like 20+ different IPs. It gets even more fun when you start using VPN services and things like Tor.

I would also like to know how the OP plans to get around multiple EVE clients running on one box under ESXi. VMs with full hardware acceleration for DirectX 3d rendering have been around for a while now. ESXi is free, RAM is cheap, and EVE is not a very demanding game to run for the CPU or GPU. Go go VM cluster based mining fleet.

Please don't make suggestions about highly technical things that you don't understand. It just shows engineers like me how little you actually know about computers.


TLDR;
As a professional network engineer I don't think the OP understands how monumentally stupid and impractical it would be to limit each client IP to one EVE account or one active EVE game session.


so in short what you're saying is that you know of an excelent way to limit 1 account per person online but you're not sharing?