EVE General Discussion

You keep ignoring the fact that ISBoxer (aka "the multiboxing software") was mentioned in the Third Party Policies from spring of 2013 until last week. Quote:



For over a year-and-a-half, CCP had posted on its website a statement proclaiming that ISBoxer (aka "the multiboxing software") violated provisions of the EULA, but that CCP would just not enforce the EULA. CCP also retained the right to prohibit the use of ISBoxer if the company feels that the software gave an unfair advantage to ISBoxer users.

Well, the day that CCP feels it has to take action came last week, and ISBoxer users were given 35 days notice. But CCP chose not to ban the entire program, just the optional parts that it felt gave ISBoxer users "an unfair advantage." Which means that people like Goonswarm fleet commander Lazarus Telraven can continue to use ISBoxer to not only FC, but to stream on Twitch as well. Other people can continue to enjoy the Windows FX features that allow them to run more clients on older computers than they would normally be able to when they are multiboxing.

You got to use input broadcasting for a very long time, a practice that seems to violate Section 6A3 of the EVE EULA. Now CCP has done a review and decided that input broadcasting is overpowered and needs to be banned in all cases that affect the EVE universe. I haven't read or heard anyone explain why input broadcasting is not overpowered. All I've heard is that CCP didn't ban people for it before and they shouldn't change their minds. I haven't heard an explanation of why input broadcasting is good for EVE. Since CCP believes that input broadcasting is bad for EVE, I would expect somone to at least try to explain why CCP is wrong.

OMG...yet another argument relying on an IN GAME feature that is available to everyone. Drone assist, fleet warping, oh wait and of course autopilot. Why that is automation and cheating! Cheating not only sanctioned by CCP but aided and abetted by CCP. Why its tantamount to murder...or something bad at any rate. These features are a pure outrage and should be nerfed immediately. Oh, and docking up and going AFK. Why that's just horrible too, because ~reasons I'll fill in later~.

I will add one more thing.

The worst thing about this decision, is that its motivation (in part) appears to me to be to attract new, bright eyed players to the game without some unwashed veteran assaulting them with 30 bombers, or eating up their ice fields with a locust swarm of mining ships.

I've realized one thing about EVE. The game is designed for a special type of human being who comes with a blend of patience, sociopathy, persistence, intelligence, and sociability (the proportions are different from EVE player to EVE player). This game could be altered to the point that the mainstream MMO player could wander in and feel comfortable, but I feel that would require that EVE as we know it is destroyed.

The hardcore input multiplexer is obssessed with the game. They like it enough that they've spent hours upon days upon weeks trying to perfect their setup and skill up tens of accounts and spend hours gathering ISK or kills. It takes a special brand of "crazy" to go to that level, and it is without a doubt the type of player who loves EVE.

CCP has every right to amend the EULA. I think a company also should try to do the best they can for customers who seem to really like and enjoy the game.

"35 days and then GTFO" is a terrible way of handling the change. CCP is kicking players out when there is absolutely no need to handle things that way.

Note, ISBoxer is not banned, just its optional capability to conduct keystroke duplication across multiple clients. I keep reading and hearing that ISBoxer users claim that the removal of keystroke duplication will make things more awkward and require more keystrokes, but that it won't keep them from being able to effectively use ISBoxer to multibox.

Also, I wonder if the changes in interpretation and the introduction of new terminology such as "input broadcasting" and "input multiplexing" will require a rewrite of parts of the EULA, specifically Section 6A3. If there is a material change in the EULA that requires players to accept a new version of the EULA after downtime on 1 January, then players will have the option of not pressing the "Accept" button, thus terminating the EULA. Here is what Section 5C3 states:



So according to this, it is possible that you could receive a prorated refund, assuming that players will need to re-accept the EULA. I think that means, however, that you have to completely stop playing EVE. No stopping 8 accounts and continuing to play on one. However, CCP Falcon's statement did state they were just interpreting the rules differently, not changing any of the wording. We'll find out on 1 January, but if you really feel strongly, pay attention and don't just click the "Accept" button if the EULA shows up on the screen.

Finally, I have to point out the weaselly worded final sentence of the section of the Third Party Policies I quoted: "Please use such third party applications or other software at your own risk."

Quite frankly, I wish CCP had banned the use of ISBoxer when the issue of the software engaging in client modification was first brought up by Team Security at the beginning of 2013. But ISBoxer users won the debate and we got the Third Party Policies instead.

While I don;t agree with a 4 digit code or mini games, yes, the way they should approach this is by making the gameplay more involved. Mutliboxers do what they do and will continue to do so even without key broadcasting because the gameplay elements they are multiboxing are too simple and require no skill. Mining for example has needed a complete overhaul for just about ever.

I highlighted the bit you missed.

Of course the player using isboxer, because they've used tools available to make themselves more efficient. I make more in trading because I use tools which allow me to spend as little time as possible collating and analysing information. It's no different except the tools I use will never be available publicly, not even for a price.

And following this change, you realise that people with isboxer will *still* make more isk, right? The main benefit of isboxer isn;t even key broadcasting. I'd say at the cop is the CPU/FPS management, followed by Video FX, then it would probably be key broadcasting. So what was the point in removing broadcasting?

Legally CCP can keep every dollar already relinquished to them, and not have to refund a single cent.

I think my point was simply that EVE is not a game that people are kicking down the doors to come subscribe to. It doesn't seem like it's a great idea to kick existing customers (who happen to really like the game) and keep their money in the event of a completely altered EULA.

These ISBoxers aren't ragequitters who can't deal with the fundamentals of EVE gameplay. They are enthusiastic gamers like us who feel terrible that their style of gameplay, which is uniquely tied to a large number of concurrent game subscriptions, has received less of a heads up than most skill and naming transitions and that CCP doesn't care that they've already paid for a game that is being totally altered (as far as their style of play is concerned).

Wrong. See this image straight from CCP. As long as 1 click or keypress = 1 click or keypress on 1 client, then it's still within the rules. Round robin keybinds do exactly that. Even usiing good window management/multiple monitor then clicking though each client hammering the F1 button does that.

And the rule is the rule. The "spirit" of the rule is that you can't use key broadcasting. Round robin keybinds are not broadcasting in any way shape or form. Neither is using VideoFX to line up all your clients modules next to each other in a single block. Neither is laying out your windows and clicking through them really fast.

So by all means continue sitting around whining because CCPs dumb ruling will have very little effect on isboxer users. That's *exactly* what I've been saying all along. If they want to fix the problem then they need to address the problem - as in the fact that the gameplay elements in question are too simple and easy to replicate.

Who knows? I guess we'll see. CCP seems to word things as to give them all the discretion they want in matters like this, so I doubt going all lawyer on them will be all that effective.


Many in my boxing community called it quits shortly after the announcement. The ones that are trying to adapt are looking at greatly reduced effectiveness, depending on the activity. Mining may still be possible, though on a much more limited scale. Not sure about bombers. As for incursions (what I did), if you want to attempt a 3rd wave OTA without broadcasting, then be my guest. It may be possible, but at that point I'd rather go do something else with my time.


I agree that a higher level of interactivity with many/most activities within EVE would be a welcome change.

There's always people having knee-jerk reactions to changes. Give them some time to look at it properly and they'll realise it's barely a change.

Use Video FX with mouse and keyboard passthrough and cluster your controls.

oh yeah? well...

anyway, I will not be a happy camper if rapid sequences are an issue.


clearly. the only software allowed to provide an unfair benefit is the client itself.