EVE General Discussion

That's absolutely fine so long as it's only sending commands to one client at a time

So....all of isboxer banned by sometime 2015? That's probably whats going to happen if ccp realizes that the multiboxing community is getting around the "spirit of the law," as it were.

Other than that, alt-tabbing multiple bombers in a coordinated bombing run without external software doesn't work particularly well, I've tried. If isboxer get's reduced to that level of effectiveness, I have no problem with it.

So yeah, good changes overall. If more are needed, I'm sure ccp will continue along the proper path.

The interesting bit to me is, CCP is effectively banning a behaviour with this rule. The "old" input duplication rule was basically in place because CCP couldn't tell the diff between "chopsticks and tape on 20 keyboards" and a software program. IIRC my EVE history, one of the early implementers of ISBoxer was banned at first, then unbanned when he demonstrated the "mouse and chopsticks" method.

Now CCP is saying, ALL of those techniques are banned. Software, KVM switches, taping your hardware together, you name it., it all falls under the same heading.

Now, if CCP were truly evil, they'd implement a sort of "pause" feature for client windows that aren't the active window on the desktop. Don't know if they could do that technically, but setting the client up so that in order to receive commands, it must be the active "clicked-on" window would make input duplication a tad more difficult to pull off.

Technology man, what can't it do!

Still, it'll be interesting to say the least, just to see where CCP goes with this. They could take a really hard-line stance and say "If it looks like input duplication on our side, it's input duplication, we don't care what you're doing to pull it off".

It may come about that the only "safe" way to pull it off is to implement a realistic delay between each input, that generally matches the time it'd take for someone to alt-tab and issue each command to each separate window. Doing that takes away a big chunk of what makes input duplication powerful though (which may be exactly what CCP is gunning for).

This.

They pretty much will be looking at simultaneous inputs being received, and potentially small delays, but how big those delays can be is limited by how fast EVE players manually multiboxing can click (which can be pretty damn quick). If they set the threshold too high, they'll start banning manual multiboxers by mistake. They are coming at it from the wrong angle. If they simply fixed the gameplay so it was more interactive and more rewarding to pay more individual attention to, it would restrict how much you can realistically do without looking at each client.

This. When Pantheon Slowcats and Boot Domis were FOTM, CCP didn't remove sentries or nerf carriers into the ground. They sensibly balanced the mechanic (drone assist) so you couldn't get 250+ Archons assisting 1250 Gardes to a single Loki.
If CCP balanced the major "spotlights" that ISBoxers use (namely, bombers, miners, and incursions) with sensible mechanics (4-digit arm code, mining minigame, reduce ISK and buff LP rewards) then you'd see the changes in the game that you'd want to with the added bonus of rewarding active players (mining minigame), encouraging player interaction (incursion focus on LP), and more focus on groups like Bombers Bar or Renegade Squadron (bomb code).

Dear ccp,
Can you please tell us what the scope of this change is? Why are you wanting to make this change? How will this help the game? What are your expected results?

If bombers were an example of undesirable results, have you considered simply banning it considering pvp? Is pve (and mining ) different from the desired results?
You may be able to use a surgical strike, by banning in PvP situations, vs a broad stroke depending on your desired outcome.

Thanks,

Still not seeing why ISBoxers should have to deal with what is effectively a ban on the software when there's nothing wrong with it other than hurt feelings.

Reducing ISK payouts and increasing LP would further deepen the ISK sink involved in the CONCORD LP store, and would quell those who claim incursions is nothing but an ISK faucet whilst ignoring all evidence presented by CCP that there's a massive ISK sink there as well. It would also necessitate, for those who don't market PVP themselves, more interaction between players and the LP buyers.

Another way to "break the drone assist limit" as you say would be to remove it completely. Doesn't mean it'd be a good change.

This whole situation is insane.

1.) CCP says you can't use the multicast feature in ISBoxer.
2.) Well with video FX (which CCP has said windows management features are fine) I get the same functionality, just have to click once per client.

So in summary CCP is saying that if you have 1 client you click the button 1 time. If you have 10 clients you click the button 10 times.

Is that really what CCP is saying? Because that is kinda silly.

What exactly is CCP trying to enforce? What is their goal? Why the secrecy around their goals? I'm very confused.

If they goal is they want everyone to have one client (as CCP Falcon has stated in other forums), then this isn't going to work? Unless the plan is to simply ban anyone who is mining with more than a few characters and just ignore the content of the original post? In which case why even have the thread?

CCP really needs to clarify what they are going for because one half or the other is going to be disappointed and that isn't good customer service in my book.

Or maybe keeping everyone confused is their plan, but that isn't very good customer service either.

For the life of me I don't understand why CCP is happy to sit back and have their community go at each other like this, instead of clearly stating what their goals are. Then again, maybe that is the plan. Maybe we are entertainment for bored CCP employees who like to read our forums and watch us fight like little kids.

I'm tired...so very tired. Time for some sleep.

you need clarification for that? See one of the first pages, 1 input = 1 action. If this is true: you have nothing to worry about. 1 input = more than 1 action: not allowed.