These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3621 - 2015-03-02 22:14:26 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Eve-o-preview does nothing like as much as ISboxer's cut and paste of parts of windows where you need them - afaik all it offers is a miniaturised window of an alt that you can hotswap with your main screen though I only played with it briefly when I first heard of it. I already said I kind of grudgingly agree with videoFX anyways as it allows people with fewer hardware displays to engage with the higher levels of multiboxing complexity.
No idea why you're talking about tanking and alpha in PvP fleets, I've been talking about the incursion video. The only advantageous uses of multiboxing in pvp are capitals and bombers, neither really have that sudden requirement for you to broadcast for reps on a second by second basis due to warping off and cloaking or the general pace of capital fights (tidi included) although both are fairly important when talking about alpha now that you mention it, a few dread alts all in perfect sync really could test out the opponent's logi.
I really don't care for how long it takes to adjust and setup ISboxer, I once coded a synthesiser from scratch as a hobby, I'm not asking for that time back, I enjoyed the challenge. Did you do it for the challenge or to seek an in-game isk making advantage?
My Tengu comparison was supposed to illustrate that the game changes, adapt or die.


You can setup ISBoxer to do that as well. What you forgot to mention is that the current iteration of EVE-O-Preview does not allow cut-paste. I didn't look at it too hard, so I don't know if it uses Aero. If it does, it's no large leap to have it do the same cut-paste that VideoFX does.

You brought up alpha fleets first, which inherently brings up tanking at the same time. I ask you to re-read what I wrote as it is still valid. As for capitals, I don't know of a single ISBoxer who boxes a PVP capital fleet, so that doesn't count. Pantheon pilots still have to broadcast for reps when they need it. I'm certain that, had the Omega fleet doctrine (alpha naglfars) taken hold, we'd see some interesting stuff come out of that.

Your Tengu comparison was flawed as CCP wasn't removing Tengus from the game, their railgun sub, or alternatively their missile sub. My comparison was closer to being accurate.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3622 - 2015-03-02 22:17:04 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Your Tengu comparison was flawed as CCP wasn't removing Tengus from the game, their railgun sub, or alternatively their missile sub. My comparison was closer to being accurate.

They nerfed tengus, they nerfed multiboxing.

People are still multiboxing haven't you heard?

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Charadrass
Angry Germans
#3623 - 2015-03-02 22:17:34 UTC
you dont have to Switch that much of a target when you shoot a Tower.

but thats why god invented mouse sync

i put my mouse over the target i want to lock
hit my 10 keys and each box is using mouse sync to Position the mouse over my real mouse Position.
after that i shift left click with 10 keys and that target will be locked.

takes a bit of time ofc. but it is working
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3624 - 2015-03-02 22:24:54 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Your Tengu comparison was flawed as CCP wasn't removing Tengus from the game, their railgun sub, or alternatively their missile sub. My comparison was closer to being accurate.

They nerfed tengus, they nerfed multiboxing.
People are still multiboxing haven't you heard?


CCP tapped Tengus with a nerfbat.
They doomsdayed multiboxing with a nerftitan.

Nice straw man though. You did cost me 50m on a wager as to how long you lasted.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3625 - 2015-03-02 22:27:13 UTC
So whilst the changes were ineffective, they were actually hugely effective. No wonder this thread is so long if even the hardcore multiboxers themselves can't decide whether this was effective or not.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
KC Kamikaze
Blue-Fire
#3626 - 2015-03-02 22:27:15 UTC
CCP: We're gonna refer you the EULA as it clearly defines the rules (even though it has more grey areas than accurately defined rules). They don't care. It's been 3 months. We won't get anything better. Get over it.

ISBoxers: The change is fair / the change is not fair ... we can live with it though so plz don't ban us.

"ISBoxer is cheating": You have the right to your opinion, and we have our limitations as set forth in the 'Clearly Defined' EULA. You need to get over it the same as we do.

Anyone who uses the term ISBotter: You're a moron. Biomassing would be your greatest contribution to the community.


We need to kill this thread. All opinions and beliefs have been covered and this has become a 185 page pissing match with no direction or purpose.
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#3627 - 2015-03-02 22:28:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Kinete Jenius
Eli Apol wrote:
So whilst the changes were ineffective, they were actually hugely effective. No wonder this thread is so long if even the hardcore multiboxers themselves can't decide whether this was effective or not.

Aren't you quoting the guy that got banned? Seems super effective to me.


I haven't been able to run the last week so I haven't been banned yet for using windowed mode. I imagine it's coming though.

When it does I'll probably move on to one of the many free or nearly free options that exist today. PLaying eve with one account only is far too boring.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3628 - 2015-03-02 22:33:21 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
So whilst the changes were ineffective, they were actually hugely effective. No wonder this thread is so long if even the hardcore multiboxers themselves can't decide whether this was effective or not.


It was ineffective at stopping multiboxers who were following the new EULA until they started cracking down on rollovers, round robins, and simply playing fast. It's rather effective at generating negative news and having people reconsider life choices to play this game, and it's VERY effective at exposing the hypocrisy in CCP and the GM corp.

But I commend you on the faulty causality fallacy. It's been a while since I heard that one. You also participated in an "ignore the question" fallacy, and it's corollary, the "ignore the evidence" fallacy.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3629 - 2015-03-02 22:40:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
So a rollover, which produces a click from nothingness, is surprisingly against the new EULA preventing input duplications.

Round robins I agree can be done legitimately but I have yet to see footage of someone that was wrongly banned, which is why I chipped in to this thread again after a couple of months of absence. Please enlighten me with this evidence.

I have no idea what fallacies you're talking about. What evidence have you put forwards other than the one youtube video I picked apart?

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3630 - 2015-03-02 22:53:52 UTC
A rollover is nothing more than an on-screen keyboard whose keys are sensitive to "on mouse focus" or "on mouse boundary" OS triggers, not some magic voodoo conjured up by a corner magician. Just because you don't understand how it works does not mean it's a bot, a hack, a cheat, or a macro.

It's very hard to give you proof that people were banned when CCP has a thing against that sort of thing, however, if you hop onto our forums and ask, you'll no doubt receive.

I was referring to the parts where you ignored all my arguments about ISBoxer, third party programs, the EULA, and 6A3. You instead attacked me as a person instead of my arguments, and those arguments which you had no excuse or counter-argument, you ignored.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3631 - 2015-03-02 23:02:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Eli Apol
lol of course I understand how it works. Are you clicking or are you just moving the mouse? One click = One action has been a pretty clear message from the start, not 'one click, then move the mouse across each activation box' to send n actions.

As I already pointed out, someone with a 1080p monitor could have 1080 1 pixel high boxes along the edge of their screen and just swipe the mouse down through them and activate 1080 modules you'd have to be incredibly dumb if you think that kind of setup doesn't construe input multiplication through software. So yeah glad people are getting banned for being dumb and trying to game the system.

You're the one saying I'm disregarding evidence, show me some, the burden of proof is on your side of the argument not mine. I can't 'not show' you evidence of people not being wrongfully banned for my side of the argument or must I just accept your anecdotal pleas of 'This guy I knew totally got banned and he was totally legit'

edit: I just happened upon a thread in dual boxing which shows your 'wrongfully banned' person using input duplication at 17s in the video to change overviews across all clients as well... he didn't even make 20s without breaking the EULA.

le sigh

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
ashley Eoner
#3632 - 2015-03-02 23:23:24 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Eli Apol wrote:
lol of course I understand how it works. Are you clicking or are you just moving the mouse? One click = One action has been a pretty clear message from the start, not 'one click, then move the mouse across each activation box' to send n actions.

As I already pointed out, someone with a 1080p monitor could have 1080 1 pixel high boxes along the edge of their screen and just swipe the mouse down through them and activate 1080 modules you'd have to be incredibly dumb if you think that kind of setup doesn't construe input multiplication through software. So yeah glad people are getting banned for being dumb and trying to game the system.

You're the one saying I'm disregarding evidence, show me some, the burden of proof is on your side of the argument not mine. I can't 'not show' you evidence of people not being wrongfully banned for my side of the argument or must I just accept your anecdotal pleas of 'This guy I knew totally got banned and he was totally legit'

edit: I just happened upon a thread in dual boxing which shows your 'wrongfully banned' person using input duplication at 17s in the video to change overviews across all clients as well... he didn't even make 20s without breaking the EULA.

le sigh

It says in this very thread in the first post that using the repeater to adjust windows and such is perfectly legal. Nothing illegal about changing the overview tab..
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3633 - 2015-03-02 23:26:14 UTC
OP wrote:
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)


Swing and a miss.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
ashley Eoner
#3634 - 2015-03-02 23:27:35 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
OP wrote:
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)


Swing and a miss.

Window positions and arrangements... arrangement.... arrangement....
Charadrass
Angry Germans
#3635 - 2015-03-02 23:28:03 UTC
i can use a Touchscreen with displayed keys and "rollover" my fingers over the Buttons
that would be a rollover in the most primitive way. and still allowed in the eula.
so rollover with a mouse activating ONE Action is NOT violating the eula.
Eli Apol
Definitely a nullsec alt
#3636 - 2015-03-02 23:29:30 UTC
ashley Eoner wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
OP wrote:
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)


Swing and a miss.

Window positions and arrangements... arrangement.... arrangement....


I made it bold this time for you.

but what would I know, I'm just a salvager
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3637 - 2015-03-02 23:30:01 UTC
If someone has a supercomputer that can host as many EVE clients to fill 1080 modules, he should get a medal.

Sarcasm aside, the simple act of moving a mouse across the screen is registered. Mouse XY detection is nothing new nor is it copyrighted by ISBoxer. Same thing with "Mouse Focus Gain". It's quite easy to detect.

Actually no, the burden of proof is on you for claiming that ISBoxer is as bad as botting. I presented my arguments about why EFT/PYFA/EVEMon/Fuzzworks earlier in the thread (within the last 5 pages), not to mention my numerous other posts earlier in the thread.

If you'd link the video, we can get on the same page for that.
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3638 - 2015-03-02 23:30:17 UTC
ashley Eoner wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
OP wrote:
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)


Swing and a miss.

Window positions and arrangements... arrangement.... arrangement....


CCP Falcon wrote:
Window positions and arrangements (of the EVE Online client in your operating system’s desktop environment)


Try again.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.
ashley Eoner
#3639 - 2015-03-02 23:30:58 UTC
Eli Apol wrote:
ashley Eoner wrote:
Eli Apol wrote:
OP wrote:
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)


Swing and a miss.

Window positions and arrangements... arrangement.... arrangement....


I made it bold this time for you.

Quote:
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.



What consequence is there in game for changing over view tabs? When I change my overview tab can you tell by sitting next to me in space?
Kaarous Aldurald
Black Hydra Consortium.
#3640 - 2015-03-02 23:32:19 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:

Actually no, the burden of proof is on you for claiming that ISBoxer is as bad as botting. I presented my arguments about why EFT/PYFA/EVEMon/Fuzzworks earlier in the thread (within the last 5 pages), not to mention my numerous other posts earlier in the thread.


Actually, the burden was on me to laugh at that comparison. And I did, with gusto.

Trying to justify actual cheating on the basis of freaking Fuzzworks is the flimsiest justification imaginable.

"Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws."

One of ours, ten of theirs.

Best Meltdown Ever.