These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3901 - 2015-03-26 22:53:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Sir Constantin wrote:
TLDR: People want VFX to be allowed so they can import pieces of Eve into their 3'rd party software on pc or tablets so they can go fullretard there with rollovers and all the things.

How about HTFU and play the game as we 99% of players do.
Roll

It's called comprehension. Look it up. How many special people are going to repeat this as if it's an accurate representation of what's going on here, even though they've not bothered to actually read the posts?

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3902 - 2015-03-26 23:05:56 UTC
Sir Constantin wrote:
TLDR: People want VFX to be allowed so they can import pieces of Eve into their 3'rd party software on pc or tablets so they can go fullretard there with rollovers and all the things.

How about HTFU and play the game as we 99% of players do.


Wrong, actually. A better tl;dr would be: People want CCP to stop killing emergent gameplay simply because a select few individuals cried about it long enough. Especially since this program does not violate any part of 6A2 and input broadcasting is nowhere to be found in the EULA. CCP might as well remove fleets and declare that you can't fly with your friends.

As for the "99%" comment, you must've missed when CCP broke down the demographics of EVE, which is where the famous "leveling my raven" joke came from. I'm not a station trader. I don't move 1T isk / month through orders. If I wanted to play "Market PVP Online" I'd play the stock market. Other people live in a WH 24/7 and never see the light of day, so to speak. Attempting to force us to do a certain thing in-game has always lead to disaster. We just want to play the game the way we want to.
Rosewalker
Khumaak Flying Circus
#3903 - 2015-03-26 23:59:37 UTC  |  Edited by: Rosewalker
Lucas Kell wrote:
Rosewalker wrote:
If you use ISBoxer just like you would Eve-O Preview, then you won't get banned. It's when things like putting 12 capacitor readout wheels and other things that allow you to control 12 clients from one window where you get ISBoxer changing the way the game is played. I've watched some YouTube vidoes demonstrating the advanced capabilities of ISBoxer and the guy definitely was playing a different game that I do.
This right here is a problem though. As we found out, they have no client side detection, so there's no way to know if someone is tiling their windows as long as they aren't using them "too efficiently". How is is fair to allow a guy with scouts for example to tile all of his local windows and d-scans into a single screen to protect his ratter, or tile all his ratters information panels into a single place to view them more quickly? Answer is, it's not, but it's impossible to ban.

So what's happening here is the most obvious ISBoxer users and the most efficient manual multiboxers will get banned, while people who are less efficient but still gaining a massive advantage over "normal" players get away without an issue.


The question is, how long will CCP monitor a player before pulling out the ban hammer? CCP stated that they are not using automated means to ban players for input broadcasting/multiplexing at this time and that they are looking at players over several sessions. If they were using client side detection, then it gets easier. But with a big data approach with everything being done server-side? I would think that someone doing everything manually would show a lot more slip-ups than someone using advanced multi-boxing software, but if one of those incredible LoL or StarCraft guys decides to play EVE? I don't know how that would look in the logs.

I'd suggest doing what I did a few years ago with botting and RMT. Watch what's happening and publicize what you see. You've got a nice blog already, use it. Being a watchdog isn't a bad thing. And that would be something I'd read.

The Nosy Gamer - CCP Random: "hehe, falls under the category: nice try, but no. ;)"

Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3904 - 2015-03-27 00:34:19 UTC
Rosewalker wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Rosewalker wrote:
If you use ISBoxer just like you would Eve-O Preview, then you won't get banned. It's when things like putting 12 capacitor readout wheels and other things that allow you to control 12 clients from one window where you get ISBoxer changing the way the game is played. I've watched some YouTube vidoes demonstrating the advanced capabilities of ISBoxer and the guy definitely was playing a different game that I do.
This right here is a problem though. As we found out, they have no client side detection, so there's no way to know if someone is tiling their windows as long as they aren't using them "too efficiently". How is is fair to allow a guy with scouts for example to tile all of his local windows and d-scans into a single screen to protect his ratter, or tile all his ratters information panels into a single place to view them more quickly? Answer is, it's not, but it's impossible to ban.
So what's happening here is the most obvious ISBoxer users and the most efficient manual multiboxers will get banned, while people who are less efficient but still gaining a massive advantage over "normal" players get away without an issue.


The question is, how long will CCP monitor a player before pulling out the ban hammer? CCP stated that they are not using automated means to ban players for input broadcasting/multiplexing at this time and that they are looking at players over several sessions. If they were using client side detection, then it gets easier. But with a big data approach with everything being done server-side? I would think that someone doing everything manually would show a lot more slip-ups than someone using advanced multi-boxing software, but if one of those incredible LoL or StarCraft guys decides to play EVE? I don't know how that would look in the logs.
I'd suggest doing what I did a few years ago with botting and RMT. Watch what's happening and publicize what you see. You've got a nice blog already, use it. Being a watchdog isn't a bad thing. And that would be something I'd read.

CCP killed the last real "watchdog" website/blog (kugu) after they ragebanned them for exposing the T20 scandal.
Marsha Mallow
#3905 - 2015-03-27 00:36:43 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
CCP killed the last real "watchdog" website/blog (kugu) after they ragebanned them for exposing the T20 scandal.

Err, no

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day

Jason Xado
Doomheim
#3906 - 2015-03-27 01:04:38 UTC
I got to thinking about this a bit more and I think I know what is going on here.

CCP is hostile to people who prefer solo game play. They only want non solo players in Eve. Therefore they wish to take away the tools that solo players have from being on equal footing with groups.

Well played CCP. Well played.
Aru Kacbis Danvill
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#3907 - 2015-03-27 01:23:23 UTC
Jason Xado wrote:
I got to thinking about this a bit more and I think I know what is going on here.

CCP is hostile to people who prefer solo game play. They only want non solo players in Eve. Therefore they wish to take away the tools that solo players have from being on equal footing with groups.

Well played CCP. Well played.


Except to do so they'll have to make their own OS! Hahahah!

http://www.reddit.com/r/Eve/comments/2z1dn6/isboxer_essay/

https://scontent-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/11037717_10202501843106735_4596834953263635890_n.jpg?oh=940016d62d1e31a87ecc7362438ee1c6&oe=557244E3

Yep..

Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3908 - 2015-03-27 07:46:48 UTC
Rosewalker wrote:
The question is, how long will CCP monitor a player before pulling out the ban hammer? CCP stated that they are not using automated means to ban players for input broadcasting/multiplexing at this time and that they are looking at players over several sessions. If they were using client side detection, then it gets easier. But with a big data approach with everything being done server-side? I would think that someone doing everything manually would show a lot more slip-ups than someone using advanced multi-boxing software, but if one of those incredible LoL or StarCraft guys decides to play EVE? I don't know how that would look in the logs.
But that's the point I raised in the round table. VFX/Round robin is manual, so it will show just as many slip ups as someone using no tools. All it does is group your binds and screens into one area, it doesn't automate anything, so it doesn't eliminate human error. If they study someone and find them to be too efficient, they have absolutely no way of knowing if that person is simply tiling their screens over 3 monitors or using VFX to chop up their clients. They are guessing.

That's an absolutely ludicrous way to go about banning people from a game, and quite honestly there's no gain from doing it. Since all this has started, the game hasn't improved. We're not logging in going "wow, I'm so glad multiplexing is gone, my gameplay is just so much better!". Basically nothing changed. Ice is still owned by multiboxers, single man incursion and bombing fleets still exist, and traders still dominate ISK making more than any other multiboxer can ever dream of. So other than reducing subs from the giants and throwing all multiboxers at risk, manual or not, this whole thing has been a pointless endeavour.

Rosewalker wrote:
I'd suggest doing what I did a few years ago with botting and RMT. Watch what's happening and publicize what you see. You've got a nice blog already, use it. Being a watchdog isn't a bad thing. And that would be something I'd read.
How can one be a watchdog when CCP can do no wrong? You even had the same opinion, when someone says they did nothing and didn't use tools when they got banned by CCP, they were lying. That's what you said, that's what CCP said. As far as CCP are concerned they get nearly no false positives, because out of everyone they ban very few people are able to prove they did nothing wrong, primarily because they only have their word. If CCP decide to ban someone then in the eyes of the community they were using tools, regardless of what the actual truth is. Nothing anyone posts on a blog will change that.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.

Charadrass
Angry Germans
#3909 - 2015-03-27 08:54:53 UTC
Jason Xado wrote:
I got to thinking about this a bit more and I think I know what is going on here.

CCP is hostile to people who prefer solo game play. They only want non solo players in Eve. Therefore they wish to take away the tools that solo players have from being on equal footing with groups.

Well played CCP. Well played.


I could play with my 10 boxes solo.
i don't
the reason for me to 10box is the amount of attentive is need to operate them while beeing fc of an HQ incursion fleet for example.
i fall asleep with one ship.
i tried 20 boxes. it was too much for me. so i went down to 10. which i found a good amount for me to be concentrated on while fcing and having fun.

i dont 10 box cause of money. i have more money to spent in my whole life in eve online :) mostly out of trading. <-- nothing to do with multiboxing.

so ccp is trying to force me into a less attractive gameplay.

again. i am not a solo player.
yes i fly 10 boxes, but i dont like to fly them alone.
Tiberius Zol
Moira.
#3910 - 2015-03-27 09:01:02 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:

Wrong, actually. A better tl;dr would be: People want CCP to stop killing emergent gameplay simply because a select few individuals cried about it long enough. Especially since this program does not violate any part of 6A2 and input broadcasting is nowhere to be found in the EULA. CCP might as well remove fleets and declare that you can't fly with your friends..


The only "minority" crying for about 200 pages, are you few guys who desperately search for workarounds to use your tools.
You want CCP to justify their bans? They don't have to.
You want to dictate CCP how they have to work? Good luck.
You say, you pay for it? No one soerce you to do. Just leave the game.

Maybe it is not obvious to you few guys, but CCP can ban whoever they want without a reason.
And using tools like you do is a good reason. You didn't get banned yet? Lucky guys. But this doesn't mean you're right and CCP wrong.

Mr. Tibbers on twitter: @Mr_Tibbers

Mr. Tibbers Blog: www.eve-versum.de

Charadrass
Angry Germans
#3911 - 2015-03-27 09:39:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Charadrass
Tiberius Zol wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:

Wrong, actually. A better tl;dr would be: People want CCP to stop killing emergent gameplay simply because a select few individuals cried about it long enough. Especially since this program does not violate any part of 6A2 and input broadcasting is nowhere to be found in the EULA. CCP might as well remove fleets and declare that you can't fly with your friends..


The only "minority" crying for about 200 pages, are you few guys who desperately search for workarounds to use your tools.
You want CCP to justify their bans? They don't have to.
You want to dictate CCP how they have to work? Good luck.
You say, you pay for it? No one soerce you to do. Just leave the game.

Maybe it is not obvious to you few guys, but CCP can ban whoever they want without a reason.
And using tools like you do is a good reason. You didn't get banned yet? Lucky guys. But this doesn't mean you're right and CCP wrong.


The only "minority" crying for about 200 pages, are you few guys who desperately search for workarounds to use your tools.
- not everyone is writing in the forums you should know that. you cant extrapolate the numbers posting to the numbers against or for multiboxing. you just cant

You want CCP to justify their bans? They don't have to.
- yes they have to, at least me is paying a lot of his accounts with real money. if they ban me without justifying that, they would get a problem with my lawyer. so does any other service provider which ccp is. nothing more. a service provider. they can't just cut you out without justifying why. if you break the rules with botting, ok, but they have to proof it.
and don't try to make it laughable with the famous "its only a game" sentence. it is real money which we give ccp.

You want to dictate CCP how they have to work? Good luck.
- You should really buy goggles,. We dont want to dictate CCP anything. We do want CCP to ANSWER CUSTOMER QUESTIONS.. and that is not a dictate, that is mandatory for a service provider. We are paying their salary.

You say, you pay for it? No one soerce you to do. Just leave the game.
- If youre paying for a service. like we do. and you change the service one sided. and you cant use the service the way you are used to, you are able to go to court. not a lot of players would do that, but you have that option on the table.
i know at least one multiboxer who is still using broadcast cause he took a lawyer and wrote ccp that he would took them to court if he get banned.
no i dont took the lawyer.
i prefer trying to talk with ccp.
still no answer.
sadly...
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#3912 - 2015-03-27 10:43:24 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
I have removed some rule breaking posts

The Rules:
31. Abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers is prohibited.

CCP operate a zero tolerance policy on abuse of CCP employees and ISD volunteers. This includes but is not limited to personal attacks, trolling, “outing” of CCP employee or ISD volunteer player identities, and the use of any former player identities when referring to the aforementioned parties.
Our forums are designed to be a place where players and developers can exchange ideas in a polite and friendly manner for the betterment of EVE Online. Players who attack or abuse employees of CCP, or ISD volunteers, will be permanently banned from the EVE Online forums across all their accounts with no recourse, and may also be subject to action against their game accounts.


Edit:
12. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.

The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a support ticket under the Community & Forums Category.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)

Sgt Ocker
What Corp is it
#3913 - 2015-03-27 11:51:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Sgt Ocker
Sir Constantin wrote:
TLDR: People want VFX to be allowed so they can import pieces of Eve into their 3'rd party software on pc or tablets so they can go fullretard there with rollovers and all the things.

How about HTFU and play the game as we 99% of players do.

I think you would be unhappily surprised at how few players use a single character.

I've said it before and still believe - Multi boxers are the backbone of Eve, without them, it would be a very different game.
20,000 individual accounts subbed every month is not going to keep CCP afloat, hell that wouldn't even pay the electricity bill.
Whereas 1 person subbing 20 accounts a month multiplied by the amount of multi boxers = money in the bank.
Just in the small group I play the game with, there are a little over 100 individual accounts spread between 8 of us. (around 80 of which are now unsubbed or will be when current game time expires)

CCP keep making multiboxing rules vaguer and vaguer, with no clear instructions/rules for players (paying customers). Eventually multiboxers stop subbing multiple accounts, personally i have gone from 11 down to 2 and have no intention of resubbing more until CCP publishes clear precise rules for multiboxers.

I don't want to take the chance of breaking some vague, subsection of the EULA which depending on who's interpreting it can be used to ban me.
Easy fix - No more multiboxing.

My opinions are mine.

  If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - - Just don't bother Hating - I don't care

It really is getting harder and harder to justify $23 a month for each sub.

Jason Xado
Doomheim
#3914 - 2015-03-27 12:37:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Jason Xado
Charadrass wrote:

I could play with my 10 boxes solo.


Sure people can continue to multibox 10+ accounts, and they will.

CCP really doesn't mind if you multibox with a few accounts, so they really can't ban the 10+ account people and leave alone the few account people as that would look bad. Nor would they want to, as the people with just a couple accounts are not on a level playing field with large groups, so there isn't a problem.

But what they can do, and have done, is take away the tools that a player with 10+ accounts have to level the playing field against larger groups. They don't want the solo players to be effective against the group players, so they have removed a tool that allowed the solo player to be effective against the group players. CCP doesn't mind you being a solo player as long as you can't defend yourself against larger groups.

Anyway, just a theory. I use to have 12 accounts and peacefully mined ice in Providence. With ISBoxer I was able to defend myself against larger hostile groups. Now I no longer have the tools to do that. As a solo player that limits my options, hence the whole CCP doesn't want you to be a solo player theory. CCP is trying to force solo players to abandon their play style or be demoted into irrelevance.

It's CCPs game, they can do what they want. But at least now I have a good idea the "why" behind the madness :-)
Charadrass
Angry Germans
#3915 - 2015-03-27 14:09:58 UTC
so your point is that ccp is banning players who use their boxes against others?

possible.
but a larger group is always able to take out a boxer.
you just have to shoot the anchor :P
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3916 - 2015-03-27 14:18:30 UTC
Charadrass wrote:
so your point is that ccp is banning players who use their boxes against others?
possible.
but a larger group is always able to take out a boxer.
you just have to shoot the anchor :P


Hell, even a smaller group is able to take out a boxer. EWAR is there for a reason. There's a video out there of a multiboxer using Harbingers who was destroyed by a smaller group because of EWAR and fitting.
eXeler0n
Shark Coalition
#3917 - 2015-03-27 15:51:36 UTC  |  Edited by: eXeler0n
I have to say, that Charadrass is totally right.

I hate it, that I can't play more characters at the same time as my own personal skills allow me to. Unfortunately CCP has not integrated any multiboxing functionality into the client and also they banned every external tools that helps me to achive more then I could only with my personal skills.

I think this is unfair, as I now have to play as a normal player and can't feel any better, stronger or even cooler then other players. May I should quit Eve because now I have realized that I'm not a pro-gramer. Instead I'm only a small player like all the other players out there and because of this I feel really mad.

Instead of adepting this I think it's the best way to flame the forums and threaten other players and CCP with my lawyer. This is the only educated and mature way to handle my own inability to play (or leave) a game the way the create intended it to.

eXeler0n

============================

Quafe:  http://quafe.de

Blogpack:  http://eveblogs.de

Jason Xado
Doomheim
#3918 - 2015-03-27 16:07:23 UTC
eXeler0n wrote:
I have to say, that Charadrass is totally right.

I hate it, that I can't play more characters at the same time as my own personal skills allow me to. Unfortunately CCP has not integrated any multiboxing functionality into the client and also they banned every external tools that helps me to achive more then I could only with my personal skills.

I think this is unfair, as I now have to play as a normal player and can't feel any better, stronger or even cooler then other players. May I should quit Eve because now I have realized that I'm not a pro-gramer. Instead I'm only a small player like all the other players out there and because of this I feel really mad.

Instead of adepting this I think it's the best way to flame the forums and threaten other players and CCP with my lawyer. This is the only educated and mature way to handle my own inability to play (or leave) a game the way the create intended it to.


Exactly my point. CCP doesn't want solo players to have tools to compete with groups. If you don't want to join a group then you just have to live with the fact that CCP sees you as a second class citizen of the game.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#3919 - 2015-03-27 16:15:39 UTC
eXeler0n wrote:
cherry picking fallacy, straw man fallacy, and wrong to boot


1/10 made me respond.
1) ISBoxer does not allow a player to exceed the ISK/hour that an identical fleet can earn. ISBoxer does not allow a player to take a trip to Europe and let the program continue to earn ISK for the player. ISBoxer does not modify a player's guns to do 140k alpha every second with perfect tracking and 250km optimal.

2) We did adapt by using RoundRobin and Rollover, as well as VideoFX dashboards. ISBoxer's Round Robin and Rollover features are allowed by CCP Falcon's own statements but we've been banned for using them.

2.5) We just had a 5-boxer who was banned while mining in a belt without using any broadcasting tools.

3) While I do not agree with Aru's methods, if that is what it takes to get CCP to respond, then so be it.

4) The fact remains that ISBoxer does nothing to break the EULA that is not also broken by Fraps and other video recording software, as well as EVE-O Preview, TS3, Mumble, and Steam, not to mention KVM Switches, which were explicitly allowed by CCP.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#3920 - 2015-03-27 16:22:07 UTC  |  Edited by: Lucas Kell
Jason Xado wrote:
Exactly my point. CCP doesn't want solo players to have tools to compete with groups. If you don't want to join a group then you just have to live with the fact that CCP sees you as a second class citizen of the game.
But then their method of banning doesn't prevent the use of tools, and puts manual multiboxers at risk too. If you have 3 monitors and 12 accounts tiled, you will be able to react as fast as someone using VideoFX and efficiently using that setup will likely result in a ban a few months down the line. At the same time, someone using VFX/round robin but not being overly efficient is likely to survive a lot longer. They have no method of detecting how you are playing, they've made that clear. They are analysing your gameplay data, and if you play substantially more efficiently than the average player, you're assumed to be using tools.

In the meantime, players like myself get to continue happily using trading tools which are fully within the EULA to make orders of magnitude more than any multiboxer gets for their effort and with considerably less accounts. Quite honestly they've got their priorities twisted and are kicking some of the most dedicated players who have invested thousands into the game in the nuts to appease people who whine that "their" ice is being taken, which amusingly still happens.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.