EVE Information Portal

Sounds like we're gonna have to go with no browsers at all!

Interesting can of Fedos here...

I wouldn't go that far, believe it or not you'd kill a good amount of subscriptions this way.

It would be better for 3-4, but that REALLY wouldn't stop determined people. For example, using remote desktop software prevents CCP from detecting botting software.

As a loyal customer who's been here since the beginning (Well minus the first few months!) it saddens me to have to say this, but maybe it's time you fine chaps at CCP all start to pull in the same direction?

I know CCP has never really been a professional company, and in the old days that was fine. Back then it was a small team that took pride in it's informal interactions with it's customers and as it grew took pride in it's informal way of working, but this approach clearly isn't working at scale, and hasn't been for quite some time.

Somewhere along the line it became acceptable for CCP employees to effectively troll paying customers. I wont even go into the unprofessional behavior of some CCP staff towards some of it's customers, but the recent "rule clarification" is just the latest example. I simply don't get how your own staff can use 3rd party software with impunity while leaving the sword of Damocles hanging over the rest of us paying customers heads with the effective catch all ban justification that is the 3rd party software part of the EULA. This is even more mind boggling considering that your own staff develop and promote some of this software behind Dev tags on this very forum.

I'm sure I'm not the only one that would REALLY appreciate the last 12 years not ending up a potential waste of time so if you could see your way to presenting a unified clear and professional front to us customers that would be fantastic. If that involves someone vetting your staff's actions and being nominated to be the defacto rule interpreter we can all refer to then so much the better.

>Posts vague things that now are bannable.

>Posts vaguer timescale on when, if ever, clarification will be given.

This is a very uncool topic to let people guess on dudes...

Time to go multi-box shoot a monument in Jita.

What's missing here is some kind of definition what might count as a fair advantage. Each and every third party tool I might use while playing EVE is of course aimed at giving me an advantage in the game. That's the very point of using said tool!

For example, Tripwire keeps track of my wormhole connections and the signatures I encountered. It would be more tedious, slower, and much less useful to do this by other means (e.g., pen and paper, or perhaps the built-in notepad). So compared with someone who does not use Tripwire I clearly have an advantage when exploring wormholes.

But is this an "unfair advantage"? Are you going to outlaw Tripwire? I really would like to know, since that's software I like to use in game.

And if you say that Tripwire is fine, then what about say the "Dscan Locator" tool in Pirate's Little Helper? Is that kind of "computer assisted" dscan analysis also fine?

And if you say that the "Dscan Locator" is indeed fine as well, then I really have no idea what you are talking about concerning "unfair advantage". Unless perhaps somebody has built an EVE PVP bot, or the like...

Please clarify. Seriously, you need to give us a much better idea where the line is with 3rd party tools.

This makes no sense, even on the scale of CCP things making no sense. If I use *some* software to view additional EVE overviews than just the one on the client I'm actually playing at a given point in time, then that's unfair and I should be banned? Yet if I use *other* software to do exactly the same thing, I get exactly the same information but it's suddenly not unfair and I don't get banned? Whilst I sort of understand the initial intent, regarding this point in particular just about any attempt to even pretend to implement rules is not only utterly insane but entirely unworkable. There is literally no way possible to enforce anything about this and bothering to try and write a devblog using it as an example of what's not allowed is laughable at best, and deeply indicative of how far from reality some people seem to live.

As a seperate point the brief mention in there about ending in-client logins was snuck in quietly, are you actually reworking how login mechanics work in any way or just dumping this to force people to use a launcher for the sake of doing so? If as I expect the latter then why? We do not need to **** about starting an additional program to start the program we want to run then closing the additional program to avoid useless crap running all the time. Maybe someone else can explain to me this trend for forcing players to load up additional needless layers of junk to play anything these days, other than a additional spot for companies to spam ads at me I see zero purpose.

I think I can get a second monitor cheaper than a subscription for the supporting software for ISBoxer.

EDIT: I Forgot people used some of the free software solutions. Regardless, its not exactly a high pay-wall, more of a pay-curb.

A paywall is a paywall, and going beyond 2 monitors requires substantial investment of hardware beyond just the monitors. Of course CCP could always do the graphics cards for plex deal again