These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
 

secrret nurf to people with more then 1 monitor

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Professor Alphane
Les Corsaires Diable
#21 - 2012-02-16 21:50:52 UTC
I personally love the fact CCP allows people to us multiple accounts, so we can invstigate multiple aspects of the game.


Though there is some logic in the arguement if a solo player Wardecs a 10 account multi boxer, we know who is going to win.

But that said if a solo player wardecs a 10 player corp, we also know who's going to win.

Does it follow then that you believe those 10 players are collectively 'paying to win'?

[center]YOU MUST THINK FIRST....[/center] [center]"I sit with the broken angels clutching at straws and nursing our scars.." - Marillion [/center] [center]The wise man watches the rise and fall of fools from afar[/center]
Hauling Hal
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#22 - 2012-02-16 21:51:40 UTC
Paragon Renegade wrote:
thatboydc wrote:

Your statement has literally nothing to do with his statement.


Paying for something you wouldn't otherwise have.

It has everything to do with it.

Multiboxing is ******** and should be against the rules


So an alliance with 400 players is 'unfair' when they kill a solo player, because they paid 400x as much?

Your logic sucks.
Paragon Renegade
Sebiestor Tribe
#23 - 2012-02-16 21:53:03 UTC
Professor Alphane wrote:
I personally love the fact CCP allows people to us multiple accounts, so we can invstigate multiple aspects of the game.


Though there is some logic in the arguement if a solo player Wardecs a 10 account multi boxer, we know who is going to win.

But that said if a solo player wardecs a 10 player corp, we also know who's going to win.

Does it follow then that you believe those 10 players are collectively 'paying to win'?


No, all those people need to work together as a team.

Multiboxers need to buy another monitor(s) and learn to multitask, and as a result the ONE person has a truly enormous advantage over any other single player.

The pie is a tautology
Paragon Renegade
Sebiestor Tribe
#24 - 2012-02-16 21:53:46 UTC
Hauling Hal wrote:

So an alliance with 400 players is 'unfair' when they kill a solo player, because they paid 400x as much?

Your logic sucks.


That's 400 different people -_-

The pie is a tautology
Sverige Pahis
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#25 - 2012-02-16 21:54:47 UTC
Orcirk wrote:
Paragon Renegade wrote:
Xolve wrote:
[quote=Paragon Renegade]

Couldn't you have just drank the kool-aide with the rest of the cultists.

Your presence here and your posting habits arn't beneficial to anyone.


I'm blunt, if you dislike that, too bad.

As far as I'm concerned, multi-boxing is cheating

As far as CCP is concerned, it's not.
Given that they actively encourage multiboxing through various offers aimed specifically at getting people second/third accounts, I'd have thought this to be fairly obvious.



You should probably quit. That would send a clear message to CCP.
Hauling Hal
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#26 - 2012-02-16 21:57:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Hauling Hal
Paragon Renegade wrote:
Hauling Hal wrote:

So an alliance with 400 players is 'unfair' when they kill a solo player, because they paid 400x as much?

Your logic sucks.


That's 400 different people -_-


No, it's 400 accounts. You don't know how many are dual or triple boxing.
Paragon Renegade
Sebiestor Tribe
#27 - 2012-02-16 21:59:13 UTC
Hauling Hal wrote:


No, it's 400 accounts. You don't know how many are dual or triple boxing.


I don't really care either.

You should be able to have multiple paying accounts, but you shouldn't be able to use them simultaneously

The pie is a tautology
Professor Alphane
Les Corsaires Diable
#28 - 2012-02-16 22:01:16 UTC
Paragon Renegade wrote:




Multiboxers need to buy another monitor(s) and learn to multitask , and as a result the ONE person has a truly enormous advantage over any other single player.


What you fail to mention is they also need to pay CCP for a sub.

So £100 worth of accounts > £10 worth of accounts, why should who runs them be of any signifcance.

[center]YOU MUST THINK FIRST....[/center] [center]"I sit with the broken angels clutching at straws and nursing our scars.." - Marillion [/center] [center]The wise man watches the rise and fall of fools from afar[/center]
Hauling Hal
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-02-16 22:03:04 UTC
Paragon Renegade wrote:
Hauling Hal wrote:


No, it's 400 accounts. You don't know how many are dual or triple boxing.


I don't really care either.

You should be able to have multiple paying accounts, but you shouldn't be able to use them simultaneously


Why?

Please provide a valid reason, not a whinge.
Paragon Renegade
Sebiestor Tribe
#30 - 2012-02-16 22:04:39 UTC
Professor Alphane wrote:


What you fail to mention is they also need to pay CCP for a sub.

So £100 worth of accounts > £10 worth of accounts, why should who runs them be of any signifcance.


Again, then why should buying modules with real money be against the rules then? After all, paying money to CCP in exchange for an advantage, what's so bad about that?

Of course, I would never advocate that because that's stupid in a player-driven economy, just as multi-boxing is stupid because it goes against the "MMO" part of the "MMORPG"

The pie is a tautology
Paragon Renegade
Sebiestor Tribe
#31 - 2012-02-16 22:06:29 UTC
Hauling Hal wrote:

Please provide a valid reason, not a whinge.


It provides an advantage to those who shell out more cash, as it allows one person to simulate team members with............ themselves...... in what is necessarily a Multiplayer game.

The pie is a tautology
Hauling Hal
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#32 - 2012-02-16 22:12:02 UTC
Paragon Renegade wrote:
Hauling Hal wrote:

Please provide a valid reason, not a whinge.


It provides an advantage to those who shell out more cash, as it allows one person to simulate team members with............ themselves...... in what is necessarily a Multiplayer game.


The advantage you talk of isn't relevant in a multi-player game, as it's multi-player. You're fighting 2, whether they are played by 2 people or the same person. When you can tell me the advantage 2 accounts has over 2 accounts I'll listen to you. Right now you're just a troll.
Bubanni
Corus Aerospace
#33 - 2012-02-16 22:13:30 UTC
I think CCP should make the freezing overview optional ASAP! Holding down CTRL was enough

Supercap nerf - change ewar immunity https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=194759 Module activation delay! https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1180934
Professor Alphane
Les Corsaires Diable
#34 - 2012-02-16 22:13:48 UTC
Paragon Renegade wrote:
just as multi-boxing is stupid because it goes against the "MMO" part of the "MMORPG"




No it doesn't why can't me and my alter ego's play with other players and there alter egos?

[center]YOU MUST THINK FIRST....[/center] [center]"I sit with the broken angels clutching at straws and nursing our scars.." - Marillion [/center] [center]The wise man watches the rise and fall of fools from afar[/center]
Paragon Renegade
Sebiestor Tribe
#35 - 2012-02-16 22:14:29 UTC
Hauling Hal wrote:

The advantage you talk of isn't relevant in a multi-player game, as it's multi-player. You're fighting 2, whether they are played by 2 people or the same person. When you can tell me the advantage 2 accounts has over 2 accounts I'll listen to you. Right now you're just a troll.


Why am I a troll? I'm just disagreeing with you.

In an MMO, generally you fight other players, not one masquarding (Spelling?) as twenty. It totally goes against the concept of an MMO

The pie is a tautology
Xolve
State War Academy
Caldari State
#36 - 2012-02-16 22:16:55 UTC
Paragon Renegade wrote:

Why am I a troll? I'm just disagreeing with you.

In an MMO, generally you fight other players, not one masquarding (Spelling?) as twenty. It totally goes against the concept of an MMO




Someone Mad.
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#37 - 2012-02-16 23:04:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Ptraci
Paragon Renegade wrote:
Xolve wrote:
[quote=Paragon Renegade]

Couldn't you have just drank the kool-aide with the rest of the cultists.

Your presence here and your posting habits arn't beneficial to anyone.


I'm blunt, if you dislike that, too bad.

As far as I'm concerned, multi-boxing is cheating


Nah it's not cheating. I pay more per month than you, I should be allowed some advantage for this. How are you going to stop it - allow only one instance? Then I get a virtual machine program. Or another computer. One per IP - seriously? Besides, multi-boxing for PVP is possibly the worst thing you can do - you are guaranteed to lose multiple ships. But for mining and cynos...
Selinate
#38 - 2012-02-16 23:11:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Selinate
Ptraci wrote:


Nah it's not cheating. I pay more per month than you, I should be allowed some advantage for this. How are you going to stop it - allow only one instance? Then I get a virtual machine program. Or another computer. One per IP - seriously? Besides, multi-boxing for PVP is possibly the worst thing you can do - you are guaranteed to lose multiple ships. But for mining and cynos...




LolLolLolLolLolLol

And people bitched about pay to win with aurum. This argument for multiboxing is no better. Apparently, Eve is already pay to win.

I think CCP should start selling gold ammo. Why not put the final nail in the coffin.
CCP Veritas
C C P
C C P Alliance
#39 - 2012-02-16 23:42:16 UTC
saltrock0000 wrote:
So this freezing overview not only freezes when the mouse is over it, but when the mouse is over on another monitor!

This is fixed internally. Hopefully we can get a round of fixes out quickly.

CCP Veritas - Technical Director - EVE Online
Ptraci
3 R Corporation
#40 - 2012-02-16 23:54:23 UTC
Selinate wrote:
Eve is already pay to win.



EVE was always pay to win. Don't like your toon? Buy someone else's. Oh ok you pay in GTC's or PLEX, but it's still pay to win. How else do you get people in Rorquals who didn't know that these ships can't use stargates?