These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Quick demo on how to Multi-box in EVE using ISBoxer. Went ratting in Navy Omens...
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Arronicus
State War Academy
Caldari State
#81 - 2013-04-22 18:08:26 UTC
Jack Miton wrote:
I have no idea why CCP do not consider this an exploit but they really should.
I run multiple accounts a LOT myself but don't use any lame ass software to bot it.

If I was to change one single thing about EVE EULA it's make this garbage a ban-able offense.


Because A) They aren't botting it, as you so claim, only proving your ignorance on the matter,
B) People playing multiple accounts increases the total players online count, which keeps Eve looking healthy and growing, which attracts more players and helps give people the feeling of being part of something huge,
and C) It generates more revenue for them.

Luckily for all of us regular players, you don't have any control over the EULA. Even for those of us with 4 accounts or less, these is-boxers are good for us. They help our game.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#82 - 2013-04-22 18:18:40 UTC  |  Edited by: De'Veldrin
oodell wrote:
De'Veldrin wrote:
[quote=Lady Areola Fappington]
As for the amount of effort spent mastering the technique, that's neither here nor there. Spending a lot of time learning to how to exploit a bug, for example, does not mean said exploit isn't wrong. Just because you spent six months learning to ISBox effectively has no bearing on whether or not ISBoxer ultimately damages the game experience for others.



Spending 6 months learning and perfecting a technique is profoundly different than writing a script to do it for you.


If it takes 6 months of testing and tweaking to make your bot script operate correctly, does that make it suddenly ok? If not, then why does the amount of real-life time make any difference, regardless of the activity?

As far as the disadvatages, I am sure there are some - that's not the point. The point is that it does provide you with an advantage, no matter how narrow, over players who do not use this third party tool (i.e. outside of normal game mechanics) to duplicate their keystrokes.

Let's compare apples and apples for a minute.

Two people, each running twenty accounts on one machine. One guy has to watch one overview, click a button one time. The other one has to alt tab between clients, and click twenty buttons. Discount every other factor - overviews are the same, ships are exactly equal, character skills are the same down to the skill point. The simple time delay in getting that twentieth client activated will be the deciding factor in determining success or defeat, and ISBoxer offers a clear advantage, because those commands will be implemented instantly (or nearly instantly), while the alt-tabber is hampered by his own human limitations. THAT is the advantage ISBoxer offers over traditional multi-boxing and even over group game play - instaneous execution of commands over a large group with no time lost due to reception and interpretation of orders or changing of clients and reclicking buttons.

In a game where a half second's hesitation can (and does) determine the loss of a billion ISK, trying to pretend that NOT having to spent those precious few seconds is anything other than an advantage is a blatant disregard for the truth.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
Haulie Berry
#83 - 2013-04-22 18:23:54 UTC
Ace Uoweme wrote:
Domina Trix wrote:
considering the popularity of multi-boxing I can see this thread going downhill quickly Smile


It's not that multiboxing is evil (I multibox), it's when players don't use good judgment when using so many alts. If you were in a game and met a 40+ multiboxer, you'll learn quickly to dislike them being in group activities (no real way to counter them. Tactics like identifying and killing the main don't even work anymore). It makes a game not a "game" anymore.

In WoW it's gotten to be in PvP with such multiboxers it's which team with less bots and multiboxers wins. Lead a BG there when a 40 boxer showed up. Manage to make the dude wait almost 2hrs for his "guaranteed win", but the outcome was assured as there's no means in the instance to remedy the situation.

Solo activities no one cares. But in groups it becomes a bot vs bot fest. That isn't good.


Everything is okay when it's done my way. Roll
oodell
Rotciv Rrama Industries
Goonswarm Federation
#84 - 2013-04-22 18:26:54 UTC
Quote:

Two people, each running twenty accounts on one machine. One guy has to watch one overview, click a button one time. The other one has to alt tab between clients, and click twenty buttons.


Do you have a problem with macro's? The second guy could have written a pretty basic one bound the the mouse click key which alt tabs through all the windows, holds control, and clicks. (To lock everything) He could have a second one to alt-tab through them all again and hit f1 (for mining lasers or whatever) What's the difference? Both players had to click the same thing and do the same action, but the isboxer did it with a nicer interface.

Quote:

If it takes 6 months of testing and tweaking to make your bot script operate correctly, does that make it suddenly ok? If not, then why does the amount of real-life time make any difference, regardless of the activity?


Because, again, a bot can run 23/7 with zero human interaction, while a multiboxer can play X hours a day with the requirement of 100% of their attention just to keep things going smoothly. A bot also isn't vulnerable to human error, while a multiboxer is certainly vulnerable. Stop trying to compare them to make a point because they are completely different.
Charlie Jacobson
#85 - 2013-04-22 18:28:28 UTC
Thelonious Blake wrote:
Doesn't having multiple accounts make the game to feel too much as a "job"?

Maybe it's just me, but I prefer playing with only one account at a time. I currently have only 1 account, and haven't had another one ever. I can "afford it" (via PLEXes) but I'm afraid it will suck out the fun of the game for me.


Yes

I support James 315 and the New Order of Highsec
oodell
Rotciv Rrama Industries
Goonswarm Federation
#86 - 2013-04-22 18:35:00 UTC  |  Edited by: oodell
Quote:

In a game where a half second's hesitation can (and does) determine the loss of a billion ISK, trying to pretend that NOT having to spent those precious few seconds is anything other than an advantage is a blatant disregard for the truth.



Any advantage you speak of is (currently) legal and available to anyone that wants it. If you really wanted to do it you could, and I invite you to try it before you claim it should be eliminated from the game. Why doesn't everyone do it then? Because it's extremely difficult to set up, perfect and use, which limits it's usage to those with too much time on their hands.

All you're trying to do is 'level' the playing field (not that I think it needs leveled in the first place) because you are presumably incapable of doing it yourself (either because of resources, computer hardware, real life time or whatever) and eliminate a huge amount of endgame content that many people enjoy.
Herzog Wolfhammer
Sigma Special Tactics Group
#87 - 2013-04-22 18:47:09 UTC
Were it up to me all mining ships would be piloted by NPCs but owned by players. They could be attacked at any time, but the owner would have kill right on you for a while.

Otherwise, any game whereby one MUST have multiple accounts to make it appears like a scam to people on "the outside".

Bring back DEEEEP Space!
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#88 - 2013-04-22 18:53:46 UTC
oodell wrote:
Quote:

Two people, each running twenty accounts on one machine. One guy has to watch one overview, click a button one time. The other one has to alt tab between clients, and click twenty buttons.

Stop trying to compare them to make a point because they are completely different.


Why should I stop comparing them when you continue to do so to make your own points?

And I am aware that ISBoxer is NOT botting - the player interaction is required - but it IS automation. Replication of a repetitive task is the very soul of automation.

I also am aware that it's legal according to CCP - at no time have I (intentionally at any rate) said that the ISBoxer crowd are violating the rules or using an exploit (though others do, and have, as incorrect as that stance is). That doesn't mean the topic doesn't need to be discussed.

As far as leveling the playing field - well, yeah, a level playing field is kind of necessary for a game. Otherwise, why have rules at all? Game mechanics do exactly that - they provide a level playing field so that players can, presumably, compete with one another within the constraints provided by the game itself. Using that level playing field, two fleets can, for instance, meet on the field of battle, and fight each other, with the outcome being determined by the skill of the players, the ability to prepare for the challenge ahead, and even their ability to manipulate the meta-game (in terms of providing false intelligence, planting spies, etc). All of those are freely available to all players of the game, regardless of their time spent in game, their ability to write a check, or any other out of game consideration.

ISBoxer (and tools like it) do not fall into that "freely available to all players" category; as you so eloquently put it yourself - they are only available to those players with "too much time on their hands".

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
oodell
Rotciv Rrama Industries
Goonswarm Federation
#89 - 2013-04-22 19:06:04 UTC
De'Veldrin wrote:

...



When has EVE ever had a level playing field? Someone who invests a lot of time and effort into something SHOULD have certain advantages, but still be counterable in the right conditions.

Someone multiboxing 6 drakes is certainly counterable - they have no logistics, they can't micromanage and they don't have the control granularity that 6 real pilots would have.
Doc Severide
Doomheim
#90 - 2013-04-22 19:12:13 UTC
6 accounts and 12 characters. However I never have more than 2 on at a time.

I like it...
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#91 - 2013-04-22 19:32:24 UTC
oodell wrote:

When has EVE ever had a level playing field? Someone who invests a lot of time and effort into something SHOULD have certain advantages, but still be counterable in the right conditions.

Someone multiboxing 6 drakes is certainly counterable - they have no logistics, they can't micromanage and they don't have the control granularity that 6 real pilots would have.


Eve has always had a level playing field; every player plays under the same set of game mechanics - that is the level playing field. How you take advantage of those mechanics to allow you to triumph over other players does not change the fact that they have the same opportunities within the game mechanics that you do.

I also dispute your granularity argument.

I took this quote from ISBoxer's own website:

Quote:

When it comes to other players, there are some very simple things you can do to bring a smile to their faces. I like to put on a little show, sort of like live machinima. If someone is following me around and watching, I will put my guys in a Flying V formation (a simple 2-step key map where 4 guys move on the first step, and 2 guys move on the second), and break into a dance. People also like to see you do the same thing across all of your characters at once (unless you're killing them at the time). It's as simple as making all of your guys jump at the same time. It just blows their mind. Or all use a different buff at once, and so on. Or Death Knights in WoW have a spell called Army of the Dead, which spawns several ghouls and can be used every 20 minutes -- that adds up to fun when you have multiple Death Knights!


I highlighted the salient point. If I can make a bunch of different characters all use a different buff at the same time, it doesn't sound like you lose much fine control over the individual characters. It may require particular manipulation of the game clients ahead of time in terms of what the overviews show and how modules are laid out to be mapped to the F-Keys, but I don't doubt you could run a couple of logi along with your six drakes. Or a couple of E-war ships perhaps.

Or, using two PC's, you could run your ISBoxed logi fleet on one screen and your ISBoxed DPS group on the other. Watching two screens is a pretty trivial task, and using Synergy you could run them both from one keyboard and mouse. Adding a G15 macro you could even have your logi chars prelock your DPS chars - or write a macro that allows you to unlock the current target and start reps when you ctrl-click your left mouse button over the logi broadcast in the fleet window. With my Naga Razor I could bind that control stroke to a thumb button so I don't run the danger of accidentally unlocking my DPS target.

So it is, in theory, possible to run a full on gate camp, complete with static bubbles, sniper Tier 3's, logi, and possibly ECM, all from one player, with no latency between command issuance and execution, and all completely legal within CCP's current guidelines. Oh and let's not forget the off grid boosting command ship.

Is such a fleet counterable? Of course it is. The real question though is: Could a normal person run such a fleet by themselves without the use of these out of game tools? The answer to that question is what determines if ISBoxer provides an unnatural advantage or not.

De'Veldrin's Corollary (to Malcanis' Law): Any idea that seeks to limit the ability of a large nullsec bloc to do something in the name of allowing more small groups into sov null will inevitably make it that much harder for small groups to enter sov null.
oodell
Rotciv Rrama Industries
Goonswarm Federation
#92 - 2013-04-22 20:09:57 UTC  |  Edited by: oodell
De'Veldrin wrote:

Is such a fleet counterable? Of course it is. The real question though is: Could a normal person run such a fleet by themselves without the use of these out of game tools? The answer to that question is what determines if ISBoxer provides an unnatural advantage or not.



If a single person can do all that, with or without outside tools, I tip my hat to them and say carry on.

You are trivializing it when in fact that would be nearly impossible to accomplish. And if you did, it would fall apart the first time someone engaged you.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#93 - 2013-04-22 21:38:18 UTC
oodell wrote:

All you're trying to do is 'level' the playing field (not that I think it needs leveled in the first place) because you are presumably incapable of doing it yourself (either because of resources, computer hardware, real life time or whatever) and eliminate a huge amount of endgame content that many people enjoy.


The reason is none of those, it's because most people feel that using a 3rd party program to control a game client is cheating.

It's not endgame content, it's not hard, it doesn't require skills. The guy who wrote ISBotter has skills, subscribers just pay up and get an advantage not possible using ingame tools.

Botter elitism is probably the saddest thing I've read on these forums.

.
Georgina Parmala
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#94 - 2013-04-23 03:08:46 UTC
Interesting vid. I found myself skimming the first bit, it started to get too long for an introduction and I was losing interest. I would start with bare bones of what the viewer needs to understand to "get" the combat part. Go through the combat sequence, then fill in missing details for those who stuck around that far and are interested.


As for the whole legitimacy debate:

Quote:
You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game.


I bolded the actual important part.

The comparison of the effort required looks quite against use of something like this.

a) Broadcast CTRL Click F1

b) CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1, Alt Tab, CTRL Click F1

Clearly A offers an advantage over a PLAYER trying to do B with no automation. Chances are the rat will be dead by the time B even tries to lock the target on the 14th account, and A will have dispatched more than one rat in that time with an efficient setup. A is an "unfair" advantage.

Or is it?

What was the important part again?
Quote:
at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play.


I think the mistake people make when reading the EULA is in the above interpretation of what that statement means. Looking at what the software allows one PLAYER with 14 game clients to do. It doesn't actually breach the EULA unless it lets him do something "at an accelerated rate" when compared to 14 individual players.

And about the only thing it does in that respect, is allow a perfectly coordinated Alpha strike. Sadly, short of spreading points or EWAR in PvP, EvE is probably one of the games with the worst incentives to ever spread damage.

Science and Trade Institute [STI] is an NPC entity and as such my views do not represent those of the entity or any of its members

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=276984&p=38
culo duro
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2013-04-23 06:03:45 UTC
People here really have to learn what "automation" means... it's not automated if someone is clicking for it to happend, that makes it SEMI-AUTOMATED.

Also you guys complaining about multiboxers in pvp.. learn to kite man, or get friends you will always beat a multiboxer in pvp if you know what to do.
As i and someone else have said, for thoes few advantages there's alot of disadvantages using ISBoxer. If you're going to smack talk it while you haven't tried it, go and try it before being the 'i know everything" kind of type.

So please before you saying anything about any Multiboxing software, go use it before you think your assumption is correct.

I've starting blogging http://www.epvpc.blogspot.com 
Sola Mercury
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#96 - 2013-04-23 07:07:47 UTC
De'Veldrin wrote:
oodell wrote:
Quote:

Two people, each running twenty accounts on one machine. One guy has to watch one overview, click a button one time. The other one has to alt tab between clients, and click twenty buttons.

Stop trying to compare them to make a point because they are completely different.


Why should I stop comparing them when you continue to do so to make your own points?



You should compare it with a guy running multiple computers with one EVE client each, connected by a kvm switch, that pases mouse and keyboard actions to each computer.
And you will see that this guy doesn't use any third party software and gets the same result as the Isboxer.
culo duro
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#97 - 2013-04-23 08:03:25 UTC
Sola Mercury wrote:
De'Veldrin wrote:
oodell wrote:
Quote:

Two people, each running twenty accounts on one machine. One guy has to watch one overview, click a button one time. The other one has to alt tab between clients, and click twenty buttons.

Stop trying to compare them to make a point because they are completely different.


Why should I stop comparing them when you continue to do so to make your own points?



You should compare it with a guy running multiple computers with one EVE client each, connected by a kvm switch, that pases mouse and keyboard actions to each computer.
And you will see that this guy doesn't use any third party software and gets the same result as the Isboxer.


Exactly THANK YOU, for throwing some wisdom out here.
ISBoxer just makes it alot cheaper to multibox.

I've starting blogging http://www.epvpc.blogspot.com 
Lady Areola Fappington
#98 - 2013-04-23 11:22:53 UTC
Sola Mercury wrote:

You should compare it with a guy running multiple computers with one EVE client each, connected by a kvm switch, that pases mouse and keyboard actions to each computer.
And you will see that this guy doesn't use any third party software and gets the same result as the Isboxer.


Forgive me, but a legit question. I haven't messed with KVM stuff for...at least 15 years. The last KVM I used had a "computer A, B, C, D, etc" rotary switch that you had to physically change. you still had to issue individual commands to each system.

Do they make KVM systems that "broadcast" one keystroke to multiple systems?

7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided. --Eve New Player Guide
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#99 - 2013-04-23 12:08:01 UTC
culo duro wrote:
Sola Mercury wrote:
De'Veldrin wrote:
oodell wrote:
Quote:

Two people, each running twenty accounts on one machine. One guy has to watch one overview, click a button one time. The other one has to alt tab between clients, and click twenty buttons.

Stop trying to compare them to make a point because they are completely different.


Why should I stop comparing them when you continue to do so to make your own points?



You should compare it with a guy running multiple computers with one EVE client each, connected by a kvm switch, that pases mouse and keyboard actions to each computer.
And you will see that this guy doesn't use any third party software and gets the same result as the Isboxer.


Exactly THANK YOU, for throwing some wisdom out here.
ISBoxer just makes it alot cheaper to multibox.


Installing a bot program is also easier and cheaper than setting up a robot at your desk to run L4s.

And as irrelevant to this discussion.



.
4runner
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#100 - 2013-04-23 12:17:04 UTC
This is simply killing the MMO element of this game, things that used to be group activities (IT'S A MMO FFS !!) are now done just as well by a single pilot with many toons. You need someone to light a cyno for your cap ship (caps were intended as a group project I belive) naahh, I'll just log in one of my 10+ alts spread around the galaxy and cyno myself, I don't need to interact with other pilots it's a single player campaign right ?? first one to 10000 Billions wins ??

get in a group, run difficult sites, Mine, share good stories and have some laughs while you are at it interact with people FFS ! It's a game its not work Lol