These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Auto Click Software?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#81 - 2014-03-24 14:39:08 UTC
LordOfDespair wrote:
You didn't answer my question either, how isn't it overpowered?
By virtue of not being overpowered, since you refuse to show that it is. My answer is in your lack of answer.

So: how is it overpowered?

Quote:
So its okay if an account does something it normally could? Regardless if it is manually possible or not?
If it's not manually possible, the account can't normally do it and it's not allowed. That's why travelling between multiple gates without the use of either the autopilot or being at the keyboard is not allowed.
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#82 - 2014-03-24 14:41:56 UTC
Tippia wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
You didn't answer my question either, how isn't it overpowered?
By virtue of not being overpowered, since you refuse to show that it is. My answer is in your lack of answer.

So: how is it overpowered?

Quote:
So its okay if an account does something it normally could? Regardless if it is manually possible or not?
If it's not manually possible, the account can't normally do it and it's not allowed. That's why travelling between multiple gates without the use of either the autopilot or being at the keyboard is not allowed.


How can twenty accounts be used in perfect harmony "manually"?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#83 - 2014-03-24 14:47:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
LordOfDespair wrote:
How can twenty accounts be used in perfect harmony "manually"?
Through the use of a good FC.

You bailed out on the question: how is it overpowered?
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#84 - 2014-03-24 15:00:00 UTC
Tippia wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
How can twenty accounts be used in perfect harmony "manually"?
Through the use of a good FC.

You bailed out on the question: how is it overpowered?


Whether it is overpowered or not is irrelevent.

The rules aren't "you can cheat unless its overpowered".

But it is overpowered. Multiboxing incursions/WHs makes probably the most ISK per hour out of anything else.... and is only possible with ISboxing.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#85 - 2014-03-24 15:03:31 UTC
LordOfDespair wrote:
Whether it is overpowered or not is irrelevent.
So your argument is irrelevant then. Goodie.

Quote:
But it is overpowered.
How so? And so what?
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#86 - 2014-03-24 15:27:43 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

Multiboxers have to click. Previously CCP have stated that as long as a physical click happens it doesn't matter how many simultaneous client clicks that generates, but if a click is generated without a physical click, then it's bannable. so what you have, which is essentially an autopilot bot, is very very bannable.

If I can find the CCP quote I'll link it.


Lol, somehow I just had to think about an insanely complex LEGO technic apparatus to click my mouse once in a while. xD

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Debora Tsung
Perkone
Caldari State
#87 - 2014-03-24 15:33:58 UTC
LordOfDespair wrote:


But it is overpowered. Multiboxing incursions/WHs makes probably the most ISK per hour out of anything else.... and is only possible with ISboxing.


That's something I never quite understood.

The Multiboxer says he earned twenty times more than with his one single account, but then he has 20 accounts. All those accounts need to be plexed, the toons need equipmnent etc.

In the end wouldn't he earn just as much as if he were in a corp with 20 (very well organized) players?

Stupidity should be a bannable offense.

Fighting back is more fun than not.

Sticky: AFK Cloaking Thread It's not pretty, but it's there.
Wulfgar WarHammer
Unrustled
#88 - 2014-03-24 16:33:12 UTC
Don't even bother arguing with the ISBoxers. They will fight tooth and nail telling you that they could do the same thing without the third-party software, but they can't; which is why they defend/use ISBoxer in the first place.

Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#89 - 2014-03-24 16:37:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Wulfgar WarHammer wrote:
Don't even bother arguing with the ISBoxers. They will fight tooth and nail telling you that they could do the same thing without the third-party software, but they can't; which is why they defend/use ISBoxer in the first place.

Really? Do you have any example of someone doing this?

Debora Tsung wrote:
That's something I never quite understood.

The Multiboxer says he earned twenty times more than with his one single account, but then he has 20 accounts. All those accounts need to be plexed, the toons need equipmnent etc.

In the end wouldn't he earn just as much as if he were in a corp with 20 (very well organized) players?

Yes. Actually, the corp would probably be able to do most things even better since each individual can respond to their individual and specific situation rather than have everyone act the same no matter how appropriate it is to what they're doing.
Anne Dieu-le-veut
Natl Assn for the Advancement of Criminal People
#90 - 2014-03-24 16:46:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Anne Dieu-le-veut
Posting in not-so-stealth anti-ISboxer thread. I doubt the OP actually made a macro to do what he says, since that would be good for precisely one gate jump, and why doesn't he just use the jump through gate option in the first place?

Also, IB4L

Lucas Kell wrote:


If I can find the CCP quote I'll link it.


Quote:
Lastly, multiboxing is allowed, and programs designed for multiboxing in mind which allow a player to manually issue the same command to multiple game clients at the same time are allowed. In the same vein as what has been stated above, the player must be manually sending the commands; if a program is automating those commands for you, then it would be considered a breach of our EULA.


Bolded relevant part.

Disclaimer: I don't use ISboxer or any other program like it. I do dual box often, but I control both accounts. However, the crying over people that do use ISboxer is pathetic. Reminds me of the people that cried about buffbots in my DAoC days.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#91 - 2014-03-24 16:56:39 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:

Multiboxers have to click. Previously CCP have stated that as long as a physical click happens it doesn't matter how many simultaneous client clicks that generates, but if a click is generated without a physical click, then it's bannable. so what you have, which is essentially an autopilot bot, is very very bannable.

If I can find the CCP quote I'll link it.


thats just a poor excuse not to ban profitable ISBoxer - they seem to ignore the fact that said physical click only happens on the main client, not on the other 19 running in background and controlled by ISbox.

Automation per definition also includes methods or tools which reduce human workload for operating machines, cars etc - thus is clearly EULA violation.
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#92 - 2014-03-24 16:58:16 UTC
Tippia wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
Whether it is overpowered or not is irrelevent.
So your argument is irrelevant then. Goodie.


Aaaa.. what?
That made absolutely no sense.


You are delusional. Next!
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#93 - 2014-03-24 17:04:33 UTC
LordOfDespair wrote:
Aaaa.. what?
That made absolutely no sense.
You made the argument that multiboxing was overpowered.
When you couldn't articulate in what way it was overpowered, you claimed that it was irrelevant whether it was or not.

That makes your argument irrelevant. It's very simple to make sense of, really.

Robert Caldera wrote:
Automation per definition also includes methods or tools which reduce human workload for operating machines, cars etc - thus is clearly EULA violation.
…but as long as it requires 1:1 human input rather than make use of machine-genrateed input, it doesn't qualify for the only definition that matters: the EULA one, according to which multiboxing is not a violation.
Muestereate
Minions LLC
#94 - 2014-03-24 17:07:57 UTC
Debora Tsung wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:


But it is overpowered. Multiboxing incursions/WHs makes probably the most ISK per hour out of anything else.... and is only possible with ISboxing.


That's something I never quite understood.

The Multiboxer says he earned twenty times more than with his one single account, but then he has 20 accounts. All those accounts need to be plexed, the toons need equipmnent etc.

In the end wouldn't he earn just as much as if he were in a corp with 20 (very well organized) players?


the first 6 hours of the month are used to pay for the plex, after that the income is over a hundred million an hour for each account. For a vanguard ISBOXER thats about 10 times a 100 mil or a billion an hour. Theres over 600 hours a month and a lot of incursion guys grind till they can't talk. Its hard to believe, its like they are earning real money or are forced labor. a couple hundred hours a month wouldn't surprise me. Sure theres ammo to buy and ships to replace but thats still a few titans a month. Next thing you know the guy is multiboxing 10 titans and his alliance of 10 guys has taken over the universe.

And to answer some one elses prattle, THAT by any definition is overpowered.
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#95 - 2014-03-24 17:09:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Robert Caldera
Tippia wrote:
but as long as it requires 1:1 human input rather than make use of machine-genrateed input, it doesn't qualify for the only definition that matters: the EULA one, according to which multiboxing is not a violation.


1:1 what?
Its more like 1:19, otherwise isbox would have zero use for people who want to control 20 clients with 1 click.
Also ist not about multiboxing but about input broadcasts which is why people use it in the first line - for automating their bomber/ratting/mining fleets they would have trouble to effectively play the game without any multiboxing software
making things easier.
Like I stated before, CCP only allows it because profitable like hell not becaust its not automation.
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#96 - 2014-03-24 17:35:55 UTC
Tippia wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:
Aaaa.. what?
That made absolutely no sense.
You made the argument that multiboxing was overpowered.
When you couldn't articulate in what way it was overpowered, you claimed that it was irrelevant whether it was or not.

That makes your argument irrelevant. It's very simple to make sense of, really.

Robert Caldera wrote:
Automation per definition also includes methods or tools which reduce human workload for operating machines, cars etc - thus is clearly EULA violation.
…but as long as it requires 1:1 human input rather than make use of machine-genrateed input, it doesn't qualify for the only definition that matters: the EULA one, according to which multiboxing is not a violation.


Umm no. You are wrong.. again.

The argument has always been that ISboxer is automation and it lets players do something that they cannot do manually.
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#97 - 2014-03-24 17:38:11 UTC
Muestereate wrote:
Debora Tsung wrote:
LordOfDespair wrote:


But it is overpowered. Multiboxing incursions/WHs makes probably the most ISK per hour out of anything else.... and is only possible with ISboxing.


That's something I never quite understood.

The Multiboxer says he earned twenty times more than with his one single account, but then he has 20 accounts. All those accounts need to be plexed, the toons need equipmnent etc.

In the end wouldn't he earn just as much as if he were in a corp with 20 (very well organized) players?


the first 6 hours of the month are used to pay for the plex, after that the income is over a hundred million an hour for each account. For a vanguard ISBOXER thats about 10 times a 100 mil or a billion an hour. Theres over 600 hours a month and a lot of incursion guys grind till they can't talk. Its hard to believe, its like they are earning real money or are forced labor. a couple hundred hours a month wouldn't surprise me. Sure theres ammo to buy and ships to replace but thats still a few titans a month. Next thing you know the guy is multiboxing 10 titans and his alliance of 10 guys has taken over the universe.

And to answer some one elses prattle, THAT by any definition is overpowered.


Yeah exactly ^.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#98 - 2014-03-24 17:39:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
LordOfDespair wrote:
Umm no. You are wrong.. again.
Uhm, yes. I'm still right. As demonstrated by every single official communication on the matter.

Quote:
The argument has always been that ISboxer is automation and it lets players do something that they cannot do manually.
…and that argument has always been factually incorrect since it ignores both reality and every definition that matters.

Robert Caldera wrote:
1:1 what?
If you click a button, all that happens is that you click a button.

Quote:
Like I stated before, CCP only allows it because profitable like hell not becaust its not automation.
…except that CCP happily foregoes profit to uphold the rule against automation. State is as much as you like, it is completely contradicted and disproven by reality.
LordOfDespair
Deep Dark Fantasy.
#99 - 2014-03-24 17:43:59 UTC
You've still not answered the question: How many accounts do you play on?
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
#100 - 2014-03-24 17:47:42 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Uhm, yes. I'm still right. As demonstrated by every single official communication on the matter.

but not for the reason of their excuses but just because they want the money.

Tippia wrote:
and that argument has always been factually incorrect since it ignores both reality and every definition that matters.

reality = guy cant play fleet of mining barges, gets isbox and suddenly can play a fleet of mining barges.
definition of automation includes isbox pretty obviously.
Which matters? I tell you what matters -> your money from 20 isboxed accounts.

Tippia wrote:
If you click a button, all that happens is that you click a button.

if this would be true, noone would use it. You click a button and software clicks same button in 19 other eve clients in background.

Tippia wrote:
except that CCP happily foregoes profit to uphold the rule against automation. State is as much as you like, it is completely contradicted and disproven by reality.

more hurfblurf in lack of arguments?