These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Isboxer, why is it allowed?

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#81 - 2014-03-24 01:39:42 UTC  |  Edited by: Divine Entervention
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban botters
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#82 - 2014-03-24 01:41:20 UTC
Yes but your bases for arguing why it's wrong is incorrect.

You use section of the EULA that has got nothing to do with how ISK Boxer works. Which is why i kept asking you... do you even understand?

Clearly you don't so what is the point?

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Nidal Fervor
Doomheim
#83 - 2014-03-24 01:42:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Nidal Fervor
Divine Entervention wrote:
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban ixboxers


Exactly. They require 3rd party software to send the commands to the other clients, as many as they are running. The effect is the same as botting in every way.

They can still multibox without isboxer or any other 3rd party program, but they don't want to, because it will be much harder and they will lose the advantage of having software to send the commands to the other clients for them.

Software advantage is software advantage.
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#84 - 2014-03-24 01:43:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Cannibal Kane
Divine Entervention wrote:
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban botters


Botting is defined by how it works. It is a pure output system.

ISK Boxer requires manual input for an ouput. So no.. it is not botting.

Still waiting for a concise arguament though using yourr guys Logic? Still not convincing me.

I don't like ISK Boxer either but I am not going to blatantly talk shyte to get it removed just because I think it is evil. I understand how it works which is why I cannot point to the EULA and say it is wrong to use it.

All I can say I think is I just don't like it. I think it takes something away from the game.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Nidal Fervor
Doomheim
#85 - 2014-03-24 01:44:58 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban botters


Botting is defined by how it works. It is a pure output system.

ISK Boxer requires manual input for an ouput. So no.. it is not botting.


Input? Output? You're just saying anything to try to defend isboxing. Clearly an isboxer.
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#86 - 2014-03-24 01:47:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Cannibal Kane
Nidal Fervor wrote:
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban botters


Botting is defined by how it works. It is a pure output system.

ISK Boxer requires manual input for an ouput. So no.. it is not botting.


Input? Output? You're just saying anything to try to defend isboxing. Clearly an isboxer.


I don't like ISK Boxer either but I am not going to blatantly talk shyte to get it removed just because I think it is evil. I understand how it works which is why I cannot point to the EULA and say it is wrong to use it.

All I can say I think is I just don't like it. I think it takes something away from the game.

And you are just throwing around tired arguments that hold no ground.

EDIT: Also the fact that you question input output and accuse just told me you are just trolling. And we are done here. My point has been proven.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
#87 - 2014-03-24 01:47:42 UTC
Nidal Fervor wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban ixboxers


Exactly. They require 3rd party software to send the commands to the other clients, as many as they are running. The effect is the same as botting in every way.


Ok there's clearly no showing you the errors in your comprehension of the eula. Please stop bothering to quote it until you have a clear and concise understanding.

Let me ask you one final question. What if I used, say, 10 accounts, and EACH ACCOUNT was on a separate computer with its own keyboard and mouse, and I used an assembly of sticks to press the buttons ALL AT ONCE. Would this still be 'illegal' game play?

They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake.

**This IS my main so STFU.
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#88 - 2014-03-24 01:47:53 UTC
If the advantage the 3rd party program provides cannot be matched by the persons not using the 3rd party program, then it's abusing the advantage offered by a 3rd party program.
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#89 - 2014-03-24 01:49:37 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
If the advantage the 3rd party program provides cannot be matched by the persons not using the 3rd party program, then it's abusing the advantage offered by a 3rd party program.


You got no ground to stand on.

Based of your other threads and replies you are even worse then the troll that started this thread.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Cannibal Kane
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#90 - 2014-03-24 01:50:51 UTC
Belt Scout wrote:
Nidal Fervor wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban ixboxers


Exactly. They require 3rd party software to send the commands to the other clients, as many as they are running. The effect is the same as botting in every way.


Ok there's clearly no showing you the errors in your comprehension of the eula. Please stop bothering to quote it until you have a clear and concise understanding.

Let me ask you one final question. What if I used, say, 10 accounts, and EACH ACCOUNT was on a separate computer with its own keyboard and mouse, and I used an assembly of sticks to press the buttons ALL AT ONCE. Would this still be 'illegal' game play?


oddly enough that is how ISK boxer works. I bet they would call it botting as well if you posted pictures on the internet of it.

"Kane is the End Boss of Highsec." -Psychotic Monk
Klymer
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#91 - 2014-03-24 01:51:22 UTC
I love ISBoxer!

....the tears it generates are delicious.
Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
#92 - 2014-03-24 01:54:41 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Belt Scout wrote:
Nidal Fervor wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban ixboxers


Exactly. They require 3rd party software to send the commands to the other clients, as many as they are running. The effect is the same as botting in every way.


Ok there's clearly no showing you the errors in your comprehension of the eula. Please stop bothering to quote it until you have a clear and concise understanding.

Let me ask you one final question. What if I used, say, 10 accounts, and EACH ACCOUNT was on a separate computer with its own keyboard and mouse, and I used an assembly of sticks to press the buttons ALL AT ONCE. Would this still be 'illegal' game play?


oddly enough that is how ISK boxer works. I bet they would call it botting as well if you posted pictures on the internet of it.


Man, I was taking a sip of my coffee while googling "multiboxing with sticks" and this came up. My ribs hurt now. By the way, love ur sig.

http://gizmodo.com/5515135/mmorpg-multiboxing-gallery

They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake.

**This IS my main so STFU.
Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
#93 - 2014-03-24 01:58:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Belt Scout
Klymer wrote:
I love ISBoxer!

....the tears it generates are delicious.


You'd have to see iskboxer attack a gate camp. Its a freakin riot. Drop in at 25km, oooo, look at the pretty raven, blap alpha shot, move to next target, rinse and repeat. Shocked

They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake.

**This IS my main so STFU.
Jessica Duranin
Doomheim
#94 - 2014-03-24 02:07:29 UTC  |  Edited by: Jessica Duranin
This topic is new and exciting!
Belt Scout wrote:

Let me ask you one final question. What if I used, say, 10 accounts, and EACH ACCOUNT was on a separate computer with its own keyboard and mouse, and I used an assembly of sticks to press the buttons ALL AT ONCE. Would this still be 'illegal' game play?

Well, according to this* german GM: yes, it would be illegal, since it doesn't matter how you brake the rules and "if a (mouse) click is distributed to multiple clients, this parallelization also falls under 'automation' ".
google translate version of the german GM:
http://translate.google.de/translate?sl=de&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=de&ie=UTF-8&u=https%3A%2F%2Fforums.eveonline.com%2Fdefault.aspx%3Fg%3Dposts%26m%3D3592753%23post3592753&act=url


Of course this whole debate is completely pointless, because CCP would never enforce those rules anyway. All those multiboxed accounts mean a lot of money for CCP.



EDIT: In case of "ololol, some random GM said something, only DEV posts matter" : here a DEV quoting that GM.
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#95 - 2014-03-24 02:16:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Dalto Bane
Deal with it. Its allowed because CCP wants me to play my own game, and my game doesn't involve answering questions to those which you've already been given the answer. My alts just except the keystroke I give them... See, what I did there?? Keyword is I am inputting the keystroke. Whether 1 account or 25. Now get on my level and stop parading you tears on a public forum. Fly safe!

Drops Mic
Caviar Liberta
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#96 - 2014-03-24 02:21:28 UTC
Belt Scout wrote:
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Belt Scout wrote:
Nidal Fervor wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Bots are bots. If it requires automation, it's not the player performing it.

The person who wants to run multiple clients should be required to give those clients their orders individually.

Using a bot to automate the giving of commands is using a bot.

And what's the policy on botting?

Ban ixboxers


Exactly. They require 3rd party software to send the commands to the other clients, as many as they are running. The effect is the same as botting in every way.


Ok there's clearly no showing you the errors in your comprehension of the eula. Please stop bothering to quote it until you have a clear and concise understanding.

Let me ask you one final question. What if I used, say, 10 accounts, and EACH ACCOUNT was on a separate computer with its own keyboard and mouse, and I used an assembly of sticks to press the buttons ALL AT ONCE. Would this still be 'illegal' game play?


oddly enough that is how ISK boxer works. I bet they would call it botting as well if you posted pictures on the internet of it.


Man, I was taking a sip of my coffee while googling "multiboxing with sticks" and this came up. My ribs hurt now. By the way, love ur sig.

http://gizmodo.com/5515135/mmorpg-multiboxing-gallery


But but but sticks is giving an advantage. Must ban sticks Big smile
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#97 - 2014-03-24 02:24:51 UTC
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
If the advantage the 3rd party program provides cannot be matched by the persons not using the 3rd party program, then it's abusing the advantage offered by a 3rd party program.


You got no ground to stand on.

Based of your other threads and replies you are even worse then the troll that started this thread.


I'm disappointed in you. How can anyone consider your arguments valid when upon you being presented with an argument you can't refute, you resort to insulting the person proving your logic is flawed?
Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
#98 - 2014-03-24 02:32:01 UTC
Caviar Liberta wrote:


But but but sticks is giving an advantage. Must ban sticks Big smile


California will prolly jump on that whole stick banning bandwagon first.

They say most of your brain shuts down on the EvE forums. All but the impatient side, and the sarcastic side. No wonder I'm still awake.

**This IS my main so STFU.
Dalto Bane
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#99 - 2014-03-24 02:43:34 UTC
Divine Entervention wrote:
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
If the advantage the 3rd party program provides cannot be matched by the persons not using the 3rd party program, then it's abusing the advantage offered by a 3rd party program.


You got no ground to stand on.

Based of your other threads and replies you are even worse then the troll that started this thread.


I'm disappointed in you. How can anyone consider your arguments valid when upon you being presented with an argument you can't refute, you resort to insulting the person proving your logic is flawed?


What's the advantage? Alpha? Flawless Fleet coordination? Give me a break. Risk vs reward...I pay, I risk more, by undocking multiple accounts, whereas you may have one. When things do go wrong, they go way wrong. Bottom line, there is no statistics or study that has concluded that 20 accounts being multiboxed has an advantage over 20 corpmates with individual accounts. If anything, it is the individuals that have the advantage.

Drops Mic
Divine Entervention
Doomheim
#100 - 2014-03-24 02:56:42 UTC
Dalto Bane wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
Cannibal Kane wrote:
Divine Entervention wrote:
If the advantage the 3rd party program provides cannot be matched by the persons not using the 3rd party program, then it's abusing the advantage offered by a 3rd party program.


You got no ground to stand on.

Based of your other threads and replies you are even worse then the troll that started this thread.


I'm disappointed in you. How can anyone consider your arguments valid when upon you being presented with an argument you can't refute, you resort to insulting the person proving your logic is flawed?


What's the advantage? Alpha? Flawless Fleet coordination? Give me a break. Risk vs reward...I pay, I risk more, by undocking multiple accounts, whereas you may have one. When things do go wrong, they go way wrong. Bottom line, there is no statistics or study that has concluded that 20 accounts being multiboxed has an advantage over 20 corpmates with individual accounts. If anything, it is the individuals that have the advantage.


The advantage is time. You say 20 individuals working against one botter with 20 accounts, they have the advantage.

If you spend 1 hour, with 20 accounts, it's still only 1 hour of your time. 1 hour.

20 people to fight your 20 accounts for 1 hour equals 20 hours. Because you're utilizing a 3rd party program that gives you the ability to do something you could not do out of game efficiently such as control 20 accounts in an quick effective manner.

3rd party programs that offer an advantage over others should be banworthy.

You argue that someone using an automation bot that will effectively play for him is illegal? Well according to your logic, that person "could" do every action manually, just as an isboxer could alt tab and input each action manually.

You say you risk 20 accounts worth of ships when you undock, Ok cool. That's nice i guess, but you're still there to save your own 20 account risk by telling them all to warp away and dock. Someone afk botting is taking a much larger risk because he's not there to decide when to and when not to warp away and dock.

an AFK botter is a GREATER risk than your 20 accounts. That leg is not strong enough to support your argument.
You don't want to manually alt tab to each instance of eve and input the commands seperately? Well someone else doesn't want to have to manually select a rock to target and manually press the f1 button.

You want to draw the line straight through the middle of automation, to pick and choose which one should and shouldn't be allowed, whichever one suits your desired playstyle.

I want no automation whatsoever. If you want to fly twenty ships, alt tab alot.