These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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: pay to win in eve?

First post First post
Author
Lothros Andastar
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#81 - 2014-06-23 17:39:59 UTC
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#82 - 2014-06-23 17:43:08 UTC
A better solution is for CCP to create an authorised multi-account control system of their own

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#83 - 2014-06-23 17:47:39 UTC
Lothros Andastar wrote:
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.


Wait, what's wrong with ISBoxer?
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#84 - 2014-06-23 17:52:25 UTC
Carmen Electra wrote:
Lothros Andastar wrote:
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.


Wait, what's wrong with ISBoxer?


Apparently, it makes people jelly

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Barzai Mekhar
True Confusion
#85 - 2014-06-23 17:55:01 UTC
Lothros Andastar wrote:
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.


It's only a solution if the people that matter (=Devs) decide that there's a problem to be solved.

As for a game identifying whether it's run from a virtual box and whether that box receives hardware or software input without branching into becoming spyware itself - sure, sound like an "easy" thing.
Belt Scout
Thread Lockaholics Anonymous
#86 - 2014-06-23 17:56:10 UTC
Carmen Electra wrote:
Lothros Andastar wrote:
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.


Wait, what's wrong with ISBoxer?


It allows a single player harvest tears at an incredible rate. Big smile

.

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.

Rhivre
TarNec
Invisible Exchequer
#87 - 2014-06-23 17:58:00 UTC
If it wasn't ISBoxer, it would be "OMG 10 players can blow up my ship/Mine out my asteroid belt".

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#88 - 2014-06-23 17:58:26 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Carmen Electra wrote:
Lothros Andastar wrote:
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.


Wait, what's wrong with ISBoxer?


Apparently, it makes people jelly


Another ban multiboxing thread...
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#89 - 2014-06-23 17:59:13 UTC
weavesilk.com is one of my new favourite websites ever.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#90 - 2014-06-23 18:01:42 UTC
Lothros Andastar wrote:
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.

Why? Solution to what?

Wouldn't it be better to simply disconnect and pemaban anyone with a Symantec product installed, since those actually are bad for you and you should be taught not to use them? I mean, at least there would be some logic to that kind of move.
De'Veldrin
Republic University
Minmatar Republic
#91 - 2014-06-23 18:05:28 UTC  |  Edited by: De'Veldrin
Lothros Andastar wrote:
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.


Yeah, your assembly hall thread on this topic is riveting stuff. Especially the part where you accidentally ban everyone connecting from University housing.

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.

PotatoOverdose
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#92 - 2014-06-23 18:11:41 UTC
Pay to win is an interesting concept. In eve, bringing more isk to the table (in the form of falcon alts, OGB alts, Implants, Super hotdrops, etc.) can often provide an advantage to an individual or group. While they don't guarantee victory (individual skill is usually a much larger deciding factor), they can nonetheless help you advance your goals. And all of these things can be acquired with isk acquired through in game means or through sufficient quantities of real world currency exchanged for plex.

For all intents and purposes, isboxed clients fall into that same category.

So, is that pay to win? In Dota (for example), one guy controlling two heroes while taking up only one slot on a team might be considered pay to win. But Eve isn't Dota, and finding a fair fight in eve is like finding a needle in a haystack. Eve isn't about fair competition between two or more players. In fact, the "game" in eve is, more often than not, about securing some advantage over an opponent to allow for a decidedly unfair fight.

It's ultimately up to you if you think that is pay to win. If you look at it through the lens of Dota or some other equally banal "esport" game, maybe. But if that's what you think, you probably missed the entire point of eve.
Stabs McShiv
Royal Amarr Institute
Amarr Empire
#93 - 2014-06-23 18:32:25 UTC
Isboxer will stop being pay to win when CCP pays our innerspace subscriptions.
Carmen Electra
AlcoDOTTE
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#94 - 2014-06-23 19:02:08 UTC
Stabs McShiv wrote:
Isboxer will stop being pay to win when CCP pays our innerspace subscriptions.


Grrr software engineers who want to get paid for doing work.
Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#95 - 2014-06-23 19:03:19 UTC
Did someone win the game???

Why wasn't I told?

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~

IIshira
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#96 - 2014-06-23 19:09:00 UTC
Sentamon wrote:
Did someone win the game???

Why wasn't I told?

Of course... It's a secret key combination but not many people know
ashley Eoner
#97 - 2014-06-23 20:18:43 UTC  |  Edited by: ashley Eoner
Tauranon wrote:
J'Poll wrote:
Tauranon wrote:
J'Poll wrote:


You are yet another whiner about ISB.

It's allowed, deal with it.


Some of us would very definately like that changed, and it is not whining to point that out.


Are you then also going to whine to CCP to visit all their subs to see if they didn't do this:

http://forums.riftgame.com/attachments/pvp-warfronts/12520-stop-multiboxing-least-pvp-eve_multiboxing_1.jpg

p.s. that's exactly what ISB does, only on a software level.


I'd be perfectly ok if they banned duplicated input, no matter what the source. You'll have to live with the fact that some of us don't want it in the game.

You're asking for an impossibility...


Lothros Andastar wrote:
Simple solution is to simply not allow you to connect to TQ if you have ISBoxer installed, with permabans if you evade it.

Then people use various tricks to hide isboxer and continue to use the program.

Or people use different programs that CCP doesn't know of.

Or people like me just use a hardware solution which ccp cannot detect..



I would like to point out that when you multibox 10 characters you're exposure to loss is 10x as much. Meaning while you might make more then a single player you're risking 10x as much isk. On a per character basis you generally make a lot less then what a single played character makes.
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#98 - 2014-06-23 20:23:21 UTC
Personally I don't have a problem with multiboxers, I am one.

But when I multibox, I control my chars individually as I believe multiboxing software is essentially botting because you control one char and then rely on third party software to control the others, lets face it if that's not botting then what is.

It is also against the EULA, but will CCP do anything about it? No, because they are making money from it (indirectly), which is also having an effect on the in game economy which affects us all.

The problem is not just with the bomber fleets, but also also in mining (especially ice), incursions and although I haven't witnessed it, I dare say in wormholes too.

I would love to see a ban on multiboxing software and stop this game from being ruined, but just cant see CCP doing anything about it.
Ramona McCandless
Silent Vale
LinkNet
#99 - 2014-06-23 20:28:03 UTC
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:


It is also against the EULA

I would love to see a ban on multiboxing software


wut

"Yea, some dude came in and was normal for first couple months, so I gave him director." - Sean Dunaway

"A singular character could be hired to penetrate another corps space... using gorilla like tactics..." - Chane Morgann

Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#100 - 2014-06-23 20:38:13 UTC
Ramona McCandless wrote:
Prostetnik Vogon Jeltz wrote:


It is also against the EULA

I would love to see a ban on multiboxing software


wut


CONDUCT
A. Specifically Restricted Conduct

Your continued access to the System and license to play the Game is subject to proper conduct. Without limiting CCP's rights to control the Game environment, and the conduct of the players within that environment, CCP prohibits the following practices that CCP has determined detract from the overall user experience of the users playing the Game.

1. You may not take any action that imposes an unreasonable or disproportionately large load on the System.
2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
3. 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.



As you can see part 2 states "You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played", which multiboxing software obviously does.

and part 3 "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.". Multiboxing software allows the acquisition of items in an accelerated way.

Therefore is in contravention of the EULA.