EVE General Discussion

You're the one who wanted clarification, I was pointing out that the original post was clear enough regarding that feature. You seem to understand that now, so I'm not sure why you were looking for clarification.



Bullsh*t, it's been explained many times in depth over the last 109 pages, some of us actually read them so we know that. But to make it crystal clear: Multiplexing allows levels of efficiency and productivity that surpass a normal multiboxer with the same number of accounts. A person can run incursions with 12 accounts more efficiently by broadcasting to clients with similar roles. The same goes for other things like mining or bombing. A person with a single account operates at one level of efficiency. A person with multiple accounts operates at a higher level even though each account is slightly less efficient than running a single one. A multiplexer running multiple accounts can operate all of those accounts at near single account efficiency, mitigating the affect of running those accounts simultaneously. CCP and many players have a problem with that. They are saying you can have all the accounts you want, but multiplexing is no longer a legal option for mitigating the affects of running multiple account simultaneously.



You keep using that word, minority, I don't think it means what you think it means. You really don't seem to understand how many people are happy with this change. Once again, read the last 109 pages and realize it's a couple guys saying "no, not in the face" and a lot of other people, solo and multiboxers alike, saying "this is great, thanks." Banning multiplexing isn't attacking a playstyle because it was never about the playstyle, it was about the results. Multiboxing is a playstyle, improved efficiency through linked input is one aspect of that playstyle that not even all multiboxers use. Who's the minority now?



Unlikely, as I tread carefully and take care to know the rules. I'm fine with a loss of efficiency or missed opportunity if the result is that I'm not skirting the rules. I enjoy the game for what it is, not what I can squeeze out of it by pushing the limits of legality.

I wonder how much prices for everything will go up since all minerals in the new year will go up in price?


Wont affect vets since they have a ton of isk.

New players will look at the cost of ships and what little isk they can earn and go wtf..........

As a non-boxing incursion runner (my second account is PI and trading), my efficiency is zero when I have no fleet to fly with, when other players are busy/asleep, there are no FCs available or on the contrary when there are too many active players at the weekends and it takes forever getting into a fleet in the first place. What's the multiboxer's efficiency at those points? Log on x12 (or 40!), start running instantly at 95%? 95 > 0

Multiboxers earning more isk affects the economy for everyone - likewise for multiboxing miners flooding the markets with minerals.

So you're a minority of a minority that's whining here? I don't really see how saying 'it's only the 1% of forum users' will help or hinder either sides' arguments.

So you are saying that your problem with isboxer is that you don;t have enough friends to be able to actively pursue your interests whenever you want? So I guess someone in a highly active corp that constantly runs incursions should also be banned, since they are unfairly able to do incursions all day long.

What if an isboxer miner wants to go out and mine some ice but there's no belt! Onoes!

Uhhh, not really, no. The mineral prices didn't drastically drop when eve players started using isboxer, and it's unlikely to drastically rise even if isboxers stop altogether. The whole "the economy!" argument is put forward by people with absolutely no idea how the economy actually functions. People won't suddenly be making billions of isk/hours from their minerals, because as the price increases the amount of people running the activity does too, bringing it back to a normal price, not to metion the trillions of minerals sitting around being trickle fed to the market to keep it from crashing. On top of that, the amount of multiboxers will barely change. Even without isboxers it's easy to run 20 miners all day long. EVE is not a click intensive game.

Well since whining carebears tend to say "look, we're whining, therefore this is obviously a problem" it's worth mentioning. and yes, on both sides there's a minority. The vast majority of users do not care how everyone else is playing.

Third party tools have always been against the EULA. Multiple times over, CCP devs have stated that as long as no automation was taking place, it's fine.

Let's not forget that EVEMon and several other 3rd party tools are also against the EULA, and those are also still allowed.

Well then CCP should ban them. And EVE-central, dotlan, jeveassets, eft, eve-mentat, elinor, eve-mogul, the list goes on and on and ends with several thousands spreadsheets used by traders every day. The fact is that CCP allow tools to augment gameplay. They always have. They even have a whole new site up designed to help people create more third party applications, so it's unlikely they are going to go down that route, no matter how many whining idiots cry about how unfair it is.

And how many incursion boxers do you have site times for? On average, a real fleet of comparable investment and skill is 10-20% faster than a boxer. The issue is more that the boxer has control of their own coase cost, and absolute control over the investment applied to the entire fleet. Most boxers are easy enough to shut down through target denial if you actually watch them for a site or two and do a little bit of comp shuffling.

You want to ***** about no fleet? Either HTFU and FC cause its really easy these days, go shiny enough to get into other communities or found your own.

Not quite. Boxers went into mining because it is a safe way to make a reasonable amount for a limited investment and generally safe. They have lower earnings per hour than X individual players in the same fits paying the same amount of attention, and while it does drive the margins down as they are effectively reducing the number of hours that someone must shoot lasers at rocks, they aren't more than a moderate fraction of the market at most. Nothing says you can't mine and make minerals appear from pixels that are labeled rocks and make your space money that way, just nothing forcing people to buy from you at the price that makes it worth it to you to mine.



I always suggest not messing with the sort of minority most boxers present: An engaged, competent and individualistic minority with a strong relative stake should not be dismissed quickly.

CCP would like more pilots to join player run corporations and to encourage more new pilots to stay long term. AWOXing is probably a spanner in the works for this plan to be successful. Wardecs, suicide ganking, and destruction of ships in general are part of the cycle in New Eden as on Earth. If no humans died on Earth we would be in one hell of a mess. If you don't want to have the risk of losing any of your in-game assets you should play another MMO such as Guild Wars where you can't lose any of your accrued assets. Ninja salvaging/salvaging in general have been hit by the industry changes and the reduction in reprocessing value of loot. Regarding margin scammers and abuse of open trade windows I expect everyone has suffered at least once from those but you learn from your mistakes. I wouldn't bother me if CCP fixed the client so margin scamming and abuse of open trade windows couldn't happen.

I haven't read the latest CSM minutes but I don't expect the CSM would have pushed for some action on ISBoxer use if they didn't believe there was wide support for it and that it would be good for EVE Online.

Per-character efficiency. It's the bit you are seeming to miss. Of course having more characters is going to make more isk overall than a single character, isboxer or not, but the fact remains that a single character played manually is more efficient than a single character of a multiboxed set, which is in turn more efficient than a single character of a broadcast controlled set.

So again, we're back to the point that you issues isn't with them more efficient, your issue is that someone has more characters than you, which will still be the case even without broadcasting.

No, I can see that you've jumped into the thread with seemingly very little knowledge of the subject matter talking about how hard done by people are who are being crush by zee evil multiboxers and their superior efficiency.

You must be new to the forums. Pretty much every time any change is suggested which makes the game easier for players who have just migrated from WoW, there's mass cheering. It's because there's quite a large collection of players who want to sit in complete safety in a completely fair game. Well that's just not EVE. People will scam and gank, metagame and minmax their way through the entire game. A bunch of people on the forums supporting a change doesn't automatically make that change a good idea.

Yes, like the rules that broadcasting input was completely fine. the rules that have been in place for years and that people have based the development of their gameplay style off of. The rules that are being changed to solve an issue that the rule change will not solve.

Well that's probably because you either have no stake in the matter or, like many, you post your whining under an alt. But of course you have no problem with someone else's playstyle being banned. It doesn't affect you one way or the other.

Attempting to compare WTM or TDF to an ISBoxer is akin to comparing WTM to ISN or ICU.
Many ISBoxers are members of alliances and communities. It's very hard to be the equivalent of the lone gung-ho elite special forces in a game such as this. Even bomber boxers are members of an alliance and interact with others.
I'm not going to touch the PLEX thing because we get mixed signals from CCP about it. But reduced demand with constant supply will reduce the prices of PLEX.

If by "allowed," you mean "tolerated because CCP sees that they fill a need that their tools don't yet satisfy," then, yeah, sure.

If you're arguing that this means that people think they can continue cache-scraping with impunity when CCP rolls out the CREST functionality that replaces it, I have news for you. The relevant developers already know that the writing is on the wall.

When you're in a grey area, keep your eyes open, tread carefully and take nothing for granted.