These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Update regarding Multiboxing and input automation

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#2881 - 2014-12-28 07:53:33 UTC
The hilarity until the the next "update"... and if it never occurs will be amusing.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2882 - 2014-12-28 07:54:18 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Updates seem to come slowly. Not sure what's up with that. I don't hold this issue against CCP -too much- because it makes sense to me how we got here. And it's just a situation, not necessarily one where one party has to "lose." By accident, the EVE client lended itself reasonably well to controlling multiple instances, and at some point CCP went with it and started peddling the idea. Then players wanted to make it easier, and some used ISBoxer.
I think, instead of being ok with ISBoxer for this long, CCP should have looked at what players were using ISBoxer for, and attempted to provide support for those actions in the client. I think then, the issues of scalability would make themselves more apparent, and faster, so they can be balanced.
I understand why some people think it would be a travesty to openly support multiboxing, but I think that goes back to the basic disagreement between players who are willing to play harder, and those who are not. However, with in-client support, any player can participate in the type of coordination and synchronization enjoyed by ISBoxer users.
Ethically, any dilemmas are solved by encouraging fleet gameplay (lol friends?) to make use of the ISBoxer-type multibox support that could be provided in the client.
I just see it as a matter of being a responsible merchant, and supporting their product. In the meantime, with ISBoxer out of the picture, collecting money for multiple subscriptions is just irresponsible on CCP's part. It strikes me as deadbeat behavior.


I was more referring to their new patch schedule with faster releases than the "once a year" stuff. I remember one of the devs going on about how this will let them change something a certain amount, and then let them fix it later on in a much shorter timespan than the 1/year.
I'd agree with you that they could've done something to mimic or duplicate ISBoxer, but I'm not going to have ISBoxer sit on the front line of the changes with more important things such as EVEMon and EFT being relegated to the end, where "more important" means "used by more people / percentage".

CCP was fine with ISBoxer being used to control multiple clients sans automation until people started whining and wanting CCP to fix their problems for them because they were too lazy to look up "Catalyst", "Talos", and "EWAR".

Activision recently had a minor kerfluffle over accusations that their CoD netcode actively hampered better players and gave unfair advantages to "noobs", for lack of a better term. I'm no sysadmin, but from what I could gather, the net-code would actively fiddle with latency and ping times on the players, would discount "hits" from the better player, and change misses to hits for the noob. I don't want to see the same thing to happen to EVE; nerfing "experts" in an attempt to level the playing field in a game that's not designed to be fair.
Actually, any dilemmas are solved by rewarding solo player gameplay to a point where the benefit of controlling fewer accounts outweighs the gained rewards.

I'm not willing to touch the "responsible merchant" tidbit given that PLEX was well on it's way to break 1b ISK and there was no word from CCP about it, even with people unsubbing until the price dropped to something more reasonable.
What strikes me as "deadbeat behavior" is going to EVE Vegas and Fanfest, making promises that nothing is changing regarding multiboxing, dropping a patch this huge on the playerbase, refusing any and all questions and requests for a sit-down by at least 5 people in the ISBoxing community, going off on vacation after said repeated requests, and then finally agreeing to a sit-down on Jan1, AFTER the patch goes through.
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#2883 - 2014-12-28 08:02:53 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Actually, any dilemmas are solved by rewarding solo player gameplay to a point where the benefit of controlling fewer accounts outweighs the gained rewards.

You mean like the mining minigames intended to take all your attention on a single client sort of thing?

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2884 - 2014-12-28 08:12:24 UTC
Alavaria Fera wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Actually, any dilemmas are solved by rewarding solo player gameplay to a point where the benefit of controlling fewer accounts outweighs the gained rewards.

You mean like the mining minigames intended to take all your attention on a single client sort of thing?


Hey, at least I'm trying to find a solution instead of blindly drinking the kool-aid. The length of the minigame doesn't have to take up an entire cycle's worth of time. Just enough (after some research, ofc) where there would be a definitive point of diminishing returns.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2885 - 2014-12-28 08:37:21 UTC
Replacing ISBoxer has big implications and benefits everyone able to get in a fleet. It's basically a proliferation.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Aoto Machine
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#2886 - 2014-12-28 08:53:58 UTC
I think i understand the policy but better safe then sorry would a problem like Synergy be considered against the EULA?
Basicly it lets you use 1 mouse 1 keyboard on two computers BUT i would have to move my mouse to the other screen to use the keyboard on the other computer... it does have features that could be considered against the new rules but as long as you just use its basic functions it should be fine right?

For example i have 1 account on the other computer and one on my mine while i mine or mission i would have to move the mouse to the other computer to use shortcuts and or click on things then move it back to the main PC to use shortcuts and click on things on that account.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2887 - 2014-12-28 09:05:25 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Replacing ISBoxer has big implications and benefits everyone able to get in a fleet. It's basically a proliferation.

Nope, can't understand this while hammered. I'll try in the morning when I'm not shitfaced.
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2888 - 2014-12-28 10:22:40 UTC
Indis Inzilbeth
Miners Inn
Goonswarm Federation
#2889 - 2014-12-28 15:24:03 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Indis Inzilbeth wrote:
multi boxing is not being banned, just the use of software/hardware to over come it's challenges
multi-boxing or multi-clienting (i know, thats probably not a real word) shouldn't be easy,
everything else in this game follows the premise that the more money an activity makes the more challenging it is,
ether by way of higher risk or increased effort or complexity of game play.
why should multi-boxing be any different, the more clients you have the more potential ya have for making isk,
so the more clients ya run the harder it should get.
I'm a mining ***** and I simul-run 6 clients on a single 15" laptop with a standard mouse and the laptops keyboard,
thats 4 hulks an Orca and a Charon Freighter, now the reason I run 4 hulks instead of say 8 or 10 is because managing 12 strip miners with A 82 second cycle and keeping an eye on 4 ore holds that only hold 1 whole cycle gives me plenty to do in a activity that is considered slow monotonous and boring. .....(also that gives me 1 hulk per ore type)
so when ya have come to a point where ya are running so many clients that it exceeds yer human capacity to effectively manage then maybe its time to find a player corp that can take some of the workload of yer hands.
to me, using outside software/hardware to over come this limitation by effectively enabling ya to click multiple buttons at once is just plane and simple cheating.

Quite frankly, I'm not sure what you're trying to say here. It's been established that multiboxing is not banned (yet). It has also been established (with no counter-evidence or counter-proof) that ISBoxing is anything but "simple" or "easy" so I don't know why you attempt to once again claim it's easy without proof or evidence to back up your claim.
Again, certain people will multibox or run multiple accounts easier than others. My friend runs solo C5 full escalations, and I'm 99% positive I can't do that yet, not without a lot of time training. I'm nowhere near the level that wheniaminspace or Oodell operate at. Hell, I still had trouble commanding 10 even after a year of flying them. I find it very disingenuous when people dare to lump every non-ISBoxer person into one catagory, and then lump every ISBoxer into another. This isn't a black-and-white community. This isn't something you can just "wave away" with a hand and make the baseless and evidence-lacking claim that somehow defending your gamestyle automatically means we're guilty. It's silly and it looks bad.
6 clients on a 15inch laptop? So you either have a powerful 2-core gaming rig, or a average/slightly above average 4-core laptop. Either way, you can arguably gain a marked advantage over another player who's using older stuff by running a single or two accounts and hitting 60 to 90 or even 120 FPS consistently in a small scale engagement, allowing you to react faster to the changes and have the game register your commands in a timely manner and transmit them to the server.
In your last paragraph, please define "effectively" and "human capacity". As stated earlier by others and myself, ISBoxer is not some plug-and-play software that runs itself. Please do some research on something you're going to decry on the forums, as we've heard the usual stuff spouted by Carl Crazycakes in system local and it's tiring at this point.
And finally, you tell us to join player corps, yet you completely missed 2 simple facts: 1) the general population of EVE would love nothing more than to find themselves in a player corporation of an ISBoxer, as awoxxing runs rampant in EVE and is at times encouraged. 2), it is a pain in the ass to transfer funds from 10+ accounts to one every day, so most players simply form a corp with 100% tax and call it a day. Not many are willing to be in a 100% tax corp, so ISBoxers are mostly alone.
edit: And as for your claim that it's simply cheating, how? Why? What part? Please, let us know.




Yer right I know nothing about Using outside software/hardware having never used any, but I also dare ya to find a single specific
referance to ISBoxer in my post, I refrained from talking about it specifically because as you say i no nothing about it, I just feel that activating 12 miners at once, over 4 clients with 1 push of a button is cheating, thats just my opinion, and I am perfectly fine with you disagreeing with me.
regarding my equipment. I used to (up until 4 months ago) use A 13" macbook pro 2,9 GHz i7 core 8GB RAM Intel HD Graphics 4000 1024MB client graphics optimized for memory, changed to PC Laptop 2,5 GHz i7 core 16GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 880M, 8GB of dedicated graphics memory now i run 6 clients on full graphics. changed because due to the graphic changes to the game I was starting to get a little lag in my clicking to game reaction time 2-3 sec
any hoo I rarely post on forums and I was just posting my musings, I didn't expect to have to defend it like a theses so I'm just gona accept the fact that ya disagree with me

Indis
Indis Inzilbeth
Miners Inn
Goonswarm Federation
#2890 - 2014-12-28 15:39:15 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
Updates seem to come slowly. Not sure what's up with that. I don't hold this issue against CCP -too much- because it makes sense to me how we got here. And it's just a situation, not necessarily one where one party has to "lose." By accident, the EVE client lended itself reasonably well to controlling multiple instances, and at some point CCP went with it and started peddling the idea. Then players wanted to make it easier, and some used ISBoxer.

I think, instead of being ok with ISBoxer for this long, CCP should have looked at what players were using ISBoxer for, and attempted to provide support for those actions in the client. I think then, the issues of scalability would make themselves more apparent, and faster, so they can be balanced.

I understand why some people think it would be a travesty to openly support multiboxing, but I think that goes back to the basic disagreement between players who are willing to play harder, and those who are not. However, with in-client support, any player can participate in the type of coordination and synchronization enjoyed by ISBoxer users.

Ethically, any dilemmas are solved by encouraging fleet gameplay (lol friends?) to make use of the ISBoxer-type multibox support that could be provided in the client.

I just see it as a matter of being a responsible merchant, and supporting their product. In the meantime, with ISBoxer out of the picture, collecting money for multiple subscriptions is just irresponsible on CCP's part. It strikes me as deadbeat behavior.



Thats just good old fashioned Icelandic greed
Sirius Jr
Killer Monkey Army
#2891 - 2014-12-28 18:34:40 UTC
OK for all the STUPID people here, ISBOXER isnt band, some of its functions are.

If your using it to log on your toons to mine with etc and use each account separately then you are fine, if you log on your toons, form a gang and go kill **** using one key stroke, you get BANNED.

Easy isnt stupid people ShockedShockedShocked
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers
#2892 - 2014-12-28 18:47:48 UTC
your really over dramatizing what is now "prohibited". You can still multibox and kill someone with one key stroke (assign drones to your main and press F1 on that main client).

but dont send the same command to 2+ clients at the same time, or your banned (man that sounds so ridiculous, its laughable)

Legacy - An EVE Online Blog

Legacy of a Capsuleer Podcast

EVEServers.info - One stop API Solution for Corps/Alliances
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2893 - 2014-12-28 21:48:47 UTC
Indis Inzilbeth wrote:
Yer right I know nothing about Using outside software/hardware having never used any, but I also dare ya to find a single specific
referance to ISBoxer in my post, I refrained from talking about it specifically because as you say i no nothing about it, I just feel that activating 12 miners at once, over 4 clients with 1 push of a button is cheating, thats just my opinion, and I am perfectly fine with you disagreeing with me.
regarding my equipment. I used to (up until 4 months ago) use A 13" macbook pro 2,9 GHz i7 core 8GB RAM Intel HD Graphics 4000 1024MB client graphics optimized for memory, changed to PC Laptop 2,5 GHz i7 core 16GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 880M, 8GB of dedicated graphics memory now i run 6 clients on full graphics. changed because due to the graphic changes to the game I was starting to get a little lag in my clicking to game reaction time 2-3 sec
any hoo I rarely post on forums and I was just posting my musings, I didn't expect to have to defend it like a theses so I'm just gona accept the fact that ya disagree with me

When you referenced using multiple clients and your sniping remark at "software/hardware to overcome it's challenges" I naturally assumed you meant ISBoxer and similar software since that was the general target of this thread. I have no problem with people disagreeing, I just wish that people who disagree would post actual arguments instead of "I feel that". This isn't tumblr where "feels" have any weight to them.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2894 - 2014-12-28 21:51:47 UTC
It isn't his either.
Marsha Mallow
#2895 - 2014-12-28 22:14:35 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
It isn't his either.

Thanks for clarifying. Since I can't be bothered rereading this can you summarise the thread (and your argument) atm? I'm assuming it's fairly detailed since Eve-search is telling me you've just about beaten Lucas for posts with 234 and counting. Although he's flailing about gloriously elsewhere and might be in the lead overall.

Btw, your sig isn't proving anything other than a comprehension failure. Multiboxers don't have anything to worry about if they don't use Isboxer, macros or 15 plyboard keystroke replicators in their forevervirgin basements.

But, please, carry on. First one to 500 posts gets a Fedo.

Ripard Teg > For the morons in the room:

Sweets > U can dd my face any day
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#2896 - 2014-12-28 22:59:37 UTC
"Multiboxing" encompasses ISBoxers. ISBoxers, by definition, use multiple accounts. All ISBoxers are multiboxers, but not all multiboxers are ISBoxers.
If you insist on not reading my other posts, here's a quick summary:

This change was brought about by lazy whiners who want CCP to bring down multiboxers because they put more time, effort, and money into the game. These whiners make false comparisons in order to shore up their cause, and blatantly ignore force-multipliers like EWAR and capacitor warfare in their tantrum, as well as ignoring the limitations that ISBoxer puts on fleet and fit compositions. Additionally, it makes maneuvering solitary clients to avoid EWAR and minimize damage near impossible without compromising the entire fleet.
These players' continuous attempts to make the argument that 6A3 was on a per-human basis despite months if not years of GMs and Devs stating otherwise is a pathetic attempt to further cloud the issue.
Additionally, these players want to argue that ISBoxers earn an inordinate amount of ISK than some magical "average" player, meanwhile making any excuse they can to justify and defend market traders who earn much more than ISBoxers with comparably less effort.

These players can't make any argument as to why ISBoxing or input broadcasting in it's current form should be banned without engaging in multiple logical fallacies, outright lying to players, using double standards, and attempting to use their emotions as something with value.
Indis Inzilbeth
Miners Inn
Goonswarm Federation
#2897 - 2014-12-29 02:37:12 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Indis Inzilbeth wrote:
Yer right I know nothing about Using outside software/hardware having never used any, but I also dare ya to find a single specific
referance to ISBoxer in my post, I refrained from talking about it specifically because as you say i no nothing about it, I just feel that activating 12 miners at once, over 4 clients with 1 push of a button is cheating, thats just my opinion, and I am perfectly fine with you disagreeing with me.
regarding my equipment. I used to (up until 4 months ago) use A 13" macbook pro 2,9 GHz i7 core 8GB RAM Intel HD Graphics 4000 1024MB client graphics optimized for memory, changed to PC Laptop 2,5 GHz i7 core 16GB Nvidia GeForce GTX 880M, 8GB of dedicated graphics memory now i run 6 clients on full graphics. changed because due to the graphic changes to the game I was starting to get a little lag in my clicking to game reaction time 2-3 sec
any hoo I rarely post on forums and I was just posting my musings, I didn't expect to have to defend it like a theses so I'm just gona accept the fact that ya disagree with me

When you referenced using multiple clients and your sniping remark at "software/hardware to overcome it's challenges" I naturally assumed you meant ISBoxer and similar software since that was the general target of this thread. I have no problem with people disagreeing, I just wish that people who disagree would post actual arguments instead of "I feel that". This isn't tumblr where "feels" have any weight to them.



wtf is tumblr?
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2898 - 2014-12-29 03:29:09 UTC
I wonder if there are plans to accommodate multiple clients, or if CCP expects everyone to create frankencomputers like I've done, just to play EVE. It's no wonder why EVE never had a breakout moment. To be accurate, multiboxing isn't the biggest issue, it's the clunkiness of the UI, with information laid out in bare, unimaginative tables with the excuse of there being a lot of information.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
#2899 - 2014-12-29 03:44:42 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
clunkiness of the UI, with information laid out in bare, unimaginative tables with the excuse of there being a lot of information.

But you have to admit it is a pretty good excuse.

Triggered by: Wars of Sovless Agression, Bending the Knee, Twisting the Knife, Eating Sov Wheaties, Bombless Bombers, Fizzlesov, Interceptor Fleets, Running Away, GhostTime Vuln, Renters, Bombs, Bubbles ?
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#2900 - 2014-12-29 03:46:27 UTC
I understand why an elegant solution has escaped so many people for so long, yeah.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)