EVE General Discussion

CCP isn't going to win if they try to change eve into a SC or elite clone...

I say this because CCP has been slowly removing aspects of the game that made it unique. Now if you're a scammer it's okay but don't get too good or you'll get banned like a certain famous scammer. It's okay to multibox but if you get too good you'll get banned. The wording they used in the fanfest presentation seems to ban some features of windows including areo. It's madness at best with the worst case being a course set for oblivion.

It's obvious that CCP considers a certain section of players to be problematic and in their zeal to remove those players they are creating all kinds of vagueness and shiftiness in their wording that makes it incredibly difficult for those of us that want to continue boxing without being banned. I would prefer CCP just be honest and say what activities it is that they want boxers to stop doing so at least then we'd know where we stand.

I find it hilarious that it's Blizzard doing HTFU while CCP panders to the lazy.

Oh we tried. We have a few Guys in Island at the fanfest. They had prepared questions. and they got blocked. the werent allowed to ask those unwanted questions at the roundtable.

I dont like to just assume it's ok with how i multibox cause i am not banned.

i just want to talk with a guy from ccp who is not limited in his answers to predefined eula Responses.

Funny Thing too is, that the other overview program is explicit allowed by ccp. and videofx was too in that context. and now videofx suddenly becomes a modifying eve tool... i think they didnt even looked into videofx and what it can do.
but ok, were not using that one.

currently in my Setup:

F1 = F1 in Box1
F2 = F1 in Box2
F10 = F1 in Box10

X1 = Shift+F1 in Box1
X2 = Shift+F2 in Box2

etc.

As i am flying with 10 boxes max, i can all of them use at nearly the same time.

again my question, as it was blocked at the fanfest and didnt even made it to the presentation. am i violating the eula?

If you re-look at the second TMC article about the banned bonus room player, you'd realize he didn't go to the same lengths as Erotica 1 did. He claimed to keep it well before the line that Erotica 1 crossed, and James 315 made an excellent argument for having clear lines in the sand Additionally, players who were just idling in the channel were banned for guilt by association, something which any lawyer in the world would have a wet dream if he was assigned a criminal case where that was the case.

As for ISBoxer, yes, I agree we have already demonstrated without a shadow of a doubt that ISBoxer does not break 6A3, and if it's being banned for 6A2 then we must also ban Steam Overlay, TS3 Overlay, and Mumble Overlay. That's not even COUNTING the fact that ISBoxer does not display it's VideoFX ONTO ANOTHER CLIENT, but rather onto WINDOWS AERO. If we're banning it for it's FPS limiting factor, then there's a problem as that can be inserted into the properties window of the exe, as well as being a staple feature you can set on most games coming out on the market these days. If we're banning on 6A3 on per-client basis, no ISBoxer has yet been able to break the ISK of an identical fleet with identical setup/mods/implants/skills/exp. If we're banning on 6A3 on per-human basis, then we have a problem as 1) This was not mentioned anywhere by CCP and 2) Even a 5-box (loki + archon + moros + booster + cap escalator) C6 capital escalation fleet with an unlimited amount of C6 sites doesn't even come close to the amount of ISK earned by a supercap scammer, a market PVPer, or even a regular supercap builder.

Funny you said that. I used power of two A LOT.

Can someone from CCP please clarify what Team Security presented during Fanfest?



They seem to say its "client modification" if you put VFX inside your client window. Then state to "read the EULA" and that these programs modify the client.

CCP's Example of a modified Client

That is of course false, since your just using built in Window DWM / AERO features (the same thing you see when you hold alt-tab). This is a built in windows feature that you could implement on your PC without using tools like ISBoxer, which just makes it easier.

In fact CCP is helping development one now.

If I use the CCP endorsed DWM tool, which modifies how the game client is presented, am I not in the same violation?

EVE-O preview - multi-client preview

That program is EASILY following the same pathway that ISBoxer uses to modify clients for easier window management, it could VERY QUICKLY turn into the same exact feature set (would that be falling into some kind of copyright infringement, CCP?)

However since they are seemingly intent on calling Windows Features "client modification", using VFX and Rollover OUTSIDE the client cant be considered client modification.

So if I use VFX, Clickbars, round-robin etc OUTSIDE the client window, I am not modifying the client in anyway, so therefor I am not in violation if I am using CCP's strict interperation of the rules.

This is an example of a dxnothing window that DOES NOT in anyway put anything inside the EVE Client Window. This MUST be within the EULA based on CCP's presentation. (Before anyone harps the "3rd party tool for an advantage to the average player" garbage, 1st defend the CCP endorsed EVE-O Preview tool, Evernus, Elinor, EVEHQ and many other 3rd party programs that give you an advantage over others).



Assuming that using Rollover buttons OUTSIDE of the client is ok, since im not "modifying the client", then what is the issue? Am I not allowed to send a "left mouse button click" when I move my mouse?

In Team Security's presentation they stated you CAN use Touch Screens. Ok, can I use a Touch Screen to activate a bunch of modules in a row (like all of my low slots)? Is using Touch Screens ok but using Rollover's not ok?

What about just re-mapping the keys from my clients onto my keyboard or another input device?

Are we allowed to make key remaps? Can I remap F1 on Client #2 to F2 instead?

If I get a Xkey 80 and assign each button, I could easily use bombers almost as effeicently as using Rollover or Input Duplication... Is this allowed? Its certainty not a macro, just a key remap? How would CCP know the difference though? I can hit 16 + buttons in a second using my fingers, what if i just took my fist and smashed all the keys?

There is a simple solution to all of this vagueness

If you dont want to name features directly then draw a line

" you cannot send more then x commands to your clients in x seconds."

Simple, easy to follow, no confusion. Something like that would be completely feature agnostic.

This current vagueness is complete garbage.

I and others have outlined questions and concerns at Dual-boxing.com

http://www.dual-boxing.com/threads/52086-Team-Security-EVE-Fanfest-presentation-1500-GMT-on-Saturday-March-21st?p=397319&viewfull=1#post397319

I have removed two posts that were off topic or trollish in nature.

I am using the 120 xkey version btw.

What do you think they have done that would allow you to take this course of action ?

http://xkeys.com/xkeys/xk128.php

but i am currently experimenting with a usb touchscreen, cause i can adjust keys faster.

and ccp allowed using touchscreens for input.

it is a usb display in fact. as touchscreen.