These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Astroyka
IXXAXAAR
#381 - 2014-11-25 18:23:40 UTC
Veers Belvar wrote:
Big +1 on the decision, but I'm worried it doesn't go far enough. People will just purchase more screens, and manually control multiple accounts. It'll be harder, surely, but it's still viable to manually control a 10 ship tornado gank fleet or procurer mining fleet. The only sure way to get rid of multiboxing, and entitle everyone equally to the actions of one character at a time, is to get rid of multiboxing entirely.


Running multiple accounts should not be removed, it has its place. Human control of multiple accounts is fine with me, software control of multiple accounts is not.

Simply put, human error will creep in and that's good for EvE.

Astroyka

A New Eden pilot, fighting against slavery in New Eden

www.astroyka.net

@Astroyka
Apo Lamperouge
#382 - 2014-11-25 18:23:54 UTC
Fiberton wrote:
Hrm so Mining goods are about to sky rocket. Ok so I have never used one of these things you speak of but even I after over 10 years in the game know that this is a terrible idea. So when you are making decisions did you consult an accountant? You realize that you are prob going to reduce CCP income about 3M a year just from logins who will drop accounts that are used for that sort of thing ? Ok not to tell you guys how to run a company but just flying around for so many years and knowing persons who use that.. At least 5% of eve is just miners on isboxer. Good luck on driving into a brick wall or whatever you dudes do.. Phobe great idea. this.. I would consult an accountant.



Just like every other "you do this CCP and I swear to god i will unsub" and "....everyone will unsub" post that goes up with every change.

Some changes I don't like. Jump drive changes. Don't like em. But dealing with it.

How many of the 50,000 people who swore on their collection of awesome nintendo controllers actually did?

Less than 1% I'd wager.

This change? LOVE IT!!!! GO GO ISBOXER BOMBER BAN!

So go ahead, unsub, can I haz yer lewts and all that. Bye bye and bye bonds.

Don't let the space dock door hit you in the ass on the way out scrub.

Sometimes a knife right through your heart is exactly what you need.
Mildew Wolf
#383 - 2014-11-25 18:24:27 UTC
)))
Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#384 - 2014-11-25 18:24:49 UTC
Gina Taroen wrote:
lol wonder how many people will quit because of this :D


None of the ones that care about the game.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.
Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
#385 - 2014-11-25 18:26:03 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
So honest question here. Is this rig still legit or is it also banned?


Quote:
We would like to clarify that it does not matter how Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are being done, whether through use of software or modified hardware. Our only concern is regarding how it is being used in the EVE universe.


Christ, why are you people so bad at reading?

"Shoot at anything that moves. If it doesn't move, shoot it anyway, it might move later."

"Do not be too positive. The light at the end of the tunnel could be a train." - Franz Kafka
Rowells
Blackwater USA Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#386 - 2014-11-25 18:26:05 UTC
can anyone help me put my foot in my mouth? I cant seem to reach...
Jack Harvey
Iron Inquisition
Hisec Miners
#387 - 2014-11-25 18:26:09 UTC
This topic is very interesting. There is a phrase/concept called 'round robin' where the user (for example) presses F1, and then the software is sequenced to the next client. So he hits F1 again and it broadcasts to the second client. Because the broadcasts aren't simultaneous, it appears that you can rapidly hit F1 and still be within the rules laid out. Will be interested to see how a lot of the niche questions are addressed!
RudinV
Sons Of Mother's Friend
Can i bring my Drake...
#388 - 2014-11-25 18:26:22 UTC
Zechariah Jericho wrote:
Guys the toxic is getting high
Was in the middle of showing a friend this game, got to general discussion "what's that?" >>> 6 minutes later he decides he doesn't want to play because of our community and how badly we're reacting to the news that people cannot play the way they want to.

last words of the discussion were (and I quote) "Some sandbox, lets just go play LoL"

pff seems legit.
LoL community is famous to be tolerant and newbie welcome.
Jean Luc Lemmont
Carebears on Fire
#389 - 2014-11-25 18:26:29 UTC
marly cortez wrote:
The Sandbox ....What can be will be......except when we decide it's not to be. Compliments of CCP... Evil


You don't understand the term sandbox.

Will I get banned for boxing!?!?!

This thread has degenerated to the point it's become like two bald men fighting over a comb. -- Doc Fury

It's bonuses, not boni, you cretins.
Colin Wilson
Meow Meow Multigalactic Enterprises
#390 - 2014-11-25 18:26:30 UTC
Querns wrote:
Do you really think that people subscribing with PLEX somehow deny CCP a sale? People who PLEX their accounts are just paying with someone else's money. CCP gets theirs no matter what. In fact, every account sustained via PLEX grosses CCP 33% MORE money than the same account kept alive with a traditional subscription, due to PLEX costing $20 (compared to the traditional sub costing $15.)


I don't know why this is so had to understand for so many. While the buyer and seller PLEX markets are obviously tied together by the isk transferring, the buying of PLEX by the sellers and the consuming of PLEX by the account PLEX'ers are effectively independent, other than the PLEX sellers needing to buy more if the price drops or less if the price increases. The loss of EVE players not paying a sub fee or using PLEX will not translate into a material loss of revenue for CCP.
Odysseus Rhodes
Doomheim
#391 - 2014-11-25 18:26:38 UTC
Warr Akini wrote:
I've had a good suicide ganking run, but the wave of nerfs against it don't seem to be stopping anytime soon.

Thanks. It's been fun.



Best tears ... ever.

See ya!

Don't let the door hit ya in the ass!
Anonymous Forumposter
State War Academy
Caldari State
#392 - 2014-11-25 18:26:55 UTC
Kronarn wrote:
This is interesting. I know a few people who mine with 20+ clients using ISBOXER, there is no way anyone will mine with 5 maybe 10 accounts or more without a tool to help such as ISBOXER, now the question is, will they quit eve seeing as they only mine?

Will the cost of capitals go through the roof again? Will the cost of all things go through the roof.

Looking forward to seeing the outcome of the end result here.

I use ISBOXER at times to mine ice (10 accounts) and I don't think I could be bothered managing 10 clients to mine ice or ore, that would be so painful Lol

I also don't plex my accounts, I don't have enough time to make 10b a month just to be able to login, I pay for everyone of them.

Really love the new strategy of CCP, I genuinly hope this does what they intend it to do and it's not a negative backlash to the subscriber base.


I've manually mined with 8 accounts. I could see myself going to 10, but no more.
Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
#393 - 2014-11-25 18:26:59 UTC
Querns wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Big +1 on the decision, but I'm worried it doesn't go far enough. People will just purchase more screens, and manually control multiple accounts. It'll be harder, surely, but it's still viable to manually control a 10 ship tornado gank fleet or procurer mining fleet. The only sure way to get rid of multiboxing, and entitle everyone equally to the actions of one character at a time, is to get rid of multiboxing entirely.

This will probably never happen. This game is pretty much impossible to play on any meaningful level without multiboxing.

It really is not, but people are not willing to rely on specialised friends to do what you "can easily do with an alt".

"Shoot at anything that moves. If it doesn't move, shoot it anyway, it might move later."

"Do not be too positive. The light at the end of the tunnel could be a train." - Franz Kafka
Swiftstrike1
Swiftstrike Incorporated
#394 - 2014-11-25 18:27:08 UTC
Do we still get a Christmas gift from CCP this year, or is this it?

+1

Casual Incursion runner & Faction Warfare grunt, ex-Wormholer, ex-Nullbear.
Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#395 - 2014-11-25 18:27:17 UTC
XXXMina wrote:
this is not right, you cant change the rules after 10 years, i got 5 accounts because it made sense with how the game is. now i cant use what little automation i take advantage of (just pressing the f keys ) . also jump fatigue and jump range change suxx: this is a space sim, way to clip our wings.


PS: im unsubbing all my accounts . you have till my 3 month sub runs out to fix this game.


I multibox Jump Freighters. If I can take the latest changes to Eve in stride then so can you. Man up.

The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

Ginger Barbarella
#396 - 2014-11-25 18:27:28 UTC
Zechariah Jericho wrote:
Guys the toxic is getting high
Was in the middle of showing a friend this game, got to general discussion "what's that?" >>> 6 minutes later he decides he doesn't want to play because of our community and how badly we're reacting to the news that people cannot play the way they want to.

last words of the discussion were (and I quote) "Some sandbox, lets just go play LoL"


There's a reason I don't discuss cap warfare: I don't know d!ck about it. You and your friend clearly don't have a clue. Perhaps you should consider not discussing the concept of "sandbox" as it applies to this world.

"Blow it all on Quafe and strippers." --- Sorlac
knobber Jobbler
State War Academy
Caldari State
#397 - 2014-11-25 18:28:09 UTC
The rage, the smug, the self important CSM posts, it's all to much to take in.
Arrendis
TK Corp
#398 - 2014-11-25 18:28:25 UTC
KeeperRus wrote:
I wonder how exactly this will change anything. CCP can not detect the software, so how will CCP know if it's being used? Exactly.


Pretty damned easily: do the accounts receive the same command from the same IP at the same time?

You're communicating with their server. How hard will it be for them to detect?
Querns
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#399 - 2014-11-25 18:29:09 UTC
Ancy Denaries wrote:
Querns wrote:
Veers Belvar wrote:
Big +1 on the decision, but I'm worried it doesn't go far enough. People will just purchase more screens, and manually control multiple accounts. It'll be harder, surely, but it's still viable to manually control a 10 ship tornado gank fleet or procurer mining fleet. The only sure way to get rid of multiboxing, and entitle everyone equally to the actions of one character at a time, is to get rid of multiboxing entirely.

This will probably never happen. This game is pretty much impossible to play on any meaningful level without multiboxing.

It really is not, but people are not willing to rely on specialised friends to do what you "can easily do with an alt".

You and I have differing definitions of "meaningful," I suppose.

This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
Needmore Longcat
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#400 - 2014-11-25 18:30:00 UTC
Finally.