EVE General Discussion

Can't believe I have to spell this out but here goes:

Actual botters, the ones who start the botting program and go off to work and let the bot work, didn't give two hoots about this change, as they would have been botting anyways. Most botting programs are singular character entities, i.e. they only control 1 account per instance of the bot, so it would be difficult to differentiate between a very good ratter (or even a normal AFKTar) and an actual bot at times. This change did nothing but drive away people who were actually behind their keyboards and playing, not to mention those who alt-tabbed too quickly, or even those who did not use ISBoxer at all.
Botters don't care as they're already breaking the EULA.

e: And the only logical fallacies I've seen have been coming from CCP and the anti-ISBoxer crowd.

4 windows tiled, or 4 separate monitors. Have Windows function "OnMouseOverFocus" set on. Spin mouse in circle at the corner of the 4 monitors, and mash F1. Tada, you just send 4x commands on 4x separate clients to the servers during the same cycle. And yes, CCP does not have client side detection per their own admission and only look at the incoming server commands which are limited every 1 second.


Not sure what you're asking me to do here, honestly.

Yeah, think I'll believe a dev over you on this one, especially after having multiple players banned whilst not broadcasting, one of which was only using ISBoxer's FPS limiter.


Ah, you want me to explain which logical fallacies are being used?
Generalization fallacy - "All ISBoxers are bad!" and similar statements
Cherry-picking fallacy - "This one guy used broadcasting, so they all must!"
Appeal to Authority - "CCP said so, so it must be true!"
Ad hominems - Self explanatory.
*Subset of Ad Hominem: Poisoning the well - "Nothing he says can be trusted because he's an ISBoxer!"
True Scotsman - "No real EVE player uses ISBoxer!"
Appeal to Accomplishment - "Look at the reduction in PLEX / number of people banned!" Note that the first, the PLEX argument, is also a Faulty Cause fallacy.
Faulty Cause, aka Correlation/Causation fallacy - "I wore a red shirt today and got in a car accident, so red shirts must be the cause of all car accidents!" or, in EVE terms, "Look at the drop in PLEX!"
Appeal to Ignorance
Bifurcation, aka Black and White fallacy - "Either CCP bans anyone playing too fast, or we let bots run rampant!" Also a straw-man fallacy, as ISBoxers have never and will never say that AFK botters are "innocent" or "good".
Tautological Fallacy - "All ISBoxers are against this change, and if anyone else argues against me, he must be an ISBoxer too!"
Straw man - "CCP will never repeal this interpretation because bots will run rampant and there will be no real players left!"

To name but a few.

And we didn't. We always multiboxed.

Even the RMT people back in 2004-2008, before the introduction of PLEX, multiboxed.

ISBoxer concept is a relatively new addition to the whole industry.



Accomplishment is reducing the imbalances of faucet ISK inflows into the game, and the fact that the average player can now compete with someone, who had been "playing Eve" at 1000, 1100, 2000% efficiency before the change.

Please expand on the topic of PLEX more thoroughly.



PLEX price drop is indeed because of the November policy shift. At this point, you're grasping at straws and I'm running out of the Quote limit per post.



On the contrary, the botters appeal to ignorance in saying that what they do only concerns them, and has not effect on the greater Economy.



There are only two player sides in this discussion:

1) The ones who genuinely care about the future of this game;
2) The ones who are genuinely only care about retaining their 1100% ISK generating efficiency.

Wow, you obviously haven't read the last 50 pages or so in which I've been defending CCP, or THIS POST which was right above yours. I've never used bots or ISBoxer.

Perhaps read my posts HERE pages 157-159. I'm not against multiboxing, I'm against third-party software which violates EULA/TOS/Policy that CCP is now enforcing. Also, just to clear things up for you, botting and using ISBoxer are not the same, at all. Botters have complex scripts where they can essentially let their computer run their account all day long, and their ships will mine asteroids, return full cargo to station, return to mine some more, and do things like run away and dock if attacked, all automated without user input. ISBoxer facilitates the use of multiple accounts simultaneously but requires some user input. Again, I'm against the use of ISBoxer, I'm just pointing out the difference to you.

I explained quite clearly how to detect the probability of a round-robin user HERE and HERE .

"using pattern recognition combined with linear discriminant analysis will show the likely violators, then apply the Probit Model to that, and more specifically probit regression, which will yield very little to no false positives, especially after analyzing logs over a length of time"

"It's really not hard to take a large amount of data and put it up against sets of filters and nested queries that can sort out specific criteria in data sets, with each new step drilling down to more specific results. Then you have a much smaller set of extremely highly probable positives to which a human can then look at manually for further investigation. I told you before how it can be done and the methods that can be used, I was pretty specific (But I won't lay down exact query methods or pseudo code because CCP might not be happy with possibly posting how they get their data set results). There are many models and boolean queries that can be used for complex criteria no matter how many combining or negating conditions you need to get the end result, and I already stated some."

I would also like to point this out to you.

True Scotsman fallacy again. See here: https://sites.google.com/site/khromtor/oldrigs
Duct tape and dowels were used by dedicated players, and programs such as Synergy and AutoHotkey were used before ISBoxer was introduced. If by "relatively new" you mean over 5 years old, then sure, I guess.


This is not about adjusting ISK faucets. I could easily earn more than a VG fleet with fewer characters if I went to solo C5/6 Capital escalations with 1 Moros, 1 Loki, 1 Archon, 1 OGB, and 1 toon warping capitals in and out. Toss in PI, and I would have Scrooge McDuck levels of ISK.
As for your "2000%" efficiently, [Citation Bloody Needed]. 6a3 has never in it's entirety of existence been interpreted to be on a Per Human-Being basis. If it was, CCP would have to disallow multiple clients.


[Citation Needed]. As discussed earlier, if Plex dropping really was the fault of the new policy, it would be dropping to below 600m ISK levels. However, if indeed it was being manipulated as literally everyone who market trades believes, then the current price makes sense after hitting 1B ISK/Unit and then having the massive spike in number of PLEX traded per day for that period until it settled.


We have never said that what we do only concerns us. We have said that you cannot attribute the rise of PLEX prices to what is considered a drop in the ocean of manipulation by PLEX traders.


We do care about the future of this game, what with two CCP at two CSM members being on the record for disallowing multiple clients, and the dangerous precedent this follows in the wake of T20's "Do as we say, not as we do" in regards to the EULA. You are also participating in a Black and White fallacy whereby you divide the player base into two extremes.
I and other ISBoxers believe that CCP has failed to meet the burden of proof required to disallow input broadcasting whilst allowing other programs in violation of the EULA to continue to work, including a program that a CCP dev is working on that mimics ISBoxer.

I simply can't resist responding to a few points here:

Serentiy isn't simply allowing ISBoxer however. AFAIK, actual bots are allowed, which ISBoxer is not.

Long before I'd even heard of ISBoxer, I controlled 10 accounts and knew people with more. Now that I've got upgraded tech I can long-term control 10 passively with ease while playing PS4. I doubt I'd have an issue controlling up to around 30, using nothing but the OS - not even EVE-O preview.

Actually, it's almost entirely speculation. Sure, there were a few of the biggest multiboxers who dropped accounts leading to a little less consumption, but most of the PLEX price is driven by people with PLEX as an investment (we've had stats on where PLEX ends up before). A lot of us went from flipping PLEX to selling PLEX waiting for the dust to settle before buying back in more recently. A shockingly large amount of the prices in EVE are driven by ludicrously easy and risk free trading, all of which is only possible at the scale it is thanks to third party tools.

Oh, and I doubt we'll ever see <=600m PLEX again as a stable price. Re your element 43 graph, you realise that spike occurred prior to this announcement, right? it's surprisingly stable if you ignore that spike which definitely had nothing to do with players reacting to an announcement that had not yet been made.

Botters were totally unaffected by this change as AayJay mentioned earlier. Botters were already violating the EULA before and they are still violating the EULA now. It's irrelevant to them as it's a simple cost of doing business. There's a clear distinction between a botter, who is entirely autonomous, using disposable accounts and designed to avoid detection, and a tool-using multiboxers, who require constant manual input, use accounts and characters they are as committed to as you are to yours, and operate in plain sight attempting to work within the rules laid down by CCP. Honestly, I don't care if you want to hate both, but to be taken seriously, you should understand the distinction between the two.

Incredibly biased wording on the categorisation, but there's at least a third - me. Those who genuinely care about the future of this game and feel that while banning multiplexing is achievable and fine, banning of other methods of control put manual multiboxers at risk. FYI, those arguing about efficiency rarely know what they are talking about. From the point of view of 10 accounts, easily with room for more, it's actually slightly more efficient to control them manually than it is with tools - albeit with slightly more effort to get the character set up.

Uh, what do you think those botters do to earn enough ISK to sell it? Twiddle their thumbs?
ISK buying is rampant on Serenity. There are dedicated groups of players who do nothing but farm ISK and sell it, oftentimes those in prison. There was an article in the news recently about a group of WoW gold farmers who were actually prisoners forced to earn gold. I would be greatly surprised of there was not an EVE counterpart.


That, if there's a 10-boxer left after the new change, that he is following the new rules.
Again, efficiency is per character, not per human. Come back when you've learned that.


First off, ignoring the laughable idea that "they are the truth", why, in your own words, is ISBoxer any more cancerous than the likes of CODE, who arguably drive more players away than any ISBoxer has? Why is ISBoxer worse than those margin traders and PLEX stockpilers, ever driving PLEX skyward?



Hang on, are you comparing ISBoxers, players who have always followed the EULA, to the likes of Nazi sympathizers? False comparison fallacy much?

The answer is elementary, Watson - Quality of Life.

Now, they will be playing Alt-Tab and 10-times-the-number-of-inputs Online, as compared to the previous easy life, which essentially didn't differ from the normal Eve player leveraged ten, fifteen, twenty times.

It had never been the intention by the game's Founders for the player to simultaneously run 10 accounts comfortably and efficiently, hence why most of us average out at 2.4 accounts since the Dawn of Time.