These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#501 - 2014-11-25 19:12:38 UTC
Capri Sun KraftFoods wrote:
As someone who actually ISBox's bombers I'm a little upset.

The problem isn't ISBoxer. The problem is that bombs as they currently stand are completely broken Sure isboxer exacerbates the problem significantly, but you can still get 30 dudes into a fleet easily and go kill anything with 4 waves that isn't a T3 or a faction battleship. I'd be happy to see my bomber accounts become useless and de-sub them if it meant I didn't have to worry about getting hell bombed every other fleet.



What BL too addicted to nullified Tengus that you can't get them to fly bombers?


RIP EMP

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
Wille Sanara
No Shoosting
#502 - 2014-11-25 19:12:45 UTC
Wow, I must say I didnt see it coming, but definitelly welcome it. Good job CCP!
Zappity
New Eden Tank Testing Services
#503 - 2014-11-25 19:12:50 UTC
The new CCP - drastic action for strengthening game play even at the cost of current accounts. Good stuff.

Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec and nullsec.
Lord Moridin
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#504 - 2014-11-25 19:13:05 UTC
Am I the only one who want a definition to the definition?

What's the difference between this macro definition and this input & broadcasting definition?
Some practical examples of what is OK and what is NOT OK would be nice.

Perhaps the explanation is there but threadnought is +30 pages now.
Jvpiter
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#505 - 2014-11-25 19:13:08 UTC
Systimus wrote:
I use isboxer to mine with 4 accounts. Never have pvp'd with it. I don't use constantly but might use it to activate auto pilot or to dock. If I'm reading this correctly, this action with be banned . So no point in having 4 accounts so might as well cancel 3 of them.

Elite dangerous is out soon. Maybe cancel all 4 and have a go at that instead.


I doubt you're going to multibox mine in that game, but thanks for informing us.

Call me Joe.
Abernie
Thoroughly Incompetent
#506 - 2014-11-25 19:13:41 UTC
Great change, A+

Also I made a flowchart for you who can't be bothered to read the OP:
AM I GOING TO GET BANNED???

Do let me know if I messed something up when making that.
Alp Khan
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#507 - 2014-11-25 19:14:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Alp Khan
Mike Azariah wrote:
Alp Khan wrote:
Never establish a rule that you cannot enforce with considerable accuracy.


Have you ANY experience in the real world. That would negate most laws and legal systems.

m


I'm sure that most laws and legal systems emphasize enforcement with considerably accuracy. If someone is suspected of committing an offense against a certain law, they are tried, the facts are reviewed and a judgement is brought forward on whether they have committed such an offense or not.

Besides server-side behavioral analysis that leverages command/input timing comparison between multiboxing clients from the server side, I don't see any reliable method through which CCP may differentiate between non-EULA violating usage and EULA compliant usage of ISBoxer.
virm pasuul
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#508 - 2014-11-25 19:14:04 UTC
+1 for this.
Well done CCP :) You are really restoring my faith in you after some pretty large **** ups in the past.
I think this will be very good for the game. Please enforce it properly.
Utari Onzo
Escalated.
OnlyFleets.
#509 - 2014-11-25 19:14:20 UTC
Daniel Jackson wrote:
what exactly is Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing? i still don't understand is using the logitech keyboards GKEY binds Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing ?


The easiest explanation is if you push one button, and it sends the command to multiple accounts at the same time it's NOT OK.

Using ISBox to 'tile' your clients on one monitor, but then manually inputting a command to each individual client is OK.

"Face the enemy as a solid wall For faith is your armor And through it, the enemy will find no breach Wrap your arms around the enemy For faith is your fire And with it, burn away his evil"
Angus McRothimay
Fenrir Vangard
#510 - 2014-11-25 19:14:23 UTC
JIeoH Mocc wrote:
Zishy Linaris wrote:
goodbye ccp. 12 accounts unsubbed as of now. i feel bullshitted for my time i invested but **** happens


I've a feeling that, by this rate - this thread is going to account for more unsubbed characters than there were ever subbed.

(Obligatory your stuff, can i haz remark)



I am sure that many accounts will be 'unsubbed' now that that they cannot be isboxed to cover the cost of subscription....

However, using an exploit to cover the cost of subscription isn't really subscribing, If no one spent real money on the game there would be no game to play.
Airi Cho
Dark-Rising
Wrecking Machine.
#511 - 2014-11-25 19:14:23 UTC
Systimus wrote:
I use isboxer to mine with 4 accounts. Never have pvp'd with it. I don't use constantly but might use it to activate auto pilot or to dock. If I'm reading this correctly, this action with be banned . So no point in having 4 accounts so might as well cancel 3 of them.

Elite dangerous is out soon. Maybe cancel all 4 and have a go at that instead.


lol ... seriously ... 4 toon mining and you needed isboxer for it? good god, kids are lazy nowadays.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#512 - 2014-11-25 19:14:32 UTC
Mara Pahrdi wrote:
Good decision. This will make EVE a better game. There's been some decent stuff this year.


Whether it will be better or not remains to be seen.

It will certainly be different, though, and I'm looking forward to seeing how it plays out. CCP had been stagnating for some time and now that a new captain is at the helm we are seeing some bold changes.

At the end of the day, it's all about me and I'm just trying to figure out how best to make a pile of ISKies from these new changes. I can see the potential for some to become very rich, very fast and others to quickly lose it all and ragequit. I intend to be on the 'getting very rich' end of that situation.

Mr Epeen Cool
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#513 - 2014-11-25 19:15:27 UTC
Systimus wrote:
I use isboxer to mine with 4 accounts. Never have pvp'd with it. I don't use constantly but might use it to activate auto pilot or to dock. If I'm reading this correctly, this action with be banned . So no point in having 4 accounts so might as well cancel 3 of them.

Elite dangerous is out soon. Maybe cancel all 4 and have a go at that instead.


I will take your stuff you no longer need.
Ancy Denaries
Frontier Venture
#514 - 2014-11-25 19:15:27 UTC
Malcolm Lionel wrote:
gg mining. It was fun.

If you had to isbox to mine, it wasn't really fun. ;)

"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
Servant's Lord
The Untraceable
M A R A K U G A
#515 - 2014-11-25 19:15:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Servant's Lord
As the CEO of a corp with a high population of multiboxers and an Isboxer myself(10-15 chars), I fully support these changes.

What these changes will have a large effect on/kill:

-Retards who put little effort into their isboxer setups
-People running ridiculous amounts of characters (>25)


These changes won't affect me and my corp much at all since we don't fall into either of those two categories(a few of my guys panicked without thinking, I've since sat down and had a chat with folks and explained how this doesn't hurt us at all). We don't use broadcasting for anything necessary, and the end result is that things we do only a handful of times in a play session take us 15-20 seconds instead of 3-5.

The tears in this thread have been great from the retards who can't adapt, and the horribly misguided smug from all the retards who believe this will kill isboxer is even better. ;)

I won't be going anywhere, nor will I be unsubbing any of my accounts over this change, nor will my corp(and all our multiboxers) be affected by this change.

+1 CCP for kicking out the retards, and +1 for making plex prices eat ****. I will likely be resubbing a few more chars if plex prices keep dropping. ;)
Taram Caldar
Royal Black Watch Highlanders
#516 - 2014-11-25 19:16:23 UTC
Capri Sun KraftFoods wrote:
As someone who actually ISBox's bombers I'm a little upset.

The problem isn't ISBoxer. The problem is that bombs as they currently stand are completely broken Sure isboxer exacerbates the problem significantly, but you can still get 30 dudes into a fleet easily and go kill anything with 4 waves that isn't a T3 or a faction battleship. I'd be happy to see my bomber accounts become useless and de-sub them if it meant I didn't have to worry about getting hell bombed every other fleet.


No, there's no problem at all with 30 PEOPLE getting together and using bombers, as intended, to kill things.

The problem is when one ******* uses 30 accounts and isboxer to do it even better than 30 people can.

I'm sorry, you are wrong. ISBOXER is 90% of the problem. Very glad it's gone. Sure, bombers need some tweaking to balance them out a bit.... but isboxer is absolutely a HUGE problem and has been since... forever.

"No bastard ever won a war by dying for his country.  He won it by making the other poor dumb bastard die for his country."
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#517 - 2014-11-25 19:16:24 UTC
Ranger 1 wrote:
War Kitten wrote:
Hopelesshobo wrote:
So, because broadcasting is being banned as of 01 Jan 2015, does that mean on 01 Jan 2015, cloaks will be reverted again to not decloaking each other while cloaked since the main reason this was changed back was to nerf broadcasting bombers together?


Keep up with the times... they already changed their minds on that one before even implementing it. Nothing to revert.

Hey! Thanks for that, I missed it.

So the decloak other cloaked ships thing is not going to be implemented eh? Excellent.

I much prefer this solution.


No problem... here's CCP Fozzie's post on the topic: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5159156#post5159156

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.
Kassasis Dakkstromri
State War Academy
Caldari State
#518 - 2014-11-25 19:16:43 UTC
+100


First "This is EVE!" Trailer, and now this!


All Hail CCP Falcon!!!

CCP you are bad at EVE... Stop potential silliness ~ Solo Wulf
David Therman
#519 - 2014-11-25 19:16:45 UTC
ISboxer is dead, long li...

Ah, screw it;

A picture is worth a thousand words
Jvpiter
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#520 - 2014-11-25 19:17:33 UTC
Angus McRothimay wrote:
However, using an exploit to cover the cost of subscription isn't really subscribing, If no one spent real money on the game there would be no game to play.



The cost of subscription is always paid with real money. There may simply be less buyers of PLEX but we don't have enough information to make a definitive conclusion.

Call me Joe.