EVE General Discussion

No, I'm not stupid at all. I will note first that it is, naturally, only those multiboxers that think they can't handle more than one click for multiple accounts that are complaining about this change. Rules change, deal with it.

And Rain, I respect you and all, but on this one you're wrong. The balance is out of whack when 1 player vs 1 player is actually 50 ships vs 1 ship, with one click per move for both players. If you want to run multiple ships, especially in PVP, then you click for each one, not one click for all. If this was just about CCP 'playing possum' because 'oh noes petitions!' then ganking would have been gone from the game long ago. Don't be naive. I'm not mad at you, and I'm not trying to pick a fight with you, I mean it when I say I respect you, but I also know that you multibox, so your self-interest is noted, and I know that you know better than that. You can't have your cake, and eat it too.

My play style has been affected time and again in the almost three years I've been playing now, but I roll with the punches and adapt to a new one for the simple reason that I know I'm playing a videogame, a sandbox, that can be played in many different ways, and as a result of enjoying every aspect of it from a single account, I've become very adaptable to almost any situation. So no, changes to playstyles, whether mine be nerfed or buffed, don't affect me in any way at all.

I've never been publicly vocal against broadcast multiplexers. In fact, I've frequently trolled the threads complaining about them. That's because at the end of the day, I know it's CCP making decisions regarding these sorts of things based on data that neither I nor the OP have access to. I trolled them because I adapted to the situation in-game and handled it just fine. The whole time though, I've taken a serious position against this kind of gameplay - not multiboxing in general, just automated broadcasting like this. Now that it's actually being removed, I stand in 100% support of it. Not because I don't do it, either by choice or otherwise, but because it is demonstrably and objectively unbalanced.

This is misleading an inaccurate. Taking the enumerated points,

1) The accelerated gameplay clause is on a per-toon basis.

I and other have addressed this and pointed out the flaws with the case you are using. Yes, if everyone plays perfectly the 10 man fleet vs. the 10 account/1 man fleet would earn equivalent isk. Problem is nobody plays perfectly all the time, or to put it differently playing perfectly is NOT normal game play. Since the EULA clause in question is "normal game" play you are using a faulty metric.

2) We will not set up an automated system where we can leave our computer and it will still issue actions.

This is an overly restrictive reading of the EULA clause in question. That clause says NOTHING about being AFK, it says you cannot use 3rd party software of hardware to acquire Stuff™ faster than "normal game" play. Further, the notion of one click effecting multiple clients is not very much different than 1 click effecting multiple things in a single client (turning on say the mid and low modules).

3) We will receive no special treatment when it comes to protection from gankers, wardecs, or other such harm

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

4) We will pay, via PLEX or $$$, for each account and there will be no discounts for multiple accounts.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot?

It's inaction, while continuing to let it happen, promoting it, even. It's an awfully passive stance on something that defines this game.

Stealth bomber with torps... 700 dps per. even blaster harpies are half that. Whatever problem they wanted to fix, it's not fixed.

fast forward another cycle of heartache, and CCP will start streamlining multiboxing, with balance in mind.

Mike is a uniboxer. according to CSM whispers here and there, CCP doesn't talk to them about a lot of things either.

I hate to say it, but what really needs to happen to put the complete issue to rest is only allow one client at a time.

ccp promotes more than one account so I dont think they will ever do this. Also wouldn't just loading other clients in vm behind vpn make it so you could run more than one client anyway

ThatsThePoint.JPG



That picture was taken around the same time that ISBoxer and input broadcasting came into the light. It was made in direct response to GM's declaring ISBoxer against the EULA until they could discuss it in depth. CCP's attempts to police out-of-game spaces and hardware is laughable. Next, we will be forced to limit our clients to 15fps and have a 500ms ping to even the playing field for those with substandard hardware or a poor ISP.

It jives with the stipulations in the OP. only allowing one client at a time means you won't be affecting -anything- in an adverse or imbalanced way. So multiple accounts would be limited to people who do industry or research chains, and such. It seems to be the pure game people want. I'll be honest with you, fleeting with 8k DPS in subcaps including logi is kind of broken, don't you think. if I eat someone alive with a multiboxed setup, even if I didn't use keystroke broadcasting... I still faceroll them by using 8 clients. key broadcast changes nothing

Simple answer: No. One account. One person. Totallarian approach or ccp is just half ass doing a job.

I'm trying on several hats in this discussion, one of them may have high tin content.