These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Eryn Velasquez
#1881 - 2014-11-29 17:39:09 UTC
Lucas Kell wrote:
Eryn Velasquez wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Recyclers wrote:
Im Done!
Characters Biomassed

Feels goooooood. Big smile
More people need to have the balls to do this. Lately it really does seem that CCPs direction is "solve issues that whining carebears complain about" and it's completely understandable why people don't want to stick around to watch that trainwreck, but not enough people actually biomass and say "**** you CCP".
I totally agree. Would be nice if all those cheaters would.
Using software confirmed by CCP explicitly as being within the rules is not cheating. No matter how many times you say it won't make it fact.



Try after January 1st. Until then i applaud every ISBox mutlibroadcasting Toon who gets biomassed.

_“A man's freedom consists in his being able to do whatever he wills, but that he should not, by any human power, be forced to do what is against his will.” ― Jean-Jacques Rousseau _
Garadim
#1882 - 2014-11-29 17:44:10 UTC
To me, this sound like a very good step in the right direction and i am very pleased about this change of attitude from CCP regarding the people who clearly abuse the game mechanic to gain in a vicious way against others.

Since i play Eve Online i have never, ever, read anything that please me so much than this and i just can wish CCP will enforce this for real.

Please clarify this to me:
I have 2 alt account i use for mining and hauling, and also to sell my ores. If i understand the policy correctly, i will be able to keep using them at the same time correct ? Each time i do something i use ALT - TAB to switch between them and see the corresponding screen.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1883 - 2014-11-29 17:44:37 UTC
Eryn Velasquez wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Eryn Velasquez wrote:
Lucas Kell wrote:
Recyclers wrote:
Im Done!
Characters Biomassed

Feels goooooood. Big smile
More people need to have the balls to do this. Lately it really does seem that CCPs direction is "solve issues that whining carebears complain about" and it's completely understandable why people don't want to stick around to watch that trainwreck, but not enough people actually biomass and say "**** you CCP".
I totally agree. Would be nice if all those cheaters would.
Using software confirmed by CCP explicitly as being within the rules is not cheating. No matter how many times you say it won't make it fact.
Try after January 1st. Until then i applaud every ISBox mutlibroadcasting Toon who gets biomassed.
And after January the 1st, you won't see multibroadcasters any more than you see other EULA violators. Accusing everyone who uses it right now of cheating is still wrong though.

I really can't wait for January 1st though, when you'll see just as many multiboxers and start shrieking at the top of your lungs. Most people that use isboxer treat broadcasting as a bonus, not as the core reason to use it. The main benefit is quickly seeing and switching between clients, which will still be allowed.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Lucas Kell
Solitude Trading
S.N.O.T.
#1884 - 2014-11-29 17:54:52 UTC
Garadim wrote:
To me, this sound like a very good step in the right direction and i am very pleased about this change of attitude from CCP regarding the people who clearly abuse the game mechanic to gain in a vicious way against others.

Since i play Eve Online i have never, ever, read anything that please me so much than this and i just can wish CCP will enforce this for real.
OK. Why?
What is it exactly you think is going to change for the better?

Garadim wrote:
Please clarify this to me:
I have 2 alt account i use for mining and hauling, and also to sell my ores. If i understand the policy correctly, i will be able to keep using them at the same time correct ? Each time i do something i use ALT - TAB to switch between them and see the corresponding screen.
You will be able to continue doing this. You should however know that mining like that is pretty much the worst choice of playstyle in EVE.

The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.

Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Mr Epeen
It's All About Me
#1885 - 2014-11-29 18:09:20 UTC
Recyclers wrote:
Im Done!
Feels good...
No one gets my stuff or tunes.
Thanks CPP.
U guys have fun bantering about my post. Don't care as once this post is done i will biomass this last character and get on with my life.

Characters Biomassed

Feels goooooood. Big smile


It's bad enough that people call their characters 'toons', but you took it one step further and even managed to **** that up with this fine title for your video: Biomass of $3000 US dollars worth of Tunes and assets.

I'd have though you were protesting the Apple based music store if I just saw that in passing.

It's like the internet is a secret government conspiracy to either find and catalog stupid people or find and remove I.Q. points from the general population by some nefarious hypnotic suggestion.

Mr Epeen Cool
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1886 - 2014-11-29 18:47:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Teckos Pech
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Pain Time wrote:
Simple answer: No. One account. One person. Totallarian approach or ccp is just half ass doing a job.


You might think this would be good, but its impact would be very significant. Try doing invention on a single character. Very difficult. And I doubt CCP is going to gut its revenue stream.

Next horrible idea. Roll


Unfortunately, that is what we see as the next thing CCP will do when people successfully alt-tab fast enough, or use enough monitors to cause another public outcry with ****-poor arguments such as "I don't want to spend time and effort making a new account; BAN MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS!"


Nonsense. You are using a completely illogical argument to try and save your own automation. You are essentially relying on a slippery slope argument. Now maybe if we had a significant number of people complaining about multiboxing you might have something...but funnily enough the only people complaining about multiboxing...are the soon to be ex-ISBoxers. Curious that.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1887 - 2014-11-29 18:58:30 UTC
Teckos Pech wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Pain Time wrote:
Simple answer: No. One account. One person. Totallarian approach or ccp is just half ass doing a job.


You might think this would be good, but its impact would be very significant. Try doing invention on a single character. Very difficult. And I doubt CCP is going to gut its revenue stream.

Next horrible idea. Roll


Unfortunately, that is what we see as the next thing CCP will do when people successfully alt-tab fast enough, or use enough monitors to cause another public outcry with ****-poor arguments such as "I don't want to spend time and effort making a new account; BAN MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS!"


Nonsense. You are using a completely illogical argument to try and save your own automation. You are essentially relying on a slippery slope argument. Now maybe if we had a significant number of people complaining about multiboxing you might have something...but funnily enough the only people complaining about multiboxing...are the soon to be ex-ISBoxers. Curious that.


Nonsense. People are currently crying at CCP because they lost a 20b Providence to an ISBoxer ganker and are trying desperately to make the argument that they would not have been ganked if ISBoxing wasn't a thing.

I've seen more people complain about the local CODE monkey who constantly bumps people in belts and tries to sell "mining permits" in their relatively short lifespan than I ever have of people complaining about ISBoxer in my three years of playing.

But CCP *is* gutting it's revenue stream. There are some multiboxers such as myself that didn't PLEX their accounts ever because we wanted to support the game. To take away a significant chunk of the demand of a product and then claiming "We will still sell the same amount / make the same profit" is ludicrous to say the least.
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1888 - 2014-11-29 19:07:53 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Teckos Pech wrote:
Pain Time wrote:
Simple answer: No. One account. One person. Totallarian approach or ccp is just half ass doing a job.


You might think this would be good, but its impact would be very significant. Try doing invention on a single character. Very difficult. And I doubt CCP is going to gut its revenue stream.

Next horrible idea. Roll


Unfortunately, that is what we see as the next thing CCP will do when people successfully alt-tab fast enough, or use enough monitors to cause another public outcry with ****-poor arguments such as "I don't want to spend time and effort making a new account; BAN MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS!"


Nonsense. You are using a completely illogical argument to try and save your own automation. You are essentially relying on a slippery slope argument. Now maybe if we had a significant number of people complaining about multiboxing you might have something...but funnily enough the only people complaining about multiboxing...are the soon to be ex-ISBoxers. Curious that.


Nonsense. People are currently crying at CCP because they lost a 20b Providence to an ISBoxer ganker and are trying desperately to make the argument that they would not have been ganked if ISBoxing wasn't a thing.

I've seen more people complain about the local CODE monkey who constantly bumps people in belts and tries to sell "mining permits" in their relatively short lifespan than I ever have of people complaining about ISBoxer in my three years of playing.

But CCP *is* gutting it's revenue stream. There are some multiboxers such as myself that didn't PLEX their accounts ever because we wanted to support the game. To take away a significant chunk of the demand of a product and then claiming "We will still sell the same amount / make the same profit" is ludicrous to say the least.


Complaining about ISBoxer is not complaining about multiboxing in and of itself. It is complaining about a subset of the multiboxing community that is, when you get right down to it, using macros.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Madd Adda
#1889 - 2014-11-29 19:08:45 UTC  |  Edited by: Madd Adda
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Simple answer: No. One
But CCP *is* gutting it's revenue stream. There are some multiboxers such as myself that didn't PLEX their accounts ever because we wanted to support the game. To take away a significant chunk of the demand of a product and then claiming "We will still sell the same amount / make the same profit" is ludicrous to say the least.


The thing is, even if you were to plex, you are supporting the game. People buy plex to sell with real money. That money goes to CCP, and you get game time. Now that you and a lot of other multiboxers are either gone or reducing in number of accounts, there's more for the rest of us, and can now pick up the slack. Revenue stream might be hurt, but it won't be catastrophic.

Carebear extraordinaire
Verde Minator
Crack And Cookies For Santa
#1890 - 2014-11-29 19:08:57 UTC
so let me get this straight, you want me to setup a complete mining fleet setup with isboxer to do what is going to be bannable, just to see if i can do it to what, waste my time? lolz because that's all it is, a complete waste of time. as you stated in your thorough and long winded post, my friend showed me, and i found it to be morally reprehensible for myself to do something like that. morals, in eve? yes, people in eve have morals, maybe not the likes of which you have seen, but there are. and many people like to use them, i myself for one. and several people i play with do as well, same with the new players, until they get turned into crazed isk hungry agents of chaos.. but some men just like to watch the world burn...
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1891 - 2014-11-29 19:13:00 UTC
Madd Adda wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Simple answer: No. One
But CCP *is* gutting it's revenue stream. There are some multiboxers such as myself that didn't PLEX their accounts ever because we wanted to support the game. To take away a significant chunk of the demand of a product and then claiming "We will still sell the same amount / make the same profit" is ludicrous to say the least.


The thing is, even if you were to plex, you are supporting the game. People buy plex to sell with real money. That money goes to CCP, and you get game time. Now that you and a lot of other multiboxers are either gone or reducing in number of accounts, there's more for the rest of us, and can now pick up the slack. Revenue stream might be hurt, but it won't be catastrophic.


Simple supply/demand + profit economics as explained in ECON 101.

CCP reduces the demand for PLEX. Supply remains constant. There will be a point where supply will overtake demand. Since demand is lower, people will purchase less PLEX, reducing their income.
Verde Minator
Crack And Cookies For Santa
#1892 - 2014-11-29 19:14:01 UTC
false: you can not use macros, that is input automation:


Input Automation

Input Automation refers to actions that are commonly also referred to as botting or macroing. This term is used to describe, but is not limited to, the automation of actions which have consequences in the EVE universe.

Input Broadcasting & Input Multiplexing

Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing refer to the multiplication of inputs, actions and events to multiple instances of the game.

Going Forward

As of 15th of March 2013 we have been policing input automation based on a two-strike policy

• 1st strike for input automation is a 30 day ban
• 2nd strike for input automation is a permanent ban

Input Automation remains strictly prohibited, and is policed under our suspension and ban policy.

Based on the discussion in this area and our will to be more clear and concise with the community regarding this part of our rules, we have decided to also apply this two-strike policy to prohibited forms of Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing as of January 1st 2015.
FunGu Arsten
Ascendance
Goonswarm Federation
#1893 - 2014-11-29 19:14:47 UTC  |  Edited by: FunGu Arsten
Verde Minator wrote:
so let me get this straight, you want me to setup a complete mining fleet setup with isboxer to do what is going to be bannable, just to see if i can do it to what, waste my time? lolz because that's all it is, a complete waste of time. as you stated in your thorough and long winded post, my friend showed me, and i found it to be morally reprehensible for myself to do something like that. morals, in eve? yes, people in eve have morals, maybe not the likes of which you have seen, but there are. and many people like to use them, i myself for one. and several people i play with do as well, same with the new players, until they get turned into crazed isk hungry agents of chaos.. but some men just like to watch the world burn...


again, you are showing us you do not understand isboxer as you think it can't be done within the rules set out by ccp...

the setup is made, adapted and you will still be annoyed by miners multiboxing (isboxing).

I myself have the optioin to go back to windowmode eve clients, or use the isboxer functions that are still allowed after 1jan2015 and not care about the rants that will trown in local when people realise their petitions come back as " no problems with that multiboxer fleet all legit"

For the giggles i could show you fixed windows, gpu and cpu settings but why waste my time right? I can still use isboxer or another program that gives me the options and functions i use...

troll on o/
but i now must tend my alts and not waste my time
07 fungu
Verde Minator
Crack And Cookies For Santa
#1894 - 2014-11-29 19:18:07 UTC
input automation is clearly described as pressing a button on a keyboard and it utilizing slot f1 and f2 at the same time. that's a macro, and is input automation, even just two slots. if it does that, it's input automation. read the op, i posted it a minute ago where it states that since we have been going back and forth on this subject for some time now
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge
Caldari State
#1895 - 2014-11-29 19:19:08 UTC
Quote:
yes i have 5 clients of eve installed on my computer per eula rules to have one copy of eve per active account logged in at any given time.


Why would you do that, I have 3 accounts and the launcher takes care of launching each .exe.
Verde Minator
Crack And Cookies For Santa
#1896 - 2014-11-29 19:20:34 UTC
both what i stated is in the eula, you need to go read it for the launcher settings, you have to have one copy of eve per client launched (in other words, one copy of eve per character in game) and here:

Input Automation

Input Automation refers to actions that are commonly also referred to as botting or macroing. This term is used to describe, but is not limited to, the automation of actions which have consequences in the EVE universe.

Input Broadcasting & Input Multiplexing

Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing refer to the multiplication of inputs, actions and events to multiple instances of the game.

Going Forward

As of 15th of March 2013 we have been policing input automation based on a two-strike policy

• 1st strike for input automation is a 30 day ban
• 2nd strike for input automation is a permanent ban

Input Automation remains strictly prohibited, and is policed under our suspension and ban policy.

Based on the discussion in this area and our will to be more clear and concise with the community regarding this part of our rules, we have decided to also apply this two-strike policy to prohibited forms of Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing as of January 1st 2015.
Madd Adda
#1897 - 2014-11-29 19:21:27 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Madd Adda wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Simple answer: No. One
But CCP *is* gutting it's revenue stream. There are some multiboxers such as myself that didn't PLEX their accounts ever because we wanted to support the game. To take away a significant chunk of the demand of a product and then claiming "We will still sell the same amount / make the same profit" is ludicrous to say the least.


The thing is, even if you were to plex, you are supporting the game. People buy plex to sell with real money. That money goes to CCP, and you get game time. Now that you and a lot of other multiboxers are either gone or reducing in number of accounts, there's more for the rest of us, and can now pick up the slack. Revenue stream might be hurt, but it won't be catastrophic.


Simple supply/demand + profit economics as explained in ECON 101.

CCP reduces the demand for PLEX. Supply remains constant. There will be a point where supply will overtake demand. Since demand is lower, people will purchase less PLEX, reducing their income.


Now that's just silly, no one is going to ever stop buying plex. Either they are going stockpile it, use it for game time, or additional training queues. Even then, you assume that subscriptions are in decline because multiboxers are quitting, as if they make up the majority of the player base, but even now new players are joining (they won't necessarily stay, but some will).

Carebear extraordinaire
Verde Minator
Crack And Cookies For Santa
#1898 - 2014-11-29 19:22:55 UTC
Teckos Pech
Hogyoku
Goonswarm Federation
#1899 - 2014-11-29 19:27:40 UTC
Madd Adda wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Madd Adda wrote:
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Simple answer: No. One
But CCP *is* gutting it's revenue stream. There are some multiboxers such as myself that didn't PLEX their accounts ever because we wanted to support the game. To take away a significant chunk of the demand of a product and then claiming "We will still sell the same amount / make the same profit" is ludicrous to say the least.


The thing is, even if you were to plex, you are supporting the game. People buy plex to sell with real money. That money goes to CCP, and you get game time. Now that you and a lot of other multiboxers are either gone or reducing in number of accounts, there's more for the rest of us, and can now pick up the slack. Revenue stream might be hurt, but it won't be catastrophic.


Simple supply/demand + profit economics as explained in ECON 101.

CCP reduces the demand for PLEX. Supply remains constant. There will be a point where supply will overtake demand. Since demand is lower, people will purchase less PLEX, reducing their income.


Now that's just silly, no one is going to ever stop buying plex. Either they are going stockpile it, use it for game time, or additional training queues. Even then, you assume that subscriptions are in decline because multiboxers are quitting, as if they make up the majority of the player base, but even now new players are joining (they won't necessarily stay, but some will).



Most players maybe multi-boxers. I have no idea, but it may very well be that most multi-boxers are not ISBoxers and the like. ISBoxers are a subset of multiboxers. And not all ISBoxers maybe using it to strip mine systems or blitz through anomalies. And even the guys in anomalies may not be that badly off. After all with fleet warp and drone assist its not that big a ding to efficiency, IMO. Mining will likely take more of a hit, but then again ISBoxing miners have popped up in this thread saying that they don't use broadcasting to shoot the same roid as it is less efficient.

As for the PLEX market, I'm wondering if CCP did not use the timing of this announcement to help with an intervention in that market. Basically "prick the bubble". Put up some PLEX for sale at lower prices for a short sustained period and induce people into panic selling.

"The curious task of economics is to demonstrate to men how little they really know about what they imagine they can design."--Friedrich August von Hayek

8 Golden Rules for EVE Online
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#1900 - 2014-11-29 19:30:30 UTC
Madd Adda wrote:
Now that's just silly, no one is going to ever stop buying plex. Either they are going stockpile it, use it for game time, or additional training queues. Even then, you assume that subscriptions are in decline because multiboxers are quitting, as if they make up the majority of the player base, but even now new players are joining (they won't necessarily stay, but some will).


I said nothing about subscriptions. I was talking about raw demand. I don't have the numbers on all the multiboxers in EVE, but we had somewhere around 250 accounts in one "chat". That's 250 less PLEX being used each month. Nothing about actual subs.