EVE General Discussion

I specialize in the secondary RMT markets, so I'm going to be looking at the effect of the input broadcast bans on that

Ignoring my other arguments doesn't mean I didn't make any.

CCP Falcon, you know that comment on Reddit of yours, where you said you would prefer seeing twenty individuals rather than 20 alts. If you were serious about the RP integrity of EVE, what you would have said was you'd prefer just one running client per player. I hope you see the issue of double dipping that CCP engages in, by selling multiple accounts, without in-client support for multiple clients.

The real problem was the decision to start allowing multiple clients way back when. All that income, all that content... should never have happened.

That's what you should be speaking to, in opinion statements. Denying or ignoring or being unaware of how game-breaking multiboxing can be is just... kind of hard to believe it can happen.

Game breaking workarounds happen with as little as 2 characters. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that with a module like remote cap transfers, the amount transferred is quite a bit more than the amount required for module activation. In your ideal EVE world, two players would cap chain with each other. In reality, a player uses two characters to utilize this module and create cap from nothing. For the solo player, their options for cap are local modules like cap injects and ancillary repairs.

The disparity is even wider than that. The RR ships now have mids and lows freed up, having foregone utility roles. Utility roles which are factored in when Fozzie and Rise (whoever, I don't know who does what anymore) decide how much grid and CPU and slots etc. a ship should have.

Or do they? Do they factor in alts when balancing ships and modules? I would find it pretty amusing if Multiboxing was -so- endemic that even CCP takes it for granted, and balances around it. ...In light of this new policy change, anyway.

Something tells me there's a new shift in dogma at CCP, regarding the sanctity of the solo player. Whether that's true or not, that CCP realizes the real problem (that multiboxing happens at all), I'm sure / I'm telling you the real solution is locking players into just one client at a time.

Then you have a hope of seeing 20 individual players.

Integrity. That's what EVE stands to gain by enforcing one client at a time.

Wait, so you're tired of people who's gameplay styles have been effectively removed complaining, yet the fact that this whole change is because a bunch of carebears have been crying because they don't understand how isboxer works, that's OK?

At the end of the day CCP are treating a symptom here. The problem is that mining is boring as sin, bombers are too powerful, and the control system is far too simple all round. Fixing that by nuking out a single playstyle isn't fixing it. It's just appealing to the entitled little brats that like to cry a lot. By February, when the multiboxers have adapted they'll be right back here whining to CCP that even more needs to be done.

Why? Set up your isboxer right and you can still be as effective if not slightly more effective up to about 20 chars. I've actually resubbed my old isboxer account specifically so I can ensure the crying noobs continue to cry. You can still crush their spirits without input broadcasting. I'm checking with CCP, but reading their change, using the Video FX viewers to create clickable zones for the extra windows will still be fine as long as you click each one, not all of them together. That pretty much makes input broadcasting irrelevant for any but the biggest multiboxers.

Really? The people who buy ISK are going to buy it because they don't want to grind it out themselves. So you're predicting an increase in business for the illicit ISK sellers? Truthfully, that's not a bad guess.

Of course, you're assuming that the prices on the ISK selling sites and on the forums where the independent ISK sellers hang out is low enough to become more attractive. You may have a point, with the cost of 1 billion ISK in Jita now up to around $21.25 USD. But, in my opinion, for the price to really become more attractive, the price of PLEX really needs to get to the $23/billion ISK range, or around 760 million ISK/billion.

But that's assuming that speculators don't then step in and drive the price back up. Also, that's assuming that the supply of ISK to the illicit ISK sellers doesn't get disrupted and force the price that the ISK sellers charge to rise as well. In fact, because the price of illicit ISK has been so depressed, the ISK sellers may have to raise their prices, meaning that the difference between the legal Jita price and the illicit ISK seller price won't be great enough to entice people away from Jita PLEX and toward that dirty, dirty illicit ISK.

Only time will tell, Lucas. You could be right. But the question isn't as cut and dried as you make it out to be. Personally, I'm betting the other way.

cancelled four annuals. began transfers to consolidate. I feel better already. Time to play with PLEX and not be so AFK

and fly for Miniluv.

Aside from its effect, ISBoxer and key broadcasting are an example of people adapting to a need, and ingenuity.

In this post I'm not trying to say key broadcasting is good or bad. I just want to point out that if ISBoxer and key broadcasting were a solution to a need, that need is still there.

Players (being a subset of people) create things and ways to satisfy needs and wants. Other examples of this player compensation for missing aspects of this game are... player created fiction. art. RP. Maybe those are all due to excess imagination or escapism. On their own they are very frivolous, but make-believe, entertainment, and amusement are basically a video game's business. Right?

More serious examples are Evemon, EFT, Jump Planners, siggy. Things you have probably wondered why they don't exist in the client.

What I would like to see following this change are attempts at addressing the need that key broadcasting filled. Whether that means providing tools in the client (not likely, I know)... removing the means (no multiboxing), removing the reward (PLEX), or something else, I don't know.

As it stands right now, the thought process is 'more clients' -> 'more ISK' -> 'Play with PLEX.'

...But, let's be real, that probably won't change. I'll end this post with a snippet by FoxFour about the IGB, which should give you an impression similar to mine, that the need involving key broadcasting will be left hanging there, unaddressed.

The fact that there are plenty of players getting along just fine without it is more indicative of broadcasting being entirely optional, and therefore there is no need at all but that which some players believe there is. Belief of need is not, however, indicative of any need at all. Some people think they need a certain brand of clothing in order to survive, for example. I couldn't tell you how many times I've heard the phrase, "I couldn't live without my iPhone".

correct, but the hamster fell off the wheel there, at the start of my post, you should go back for it and start over.