These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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.
123Next page
 

To those concerned about the future of Multi-boxing in EVE...

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers
#1 - 2015-01-26 08:32:43 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
I've been trying for months to fight against not only the input duplication changes but also any future "adjustments".

It appears at least one of the very CSM's many of us supported (and are tasked with representing what the players desire the future of EVE to hold) have decided to wage a war behind the scenes against multi-boxing.

CoreBloodBrothers stated
Quote:
"We felt with isboxer we where talking too a wall, but CCP came around bigtime. I hate isboxer bomberwings."
https://sites.google.com/site/csmwire/csm-10-election/corebloodbrothers


*Snip* Please refrain from discussing forum moderation. ISD Ezwal.

CCP Falcon appears on the GRN show and only states that CCP isnt going to hold any public discussion on the topic and if you have any questions you need to open a support ticket, but dont share that information you recieve from doing so since it will get you banned.
http://www.dual-boxing.com/threads/51966-CCP-Falcon-offers-some-clarification-on-Multiboxing-ISBoxer

Instead of debating game mechanics and improving EVE, the solution was presented to ban input duplication and now per the latest CSM minutes they are also looking at removing Fleet Warping as another solution. What will be the next ball that is dropped against multi-boxing in EVE that will also have a huge negative effect against everyone else in EVE?

Quote:
"Xander asked if there was serious consideration for removing fleet warp. CCP Fozzie replied that yes, it
was something being considered but that nothing had been decided. Some CSM members expressed
support and some expressed opposition. "


I've spoken and written extensively on the topic of Mulitboxing in EVE.
http://legacyeve.blogspot.com/2014/11/in-defense-of-multiboxing-in-eve-online.html
http://www.lostineve.net/podcast-episode-3/
http://praisebobpodcast.blogspot.com/2014/12/multiboxers-crucified-episode-23.html

I encourage people to read and listen to the arguments on the issue and voice their opinion on the forums / social media.

Legacy - An EVE Online Blog

Legacy of a Capsuleer Podcast

EVEServers.info - One stop API Solution for Corps/Alliances
ITTigerClawIK
Galactic Rangers
#2 - 2015-01-26 08:37:14 UTC
wait just a clarification are you talking about the target broadcast options like broadcasting target or for shield armor that kinda thing that's in the fleet tools you talking about them removing or is this something else entirely im a little confused?
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers
#3 - 2015-01-26 08:39:14 UTC
ITTigerClawIK wrote:
wait just a clarification are you talking about the target broadcast options like broadcasting target or for shield armor that kinda thing that's in the fleet tools you talking about them removing or is this something else entirely im a little confused?


It's fleet warping, not broadcasts (yet). My mistake

Legacy - An EVE Online Blog

Legacy of a Capsuleer Podcast

EVEServers.info - One stop API Solution for Corps/Alliances
Scipio Artelius
Weaponised Vegemite
Flying Dangerous
#4 - 2015-01-26 08:41:21 UTC  |  Edited by: Scipio Artelius
This is so 2014.

It's 2015 already and the World hasn't collapsed.

If fleet warping is removed then so what? Just means the fleet won't all warp together at the same speed and time. Will take some adjustment/skill in some situations, to have everyone land on grid at the same time. That's more interesting gameplay imo.

No matter if it stays and no matter if it goes.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#5 - 2015-01-26 08:55:43 UTC
you can have mulitboxing or reasonable plex prices,
pick one

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#6 - 2015-01-26 09:00:47 UTC  |  Edited by: Nolak Ataru
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
you can have mulitboxing or reasonable plex prices,
pick one

Quote:
Multiboxing directly influences PLEX prices greater than any other force in EVE and is the sole cause of high PLEX prices

Please take ECON 101 before attempting to badpost. If ISBoxers really were causing high PLEX prices, it should have stabilized at some point at something less than 800m. Correlation =/= Causation.

Additional note to make: CCP was unwilling to consider alternative means to achieving their goal of stopping the multiboxed fleets, even when credible people came forward and all but testified that the change would not deter the fleets, and attempted to propose actual changes.

And for the trolls, ISBoxing itself is not banned, only broadcasting (so far).
ISD Ezwal
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
ISD Alliance
#7 - 2015-01-26 09:38:19 UTC
I have removed some rule breaking posts and those quoting them.

The Rules:
11. Discussion of warnings and bans is prohibited.

Such matters shall remain private between CCP and the involved user. Questions or comments concerning warnings and bans will be conveyed through email or private messaging. CCP respect the right of our players to privacy and as such you are not permitted to publicize private correspondence (including support ticket responses and emails) received from any member of CCP staff.

12. Discussion of forum moderation is prohibited.

The discussion of EVE Online forum moderation actions generally leads to flaming, trolling and baiting of our ISD CCL moderators. As such, this type of discussion is strictly prohibited under the forum rules. If you have questions regarding the actions of a moderator, please file a support ticket under the Community & Forums Category.

ISD Ezwal Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs)
Sturmwolke
#8 - 2015-01-26 09:49:09 UTC
Give it a rest already. An ant hill must look like a mountain, if you're an ant.
Playing ANY game or MMO should never have a pre-requisite that you need to subscribe to 3rd party services to get ahead. This is pure metagaming.
No sane developers or persons will want to encourage this for obvious reasons, and neither should you if you love this game.

Get off ISBoxer. Want to multi-box? Knock yourself out with the usual ways.
Too painful? That's ok .. it's Intended™.
Orchid Fury
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#9 - 2015-01-26 09:49:26 UTC
please post your whines to the stickied thread and don't clutter up the forums.
tia.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#10 - 2015-01-26 09:58:19 UTC
Sturmwolke wrote:
Give it a rest already. An ant hill must look like a mountain, if you're an ant.
Playing ANY game or MMO should never have a pre-requisite that you need to subscribe to 3rd party services to get ahead. This is pure metagaming.
No sane developers or persons will want to encourage this for obvious reasons, and neither should you if you love this game.
Get off ISBoxer. Want to multi-box? Knock yourself out with the usual ways.
Too painful? That's ok .. it's Intended™.


Nobody is forcing you to subscribe to ISBoxer.
ISBoxer does not magically turn you into a god.
It will not magically scam people in local out of their ISK.
It will not magically stop you from losing ISK if someone comes and ganks you.
It will not earn you more ISK / person than supercap building, C5-6 escalations, or scamming in Jita.
It will not magic hundreds of deadspace or officer modules into your cargohold.

It does have a high entry level for new users.
It does paint a massive bullseye on your back wherever you go.
It does not modify the program in any way that could be construed to be injecting code or modifying the rate at which each character earns ISK.
It does require a lot of fiddling to make work.
it does have a high price to pay if you mess up.

People tried to bring solutions to CCP that would have been more effective than the broadcasting ban, but we were ignored. We were the ones who were telling CCP that this wouldn't work, but we were ignored. Oh well.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#11 - 2015-01-26 10:03:10 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
you can have mulitboxing or reasonable plex prices,
pick one

Quote:
Multiboxing directly influences PLEX prices greater than any other force in EVE and is the sole cause of high PLEX prices

Please take ECON 101 before attempting to badpost. If ISBoxers really were causing high PLEX prices, it should have stabilized at some point at something less than 800m. Correlation =/= Causation.

Additional note to make: CCP was unwilling to consider alternative means to achieving their goal of stopping the multiboxed fleets, even when credible people came forward and all but testified that the change would not deter the fleets, and attempted to propose actual changes.

And for the trolls, ISBoxing itself is not banned, only broadcasting (so far).

Good thing I'm right then.
this announcement came when plex hit on billion isk and it popped the plex bubble.

in this case the cause was actually input broadcasting.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#12 - 2015-01-26 10:13:52 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Good thing I'm right then.
this announcement came when plex hit on billion isk and it popped the plex bubble.
in this case the cause was actually input broadcasting.
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.


Correlation =/= Causation. I don't understand how this is so hard for you to understand. If you attempt to compare an item that was subject to as many different extenuating circumstances and alternative mitigating factors as PLEX to before and after a single declaration, you're gonna have a bad time. If multiboxing was the sole cause of PLEX increase, it would have stabilized down near 500m or less instead of ping-ponging near 900m like it is right now. Additionally, 1B was a stated mark by multiple PLEX hoarders as the point at which they'd liquidate some or all of their massive stocks.
And another thing, I've only seen two boxers including myself (out of a group of nearly 15-20) who've stopped boxing. Thanks to Shadowandlight, bomber wings are still fine. Mining wings were pretty much never at risk, and incursion fleets have switched over to Paladins/Vargurs or drone assisted Snakes. Gankers can also use Shadow's rollover and fleet warps, and the fact that idiots still run around with 20b in their cargohold.

And finally, instead of whining at CCP to change the gameplay, grab yourself a Catalyst and make some change. That is what this game is still about, right? Changing the world yourself, not whining at CCP till you get what you want.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#13 - 2015-01-26 10:34:13 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
Good thing I'm right then.
this announcement came when plex hit on billion isk and it popped the plex bubble.
in this case the cause was actually input broadcasting.
*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.
.


Correlation =/= Causation. I don't understand how this is so hard for you to understand. If you attempt to compare an item that was subject to as many different extenuating circumstances and alternative mitigating factors as PLEX to before and after a single declaration, you're gonna have a bad time. If multiboxing was the sole cause of PLEX increase, it would have stabilized down near 500m or less instead of ping-ponging near 900m like it is right now. Additionally, 1B was a stated mark by multiple PLEX hoarders as the point at which they'd liquidate some or all of their massive stocks.
And another thing, I've only seen two boxers including myself (out of a group of nearly 15-20) who've stopped boxing. Thanks to Shadowandlight, bomber wings are still fine. Mining wings were pretty much never at risk, and incursion fleets have switched over to Paladins/Vargurs or drone assisted Snakes. Gankers can also use Shadow's rollover and fleet warps, and the fact that idiots still run around with 20b in their cargohold.

And finally, instead of whining at CCP to change the gameplay, grab yourself a Catalyst and make some change. That is what this game is still about, right? Changing the world yourself, not whining at CCP till you get what you want.

You see me whinging do you ?
where have I asked ccp for anything ?

I'm not te one furiously typing teary eyed defences over something that's done and over.

You're just going to continue dismissing anything other than hard data (which neither of us have) so I'll leave you with this.

o7

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Sturmwolke
#14 - 2015-01-26 10:37:14 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:

Nobody is forcing you to subscribe to ISBoxer.
ISBoxer does not magically turn you into a god.
It will not magically scam people in local out of their ISK.
It will not magically stop you from losing ISK if someone comes and ganks you.
It will not earn you more ISK / person than supercap building, C5-6 escalations, or scamming in Jita.
It will not magic hundreds of deadspace or officer modules into your cargohold.

It does have a high entry level for new users.
It does paint a massive bullseye on your back wherever you go.
It does not modify the program in any way that could be construed to be injecting code or modifying the rate at which each character earns ISK.
It does require a lot of fiddling to make work.
it does have a high price to pay if you mess up.

People tried to bring solutions to CCP that would have been more effective than the broadcasting ban, but we were ignored. We were the ones who were telling CCP that this wouldn't work, but we were ignored. Oh well.

No one is forcing you to continue subscribing to EVE either when CCP breaks your favorite toy. Is there some other hidden motives?
Line 2-5, pure noise.

2nd para, pure noise.

Last para, negotiate with hardcore metagamers? Nope, not if they want to save their game.
Basic principle still stands as a rock, no matter how wiggly you want play this.
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2015-01-26 10:46:44 UTC  |  Edited by: ISD Ezwal
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
You see me whinging do you ?
where have I asked ccp for anything ?

I'm not te one furiously typing teary eyed defences over something that's done and over.

You're just going to continue dismissing anything other than hard data (which neither of us have) so I'll leave you with this.o7


The irony of someone who whined to CCP about ISBoxing being OP, especially after being told by multiple people that there are seriously powerful counters available, telling me to HTFU is so great that Alexander is envious.
I've been the one who's been the voice of reason to CCP during this whole ordeal. I reached out to CCP and told them that 1) This wouldn't work and 2) I know how to do what they intended. Kind of a strange thing to do if I was crying my eyes out over space pixels.

I'm dismissal of almost anything but hard data because it's my job as a Criminal Justice Investigator student. I don't sit here making speculative guesses based on nothing other than "muh feels". I look at the evidence presented to me, consult experts in whatever field my investigation takes me to, and craft a report based on the facts. I don't jump to a conclusion and then twist the facts around to suit my purpose.

*Snip* Please refrain from personal attacks. ISD Ezwal.


Quote:
No one is forcing you to continue subscribing to EVE either when CCP breaks your favorite toy. Is there some other hidden motives?
Line 2-5, pure noise.
2nd para, pure noise.
Last para, negotiate with hardcore metagamers? Nope, not if they want to save their game.
Basic principle still stands as a rock, no matter how wiggly you want play this.


Nobody's forcing you to do nothing when there's a multibox miner in the belt either. Nobody's forcing you to play when there's someone who puts more time and effort in to the game than you.
Sure, if the definition of "pure noise" was somehow changed to mean "rebuttals to the most common arguments against a product".
And if metagaming was banned in the last year, I guess I missed it. I'm sure BL's Tengu fleets, PL's wrecking ball fleets, and the current meta buildup of Titans will be stopped soon enough. When CCP went to change wormholes, they talked to corbexx, who talked to the wormhole residents. CCP then took a look at corbexx's research, and made changes accordingly. Apparently, asking for a little respect and a chance to help them fix their game is Not Good unless you have a CSM's ear.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#16 - 2015-01-26 10:54:42 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
You see me whinging do you ?
where have I asked ccp for anything ?

I'm not te one furiously typing teary eyed defences over something that's done and over.

You're just going to continue dismissing anything other than hard data (which neither of us have) so I'll leave you with this.o7


The irony of someone who whined to CCP about ISBoxing being OP, especially after being told by multiple people that there are seriously powerful counters available, telling me to HTFU is so great that Alexander is envious.
I've been the one who's been the voice of reason to CCP during this whole ordeal. I reached out to CCP and told them that 1) This wouldn't work and 2) I know how to do what they intended. Kind of a strange thing to do if I was crying my eyes out over space pixels.

I'm dismissal of almost anything but hard data because it's my job as a Criminal Justice Investigator student. I don't sit here making speculative guesses based on nothing other than "muh feels". I look at the evidence presented to me, consult experts in whatever field my investigation takes me to, and craft a report based on the facts. I don't jump to a conclusion and then twist the facts around to suit my purpose.

If you have nothing else to contribute other than "You should HTFU while I whine to CCP", then don't post.

no, you should htfu period.

Again where am I whinging.

get over it, it's done.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Nolak Ataru
Hedion University
Amarr Empire
#17 - 2015-01-26 11:02:56 UTC
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
no, you should htfu period.
Again where am I whinging.
get over it, it's done.


You're whining that CCP may have screwed the pooch on this.
CCP is not infallible. T20 should have taught anyone that.
I want to help CCP fix their game. If that's bad, sue me.
Ralph King-Griffin
New Eden Tech Support
#18 - 2015-01-26 11:07:40 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:
no, you should htfu period.
Again where am I whinging.
get over it, it's done.


You're whining that CCP may have screwed the pooch on this.
CCP is not infallible. T20 should have taught anyone that.
I want to help CCP fix their game. If that's bad, sue me.

Am I ?
your reading comprehension sucks for a law student dude.

Murderers of Negotiable Motivations

=]|[=
Shalashaska Adam
Snakes and Lasers
#19 - 2015-01-26 11:13:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Shalashaska Adam
How about removing fleet warp and wing warp, but leaving squad warp, so squad commanders have added importance.

Fleet/Wing commanders could then have an ability to request a fleet warp which the squad commanders could accept.
Sturmwolke
#20 - 2015-01-26 11:16:29 UTC
Nolak Ataru wrote:

Nobody's forcing you to do nothing when there's a multibox miner in the belt either. Nobody's forcing you to play when there's someone who puts more time and effort in to the game than you.
Sure, if the definition of "pure noise" was somehow changed to mean "rebuttals to the most common arguments against a product".
And if metagaming was banned in the last year, I guess I missed it. I'm sure BL's Tengu fleets, PL's wrecking ball fleets, and the current meta buildup of Titans will be stopped soon enough. When CCP went to change wormholes, they talked to corbexx, who talked to the wormhole residents. CCP then took a look at corbexx's research, and made changes accordingly. Apparently, asking for a little respect and a chance to help them fix their game is Not Good unless you have a CSM's ear.

You know what this reminds me of? Arguing with a 15 year old teenager.
Do you know how teenagers argue? They nitpick everything that even touches the subject, moving goalposts etc. etc. ... i.e. lots and lots and lots of noise.
And no before the ad hominem accusations come through, it's directed at how the response was articulated, not the person.

I don't even know why I bothered posting in the first place, except on a whim Smile
123Next page