|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 4 post(s) |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
564
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 17:38:00 -
[1] - Quote
Jenn aSide wrote:I'm on the fence somewhat, i've never used anything like that but have considered trying it after seeing the isboxer Drake vid on youtube.
At the same time, I can see the argument that it's bad for the game. I know a dude who Isboxer'd 4 Ravens in null sec Forsaken Hubs and made obscene isk, and have heard the stories of the "100 man solo mining fleet" lol.
The counter-counter argument is that these tycoons would unsub their 100 ship mining fleets if they couldn't use them...
Hell, as it is I guess it's ok since the player is at the keyboard, but i don't really like it.
Then you have those scrubs telling everyone "if you can't make 100M isk farming lvl4's you're dumb" and "high sec is far too profitable".
Well if those guys play it with one character, maybe 2 and without isboxer, they would probably change their minds about how profitable some areas in the game are and how bad some changes can be for a regular "normal" player.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
565
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 18:23:00 -
[2] - Quote
GreenWithEnvy wrote:Does this mean that we have to go back to taped-together mice and keyboard with dowels over them? Because that convinced CCP pretty well last time to allow multiboxing SOFTWARE, because if they don't allow SOFTWARE people will just use HARDWARE.
Yes show us how you're going to make 30 or 100 toons repeat exactly the same task with a single command with your ubber rack of 100mices and keyboards/screens
Make those 10+ to 100 multiboxing alt guys unhappy and if they leaves you know what happens? -not a dozen unhappy accounts leaving but hundreds if not thousands, weird business model indeed when you know a single bad expansion cost about 16/20% loss in company employees.
Putting all your eggs in the same basket is looking for trouble and sooner or later it happens. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
565
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 19:08:00 -
[3] - Quote
Ohishi wrote:Even if everyone who multiboxed only had 1 extra account, imagine how much revenue you lose by people, we'll say 25% of the total account holders multibox, canceling their 2 accounts over not being able to multibox. That would be over 100k accounts gone. I would bet that the percent of multiple account holders is higher and I know that most have more than just 1 extra account.
You know those extra accounts and thx to isboxer, increase exponentially your IG income. This is a fact. Less demand for plex drives prices down at an acceptable level the 'normal" player would actually buy it, plex price being driven down you need to sell +plex to get the same isk, how's this bad for CCP? *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
566
|
Posted - 2013.02.13 21:14:00 -
[4] - Quote
Sexy Cakes wrote:My friend runs 5 accounts with Ishtars in nullsec.
Its stupid to let him duplicate one clients actions to the other 4 accounts and it shouldn't be allowed.
End of story.
However he pays 5 times more than I do and money talks.
Multiboxing those 5 ships and still pay real his subs instead of buy plex from market, he's really doing it wrong.
There's no challenge on using ISBoxer except a couple days to get used to it, and as far as you are not mentally challenged or disturbed, takes about a couple seconds to realize your global net income goes exponential per sup account added.
Then it's a matter of hardware and if you're not playing with an old DX-25 or Amiga but a recent rig, you actually play Eve without getting out of your pocket a single dime and on top, get a huge amount of isk in a very short period of time you could never ever do with a single or 2 characters.
End of story (mine in this case) is that yes I do agree that for each multiboxing player it ruins exponentially the game for many single/double account players.
CCP doesn't see any issue with this and clearly supports it, from here each one is free to think on his own how much he feels respected as paying customer or how much this single point adds/takes fun from the time/money he's willing to put in this game.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
568
|
Posted - 2013.02.14 14:50:00 -
[5] - Quote
Vera Algaert wrote:CSM minutes wrote:UAxDEATH suggested a tangible benefit for players with multiple accounts would be discounts on subscription costs. He mentioned that at one time he had 90 accounts, but since becoming a CSM he has cut back to only 37, and asked GÇ£what would inspire me to [reactivate] those accounts? you guys are doing it all wrong instead of inspiring UAxDEATH to reactivate his other 50 accounts you want to ban him. how can you be so out of touch with the needs of your CSM?
I'd rather find ways to get 50 new subscribers and better ways to keep them on the long run than one nerd, that one day or another, will get a burn out and take his 100 accounts away forever.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
574
|
Posted - 2013.02.16 12:33:00 -
[6] - Quote
Quit Whining wrote:Lascivit Mercator wrote:/signed
no reason it should be allowed No reason it shouldn't.
RMT is a good one *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
575
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 13:06:00 -
[7] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:Sergeant Acht Scultz wrote:Quit Whining wrote:Lascivit Mercator wrote:/signed
no reason it should be allowed No reason it shouldn't. RMT is a good one so according to you if it's multiboxing, he's RMT'ing.... I've seen wars starting for such statements, no really.
I'm not saying it, but rather admit the obvious. It's probably easier to RMT when multiboxing than the other way around don't you think so? *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
575
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 13:09:00 -
[8] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Thalen Draganos wrote:Do you anti-multiboxers even think before you make these posts? Really? No. Their botting friend got banned & they think everyone who is doing the right thing should have to suffer for it.
Yes because it's easier to RMT running a single/double account, sorry me, it's so obvious. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
575
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 13:21:00 -
[9] - Quote
Cazador 64 wrote:Besides just one person with his 100 accounts could out vote all of you lol.
Yes tell us all more about multiboxing huge advantages over anyone who doesn't. You got a good start. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
575
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 13:53:00 -
[10] - Quote
Herr Wilkus wrote:I don't think anyone is saying that multiboxing, or multi-clienting is a bad thing.
That's exactly my opinion. I don't think it's bad when it comes to manageable numbers you could do it manually with whatever intelligent/inventive construction like stick 6 mice with bamboo/strap or keyborads, but I'm firmly against the promotion and arguments stating this as "normal" game play.
I'm not at all against using isboxer to manage what could be considered as normal behavior when you play 4 or 5 accounts, which you should be more or less able to do RL manually.
And again, who profits the most from these growing numbers? - a guy who wants to faction/officer pimp a vindicator or someone for who Isk is real money and has all interest on running the largest possible number of accounts? If someone has that much trouble to admit it it's either an RMT or an idiot. *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
|
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
575
|
Posted - 2013.02.17 13:59:00 -
[11] - Quote
Grimpak wrote:ah.. *probably*. that means you don't know.
Because you think Sgreegs got ban only single accounts for botting maybe? -you can't be that naif or make your self one, doesn't stick with the personage.
And yes please explain me if YOU, were a botter or RMT, why wouldn't you use this tool?-how much benefits would you get from it?
And again please tell me, as normal/regular uber player, how many accounts you think are manageable to do most things you do in eve without isbox or whatever program?
I usually like your rather constructive posts but this last one you either lost your brains somewhere or are just trolling.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
596
|
Posted - 2013.02.19 19:51:00 -
[12] - Quote
Kate stark wrote:...care to actually discuss the topic of the thread? or would that force you to admit you're wrong and you have a crushing inability to do that?
Same can be said about you.
You refuse a different opinion from yours, it's ok. What it's annoying is how much word playing there is around to justify multiboxing as non botting program when it's clearly the best tool for whoever wants to do it without getting too much attention from CCP.
Notice that I'm not saying multiboxers are RMT or bots, it's not the same thing, but if you want to RMT you can do it easily by multiboxing (no big fuss from CCP for this), thus no offense to EULA in game play then it's a matter of external links and smart/less smart market operations for transfers.
In a game where Macros are not aloud, 3rd party automation programs are not aloud, multiboxing is still the best tool for RMT, that easy.
*removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
|
|
|