Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
741
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:56:00 -
[91] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote: Multiboxers have to click. Previously CCP have stated that as long as a physical click happens it doesn't matter how many simultaneous client clicks that generates, but if a click is generated without a physical click, then it's bannable. so what you have, which is essentially an autopilot bot, is very very bannable.
If I can find the CCP quote I'll link it.
thats just a poor excuse not to ban profitable ISBoxer - they seem to ignore the fact that said physical click only happens on the main client, not on the other 19 running in background and controlled by ISbox.
Automation per definition also includes methods or tools which reduce human workload for operating machines, cars etc - thus is clearly EULA violation. |
LordOfDespair
Capsuleer Combat Training Services
11
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 16:58:00 -
[92] - Quote
Tippia wrote:LordOfDespair wrote:Whether it is overpowered or not is irrelevent. So your argument is irrelevant then. Goodie.
Aaaa.. what? That made absolutely no sense.
You are delusional. Next! |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20232
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:04:00 -
[93] - Quote
LordOfDespair wrote:Aaaa.. what? That made absolutely no sense. You made the argument that multiboxing was overpowered. When you couldn't articulate in what way it was overpowered, you claimed that it was irrelevant whether it was or not.
That makes your argument irrelevant. It's very simple to make sense of, really.
Robert Caldera wrote:Automation per definition also includes methods or tools which reduce human workload for operating machines, cars etc - thus is clearly EULA violation. GǪbut as long as it requires 1:1 human input rather than make use of machine-genrateed input, it doesn't qualify for the only definition that matters: the EULA one, according to which multiboxing is not a violation. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
202
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:07:00 -
[94] - Quote
Debora Tsung wrote:LordOfDespair wrote:
But it is overpowered. Multiboxing incursions/WHs makes probably the most ISK per hour out of anything else.... and is only possible with ISboxing.
That's something I never quite understood. The Multiboxer says he earned twenty times more than with his one single account, but then he has 20 accounts. All those accounts need to be plexed, the toons need equipmnent etc. In the end wouldn't he earn just as much as if he were in a corp with 20 (very well organized) players?
the first 6 hours of the month are used to pay for the plex, after that the income is over a hundred million an hour for each account. For a vanguard ISBOXER thats about 10 times a 100 mil or a billion an hour. Theres over 600 hours a month and a lot of incursion guys grind till they can't talk. Its hard to believe, its like they are earning real money or are forced labor. a couple hundred hours a month wouldn't surprise me. Sure theres ammo to buy and ships to replace but thats still a few titans a month. Next thing you know the guy is multiboxing 10 titans and his alliance of 10 guys has taken over the universe.
And to answer some one elses prattle, THAT by any definition is overpowered.
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
742
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:09:00 -
[95] - Quote
Tippia wrote:but as long as it requires 1:1 human input rather than make use of machine-genrateed input, it doesn't qualify for the only definition that matters: the EULA one, according to which multiboxing is not a violation.
1:1 what? Its more like 1:19, otherwise isbox would have zero use for people who want to control 20 clients with 1 click. Also ist not about multiboxing but about input broadcasts which is why people use it in the first line - for automation. Like I stated before, CCP only allows it because profitable like hell not becaust its not automation. |
LordOfDespair
Capsuleer Combat Training Services
11
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:35:00 -
[96] - Quote
Tippia wrote:LordOfDespair wrote:Aaaa.. what? That made absolutely no sense. You made the argument that multiboxing was overpowered. When you couldn't articulate in what way it was overpowered, you claimed that it was irrelevant whether it was or not. That makes your argument irrelevant. It's very simple to make sense of, really. Robert Caldera wrote:Automation per definition also includes methods or tools which reduce human workload for operating machines, cars etc - thus is clearly EULA violation. GǪbut as long as it requires 1:1 human input rather than make use of machine-genrateed input, it doesn't qualify for the only definition that matters: the EULA one, according to which multiboxing is not a violation.
Umm no. You are wrong.. again.
The argument has always been that ISboxer is automation and it lets players do something that they cannot do manually. |
LordOfDespair
Capsuleer Combat Training Services
11
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:38:00 -
[97] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:Debora Tsung wrote:LordOfDespair wrote:
But it is overpowered. Multiboxing incursions/WHs makes probably the most ISK per hour out of anything else.... and is only possible with ISboxing.
That's something I never quite understood. The Multiboxer says he earned twenty times more than with his one single account, but then he has 20 accounts. All those accounts need to be plexed, the toons need equipmnent etc. In the end wouldn't he earn just as much as if he were in a corp with 20 (very well organized) players? the first 6 hours of the month are used to pay for the plex, after that the income is over a hundred million an hour for each account. For a vanguard ISBOXER thats about 10 times a 100 mil or a billion an hour. Theres over 600 hours a month and a lot of incursion guys grind till they can't talk. Its hard to believe, its like they are earning real money or are forced labor. a couple hundred hours a month wouldn't surprise me. Sure theres ammo to buy and ships to replace but thats still a few titans a month. Next thing you know the guy is multiboxing 10 titans and his alliance of 10 guys has taken over the universe. And to answer some one elses prattle, THAT by any definition is overpowered.
Yeah exactly ^. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20241
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:39:00 -
[98] - Quote
LordOfDespair wrote:Umm no. You are wrong.. again. Uhm, yes. I'm still right. As demonstrated by every single official communication on the matter.
Quote:The argument has always been that ISboxer is automation and it lets players do something that they cannot do manually. GǪand that argument has always been factually incorrect since it ignores both reality and every definition that matters.
Robert Caldera wrote:1:1 what? If you click a button, all that happens is that you click a button.
Quote:Like I stated before, CCP only allows it because profitable like hell not becaust its not automation. GǪexcept that CCP happily foregoes profit to uphold the rule against automation. State is as much as you like, it is completely contradicted and disproven by reality. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
LordOfDespair
Capsuleer Combat Training Services
11
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:43:00 -
[99] - Quote
You've still not answered the question: How many accounts do you play on?
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
743
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:47:00 -
[100] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Uhm, yes. I'm still right. As demonstrated by every single official communication on the matter. but not for the reason of their excuses but just because they want the money.
Tippia wrote:and that argument has always been factually incorrect since it ignores both reality and every definition that matters. reality = guy cant play fleet of mining barges, gets isbox and suddenly can play a fleet of mining barges. definition of automation includes isbox pretty obviously. Which matters? I tell you what matters -> your money from 20 isboxed accounts.
Tippia wrote:If you click a button, all that happens is that you click a button. if this would be true, noone would use it. You click a button and software clicks same button in 19 other eve clients in background.
Tippia wrote:except that CCP happily foregoes profit to uphold the rule against automation. State is as much as you like, it is completely contradicted and disproven by reality. more hurfblurf in lack of arguments? |
|
Wulfgar WarHammer
Imperium Research Inc
27
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:58:00 -
[101] - Quote
LordOfDespair wrote:You've still not answered the question: How many accounts do you play on?
Just don't bother arguing with Tippia, plain and simple. You, I, and anyone else with a shred of sense in their brains understands that clicking on one client and having that click broadcasted to 19 other clients is automation. It is just that simple.
She will argue the point until she is blue in the face, because yes, she does use it, and yes, profits from it greatly, and does not want it to go away.
In the end all of those accounts end up lining CCP's pockets, hence the stance they take on ISBoxing. Just be content with the fact that you don't exploit the game, others do, and it's beyond your control.
Obviously the game is not designed to have one person controlling 20 accounts, else there would be an in-game, non 3rd party way of doing so. If the ISBoxers want to be delusional and hide behind "Well CCP says its ok", so be it. You and I both know its a form of botting, even if there is one person controlling the 19 bots. If they ruin your game experience so much, move on to another game.
If I would even consider using 20 accounts to play a frickin game, I would need to take a serious step back and re-examine my life.
If the game means so much to them that they need to play 20 accounts at the same time using 3rd party software and you have fun just playing a video game .............. Well, you win by default, my friend. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
20245
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 17:58:00 -
[102] - Quote
Robert Caldera wrote:but not for the reason of their excuses but just because they want the money. What? Could you please rephrase that as a coherent sentence.
Quote:Which matters? I tell you what matters -> your money from 20 isboxed accounts. GǪwhich is proven false by the fact that CCP happily get rid of accounts that could be making them money. So how do you square that fact with your presumed reasoning?
Quote:if this would be true, noone would use it. It is true, and that's why people use it: because it doesn't automate anything and requires manual input, and thus don't break the rules.
Quote:more hurfblurf in lack of arguments? Just because you can't counter an argument doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Please try again: how do you square the very simple and much-publicised fact that they will happily jettison thousands of accounts with the presumption that they only allow multiboxing because it requires lots of accounts?
GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skill plan 2.1. |
LordOfDespair
Capsuleer Combat Training Services
11
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 18:01:00 -
[103] - Quote
Wulfgar WarHammer wrote:LordOfDespair wrote:You've still not answered the question: How many accounts do you play on?
Just don't bother arguing with Tippia, plain and simple. You, I, and anyone else with a shred of sense in their brains understands that clicking on one client and having that click broadcasted to 19 other clients is automation. It is just that simple. She will argue the point until she is blue in the face, because yes, she does use it, and yes, profits from it greatly, and does not want it to go away. In the end all of those accounts end up lining CCP's pockets, hence the stance they take on ISBoxing. Just be content with the fact that you don't exploit the game, others do, and it's beyond your control. Obviously the game is not designed to have one person controlling 20 accounts, else there would be an in-game, non 3rd party way of doing so. If the ISBoxers want to be delusional and hide behind "Well CCP says its ok", so be it. You and I both know its a form of botting, even if there is one person controlling the 19 bots. If they ruin your game experience so much, move on to another game. If I would even consider using 20 accounts to play a frickin game, I would need to take a serious step back and re-examine my life. If the game means so much to them that they need to play 20 accounts at the same time using 3rd party software and you have fun just playing a video game .............. Well, you win by default, my friend.
Yeah fair enough mate.
I'm thinking about just ignoring anything else Tippia has to say.
|
Dominic karin
Trojan Legion Fidelas Constans
32
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 18:03:00 -
[104] - Quote
LordOfDespair wrote:So I've made this little program that will click my mouse for me every 3 seconds.
I thought I'd use it to click jump to the next gate while I refill a drink or take a quick bathroom break.
What are the rules regarding this? I know that programs that do complex things like mining (lol) are banned obviously. But what about an auto clicker? All it does is just click the mouse.
Thanks!
Anything that allows you to go afk while a program plays the game for your is bannable. Clicking Jump every 3 seconds is a form of playing the game. |
Caviar Liberta
Moira. Villore Accords
492
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 18:05:00 -
[105] - Quote
This thread can be summed up with this. |
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
746
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 18:06:00 -
[106] - Quote
Tippia wrote:What? Could you please rephrase that as a coherent sentence. more blabla please as you obviously got nothing better to respond.
Tippia wrote:which is proven false by the fact that CCP happily get rid of accounts that could be making them money. So how do you square that fact with your presumed reasoning? how you know? You got some statistics about banned botters? What I see multiboxed fleets everywhere, which arent banned for the only good reason: money. Because everything else would get them banned, even CCPs own EULA.
Tippia wrote:It is true, and that's why people use it: because it doesn't automate anything and requires manual input, and thus don't break the rules. no, either you are stupid or a ******. People use it because they couldnt steer their fleets without aid of automation software.
Tippia wrote: Just because you can't counter an argument doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Please try again: how do you square the very simple and much-publicised fact that they will happily jettison thousands of accounts with the presumption that they only allow multiboxing because it requires lots of accounts?
what? |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
202
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 23:30:00 -
[107] - Quote
If Y'All would quit quoting Tipia, I wouldn't even know she's still here. Just click on her name and select hide posts. after a page goes by we can continue a real conversation.
Until then we need James to start selling boxer permits and it would be nice if our content creators would create a boxer geddon for us to play. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
796
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 23:35:00 -
[108] - Quote
Wulfgar WarHammer wrote:She will argue the point until she is blue in the face, because yes, she does use it, and yes, profits from it greatly, and does not want it to go away. I dont know that this is an accurate conclusion.
Im not sure he even plays the game at all anymore, at least not on Tippia as a character. eve-bazaar - Discount prices on ships and PLEX. Real savings to drive your ISK further. |
Remiel Pollard
Stirling Iron Society A Rather Intimidating Group of Individuals
2733
|
Posted - 2014.03.24 23:56:00 -
[109] - Quote
Muestereate wrote:If Y'All would quit quoting Tipia, I wouldn't even know she's still here. Just click on her name and select hide posts. after a page goes by we can continue a real conversation.
Until then we need James to start selling boxer permits and it would be nice if our content creators would create a boxer geddon for us to play.
I'm not one to ignore people just because they hold an opposing point of view. What you're asking for is an echo chamber of people that condemn ISBoxer, not a discussion. You've already decided that it's 'bad' and you aren't interested in discussion. Fortunately, you're wrong, that much is obvious, as is the fact that you're not very good, nor are you interested in learning. Which is good, because it means CCP will ignore your opinion entirely.
As a single account holder myself, I'm on record for talking out against multiboxers in the past. Unlike you, however, I'm capable of reason, and changed my opinion when presented with new information, as a result of actual discussion with multiple points of view. I listened to opposing points of view, and eventually conceded that multiboxing, even with ISBoxer, gives no one any special advantage.
Anyway, you won't find an echo chamber on GD. If you want that, I'd suggest checking out Answers in Genesis, see if they have a forum there or something. You don't scare me. I've been to Jita. |
Sister of Pain
Ze DoucheWaffe
20
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:08:00 -
[110] - Quote
Why so much hate for Tipp? His/her/its answers are always clear and concise. Most importantly, he/her/it sets everyone on the correct path when they are clearly wrong.
Pain is inevitable, but the suffering is optional.
This is possibly one of the worst threads in the history of these forums.-á Locked. - CCP Falcon |
|
J'Poll
CDG Playgrounds Affirmative.
3879
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:36:00 -
[111] - Quote
LordOfDespair wrote:So I've made this little program that will click my mouse for me every 3 seconds.
I thought I'd use it to click jump to the next gate while I refill a drink or take a quick bathroom break.
What are the rules regarding this? I know that programs that do complex things like mining (lol) are banned obviously. But what about an auto clicker? All it does is just click the mouse.
Thanks!
In before botting perma-ban, I hope you enjoy the time you have left in EVE. Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy
Ever wanted to PvP but can't find people to fly with. Look no further and this chat: Redemption Road |
J'Poll
CDG Playgrounds Affirmative.
3879
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:39:00 -
[112] - Quote
LordOfDespair wrote:I talked to the GMs and they weren't very helpful. They were so vague and wouldn't confirm or deny anything.
They directed me to the EULA and technically what I want to do should be okay. However the ELUA is so vague also that it raises uncertainty.
I think if somebody is allowed to ISbox 20+ accounts and make billions of isk, this shouldn't really be cared about either.
2 major errors there.
1. The EULA is very clear that any form of AUTOMATION is prohibited. What you do is automation, as you set it up to do things without your personal input.
2. You think that ISBoxer is automation, which is untrue. It just copies the MANUAL input over multiple clients and thus is not automated. If said person would walk away from the keyboard, all 20+ accounts would do NOTHING. Personal channel: Crazy Dutch Guy
Ever wanted to PvP but can't find people to fly with. Look no further and this chat: Redemption Road |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
202
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:45:00 -
[113] - Quote
Remiel Pollard wrote:Muestereate wrote:If Y'All would quit quoting Tipia, I wouldn't even know she's still here. Just click on her name and select hide posts. after a page goes by we can continue a real conversation.
Until then we need James to start selling boxer permits and it would be nice if our content creators would create a boxer geddon for us to play. I'm not one to ignore people just because they hold an opposing point of view. What you're asking for is an echo chamber of people that condemn ISBoxer, not a discussion. You've already decided that it's 'bad' and you aren't interested in discussion. Fortunately, you're wrong, that much is obvious, as is the fact that you're not very good, nor are you interested in learning. Which is good, because it means CCP will ignore your opinion entirely. As a single account holder myself, I'm on record for talking out against multiboxers in the past. Unlike you, however, I'm capable of reason, and changed my opinion when presented with new information, as a result of actual discussion with multiple points of view. I listened to opposing points of view, and eventually conceded that multiboxing, even with ISBoxer, gives no one any special advantage. Anyway, you won't find an echo chamber on GD. If you want that, I'd suggest checking out Answers in Genesis, see if they have a forum there or something.
Thank you for a personal assault on my intelligience, beliefs and resilience. |
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
797
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:46:00 -
[114] - Quote
J'Poll wrote:1. The EULA is very clear that any form of AUTOMATION is prohibited. What you do is automation, as you set it up to do things without your personal input. Really? What clause of the EULA would that be?
The nearest would be Conduct A.2., but I think that's why he only has a vague answer so far. If it was clear cut they would have said, but until a formal decision is made on what he wants to do, it mustn't be as clear as we all think (I also think what he wants to do doesn't feel right, but cudos to him for asking first). eve-bazaar - Discount prices on ships and PLEX. Real savings to drive your ISK further. |
Kaarous Aldurald
ROC Deep Space The ROC
3361
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:49:00 -
[115] - Quote
All this fuss over not wanting to be at the keyboard to fly your ship.
Why even play the game? Not posting on my main, and loving it.-á Because free speech.-á
Psychotic Monk for CSM9.
|
Scipio Artelius
The Vendunari End of Life
797
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 01:52:00 -
[116] - Quote
Kaarous Aldurald wrote:All this fuss over not wanting to be at the keyboard to fly your ship.
Why even play the game?
+1. Seems like a lot of talk to figure out if someone can implement their own form of autopilot.
Seems a silly way to play a game to me, but I'm a bit simple that way.
I wish CCP would remove autopilot all together. But that's a whole different discussion.
eve-bazaar - Discount prices on ships and PLEX. Real savings to drive your ISK further. |
Muestereate
Minions LLC
202
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 02:06:00 -
[117] - Quote
Really this thread should not even be touching on ISBOXER. If it would go anywhere it should have went to stuff like autokey or setpoint by logitech. Another area thats important to this conversation is INNERSPACE and LAVISHSCRIPT.
|
Robert Caldera
Caldera Trading and Investment
746
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 07:32:00 -
[118] - Quote
J'Poll wrote: 2. You think that ISBoxer is automation, which is untrue. It just copies the MANUAL input over multiple clients and thus is not automated. If said person would walk away from the keyboard, all 20+ accounts would do NOTHING.
google for "automation" if you want a definition of it. Broadcasting of input fall into definition (which CCP ignores because of money they farm from it).
|
Derath Ellecon
Washburne Holdings Situation: Normal
2104
|
Posted - 2014.03.25 15:57:00 -
[119] - Quote
Scipio Artelius wrote:Kaarous Aldurald wrote:All this fuss over not wanting to be at the keyboard to fly your ship.
Why even play the game? +1. Seems like a lot of talk to figure out if someone can implement their own form of autopilot. Seems a silly way to play a game to me, but I'm a bit simple that way. I wish CCP would remove autopilot all together. But that's a whole different discussion.
One big area is hauling. If you ever look near the trade hubs there is a vast amount of stuff that has to be moved around the universe in big slow as crap freighters. That speed is compounded by the time it takes to crawl that 15km to each gate under standard autopilot.
So I can understand in certain cases having the ability to "autopilot" straight to the gate would be something some people would value.
Of course ppl did this by injecting the client and got a nice big hit with the ban hammer not long ago. |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |