Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 3 post(s) |
Thatt Guy
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
128
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 11:48:00 -
[31] - Quote
Andski wrote:If they're actually implementing a stealth nerf to cloaking by making cloaked ships decloak each other, it really won't affect bombers one bit. People did bombing runs before Crucible.
Link Dev post confirming this isn't just a bug please Haters gonna hate, Trolls gonna troll. |
Dalto Bane
V I R I I Ineluctable.
146
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 12:06:00 -
[32] - Quote
I don't want to anyone to see this as the typical ISBoxer thread, where the only comments from the ones that are in support of/ impartial is "CCP allows it, end of story.". We have all seen it, time and time again. If enough people voice an opinion to ban programs like ISBoxer, CCP could very well change their stance. They have done so on an number of mechanics.
I want to educate the players out there that are forming their opinions on half truths,fallacies, and speculation surroundiing multiboxers. I want to give them something more than the tired answers they have gotten in the past.
I have decided not to bore anyone to death with a story, but to sum my up my use of ISBoxer like this. I did not become a multiboxer out of some desire to roam around in a 20 man Alphafleet. My use of ISBoxer and the fact that I log multiple accounts was out of necessity to enjoy the game.
WHAT?! See, unfortunately when it started, it was because I lacked the sufficient hardware to run two accounts simultaneously, but for anyone who plays for long enough, it becomes extremely difficult from a logistical standpoint to depend on others to light cynos, scout, etc. What many don't know about ISBoxer specifically, is that it decreases the load on graphics cards by throttling you FPS on the background client, therefore reducing heating issues, which was largely my issue.
The reason I continued to sub additional accounts after I went full-on gaming rig is that I moved to an area where the only ISP available was a satellite provider. I call this period of my life, "Internet Purgatory". The problem that arose with my new provider is that there is a 1-2 second delay on my ping. Just enough to still connect and play Eve, even with a multitude of clients, but nearly impossible to use TS for voice comms, or staying with fleet, as it takes 2-3 seconds longer to jump gates.
What does all that have to do with ISBoxer? When 10 out of 10 guest arrive at a party late, they are on time. I am sure some of you won't understand, but my alts became my fleetmates for a long time so that I was able to continue to enjoy this game.
Not all multiboxers who use ISBoxer do so out of want, but need. Not all multiboxers are bad because they are unwilling, or unable to play with you, nor do they deserve the persecution that some of you th Dalto Bane for CSM10- Getting an early start. -á-My posts are my platform
|
Dalto Bane
V I R I I Ineluctable.
146
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 12:27:00 -
[33] - Quote
Solecist Project wrote:Dalto Bane wrote:Thank you Khema, and if at least some are able to see that I am trying to give a different perspective on this "dead horse" then it is serving its purpose.
I find it unfortunate that Soles can't reply to one thread without giving a disparaging remark, but, then again, it does not surprise me in the least. It doesn't surprise me that you are unwilling to address my points ... ... even though they weren't questions, as stated later on, which is kind of irrelevant though. I was replying properly ... ... you're the one who refuses to do it. :) Here, I'll write it down for you again ... ... in a modified manner...........................................
1. This topic is a dead horse. 1a. A dead horse remains dead, no matter how much you beat it. It doesn't work that way anyway.
Why do you feel the need to create a new one? Because, the side that supports placing a ban on programs that are similar to ISBoxer are continually applying pressure for their cause by associating anything they can to ISBoxer to paint it, and multiboxers in a bad light, thus increasing that negative visibility in the eyes of CCP without any educated retort from the opposing side, other than, "CCP said its fine."
2. There are tons of threads about this already, which share the end this one will have.
Why do you think this one will end differently? I don't assume that it will end differently, but I can control the context of the thread until it reaches it conclusion, in hopes to educate the player base that has only heard one side of the story.
3. CCP's ruling is clear. Why do you believe this here will change anything, compared to the multitude of other threads like this one? There isn't a thread quite like this one. Well, many of the threads that address this issue are in threads that have nothing to do with multiboxing or ISBoxer until the spin doctors come in and make it a stealth ban ISBoxer thread.
4. What would you say does it tell about people when they create threads like these? As with the previous answer I gave in your third question, I do not associate this thread with the "other threads like these" since most are created by off topic post that make it about ISBoxer and multiboxing.
I am not going to pretend that you won't find fault in my answers, Sole. I just want you to know that I do respect you and your opinions, even on the validity of this thread. I appreciate you input thus far.
Dalto Bane for CSM10- Getting an early start. -á-My posts are my platform
|
Solecist Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
10807
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 12:42:00 -
[34] - Quote
Veeerryyyy good answers! (:
Keep it up! :)
Also ... I'm Sol.
You can call me Solstice if you want, that's fine too. :)
Regarding 1: I do not believe that players can influence this by words. I do know though how players can influence this by actions ... which is a completely different matter.
We need to remember that those who scream usually do nothing else.
Getting rid of ISBoxer completely is damn easy ... ... but it involves actual effort ... ... so I wouldn't worry about the unlit lightbulbs who keep crying about it.
That being said ... Reality applies: Opinions are irrelevant. *shrugs* I am Sol. I cook my bacon naked. New capsuleer in need of money? You hope there is more you can do than mining or being a slave to an agent? THERE IS! Send me a mail! |
cecil b d'milf
State War Academy Caldari State
9
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 13:00:00 -
[35] - Quote
I Love Boobies wrote:CCP will never ban ISBoxer because people who use it have many alts, and that means more money in CCPs pocket, especially with the number of active players has been dwindling in the past year or so. ISBoxer helps makes the subscription numbers look better.
Does it though ? I always wondered about this. It's fair to say that a large majority of accounts in 20 man ISBox fleets will plexed. If they all (plexed ISB accounts) disappeared tomorrow CCP would get no less money, plex sellers would just get less isk, and probably wouldn't even notice the tiny bit less they were getting.
Sincerely, have I missed something here ?
|
Pookoko
Sigma Sagittarii Inc.
96
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 13:44:00 -
[36] - Quote
I don't particularly agree that the 'ban ISBoxers' hordes need to hear the other side of the story, or that it will do any good.
The argument that ISBoxer is sometimes used out of pure practical necessity rather than to gain any 'upper hand' in game play is a valid one, but it doesn't matter if if use of ISBoxer is out of want or out of need.
Because IMHO, what people should get into their head is that ISBoxer can be used to gain gaming advantage AND it is fine that way, and they can complain, moan and whine but they will not take this perceived 'advantage' away from the other player's hands.
I say this because I think any advantage that can be gained through ISBoxer is in the field of usability of the gaming interface. Interface is just a tool and if anybody has a way of using it more efficiently then all power to him/her and it is not game breaking, but it is actually enhancing the game play experience.
The real game play is in player's creativity and organisational skills.
It's like if I'm playing chess, it doesn't make it 'unfair' that I use my robot arm to move my pawn or grab my rook with my fat toes instead of my hand. What matters is how I analyse the board and what moves I have planned.
If EvE was an action game and we have to press F1 each time per shot and I was using my robot fingers to press F1 1,000 times per minute to get 1,000 shots off per minute then yes, my robot finger should probably be banned. But eve is not like that.
My use of robot arm/fingers/toes whatever is for convenience only, and it doesn't matter whether I'm using my robot arm is out of want or out of need. |
Solecist Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
10817
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 14:30:00 -
[37] - Quote
Poo ... I'm not sure "practical necessity" and "gaining an upper hand" aren't actually the same thing in most cases when it comes to EVE ONLINE. I am Sol. I cook my bacon naked. New capsuleer in need of money? You hope there is more you can do than mining or being a slave to an agent? THERE IS! Send me a mail! |
Pookoko
Sigma Sagittarii Inc.
96
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 14:33:00 -
[38] - Quote
I stopped reading after you called me a 'Poo'! :(
anyways, I guess what I meant was more like 'out of game necessity' as the OP mentioned, such as bad internet connections/optimising graphic cards performance and etc. IN game, of course, practical advantage is indeed gaming advantage. |
Jarod Garamonde
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
2034
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 14:55:00 -
[39] - Quote
ISBoxer is really just a more advanced version of when my little brother used to select 2 Player on Tecmo Bowl so he could win. (to be fair, the computer cheated, hardcore, in that game) That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right... |
Solecist Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
10826
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 15:35:00 -
[40] - Quote
Pookoko wrote:I stopped reading after you called me a 'Poo'! :(
anyways, I guess what I meant was more like 'out of game necessity' as the OP mentioned, such as bad internet connections/optimising graphic cards performance and etc. IN game, of course, practical advantage is indeed gaming advantage. Aww, I meant that in a cute way! :(
Don't you know Winnie? :/
*hugs* <3 :( I am Sol. I cook my bacon naked. New capsuleer in need of money? You hope there is more you can do than mining or being a slave to an agent? THERE IS! Send me a mail! |
|
Doc Fury
Furious Enterprises
6756
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 15:46:00 -
[41] - Quote
Look it's this thread again.
The accumulated filth of all their sex and murder will foam up about their waists and all the ho's and politicians will look up and shout 'Save us!' and I'll look down, and whisper 'Hodor'. |
Iain Cariaba
494
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 17:42:00 -
[42] - Quote
I've put this in several threads myself ever since I saw it first put in a thread similar to this one. I guess I'll post it again.
ISBoxer and similar programs are allowed by CCP because of wonderful technology like this. The simple fact that I can buy 10 junk towers barely able to run EvE, plug them into that device, and run 10 accounts from one keyboard, all for the price of a high end gaming tower, is why programs like ISBoxer are allowed.
/debate Disclaimer: My opinion does not necessarily reflect that of my corp or alliance. My opinion is my own, and if you don't like, that is your problem. |
Mag's
the united
17924
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 18:05:00 -
[43] - Quote
Mr Epeen wrote:I don't use ISBoxer but at the same time I don't care if anyone else does use it. Mr Epeen This.
Destination SkillQueue:- It's like assuming the lions will ignore you in the savannah, if you're small, fat and look helpless. |
Jarod Garamonde
Sardaukar Merc Guild General Tso's Alliance
2037
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 18:25:00 -
[44] - Quote
Mag's wrote:Mr Epeen wrote:I don't use ISBoxer but at the same time I don't care if anyone else does use it. Mr Epeen This.
I didn't care when it was just miners. I didn't care when it was just nulldwellers.
I care when it causes unnecessary nerfs. That moment when you realize the crazy lady with all the cats was right... |
Commentus Nolen
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 19:56:00 -
[45] - Quote
I would like to thank the author for this topic, as someone who now has 3 accounts I have been wanting to find some good boxing software but was having no luck finding it on line as most programs showing up in search were botting programs.
Again thanks. |
Jace Sarice
Caldari State
15687
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 22:59:00 -
[46] - Quote
I couldn't care less if people use it. But the more important part is that it doesn't matter if I care, you care, any player cares - CCP doesn't care and that's all that matters in the long run. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6321
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 23:03:00 -
[47] - Quote
Iain Cariaba wrote:I've put this in several threads myself ever since I saw it first put in a thread similar to this one. I guess I'll post it again. ISBoxer and similar programs are allowed by CCP because of wonderful technology like this. The simple fact that I can buy 10 junk towers barely able to run EvE, plug them into that device, and run 10 accounts from one keyboard, all for the price of a high end gaming tower, is why programs like ISBoxer are allowed. /debate
Also apparently Mac now has a built in multiboxing function. so if CCP banned multiboxing software they would have to ban anyone using a Mac client just in case. This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
|
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
2902
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 23:40:00 -
[48] - Quote
Although CCP has said multiboxing software is legal, they have also said that that ruling can be changed any time they think doing so would be for the good of the game.
Maybe it is time for them to make that change. I feel multiboxing software puts too much capability into the hands of one player to the point that it is unbalancing. Eve is supposed to be a social game, so a fleet of ships should be flown by a fleet of players, not one person who has spent a ton of money so they can "win".
I feel that anything that automatically repeats keystrokes, be it ISboxer, some other software, or a set of levers and sticks, should be added to the EULA as a prohibited use of the client. One button push should control one client, no more. http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Solecist Project
I'm So Meta Even This Acronym
10835
|
Posted - 2014.10.11 23:56:00 -
[49] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Iain Cariaba wrote:I've put this in several threads myself ever since I saw it first put in a thread similar to this one. I guess I'll post it again. ISBoxer and similar programs are allowed by CCP because of wonderful technology like this. The simple fact that I can buy 10 junk towers barely able to run EvE, plug them into that device, and run 10 accounts from one keyboard, all for the price of a high end gaming tower, is why programs like ISBoxer are allowed. /debate Also apparently Mac now has a built in multiboxing function. so if CCP banned multiboxing software they would have to ban anyone using a Mac client just in case. Hu? Virtual environments to choose from? I am Sol. I cook my bacon naked. New capsuleer in need of money? You hope there is more you can do than mining or being a slave to an agent? THERE IS! Send me a mail! |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6324
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 00:12:00 -
[50] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote:I feel that anything that automatically repeats keystrokes, be it ISboxer, some other software, or a set of levers and sticks, should be added to the EULA as a prohibited use of the client. One button push should control one client, no more.
Also using Mac OS. That will need to be banned to. This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
|
|
Saisin
State War Academy Caldari State
153
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 00:31:00 -
[51] - Quote
Isboxer is only the visible part of what I call the "metacode" iceberg... other tools are even more efficient, and customizable, like autohotkeys, and there are other tools that do achieve quite a bit to gain some forms of advantages in game... Isboxer is just the most obvious....
There is no way to totally prevent the use of metacpde, much like there is no way to prevent players from metagaming. Both are similar in that they provide advantages in-game to the players that dabble with it.
This problem is more of a perception issue, simply put, isboxing can easily be perceived as a pay-to-win, even if its use has drawbacks. This perception has the potential to turn away players that would otherwise remain engaged with the game, and limit the reach of a game that otherwise has much to offer...
For that reason alone, I believe CCP should actively make isboxing or macro-ing the game difficult by ui and design features that makes multi boxing more difficult than doing the same thing with the same amount of characters controlled by different players, as well as openly take a stance against multi boxing rather than staying mute about it.
They will not prevent it totally, but at least they can project the idea that multi boxing is not ok in their game, which in turn may keep other players engaged longer, as they feel their contribution to the game/alliance/corp is not dwarfed by multiboxers..
isboxing is also a hindrance to regular players, a fleet of imultiboxed miners can go through a site way faster than regular players, would, and those are left empty handed., it is lke the proverbial cloud of crickets passing over a system... Last but not least, isboxing is also a control tool for powerful alliances to limit their exposure to leaks, betrayals,or active mobilization of their minions, reinforcing their power and control over the whole game, with a limited number of power players.
I truly don't believe CCP has anything to gain to continue remaining neutral/mute on this subject. With the breath of fresh air that the coming changes are going to make, this may be for them the right time to re-evaluate their position on this.
Oh, and the likelihood a frustrated multi boxer would really leave the game (they would of course threaten to) is pretty low, they have a bunch of assets to play with and to loose in the process. I'd be curious to know the statistics, but I would bet they mostly pay their multiple accounts via ISK only, so they do not contribute much to the game today
"surrender your ego, be free". innuendo.
solo? There is a new hope http://turamarths-evelife.blogspot.com/2014/05/ok-now-im-betting-man.html |
Dirk Magnum
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
371
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 00:55:00 -
[52] - Quote
Ban all ISboxers and botters. Separate keystrokes for separate clients is the only way to keep things fair between single and multi-account users. That's my position. Vote for Dreck Mongnum in CSM one million. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á "LIVE FAST DIE." - traditional Minmatar ethos [citation needed] |
Khema Fera
Brave Pros Incorparated
4
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 01:04:00 -
[53] - Quote
Dirk Magnum wrote:Ban all ISboxers and botters. Separate keystrokes for separate clients is the only way to keep things fair between single and multi-account users. That's my position. Vote for Dreck Mongnum in CSM one million. What's your problem with multiboxing? Also, since http://www.vetra.com/84AUtext.html sends the keystrokes to every separate client, does that mean it's allowed? |
Dirk Magnum
Blue Republic RvB - BLUE Republic
372
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 01:15:00 -
[54] - Quote
Multi boxing is fine. Any individual keystroke that performs an action on more than one character isn't IMO. I'd have thought it was obviously a violation of that EULA clause about not using third party programs to do things in game that you couldn't do with normal game mechanics. -á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á-á "LIVE FAST DIE." - traditional Minmatar ethos [citation needed] |
Angeal MacNova
LankTech
216
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 01:38:00 -
[55] - Quote
Dirk Magnum wrote:Multi boxing is fine. Any individual keystroke that performs an action on more than one character isn't IMO. I'd have thought it was obviously a violation of that EULA clause about not using third party programs to do things in game that you couldn't do with normal game mechanics.
To add to this.
Whether it is a one player blob or a one player locus fleet, the truth of the matter is that players are
1. Paying for multiple subs for a game that allows multiple instances of that game to be running at the same time on one machine.
2. Using 3rd party software (possibly paying to do so) that allows them to simply control just one account while the software mimics the input to control the rest.
Alternatively the player would have to alt-tab to each and directly control each account. This makes it difficult to manage depending on the number of accounts and the activity being performed.
Other developers consider the use of such a program to be botting and for good reason. Because it is. The program is taking the input you make on one account and is transferring it to other accounts. They will also go as far as making it impossible to run a second instance of the game on the same machine.
As for the two points above, I'd rather call a spade a spade and call multiboxing Pay to Win.
As for the quote above, it's simple. CCP allows it because they couldn't afford to have the subs numbers equal the player numbers. So they'll continue to pick and choose which Eula/ToS rules to follow and which not to follow along with when and when not to follow them.
There is a word for such behavior but I won't go there. |
Mallak Azaria
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
6327
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 02:16:00 -
[56] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Other developers consider the use of such a program to be botting and for good reason. Because it is.
It isn't. You can say that it's botting all you like, but it still won't be botting. This post was lovingly crafted by a member of the Goonwaffe Posting Cabal, proud member of the popular gay hookup site somethingawful.com, Spelling Bee, Grammar Gestapo & #1 Official Gevlon Goblin Fanclub member.
|
Dalto Bane
V I R I I Ineluctable.
146
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 02:27:00 -
[57] - Quote
Angeal MacNova wrote:Dirk Magnum wrote:Multi boxing is fine. Any individual keystroke that performs an action on more than one character isn't IMO. I'd have thought it was obviously a violation of that EULA clause about not using third party programs to do things in game that you couldn't do with normal game mechanics. To add to this. Whether it is a one player blob or a one player locus fleet, the truth of the matter is that players are 1. Paying for multiple subs for a game that allows multiple instances of that game to be running at the same time on one machine. 2. Using 3rd party software (possibly paying to do so) that allows them to simply control just one account while the software mimics the input to control the rest. Alternatively the player would have to alt-tab to each and directly control each account. This makes it difficult to manage depending on the number of accounts and the activity being performed. Other developers consider the use of such a program to be botting and for good reason. Because it is. The program is taking the input you make on one account and is transferring it to other accounts. They will also go as far as making it impossible to run a second instance of the game on the same machine. As for the two points above, I'd rather call a spade a spade and call multiboxing Pay to Win. As for the quote above, it's simple. CCP allows it because they couldn't afford to have the subs numbers equal the player numbers. So they'll continue to pick and choose which Eula/ToS rules to follow and which not to follow along with when and when not to follow them. There is a word for such behavior but I won't go there.
Appreciate the perspective and will address other previous comments tomorrow.
Not as a correction, but wanted to add clarification to the term botting. ISBoxer, as a stand alone program is 100% not automation, no more than a macro'd gaming keyboard. Yes, it does broadcast keystrokes and cursor position, however human in put is required. I will touch on AHK which was mentioned in an earlier post tomorrow.
Here's a little history lesson, the first bots in online gaming, specifically Eve were written for use with AHK. It was an extremely elaborate mining sequence for its time. Anyway, until tomorrow. o7 Dalto Bane for CSM10- Getting an early start. -á-My posts are my platform
|
Angeal MacNova
LankTech
218
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 02:29:00 -
[58] - Quote
Mallak Azaria wrote:Angeal MacNova wrote:Other developers consider the use of such a program to be botting and for good reason. Because it is. It isn't. You can say that it's botting all you like, but it still won't be botting.
You can say it's not all you like but it still is. I know players (across 4 other games under 3 separate developers) who got banned for using such programs in other games. Reason given? Botting. So my calling it such isn't just "because I say so". You on the other hand....
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
225
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 02:38:00 -
[59] - Quote
People are clearly having problems countering a VERY FRAGILE PROGRAM. There are at least 50 counters to ISBoxer in-game, whether it be PVP or PVE. Some examples i've encountered as a boxer:
PVP:
- Jams
- Damps
- Competent enemy Logi
- Competent enemy Anchor
- Batphones
Mining:
- Bumps
- Bumps
- Did I mention bumps?
Seriously people. Thinking is *NOT* as hard as some make it out to be. |
Angeal MacNova
LankTech
218
|
Posted - 2014.10.12 02:45:00 -
[60] - Quote
Dalto Bane wrote: Appreciate the perspective and will address other previous comments tomorrow.
Not as a correction, but wanted to add clarification to the term botting. ISBoxer, as a stand alone program is 100% not automation, no more than a macro'd gaming keyboard. Yes, it does broadcast keystrokes and cursor position, however human in put is required. I will touch on AHK which was mentioned in an earlier post tomorrow.
Here's a little history lesson, the first bots in online gaming, specifically Eve were written for use with AHK. It was an extremely elaborate mining sequence for its time. Anyway, until tomorrow. o7
Well, here's the thing. Often games will will have a rule. One action per macro. An example of such is the macros I use in GW2. I have dodge macros. I use a razor nostromo for my left hand and I gave the d-pad macros that give direction to my dodge rolls that are independent to the direction I give my character. This can be achieved manually by simply changing the direction you give your character for the moment you dodge then resume previous direction. The macro is still only performing a single action (dodge roll).
What is not allowed are macros that will sequentially play out multiple skills. This is despite that fact that it takes human input to start the sequence each and every time.
Now multiboxing is different. You can say that it's still one input resulting in a single action but it's actually not. It's still one input is resulting in multiple actions being taken, just in a different way. Rather than a vertical succession of the macro example above, it's a horizontal succession. In other words, instead of a single input causing separate actions on one account, it's triggering the same action on separate accounts. This still means that one input is causing multiple actions to take place.
One input per action vs one input per multiple/separate actions is the defining difference. Not whether or not a player can be AFK or not. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |