Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 169 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Hallvardr
53
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 00:20:41 -
[3061] - Quote
Nolak Ataru: Quote:Boxed miners have been running massive numbers even without the use of ISBoxer or similar programs. Correct. However, my point is that 20-30 (hu)man mining (or "the gate people") fleet ops while they do happen, are not the norm. In general, when there is a 20-30 man mining group, its a "isboxer" fleet. isboxer fleets at any activity that they are used in, are far more prevalent than discrete human control.
Lucas Kell: Quote:20 characters can be controlled for mining manually with ease -> perhaps ... but video longer than 30 minutes ore it didn't happen. (see what I did there)
Quote:...you don't do it therefore nobody else should be allowed. I hope you were saying this as a generalization and not to me specifically. I've already established my stance, "I could care less about isboxer .. I'm not a user." "if I did and it hampered my progress, I'd adapt."
So for me .. i don't care either way which is also why I'd held off my opinion as long as I had. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
516
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 00:43:03 -
[3062] - Quote
Hallvardr wrote:Nolak Ataru: Quote:Boxed miners have been running massive numbers even without the use of ISBoxer or similar programs. Correct. However, my point is that 20-30 (hu)man mining (or "the gate people") fleet ops while they do happen, are not the norm. In general, when there is a 20-30 man mining group, its a "isboxer" fleet. isboxer fleets at any activity that they are used in, are far more prevalent than discrete human control.
We're gonna have to disagree here as I'm pretty sure most corps who do run mining ops sure as heck aren't going to do it in unprofitable highsec. I was in TEST and I remember some of the massive mining ops that occurred in nullsec.
Hallvardr wrote:Lucas Kell: Quote:20 characters can be controlled for mining manually with ease -> perhaps ... but video longer than 30 minutes ore it didn't happen. ( see what I did there) Quote:...you don't do it therefore nobody else should be allowed. I hope you were saying this as a generalization and not to me specifically. I've already established my stance, "I could care less about isboxer .. I'm not a user." "if I did and it hampered my progress, I'd adapt." So for me .. i don't care either way which is also why I'd held off my opinion as long as I had.
Nobody's going to watch a fleet of miners mine for 30 minutes no matter how much isk/h you get. Liberal application of Alt+Tab can get it done easily. It's "couldn't care less".
As for the other quote, he was relaying the sentiments of some other posters both in this thread and in GD in general. The "I don't do it therefore nobody should be allowed to ISBox" argument was quite common among those who wanted CCP to bend to their will. To those, I would like to quote a CCP Dev: "HTFU". |
Gabriel Elarik
Celestiel Rams
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 03:42:02 -
[3063] - Quote
i think most isboxer users will switch to dxnothing windows or simply switch between windows that means mining will stay the same incursions are tricky but i think possible without broadcasting and ratting will stay mostly the same multiboxers will find ways to adapt to the changes
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
517
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 04:02:31 -
[3064] - Quote
Gabriel Elarik wrote: i think most isboxer users will switch to dxnothing windows or simply switch between windows that means mining will stay the same incursions are tricky but i think possible without broadcasting and ratting will stay mostly the same multiboxers will find ways to adapt to the changes
For VGs, people are heading towards Domis / Rattlesnakes and a Loki (with one enterprising person planning on Nestors). For HQs, round-robin broadcasting is the key. |
Drago Shouna
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
223
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 10:12:21 -
[3065] - Quote
Nobody seems to have linked this in here yet, so here goes.
http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/holiday-greetings-team-security/?_ga=1.56703274.1259077967.1406127097 |
Jadzia-Dax
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
2
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 10:49:31 -
[3066] - Quote
ShadowNeo29 wrote:Yeah finally. ISBoxer would never have been allowed according to the EULA. But ! We know some people will get a free ban because the dectection is not perfect. And sadly GMs don't care about what they do, fair or not. After investigations, we can say they also ban players who play normally and they don't care about the 2 strike policy: http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/begun-the-bot-war-has/ and allow themselves to ban for life. But like in real life, justice allow some collateral damages. Nothing personal. Just FYI, ISBoxer is not banned. One single feature (not even the most important feature) is banned. Seems like you missed that.[/quote]
"You may not use your own or any third-party software, macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items, currency, objects, character attributes, rank or status at an accelerated rate when compared with ordinary Game play"
ISBoxer is a third-party software used for facilitate stuff's acquisition. It's not a normal gameplay than "just an human" multiboxer without any program (switching windows or using several computers, all manually).[/quote]
ShadowNeo29 - You have no clue what you are talking about!! You have no idea how ISBoxer or other boxing programs work!! You also have no clue what part of the EULA applies to boxing! You should educate yourself before you post!! The only part of the the EULA that applies to ISBoxer of other types of boxing programs is the "Broadcasting and Multiplexing". The part of the EULA you posted does not apply to boxing but to botting. WOW just another cryer giving out tears due to not knowing what they are posting about!!
FYI, I could box 2-30 accounts and never use the "Broadcasting or Multiplexing" feature ISBoxer has and still remain within the EULA and never, I repeat Never get banned.
Please, get educated on the topic, the EULA and what applies, and the software before you post and make yourself look foolish!!
Cry on Multi boxing haters! lol @ your tears!! |
Hexxas kozak
Invicta Est
7
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 13:18:43 -
[3067] - Quote
So basically what CCP is saying people that have 2 accounts gets a ban for using both accounts the same time ?
Thats pretty lame and you will be shooting you self in the foot with this , so you no longer allowed to make window mode running the game and have an account on each of your screens , so no more orca and mining barge combo , honestly that a big mistake , considdering there soon will be a release of another space game where you can upgrade and mine as well, mabee you guys havent thought this one completely thrue?. You will be loosing so many players if this effect 2 accounts on 1 computer with 2 screens , so you basically punsih players with more than 1 screen. Are you trying to kill the game ? If so then there is as faster way to do it , just shut down the servers and be done with it .
Punishing people that have 2 monitors on the same computer is not some thing you do , i can understand botting and macro scriting , but banning people for running 2 accounts on the same time , thats bulls.... people that crys about multi account is normaly the ones that cant affort to have 2 accounts, but hey i take my money some where else if cant run my orca and mining barge. thats around 200 dkr a month you loose just by doing this and if others that have 2 accounts do this as well then game will die. So good luck with that !
I would like a dev to respond to this please and fast so if needed i can cancel my 2 accounts faster ! |
Navigation Boy
Decadent Behavior
17
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 14:00:19 -
[3068] - Quote
Hexxas kozak wrote:So basically what CCP is saying people that have 2 accounts gets a ban for using both accounts the same time ? If you are running multiple clients on multiple screens, and issue commands to each screen separately, you'll be fine. I dual-box all the time, and this won't effect me either.
|
Hexxas kozak
Invicta Est
7
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 14:23:21 -
[3069] - Quote
okay thank you , but i really want to hear this from a CCP Dev team member or high ranking GM |
Stouman
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 16:28:26 -
[3070] - Quote
Thanks CCP! Good riddance!
You kill the jackal!
You see here a jackal corpse.
This jackal corpse tastes terrible!
You finish eating the jackal corpse.
|
|
Hallvardr
54
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 16:30:57 -
[3071] - Quote
Hexxas kozak: "want to hear this from a CCP" <- you already have .. read the numerous posts ad infinitum.
just as Navigation Boy just said and has been stated repeatedly. |
Demolishar
United Aggression
1028
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 16:32:13 -
[3072] - Quote
CCP Falcon wrote: If you are uncertain about your Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing use-case, please get in contact with us, as we would prefer to work with members of the community to come to an amicable resolution. We will also follow up this statement with further clarifications if needed, based on questions and concerns from the community.
How may I get in contact with you about my input broadcasting use-case?
I have already tried a support ticket - the reply was not helpful.
The reply consisted of a canned statement stating that GM will not advise me on any use-case outside of the ones expressly stated in CCP Falcon's post.
|
Nyx Tamer
Nyx Tamer Corporation
0
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 19:23:27 -
[3073] - Quote
well, following the very helpful and supportive petition, I gotta ask it here:
I use ISBoxer cause I only have one 1366*768 screen on my laptop, so I can't see the other characters (2) , and EVE in windowed mode is NOT able to fit properly on the whole screen as there is a minimal resolution the client has.
So I use ISBoxer to run 3 clients in Fullscreen (taskbar excluded), 2 scouts and 1 I actually use. Long story short: Am I allowed to use the VideoFX feature to show me parts of the scouts as overlay on the mainscreen? As much as I know and asked so far it is ok, I do not use any input broadcasting or whatever some people are extremly energetic discussing here, but I'd like to know if this is ok as I had a **** ton of a discussion this afternoon about it.
|
Trakow
Beta Switch
1
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 20:06:21 -
[3074] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Tyranis Marcus wrote:It will be good to see those particular mining fleets take a hit. It may slow down their fleets a tiny bit, but for the most part Round Robin and repeater regions will allow them to keep running.
You do realize that the mouse is also an input device right? So one click to select an object either from the overview or from the screen for multiple clients is also considered input broadcasting. But if you're going to individually click on each window or overview one at a time then have at it. But I'm sure most people don't realize the mouse is also considered input. This will still get many ppl the 30-day ban, and will make ISBoxing that much less useful.
And also, round robin can still be considered automation because isboxer automatically changed the input focus after each button press without user input to do so. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
526
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 20:20:36 -
[3075] - Quote
Trakow wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:Tyranis Marcus wrote:It will be good to see those particular mining fleets take a hit. It may slow down their fleets a tiny bit, but for the most part Round Robin and repeater regions will allow them to keep running. You do realize that the mouse is also an input device right? So one click to select an object either from the overview or from the screen for multiple clients is also considered input broadcasting. But if you're going to individually click on each window or overview one at a time then have at it. But I'm sure most people don't realize the mouse is also considered input. This will still get many ppl the 30-day ban, and will make ISBoxing that much less useful. And also, round robin can still be considered automation because isboxer automatically changed the input focus after each button press without user input to do so.
Except according to the very childish flowchart, it's still only issuing one command per client and that's what counts. Which is exactly why we need CCP to release a statement regarding Round Robin, as well as their reasoning of why ISBoxer is the big bad demon in the room and not any of the other dozen or so in-game problems that are legitimately causing players to leave. |
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4779
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 21:49:21 -
[3076] - Quote
Hallvardr wrote:perhaps ... but video longer than 30 minutes ore it didn't happen. ( see what I did there) Eve noobs these days. Multiboxing mass fleets has been around a lot longer that ISBoxer has been popular kiddo.
Hallvardr wrote:I hope you were saying this as a generalization and not to me specifically. I've already established my stance, "I could care less about isboxer .. I'm not a user." "if I did and it hampered my progress, I'd adapt."
So for me .. i don't care either way which is also why I'd held off my opinion as long as I had. Strange, because it really does seem like you do care.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4779
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 21:56:35 -
[3077] - Quote
Trakow wrote:You do realize that the mouse is also an input device right? So one click to select an object either from the overview or from the screen for multiple clients is also considered input broadcasting. But if you're going to individually click on each window or overview one at a time then have at it. But I'm sure most people don't realize the mouse is also considered input. This will still get many ppl the 30-day ban, and will make ISBoxing that much less useful.
And also, round robin can still be considered automation because isboxer automatically changed the input focus after each button press without user input to do so. It seems that like many many many others, you don't know how ISBoxer works or what round robin/ VideoFX entails. It's been explained probably hundreds of times in this very thread, so if you haven't figured it out yet, you probably never will. The only thing you really need to know is that it won't be banned as it's not input broadcasting and is near impossible to reliably separate from manual multiboxers, so is unlikely to be banned on it's own. Most multiboxers have already adapted the new methods they will be able to continue using beyond January.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
Trakow
Beta Switch
2
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 22:23:18 -
[3078] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Trakow wrote:You do realize that the mouse is also an input device right? So one click to select an object either from the overview or from the screen for multiple clients is also considered input broadcasting. But if you're going to individually click on each window or overview one at a time then have at it. But I'm sure most people don't realize the mouse is also considered input. This will still get many ppl the 30-day ban, and will make ISBoxing that much less useful.
And also, round robin can still be considered automation because isboxer automatically changed the input focus after each button press without user input to do so. It seems that like many many many others, you don't know how ISBoxer works or what round robin/ VideoFX entails. It's been explained probably hundreds of times in this very thread, so if you haven't figured it out yet, you probably never will. The only thing you really need to know is that it won't be banned as it's not input broadcasting and is near impossible to reliably separate from manual multiboxers, so is unlikely to be banned on it's own. Most multiboxers have already adapted the new methods they will be able to continue using beyond January.
So are you saying that when you click on an object to lock onto it, that you do it individually for each client? If so then that's fine. But if you click once and all your clients select/lock the same target, then this is still input broadcasting... |
FunGu Arsten
Fungu .Inc
55
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 22:35:36 -
[3079] - Quote
I cant believe this is still going on.... |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
527
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 22:41:51 -
[3080] - Quote
Trakow wrote:So are you saying that when you click on an object to lock onto it, that you do it individually for each client? If so then that's fine. But if you click once and all your clients select/lock the same target, then this is still input broadcasting...
He must click once for each client to lock / target / activate button. This was stated ages ago. Please learn to read, or do some research before jumping on the bandwagon. |
|
Lucas Kell
Internet Terrorists SpaceMonkey's Alliance
4785
|
Posted - 2014.12.21 23:58:12 -
[3081] - Quote
Trakow wrote:Lucas Kell wrote:Trakow wrote:You do realize that the mouse is also an input device right? So one click to select an object either from the overview or from the screen for multiple clients is also considered input broadcasting. But if you're going to individually click on each window or overview one at a time then have at it. But I'm sure most people don't realize the mouse is also considered input. This will still get many ppl the 30-day ban, and will make ISBoxing that much less useful.
And also, round robin can still be considered automation because isboxer automatically changed the input focus after each button press without user input to do so. It seems that like many many many others, you don't know how ISBoxer works or what round robin/ VideoFX entails. It's been explained probably hundreds of times in this very thread, so if you haven't figured it out yet, you probably never will. The only thing you really need to know is that it won't be banned as it's not input broadcasting and is near impossible to reliably separate from manual multiboxers, so is unlikely to be banned on it's own. Most multiboxers have already adapted the new methods they will be able to continue using beyond January. So are you saying that when you click on an object to lock onto it, that you do it individually for each client? If so then that's fine. But if you click once and all your clients select/lock the same target, then this is still input broadcasting... Yes, however you are able to spam press 1 key without alt tabbing, rather than switching and key pressing, or in the case of VFX make merge multiple clients controls into a single window. The result of which is that this change doesn't prevent mass multiboxing in any way, it simply removes one of the many methods of control. This change is a pointless waste of time which avoids the real issue which is crappy gameplay mechanics.
The Indecisive Noob - EVE fan blog.
Wholesale Trading - The new bulk trading mailing list.
Chrysus Industries - Savings made simple!
|
ESN Seeker
The Scope Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 02:45:52 -
[3082] - Quote
I don't use software that provides "round robin" service, so I don't know what any such software, that exists currently, does.
Suppose, though, that "round robin" means that there is an automatically generated alt-tab after the first keystroke, then two auto-alt-tabs after the second keystroke, etc., so that successive keystrokes go to different EVE-sessions.
Although this might not fall afoul of the Prohibition Against Broadcasting, might it not violate the Prohibition Against Generating Keystroke Sequences?
But how about an intermediate case? What if one had a foot-pedal that generated alt-tab for every pump of the pedal? One could pump once after the first keystroke, twice after the second, etc., to switch round-robin amongst multiple sessions.
Would using such a foot-pedal violate the Prohibition Against Generating Keystroke Sequences?
Argument in the Affirmative: Yes, because alt-tab is a two-keystroke sequence.
Argument in the Negative: No, because alt is just a shift that modifies other keys; only the tab-keystroke is a keystroke.
I tried to file a Support Ticket asking this question, but it has been several hours since I submitted it and the ticket not -- or at least not yet -- appeared under "My Tickets". Since I have not filed a support ticket since 2006, I don't remember how long it's supposed to take for a ticket to appear after filing. |
ShadowandLight
DeathWatch Milita Soviet-Union
302
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 02:47:23 -
[3083] - Quote
As far as I know there has been no response from CCP to answer numerous questions we've had about this new policy. A rumored sit down meeting has also not happened and app
I'm really disappointed in this decision to not have an open discussion about this with CCP, I hope they change their mind and talk to "advanced" multiboxing community.
EVE Online and Multiboxing: My position against the upcoming changes and why Multiboxing is good for EVE and its player economy
|
Proddy Scun
Renfield Inc
65
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 03:02:05 -
[3084] - Quote
ShadowandLight wrote:As far as I know there has been no response from CCP to answer numerous questions we've had about this new policy. A rumored sit down meeting has also not happened and app
I'm really disappointed in this decision to not have an open discussion about this with CCP, I hope they change their mind and talk to "advanced" multiboxing community.
Its pretty clear to me that this CCP policy is not subject to negotiation. Here CCP did some research using player input first. But I don't think CCP ever said players had a vote on this issue.
CCP does a very good job of working letting players in on deciding many issues.-- maybe most. But CCP has to claim exclusive ownership of a few decisions to keep the game wide open to all players....rather than letting the loudest or strongest cliche drive everyone else out through rule management. |
Proddy Scun
Renfield Inc
65
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 03:25:09 -
[3085] - Quote
The input multiplexing issue is also very simple.
Do the inputs get acted on by the desktop OS (including the start up EVE client)? Allowed (Round robin window switching therefore allowed. No EVE server involvement.)
Or does the input get acted upon by the EVE server via the client? this is an in game effect
If a single user input action (keystroke or click) produces multiple player commands on the server -- not allowed.
A single input movement producing multiple commands in 1 client or 1 command in multiple clients - either way CCP is gonna slap you.
Nope it does not sound like CCP wants to debate the game lawyers or complicate their tasks by allowing you to send commands to change overview settings on multiple clients. From a practical point it makes CCP's job easier to treat all commands to the EVE server the same - and that is how they are gonna do it. In this case the convenience of CCP enforcement overrides your personal convenience for something 99% of EVE does manually.
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
530
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 03:59:16 -
[3086] - Quote
Proddy Scun wrote:The input multiplexing issue is also very simple. Do the inputs get acted on by the desktop OS (including the start up EVE client)? Allowed (Round robin window switching therefore allowed. No EVE server involvement.) Or does the input get acted upon by the EVE server via the client? this is an in game effect If a single user input action (keystroke or click) produces multiple player commands on the server -- not allowed. A single input movement producing multiple commands in 1 client or 1 command in multiple clients - either way CCP is gonna slap you. Nope it does not sound like CCP wants to debate the game lawyers or complicate their tasks by allowing you to send commands to change overview settings on multiple clients. From a practical point it makes CCP's job easier to treat all commands to the EVE server the same - and that is how they are gonna do it. In this case the convenience of CCP enforcement overrides your personal convenience for something 99% of EVE does manually.
Jesus christ the irony is burning. You claim that the game should be wide open to all players and not let "the loudest or strongest cliche drive everyone out" yet you don't see that this change was brought about by a loud minority of players who's arguments consist of "I don't do it so he shouldn't", "hurrdurr it's a bot even though I know nothing about the software", and, my favorite, "he's cheating because he has multiple accounts open" which is similar to "I know nothing about 6A3 and how it works, so I'll claim he's gaining an unfair advantage because I'm under the impression that he doesn't have to pay for his accounts." CCP did the exact same research that Target did after presented with the Change.org petition that was so full of lies, the North Korean propaganda team stood in awe of it. Listening to the whiners in the minority may change something in the short term, and may indeed cause a short-term improvement, but in the long term will cause more harm as players remember that they bent to the will of the equivalent of SJWs, or if they continue to bend over for said lunatic few.
Round Robin sends 1 command to 1 client per input. It then sends 1 command to the next client on the next input. It uses similar concepts on window focusing that VideoFX does.
If any issue warranted, no, NEEDED player input and discussion before a go-ahead, it would be this. Instead, we're treated like third-class citizens thanks to, in part, the public's lack of knowledge as to what ISBoxer lets a player do, the unwillingness to differentiate between an ISBoxer with a human behind the keyboard that stops doing things when the player goes for a smoke break, and a botter that continues to operate while the person went down to the corner store for a pack of smokes and a 40. Not to mention that CCP absolutely refused to sit down with multiple ISBoxer reps until after Jan 1, after lying to EVERYONE at Fanfest and EVE Vegas, where CCP Seagull and other CCP devs were seen by dozens if not hundreds of witnesses going around telling people "Multiboxers have nothing to fear" and "Nothing's changing regarding multiboxing."
Never forget: CCP Seagull and other Devs LIED to everyone during Fanfest and EVE Vegas: "Multiboxers have nothing to worry about" and "Nothing's changing regarding multiboxing".
If CCP is willing to lie about that, what's next?
|
Eli Apol
Brutor Tribe Minmatar Republic
50
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 04:45:39 -
[3087] - Quote
Round robin sends one command to the focus window and one command to your window management software (to change to the next focus window) per click.
Macro.
(Also to preempt your next attempt at having alternate presses do the same dirty, you're then sending each click to the mouse software to control the switching of functions, so still a macro.) |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
530
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 06:12:00 -
[3088] - Quote
Eli Apol wrote:Round robin sends one command to the focus window and one command to your window management software (to change to the next focus window) per click.
Macro.
(Also to preempt your next attempt at having alternate presses do the same dirty, you're then sending each click to the mouse software to control the switching of functions, so still a macro.)
Technically no. It sends command A to window 1 on button press #1. It then sends command A to window 2 without changing windows on button press #2. If it sent the command and then alt-tabbed, or something similar, then yes, it would be a macro. Since it doesn't, it isn't, and you don't know what you're talking about.
Never forget: CCP Seagull and other Devs LIED to everyone during Fanfest and EVE Vegas: "Multiboxers have nothing to worry about" and "Nothing's changing regarding multiboxing".
If CCP is willing to lie about that, what's next?
|
Orchid Fury
University of Caille Gallente Federation
10
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 07:16:44 -
[3089] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Round robin sends one command to the focus window and one command to your window management software (to change to the next focus window) per click.
Macro.
(Also to preempt your next attempt at having alternate presses do the same dirty, you're then sending each click to the mouse software to control the switching of functions, so still a macro.) Technically no. It sends command A to window 1 on button press #1. It then sends command A to window 2 without changing windows on button press #2. If it sent the command and then alt-tabbed, or something similar, then yes, it would be a macro. Since it doesn't, it isn't, and you don't know what you're talking about.
since only one window can have focus to accept keyboard input, it has to fall under the policy. even if it doesn't send an alt+tab, it sends your command + a switch of window focus. as here is even logic included as to which window to switch next, it clearly is a macro. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
533
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 07:59:31 -
[3090] - Quote
Orchid Fury wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:Eli Apol wrote:Round robin sends one command to the focus window and one command to your window management software (to change to the next focus window) per click.
Macro.
(Also to preempt your next attempt at having alternate presses do the same dirty, you're then sending each click to the mouse software to control the switching of functions, so still a macro.) Technically no. It sends command A to window 1 on button press #1. It then sends command A to window 2 without changing windows on button press #2. If it sent the command and then alt-tabbed, or something similar, then yes, it would be a macro. Since it doesn't, it isn't, and you don't know what you're talking about. since only one window can have focus to accept keyboard input, it has to fall under the policy. even if it doesn't send an alt+tab, it sends your command + a switch of window focus. as here is even logic included as to which window to switch next, it clearly is a macro.
VideoFX allows a player to have multiple window's focus on a single screen. Doesn't break EULA. Neither does RR no matter how loud you cry.
Never forget: CCP Seagull and other Devs LIED to everyone during Fanfest and EVE Vegas: "Multiboxers have nothing to worry about" and "Nothing's changing regarding multiboxing".
If CCP is willing to lie about that, what's next?
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 .. 169 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |