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) |
Dustpuppy
New Eden Ferengi
57
|
Posted - 2015.01.19 16:35:25 -
[3571] - Quote
KC Kamikaze wrote: ISBoxers most gameplay affecting feature is and has always been VideoFX not broadcasting.
If this would be the case the plex price wouldn't have dropped from 1 billion to 800 million after the announcement of the multicast ban and stay on this level since the change.
Why cancel subscription on plexed accounts if the main feature of something is not touched by a change?
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
586
|
Posted - 2015.01.19 17:15:23 -
[3572] - Quote
Dustpuppy wrote:KC Kamikaze wrote: ISBoxers most gameplay affecting feature is and has always been VideoFX not broadcasting. If this would be the case the plex price wouldn't have dropped from 1 billion to 800 million after the announcement of the multicast ban and stay on this level since the change. Why cancel subscription on plexed accounts if the main feature of something is not touched by a change?
Correlation =/= Causation. When it hit 1b, people expected CCP to intervene, so they sold their stocks at 1b and it settled down to 800m. If indeed ISBoxer was the main cause of the high prices and not market traders and hoarders and simple supply/demand, we should have seen PLEX drop to 500m or so. Additionally, I've only seen two multiboxers including myself who stopped out of a group of 13 or so. Now I know we aren't everyone, but still. |
Salem Aivo
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.19 18:01:26 -
[3573] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Dustpuppy wrote:KC Kamikaze wrote: ISBoxers most gameplay affecting feature is and has always been VideoFX not broadcasting. If this would be the case the plex price wouldn't have dropped from 1 billion to 800 million after the announcement of the multicast ban and stay on this level since the change. Why cancel subscription on plexed accounts if the main feature of something is not touched by a change? Correlation =/= Causation. When it hit 1b, people expected CCP to intervene, so they sold their stocks at 1b and it settled down to 800m. If indeed ISBoxer was the main cause of the high prices and not market traders and hoarders and simple supply/demand, we should have seen PLEX drop to 500m or so. Additionally, I've only seen two multiboxers including myself who stopped out of a group of 13 or so. Now I know we aren't everyone, but still. This.
The Plex price change was speculation, nothing more. The ~1b peak price was also inflated from the normal price, so realistically the actual price dropped from about 880m to 800m and is now back on the rise. |
ashley Eoner
393
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 01:01:32 -
[3574] - Quote
Dustpuppy wrote:KC Kamikaze wrote: ISBoxers most gameplay affecting feature is and has always been VideoFX not broadcasting. If this would be the case the plex price wouldn't have dropped from 1 billion to 800 million after the announcement of the multicast ban and stay on this level since the change. Why cancel subscription on plexed accounts if the main feature of something is not touched by a change? You were getting ripped off. I never paid more then 900m for plex when people were complaining here about it being almost 1b...
Plex prices for me dropped a little. It's unknown how much was because of the change or because of something else. Like Nolak said speculators etc could be the real cause. It's probably a combination of all those things. Maybe CCP dumped some plex off banned accounts. No one that is willing to talk knows for sure.
EDIT : I broke down and extended some of my accounts because of a recent development that has my interest in game. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
589
|
Posted - 2015.01.20 05:27:12 -
[3575] - Quote
Exactly. If PLEX was steady at 800m for a month or so, and *then* CCP banned broadcasting, and you saw PLEX drop, you *might* have an argument. You'd first have to look at any other changes CCP made to the game at the time of the ban, as well as take into account real life situations, as the global market does have an impact on the game. |
KC Kamikaze
Blue-Fire
28
|
Posted - 2015.01.21 17:14:55 -
[3576] - Quote
Dustpuppy wrote:KC Kamikaze wrote: ISBoxers most gameplay affecting feature is and has always been VideoFX not broadcasting. If this would be the case the plex price wouldn't have dropped from 1 billion to 800 million after the announcement of the multicast ban and stay on this level since the change. Why cancel subscription on plexed accounts if the main feature of something is not touched by a change?
That's right we control the price of plex. For every 100m isk you send me I will drop the price of PLEX on the market by 100m for one week. I'll do this for you because i'm nice ... and because I can. Just be sure when you send me the isk to put "For PLEX" in the reason box. Remember to follow the rules to get your discount PLEX prices!
|
Madchen Sterben
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2015.01.23 07:41:16 -
[3577] - Quote
Multi boxers actually read the new rules very carefully.
Minor changes, no big deal. Multi boxing, still a great choice. ISboxer, still a great choice.
The overall plan by CCP might be to ban mboxing but it looks like baby steps.
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6526
|
Posted - 2015.01.24 05:36:00 -
[3578] - Quote
Madchen Sterben wrote:Multi boxers actually read the new rules very carefully.
Minor changes, no big deal. Multi boxing, still a great choice. ISboxer, still a great choice. Still a great choice, huh.
Really nice :)
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Flash Startraveler
Startravelers
1
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 15:51:43 -
[3579] - Quote
Falcon brought me here
So i'm just gonna quote a person i generally totally agree with, not all the time but usually... me:
Flash Startraveler aka he's right you are not wrote:I hope i am allowed to post this and dont offend anyone in his or her personal space... People that are not using input broascasting are having problems at the moment ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=400578&find=unread ) which is obviously one of the first negative effects on the non ISBoxing community. I dont want to say non multiboxing community cause the considerated changes hit everyone multiboxing or not. There are posts on the forum Klick! that promote new per new regulation LEGAL ways of simplifying the control over several clients at the same time. So as i see it, the recent efforts to prevent players from getting a significant advantage by using the broadcast function of ISBoxer were more or less ineffective. As long a the game itself doesn't force you to do something different to issue the same command on another client, most used example is the entering of a code before you can lauch a bomb, nothing's really gonna change if the boxers dont have a problem with putting in a little bit more effort than before and klick several buttons and not only one. I finance my stuff with incursions and i have seen some small effects on the incursion community since first of January. Some boxers reduced the amount of their clients and some stopped completely, but by far not all. In my humble opinion though, the incursion boxers are not the real problem. Ya i know some hold them responsible for the high plex prices despite loads of facts proving otherwise (for example a presentation a the last fanfest... war was it two years ago?) yadi yadi yada...I see the bigger problems with the PvP boxes. Right, removing the fleetwarp could make it a bit harder but i can imagine just a little bit because issuing the warp command will still be the same on all clients and it will hit a huge amount of players that maybe dont even have a second account to multibox. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
607
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 16:42:08 -
[3580] - Quote
I hope the irony of CCP Falcon responding to us long enough to tell us to use this thread is not lost on anyone here. This is exactly what we were talkin anout, Falcon. You had an opportunity to clear things up with some players, a chance to present a rebuttal to our claims and argument, but instead basically said "yeah we are banning people who are following the EULA." E: oh and with all due respect, CCP's breach of the EULA was never a topic of this thread, not do we find it "amusing" that you have blown us off. |
|
Agent Unknown
Night Theifs DamnedNation
8
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 17:38:07 -
[3581] - Quote
Flash Startraveler wrote:Falcon brought me hereSo i'm just gonna quote a person i generally totally agree with, not all the time but usually... me: Flash Startraveler aka he's right you are not wrote:I hope i am allowed to post this and dont offend anyone in his or her personal space... People that are not using input broascasting are having problems at the moment ( https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=400578&find=unread ) which is obviously one of the first negative effects on the non ISBoxing community. I dont want to say non multiboxing community cause the considerated changes hit everyone multiboxing or not. There are posts on the forum Klick! that promote new per new regulation LEGAL ways of simplifying the control over several clients at the same time. So as i see it, the recent efforts to prevent players from getting a significant advantage by using the broadcast function of ISBoxer were more or less ineffective. As long a the game itself doesn't force you to do something different to issue the same command on another client, most used example is the entering of a code before you can lauch a bomb, nothing's really gonna change if the boxers dont have a problem with putting in a little bit more effort than before and klick several buttons and not only one. I finance my stuff with incursions and i have seen some small effects on the incursion community since first of January. Some boxers reduced the amount of their clients and some stopped completely, but by far not all. In my humble opinion though, the incursion boxers are not the real problem. Ya i know some hold them responsible for the high plex prices despite loads of facts proving otherwise (for example a presentation a the last fanfest... war was it two years ago?) yadi yadi yada...I see the bigger problems with the PvP boxes. Right, removing the fleetwarp could make it a bit harder but i can imagine just a little bit because issuing the warp command will still be the same on all clients and it will hit a huge amount of players that maybe dont even have a second account to multibox.
That multi-client preview is not against the EULA as all it does is draw the game's screen as an overlay and doesn't affect the game at all. This is very useful if you have more clients than monitors as an example ...or for keeping an eye on that link alt as you pew-pew in lowsec.
I didn't read most of the posts on this thread, but CCP's ban on input broadcasting was pretty clear to me. If you use a tool to mirror commands to multiple clients, it's the CONCORD slammer for you. If you use software to allow you to move the client to a specific place for easier access or have overlays for it, that's legal. I mean, Overwolf and Steam do overlays too, so users with client switchers should be fine. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
608
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 18:36:18 -
[3582] - Quote
Re-read Flash's link. People who have adapted to the current EULA are getting banned. |
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
885
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 18:52:33 -
[3583] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Re-read Flash's link. People who have adapted to the current EULA are getting banned.
Charadrass is a known incursions multiboxer. He's the leader of a German community setup to ISBox.
He claims that 2 out of 4 people that were not even using ISBoxer got banned for input automation. Were they using another input automation program? Were the original 2 using input automation?
All you have is claims from Charadrass (of all people lol if you only knew who this guy was you'd see the hilarity) that friends of his got banned with no evidence.
CCP will not go into the details of the cases I'm sure so what are you really going on or asking here Nolak?
Not today spaghetti.
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
609
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 19:09:02 -
[3584] - Quote
Sexy Cakes wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:Re-read Flash's link. People who have adapted to the current EULA are getting banned. Charadrass is a known incursions multiboxer. He's the leader of a German community setup to ISBox. He claims that 2 out of 4 people that were not even using ISBoxer got banned for input automation. Were they using another input automation program? Were the original 2 using input automation? All you have is claims from Charadrass (of all people lol if you only knew who this guy was you'd see the hilarity) that friends of his got banned with no evidence. CCP will not go into the details of the cases I'm sure so what are you really going on or asking here Nolak?
I am well aware of Charadrass's reputation and his "vocation" in EVE. I've had lots of contact with the fellow, and do not in this instance believe him to be lying. I would also like to draw your attention to this statement made by another boxer: http://puu.sh/f3SyN.png I spoke to other incursion boxers, and obtained a first-hand account of what happened by one of the banned people. I'm not on the best of terms with the guy, but again, I don't believe him to be lying as he was one of those involved in the multiboxing brainstorm on ways to work around the broadcast ban.
e: If you mean to insinuate that I am some servant of Charadrass, I'd like to point out that I was one of those who spoke out, rather loudly, against DIN and Charadrass's involvement in the incursion drama last year. |
Dirritat'z Demblin
Stardust Heavy Industries SpaceMonkey's Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 19:17:55 -
[3585] - Quote
Ya... and on the German EVE-Boards he repeated multiple times that his Tec-Ni-Ca-Ly EULA-approved workarrounds that do not broadcast will look like the now banned broadcasting on the Serverside. So, if he indeed is not lying on the subject, then he is at least a bit naive and retardet. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
609
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 19:31:14 -
[3586] - Quote
Dirritat'z Demblin wrote:Ya... and on the German EVE-Boards he repeated multiple times that his Tec-Ni-Ca-Ly EULA-approved workarrounds that do not broadcast will look like the now banned broadcasting on the Serverside. So, if he indeed is not lying on the subject, then he is at least a bit naive and retardet. Personal attacks aside, the legality of round robin broadcasting has been petitioned and asked multiple times, all with the same answer: Legal. As I said, CCP stated that they cannot tell the difference, which leads me to wonder why, exactly, if they were unable to detect the differences, did they not take me (and other ISBoxers) up on my offer to work with them to target the trouble areas of ISBoxer to do what CCP intended to do with the broadcast ban. |
Dirritat'z Demblin
Stardust Heavy Industries SpaceMonkey's Alliance
14
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 19:51:08 -
[3587] - Quote
It leads me to wonder why one wants to do something that is well known for looking illegal. Well, guess some peeps just like riding razorblades...
And, tbh: Of corse CCP will not tell you how they Identify Bots. If they would the could as well stop searching, since any bot and broadcast-program will then avoid exactly what CCP is looking for. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
609
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:07:00 -
[3588] - Quote
We never asked CCP to reveal their exact detection methods. At most, we asked for reassurances from them.
Cache scraping breaks the EULA, yet people do it as it was explicitly allowed. Same with ISBoxing and broadcasting pre Nov24. And before you try to argue it, no, we aren't talking about actual bots that do stuff when you alt-tab or go get a beer from the corner deli. |
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Half Massed
101
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:08:47 -
[3589] - Quote
The witch hunt continues: https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5435888#post5435888 Contact me if you want to know about getting representation for this stupid ****
Check out my Podcast!
CSM X: Candidate - Wormholes, Multiboxing, and New Bro's!
|
Delt0r Garsk
Shits N Giggles
262
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:23:00 -
[3590] - Quote
God dam... Just Say What the **** is going on CCP. Pick a side. Muliboxers... The care bare solo folks that will never be happy unless there is ZERO risk.
stop wasting our time time.......
Death and Glory!
Well fun is also good.
|
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
609
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:44:26 -
[3591] - Quote
Delt0r Garsk wrote:God dam... Just Say What the **** is going on CCP. Pick a side. Muliboxers... The care bare solo folks that will never be happy unless there is ZERO risk.
stop wasting our time time.......
I'm sure Everlasting Vendetta would like to have a word with you regarding zero risk. You know, the wormhole multibox alliance living in a C5. If there's any carebears whining about wanting zero risk, it's miners and freighter pilots. We know the risks we take when we start multiboxing. We know we paint a bullseye on our butt when we undock. We accepted that ages ago. |
Josef Djugashvilis
2866
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 20:46:55 -
[3592] - Quote
I do not know if I am impressed or depressed that this thread is still going.
I guess everybody has a right to fight their corner.
This is not a signature.
|
Mike Azariah
The Scope Gallente Federation
2385
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:01:00 -
[3593] - Quote
Josef Djugashvilis wrote:I do not know if I am impressed or depressed that this thread is still going.
I guess everybody has a right to fight their corner.
I figure another couple of months before people learn the new borders or are removed
m
Mike Azariah-á CSM8 and now CSM9
|
Angrod Losshelin
Oath of the Forsaken Half Massed
102
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:09:04 -
[3594] - Quote
ya at this point we are basically testing the new electric fence the "rulers" have put in place. Eventually we will forget what sky looks like and just tell our children that the sky was always concrete....
Check out my Podcast!
CSM X: Candidate - Wormholes, Multiboxing, and New Bro's!
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
609
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 21:30:47 -
[3595] - Quote
Mike Azariah wrote:Josef Djugashvilis wrote:I do not know if I am impressed or depressed that this thread is still going. I guess everybody has a right to fight their corner. I figure another couple of months before people learn the new borders or are removed m
Hey Mike. Any word from CCP as to Falcon blowing off the promised meeting with the boxers? |
ShadowandLight
Trigger Happy Capsuleers Soviet-Union
319
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 22:09:35 -
[3596] - Quote
For some more specifics from CCP Falcon listen here regarding what is and isnt allowed (This was his interview on the GRN show)
http://show.gamingradio.net/podpress_trac/web/181/0/GRNShow250115.mp3
Start at 02:07:45
The basic's I grabbed were
- VideoFX and other features outside Input Duplication is not considered an offense - Only sending the same command to multiple clients at the same time is what the problem is - CCP is not going to hold any public discussion on the issue (as far as I can read between the lines) - If you have any questions on what your doing using multiboxing / ISBoxer or any solution send in a ticket to customer service - You are reminded you are NOT allowed to share that response to the EVE Community as doing so is against the EULA.
More discussion on EVE Multiboxing can be found here
http://www.dual-boxing.com/forums/36-EVE-Online
EVE Online and Multiboxing: My position against the upcoming changes and why Multiboxing is good for EVE and its player economy
|
Sugar Smacks
State War Academy Caldari State
30
|
Posted - 2015.01.26 23:50:53 -
[3597] - Quote
I enjoy this topic and the reasoning behind people. You can literally get these people to say ANYTHING to get things to stay the same. Fear is large here, for good reason.
Please name a game scripting of any sort has helped? Im sure this will take a while.
After your done i will easily show you games scripting has utterly destroyed. The main reason people leave is "scripting" and "who would want to compete with that".
Now you can say it doesn't hurt anything, well give examples, because we can all see games its utterly devastated. Having a argument that has no real fact behind it is like a scientist with no balls to stand behind his conclusions. Next time save yourself the money from school buddy. |
ashley Eoner
394
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 00:06:38 -
[3598] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Sexy Cakes wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:Re-read Flash's link. People who have adapted to the current EULA are getting banned. Charadrass is a known incursions multiboxer. He's the leader of a German community setup to ISBox. He claims that 2 out of 4 people that were not even using ISBoxer got banned for input automation. Were they using another input automation program? Were the original 2 using input automation? All you have is claims from Charadrass (of all people lol if you only knew who this guy was you'd see the hilarity) that friends of his got banned with no evidence. CCP will not go into the details of the cases I'm sure so what are you really going on or asking here Nolak? I am well aware of Charadrass's reputation and his "vocation" in EVE. I've had lots of contact with the fellow, and do not in this instance believe him to be lying. I would also like to draw your attention to this statement made by another boxer: http://puu.sh/f3SyN.png I spoke to other incursion boxers, and obtained a first-hand account of what happened by one of the banned people. I'm not on the best of terms with the guy, but again, I don't believe him to be lying as he was one of those involved in the multiboxing brainstorm on ways to work around the broadcast ban. e: If you mean to insinuate that I am some servant of Charadrass, I'd like to point out that I was one of those who spoke out, rather loudly, against DIN and Charadrass's involvement in the incursion drama last year. Wow in this very thread many MANY pages ago I called it that CCP was going to have issues determining whether commands are broadcasted or manually inputted.
I run multiple machines with multiple keyboards as I stated before and that is why I was worried. I haven't been hit so far but I haven't done incursions in a while.
Sugar Smacks wrote:I enjoy this topic and the reasoning behind people. You can literally get these people to say ANYTHING to get things to stay the same. Fear is large here, for good reason.
Please name a game scripting of any sort has helped? Im sure this will take a while.
After your done i will easily show you games scripting has utterly destroyed. The main reason people leave is "scripting" and "who would want to compete with that".
Now you can say it doesn't hurt anything, well give examples, because we can all see games its utterly devastated. Having a argument that has no real fact behind it is like a scientist with no balls to stand behind his conclusions. Next time save yourself the money from school buddy. You must be in the wrong thread because nothing you said had any relevance to innerspace (the real program's name not isboxer) or any other repeater capable program/setup. I don't even see anything in this thread that would have any relevance to what you are talking about. |
Sugar Smacks
State War Academy Caldari State
31
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 00:48:34 -
[3599] - Quote
Any key commands that lead to automation of playing should be destroyed. Any key commands that lead to multiple commands from a single source should be destroyed.
Anyone that thinks otherwise has no basis for their argument as only failed games stand behind these decisions.
I still wait to hear of a sucessfull game people were allowed to do this in. The fact is there is none. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
610
|
Posted - 2015.01.27 00:53:37 -
[3600] - Quote
Sugar Smacks wrote:Please name a game scripting of any sort has helped? Im sure this will take a while.
After your done i will easily show you games scripting has utterly destroyed. The main reason people leave is "scripting" and "who would want to compete with that".
Now you can say it doesn't hurt anything, well give examples, because we can all see games its utterly devastated. Having a argument that has no real fact behind it is like a scientist with no balls to stand behind his conclusions. Next time save yourself the money from school buddy.
Portal, Portal 2, Half Life, Half Life 2, Halo, Halo 2, and Halo 3 speedruns. I'm no doubt missing millions more, but these were the most memorable as I just went on a minor binge of speedrunning videos. Check out High Speed Halo, or the Portal 2 Co-Op speedrunning community.
You're one to talk about scientists with no balls. One day back in September or so, I took notice of the number of "ISBoxer too stronk" threads that populated GD. I looked at each thread, then at the poster's KB. 9 times out of 10, they were a carebear or miner who had never had the brilliant idea to pick up a Catalyst and force the ISBoxer to move systems or stand down. It was always someone making a vague threat regarding the health of the game, followed by 4-5 people promptly laughing at the foolishness of the poster. So before you try to tell us we have no balls, look in a mirror, and ask yourself how many times you forced an ISBoxer's fleet to stand down.
We accepted the bullseye we painted on our backs when we multiboxed. We just never expected people to be such cowards and run to mommy instead of thinking of things themselves. |
|
|
|
|
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 |