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) |
Sgt Ocker
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
322
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 05:39:12 -
[3841] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:Trakow wrote:Charadrass wrote:first. posting a gm petition answer is violating the eula.
First, it wasn't from a GM. And second, how does it violate the EULA? Can't post private correspondences between players and GMs / CCPs from petitions. e: I'd quote you the exact section, paragraph, and subsection, but CCP has no doubt changed that. And a huge problem with that part of the EULA is - The person asking the right question gets a "private" answer which the rest of the playing community may or may not get, depending on who gives the answer and or if it suits them to keep everyone on the same page as far as rules and changes go. Prior to the message from CCP Peligro being posted, there was no ruling stating you would be banned for using round robin keystrokes. Now it "seems" you can be banned for using them but no-one from CCP has officially made this information known to their paying customers. Some of whom are at risk of being banned for using tools provided by CCP. Keeping secrets about upcoming changes to SOV is one thing, keeping secrets about rule changes is entirely different. Yeah, Well it's also the case that you can't anyway be allowed to know what has been done (as the person telling you would get banned for letting you know about a decision). So their intent is for everyone to petition anything involving more than one client at a time (obviously not just cyno alts, unless you're lighting cynos really rapidly, but why would you...) (or afk cloaking alts, unless they all cloak really rapidly, but logging in at once is ok) With all the vague wording around, it's common sense to not assume anything is "ok" without a specific petition to a GM, which has a reply attached to it clearly saying "yeah this one thing is ok". But you can't share it, or you will be In Trouble. The support ticket i lodged simply referred me to this forum thread "as all changes relating to my questions can be found there".
Not very supportive (or informative) support.
My opinions are mine.
If you don't like them or disagree with me that's OK.- - - - - -
Just don't bother Hating - I don't care
|
Komisarzzawada
The Senate and People of Rome Northern Associates.
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 15:01:57 -
[3842] - Quote
Trakow wrote:Komisarzzawada wrote:Trakow wrote:Well, I finally got a response from CCP regarding their true stance on things and how THEY interpret their EULA, which in the end, is all that matters.
Clipped correspondence with CCP...
Not sure I believe this post until its get clipped by GM/DEV/ISD ;) if its clipped its true, and at least we got some response and the line(of what is acceptable) is somewhat drawn. Do you believe it now? My post was indeed clipped...
Yup, now i believe ;) Some say its nothing new being said, but from my point of view, its a little progress to players, something was said, so there is some point of reference
Not a iSBOXER myself, but i do multibox, so im interested in the topic.
Maybe in another month we'll get something official. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6529
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 15:28:03 -
[3843] - Quote
Komisarzzawada wrote:Trakow wrote:Komisarzzawada wrote:Trakow wrote:Well, I finally got a response from CCP regarding their true stance on things and how THEY interpret their EULA, which in the end, is all that matters.
Clipped correspondence with CCP... Not sure I believe this post until its get clipped by GM/DEV/ISD ;) if its clipped its true, and at least we got some response and the line(of what is acceptable) is somewhat drawn. Do you believe it now? My post was indeed clipped... Yup, now i believe ;) Some say its nothing new being said, but from my point of view, its a little progress to players, something was said, so there is some point of reference Not a iSBOXER myself, but i do multibox, so im interested in the topic. Maybe in another month we'll get something official. Kind of surprised that anything even mentioning that has not been nuked from orbit...
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Trakow
Beta Switch
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 17:30:49 -
[3844] - Quote
So, I posted my answer not to stir the pot, but to help clear things up. Since nobody seemed to get any straight answers, and CCP does not clarify or seem to want to make things clear, I figured I should post the response because I DID get a clear, specific and definite answer to my questions.
In my defense for posting the correspondence:
First of all, by doing so, I DID NOT breach any of the EULA rules. I read the whole thing, including the Privacy Policy. What I did "break" was the Forum Moderation Policy which is separate from the EULA.
Second of all, I did not have to sign up for this forum, nor did I have to click on a checkbox or button saying I agreed to the Forum Moderation Policy. All I had to do was log into Eve Gate like I always do, and thanks to SSO, I was signed into the forum. Perhaps CCP should revisit the forum login method and have users have to click on "agree" on their first visit to the forum. Then the policy is right there in front of you and you have no choice but to click "agree". Putting a link somewhere on the page to the forum rules does not mean anyone will click on it, it could for all we know, be one of those spam ads, like "You have one new message, click here to read it". You know what I mean... This is for the same reasons that when you install software, you have to click the button that says you agree or accept the terms/conditions/eula otherwise it will not install. This forces you to agree/accept if you want the software installed.
Just wanted to clear those things up. |
Rosewalker
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
158
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 18:28:50 -
[3845] - Quote
Trakow wrote:First of all, by doing so, I DID NOT breach any of the EULA rules. I read the whole thing, including the Privacy Policy. What I did "break" was the Forum Moderation Policy which is separate from the EULA.
Actually, it is a violation of the EVE EULA, but you have to dig a bit...
First, Section 6C refers you to a location outside the EULA...
Section 6C of the EVE Online EULA wrote:
Paragraph 18 in the ToS is where CCP's stance on publishing communications from CCP is stated.
EVE Online Terms of Service wrote: 18, You may not publish private communications from CCP, their agents or representatives or EVE Online volunteers without authorization.
That's anything, any place. Even outside the forums. So yes, publishing that violated the EULA, through violating the Rules of Conduct (aka the ToS). Trust me, I understand your reasoning and sympathize with it. There are some things I've been sent in the past (not necessarily directly by CCP) I'd like to publish, but I like my accounts too much
The Nosy Gamer - CCP Random: "hehe, falls under the category: nice try, but no. ;)"
|
Charadrass
Angry Germans
149
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 19:03:57 -
[3846] - Quote
somer blink got banned permanently for posting gm communication btw.
but back to Topic.
we still need clarification. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6530
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 21:32:25 -
[3847] - Quote
It's good we all agree that someone can be nuked.
I'm going to try and learn to use multiple characters as well, it seems like an interesting challenge.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Trakow
Beta Switch
7
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 22:34:07 -
[3848] - Quote
Rosewalker wrote:Trakow wrote:First of all, by doing so, I DID NOT breach any of the EULA rules. I read the whole thing, including the Privacy Policy. What I did "break" was the Forum Moderation Policy which is separate from the EULA. Actually, it is a violation of the EVE EULA, but you have to dig a bit... First, Section 6C refers you to a location outside the EULA... Section 6C of the EVE Online EULA wrote: Paragraph 18 in the ToS is where CCP's stance on publishing communications from CCP is stated. EVE Online Terms of Service wrote: 18, You may not publish private communications from CCP, their agents or representatives or EVE Online volunteers without authorization. That's anything, any place. Even outside the forums. So yes, publishing that violated the EULA, through violating the Rules of Conduct (aka the ToS). Trust me, I understand your reasoning and sympathize with it. There are some things I've been sent in the past (not necessarily directly by CCP) I'd like to publish, but I like my accounts too much
Ah, well, something I learned from the ISBoxers is how to interpret the EULA and rules in my favor, and nitpick details. As I see it, they say that you may not publish it. I didn't, because it's not in any newspaper, magazine or article, nor was it produced or distributed by a publisher. That's my understanding of that statement until CCP tell me directly, specifically and publicly what they mean by that para. |
Verisimilidude 001
Viziam Amarr Empire
15
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 22:35:27 -
[3849] - Quote
http://youtu.be/HFdYO9h0H3Y
Here's a video of me multiboxing two 20 man Incursions post-EULA changes. The first took 20 minutes and the second 18 and change. Max skilled, I could probably shave this down to 12-15 minutes per site.
You'll note that there is no multiplexing or macros--Just some good old video effects. Everything you see here falls completely within the guidelines that CCP has posted with respect to their ToS/EULA changes.
Ultimately, I find the changes to be an irritation more than anything else. All they do is make certain activities more inefficient and certainly don't break any of the activities CCP was trying to curtail.
The worst part about the changes is that CCP refuses to answer questions--It seems like the plan is to intimidate people more than anything. |
Charadrass
Angry Germans
149
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 22:51:16 -
[3850] - Quote
wow i was thinking a was videofxing like a pro but it seems i am only at beginner state :)
that is awesome!
i am using different keys. one key for each box and each order. in combination with videofx ofc. |
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
665
|
Posted - 2015.02.07 22:54:34 -
[3851] - Quote
Charadrass wrote:i was thinking a was videofxing like a pro but it seems i am only at beginner state :) Told'ja. |
Kaphrah
Kaphrah Corporation4
35
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 00:10:27 -
[3852] - Quote
Verisimilidude 001 wrote:http://youtu.be/HFdYO9h0H3Y
Here's a video of me multiboxing two 20 man Incursions post-EULA changes. The first took 20 minutes and the second 18 and change. Max skilled, I could probably shave this down to 12-15 minutes per site.
You'll note that there is no multiplexing or macros--Just some good old video effects. Everything you see here falls completely within the guidelines that CCP has posted with respect to their ToS/EULA changes.
Ultimately, I find the changes to be an irritation more than anything else. All they do is make certain activities more inefficient and certainly don't break any of the activities CCP was trying to curtail.
The worst part about the changes is that CCP refuses to answer questions--It seems like the plan is to intimidate people more than anything.
nicely done, so could maybe some ccp official state if stuff like this is fine if done very fast? |
Rosewalker
Signal Cartel EvE-Scout Enclave
158
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 01:58:08 -
[3853] - Quote
Trakow wrote:Rosewalker wrote:Trakow wrote:First of all, by doing so, I DID NOT breach any of the EULA rules. I read the whole thing, including the Privacy Policy. What I did "break" was the Forum Moderation Policy which is separate from the EULA. Actually, it is a violation of the EVE EULA, but you have to dig a bit... First, Section 6C refers you to a location outside the EULA... Section 6C of the EVE Online EULA wrote: Paragraph 18 in the ToS is where CCP's stance on publishing communications from CCP is stated. EVE Online Terms of Service wrote: 18, You may not publish private communications from CCP, their agents or representatives or EVE Online volunteers without authorization. That's anything, any place. Even outside the forums. So yes, publishing that violated the EULA, through violating the Rules of Conduct (aka the ToS). Trust me, I understand your reasoning and sympathize with it. There are some things I've been sent in the past (not necessarily directly by CCP) I'd like to publish, but I like my accounts too much Ah, well, something I learned from the ISBoxers is how to interpret the EULA and rules in my favor, and nitpick details. As I see it, they say that you may not publish it. I didn't, because it's not in any newspaper, magazine or article, nor was it produced or distributed by a publisher. That's my understanding of that statement until CCP tell me directly, specifically and publicly what they mean by that para.
I bow to the master
The Nosy Gamer - CCP Random: "hehe, falls under the category: nice try, but no. ;)"
|
ashley Eoner
421
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 03:29:34 -
[3854] - Quote
That's really close to how I'm doing it currently. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6530
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 05:47:02 -
[3855] - Quote
Kaphrah wrote:Verisimilidude 001 wrote:http://youtu.be/HFdYO9h0H3Y
Here's a video of me multiboxing two 20 man Incursions post-EULA changes. The first took 20 minutes and the second 18 and change. Max skilled, I could probably shave this down to 12-15 minutes per site.
You'll note that there is no multiplexing or macros--Just some good old video effects. Everything you see here falls completely within the guidelines that CCP has posted with respect to their ToS/EULA changes.
Ultimately, I find the changes to be an irritation more than anything else. All they do is make certain activities more inefficient and certainly don't break any of the activities CCP was trying to curtail.
The worst part about the changes is that CCP refuses to answer questions--It seems like the plan is to intimidate people more than anything. nicely done, so could maybe some ccp official state if stuff like this is fine if done very fast? That is very amazing. Verisimilidude, really well thought out stuff you have there.
If you want to know if it is fine then I guess you'll have to petition and ask. But don't share the response (whatever it is) because you might suddenly get nuked!
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Kaphrah
Kaphrah Corporation4
35
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 22:22:08 -
[3856] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Kaphrah wrote:Verisimilidude 001 wrote:http://youtu.be/HFdYO9h0H3Y
Here's a video of me multiboxing two 20 man Incursions post-EULA changes. The first took 20 minutes and the second 18 and change. Max skilled, I could probably shave this down to 12-15 minutes per site.
You'll note that there is no multiplexing or macros--Just some good old video effects. Everything you see here falls completely within the guidelines that CCP has posted with respect to their ToS/EULA changes.
Ultimately, I find the changes to be an irritation more than anything else. All they do is make certain activities more inefficient and certainly don't break any of the activities CCP was trying to curtail.
The worst part about the changes is that CCP refuses to answer questions--It seems like the plan is to intimidate people more than anything. nicely done, so could maybe some ccp official state if stuff like this is fine if done very fast? That is very amazing. Verisimilidude, really well thought out stuff you have there. If you want to know if it is fine then I guess you'll have to petition and ask. But don't share the response (whatever it is) because you might suddenly get nuked!
Make a guess where I was told to ask.
it couldn't be this thread here, could it? Oh wait, they really told me to ask in this thread... |
JGar Rooflestein
Red Phoenix Rising Alternate Allegiance
5
|
Posted - 2015.02.08 22:26:37 -
[3857] - Quote
Its almost how im set up. When the change came I was pissed and upset as i broadcasted my inputs. Now realized its not as bad as people make out. Yes its a bit of extra work and i have to pay attention now. Just happy they allow input broadcast while logging in and setting up windows. Also allowing us to still use the dxnothing fx setups.
-JGar
"Great man once said nothing."
|
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6531
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 05:30:14 -
[3858] - Quote
Kaphrah wrote:Alavaria Fera wrote:Kaphrah wrote: nicely done, so could maybe some ccp official state if stuff like this is fine if done very fast?
That is very amazing. Verisimilidude, really well thought out stuff you have there. If you want to know if it is fine then I guess you'll have to petition and ask. But don't share the response (whatever it is) because you might suddenly get nuked! Make a guess where I was told to ask. it couldn't be this thread here, could it? Oh wait, they really told me to ask in this thread... Oh yeah. If that happens you should link them to the post here that says to make a petition.
For the people that decide if we get nuked or not, they don't seem aware of their responsibility, or rather they just want to push you off elsewhere. Or it's part of the whole vagueness/ambiguity thing where you are bounced around and never get an answer either way until you're suddenly nuked from orbit?
I believe this post is the one?
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Verisimilidude 001
Viziam Amarr Empire
20
|
Posted - 2015.02.09 14:34:25 -
[3859] - Quote
Well, I've done maybe 9 or 10 more Assault-level Incursion sites and I haven't been banned.
I've got another video I'm gonna' put together for the boxing community; I'll cross-post it here. |
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 01:28:06 -
[3860] - Quote
Verisimilidude 001 wrote:Well, I've done maybe 9 or 10 more Assault-level Incursion sites and I haven't been banned.
I've got another video I'm gonna' put together for the boxing community; I'll cross-post it here. I have been running quite a lot the last few days.
While I was at work today I started thinking about this thread. So I decided I was going to run some VGs when I got home with nothing more than eve in window mode. Unfortunately I came home to a NCO wall which made me sad because I wanted to run an OTA. OTAs are MUCH faster for me time wise with my current setup so they look much more impressive.
Regardless I ran about the same time with this setup as I do when I use isboxer. Which isn't terribly surprising as I don't use round robin or any of that stuff.
Actually having done this I'm pretty sure I could make turret ships work this way. Might dust off my NMs and take them for a spin again.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B40tc3dr8s |
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
666
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 06:34:28 -
[3861] - Quote
http://crossingzebras.com/the-limiting-factor/ Oy CCP. You could learn a lot from this. Stop punishing us because people don't wanna use a falcon or a catalyst. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6532
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 06:58:22 -
[3862] - Quote
Kinete Jenius wrote:Verisimilidude 001 wrote:Well, I've done maybe 9 or 10 more Assault-level Incursion sites and I haven't been banned.
I've got another video I'm gonna' put together for the boxing community; I'll cross-post it here. I have been running quite a lot the last few days. While I was at work today I started thinking about this thread. So I decided I was going to run some VGs when I got home with nothing more than eve in window mode. Unfortunately I came home to a NCO wall which made me sad because I wanted to run an OTA. OTAs are MUCH faster for me time wise with my current setup so they look much more impressive. Regardless I ran about the same time with this setup as I do when I use isboxer. Which isn't terribly surprising as I don't use round robin or any of that stuff. Actually having done this I'm pretty sure I could make turret ships work this way. Might dust off my NMs and take them for a spin again. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B40tc3dr8s Yeah, I used to just manually do it that way for miners, but eventually I didn't really care enough as I had all the isk I really was willing to mine for. Some things just don't die.
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Intar Medris
Viziam Amarr Empire
222
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 15:30:18 -
[3863] - Quote
Thank God! Finally no more one man personal fleets be controlled with a single click. I knew CCP would finally come to their senses on this. Adios ISboxer
I try to be nice and mind my business just shooting lasers at rocks. There is just way too many asshats in New Eden for that to happen.
|
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
666
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 15:41:46 -
[3864] - Quote
Intar Medris wrote:Thank God! Finally no more one man personal fleets be controlled with a single click. I knew CCP would finally come to their senses on this. Adios ISboxer I guess you missed the previous videos where people are still ISBoxing....
e: And if you'd be so kind, what are your specific objections to ISBoxer? |
Charadrass
Angry Germans
150
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 20:04:39 -
[3865] - Quote
Intar Medris wrote:Thank God! Finally no more one man personal fleets be controlled with a single click. I knew CCP would finally come to their senses on this. Adios ISboxer
Earth 2012 in USA: -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YQIMGV5vtd4&feature=player_detailpage#t=39 multiple clients controlled by one person.
New Eden 21,000 years in the future: we suddenly lost the ability to control multiple clients by one person.
Sad universe. evolution backwards. |
Kinete Jenius
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
3
|
Posted - 2015.02.10 21:05:15 -
[3866] - Quote
Alavaria Fera wrote:Kinete Jenius wrote:Verisimilidude 001 wrote:Well, I've done maybe 9 or 10 more Assault-level Incursion sites and I haven't been banned.
I've got another video I'm gonna' put together for the boxing community; I'll cross-post it here. I have been running quite a lot the last few days. While I was at work today I started thinking about this thread. So I decided I was going to run some VGs when I got home with nothing more than eve in window mode. Unfortunately I came home to a NCO wall which made me sad because I wanted to run an OTA. OTAs are MUCH faster for me time wise with my current setup so they look much more impressive. Regardless I ran about the same time with this setup as I do when I use isboxer. Which isn't terribly surprising as I don't use round robin or any of that stuff. Actually having done this I'm pretty sure I could make turret ships work this way. Might dust off my NMs and take them for a spin again. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3B40tc3dr8s Yeah, I used to just manually do it that way for miners, but eventually I didn't really care enough as I had all the isk I really was willing to mine for. Some things just don't die. Yeah really basic stuff. For some reason though some people in this thread consider it cheating if I use isboxer to clean up the aesthetics some.
What you can't see is my nestor on the right screen and the nestor/venture on the second computer to the left. |
Nolak Ataru
Incursion Osprey Replacement Fund LLC
668
|
Posted - 2015.02.13 16:50:53 -
[3867] - Quote
Kinete Jenius wrote:Yeah really basic stuff. For some reason though some people in this thread consider it cheating if I use isboxer to clean up the aesthetics some. To be fair, some people think of Falcons as cheating. |
Alavaria Fera
GoonWaffe
6541
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 04:22:33 -
[3868] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Kinete Jenius wrote:Yeah really basic stuff. For some reason though some people in this thread consider it cheating if I use isboxer to clean up the aesthetics some. To be fair, some people think of Falcons as cheating. Well, I'm sure no one get ccp reimbursed when they died "because of falcon"
It's quite well known that solo pvping with boosts and a falcon alt and scouts is perfectly fine...
^^ Delicious goon ((tech nerf, siphon, drone assist, supercap)) tears.
Taking a wrecking ball to the futile hopes and broken dreams of skillless blobbers.
|
Charadrass
Angry Germans
151
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 11:52:36 -
[3869] - Quote
back to topic: we still need information about eula conform use of isboxer. |
ashley Eoner
440
|
Posted - 2015.02.14 21:32:04 -
[3870] - Quote
Charadrass wrote:back to topic: we still need information about eula conform use of isboxer. Well it seems if you don't use round robin or the rollover stuff you're fine.
It seems the problem begins when you start using hotkeys and stuff too quickly across multiple clients. |
|
|
|
|
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 |