Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 [70] 80 .. 89 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
dexington
Caldari Baconoration
|
Posted - 2011.03.29 23:36:00 -
[2071]
Originally by: Grey Stormshadow People surely seem to like the grey area and pushing their boundaries as close to the limit as possible.
I can't see how it can be a grey area or pushing boundaries, until CCP decides to change their policy/EULA/TOS you are allowed to use multibox setups.
CCPSreegs - Multiboxing
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 00:05:00 -
[2072]
Originally by: dexington
Originally by: Grey Stormshadow People surely seem to like the grey area and pushing their boundaries as close to the limit as possible.
I can't see how it can be a grey area or pushing boundaries, until CCP decides to change their policy/EULA/TOS you are allowed to use multibox setups.
CCPSreegs - Multiboxing
Well the eula states that "3.You may not use 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. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game."
I would say that using 3rd party program to store mouse click on one client window and automatically applying it to random number of other client windows is "macroing". Also if used in PVP/PVE that surely makes it easier to gain items, currency objects, standings and so on... It is also modification of the user interface, as basic interface doesn't allow you to share mouse clicks with other client interfaces...
In other words... would say that using program which distributes mouse movement, clicks and keyboard actions to multible clients is seriously breaking the eula.
...but as I said earlier - people should make their own conclusions but also learn to live with the consequences. "Omg they banned my friend who didnt do anything... right?".
------------------------------------------------- Play with the best - die like the rest starwreck.com - support the cause :) |
Baihuigau
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 00:28:00 -
[2073]
But thats the whole point, we shouldent be kept in the dark, either come out and say heres a list of multiboxing programs their not allowed, heres a list of programs allowed ex:fraps.....obviously botting programs are banned, but the point is give a deffinative answer, dont just be like, hey im a arrogant security guy who has all the power and i will swing the ban hammer because i can interpret the eula/tos however i like, which is what the dev dude sounded like in the presentation......as a IT guy i understand what hes saying from a security prespective, but thats why in most IT situations there are written procedures you go trough if you have stuff like tos and eulas, one person can interpret a tos one way the next person can interpret it another way.
|
dexington
Caldari Baconoration
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 00:52:00 -
[2074]
Originally by: Grey Stormshadow Well the eula states that "3.You may not use 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. You may not rewrite or modify the user interface or otherwise manipulate data in any way to acquire items, currency, objects, character attributes or beneficial actions not actually acquired or achieved in the Game."
I would say that using 3rd party program to store mouse click on one client window and automatically applying it to random number of other client windows is "macroing". Also if used in PVP/PVE that surely makes it easier to gain items, currency objects, standings and so on... It is also modification of the user interface, as basic interface doesn't allow you to share mouse clicks with other client interfaces...
A keyboard or mouse macro is a sequences of keystrokes and mouse actions, and it has nothing to do with sharing the mouse/keyboard input between multiple computers. And it's in no way a modification of the EVE UI, it's still receiving input from a mouse and keyboard controlled by a human.
Multiboxing and automated game play is two different things, and if CCP wants to "ban" multiboxing they should add a paragraph about it when they release the revised EULA.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 01:02:00 -
[2075]
Originally by: Baihuigau But thats the whole point, we shouldent be kept in the dark, either come out and say heres a list of multiboxing programs their not allowed, heres a list of programs allowed ex:fraps.....obviously botting programs are banned, but the point is give a deffinative answer, dont just be like, hey im a arrogant security guy who has all the power and i will swing the ban hammer because i can interpret the eula/tos however i like, which is what the dev dude sounded like in the presentation......as a IT guy i understand what hes saying from a security prespective, but thats why in most IT situations there are written procedures you go trough if you have stuff like tos and eulas, one person can interpret a tos one way the next person can interpret it another way.
I'm on vacation this week so I haven't been able to keep up with the thread but suffice it to say, my recommendation is to follow the EULA. Any thing ever written down in any way can be interpreted. That doesn't mean we don't make standards and procedures and rules. The EULA states pretty clearly what is allowed. My concern is enforcing the existing rules as stated in the EULA. The first I'd heard of any applications being given some grant by someone to interact with the EVE client directly AGAINST the very clear written statement in the EULA was at Fanfest and I certainly can't answer something like that without doing a bit of digging.
If you are interpreting me expressing to you what our responsibilities are as being arrogant than I apologize, but the fact of the matter is that the EULA and TOS are pretty clear and until we amend them to say otherwise I'd follow what they say because that's what you're agreeing to when you play EVE. |
|
Baihuigau
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 01:08:00 -
[2076]
Edited by: Baihuigau on 30/03/2011 01:08:08 So then its only a problem if it interacts with the eve client itself? So lets say if it hooks into windows itself then its fine?
|
Eternal Noob
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 01:14:00 -
[2077]
Then all botting material should be free-space and the code for this be given to all players,starting like, years ago.
cmon this is EULA right, highest law on the planet, if you don't provide everyone with the scripts, the CCP is actually in violation of the EULA.
|
Baihuigau
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 01:20:00 -
[2078]
Edited by: Baihuigau on 30/03/2011 01:24:08 Thing is bot programs do hook into the eve client to automate their commands, or use macros to automate it, most multiboxing software does not do that, it just allows you to move your mouse from window to window or clone your movements as in if i move the mouse to the left it moves the mouse to the left real time in all other windows as well if thats what i want, no matter what there is still someone doing the commands in real time unlike a bot which has no one at the keyboard and issues the commands all by itself.
Not to mention this part of the eula "You may not use macros or other stored rapid keystrokes or other patterns of play that facilitate acquisition of items" is pretty open ended, lets say i got two clients side by side on the screen and playing both at the same time manually that can be considered a different pattern of play from what ccp considers a pattern of play, just that part itself can get you nailed for almost anything.
|
Eternal Noob
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 01:26:00 -
[2079]
it's so obvious. people at CCP know exactly how this is being done. but their own knowledge is the ultimate EULA violation. if they were to admit the knowledge, then real monetary damages would have to be remitted in a court of law.
this is really the issue here. ....like a bunch of eggheads would not have by now figured out how an auto-code would be carried out. an active team of coders would have just no idea of how this is carried out, whatsoever?????????????
after what, 6 years? it's completely obvious what has happened here.
|
Eternal Noob
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 01:29:00 -
[2080]
this might even explain their crazy missioning and null-sec decisions of late.
|
|
Baihuigau
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 01:32:00 -
[2081]
Obviously their trying to cut down the number of botters and hey i welcome that, im a miner and they have completely killed the mining profession, that and the drone regions but thats beside the point, problem is at the moment the eula is too open for interpretation as i stated above, if their going to go ahead with the security teams plan they need a updated eula hopefully thats forth coming.
|
dexington
Caldari Baconoration
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 02:01:00 -
[2082]
Originally by: CCP Sreegs The first I'd heard of any applications being given some grant by someone to interact with the EVE client directly AGAINST the very clear written statement in the EULA was at Fanfest and I certainly can't answer something like that without doing a bit of digging.
To interact with the client would imply that the applications use some form of two-way communication, that is not the case with mouse/keyboard sharing software.
|
Dethmourne Silvermane
Gallente Northstar Cabal R.A.G.E
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 02:40:00 -
[2083]
Multiboxing programs are against the EULA. Even if you're at the keyboard, if you replicate one mouseclick to 10 clients, that's what I would define as "an accelerated rate" of acquisition.
|
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 02:51:00 -
[2084]
Unfortunately for some people adapting to any kind of boundaries is way too difficult... If there wasn't such people, game developers could truncate big part of the eula to only 3 words; "No cheating allowed". Most of the people would understand what it means, but then there is always that one guy who ignores the 2 first letters and starts living in his own reality. Funniest part is that even they write 10 page eulas, there still is that "one guy" around.
------------------------------------------------- Play with the best - die like the rest starwreck.com - support the cause :) |
Sullen Skoung
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:11:00 -
[2085]
Originally by: Florestan Bronstein CCP already permabans on first-offense if they find out you have tinkered with the client
yet the botters that do this get 3 steps of ban...
yeah this makes sense
|
Elyssa MacLeod
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:19:00 -
[2086]
Originally by: dexington
Originally by: bitters much Edited by: bitters much on 29/03/2011 11:43:56 1st time they catch you --> slap on you wrist
2nd time they catch you --> 30 days banz0r
3rd time they catch you --> permaban
Only CCP forgot about the possibility for the botter to sell his character for ISK, buy a new one of the forums after the 2nd catch and start all over again.
Way to go CCP
I hardly think it's the case they don't know that people are able to sell characters, seems more to me that it's you who don't understand bans are account based not character. If you get catch two times using bots on you original character, and get catch again on a new character on the same account you are still getting banned.
oooor after the first one they sell it to an account that hasnt gotten banned yet?
|
Elyssa MacLeod
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:25:00 -
[2087]
Originally by: Caius Sivaris BTW given that per CCP Fanfest security presentation the security team is three months old does it means it was because of this thread?
If so proving again and again that threadnaught and bad press are a far better efficient lever on CCP than the CSM will ever be?
BINGO!!! We have a winner! disband the useless CSM. They arent doing what they were supposed to do when they were formed (ofc that was impossible)
|
Puppet Mas'ter
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:29:00 -
[2088]
Originally by: CCP Sreegs
Originally by: Baihuigau But thats the whole point, we shouldent be kept in the dark, either come out and say heres a list of multiboxing programs their not allowed, heres a list of programs allowed ex:fraps.....obviously botting programs are banned, but the point is give a deffinative answer, dont just be like, hey im a arrogant security guy who has all the power and i will swing the ban hammer because i can interpret the eula/tos however i like, which is what the dev dude sounded like in the presentation......as a IT guy i understand what hes saying from a security prespective, but thats why in most IT situations there are written procedures you go trough if you have stuff like tos and eulas, one person can interpret a tos one way the next person can interpret it another way.
I'm on vacation this week so I haven't been able to keep up with the thread but suffice it to say, my recommendation is to follow the EULA. Any thing ever written down in any way can be interpreted. That doesn't mean we don't make standards and procedures and rules. The EULA states pretty clearly what is allowed. My concern is enforcing the existing rules as stated in the EULA. The first I'd heard of any applications being given some grant by someone to interact with the EVE client directly AGAINST the very clear written statement in the EULA was at Fanfest and I certainly can't answer something like that without doing a bit of digging.
If you are interpreting me expressing to you what our responsibilities are as being arrogant than I apologize, but the fact of the matter is that the EULA and TOS are pretty clear and until we amend them to say otherwise I'd follow what they say because that's what you're agreeing to when you play EVE.
OMG theyre actually following the EULA!!! WERE SCREWED!!!
|
Kengutsi Akira
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:32:00 -
[2089]
Originally by: Grey Stormshadow Unfortunately for some people adapting to any kind of boundaries is way too difficult... If there wasn't such people...
...EVE wouldnt exist ------------------------------------ "You know, my foot oughta vandilize your ass" |
dexington
Caldari Baconoration
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:33:00 -
[2090]
Originally by: Dethmourne Silvermane Multiboxing programs are against the EULA. Even if you're at the keyboard, if you replicate one mouseclick to 10 clients, that's what I would define as "an accelerated rate" of acquisition.
It's only illegal if you eg. use macros to accelerate the rate of acquisition, tabbing between two accounts is also an accelerated rate of acquisition but perfectly legal.
|
|
DR reseacher
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:46:00 -
[2091]
More stupid bots in hisec grinding missions! http://forum.thehackerwithin.com/
|
Baihuigau
Gallente The Scope
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 03:54:00 -
[2092]
Edited by: Baihuigau on 30/03/2011 03:54:48
Originally by: dexington
Originally by: Dethmourne Silvermane Multiboxing programs are against the EULA. Even if you're at the keyboard, if you replicate one mouseclick to 10 clients, that's what I would define as "an accelerated rate" of acquisition.
It's only illegal if you eg. use macros to accelerate the rate of acquisition, tabbing between two accounts is also an accelerated rate of acquisition but perfectly legal.
Using two clients with each character using a hulk could also be determined as accelerated rate of acquisition, like i said the eula is too open ended and needs to be updated, to be honest i dont even care for the command replication options of multiboxing programs, i just like the fact that they can devide the clients to take up the space of one screen and allow me to switch between them pretty fast, but yet since thats considered part of the program its unknown if you can be banned for it.
|
Angel of Night
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 04:11:00 -
[2093]
World (and Eve) would be better place if common sense had more room in peoples brainfunctions and brains would actually function ;)
This discussion in here sometimes reminds me about a place, where microwaves come with instruction manuals explaining that it is not very healthy practice to dry a cat in this device and that to drive a car you should be sitting on front seat behind the driving wheel and check that doormat isn't in any way interfering with the pedals or it might cause unexpected termination of life in which case legal actions could not be raised against the manufacturer.
Now - is there someone who wants to try writing a manual that everyone can undestand?
I help with start of the project...
Word automatic means some event which actually isn't an event but still does something which is mentioned as unexpected action in hitchhikers guide paragraph six on page four. This can also be referred as hand of robotic intervention landing from the skies to move something what wasn't there before. However it is not actually sure except that thing which wasn't there now is there now making it really hard to deny that it isn't. For this reason this unexpected action happened without anyone doing anything to make it happen so it has to be automatic in the purest form of automaticly around.
btw... the point of this entire post was to tell CCP and new security team that they are doing kick butt job and I just wanted to say thank you - in case you didn't quite catch it from the lines above.
|
Kengutsi Akira
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 04:15:00 -
[2094]
Look first at the game you are playing before yelling at ppl about exploiting the grey area
think really hard about that ------------------------------------ "You know, my foot oughta vandilize your ass" |
Grey Stormshadow
Starwreck Industries
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 04:24:00 -
[2095]
Originally by: Kengutsi Akira Look first at the game you are playing before yelling at ppl about exploiting the grey area
think really hard about that
Well if this was ment for me... I am not yelling and perhaps you want to share bit further where are you trying to head with this comment ? ------------------------------------------------- Play with the best - die like the rest starwreck.com - support the cause :) |
Aura Kindle
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:29:00 -
[2096]
First post in this huge thread and i dont really have the time to read through 70 pages at the moment, but i think maybe everyone is focusing on what actually happens inside EVE as apposed to what happens outside of eve, which i think is what CCP should actually be doing. To clarify on what i mean, we would all love to get rid of the bots, and there seems to be 100 excellent idea's on how we can accomplish that, but that doesn't really stop or prevent the main issue as some kind of bot will always seep through the cracks.
What I feel CCP needs to essentially do, is kill the chicken by cutting off its head (and with that i mean going after the websides that actually sell the isk) instead of going after the players themselfs. Im not a lawyer, but I would take a pretty good bet, that ISK is under the interlectual copywrite protection of CCP, and use of/or selling of CCPs product is by far, break the law? in which you could im-peach every website that is selling isk to mass's as its not theirs to........sell? which breaks any copy protection law you can think of? If you stop the sites, you will essential kill of any RMT that exsist in eve would you?
If there is no means to buy isk, you simply wouldn't be able to... but i dont know how far CCP would go if they would be whilling to file suits against websites that are selling their products (if CCP isn't actually allowing them) of course if they are allowing them then all this is just hyper-critical anyway. Google isk and just see how many websites come up, its absolutely rediculas how many you can find with no effort what so ever, and it should be something CCP should strongly consider looking into.
This is just my opinion though of course which i dont think will account to much
|
Laser Purification
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:33:00 -
[2097]
CCP does aggressively go after RMT and are quick on the ban button because that impacts their profits. Whereas players by and large don't care so much (since CCP sells legal isk anyway).
This is about botting where they are a bit more ambivalent and players care more.
|
Aura Kindle
Minmatar Pator Tech School
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 05:38:00 -
[2098]
ahh okay, i saw the RMT in topic n thought i'd share my thoughts.... personally think they should go after the websites though still, would help a lot i think.
|
Malcanis
Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous Scum Alliance
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 07:49:00 -
[2099]
So would I be correct in thinking that under the proposed new regime I can bot my little heart out until I get a first warning, at which point I can just stop and keep the profits (using some of them to start up a new account to repeat the process with)?
Apart from a personal dislike of cheating, what exactly is my disincentive to make a few dozen billion ISK this way?
Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players. |
Lors Dornick
Caldari
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 08:20:00 -
[2100]
Originally by: Malcanis So would I be correct in thinking that under the proposed new regime I can bot my little heart out until I get a first warning, at which point I can just stop and keep the profits (using some of them to start up a new account to repeat the process with)?
Apart from a personal dislike of cheating, what exactly is my disincentive to make a few dozen billion ISK this way?
Note that during the presentation when they talked about the "three strikes" policy, they also added that it was the normal action, but that they where free to take any action they felt was right in each case.
So anyone banking on it being safe to bot until they get their first little slap might be in for a nasty surprise.
// Lors |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 [70] 80 .. 89 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |