Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 2 post(s) |
thebarry
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:33:00 -
[31] - Quote
Domina Trix wrote:thebarry wrote:Apparently CCP is no longer tolerating use of the multi-boxing software known as ISBoxer, or any other for that matter. I learned yesterday that accounts which were using it are being banned and was pretty concerned since I had just purchased the software about 2 weeks ago and rather enjoyed it. More disturbing was that I had to learn this from a friend...I had no idea that they had stopped allowing it at all since there were no notifications of this policy change that I know of. Anyways, I don't have a ton of accounts like some do, but even I will be shutting down at least one of them, possibly two. It just seems odd for a company that encourages multiboxing with Power of Two promotions to then outlaw the use of programs that make running these extra accounts so much less cumbersome.
CCP if you are going to have a policy change like this you should at least let people know with some kind of obvious warning, so that we don't get banned for using a program that was acceptable in the past! You say that as if multi-boxing being banned is a bad thing, hell, even Blizzard have just stopped it working in WoW.
Do you think multiboxing being banned would be a good thing? I know very few people who have been playing this game for a long time who do not have at least two accounts... |
thebarry
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:36:00 -
[32] - Quote
Abrazzar wrote:thebarry wrote:Abrazzar wrote:Jason Xado wrote:This feels like rumour spreading.
Nothing CCP has said has indicated using ISBoxer to duplicate keystrokes to multiple clients is against the rules.
I will continue to use ISBoxer until such time as CCP says to stop. Have they ever explicitly stated that it is within the rules and EULA? Yes, they have said as long as you are at the keyboard controlling the clients, even if you are using program like synergy to broadcast to multiple computers, that this is not botting(and it isn't) and is not a banable offense. There was a guy who taped together a bunch of mice and keyboards to prove that he could just do that to control multiple clients at once, but that it is obviously quite silly not to use a program that does the same thing more effectively, and ccp agreed at the time and allowed synergy and isboxer etc. So it is not a grey area and people will not suddenly get banned for it without an official statement (i.e. devblog) beforehand. I'd say this concludes the /thread.
That's what they have said in the past, that is not what I am hearing now, and they have modified the original post where they said it was OK... |
Rengerel en Distel
Amarr Science and Industry
1275
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:39:00 -
[33] - Quote
thebarry wrote:Domina Trix wrote:thebarry wrote:Apparently CCP is no longer tolerating use of the multi-boxing software known as ISBoxer, or any other for that matter. I learned yesterday that accounts which were using it are being banned and was pretty concerned since I had just purchased the software about 2 weeks ago and rather enjoyed it. More disturbing was that I had to learn this from a friend...I had no idea that they had stopped allowing it at all since there were no notifications of this policy change that I know of. Anyways, I don't have a ton of accounts like some do, but even I will be shutting down at least one of them, possibly two. It just seems odd for a company that encourages multiboxing with Power of Two promotions to then outlaw the use of programs that make running these extra accounts so much less cumbersome.
CCP if you are going to have a policy change like this you should at least let people know with some kind of obvious warning, so that we don't get banned for using a program that was acceptable in the past! You say that as if multi-boxing being banned is a bad thing, hell, even Blizzard have just stopped it working in WoW. Do you think multiboxing being banned would be a good thing? I know very few people who have been playing this game for a long time who do not have at least two accounts...
There is quite a bit of difference between multi-boxing and having multiple accounts. That said, i think one of your first responses was the correct one, that you'll only get banned if you have the bot extension from ISBoxer.
With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
|
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
8
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:51:00 -
[34] - Quote
thebarry wrote:
Do you think multiboxing being banned would be a good thing? I know very few people who have been playing this game for a long time who do not have at least two accounts...
Do you think one player multiboxing an orca and a handful of mining barges and doing what is intended to be a corporate activity in a multiplayer game is a good thing?
FYI more than one account =/= multiboxing. Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them. |
thebarry
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 11:56:00 -
[35] - Quote
Domina Trix wrote:thebarry wrote:
Do you think multiboxing being banned would be a good thing? I know very few people who have been playing this game for a long time who do not have at least two accounts...
Do you think one player multiboxing an orca and a handful of mining barges and doing what is intended to be a corporate activity in a multiplayer game is a good thing? FYI more than one account =/= multiboxing.
I think that's fine...perhaps you aren't aware that many ppl will pvp with their friends in low/null but carebear by themselves in high sec with alts for the isk they need to pvp. |
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
227
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:02:00 -
[36] - Quote
Tom Gerard wrote:ISBoxer is the only way market prices are as low as they are, if they ban it the 23/7 ACTIVE players will depart. Prices will go up, all will be tears. Macroing is not a black or white issue, hurting Macros hurts everyone.
Confirmed botter. Not today spaghetti. |
|
ISD Suvetar
ISD Community Communications Liaisons
1962
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:06:00 -
[37] - Quote
Hi Guys,
I've trimmed this thread slightly.
As CCP Eterne has stated, they are still discussing this internally and that your feedback is appreciated; so please leave feedback and not turn this into another big argument about whether or not its right or wrong.
This has consistently led to arguments and trolling.
Now's your time to make your points constructively, so please do so without resorting to attacking each other about it!
Thanks. ISD Suvetar Captain Community Communication Liaisons (CCLs) Interstellar Services Department |
|
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
8
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:07:00 -
[38] - Quote
thebarry wrote:Domina Trix wrote:thebarry wrote:
Do you think multiboxing being banned would be a good thing? I know very few people who have been playing this game for a long time who do not have at least two accounts...
Do you think one player multiboxing an orca and a handful of mining barges and doing what is intended to be a corporate activity in a multiplayer game is a good thing? FYI more than one account =/= multiboxing. I think that's fine...perhaps you aren't aware that many ppl will pvp with their friends in low/null but carebear by themselves in high sec with alts for the isk they need to pvp.
Or they actually play with other players and generate their ISK in null/low while at the same time contributing to the economy there...yeah I know silly idea they would rather play a single player game up in hi-sec and complain that there are not enough people down in low/null and industry down there is fubar...
Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them. |
Randi Fleetstalker
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:08:00 -
[39] - Quote
Greetings! Disclosure: I wrote ISBoxer.
Lelouch edited that post a month ago! People are just noticing now because CCP has started specifically targeting various bots with detection mechanisms. Some people who use bots also happen to use ISBoxer, and naturally anyone who is caught red handed with their cheating is going to try to pretend they were just using ISBoxer and no hacks.
If they meant to ban ISBoxer, then why would they not just say that in one of the many multiboxing threads since the edit? Probably because they are not specifically banning for ISBoxer. They are banning for bots; if you're worried about the changes, the solution is simple: STOP BOTTING/HACKING. (And that has nothing to do with ISBoxer...)
Another thing to remember is that back in 2008 or so with World of Warcraft, Blizzard started detecting and banning bots, similar to what CCP is currently doing. Through discussions with Blizzard at the time, they basically agreed that they could work on the bots without banning Inner Space, and they would much rather have multiboxers than botters -- wouldn't you? And, frankly, there's a lot more interest in multiboxing than botting, simply for the fact that people don't want their accounts banned.
Besides, people claiming to just be using ISBoxer when they're hacking/botting, are attacking ISBoxer. These are not my friends... |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13251
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:12:00 -
[40] - Quote
Tom Gerard wrote:ISBoxer is the only way market prices are as low as they are, if they ban it the 23/7 ACTIVE players will depart. Good.
Quote:Prices will go up, all will be tears. -á remain the same, and actual people get to earn the ISK Fixed. And good.
Quote:Macroing is not a black or white issue, hurting Macros hurts everyone. Incorrect in every way. Macroing is a very simple issue: hurting macros hurts no-one and helps everyone.
Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
|
Kyra Quinn
Federation of Elsinore
17
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:25:00 -
[41] - Quote
I don't have experience with it in this game (I've not seen someone doing it) but I HAVE seen it in other MMOs. Here's my newbie view on it:
If someone wants to run 17 accounts then by all means go ahead, as long as he controls those 17 accounts in person. The second you automate it (and ISBoxer does automate, it relays your input to other accounts) is where it's just wrong. It breaks immersion to see 6 Mages run around doing the exact same thing as if they were radio controlled, it looks wrong, it feels wrong and it is wrong. In an MMO it's kinda backwards to allow ways of playing that exclude the need for others and while that could also extend to using more than one account at least then the player has to divide his attention between them meaning there's a disadvantage to it.
A company that allows stuff like ISBoxer is effectively stating they're ok with lowering the quality of their game towards "real" players, just like botting in that respect. The adventures of a newbie: http://kyraquinn.wordpress.com/ |
Signal11th
The Retirement Club
929
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:28:00 -
[42] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Tom Gerard wrote:ISBoxer is the only way market prices are as low as they are, if they ban it the 23/7 ACTIVE players will depart. Good. Quote:Prices will go up, all will be tears. -á remain the same, and actual people get to earn the ISK Fixed. And good. Quote:Macroing is not a black or white issue, hurting Macros hurts everyone. Incorrect in every way. Macroing is a very simple issue: hurting macros hurts no-one and helps everyone.
Jesus I actually agree, I need a lie down now..
If you want to run mutiple accounts you should just accept it will be a ball ache, if you dont want the ball-ache don't run mutiple accounts.
I run a few manually and it's a ball-ache but I accept that. God Said "Come Forth and receive eternal life!" I came fifth and won a toaster. |
Colonel Xaven
Decadence. RAZOR Alliance
257
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:40:00 -
[43] - Quote
Jason Xado wrote:This feels like rumour spreading.
Nothing CCP has said has indicated using ISBoxer to duplicate keystrokes to multiple clients is against the rules.
I will continue to use ISBoxer until such time as CCP says to stop.
You probably should read the EULA Section 6 A:
Quote:2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
www.facebook.com/RazorAlliance |
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 12:57:00 -
[44] - Quote
Kyra Quinn wrote:I don't have experience with it in this game (I've not seen someone doing it) but I HAVE seen it in other MMOs. Here's my newbie view on it:
If someone wants to run 17 accounts then by all means go ahead, as long as he controls those 17 accounts in person. The second you automate it (and ISBoxer does automate, it relays your input to other accounts) is where it's just wrong. It breaks immersion to see 6 Mages run around doing the exact same thing as if they were radio controlled, it looks wrong, it feels wrong and it is wrong. In an MMO it's kinda backwards to allow ways of playing that exclude the need for others and while that could also extend to using more than one account at least then the player has to divide his attention between them meaning there's a disadvantage to it.
A company that allows stuff like ISBoxer is effectively stating they're ok with lowering the quality of their game towards "real" players, just like botting in that respect. Automation is not the same as duplication. Most use of ISBoxer is duplication, and that is what CCP allows. CCP does not allow automation. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13256
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:01:00 -
[45] - Quote
Colonel Xaven wrote:Jason Xado wrote:This feels like rumour spreading.
Nothing CCP has said has indicated using ISBoxer to duplicate keystrokes to multiple clients is against the rules.
I will continue to use ISBoxer until such time as CCP says to stop. You probably should read the EULA Section 6 A: Quote:2. You may not use your own or third-party software to modify any content appearing within the Game environment or change how the Game is played.
GǪand ISBoxer does none of that, which is why CCP has quite expressly allowed it. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Doc Severide
Caldari Provisions Caldari State
11
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:03:00 -
[46] - Quote
I always thought multi-boxing referred to sex with 2 women at once... |
Kyra Quinn
Federation of Elsinore
19
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:04:00 -
[47] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Kyra Quinn wrote:I don't have experience with it in this game (I've not seen someone doing it) but I HAVE seen it in other MMOs. Here's my newbie view on it:
If someone wants to run 17 accounts then by all means go ahead, as long as he controls those 17 accounts in person. The second you automate it (and ISBoxer does automate, it relays your input to other accounts) is where it's just wrong. It breaks immersion to see 6 Mages run around doing the exact same thing as if they were radio controlled, it looks wrong, it feels wrong and it is wrong. In an MMO it's kinda backwards to allow ways of playing that exclude the need for others and while that could also extend to using more than one account at least then the player has to divide his attention between them meaning there's a disadvantage to it.
A company that allows stuff like ISBoxer is effectively stating they're ok with lowering the quality of their game towards "real" players, just like botting in that respect. Automation is not the same as duplication. Most use of ISBoxer is duplication, and that is what CCP allows. CCP does not allow automation. It automatically copies your input over to other clients without further action from the user, I'd say that's automation.
The adventures of a newbie: http://kyraquinn.wordpress.com/ |
thebarry
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:07:00 -
[48] - Quote
Signal11th wrote:Tippia wrote:Tom Gerard wrote:ISBoxer is the only way market prices are as low as they are, if they ban it the 23/7 ACTIVE players will depart. Good. Quote:Prices will go up, all will be tears. -á remain the same, and actual people get to earn the ISK Fixed. And good. Quote:Macroing is not a black or white issue, hurting Macros hurts everyone. Incorrect in every way. Macroing is a very simple issue: hurting macros hurts no-one and helps everyone. Jesus I actually agree, I need a lie down now.. If you want to run mutiple accounts you should just accept it will be a ball ache, if you dont want the ball-ache don't run mutiple accounts. I run a few manually and it's a ball-ache but I accept that.
I too have run multiple accounts without ISBoxer and wish I'd been using it a long time ago. When I ran multiple accounts without isboxer it generally consisted of me using fixed windows, setting up every window identically and then rapidly alt+tabing through the clients as I clicked the same spot on the screen over and over across the clients. It was needlessly mundane and tedious compared to just broadcasting the commands to all the clients at once, and it is enough to severely limit the number of accounts you can run at one time. IMO one of the main benefits of using isboxer is allowing you to actually see all your clients at one time, even tho they all might be in small windows it helps tremendously, and that has nothing to do with broadcasting. You could do the same basic thing if you wanted to spend thousands of dollars on monitors and spare computers to display all the clients on them, but isn't that a bit silly when isboxer does this pretty well on just one or two monitors?
I think the fundamental question is whether or not CCP actually wants people to multibox. If they do then obviously they should allow multi-client software like isboxer which makes it easier to run the clients. I think the benefits of the increased revenue from the extra clients far outweighs any negatives...then again, I really can't think of any negatives. Can you think of a single instance where someone running many clients just really messed up the game for you? The most extreme example I know of is that guy who runs dozens and dozens of mining barges, and I just don't see how him mining the crap out of ice really hurts the game. There was another guy who ran all those drakes, and again, I'm not sure how running the hell out of a mission or pvping with them would really damage the game. Sure his drakeswarm might kill you but then again you and your friends might kill a small fleet of drakes(pvping with isboxer is pretty rough btw, I've tried it with just 3 dps chars and while it does work, any minor mistake you make is multiplied across all of the clients...it's not nearly as awesome as you might think). |
sYnc Vir
Wolfsbrigade Lost Obsession
501
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:12:00 -
[49] - Quote
Kyra Quinn wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Kyra Quinn wrote:I don't have experience with it in this game (I've not seen someone doing it) but I HAVE seen it in other MMOs. Here's my newbie view on it:
If someone wants to run 17 accounts then by all means go ahead, as long as he controls those 17 accounts in person. The second you automate it (and ISBoxer does automate, it relays your input to other accounts) is where it's just wrong. It breaks immersion to see 6 Mages run around doing the exact same thing as if they were radio controlled, it looks wrong, it feels wrong and it is wrong. In an MMO it's kinda backwards to allow ways of playing that exclude the need for others and while that could also extend to using more than one account at least then the player has to divide his attention between them meaning there's a disadvantage to it.
A company that allows stuff like ISBoxer is effectively stating they're ok with lowering the quality of their game towards "real" players, just like botting in that respect. Automation is not the same as duplication. Most use of ISBoxer is duplication, and that is what CCP allows. CCP does not allow automation. It automatically copies your input over to other clients without further action from the user, I'd say that's automation.
Well you would say that, but you would be wrong. That's okay, being wrong about something is fine. ISBoxer is legal, does not automate, does not earn players isk faster, does not make the game different from normal.
The only reason i see people hating on ISBoxer is because they see a mining fleet and think its bad one person can do that with ISBoxer. News flash, a person could run a 50 man Ice mining fleet easily enough without ISBoxer, at the same isk per hour. Its not hard at all.
I personally use ISBoxer to Quad boxer mission run, as well as Ore mine, and manage screen real estate. I earn no more isk then I would alt tabbing.
Time people got over it. Its fine until CCP decide otherwise. Don't ask about Italics, just tilt your head. |
Mara Rinn
Cosmic Goo Convertor Cosmic Consortium
3181
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:18:00 -
[50] - Quote
The rules are quite clear: if you use some mechanism to advance in the game faster than "normal game play", you are guilty of automation. To me it is clear that using automation to press 40 keys instantly (instead of pressing those 40 keys individually) is a violation of those rules. That is what keystroke broadcasting does: whether it's hardware (e.g.: skewers taped to the buttons of a dozen mice) or software (e.g.: ISBoxer) is irrelevant.
Being able to harvest ice with 40 mackinaws in the same number of keystrokes that it takes any person playing the game normally to harvest ice with one is clearly using a third party tool to gain advantage over normal game play.
The brute force advantage of being able to fly 15 Caracals against the enemy fleet of two caracals is quite clear: using the one stone you've killed the two birds of superior numbers and coordinated fire. The answer to nano ships wasn't to make everyone fly nano ships, the answer was to nerf nano ships. The answer to 15 ship solo player fleets is not to have everyone buy more accounts and learn to use ISBoxer: then you're no longer playing EVE Online, you are playing "competitive ISBoxer subscription".
If you want to multibox, learn to cope with the need to send each client individual actions. The short version is that if you can't manage your collection of clients without software assistance, you are using software assistance to automate your gameplay. I would draw the line at keyboard/mouse sharing tools such as Synergy (without the keystroke broadcasting support) which allow you to use the one keyboard and mouse to control multiple computers (effectively turning extra computers into multiple screens).
With apologies to people like Zhek Kromtor, while the technical input into multiboxing ranges from interesting to amazing (monofilament supports for multiple screens to reduce visual clutter of the room? very impressive), what keystroke-broadcasting multiboxers are doing provides a competitive advantage over normal game play and should be stopped. There will no doubt be mass unsubscriptions as those 1% of players unsubscribe their 10-30 accounts which they cannot hope to control without the aid of a software tool.
Day 0 advice for new players: Day 0 Advice for New Players |
|
Primary This Rifter
Imperial Academy Amarr Empire
2
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:24:00 -
[51] - Quote
Kyra Quinn wrote:It automatically copies your input over to other clients without further action from the user, I'd say that's automation.
Sorry, you don't get to just redefine words to suit your argument. Yes, I'm an alt. Congratulations. |
thebarry
SniggWaffe YOUR VOTES DON'T COUNT
7
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:25:00 -
[52] - Quote
Mara Rinn wrote:The rules are quite clear: if you use some mechanism to advance in the game faster than "normal game play", you are guilty of automation. To me it is clear that using automation to press 40 keys instantly (instead of pressing those 40 keys individually) is a violation of those rules. That is what keystroke broadcasting does: whether it's hardware (e.g.: skewers taped to the buttons of a dozen mice) or software (e.g.: ISBoxer) is irrelevant.
Being able to harvest ice with 40 mackinaws in the same number of keystrokes that it takes any person playing the game normally to harvest ice with one is clearly using a third party tool to gain advantage over normal game play.
The brute force advantage of being able to fly 15 Caracals against the enemy fleet of two caracals is quite clear: using the one stone you've killed the two birds of superior numbers and coordinated fire. The answer to nano ships wasn't to make everyone fly nano ships, the answer was to nerf nano ships. The answer to 15 ship solo player fleets is not to have everyone buy more accounts and learn to use ISBoxer: then you're no longer playing EVE Online, you are playing "competitive ISBoxer subscription".
If you want to multibox, learn to cope with the need to send each client individual actions. The short version is that if you can't manage your collection of clients without software assistance, you are using software assistance to automate your gameplay. I would draw the line at keyboard/mouse sharing tools such as Synergy (without the keystroke broadcasting support) which allow you to use the one keyboard and mouse to control multiple computers (effectively turning extra computers into multiple screens).
With apologies to people like Zhek Kromtor, while the technical input into multiboxing ranges from interesting to amazing (monofilament supports for multiple screens to reduce visual clutter of the room? very impressive), what keystroke-broadcasting multiboxers are doing provides a competitive advantage over normal game play and should be stopped. There will no doubt be mass unsubscriptions as those 1% of players unsubscribe their 10-30 accounts which they cannot hope to control without the aid of a software tool.
So why would doing it with hardware be worse than with software? That is a point that Zhek made when he rigged those mice and keyboards together. Multiboxing does give a competitive advantage, with or without broadcasting, so again, the real question is whether or not multiboxing is desirable. IMO it certainly is. |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
13256
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:26:00 -
[53] - Quote
Kyra Quinn wrote:It automatically copies your input over to other clients without further action from the user, I'd say that's automation. Rest assured: it isn't. It still requires constant and continuous input from the user and it does absolutely nothing on its own. Thus, no automation.
Mara Rinn wrote:The rules are quite clear: if you use some mechanism to advance in the game faster than "normal game play", you are guilty of automation. GǪexcept that multiboxing doesn't do that: it only lets you play the game at normal speed; it doesn't advance you any more than anyone else who's doing the same thing. In fact, in many ways it's a lot worse than doing it individually since you can't direct each client according to its specific needs.
Oh, and that's not automation regardless. Vote Malcanis for CSM8. |
Alternate Poster
Blatant Tax Avoidance Victrix Mortalis
25
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:30:00 -
[54] - Quote
Some of you guys could just stop occupying one of your hands with non-EVE related activities, then you wouldn't need these extra tools. |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
675
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:39:00 -
[55] - Quote
Sab Sab Five wrote:this must be why we say "the whole truth, and nothing but the truth" in US courts after also leading with "truth".
never trust an american, they might be telling the truth, a half truth, or nothing of the truth.
Some countries added a counter to that but in the end it's the same "truth and nothing but the truth" with some mention stating omissions of facts directly or indirectly related to [put whatever you want] are a voluntary will to hide the bad part or arrange the real truth and therefore the first argument part becomes null because incomplete. And this can cost a little bit (from a couple months of prison+several thousands of $ for making fun of justice), however it's up to the defender to prove this voluntary omission (some times justice it self has to). *removed inappropriate ASCII art signature* - CCP Eterne |
Infinite Force
Hammer Of Light Covenant of the Phoenix Alliance
608
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:44:00 -
[56] - Quote
Wow .. What is this, the 50th thread on this in the past month?? People really need to get a life and stop botting.
isBoxer is not going to get you banned and I would fully expect CCP to give everyone a big heads-up before they took that action.
Any one remember this thread from last year?? isBoxer has been around a long time now.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=847111#post847111 - that's my specific response. There are a few other good posts in there with official GM responses as well.
Read the _whole_ thing with all the references and get panties out of a bunch. HROLT CEO Live Free; Die Proud
Hammer Mineral Compression - The only way to go! |
Felicity Love
STARKRAFT
330
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:44:00 -
[57] - Quote
... donates the obligatory and customary "EVE IS DYING" content to this thread....
Proud Beta Tester for "Bumping Uglies for Dummies" |
Arcaus Rotrau Romali
Apex Nebula Ventures
30
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:49:00 -
[58] - Quote
I'm unfamiliar with ISBoxer, does it send the same player inputs to every instance of the game running or does it allow you to run each instance separately? |
Din Chao
185
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 13:57:00 -
[59] - Quote
thebarry wrote:Do you think multiboxing being banned would be a good thing? I know very few people who have been playing this game for a long time who do not have at least two accounts... Nobody said ban multiboxing. Just software that allows you to simultaneously control as many accounts as your hardware can handle while only performing the necessary keystrokes once. I've had 2 accounts for years so I can train more than 1 character for different goals at the same time, which is what most people use multiple accounts for. |
|
CCP Eterne
C C P C C P Alliance
2237
|
Posted - 2013.03.15 14:08:00 -
[60] - Quote
Locking this thread for rumor mongering. Our policy on this has not changed since yesterday. New Eden Community Representative GÇ+ New Eden Illuminati GÇ+ Fiction Adept
@CCP_Eterne GÇ+ @EVE_LiveEvents |
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |