But it is okay to farm with Moon Mining 25bil a month just by doing 1-2 hours logistic movements? At least he spend 40 hours to earn the ISK.

How can you even write this and act like it's correct?

The guy has 25bil left over to do with what he wishes, he has no obligation to spend it on each of the characters evenly.

Can you make 25bil in 40 hours?

OK? We were talking about someone buying it off the market with ISK to renew their subscription,

How about this. If someone who multi-boxes with ISboxer using 8+ boxes can make a video of themselves using the same amount of boxes just as well without using ISboxer, doing anything that requires shooting guns, I will admit ISboxer is not a problem.

All I want is two videos. One with ISboxer, one without, doing the same activity with the same amount of boxes (8+).

If it really is just as easy to multibox without ISboxer, than this should be no problem.

You don't need that much. All you need is the owner/maker of the game to tell you that it's ok.

CCP said it's ok and it's their game, end of story.

How can you even write this and act like it's correct?

The guy has 25bil left over to do with what he wishes, he has no obligation to spend it on each of the characters evenly.

Can you make 25bil in 40 hours?

I'm totally cheating because I send billions from my industry alt to my PvP alt.

Ban me CCP I'm making my PvP character gain Isk at an ill proportionate rate.

And honestly another great reason to fix the war dec system. It would be exceedingly simple to kill someone running 10 clients in an incursion.

You don't need that much. All you need is the owner/maker of the game to tell you that it's ok.

CCP said it's ok and it's their game, end of story.

Sure, If one of the owners says its okay and that is a official statement from CCP, not a GM, then I might accept it. Until then we, as players, will consider it a exploit, equal with botting.

Accually they have said they don't recommend anyone use it as it is not officially supported, but thats not what I'm after. Everyone using it states it is just as easy to multibox without ISBoxer because it gives "no advantage." I would like someone to prove it.

EDIT (Source):

From ISBoxers own site (CCPs official statement)



Notice how it says nothing about click multiplation (which is why ISBoxer is used), only multiboxing. In my opinion, ISBoxer makes it go "Beyond Multiboxing"

Sure, If one of the owners says its okay and that is a official statement from CCP, not a GM, then I might accept it. Until then we, as players, will consider it a exploit, equal with botting.

I underlined the important part. You are entitled to your opinion however your opinion is demonstrably incorrect. CCP knows about ISBoxer, the very portion of the statement you copied proves that it's ok.

I think you are having a hard time understanding that your dislike of something (in this case ISBoxer) doesn't make it cheating according to the people actually in charge. As I said, you are free to dislike that, but the only people who are important in this matter are CCP.

Truthfully I don't understand the dislike of other people using it. I'd use it if it were less tedious but when i double and triple box I just use ships with FoF missiles or sentries to support my main ship. An ex-corp mate of mine from when i was briefly in TEST multiboxed 10 nagas while ratting. I think it's pretty cool to be able to do that. I don't see what the big deal is.

You seem to think I have a problem with multiboxing. I don't. ISBoxer allowes you to control multiple toons through only accually controling one. Therefor, the effort v. reward ballance is broken, making it too easy to control 10+ boxes. How is that not "messing with our process?" Maybe not cheating as far as hacking or botting, but it does give an unfair advantage.

It's not an unfair advantage. CCP tolerates isboxer, which means not only is it not cheating, you can do it too if you please.

Isboxer dones't modify the EVE process (executable) so it's legal. Again, you can think it's unfair all you like, I don't. Niether your opinon or mine means anything, the maker/owner of the game says it's ok.

Where do you think that PLEX came from in the first place? Yes, someone bought hat PLEX from CCP earlier.

Bullshit. Power of two and other bonus programms encourage more then one account.
Speculating dont work here. Just ask them directly ccp wont answer here

If you want to stop the ISBoxer's CCP put a mechanic in place to do exactly that. It's called the bounty system place a bounty in excess of 100bill on each box, when a gank kills his ship worth 5 to 6 billion they get paid. When you include the possible drop it makes the ganks profitable even with a worse case scenario.

You evidently don't understand the bounty system, but w/e

A far better solution would be for CCP to make PVE less brain-dead.

Yes, and that person gave CCP money, not the one who bought it on the in-game market; it's incorrect to assume that someone will go out and buy another PLEX from CCP because one was removed from the market. This is basic ****; you really need to **** off if you don't get it.

You can buy PLEX directly from CCP.

Directly.

from.

CCP

Yes, and that person gave CCP money, not the one who bought it on the in-game market; it's incorrect to assume that someone will go out and buy another PLEX from CCP because one was removed from the market. This is basic ****; you really need to **** off if you don't get it.

You evidently don't understand the bounty system, but w/e

A far better solution would be for CCP to make PVE less brain-dead.

Well, Byerley. So this is where you scuttled off to after I chased you out of GD. I see you still don't understand economics either.

The changing of hands of who purchased the timecard is also irrelevant.

Also, if you actually take the time to track it, the supply of PLEX is actually pretty constant, so yes, the supply will refresh itself.

Never going to happen. There are better things to spend dev time on than missions.

Which is why they've upgraded the AI and literally just finished making profession sites feedback cycle dependent.

You have precisely 0 non-anecdotal evidence that it's sensitive to in-game market demand.

They didn't upgrade the AI in the way you're meaning. They pretty much copied a better AI they had in use in the game already. Oh, and, within weeks, people had already gotten the "more advanced" AI cracked.

And ok, so profession sites equal improving missions... how? Furthermore, I'd love to know what monolithic leap you made to assume that because they fixed exploration and simplified probing, that they are going to throw more money down the dusthole trying to make missioning anything more than the grind it is.

Oh, ok, so PLEX is completely a special case, and is the only item in the game (Besides maybe a Revenant) that doesn't respond to the market, right? How do you make stuff like this up? Honestly, you should write children's books with that kind of imagination.