Isboxer allows a person to farm with far more accounts than they would normally be able to handle, it allows them to farm for much longer periods without becoming too stressed and earn a lot more isk.

Botting allows a person to farm with far more accounts than they would normally be able to handle, it allows them to farm for much longer periods without becoming too stressed and earn a lot more isk.

Why is Isboxer allowed? It's just another form of botting.

Last English statement I saw on ISBoxer by CCP was that they would neither confirm or deny if ISBoxer was strictly speaking allowed instead referring to the EULA.
Some ISBoxer functions 100% break the EULA, as it allows macro recording. Which comes under Botting.
The client 'modification' it does to display several clients in one window is edge case.
As is the click propagation. Since there is an argument that it allows accelerated clicking compared to not using the program, since you couldn't click 15/100 clients manually as fast as you can with ISBoxer.

TLDR version
Under a strict interpretation of the EULA, ISBoxer should actually be illegal, but CCP have decided to let it slide. Much like Cache scrapping.

Isboxer allows accelerated clicking across many clients, thank you. It is the software that is sending the commands to the other 19 EVE clients. Without the isboxer software, a player can not click and command 20 eve clients at the same time.

It's obvious why this should not be allowed, it's a software advantage. The player should try to control all 20 eve accounts without isboxer, but he won't because it's impossible to do that efficiently for any length of time.

Isboxer is a software advantage and should be against the Eula.

Isboxer is a software advantage and should be against the Eula.

Someone with 40 accounts who pays them nothing isn't good for CCP

So you don't put any actual money into EVE, yet you think you are helping EVE just because you use plex that someone else bought?

...and probably because CCP likes the extra account you need

Then the same argument could be used to legalize botting

More accounts = More subs for CCP
More subs for CCP = More profit for CCP
More profit for CCP = More side projects to spend Eve profit on

Isboxer allows accelerated clicking across many clients, thank you. It is the software that is sending the commands to the other 19 EVE clients. Without the isboxer software, a player can not click and command 20 eve clients at the same time.

It's obvious why this should not be allowed, it's a software advantage. The player should try to control all 20 eve accounts without isboxer, but he won't because it's impossible to do that efficiently for any length of time.

Isboxer is a software advantage and should be against the Eula.

Someone here mentioned plexes... Yeah - I think people with multiple side accounts do help to raise the price of those. 10+ clients opened give you great (and also rare) advantage over a player that doesn't use them. You generate more profit and can turn that into plex, while someone else is not able to do it.

But that's the thing, 10 IsBoxer accounts only generate the same profit as 10 normal accounts. So although 1 person might make more isk they still have 10 accounts to pay for. So really, what's the difference?

Okay, so how does that hold up against this statement from a GM (from 2010):



To me that says that having the program replicate your input to a bunch of other clients is not allowed. Because in all cases except the source client, the program is automating those commands for you, despite you giving the initial command. To me that seems no different than programming a bot and hitting 'start'. The result is the same; namely a bunch of actions being performed that require no further user input where it normally would.

I can see the benefits of having stuff from multiple clients on one screen, but 1 click replicating to multiple clients is a form of automation and clearly not allowed.

I'm not trying to attack you either, just trying to understand how the automation side of multiboxing programs is perceived to be legal while it clearly isn't.

Edit: though I have to admit, that statement of CCP is confusing. 'manually issue the same command to multiple game clients at the same time' is extremely vague and at the same time contradicted by 'if a program is automating those commands for you, then it would be considered a breach of our EULA'. One can not be done without the other.

programs designed for multiboxing in mind which allow a player to manually issue the same command to multiple game clients at the same time are allowed.

Isboxer allows accelerated clicking across many clients, thank you. It is the software that is sending the commands to the other 19 EVE clients. Without the isboxer software, a player can not click and command 20 eve clients at the same time.

It's obvious why this should not be allowed, it's a software advantage. The player should try to control all 20 eve accounts without isboxer, but he won't because it's impossible to do that efficiently for any length of time.

Isboxer is a software advantage and should be against the Eula.

It gives people who use it a huge advantage over those who don't use the software. The damage done by an isboxer with many accounts is at least equal to or perhaps greater than the damage done by a botter.

All ISboxer is, is real-time botting.

You play one account and 19 others are automated.

GǪexcept that no automation is happening.

It is a real time macro, you give the commands to one account.

You al need to quit crying and help CCP out by buying more accounts.

Teared up soloists spinning in stations don't so squat for the game, fleets of ships doing things create content.

GǪexcept that no automation is happening.

The software automates one button push to 19 other clients.

Nope. The software mirrors non-automated input.

Without manual input, nothing happens, because no automation is going on. No matter how angry you get over this issue and no matter how much you try to redefine the terms, this very simple fact remains.