isboxer isn't banned. Some of the things isboxer can do are banned.

ISBoxer isn't the only software that allows input multiplexing. Banning ISBoxer outright as the sole action of the change would just make everyone move over to another brand of software that does the same thing.

Isboxers had very little to do with isk value of plex. Well before isboxers were even noticed plex had already established a history of rising in value.

If you look at the chinese server our plex is actually way undervalued right now.



If you think banning isboxer is going to suddenly stop plex from ever rising in value you're deluded.

The idea is that logging pilots in and adjusting screens and such has no direct impact on gameplay. The actions commuted using broadcast afterwords are the issue they want to prohibit if I understand correctly.

Hello CCP,

I'm using ISboxer to ice Mine among other things such as for window management in PVP. To stay conform with the new rules regarding Multiboxing software I updated my profile. I would like to know if the following is within the rules because my understanding is that it is but I want to be sure.

http://i.imgur.com/l2LccFu.png

What I use this for and what this does is simple. Every time I click the assigned key isboxer will synchronize the mouse courser position on the next client with the main clients then click control and then issue a left mouse click. Every time I click the assigned key it will do this first for client 1->2->3->4->5->end->1->.. when it reaches the last client it will reset and start again from client 1. I use this to lock up targets from the broadcast history window. Is that legit? Given that I'm doing one action to one client at a time?

I also have a round-robin key for opening the ore hold on an active ship and every time I click it it opens the ore hold on one client same order as above 1->2->3->4->5->end->1->

My understanding is that I'm interacting with one client at a time and not sending commands to multiple clients with 1 action so it should be fine?

I have read the OP, and they are talking about the very same part of the EULA that pertains to macros and various types of hardware. So yes, they are treating the broadcast features as essentially being macros. A macro that allows for activation of multiple modules in a single client or a single module across multiple clients, it is a distinction without much meaning.

Its not it simply sends one command to one client per click which is as per CCP change within the rules. Just because you dont understand what round-robin means doesn't make it botting. Someone should maybe explain to you what botting is..




its not per click one client is doing one action... only difference when using round-robin is that instead of having to use one key for each client you can have one key for all clients and each time you hit it it sends the command to the client n+1 when it reached the last client restarts at 1... That is exactly 1 command 1 client at a time.

As was noted in the CSM Summer Summit Minutes, I pushed hard for this change and I am delighted to see it finally implemented. The grey area that was simultaneous input commands needed to be killed off and I'm over the moon to see CCP go through with it.

Are you really this dumb? How is it automation please explain to me how when I'm sitting there moving the mouse clicking the keys.. I think you seriously do not understand what automation is or even means.

So reading the Dev Blog and some of the 44pages of posts, I've probably missed one that is talking about what I'm going to write below.

If any FC Fleet warps a Fleet, they can be Banned for this as it is Navigating multiple ships through space. So how are they going to not return false positives as some Boxers have more than one squad of characters?

As far as I am aware, they don't transmit the spot that is clicked, only the action. And yes, "sometimes" people miss and such, but it will also be pretty common for people to run it like clockwork. Without isboxer I've been playing long enough for everything to pretty much be automatic.

In this instance, yes, but when you say "It's been brought up by people, who are being more than a touch disingenuous.", I imagine since I've not seen anyone else raise up fleet warp as an issue you are talking about the people suggesting that false positives will occur, which is a legitimate concern, especially considering CCPs response (or lack thereof) to people who petition after being banned in error.

Yes, they have been hacked off about the completely legitimate and explicitly allowed multiboxing application ISBoxer. But being hacked off at something doesn't mean the something is inherently wrong. Unfortunately lately it seems it means CCP will come in and nuke it without thought. People were hacked off about awoxing too. Lots of people are hacked off at wardecs, ganking, ninja salvagers and margin scammers. I suppose all of those should go too then, yes?

We'll see how happy "the player-base" (by which I mean "the vocal minority") is when they realise it doesn't suddenly mean all of the ice belts are empty of other players. They are happy right now because they think there's going to be a profound difference, which there won't be.

How would YOU detect a broadcaster?
Can you tell the difference between someone broadcasting and someone using round robin key sets?
Can you tell the difference between someone running 9 or 10 accounts, who has a highend machine with good internet and someone who is broadcasting to multiple clients via software?
Are you going to report and possibly get someone banned because YOU think he is broadcasting?

I have 9 accounts that can all do the same task very efficiently OR they can do many different tasks nearly as efficiently.
Am I multicasting or do I play my accounts as single entities, just very quickly?
Would you report me as a broadcaster / multicaster.

The simple idea CCP is accepting reports of breaches from players is going to see lots of multiboxers come under scrutiny for no other reason than - his characters all have similar names (mine don't).
Like any EULA breach, it falls on the player to prove his or her innocence, how does one go about proving he or she did not break the rules if CCP get it wrong?
EG;
CCP got it wrong, they believe I am multicasting and gave me a 30 day ban but I am not - How do I prove it is due to the amount I spent on my computer and the strength of my internet that allows me to play multiple accounts so efficiently?

funny thing though that the CSM member you refer to admits using at least 3 accounts - thus breaking his own self-esteemed rules

I am using my keyboard with windows to control my 10 boxes nearly simultainously.
no third party software involved.

what should i stop doing?

There's actually a script which can log on whole fleets too without having to use isboxer. Controlling even 20 miners manually is pretty trivial too, it's just the setup that is time consuming, so I imagine a lot of the time you guys see ISBoxers they are simply multiboxers. At fanfest CCP said the number of false reports at the moment is exceedingly high as you can imagine.