EVE Search - Announcement:Update regarding Multiboxing and input automation

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Announcement:Update regarding Multiboxing and input automation

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 9 post(s)
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 213	Posted - 2014.11.26 10:35:44 - [1] - Quote I don't think detecting broadcasts from good logs will be hard. If it is done properly that is. And all the people i know that isbox have no intention of cheating. They love playing eve. And please don't start with the "but it is cheating", you probably think that anyone with more accounts than you is cheating, that anyone that has more isk that you is cheating etc...... As for extra local software to catch people. Well i run wine on linux, i have 2 account and thinking of a third. I don't use isboxer because i am on linux. In fact every instance of eve is run on a fresh instance of wine. So as far as eve the client can tell, it is on a windows machine with absolutely nothing else running on the machine. There are quite a lot of us out there. And even some of the eve devs are on linux, running eve. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 217	Posted - 2014.12.08 13:56:58 - [2] - Quote I can't tell if people are being serious or not. I could trivially control 20 freighters with alt tab all traveling different routes. You have a minute between warps. Mining is even easier and more trivial. 20 accounts with nothing but alt tab would be easy. While you can multibox there will be fleets of miners under the control of one person. Now in PvP that would get pretty tricky. As for these vast fleets of PvP isboxers, please show me them (i think in the last thread one one person could be shown to have done anything in the last 3 months! ). Fact is they don't exist. There is a very small number of people doing the 20+ account thing. Most of us are doing the 3-5 account thing. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 217	Posted - 2014.12.09 15:33:36 - [3] - Quote Yea and then ban mulitboxing cus it should only be one person one account. And ban battleships cus they kill me all the time, and ban plex, cus its not fair that others get an advantage that i don't have. And ban corps since i don't have friends and well that makes it unfair to me against people who do have friends. Multiboxing will never be banned for the very simple reason that entire ships classes are based around them. And well then your splitting hairs on a multiboxing tool and a OS. Linux lets you set up isboxer like features out of the box. If you want a perfectly even playing field, there is always chess and go. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 218	Posted - 2014.12.09 15:47:33 - [4] - Quote Enteron Anabente wrote: Hi there, I was directed to this thread by a GM when I petitioned to ask the following question--can one of the GMs or devs clarify this for me? Back in 2010 GM Lelouch posted: "'macros' which allow you to group different commands into one keypress are allowed. For example, setting your G1 key to press F1, F2, F3 and so on for you with one key press is allowed (although this specific command is not as useful as it was before now that we have weapon grouping)." source: http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=topic&threadID=1291641&page=10#274 I would like clarification on whether this ruling still stands. Specifically, is it still allowable to use a keyboard macro to activate multiple modules (within a single client) simultaneously: for example, to activate a set of hardeners, reps (remote or local), smartbombs, etc., since these modules cannot be grouped? Please note that I am referring to actions that affect only one client. This is not a multiboxing use-case. Thanks! A relevant follow up is what about programmable keyboards and mice that allow you to do this? Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 218	Posted - 2014.12.09 23:22:31 - [5] - Quote It is very clear what is and what is not legal. You just don't like it. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 218	Posted - 2014.12.09 23:31:27 - [6] - Quote Nidal Fervor wrote: Round Robin is still input broadcasting. If you want to test CCP go ahead and use it. Be sure to whine a lot when you are banned so we can all laugh at you for it. It was made clear, it doesn't matter what method you use to achieve it, it is not allowed. How is it broadcasting? A single key is pressed and a single keypress is sent to a single client. No broadcast there. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 223	Posted - 2014.12.10 18:42:56 - [7] - Quote Jason Xado wrote: CCP Falcon has already stated in other forums that he doesn't like multiboxing and would prefer every character to be controlled by just one player. Citation required. There are ships that need you to have multiple accounts to be remotely playable. Unless titan pilots only log in for 5 mins a month to bridge someone, it is expected that they have sitters and cynos and stuff. I can F1-TAB-F1-TAB-F1 as fast as i can just hit F1 many times. I don't need isboxer for round robin. I don't need anything other than a machine that is good enough to play many clients. Multiboxing is going nowhere. It is right there in the OP. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 224	Posted - 2014.12.11 14:10:18 - [8] - Quote Eli Apol wrote: - because it adversely affects their game design (through breaking pvp combat with bombers and screwing up their player driven economy)? I get really sick of this claim. Killmails are public. If isboxer bombers are doing this so much then either show some evidence or shut up. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 224	Posted - 2014.12.11 14:18:06 - [9] - Quote Eli Apol wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: Eli Apol wrote: - because it adversely affects their game design (through breaking pvp combat with bombers and screwing up their player driven economy)? I get really sick of this claim. Killmails are public. If isboxer bombers are doing this so much then either show some evidence or shut up. Do you live in a hole? Have you not seen the effect of small groups of bombers on nullsec fleet battles over the past few months? Outside of T3 doctrines bombers have absolutely demolished various subcap support fleets - and I have it on good authority that these have largely been multiboxed bomber squadrons controlled by just one or two players. I am in some of these fleets. We are not isboxing. Yea not much effect or you would be able to point to it. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 228	Posted - 2014.12.14 11:52:02 - [10] - Quote Quote: I've limited myself to 4 simultaneously opened clients per screen, becaus that's the count i can control proper without any additional tools. There are many people in this thread that think your cheating. Of course that is mostly cus they are jealous. I have 3 monitors at home and 6 at work :D. I can set linux up to allow me to play many clients pretty easily without any extra tool other than a decent operating system. So how many is too many? Quite frankly why everyone gets soo upset about this is a mystery. Who cares if its one person or many people? Really what difference does it make? the 1 second it takes a fleet to fire at a FC command is no different than using isboxer. The game itself is designed around multiple accounts per person. Super capitols just wouldn't work at all without them, and capitols would suck. If someone wants to have 20 accounts, power to him/her. If someone else wants only 1 account, cool whatever. But if you going to do the "everyone should have the same as me" crap then please just play a different game. Even if isboxer was banned you would complain about multiboxing, if that got banned you would complain about big fleets crushing you, if that was banned you would complain about bittervets having an unfair skill point advantage...... Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 229	Posted - 2014.12.14 15:22:29 - [11] - Quote If you think there was an arms race to have the most accounts, you are wrong. Really put up or shut up. Show us these fleets of 50+ ships roaming around winning eve? Hell even 20+. I see the odd 3-5 ships (including scout+links), and when i see they are probably multiboxing, I deliberately PvP in a way to make it hard to deal with (spread points/webs/ewar). If you think these changes will reduce multiboxing or isboxing much at all your also wrong. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 229	Posted - 2014.12.14 15:34:19 - [12] - Quote You know the server ticks are 1 second right. There is literally no difference in a game play mechanic perspective between perfect synchronization and and all hitting f1 in about 1/2 a second. (1/2 a second is a long time. ) Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 230	Posted - 2014.12.15 08:34:33 - [13] - Quote Quote: Id rather they just say "No multiboxing, No multiple accounts. One account per person only." rather then JUST take away input multiplexing. Yeah we can still multibox, but additional rules.... That has to be the stupiest idea ever. Banning multiboxing would make burn jita look like Sunday stroll with Merry ******* Poppins. Banning multiple accounts would mean that almost all of new Eden would unsub in a month. I am just a month away from properly flying a Dread, there is no way in hell i am waiting for enough corpies to be online with nothing to do to move it every time. And you expect titan pilots to do what? Train for years just to log in once a week for bridging? This game and its game play is designed around multiboxing. Entire ship classes don't work without it. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 230	Posted - 2014.12.15 15:32:36 - [14] - Quote Of course you can always set up your OS so the following would work F1 , Tab.........F1 client 1 F1 , Tab.........F1 client 2 F1, Tab.........F1 client 3 F1, Tab.........F1 client 1 F1, Tab.........F1 client 2 No need for any extra software and i can type that just as fast as just hitting F1. So you can't ban that without banning multiboxing. And well a large chunk of eve multibox. So if the CSM is something that is suppose to represent the players.......... Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 255	Posted - 2014.12.23 13:22:19 - [15] - Quote Drago Shouna wrote: Regardless of what you are using, it's now banned. Well according to how most players are reading the EULA. Bzzzt, Wrong! No amount of faith with make it true. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 255	Posted - 2014.12.23 15:53:23 - [16] - Quote Vala Ancalagon wrote: I honestly don't think it goes far enough. They should have banned multi-boxing clients outright, for the ultimate good of the game experience. Most of the player base would unsub. You would no longer have a game to play. Seriously if you feel soo cheated by players having more than one account, go play some pretend MMO like star citizen. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 262	Posted - 2015.01.26 20:23:00 - [17] - Quote God dam... Just Say What the **** is going on CCP. Pick a side. Muliboxers... The care bare solo folks that will never be happy unless there is ZERO risk. stop wasting our time time....... Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 263	Posted - 2015.01.29 13:15:38 - [18] - Quote Have to admit this is having a chilling effect on me expanding my account base. I have 2 main accounts and i recently started a new one. I was looking at getting few more as life in a WH you really need to have a few things available to you at any one time to do much, and well we just are not a popular TZ. So i need to be about to field a few things myself (HICs, BS, Recons etc). Currently i use multiple monitors and multiple computers (synergy to use them as one). But i can and do move between them quickly. I can easily activate guns in the same server tick across 3 accounts for example. I love this game. I love the sheer brutality of it. The HTFU nature of balls deep PVP with just about every isk you have sometimes. Losing is really losing. Winning is AWESOMENESS. But this stinks more and more of a the of attitude and lack of communication habits CCP had before the original burn jita. Lets face it, a lot of that rage was just too little communication, too many unkowns. While they can reply to threads about space ship interiors this issue is just left to rot. Getting pretty worried of how this could shake out. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 266	Posted - 2015.01.29 16:16:33 - [19] - Quote corebloodbrothers wrote: Comming back from ccp visit in iceland ee have seen how they handle the detection and follow up on boxer use. I can asure hou its very carefull and i was amazed at the detials and insight. I cant tell what and so ofc, to breach my non dosclosure. I run 3 accounts on eve as its my passion, the g+ñme atracts me, the blocking of this hardly compairs too the jita riots and moncole gate, where a underlying mentality in ccp was the cause, taking cate of multiboxing as unfair advantage is somthing which the 99 procent of gamers agree with and which keeps them playing eve. Each time changes come poeple will whine and *****, which doesnt make it w bad thing for the long term heatlh of eve online Some official response is not an unreasonable request. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 270	Posted - 2015.01.29 21:32:21 - [20] - Quote Mara Rinn wrote: Oh, I believe him when he says he doesn't use macros in EVE. I don't believe that he was banned for "macro use". I believe he was banned for input broadcasting, and is purposefully avoiding telling us that he was doing that to convince people that CCP are bad, horrible people who arbitrarily ban people for no good reason. Solo incursion fleet runner gets banned by CCP for breach of EULA regarding automation of game play. Which story do you believe: "CCP made a mistake, this guy was legitimately playing using Alt+Tab and directing individual commands to individual windows" or "CCP didn't make a mistake, this guy was using input broadcasting or keystroke multiplication of some kind." you know what would help rather than a bunch of stonewalling on CCP part. An official response rather than this BS about saying exactly nothing about nothing! Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 275	Posted - 2015.02.05 10:28:57 - [21] - Quote Holy smokes. That is a long winded way of saying "we band whoever the **** we want". I run linix. My OS lets me do round robin! And change the look? change how the game looks? Seriously? So really what they are saying is "you can pay for multiboxing accounts" But by god you work out how to use them we can ban you. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 277	Posted - 2015.02.05 19:26:15 - [22] - Quote Trakow wrote: Nolak Ataru wrote: Trakow wrote: Nolak Ataru wrote: With 4 monitors in a square, you can activate modules on each of them fairly fast if you simply stick to the corners in the center of the setup. So, banhammer. Well there you go, so just do that. You just proved that you can play just as easily without using VideoFX, so why use it? No, I just proved that player solutions can get you banned for playing EVE without the use of ISBoxer. No, because CCP can see if you're running ISBoxer or not. I am a programmer and it's really easy to include a bit of code that sees what other processes are running, which can then be checked against a list of known software that is banned. It's also easy to find out which windows have focus, and if the focus changes without an ALT-TAB key combination or a mouse-click, that's also an easy way to find round-robin users. Or, alternatively, if the key press action is sent directly to another window, without the focus changing, which is also possible, then that's another red flag that round-robin is being used. It's too easy. One example of being caught red-handed is the link someone posted a while back about an incursion player who got banned. He denied using ISBoxer/input broadcasting at first when he complained on the forum, but then later admitted that he was using VideoFX and round-robin. So it wasn't the input-broadcasting that got him caught, because he wasn't doing that. They obviously knew that he was using the software. I have yet to hear about someone getting banned for using ISBoxer when they actually weren't. And those that have been banned will of course deny using it even if they are, but I have yet to hear about someone getting their account unbanned after finding it was a false accusation. You are wrong. It is easy to hide these things. For example i am on linux. To eve it looks like it is the only thing running on windows, even when i multibox. Even worse, is the privacy implications in the EU that no EULA can overrule. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 277	Posted - 2015.02.05 20:22:58 - [23] - Quote Not from within wine it doesn't. Then there are instances, and injection and well clearly your not as much of a programmer as you think you are. Oh and using isboxer is not cheating. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 278	Posted - 2015.02.05 23:55:16 - [24] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Charadrass wrote: god damn, offline for two days and new wall of text in the Forums. ccp falcon stated that in the lates Podcast that videofx is NOT taken as a bannable offense. and since no other Statement is beeing put here readable for ALL OF THE COMMUNITY we dont have reason to believe otherwise. Go back a few pages, the is a quoted message from CCP Peligro stating you "will" be banned for using any 3rd party program, this includes, VideoFX . Seems the original post has been edited by ISD. Important part is quoted here. Dirk - CCP keep banning people without clarifying where and what the line is - There won't be enough players left to attend fanfest. How many subscribers can CCP afford to throw away and still make money? It most certainly is not all multiboxers. Yet i can't see how this is going anywhere else. Why should i spend the next 2 years limping along afraid that i can get banned anytime some WoW in space guy is going to petition with zero recourse? Seriously starting to reconsider my long term plans here. And just 3 weeks ago i was planing to buying 3 characters and setting up accounts to go with them Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 279	Posted - 2015.02.06 12:28:36 - [25] - Quote Trakow wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: Not from within wine it doesn't. Then there are instances, and injection and well clearly your not as much of a programmer as you think you are. Oh and using isboxer is not cheating. An instance is just an executable running, and by running multiple copies of the executable, you're creating multiple instances. And injection has nothing to do with anything because DLL injection and SQL injection has nothing to do with anything I'm talking about, and nothing to do with wine or eve... So don't talk about random things that you googled and know nothing about. Your funny. Injection, as in replace OS libs so that all os call are intercepted by your own code is not hard to do. All root kits do it. They exist for just about every OS out there. MS, sony , Disney and other massive players in this game learn this lesson every single time they try and own others hardware in a bid to curb copyright stuff. You can't make other peoples computers do what you want them to do. What makes you think that CCP can do better. Oh computer security was my day job in a previous life. It is not hard to hide running programs. Especially when eve does not run with elevated permissions. And by instance i mean Xen and other virtualization stuff. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 279	Posted - 2015.02.06 17:15:08 - [26] - Quote Thread derailing... Who cares about evemon. I don't. What i care about is that something that was fine for 10 years no longer is. A CSM person posted to claim that 99% think mulitboxing is cheating, finally we are having people band with no explanations other "anything that is not eve shall invoke a banhammer if we feel like it". What is going to be changed next, because of a vocal minority that want everything to be perfectly "fair". Fixed screen resolution? no multiboxing at all? In the mean time the power of two advertising continues. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 285	Posted - 2015.02.16 13:19:36 - [27] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Nolak Ataru wrote: All we're asking is for CCP to step up to the plate and answer a few questions. I'm curious as to what questions remain unanswered after this. Using ISBoxer to cheat is no longer allowed. You can only control one client at a time with one click of the mouse, simple as that. Stop using spoofing, stop using input duplication, stop using uber macros. How could it be any more clear? In CCP falcons original post this is clearly not the case. ISBoxer is clearly allowed. So either your projecting your own wishes, or you didn't even read the OP or even the fist page of posts. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 293	Posted - 2015.02.20 11:35:52 - [28] - Quote While true, a lot of people use a biomass alt for the forums. So i don't really see that as a reason to not trust posts. Me however, I post with my main. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 299	Posted - 2015.02.26 16:11:48 - [29] - Quote ashley Eoner wrote: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAH oh god help us if this dude really is a programmer. As for the banning aspect at the end of your post all I can say is "you must be new......" If you see the replies i gave and his responses, yea i am guessing he just learned what task manager is. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 299	Posted - 2015.02.27 14:47:23 - [30] - Quote corebloodbrothers wrote: Move on? So much more fun stuff hitting eve s future to focus energy on, new player experience, new sov, rebalancing ishtar online, fanfest, china versus free world eve, ton of devblogs aimed at the future versus going over and over ccp actions versus inout broadcasting. From what we have seen no unjust bans, and the guys who did get one know why. Same goes for botting. The harder users say it didnt give them a benefit over others and keep whining, the more it shows it did give on. If the majority of players would be in favor of this crap, then run a csm member, as you shoudl easily get thousands of votes right... If not, then its a storm in a glass of water really Look at the future ratehr then ***** about the past, be positive, as much as i love the tears in my email about it, tweetimg i killed isboxer helps me actually getting votes, thnx for that Greetz Core Csm9 csmx candidate Spot the CSM member that didn't read the thread, doesn't understand our concerns and doesn't care about improving communication between CCP and the players. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 306	Posted - 2015.02.28 11:15:52 - [31] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Nolak Ataru wrote: You mean the threads where people pointed out time and time again where when an ISBoxer screwed the pooch, he lost 20x the ISK a single person with a single client would lose? No, I mean the threads discussing the people who would ISBot an entire incursion fleet, racking in a ludicrous income with zero downsides. They make no more than a standard incursion fleet, and require X more ships X more isk to fit and buy those ships, require X more plex or account subscriptions. In other words completely indistinguishable to a non isboxer fleet. And then you show your bias with that "ISBot" phrase. ISBoxer is not a bot. Has never been a bot and just shows that yout really only care about the fact that your not as space pixel rich as some incursion runners. It is even funny that you think its all that much ISK. Compared to C5 C6 escals, its pretty grindy low return work. Multboxers have lived in C5s in the past and you can do it with less accounts and make far more total, so really a lot more per account. Also since this can be done with only 3-5 characters if you know what you are doing, alt tab works fine. ISBoxer cannot make rats give bigger bounties, does not increase LP payout and doesn't change per player payouts in incursions. And all this from CODE. You know a large part of you guys "cheat" according to your definition. CODE don't exactly hide it. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 306	Posted - 2015.02.28 11:17:30 - [32] - Quote Alavaria Fera wrote: Wait, is Round robin the "press button X to move from window N to window N+1" ? Yes. It something that you don't need anything but a clever setup in windows to do. Even more to the point, its not all that different from changing alt-tab to a just tab, and doing butting X, tab, button X tab.... Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 309	Posted - 2015.03.01 07:54:03 - [33] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Jeanette Leon wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: ... The message was clear from the start: Stop giving yourself an unfair advantage with the ISBoxer program. Apparently that's not clear enough for some people. Clear as mud. Tell us, oh enlightened One, all about fair and unfair advantages and maybe this thread will not reach 200 pages Personally, I'd suggest ceasing any and all use of ISBoxer. If your Alliance did that. They would probably disband. CCP has straight out said one of the biggest users of isboxer and broadcasting is gankers! Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.
Delt0r Garsk Shits N Giggles 311	Posted - 2015.03.03 15:12:04 - [34] - Quote Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Nolak Ataru wrote: I have no problem whatsoever if CCP wants to modify their EULA to narrow the scope of 6A3 and thus make PYFA, EFT, etc safe from being banned so long as they unban ISBoxer and all it's functionality when they narrow said scope. The answer is no. EFT and Pyfa are already safe. ISBoxer is justly banned. The end. Almost 200 pages and you still haven't worked out that ISBOXER IS NOT BANNED. Ask your own corp and alliance mates. Saw them using it in the weekend. Oh and out. Someone ping me if anything offical is ever said. Death and Glory! Well fun is also good.

Copyright © 2006-2025, Chribba - OMG Labs. All Rights Reserved. - perf 0,08s, ref 20250915/2025
EVE-Online™ and Eve imagery © CCP.

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.