SO, spreadsheets to track what capital parts you are building on which account is cheating? sweet. Lemme just dial up the banhammer for EVERY ALLIANCES CAPITAL PRODUCTION TEAM.

So, Dotlan to figure out JDC 4 vs JDC 5 compliant routes is cheating? sweet. That's death to all supers right there.

Nah, need SQL interacting with the right CREST endpoint for it.

Sarc aside, I missed the directly in the above. However, ISboxer doesn't directly control anything. It does not issue commands. It overrides the "this window is active and thus the only thing taking input" flag

Solo miners will never have high margins. Even if ISboxer were banned completely, they would still fall behind multiboxing miners. And their income wouldn't go up that much under any circumstances, because there will always be someone willing to do the same job for less. As for null groups, they don't get the bulk of their income from multibox mining. Most of their income comes from moon goo and rental income. Again, removing multibox mining would not affect this at all.

Or for the combat toons we have multiboxed bomber, catalyst and dreadnaught fleets all requiring pretty much the same attention and direction as a single pilot, yet arguably being more effective than a corresponding number of individuals; which obviously imbalances the pvp side of things as well as the multiboxing incursion fleets causing inflation from the isk rewards and devalued LP exchange rates from the pve side of things - which also affects the pvp side of things because these pilots/alts can replace their losses far more quickly and easily than solo pilots.

Personally I multibox just 2 clients without any external software and just a single (24") screen and as a result I have to be very passive with one account whilst the other is actively doing stuff.

A multiplexer will operate at a per-character efficiency which is lower than a manual multiboxer. It's a trade of efficiency for ease of control.

You'll still be back here whining again by February that it's still too easy to multibox. It's got nothing to do with efficiency, or gameplay or the economy.

If everyone on the entire forum were to post and say "we like this" it would *still* be a minority. In this case there are 659 unique posters in this thread.

So you are saying that your problem with isboxer is that you don;t have enough friends to be able to actively pursue your interests whenever you want? So I guess someone in a highly active corp that constantly runs incursions should also be banned, since they are unfairly able to do incursions all day long.

as the price increases the amount of people running the activity does too, bringing it back to a normal price, not to metion the trillions of minerals sitting around being trickle fed to the market to keep it from crashing.

Well since whining carebears tend to say "look, we're whining, therefore this is obviously a problem" it's worth mentioning. and yes, on both sides there's a minority. The vast majority of users do not care how everyone else is playing.

~snip~

An engaged, competent and individualistic minority with a strong relative stake should not be dismissed quickly.

i dont see anything wrong With that People pay With isk for plex. that benifit both parts, the person who sell the plex, and the person who buy the plex. I pay With real cash atm for my 3 accounts. and if someone earn isk for buying plex. what so? its a lot better that People buy it and use it than if People just horde it up. lol (and also benifit plex sellers when prices hige) lol, anyway. please dont have name calling :) And ccp get Money from the plex anyway, i hear someone talked about that it was 2.5 charaters for each real person in eve, i dont know if thats true or not. but. Yeah. :)

I'd accept your apology if you stopped trying to argue the accelerated gameplay clause was on a per human basis when it has been repeatedly reinforced by CCP that it applies on a per toon basis.

And if up-front investments for long-term payoffs are your concern, may I ask what you think of people training dedicated super / titan holders? They can sell for quite a bit for those who have the right contacts. Additionally, people who build and sell caps can make a lot of money compared to the initial investment of a BPO set, a POS, a quiet lowsec system, and the occasional mercenary defense contract.

Just another request to get clarification on voiceattack. I recently came across it and would like to try it out but Im unsure if it violates anything. I would only use it for single key clicks (e.g. orbit, warp, activate module one), but would like to get confirmation that this is ok.


I filed a petition to ask, and was told to ask in this thread about it. There are also 2 or 3 other threads where its mentioned but I havent found any official responses yet.

Jesus christ. No matter how many times you idiots say it, the accelerated gameplay clause is on a per-toon basis, not a per-human basis. Stop pretending it's so.

I very much doubt it. Getting rid of broadcasting is seen as a quick win. It's relatively easy to spot and makes a lot of idiots who don't realise how ISBoxer is used happy for a short while. Anything beyond that would be pretty difficult to control, so I doubt we'll see much more on it. I'm sure if you were correct on this, they'd have revised this thread.

It won't. It will remove at most a minority of ISBoxer users, while the majority of idiots (like yourself) cry about how people still have valid ways of playing with multiple characters. And PLEX prices will always go up. They've dropped for speculation for now, but before long they'll continue their climb. Fact. As for the isk and minerals, you'll have to show me all this inflation they are going through. Last serious analysis that was done actually showed deflation. People tend to keep saying inflation while they don't actually understand what it means, so avoid that bandwagon.

No, I think they'll not take it much further because it will be impossible to control the thousands of piece of software and hardware that could be used for these methods without seriously affecting the whole playerbase. This is why I've said from the very beginning that if they want to make an impact, then gameplay changes are required to make mass multiboxing more difficult in the first place.

You're implying that PLEX increasing is relatively recent and is only caused by multiboxed accounts when CCP themselves admitted that less plex was being moved on the market. PLEX is a consumable item that has had it's demand increase thanks to dual character training and there are many people who hoard hundreds if not thousands of PLEX like it was gold. In this case correlation =/= causation.

As I've said and as Lucas has mentioned in previous posts, there is a very vocal subset of the playerbase that hates "Alts Online" and will QQ if you use two toons at once, let alone a fleet. These were the ones running about screaming about bots in local whenever they encountered a mining fleet, or sending hundreds of petitions because they disliked ISBoxing because they couldn't do it or they didn't want to do it.

ISBoxers have always had a "live and let live" policy when it comes to other players partially due to the fact that we sacrifice quite a bit when we box a fleet.

Are they? Considering they do state of the economy talks every year and full details of the daily market trading totals and averages are widely available (eve-central, eve-marketdata, even straight from CCP via CREST) it seems to me that they aren't the only ones with full details at all

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.

I'm beginning to understand why it appears you have no idea what you are talking about when you talk about the effect on the economy.

So, what he was the player percentage of boxers and the overall number of boxes, and then wanted the inpact of these boxes on the whole economy of eve expressed as a single percentage?

Is that what he was asking for?

I am in some of these fleets. We are not isboxing. Yea not much effect or you would be able to point to it.

Eli and Tyr are still here. As well as the others who pop in just to say "grr boxers" and then disappear.

FYI, trading is more scalable, requires less effort, less hardware and makes significantly more isk than any multiboxer could. Traders also buy more PLEX and manipulate more markets than a multiboxer. So I guess you'll also be in support of getting rid of trading then?

Much like how they decided that the industry mechanics they had back in the beginning of time needed changing, how sov mechanics need changing (and are soon to be changed), I think old mechanics which don't promote a player interacting with the game to play should be reviewed, yes. If a mechanic is simple enough to be used semi-afk, or broadcasted on scale (with broadcasting being nothing but a dumb repeater), then it clearly isn't a well designed mechanic. CCP know this, and their new release schedule was specifically designed so they can tackle older more complex problems like these. You're really grasping here to suggest that the game should just stay exactly as it is because someone's day will be ruined if you change their mechanic.

At the end of the day, the game evolves. It's nothing like it was when I joined in 2005. Mechanics which were way too simple back then are now fleshed out (including space itself).

Technically no. It sends command A to window 1 on button press #1. It then sends command A to window 2 without changing windows on button press #2. If it sent the command and then alt-tabbed, or something similar, then yes, it would be a macro.
Since it doesn't, it isn't, and you don't know what you're talking about.

No, because keyboard sequences cover game actions. If you want to set up a key that presses F1, then opens 6 web browsers, 4 notepads and a calculator, that's within the rules. As long as it performs only 1 game action.

...snip...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFdYO9h0H3Y&feature=youtu.be

From what I gathered with talking to the person (something CCP desperately needs to do), he is using a Logitech G600-type mouse to cycle his windows, which can be set up outside of the exefile.exe, which allows him to switch windows with one keypress, click on the "orbit" button with one mouseclick, and then switch again with another keypress. Alternatively, you can bind a key to cycle through videoFX windows in a given area, so that would work too. Of course, the "stored rapid keystrokes" clause is a strange addition because some players may interact with their client faster than others, and with a faulty-enough connection you can appear to have pressed F1-F8, for example, in a single second or less, so I do wonder how much stock CCP places in that clause. Additionally, he has since been informed of the "regroup" fleet function and he mentioned in a conversation that his fingers were feeling better now that he can just use "regroup" instead of cycling each window / videoFX.
He claimed Geckos give him better times than Sentries, something which I believe given the Gecko's very high stats and the Snake's drone bonus.
Something any veteran ISBoxer will tell you is that every time a player creates a new VideoFX setup, changes fleet composition, or changes fits, he suffers a penalty to his site times. As a player gets more comfortable with his composition/fleet/VideoFX, his site times improve, much the same way (for example) a new mission runner speeds up his times with repetition and familiarity with his setup.
The fastest VG boxer used HG Ascendancies and Warp Speed rigs. Versi is currently using tank rigs (I believe) and doesn't have Ascendancies currently, so he'll be slower. As he improves, he can drop the tank rigs and slap on T2 Hyper-rigs, and splurge for some HG implants, and he can get his site times down.
If CCP wanted to nerf the effectiveness of ISBoxers, we have handed them at least a dozen alternatives to the broadcast ban that would have a greater effect.

"That APM is not possible..."
Let me just stop you right here and direct your attention to the Grand Masters-league of Starcraft 2 players with APMs in the 600s and up. Ten or twelve years ago, you would have been laughed at had you claimed to have a 600 APM. New players don't have anywhere near the kind of APM that veteran players do, especially in solo frigate PVP for example. Constantly adjusting orbits and juggling overheating modules leads to some fancy finger-play.
As I said, a strict interpretation of the clause on CONCORD's retribution and the avoidance might ensnare Hyperdunking. I'm sure you're unaware, but a while back, you used to be able to avoid CONCORD's guns if you were quick and clever enough. I'm not 100% sure on the history of the clause, but I'm under the impression that it was added to stop those users from avoiding CONCORD. I'm not advocating banning Hyperdunking, as I agree with CCP's decision that you still lose a ship for your actions, and I'm saying that both as a ganker and as a freighter pilot who would be targeted by Hyperdunking.

Except no, that's not what I said.
Keypress 1 > Orbit
Keypress 2 > Switch clients, or switch VideoFX window / layout.
Keypress 3 > Orbit.

I would like to pause and thank you for not calling it "ISBotter" or "that botting program".

The way you look at APM in SC and in Eve differs wildly, we're not able to do more than 60 APM by design due to how the server ticks work; you cannot activate and deactivate a gun at the same time. Now, you can send the same command (in this case, orbit) 10 times to the client within that 1 second server tick and it will only be applied once. You can spam the orbit button as fast as you can and then at a lower pace just swap between the windows, giving the illusion of being accurate when you in fact are just spamming one button and being more precise on the other.

you sir, are just dumb, or stupid. not sure what it is.

i am using a Special designed Piece of Hardware with 120 keys which i can Setup to what ever i want.

i am Setting ONE command per key per box.
i am easily up to 500 apm if i have to with that using my 10 fingers i have from mother nature.
first row from left to right activates F1 on each box
second row from left to right activates shift F1 on each box

so tell me. am i cheating? macro using? broadcasting?

Your Tengu comparison was flawed as CCP wasn't removing Tengus from the game, their railgun sub, or alternatively their missile sub. My comparison was closer to being accurate.

Examples of allowed Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing are actions taken that do not have an impact on the EVE universe and are carried out for convenience:

GÇó EVE Online client settings
GÇó Window positions and arrangements (of the EVE Online client in your operating systemGÇÖs desktop environment)

Window positions and arrangements... arrangement.... arrangement....

i can use a Touchscreen with displayed keys and "rollover" my fingers over the Buttons
that would be a rollover in the most primitive way. and still allowed in the eula.
so rollover with a mouse activating ONE Action is NOT violating the eula.

Actually, the burden was on me to laugh at that comparison. And I did, with gusto.

Trying to justify actual cheating on the basis of freaking Fuzzworks is the flimsiest justification imaginable.

What consequence is there in game for changing over view tabs? When I change my overview tab can you tell by sitting next to me in space?

Yes, however, in doing so with paper and pencil,you lose valuable time you could have spent ratting and earning ISK.
Now do you see the conundrum?

but it Safes you time and Money? no paper for example?

edit dont start picking.
teamspeak is also creating in game Advantage over those who are not using it.

Also I'm glad that CCP allows us the privilege of positioning windows as we please on our computers.

so long as they unban ISBoxer and all it's functionality when they narrow said scope.

~snip~

The functionality of ISBoxer should be reinstated across the board because it offers ISBoxed fleet "X" no measurable advantage over an identical fleet with identical SP, identical fits, identical implants, identical experience, and identical fleet composition

Bullshit detected, i can hit with 10 fingers 10 different orders in 10 different boxes without even using isboxer.

MMO. Massively Multiplayer Online..

what M exactly got removed?

~snip~

great News for you, you dont have to, just let the Players do it who want it.

Swing and a miss. You just undermined your own argument. Network latency, since we're talking about a group of players all hitting F1 at the same time thereby removing human interface delays, would cause a smaller fleet (the ISBoxer fleet) to be disadvantaged because of the DPS or alpha that he is missing, assuming a post-nerf fleet. For a pre-nerf fleet, again, stop comparing BRAVE pilots to PL. Just because you cannot find ten random people who can F1 at the same time does not mean that they don't exist.

You keep going back to comparing an ISBoxer fleet to a pub fleet, and you need to stop.

Maybe I should start stamping my feet and demand CCP remove all titans; they just might do it.

Verisimili
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HFdYO9h0H3Y

2) There have been players banned who have followed the new interpretation of the EULA.