EVE Search - Announcement:Update regarding Multiboxing and input automation

Check My IP Information

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)
Kaarous Aldurald Lords.Of.Midnight The Devil's Warrior Alliance 10708	Posted - 2014.11.26 01:13:49 - [1] - Quote Beautiful. I never thought you'd have the spine to actually do this, but you surprised me. Bravo. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 11457	Posted - 2015.01.27 06:24:47 - [2] - Quote ashley Eoner wrote: Anyone that has played WoW knows that world pvp is very active. Very actively botted, you mean. Bots comprise 40% or higher of their instanced PvP groups. And they do nothing about it either. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 11458	Posted - 2015.01.27 11:28:56 - [3] - Quote ashley Eoner wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: ashley Eoner wrote: Anyone that has played WoW knows that world pvp is very active. Very actively botted, you mean. Bots comprise 40% or higher of their instanced PvP groups. And they do nothing about it either. I'd love to see a bot do WORLD pvp... Notice I said WORLD pvp not instance pvp or bg pvp or arena pvp... WORLD pvp... Yeah, they're in the Ashran world PvP zone too. Tons of them. The worst part is the ones that auto interrupt you, so they're actually better fighters than most human players. Automation must never be tolerated. Even one step in that direction is one step too many. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 11480	Posted - 2015.01.27 23:55:47 - [4] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: I'd have no problem with that, and it would certainly give us an idea of what we are not allowed to do rather than trying to guess as we have to now. And I'm happy to abide by today's rules. Most people aren't really sure what today's rules actually are though. Oh, the ****ing irony. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 11654	Posted - 2015.02.05 02:05:45 - [5] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Marsha Mallow wrote: [That's fine. I'll continue to call you a botter, a cheater, a farmer and a peasant. Don't take it personally (and don't make it personal). All in good fun. I always thought ISBoxer looked like ISKBotter anyway And this is why nobody takes you seriously. Except for CCP, since they banned ISBotter. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 11789	Posted - 2015.02.16 01:38:31 - [6] - Quote 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? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 11792	Posted - 2015.02.16 09:34:34 - [7] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: 1) Is the use of rollover bars and Round Robin, which send one action to one client per click or keypress or mouse action, legal? According to every "source", they should be, however we have no less than 6 people on our forums, at least one of whom was the damn-near CREATOR of the rollover method, banned from EVE Online. I certainly wouldn't push the issue. It seems a flimsy justification at best, to me. Stick with alt tabbing or two monitors, like most people. The rest of your bullets are just something that the various ganking and scamming community has been trying to get for a while. Actual rules, laid out in the open. But the answer has been "nope! figure it out for yourself!" time and again(including from more than a few ISBoxer diehards in this very thread), so I really can't imagine why you expected better for your issue. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 11801	Posted - 2015.02.16 20:38:19 - [8] - Quote Delt0r Garsk wrote: ISBoxer is clearly allowed. I didn't say it wasn't. Cheating with it sure isn't, though. And people have been cheating with it for a long, long time until recently. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Sebiestor Tribe Minmatar Republic 11804	Posted - 2015.02.16 21:34:40 - [9] - Quote Charadrass wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Delt0r Garsk wrote: ISBoxer is clearly allowed. I didn't say it wasn't. Cheating with it sure isn't, though. And people have been cheating with it for a long, long time until recently. Ignore the Troll Nolak, he is wasting your time. So ccp, clarification please. It's not trolling to say that using a third party program to simultaneously multibox fifty mining barges is cheating. It fits pretty much every definition of it. And CCP finally agreed. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11939	Posted - 2015.02.27 13:04:02 - [10] - 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 You just got my vote. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11943	Posted - 2015.02.28 04:04:42 - [11] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Funny but this post lost him mine. Go vote for one of the people who support cheating, then. I am glad to see CSM candidates taking a stand on things like this. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11943	Posted - 2015.02.28 04:15:14 - [12] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: [isboxing =] cheating [Citation Needed] Oh, sure. Luckily we were recently given the final word on the matter. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11943	Posted - 2015.02.28 04:25:46 - [13] - Quote The really funny part is how people are linking the "dual boxing" site and the testimonials on it as proof of anything. Personally, I'd like to see a CCP or at least unbiased source on how many people have actually been banned for simple dual boxing. Because I do that myself, and I've never even gotten so much as a GM warning for it. It seems to me, like these people were banned for a greater offense than they're letting on, and trying to cry innocent. Some of them are obvious botters, what's more. 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. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11943	Posted - 2015.02.28 04:33:39 - [14] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: giving yourself an unfair advantage with the ISBoxer program. [Citation Needed] If ISBoxer gives a player an advantage, so does PYFA, EFT, EVEMon, Fuzzworks, and EVE-Central, to name a few. Not in the game client, no. Why is this so hard for you? Are you that dead set on keeping this unfair advantage? I mean, it should be pretty simple for you. Don't use ISBoxer anymore. For anything. Run multiple instances of the client without a central control function, and you are 100% safe. No one has ever been banned for alt tabbing, no matter how some of you are trying to claim that the sky is falling. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11943	Posted - 2015.02.28 04:39:44 - [15] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Again, give me definite proof that it provides an unfair advantage, and then we can talk. Hell, give me ANY proof! I don't have to. CCP banned it for such. Quote: As soon as you do, we can discuss banning it as well as all these other programs I mentioned. EFT does not directly effect the game client. Neither does EVE Central, or DotLan, or whatever else you want to bring up. It's literally apples and oranges at this point. You keep pointing to things like that as though they offer any defense to blatantly cheating. But they don't. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11943	Posted - 2015.02.28 04:57:52 - [16] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: facepalm No, they banned it because Corebloodbrother whined and cried enough to get them to ban it. Yeah, there sure wasn't anyone else complaining about it for the last few years... Quote: Pyfa EVEMon Fuzzworks EVE Central Do not effect the game client directly. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11943	Posted - 2015.02.28 05:12:09 - [17] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: If you mean... No, I don't mean those. I mean the threads, over and over again, that brought up whether controlling twenty clients with a single mouse click was acceptable or not. Turns out, it's not. I celebrate that decision, as it's one that I thought CCP would never have the balls to make. Quote: Except they do affect the EVE universe as mentioned previously. They do not effect the in game client. Whether they have an effect on the person using them is entirely different from effecting the client. Such justification. Methinks he doth protest too much. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11943	Posted - 2015.02.28 05:51:11 - [18] - Quote 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. Quote: ISBoxer does not modify any part of the client that would cause a given character to earn ISK at an accelerated rate than someone who isn't. Except for the part that's banned, that lets you duplicate input clicks to multiple clients. I mean, if it wasn't such a huge advantage, then losing it clearly is no big loss. You can't really have it both ways. Quote: And finally, ISBoxer does not in any way, shape, form, or inkling offer any sort of advantage to a fleet of characters that an equally skilled, fitted, experienced, and connected fleet of people would not have. Except for the level of synchronicity that only a machine can achieve, on a scale that is otherwise impossible. Why not just play fair, like everyone else? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11958	Posted - 2015.03.01 00:49:43 - [19] - Quote 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. Judging from some of the bleating, it looks like some people tried to find a way around the whole "input duplication is unequivocally banned" thing, and got hammered for that too. (of course, as I mentioned before, some of the people in that "dualboxing.com" site are likely botters trying to make excuses) Stop using that program. I get it, you paid twenty bucks or whatever for it. You've racked up ridiculous advantages against your fellow players for years for that twenty bucks. Now it's time to give up the ghost. Either bring out of the old extra monitors trick, or alt tab like the rest of us. No one ever got banned doing that. I honestly cannot imagine why anyone would honestly need twenty accounts working together in perfect synchronization anyway. And I use the word "honestly" in there deliberately. If you guys aren't getting an unreasonable advantage using ISBoxer, then you're fighting awfully hard to keep something that you're claiming doesn't matter. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11958	Posted - 2015.03.01 01:17:49 - [20] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Personally, I'd suggest ceasing any and all use of EVEMon, PYFA, EFT, and Fuzzworks. Those don't effect the game client, and you're only bringing up as a diversion. Quote: Stop using those websites. I get it, you spent all that time downloading and installing them. You don't install websites... lol. Quote: Either bring out of the old cache scraping trick, or put some alts in each trade-hub like the rest of us. No one ever got banned doing that. No one ever got banned for any of those websites either. Keep comparing apples and oranges, dude. The ruling on ISBotter isn't going to change just because you stomp your feet and cry about Fuzzworks. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11959	Posted - 2015.03.01 02:27:00 - [21] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: They affect the EVE Universe more than ISBoxer does. ISBoxer does not modify the game client in any way that can be construed to break the EULA or 6A3. CCP disagrees. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11959	Posted - 2015.03.01 04:09:12 - [22] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: 1) CCP has provided no proof or documentation to support their hilarious claim. This is hilarious. The sheer entitlement of this statement, and the irony. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 01:59:56 - [23] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: and Super and Titan pilots sure aren't going to be happy if CCP tells them they can't use multiple toons without multiple monitors. Where is anyone saying that you can't alt+tab? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 02:31:32 - [24] - Quote JGar Rooflestein wrote: Some where about 15 or more post ago someone claims to have or heard someone getting banned for Alt Tabbing to fast. Okay, and that's an obvious lie. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 03:16:24 - [25] - Quote ShadowandLight wrote: how? You're actually asking me how it's a lie that anyone, ever, got banned for alt tabbing? And you're doing this on the basis of an unconfirmed statement by someone on a third party forum, saying "friend of a friend". Are you nuts? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 03:39:17 - [26] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: ShadowandLight wrote: how? You're actually asking me how it's a lie that anyone, ever, got banned for alt tabbing? And you're doing this on the basis of an unconfirmed statement by someone on a third party forum, saying "friend of a friend". Are you nuts? Irony: You're going so far out of your way to defend CCP that you passed Bugs Bunny on his way to Albuquerque, and to give them the benefit of the doubt, while at the same time attacking anyone who is part of a close-knit community that you aren't part of who regularly share information about setups and news..... Yeah, gotta say, I give CCP the benefit of the doubt before anyone posting on that botting apologist website. I don't think that's unreasonable. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 04:10:05 - [27] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Since you're so set in your ways to see ISBoxer as nothing but a bot, and your complete refusal to even consider that it isn't, coupled with your fundamental lack of knowledge on the subject, leads me to believe you are nothing more than a troll, and as such I will attempt to ignore you until you bring something tangible to the table. Have a good day, and I wish you the best of luck with EVE. Notice how none of that is actually proof of his less-than-anecdote, folks. Care to actually try and back up the claim that people are, or ever were banned for alt tabbing? If not, at least have the dignity to admit that you're just blowing smoke. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 04:30:43 - [28] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: The irony of you asking me to provide proof of something I never claimed, while at the same time not providing proof to back up your own claims What claim? All I'm doing is asking for any proof besides the obviously biased website you keep linking. "dualboxing.com" is not a source that anyone here should believe. Their agenda is clear, to keep right on cheating their way through this game. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 09:40:35 - [29] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: As for your "source that anyone here should believe", I must wonder whether or not you understand what happens when you take a group of human beings, give them a means to communicate amongst themselves, and add time. People form friendships, grow to know each other, and tend to not be tinfoil-hat suspicious of each other when something happens (especially when it's something as serious as being banned). Yeah, I guess that totally does mean that the claim of "I got banned for alt tabbing too fast" isn't, in fact, totally bogus. Oh, wait, nope. That's still an obvious lie from someone trying to cover his ass for botting. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 14:14:18 - [30] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Especially when you consider that at least one of the people who received a ban was instrumental in devising the means to continue to multibox a fleet without using ISBoxer's broadcast feature, round robin or otherwise, at all. With an illegal mouse macro, as the Eli Apol demonstrates above. That APM is not humanly possible without machine assistance. You people are just bound and determined on this foolishness, aren't you? Quote: I realize this may be too much to swallow, but let me draw a parallel to Hyperdunking. Lord, here it comes. Even if I entertain your comparison of apples and oranges, it's still invalid. Quote: Now, going by a strict interpretation of the EULA, Hyperdunking is illegal, but no doubt you'll bend over backwards to defend it, being in CODE and all. Please point out to me precisely where the EULA does not permit Hyperdunking. Because CCP sure can't find it. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 23:30:17 - [31] - Quote ashley Eoner wrote: Eli Apol wrote: OP wrote: 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) Swing and a miss. Window positions and arrangements... arrangement.... arrangement.... CCP Falcon wrote: Window positions and arrangements (of the EVE Online client in your operating systemGÇÖs desktop environment) Try again. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11961	Posted - 2015.03.02 23:32:19 - [32] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Actually no, the burden of proof is on you for claiming that ISBoxer is as bad as botting. I presented my arguments about why EFT/PYFA/EVEMon/Fuzzworks earlier in the thread (within the last 5 pages), not to mention my numerous other posts earlier in the thread. 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. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11964	Posted - 2015.03.03 13:12:09 - [33] - Quote 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. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11964	Posted - 2015.03.03 13:40:24 - [34] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: I have already explained at great lengths, in great detail, and without anyone offering up a counterargument other than "no it doesnt", the specific advantages of the aforementioned programs, why if ISBoxer is to be banned so should they, and why if CCP narrows 6A3 to disclude these aforementioned programs then they should unban ISBoxer's functions. If I go outside right now, stand on a street corner and yell "The Moon is made of cheese!", the only refutation required is "no, it's not." "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11991	Posted - 2015.03.05 10:58:20 - [35] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Tell you what. You get CCP to remove the restrictions on posting information in tickets and private GM conversations, and we'll post our proof. That's never happening and you know it, so you're basically admitting that you have none. Quote: Also, all of your arguments have been purely anecdotal themselves as you've provided no proof that ISBoxer violates the EULA, especially 6A3, and you completely ignored my discussion of hardware in regards to ISBoxer. The opening post of this thread is proof of that. They've explicitly come out and said so. Any interpretation you have contrary to that is automatically invalid. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11991	Posted - 2015.03.05 13:48:14 - [36] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: [ That's a "absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence" fallacy. Nope. What it is is you claiming to have evidence. But refusing to release said evidence unless under a condition that you know will never, under any circumstance be met. You're basically demanding that we take it on faith, based solely on your absurd conditions. And I say no. In fact, I'll happily go so far as to say that I believe you are outright lying. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11992	Posted - 2015.03.05 14:45:30 - [37] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: I'd love to know what "absurd conditions" you are referring to. You already know, you said them yourself. You know full well that CCP will never, ever lift their prohibition on the posting of GM correspondence. And since you've decided that your "evidence" is contingent on that, I maintain that you do so solely to avoid having to present it in the first place. And the reason for doing this would be because it does not exist. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 11995	Posted - 2015.03.05 14:59:13 - [38] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: The only reason I can see them continuing to disallow the posting of these tickets and conversations would be 1) to hide the fact that their GMs aren't on the same page as their Devs, and 2) so we can't hold them accountable for changes. Yep. It's entirely to hide the fact that the GM staff is literally making it up as they go. This is most evident in the "You can be perma banned for impersonating yourself" fiasco from a while back. Doesn't mean they'll ever get rid of it though. Because if they did, they'd have to hire GM staff who actually play the game. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12173	Posted - 2015.03.19 02:00:58 - [39] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Additionally, even by a strict interpretation of the EULA, rollovers and round robin aren't in violation of the EULA, yet we keep getting banned for it. Then stop doing it already. Clearly CCP disagrees with your self deluded interpretation of the EULA, and theirs is the only opinion that matters. Why are you lot so stubbornly dead set on cheating? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12176	Posted - 2015.03.19 23:04:00 - [40] - Quote Charadrass wrote: We are using Isboxer without input broadcasting and / or multiplexing. You claim. And personally, every single time I've asked for any proof of this supposed innocence, Nolak has spun so fast that he enters a different time zone. Besides, if you're actually telling the truth and people are still getting banned... why haven't you knocked it off yet? Why are you so dead set on this? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12176	Posted - 2015.03.19 23:50:28 - [41] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Create an account on the dual-boxing forum, and ask there. No. If they have posted "proof" there, it's just as easy to post it here. If you literally have pictures of some guy streaming himself NOT using anything bannable, then nothing stops you posting them here. (although, the last video I saw linked in this thread showed a guy who was justifiably banned for macroing, by the way) Quote: You still haven't given us a solid reason why ISBoxer's broadcasting or roundrobin functions should be banned yet besides appeal to authority fallacies. Because it's cheating. It provides an unfair advantage for the player using it. CCP finally accepted that for themselves, despite years of being entrenched otherwise. You can't just say "Nuh uh!" to CCP's decree on the matter. That's not how this works, and it's hardly a fallacy by the way, it's merely a fact that happens to be rather inconvenient for you. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12176	Posted - 2015.03.20 00:14:18 - [42] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: You mean besides CCP's ban on such information being shared on these forums? Untrue, spin harder. Quote: FINALLY we're getting somewhere. What sort of unfair advantage do you believe it gives to a player? Please be specific. It permits a player to control far, far more clients with a degree of accuracy that would be functionally impossible for a player that does not use a third party program. It's level of efficiency approaches that of outright botting, what's worse. There are no circumstances where it being permitted is a good thing for the general health of the game. The sole justification to keeping this particular method of cheating is the claim that they pay for subs. Well, so do bots, and they get banned just the same. Flimsy reasoning at best, pathetic apologist tripe at worst. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12186	Posted - 2015.03.20 05:09:52 - [43] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: EVE TOS: 18: You may not publish private communications from CCP, their agents or representatives or EVE Online volunteers without authorization. Checkmate. And you once more demonstrate your dedication to being obtuse. You can post your "proof" on these forums, if you have what you've repeatedly claimed you have. Otherwise, you have nothing to begin with and you're just bitching about GM tickets telling you that, yes, you were breaking the rules. Which everyone here already knew. Quote: So anyone who runs multiple accounts is cheating? No, nor did I claim that in any way, shape or form. Blowing it up into an absurdity is not a good argument tactic, and it's patently obvious besides. Alt tabbing is fine, as has been demonstrated numerous times in this thread. I alt tab all the time. Cry more. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12189	Posted - 2015.03.20 08:33:30 - [44] - Quote Charadrass wrote: or rely on the guys who suddenly dont Show up here anymore cause they are getting banned for not violating the eula but beeing efficient? There it is, that's the part I absolutely do not believe. I've seen people claim that a few times since the year began, and all were using macros or other such. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12277	Posted - 2015.03.25 03:39:21 - [45] - Quote Charadrass wrote: the question is if ccp sees Windows as third Party or not. i think i remember a posting about Windows not beeing third Party to the eula. You should just give up, because at this point it's apparent to everyone here that you're grasping for straws. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12285	Posted - 2015.03.26 01:33:35 - [46] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: ISBoxer doesn't change the way the game is played any more than having multiple monitors, or having your windows tiled, or using virtual desktops, or even having multiple clients running. Do you think anyone believes that lie anymore? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12543	Posted - 2015.04.06 23:44:20 - [47] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Except we didn't break the EULA, and still got banned. No one believes you lot on that, except yourselves. Quote: CCP could have saved face ages ago if they were willing to come to the table and discuss this issue with us like civilized human beings. You still don't get it yet. There is no "come to the table", there is no negotiation, no deal, no discussing this. You lose. Stop cheating. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12546	Posted - 2015.04.07 12:32:09 - [48] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: What part of "people were banned while following CCP's new rules" do you not understand? I understand the claim, I just think it's a lie. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12546	Posted - 2015.04.07 13:02:30 - [49] - Quote Charadrass wrote: i truly believe that no one voting against multiboxing has ever done it. period. I alt tab routinely, and have often run multiple clients between two computers. But I don't cheat, and I never have. Quote: were doing this to get a clear statement from ccp about the eula conformable multiboxing. It wasn't clear before? Here, I'll restate it. Stop. Cheating. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12547	Posted - 2015.04.07 15:36:07 - [50] - Quote Charadrass wrote: I am using my keyboard with windows to control my 10 boxes nearly simultainously. no third party software involved. what should i stop doing? You even admit to macroing, and then spend page after page of "I did nothing wrong!" Do you wonder why no one feels sorry for you lot? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12547	Posted - 2015.04.07 15:39:40 - [51] - Quote Jason Xado wrote: 1.) Why did I wake up one morning a cheater, when I wasn't a cheater the day before? You always were, CCP just finally woke up and decided to enforce it. They were even really nice about it and gave you a dropoff date, instead of just banning you all outright like I would have. Quote: 2.) Why does CCP and the CSM not want solo players to be able to defend themselves against group players? Strawman. CCP doesn't want hordes of farmers and quasi botters stripping the game of content from genuine solo players, whom your kind crowd out. Quote: 3.) Why is CCP and the CSM wanting to force me to "group up" in a sand box game. This is an MMO. "Multi. Player." Not "single player with twenty plus accounts". Why you ever thought this was okay is beyond me. A few accounts? Sure, everyone has to scan or trade or haul, and those aren't viable for main accounts. But as many as some of the abusers have been? That is just obscene, a blight on the industry itself. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12549	Posted - 2015.04.07 17:19:51 - [52] - Quote Jason Xado wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: genuine solo players Sure as long as those "genuine solo players" don't have the tools to defend themselves from the groups all is good, correct? If they want to defend themselves from the groups they should "group up", correct? We wouldn't want those solo players to be able to defend themselves from groups now would we. That would just be wrong. ISBoxers are part of "the groups", so I really don't know what you're going on about. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12585	Posted - 2015.04.10 13:51:56 - [53] - Quote Charadrass wrote: if ccp is naming their game a sandbox game, they shouldnt interfere too much with it, cause forcing pilots into playing with others if they dont want to is not a sandbox. And being told that you can't automate twenty plus accounts simultaneously with the precision of a machine is not "forcing" you to play with others. It's simply taking a grossly unfair advantage out of your hands, finally. Your exact same argument can be made about botting, by the way. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12585	Posted - 2015.04.10 14:34:40 - [54] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: You're conflating ISBoxing and botting. Stop it. You're only underlining your own ignorance of both. They're extremely similar, that's why you want to avoid the comparison. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12590	Posted - 2015.04.11 02:15:51 - [55] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: When a player can be banned for being too efficient at the game, there is a problem with those running the game. I'd be highly interested in seeing some actual proof of this happening, and not from those bot apologists at dualboxing.com, too. Thus far, Nolak's only attempt at this, when I asked for it, was to show a guy who was clearly in violation by using macros. After that he kept blustering and refusing to post anything else for a serious attempt at proof. Quote: When those running the game just ignore valid questions and concerns it shows a complete lack of regard for EVERY paying customer, who will they point the "I/we don't like how you play" ban stick to next? They set that particular precedent some time ago, and people like you (possibly actually you, idk, the whole thread got deleted) cheered and applauded. I take great delight in twisting the knife now. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12592	Posted - 2015.04.11 11:58:02 - [56] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: You choose to believe everyone on the multibox forums is telling lies, I'm not prepared to call them liars without proof. It's not without cause. The fact that the video showing someone doing "nothing wrong" clearly violated the rules is my cause for doing so. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12592	Posted - 2015.04.11 14:16:30 - [57] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: We already went over this ten times before, but I shall do it again: No one is listening to your excuses and your wild attempts at deflection. Proof or stfu. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12648	Posted - 2015.04.17 09:47:14 - [58] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: We have a built-in software KVM switch with ISBoxer where it only sends one output to one computer per input, and it got a player banned, so clearly either you or CCP is misinformed. Or, third option. Whomever said that is lying to cover their cheating, and hoping to stir up controversy and reverse their ban. Which is pretty much the TL;DR for the last hundred and fifty pages of this thread. Well, that and blatant smokescreen and shifting goalposts by the ISBotters. No one wants to ban all multiboxing, alt tab is fine and always will be. People want to ban cheating, where you control twenty different accounts with robotic precision. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12649	Posted - 2015.04.17 11:39:12 - [59] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: So Multiple screens should be banned. Couldn't even make it a full paragraph before throwing up another smokescreen. Quote: Why because you can't afford them? This sentence reveals more than you intended it to. You think that you should receive an in game advantage based on an out of game purchase. That purchase being ISBoxer. You attempt to deflect this by claiming hardware peripherals, but the truth of the matter is that you're just trying to defend your having paid for ISBoxer. Quote: The ongoing problem is, with no real method of detection other than human interpretation of server logs, innocent players are equally at risk of being banned as the few who may choose to break the new rules. Show me one. Nolak tried, and he accidentally revealed yet another macro cheater. Got a better attempt? Maybe one that doesn't come from those bot-apologists at dualboxing.com, better yet? "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12664	Posted - 2015.04.18 19:16:26 - [60] - Quote I love the insinuation that Steve is the one with an agenda here. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.

Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12664	Posted - 2015.04.18 19:27:32 - [61] - Quote ShadowandLight wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: I love the insinuation that Steve is the one with an agenda here. he doesnt have an agenda as much as he as had a bias and narrative But you guys definitely dont, no sir. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12664	Posted - 2015.04.18 19:38:35 - [62] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Neither do you, of course. I absolutely do, I'm not going to be dishonest about it like you guys. I am extremely glad that CCP finally decided to stand up to this cheating, it took them far too long to begin with. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12665	Posted - 2015.04.18 19:52:40 - [63] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: Kaarous Aldurald wrote: Nolak Ataru wrote: Neither do you, of course. I absolutely do, I'm not going to be dishonest about it like you guys. Uh, we weren't dishonest about it either. We came out from the start opposed to this, and were pointing out from day 1 that there are multiple programs that also violate 6A2 and 6A3 that CCP has not touched. Quote: I am extremely glad that CCP finally decided to stand up to this cheating, it took them far too long to begin with. You still have yet to prove that it is cheating without resorting to circular logic and fallacies. And more smokescreens. Of course, it's not worth actually talking to you about this, because you will never admit to the truth. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12672	Posted - 2015.04.19 00:40:04 - [64] - Quote Sgt Ocker wrote: Truth according to Kaarous - Anything he chooses it to be. No, I am simply accepting CCP's ruling on this one. I've long considered ISBoxer to be outright cheating, and finally CCP had the balls to do something about it. Quote: NB; Are all scammers and gankers cheats? Nope. They play the game by the game's rules, not use a third party program or a macro setup to control twenty accounts simultaneously. There's nothing subjective about it, and there is no moral equivalency either. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12676	Posted - 2015.04.19 08:56:02 - [65] - Quote Lucas Kell wrote: As are we You might want to talk to Nolak then, since he's blowing your cover with his ranting about Teamspeak and EveMon and stuff. Quote: we just want clarification for where the line is drawn as manual multiboxers are definitely going to get caught up in the rules. And thus far, the one time someone has tried to provide proof to me of that, they exposed another person using macros. So I really don't buy that. No one ever got banned for alt tabbing, and no one ever will. This sneaky **** with keyboard macros, auto scrolling, and twenty client windows? I certainly won't miss anyone doing that. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12684	Posted - 2015.04.19 20:15:59 - [66] - Quote Archibald Thistlewaite III wrote: Nolak Ataru wrote: Wrong. The person I "exposed", as you put it, was using either RoundRobin or VideoFX manipulation, both of which are allowed under the new EULA. There is no new EULA. RoundRobin breaks Eve's EULA/TOS & policies. VideoFX manipulation can be used to break Eve's EULA/TOS & policies, when for example it is used to create those dashboard set ups. Stop incorrectly telling people what is allowed, you may end up getting them banned if they believe you. +1. I honestly don't know why this self delusion persists. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12689	Posted - 2015.04.20 20:45:05 - [67] - Quote Nolak Ataru wrote: We gave you the proof. CCP removed said proof. Bull. **. Quote:** We posted on the dual-boxing forum said proof and contact information for those who didn't post their proof. That bot apologist website is only proof that you're trying to shield yourselves from being rightfully banned. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.
Kaarous Aldurald Glorious Revolutionary Armed Forces of Highsec CODE. 12976	Posted - 2015.05.13 11:56:51 - [68] - Quote Teckos Pech wrote: GankYou wrote: Teckos Pech, I always replied with tongue in cheek here - they have far too much at stake to agree to any of the points presented, instead they ask questions. When you're the one providing answers to questions they seemingly can't either formulate, comprehend, or refuse to answer themselves, then, the war has already been won. See you in half a year, when New Eden is healthier, guise. Yes, you are probably right....I'll go ahead and do my best to let Lucas, et. al. have the last word....there is a non-zero probability I might fail though. Personally I suggest blocking him. I did that a while ago, and I only un-hide him to troll this desperate quest to be allowed to cheat once again at EVE Online. Seriously, I don't know if this thread cracks me up or sickens me. It's like being on Test comms, equal parts amusing and nauseating. "Verily, I have often laughed at the weaklings who thought themselves good because they had no claws." One of ours, ten of theirs. Best Meltdown Ever.

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.