|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
31
|
Posted - 2014.11.27 19:12:55 -
[1] - Quote
Cervix Thumper wrote:Going back a few pages... Mike Azariah wrote: 3) Yes there are workarounds, some using ISBoxer, others using scripted mice or keyboard. Some are fair game others skate close enough to the edge that they risk a ban. Basically it comes down to a question of economics. Are you willing to risk ALL your accounts (and assets) being banned by skating on the thin ice knowingly? Risk vs reward in the metagame.
This is very disturbing. For a few reasons. A 1 man team of 10 gets caught... 10 accounts banned? As opposed to the main that is commanding the fleet that is the account that ISboxer is logged into? That is kind of harsh. Then 10 acct fleet teams up with some buddies for a roam... All parties involved would have to be investigated and I am sure the ban hammer would not spare some of the innocents. This seems like it would be an administrative nightmare investigating false claims, alt accts replying they were acting independently, and the fleet members that really had nothing to do with any transgression. In reality the punishment doesn't fit the crime. Banning AN account would. Banning all no. Oh wait then if the TOS / EULA isn't updated to include this and some will say they haven't read THIS forum discussion.. oops they still get banned anyway? That just doesn't fit right. Edit after thought... if a player owns 10 toons and 3 were involved in the transgression.. all 10 are baned?
Thats why there's a month ban first. As stated in the OP. I'm also pretty sure that only those accounts which are actually broadcasting/recieving the broadcasts will get banned, since all detection will be on their servers when commands enter. The other people will not constantly hit every button at the exact same time. |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
31
|
Posted - 2014.11.28 18:31:47 -
[2] - Quote
Cervix Thumper wrote:Deck Cadelanne wrote:[quote=Nolak Ataru] You unsub the nine characters you are currently using in-game ISK to pay for, all that happens is you reduce the demand for PLEX ever so slightly.
no actually that is backasswards. You have have toons on subscription. when you unsubscribe them they rely on in game currency (Isk) to purchase Plex to extend the monthly play time. This drives the price of plex UP because they are no longer on subscription terms. O_o Some of the gob that spews on this forum is just incredible. unsubscribing is not the same as quitting... make no mistake about it. They are just not going to pay real hard currency into CCP's wallet anymore.
Price of subscription: 10-15 euro. Price of plex: 20 euro. How do you figure they will continue playing without paying real hard currency? Someone else might pay for them through plex, but someone pays aslong as they play, and with plex they pay even more than they would by "dropping real hard currency into ccp's wallet". |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
31
|
Posted - 2014.11.28 19:08:37 -
[3] - Quote
Cervix Thumper wrote:Miomeifeng Alduin wrote:
Price of subscription: 10-15 euro. Price of plex: 20 euro. How do you figure they will continue playing without paying real hard currency? Someone else might pay for them through plex, but someone pays aslong as they play, and with plex they pay even more than they would by "dropping real hard currency into ccp's wallet".
again that is incorrect terms of the topic of this thread. A player can earn enough ISK to purchase a subscription for 1 month (plex) via ISK on the market within 1 month, is that correct? Thus if someone can unsubscribe AND earn enough ISK to pay for that account for the month they are playing for free. Now comes the sticky part... do boxers have enough advantage to earn that amount of ISK per character to unsubscribe and go completely independent? Possibly, depending on their skill level, game play style and actual game input time. It takes a lot of guts to unsub. Kudos for that. There will always be ppl selling Plex because they purchased it and want to buy the bigger shinier thing. I have seen boxers boast 1 bill ISK in a day or less... so what? I'm not at that level and 1 bill in a day divided by 10 accts = 100,000,000 . Yea that is doable but not at my level. If the person will unsub and can accomplish this across 9 toons... more power to them. That is well within their right to do so. To bash a person for doing so... that is just bad form.
Who do you think puts PLEX on the market? Players who bought it. It is impossible to play for free in this game. Someone always pays. CCP does NOT put plex on the market for free, it isn't seeded in stations or anything like that. Every plex that gets bought by someone "unsubscribing" (which isn't even correct), is paid for by another player who has paid 20 euro for it (or a bit less in the case of sales or certain deals).
If you can't understand that ...
Edit: its not because they dont pay for themselves, that they dont pay. (hell, they indirectly pay CCP more by buying plex off the market than they would by subscribing) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
33
|
Posted - 2014.11.29 19:27:18 -
[4] - Quote
Teckos Pech wrote:Nolak Ataru wrote:Teckos Pech wrote:A macro that duplicates an existing function in game is likely not going to result in a problem with CCP. So pointing to this is irrelevant and errant nonsense.
Note I was talking about not just activating F1-F8, but something like F1-F8 (step 1) AND say CTRLF1-CTRLF3 (step 2) at the same instant...that would be illegal game play as CCP expects people to do those two steps seperately. Except that once again, it isn't as stated by CCP Devs in hundreds of threads where people ask whether or not their G600/G510/G15 are against the EULA. CCP has repeatedly drawn a clear line between simple macros such as F1-F8 and a macro that has functionality similar to a mining bot program. I'm not going to take your word on it regarding keyboards and mice and CCP's position. I can see CCP allowing a "macro" that activates F1-FN and a seperate macro that activates CTRLF1-CTRLFN as those can be duplicated with 2 hands. But a single macro that does both? Show me a statement by CCP on that one.
To be honest, this is splitting hairs on the other side of the fence, since you can actually change your keybinds to have all your modules for example bound to "qwer" and have those modules activate simultaneously just by slamming your head against your keyboard ;) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
34
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 15:37:24 -
[5] - Quote
The Ironfist wrote:Hello CCP, I'm using ISboxer to ice Mine among other things such as for window management in PVP. To stay conform with the new rules regarding Multiboxing software I updated my profile. I would like to know if the following is within the rules because my understanding is that it is but I want to be sure. http://i.imgur.com/l2LccFu.png
What I use this for and what this does is simple. Every time I click the assigned key isboxer will synchronize the mouse courser position on the next client with the main clients then click control and then issue a left mouse click. Every time I click the assigned key it will do this first for client 1->2->3->4->5->end->1->.. when it reaches the last client it will reset and start again from client 1. I use this to lock up targets from the broadcast history window. Is that legit? Given that I'm doing one action to one client at a time? I also have a round-robin key for opening the ore hold on an active ship and every time I click it it opens the ore hold on one client same order as above 1->2->3->4->5->end->1-> My understanding is that I'm interacting with one client at a time and not sending commands to multiple clients with 1 action so it should be fine?
You dont understand the concept behind: 1 click = 1 action. and you need to physically click? hell, they way you describe it, it actually does sound a lot like botting which you're doing. (i know isboxer is not a botting program, but this guy sure makes it sound like one) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
35
|
Posted - 2014.11.30 17:38:27 -
[6] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:Miomeifeng Alduin wrote:You dont understand the concept behind: 1 click = 1 action. and you need to physically click? hell, they way you describe it, it actually does sound a lot like botting which you're doing. (i know isboxer is not a botting program, but this guy sure makes it sound like one) He would be doing one click for one action, he'd just be clicking in one spot for an action elsewhere. It's like a cyclical keybind. Commentus Nolen wrote:I tried to find this program "Video FX" and all I could find was a video editing program. Is Video FX the correct name? Yes, it's part of isboxer and can be seen here. For an eve specific example it can do things like this.
in that case i apologize. from the post it seemed for me, like it would be 1 click -> macro which goes through the list with a slight delay, and automating the process of doing everything. If its indeed 1 click -> 1 action, i believe it isn't against the rules stated. |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
35
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 20:39:28 -
[7] - Quote
Lucas Kell wrote:True, but then to me this change is too simple. So simple in fact that it doesn't address the problem. If people are able to with a minor change continue on as normal, then what was the point in changing anything to begin with? We'll just be back here with them looking for another change to make to solve the same issue.
Here i think you're a bit wrong. By that logic: why bother to change anything or to enforce anything in the rules of a game? People'll just find workarounds. By that logic you just say: sure, come on in and do everything which is against our rules, be it broadcasting, macro's, or even full bots. i mean: a change doesn't adress the problem, people'll just continue on with minor changes to what they do.
Small changes are the way to go about enforcing the rules. People know the spirit of the rule, but try to rulelawyer their way out of it. This says more about those people than about CCP imo. (Not saying that you are one of those people, i mean this in general) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
35
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 21:43:25 -
[8] - Quote
There has been a lot of rule lawyering in this topic already. see previous pages.
While it doesn't solve the entire issue, the change does make it a bit less practical. instead of just setting up a 1 click 10 accounts do something, it will now be 1 click, 1 account does something, with round robin 10 clicks, 10 accounts do something. It is a step in the direction that ccp wants. They obviously want that 1 click is 1 action on 1 account (replace click with keypress where applicable).
Guess we'll see though. I dont understand why everyone is defending the broadcasting if it "wont have an effect on the gameplay anyway". ;) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
35
|
Posted - 2014.12.04 22:21:01 -
[9] - Quote
Or, CCP means to have different playstyle mechanics. Some exciting (big battles, piracy, suicideganking, normal ganking), some boring (mining, missions, exploration in HS), and want to cater to all players, but just want 1 physical action done = 1 action ingame happens. Neither of us has any knowledge of CCP's thought/designprocesses regarding this, so it just doesn't matter to discuss this amoung ourselves.
The only thing which i've seen in the original post: 1 action = 1 action. no broadcasting, no multicasting, nothing of that. you want something to happen, you do it, on every client. That's gonna be the rule, this is just the advance notice being given.
The wrong path? for you maybe, clearly not for CCP. I mean: why complain about it if it doesn't change a thing. for over 114 pages no less ;)
Edit: to the post above me: and if CCP doesn't have issues with multiboxer fleets in any way, but just wants what's described in their own post: 1 click/keypress -> 1 action, then they outlaw broadcasting. Easy as that ;) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
36
|
Posted - 2014.12.05 22:23:18 -
[10] - Quote
Altirius Saldiaro wrote:Jera Phalax wrote: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. I want an answer to this from CCP as well. I just bought a Razer Naga 2014 mouse. It has 12 side buttons. Am I allowed to program those buttons to mimic keyboard keys? 1 button set to D. 2 button set to f1. Etc. Thats essentially what voice attack does, except voice attack is controlled with my voice. I say warp, my ship warps. I say orbit, my ship orbits. Instead of using my keyboard, I am using the addition buttons on my mouse or vocal commands to use the ingame shortcuts. Both Razor and VA use 3rd party programs to achieve their ability. CCP, please clarify this.
you need clarification for that? See one of the first pages, 1 input = 1 action. If this is true: you have nothing to worry about. 1 input = more than 1 action: not allowed. |
|
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
46
|
Posted - 2014.12.22 13:12:43 -
[11] - Quote
The main problem is that petitions dont matter. GM's direct people who file a petition to the forum, and here the persons in charge say that you need to file a petition to learn specifics. In the meantime nothing gets answered which is a serious problem in CCP's communication. |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
49
|
Posted - 2014.12.31 14:54:38 -
[12] - Quote
Nolak Ataru wrote:Klorrak wrote:except broadcasting can do more then what a normal player can do in PVP, but not in other aspects of the game. Sure for mining its much more efficient to manually do everything but controlling your own fleet gives u a huge advantage. People may say its not true but it does give you an advantage. The entire picture needs to be looked at not just one side. To sum up the wall of text: HTFU, and stop asking for CCP to hand everything to you on a silver platter. The mechanics are there for you to use to counter ISBoxers, but you must use them in order for them to work.
And so both sides come to an agreement: the other side needs to HTFU while the own side needs to have nothing changed :D
I'll repressent the other side here for a moment: HTFU and stop asking CCP to hand everything to you on a silver platter. The mechanics are there for you to use ISBoxer without broadcasting, but you aren't allowed to use broadcasting again. Have fun ;) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
49
|
Posted - 2015.01.01 18:47:49 -
[13] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Nidal Fervor wrote:As a multiboxer who hates isboxer and all input broadcasting, I'd just like to make one point.
If you see a fleet of characters warping from gate to gate all at the same time, you don't need to cheat to do this. Warp gang to stargate, and then right click stargate and select jump on each character. Simple. click the gate in overview, press D while in warp. it takes after you land.
I think you mean press D + click the gate. Just D doesn't do anything (just tested it to be sure that nothing changed). |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
50
|
Posted - 2015.01.01 21:41:00 -
[14] - Quote
Rain6637 wrote:Miomeifeng Alduin wrote:Rain6637 wrote:Nidal Fervor wrote:As a multiboxer who hates isboxer and all input broadcasting, I'd just like to make one point.
If you see a fleet of characters warping from gate to gate all at the same time, you don't need to cheat to do this. Warp gang to stargate, and then right click stargate and select jump on each character. Simple. click the gate in overview, press D while in warp. it takes after you land. I think you mean press D + click the gate. Just D doesn't do anything (just tested it to be sure that nothing changed). been using it for years. fleet warp, and on each client select the gate in overview, and press d. repeat. not only that, but if you click the wrong gate and press d, after you land the ship will warp to the wrong gate and jump. pressing control+space while in warp cancels the command. it's like hot locking, except hot docking/jumping. as soon as the FC says "gate is green" or "jump on contact" the client gets the d
Strange. Unless its something which only works with fleetwarp. tried multiple times, but i can't get it to work:
-initiate warp. -while in warp press D. -hang at 0 at the destination gate because no warp happens.
On my client, i can't use the hotkeys without clicking a target while pressing the hotkey. (been one of my major problems with the system. Is it a setting somewhere which i haven't found yet maybe? |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
50
|
Posted - 2015.01.02 04:51:30 -
[15] - Quote
ESN Seeker wrote:Miomeifeng Alduin wrote: Strange. Unless its something which only works with fleetwarp. tried multiple times, but i can't get it to work:
-initiate warp. -while in warp press D. -hang at 0 at the destination gate because no jump happens.
On my client, i can't use the hotkeys without clicking a target while pressing the hotkey. (been one of my major problems with the system. Is it a setting somewhere which i haven't found yet maybe?
Try this: Initiate warp. While in warp, left-click on destination gate -- this selects it. Press D.
With the extra click it actually works. Thanks for that hint (and Rain6637 too). Still find it strange that i have to select the gate a second time while in warp to actually get it to register, but i'll use which works :) |
Miomeifeng Alduin
Lithonauts Inc.
50
|
Posted - 2015.01.02 23:56:48 -
[16] - Quote
Gembert Wolt wrote:I would like to clear one question. May I use voice control application to control only one ship I fly? I play only with one character and would like to control ship via my voice just for pleasure.
Does your voice control software do 1 action, or multiple actions per command? 1 input = 1 action: you're fine. It's really not that hard if you actually read what's allowed. |
|
|
|