|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 9 post(s) |
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1048
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 16:21:24 -
[1] - Quote
Glad to see some positions finally being taken in this matter. Indecision in this matter was always way more damning than the actual resolution, in my opinion. My respect goes to CCP Falcon and any other individuals involved in taking a position here.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1051
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 16:27:21 -
[2] - Quote
Commander Insignia wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Ama Scelesta wrote:RIP ISBoxer? ISBoxer has some great uses outside of it's broadcasting functions. So maybe, but probably not. it really doesnt It's moderately useful for manual multiboxing. When I was more active with Goonswarm Federation's combat special interest groups, I'd use isboxer to make it a little easier to switch between windows, and to tile windows across my screen. I'm not technically apt enough to understand how to do input multiplexing properly, and the type of PvP I was doing wasn't really conducive to it anyways.
That being said, the primary benefit for using it is definitely being castrated.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1051
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 16:32:49 -
[3] - Quote
Cue several dozen pages of people trying to invent increasingly complex vignettes that attempt to subvert the letter of the decision to legitimize actions that violate its spirit.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1054
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 16:42:18 -
[4] - Quote
Capqu wrote:progstate wrote:knobber Jobbler wrote:CCP FoxFour wrote:Ama Scelesta wrote:RIP ISBoxer? ISBoxer has some great uses outside of it's broadcasting functions. So maybe, but probably not. Your response is a bit like "Well, bumping Titans is kind of not allowed in some circumstances". Being a bit more specific on this topic would probably be appreciated. Well then be more specific in asking questions. @CCP : is using ISBOXER broadcasting to run a bomber wing or a synchronised fleet of mining vessels now against the EULA? i told u son you can still use isboxer to have multiple clients on the same screen you can no longer use isboxer to send commands to more than one client at a time you have never been able to use isboxer to automatically send commands is that clear enough? thats pretty much what the OP says btw Honestly, I wouldn't waste your time trying to explain it. People are going to try to test the limits of the decision, regardless of how many people tell them they aren't helping. At this point, I think it is better to let them delude themselves. That way, when they continue doing whatever it is they are doing, they get banned. At that point, we get to laugh at them a lot for being idiots.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1061
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 16:45:47 -
[5] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:Wait - hold on, just thought of something -
G15 and related keyboards are now banned??? They allow one keyboard click to do F1-F8 simultaneously
Although grouping guns in game does the same thing - except smartbombs I'm sure if you find enough edge cases, CCP will surely reverse the decision! Keep fishing! The fate of Eve depends on your efforts!
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1064
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 17:00:19 -
[6] - Quote
Kenneth Feld wrote:No, but the fact I am running Mac OSX and it provides these functions, how would the distinguish between legal and illegal actions. I run 6 monitors and typically have 12-25 clients running, i can see every client on the screens simultaneously, so clicking from screen to screen and pressing keyboard buttons happens super fast and I can broadcast to multiple clients or a single client, but clicking from one to the other is instant.
The default would be ban first and sort it out later. I dont' have that kind of time, it took me 5 months to get a simple reimbursement thru the CCP bureaucracy, i can't imagine how many years a petition here would take.
Just thinking outloud, I could make a script to cycle the windows and do the commands a window at a time, them I am not broadcasting to multiple clients - this may work after all
The bold part is the part you should probably cease.
If you're worried about it, don't do it. Simple.
You've got a month and change to start practicing.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1068
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 17:08:49 -
[7] - Quote
Kant Boards wrote:Kenneth Feld wrote:No, but the fact I am running Mac OSX and it provides these functions, how would the distinguish between legal and illegal actions. I run 6 monitors and typically have 12-25 clients running, i can see every client on the screens simultaneously, so clicking from screen to screen and pressing keyboard buttons happens super fast and I can broadcast to multiple clients or a single client, but clicking from one to the other is instant.
The default would be ban first and sort it out later. I dont' have that kind of time, it took me 5 months to get a simple reimbursement thru the CCP bureaucracy, i can't imagine how many years a petition here would take.
Just thinking outloud, I could make a script to cycle the windows and do the commands a window at a time, them I am not broadcasting to multiple clients - this may work after all
Haha isnt this guy the one who went on and on about how people need to adapt and put in more work when the reprocessing and jump changes went in?? Sounds like you need to practice what you preach bud You are quite correct. It makes his lamentations all the more enjoyable.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1073
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 17:21:19 -
[8] - Quote
embrel wrote:Stephan Schneider wrote:all the lost money for ccp
i can see hundreds of mining alts just die
just change it so the ban only goes for pvp related activities They'll hardly lose a buck. Don't see a ISboxer actually paying for his accounts. Any drop in PLEX prices already?? A good day for Eve. And the whiners who whine that other people whined successfully... LOL Do you really think that people subscribing with PLEX somehow deny CCP a sale? People who PLEX their accounts are just paying with someone else's money. CCP gets theirs no matter what. In fact, every account sustained via PLEX grosses CCP 33% MORE money than the same account kept alive with a traditional subscription, due to PLEX costing $20 (compared to the traditional sub costing $15.)
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1076
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 17:30:26 -
[9] - Quote
It is pretty funny that some folks think they have a case for getting reimbursed for following the Flavor Of The Month.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1084
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 17:47:29 -
[10] - Quote
Jur Grady wrote:Not Primary Disengage wrote:this is a mistake. i would not have resubscribed if I knew this would be restricted.
No other MMO restricts this and no other MMO is as well suited towards it as EVE.
Perhaps fixing your game is the solution and not banning activities that exploit its flaws.
Disappointing how Devs can make a complete 180.
Please refund my accounts. I would also point out that they are fixing the game they are closing this loophole you have been using to ISbox. Also you admit to exploiting the game in a post on their forums sounds like a good plan. To be fair, they are instituting a grace period whereupon anyone who mulitplexes inputs is not banned.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1092
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:11:06 -
[11] - Quote
ShadowandLight wrote:CCP Falcon, you stated multi boxing isn't banned in the thread of mine you locked. https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=5241567#post5241567 But In your own policy you seem to walk a very fine line between multi boxing and input duplication (using a mouse and keyboard to control multiple clients). Quote:Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing of actions with consequences in the EVE universe, are prohibited and will be policed in the same manner as Input Automation.
This includes, but isnGÇÖt limited to:
GÇóActivation and control of ships and modules GÇóNavigation and movement within the EVE universe GÇóMovement of assets and items within the EVE universe GÇóInteraction with other characters So per your last statement you called my post rumor mongering, which I really am not. The entire point of isboxer is to allow a mouse and keyboard to control multiple clients effectively. This will kill a major reason to use such software. The point is that isboxer has legitimate uses outside of input multiplexing, and that those uses aren't being banned. You can continue to use the CPU management properties of the software, as well as its ability to tile windows and its hotkeys for switching between them. Yes, the primary benefit of using the software is being castrated, but it does not render the whole thing against the rules.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1092
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:16:30 -
[12] - Quote
The EULA also has a provision that allows CCP to change the game however they want, including in ways that might be detrimental to your choice of gameplay, without owing you anything.
It's pretty safe to say that there was significant decision WRT the bottom line involved in making this decision.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1100
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:19:49 -
[13] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Big +1 on the decision, but I'm worried it doesn't go far enough. People will just purchase more screens, and manually control multiple accounts. It'll be harder, surely, but it's still viable to manually control a 10 ship tornado gank fleet or procurer mining fleet. The only sure way to get rid of multiboxing, and entitle everyone equally to the actions of one character at a time, is to get rid of multiboxing entirely. This will probably never happen. This game is pretty much impossible to play on any meaningful level without multiboxing.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1100
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:22:21 -
[14] - Quote
Zechariah Jericho wrote:Guys the toxic is getting high Was in the middle of showing a friend this game, got to general discussion "what's that?" >>> 6 minutes later he decides he doesn't want to play because of our community and how badly we're reacting to the news that people cannot play the way they want to.
last words of the discussion were (and I quote) "Some sandbox, lets just go play LoL" This is a lie.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1105
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:29:09 -
[15] - Quote
Ancy Denaries wrote:Querns wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Big +1 on the decision, but I'm worried it doesn't go far enough. People will just purchase more screens, and manually control multiple accounts. It'll be harder, surely, but it's still viable to manually control a 10 ship tornado gank fleet or procurer mining fleet. The only sure way to get rid of multiboxing, and entitle everyone equally to the actions of one character at a time, is to get rid of multiboxing entirely. This will probably never happen. This game is pretty much impossible to play on any meaningful level without multiboxing. It really is not, but people are not willing to rely on specialised friends to do what you "can easily do with an alt". You and I have differing definitions of "meaningful," I suppose.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1105
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:33:16 -
[16] - Quote
Veers Belvar wrote:Querns wrote:Veers Belvar wrote:Big +1 on the decision, but I'm worried it doesn't go far enough. People will just purchase more screens, and manually control multiple accounts. It'll be harder, surely, but it's still viable to manually control a 10 ship tornado gank fleet or procurer mining fleet. The only sure way to get rid of multiboxing, and entitle everyone equally to the actions of one character at a time, is to get rid of multiboxing entirely. This will probably never happen. This game is pretty much impossible to play on any meaningful level without multiboxing. Nonsense....I've always played single account at a time and done fine. Either do solo stuff or get friends. 10 man nado fleets controlled by a single player are ridiculous, whether using ISBoxer or not. You can multibox in this game without operating a 10 man fleet. Adding as little as one account to your repertoire radically transforms your game experience. I highly recommend it.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1112
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 18:38:18 -
[17] - Quote
Hopelesshobo wrote:So, because broadcasting is being banned as of 01 Jan 2015, does that mean on 01 Jan 2015, cloaks will be reverted again to not decloaking each other while cloaked since the main reason this was changed back was to nerf broadcasting bombers together? Doubtful. If anything, it'll cement the current mechanics. AFAICT, the original intention was to nerf ISBoxered bombers. When they started speaking up and telling CCP that it wouldn't, they backed off on it.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1132
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 20:40:53 -
[18] - Quote
Watching the PLEX rollercoaster has been very amusing.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1135
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 20:55:47 -
[19] - Quote
Mike Vandenberg wrote:This disappoints me. I don't use ISBoxer but don't have a problem with people who use it to multibox. I know CCP Falcon is stating that multiboxing isn't banned....but inhertited with multi-boxing is keyboard multiplexing either through software or hardware and this has always been ok. I think this is a little overkill. I think it hurts everyone. I can appreciate banning macros but banning people who are sitting in front of the computer, running multiple accounts, using the keyboard or mouse to control the accounts, what a disappointment.
Next you're going to want to ban multiple accounts, or ip bans, or other equaly stupid moves. As a person who pays for my multiple accounts with cash, I give two thumbs down on this decision. It doesn't hurt me. I have never used input multiplexing to multibox in Eve.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1144
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 21:37:54 -
[20] - Quote
Balder Verdandi wrote:Steve Ronuken wrote:Fonac wrote:So is-boxer is banned?
edit: I Honestly dont care about is-boxer or what it can do, since i've never used it, or met anyone who uses it. But the OP is not very clear on it. isboxer isn't banned. Some of the things isboxer can do are banned. CCP & CSM's ... Posts like this do absolutely zero good. You both need to detail what IS allowed, and what ISN'T allowed. This typical "VagueBook" garbage doesn't fly with any of the players, and a simple explanation detailing what is allowed and what isn't, in a bullet style list, wouldn't have gotten you 40 pages of "please explain what you mean" posts. Seriously, stop beating your heads with boards like in Monty Python and talk to us like adults. We're grown ups, we can handle it. There's no ambiguity here. Does it transmit one keystroke or mouse click to multiple clients, outside of the context of logging in? If so, then it's banned. If not, go hog wild.
Any attempts to find edge cases to this simple truth are unabashed sophistry.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1149
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 22:10:03 -
[21] - Quote
Tyberius Franklin wrote:Javajunky wrote:Causing people to unsub accounts when CCP is still laying people off periodically, me thinks someone didn't run this by the people who worry about how to make payroll...
Aside from that... Sov Still Broke - Yep POS Still Broke - Yep Single Core / Tidi Problems - Yep
Keep dangling "ooh shiny stuff", next you'll be selling me on Obamacare. How is this related to SOV, POS's or Tidi? Or is there some expectation that they shouldn't do anything before those are done despite being far more intensive than anything related to this policy change and presenting no reason to delay it once the decision was made? It's not. He's one of those types that thinks all CCP employee time is fully fungible between all potential issues with the game, and that any time spent in one area comes at complete detriment to another, despite things like this change being strictly about internal policy towards game actions and is being brought about by non-programming CCP staff.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1153
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 22:56:55 -
[22] - Quote
Godren Storm wrote:Fleet Warp would fall under these guidelines. Also the signing of drones to another player would fall under this outline. One account broadcasting a single action to more than one accounts. Food for thought. Not really. Neither of these activities is granted by using an external application GÇö-áthey're in the Eve client by default. As such, they don't qualify.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1153
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 22:59:24 -
[23] - Quote
Bethan Le Troix wrote: Wouldn't it be clearer and better just to say all use of ISBoxer & similar software is against the EULA and have done with it ??
ISBoxer isn't the only software that allows input multiplexing. Banning ISBoxer outright as the sole action of the change would just make everyone move over to another brand of software that does the same thing.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
Querns
GBS Logistics and Fives Support Goonswarm Federation
1153
|
Posted - 2014.11.25 23:10:42 -
[24] - Quote
Bethan Le Troix wrote:Querns wrote:Bethan Le Troix wrote: Wouldn't it be clearer and better just to say all use of ISBoxer & similar software is against the EULA and have done with it ??
ISBoxer isn't the only software that allows input multiplexing. Banning ISBoxer outright as the sole action of the change would just make everyone move over to another brand of software that does the same thing. Well obviously all types of software that do the same activity would be banned. Don't split hairs. That is essentially what is being proposed, right now. It has the bonus of not having to enumerate the individual varieties of software, and it leaves ISBoxer's legitimate uses intact. It's a good compromise.
This post was crafted by the wormhole expert of the Goonswarm Economic Warfare Cabal, the foremost authority on Eve: Online economics and gameplay.
|
|
|
|