CCP prohibiting input broadcasting/multiplexing beginning January 2015

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Alex66

I meant exactly what I said - "any action which can make them reconsider". that encompasses suggesting alternatives, pleading, boozing, pointing out that they explicitly allowed input multiplexing in the past, and yes, if all of the above fail, threatening the loss of subs. As long as it makes them pause and think again.

---

Trust me, they've considered the loss of subs already. There is no way that a change like this can go through without their accounting department raising hell about how many subs that can be potentially lost due to these changes. As for CCP's previous stance on key duplication, they are free to change their stance at any time they wish. The actual stance they had was, "this isn't technically allowed, but we are not going to pursue any violations of this nature at this time." Their EULA did in fact make the use of ISBoxer a non-compliance to the EULA, they just decided to not enforce it until now. Yes, this is a change in stance, but they did not "allow" it previously as so many players are claiming.

As for suggesting an alternative. What alternative could there possibly be to "We don't want you to control so many accounts at once with key duplication" is there? And please do not make any suggestions that are out of self-interest. I have seen so many multiboxers suggesting "Please ban multiboxing for PVP only. Mining shoudln't be affected by this" or "at least let me move things to cans" All of these people are only interested in self preservation of their own game style and they have no interest in an actual alternative to what CCP wants. Only an alternative to what THEY want.

Good post, Crayonbox. At least now I understand what you were trying to say in the one before (I was under impression you were saying "learn Isboxer, because input broadcasting can be replaced by equally efficient other features in it"). I apologize if I sounded offensive replying to it.

I guess there are different groups of multiboxers in each game - one that grew into boxing a certain game from solo, and one that came into the same game with full team. I am from the latter group in Eve - the game has zero interest to me as solo player, as is going beyond my 5 accounts while boxing. The change affects us somewhat differently too - I view it as a backstab, given that it was very clearly articulated by CCP in the past that input multiplexing is perfectly fine. Can I still box my 5 accounts come Jan 1? Yes. But it will not be the gameplay I came for, and if I decide to quit, it will be with anger at CCP for making me waste time and money because I'd not be nowhere even close to what my plans were in this game.

I only post multiboxer related stuff on this forum and isboxer one, and I never ever tell people in-game that I multibox. I had my share of grief from players in other games. But I feel each of us deserve to let his/her opinion known on this forum too.

Edit: on CCP stance in the past:
http://oldforums.eveonline.com/?a=to...1414934473#274

"Lastly, multiboxing is allowed, and programs designed for multiboxing in mind which allow a player to manually issue the same command to multiple game clients at the same time are allowed. In the same vein as what has been stated above, the player must be manually sending the commands; if a program is automating those commands for you, then it would be considered a breach of our EULA."

So, no -they were very explicit about input multiplexing, it was ALLOWED, they were not turning blind eye on it as you say.

Something that I missed about that post initially, and only spotted this morning was the bit directly above the quote you've excerpted:

Quote:

---

The old, out of date, post can be seen below as it originally appeared:

---

So, since GM Lelouch made that addition, in Feb 2013, that's not been the case, and they have been letting it happen it even though they no longer explicitly allowed it.

That post by GM Lelouch has been the bane of CCP since this entire issue has been brought up haha.

GMs do not have the authority to really say what is allowed and what isnt. they merely enforce the "law". They are more like the police. The devs are more like the supreme court and legislature all rolled into one. They are the ones with the absolute power over what is and isnt allowed.

That post has been clarified over and over in following posts about how its still not endorsed or "allowed" per se by CCP but they are are not enforcing said rule. Due to legal reasons, they never say it in those words specifically, but thats the gist of it.

To my knowledge, CCP has not withrawn Lelouch's statement in the past, they just issued qualifiers. Essentially in lawyer talk I think it means his statement on core input multiplexing is still true. Look at wording of this statement in the latest announcement, they "limit" the use of input broadcasting, rather than "allow" it:

Starting from 01.01.2015 the use of Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing is limited to activities which do not impact the Eve universe,

True, they have full rights to change the rules as thy see fit, but I am baffled why some people on this forum appear to defend them and their actions.

"Everything which is not forbidden is allowed" is a constitutional principle of English law — an essential freedom of the ordinary citizen.

The jocular saying is that, in England, "everything which is not forbidden is allowed", while, in Germany, the opposite applies, so "everything which is not allowed is forbidden". This may be extended to France — "everything is allowed even if it is forbidden"^[5] — and Russia where "everything is forbidden, even that which is expressly allowed".^[6]

... I must be one weird Russian, lol.

P.S. I am also curious how CCP is going to handle false postives arising from fleet warps (as someone on the EVE boards asked https://forums.eveonline.com/default...91#post5262891). While it is not input broadcasting, clients will simultaneously register a warp command from one IP, which should get alarm bells ringing at CCP's watchdog.

[quote]"Everything which is not forbidden is allowed" is a constitutional principle of English law — an essential freedom of the ordinary citizen.

The jocular saying is that, in England, "everything which is not forbidden is allowed", while, in Germany, the opposite applies, so "everything which is not allowed is forbidden". This may be extended to France — "everything is allowed even if it is forbidden"^[5] — and Russia where "everything is forbidden, even that which is expressly allowed".^[6]"

Uhh yeah, let us know when EVE is governed by constitutional principles of English law. It is not hard to defend a company that is making changes to try to improve the game, particularly when certain multiboxers have been specifically abusing what they were allowed to do.

Quote:

---

P.S. I am also curious how CCP is going to handle false postives arising from fleet warps (as someone on the EVE boards asked https://forums.eveonline.com/default...91#post5262891). While it is not input broadcasting, clients will simultaneously register a warp command from one IP, which should get alarm bells ringing at CCP's watchdog.

---

The only false positive you can expect from fleet warps is from player reports, and once they realize they're an idiot for reporting that, they probably won't do it again. It is common knowledge that one person can warp the fleet using functionality built into the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lax

It is not hard to defend a company that is making changes to try to improve the game, particularly when certain multiboxers have been specifically abusing what they were allowed to do.

---

If someone abuses the rules, make new rules that target abusers, not all populace. CCP is making changes that certainly do not improve the game for me as 5-man boxer, quite the opposite. Besides, one can argue that any game is better off without multiboxers, but developers tolerate us because we bring additional income. There is sort of fragile "understanding" between us, and in case of EVE it is at risk now, arguably because some boxers were abusing the rules, I do not dispute that. Still, I am sure they could have thought of solutions other than outright ban on input multiplexing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lax

It is not hard to defend a company that is making changes to try to improve the game

---

Are they trying to improve the game?
Or are they just listening to the loudest gobshites on their forum, again?

I don't see anything in the announcement that explains *why* they are making this change?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default...posts&t=387571

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lax

particularly when certain multiboxers have been specifically abusing what they were allowed to do.

---

How is it abuse if it is allowed?

I'm not affected by this change, I stopped 11-boxing Eve when they fucked over ice mining last year.

However, I am appalled at this change.

Everyone goes on about how Eve is a sandbox but it seems you can't quite do anything you want in CCPs sandbox.

Eve has never been about fair fights. The gobshites whining about being ganked by a MB fleet are probably the same motherfuckers who will happily sit on a gate with a fleet and gank pilots just trying to pass through - how is that different? You're dead to the ships from X accounts whether they are being MultiBoxed or not?

Do I get compensation next time a multi-account fleet catches me at a gate? Hypothetical question, really, as I've only lost 2 ships to real people in all my years in Eve and I've never even shot at another person's ship (the only ship I ever killed was my own, when MB targetting went wrong!).

What about the arseholes who, with one account set up a buy order using the Margin Trading scam^H^H^H^H skill and with another advertise/sell the requested goods at OTT prices? That would appear to be multiple accounts having an impact on the EVE universe!

Eve is such a dichotomy - on the one hand it is an immensely addictive game which I keep coming back to whilst on the other it is full of the biggest bunch of cunts in the gaming environment, who I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by moog

Are they trying to improve the game?
Or are they just listening to the loudest gobshites on their forum, again?

I don't see anything in the announcement that explains *why* they are making this change?
https://forums.eveonline.com/default...posts&t=387571



How is it abuse if it is allowed?

I'm not affected by this change, I stopped 11-boxing Eve when they fucked over ice mining last year.

However, I am appalled at this change.

Everyone goes on about how Eve is a sandbox but it seems you can't quite do anything you want in CCPs sandbox.

Eve has never been about fair fights. The gobshites whining about being ganked by a MB fleet are probably the same motherfuckers who will happily sit on a gate with a fleet and gank pilots just trying to pass through - how is that different? You're dead to the ships from X accounts whether they are being MultiBoxed or not?

Do I get compensation next time a multi-account fleet catches me at a gate? Hypothetical question, really, as I've only lost 2 ships to real people in all my years in Eve and I've never even shot at another person's ship (the only ship I ever killed was my own, when MB targetting went wrong!).

What about the arseholes who, with one account set up a buy order using the Margin Trading scam^H^H^H^H skill and with another advertise/sell the requested goods at OTT prices? That would appear to be multiple accounts having an impact on the EVE universe!

Eve is such a dichotomy - on the one hand it is an immensely addictive game which I keep coming back to whilst on the other it is full of the biggest bunch of cunts in the gaming environment, who I wouldn't piss on if they were on fire!

---

I totally agree. Eve allows the most rotten of scammers to operate. We have spies killing billion isk ships people stealing corp assets, exploitation of the noobs and economy for personal gain, massive capital fleets that can roll anything in the game. Yet hey are concerned with multiboxers affecting game play? WTF? Abusing mutliboxing..what a joke. I guess when a fleet of neutrals come into my system to kill my miners I must be abusing the system by trying to run and hide. I live in Catch where PL is roaming in capital fleets with titans taking system after system. There is nothing anyone can do to stop them but multiboxing is the problem huh. A few days ago they were roaming with 7 titans and about 20 supers not to mention their sub cap fleet. The only thing keeping them from just taking all of catch is they like cat and mouse games. They are the cat just swatting around the little mice. If they kill the mouse they would have no more fun. So if CCP is worried about anything having a negative effect on game play they need to focus their attention on their game mechanics instead of multiboxers.

<3 Moog