fair pvp^^ dude, dont wanna be offensive, but this is the last thing CCP/companies care about. This is business, its about money, not "fair pvp" lol
fair pvp^^ dude, dont wanna be offensive, but this is the last thing CCP/companies care about. This is business, its about money, not "fair pvp" lol
CCP stands to lose money with that decision, not make it. People were complaining about bomber fleets and freighter gate camps by boxers, so they had to react.Quote:
Originally Posted by spf
With work related stuff cutting into my play time I think this will be it for a while for me unless they change their stance, Its not just that things would be harder in ISBOXer(Just roundrobin everything, Roundrobin mouse clicks) its that their stance is after we sink all this money into the game and they say Multiboxing is fine and even the CCP employees use it alot they then pull a 180 and cater to the forum whiners. They could have made changes to curb excessive(I mean more than More than 10-15 Clients at a time) or something but they would rather kill it right off then try to reign it in to acceptable levels.
turning this thread away from debating the intentions of game companies
Just going to request again, if anyone finds information from a dev about the state of software we currently can use (Such as roundrobin and VFX) which all go to a single client at a time, basically playing without needing to alt tab which was the point of ISBoxer, please post n share
im adjusting setup. 2 moroses,2 archons, 1 loki. dont need isboxer with it. It was fun when it lasted.
CCP claims they can distinguish the difference between someone using repeater and someone not using repeater, but even the person with the fastest fingers is going to show a good level of input variance when controlling any amount of clients greater than two. I guess a suggestion to those who are going to continue to multibox would be to bring your key pressing speed down from super lightning fast to just lightning fast and purposely add in some a second or two of input lag with your own fingers throughout your key presses. /shrugQuote:
Originally Posted by shadowandlight
What if on the flip side they don't actually care about people multiboxing a realistically manageable amount of ships, but only want to stop those who want to command mega-fleets by themselves?Quote:
Originally Posted by spf
Does this new policy do just that?
Attachment 1381
Chal posted this to our corp. It seems to make the intentions of CCP pretty clear. They have done a 180 on multiboxing and the future of multiboxing will be a difficult one. When your first infraction is a 30 day ban it's going to be tough. Plan on being reported by your own coalition then dealing with the consequences. Multiboxing went from friendly to hostile in eve overnight. I will be interested to read the stories from multiboxers after Jan 1.
In my opinion this is/was the one of the Biggest factors.Quote:
Originally Posted by MiRai
Now that I've had some sleep.....Quote:
Originally Posted by EaTCarbS
I wasn't being a douche, and I'm not looking to be cool. I have absolutely nothing left to prove in Eve - I have literally done it all.
That said, yes I was a little snappy. I woke up yesterday to ppl flipping a shit over a simple change. After calming down my corp and explaining things there once, I then had to wade thru piles of shit on FHC, the Eve Forums, and ofc here.
I logged into the game and was barraged with piles of convos basically all day (vacation week for me started yesterday after class, so I was on quite a bit).
After prob 8+ hours of constantly having to answer the exact same thing on voice comms, over irc, on 3 different forums, and about 20+ private chats (NOT counting the barrage of misguided smug, then confusion, then understanding in all of the public chat channels I frequent) I was a little annoyed and grumpy.
I don't mean to be an asshole, and I apologize if you took it that way. I was just very tired of dealing with the same shit on repeat all day long.
lord you should make a FAQ from the mass of questions you had to answer
Need to make some information more accessible to stop the freakouts
This might sound silly but in RL situations when there is a big change that is not favorable to a certain group and there is two sides this would require a townhall meeting as we call it in the government. One person should represent the multiboxers asking very clear and concise questions regarding the limitations in an open environment. This person should be the one who is popular in a sense that people know who they are and one who is very knowledgable of how isboxer works. We have a month to get some answers and make sure it's very clear to the community what is allowed or not by actual words and not vague ambiguity. Flow charts and vague rules are not going to answer these questions we all have. If they can sit down and decide to limit the multi boxing gameplay they can come up with straightforward concise answers that are clearly stated without confounding statements or personal opinions.
I like this idea. I'm sending a petition to CCP and will try and poke the people I know to get a response on this.Quote:
Originally Posted by K'man
Expect a meeting like such on my comms hopefully soonish with someone from CCP.
Hopefully this will ease some folks' minds and clarify CCP's policies a bit. ;)
Get with Big Country over @ Eve-Radio... I'm sure Dirk and the boys would love to have a "civil" conversation over this.
I'd love to attend Lord, I've been multiboxing for 6? Years and was probably one of the 1st in EVE to use isboxer.
It would be great to get our more experienced people in on a "Town Hall" meeting with CCP.
I'm already going on Dirks show next week about this! Can't wait to wade into it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gurblash
Ok, chatted with a CSM friend of mine and tossed a petition in.
We'll see what happens.
If this does happen, we will be meeting on my comms with someone from CCP (I got a few specific names, but no guarantees so far).
This will be done in a civil manner in what will be a moderated channel(ie not everyone will be able to talk unless explicitly given permission to).
I will NOT tolerate the kind of sperging I saw on the eve-o forums and to a lesser extent, in the early pages on these forums. We WILL treat CCP with respect and get information in a calm and constructive manner. If all you want is to vent your anger and frustration to CCP don't bother coming - you aren't welcome.
Nobody cares about how angry you are that your 30 accounts are getting unsubbed and fuck CCP and rawr rawr rawr. That only lessens their opinion of us, and I think I can speak for everyone when I say that nobody who is still playing the game wants that.
If you have some questions you want answered, and to hear directly from CCP what their intentions and ideas are behind this change - and you can do this in a respectful manner, you are welcome to come. :)
I urge people to start formulating a list of questions - you can post them here, PM them to me here, or mail them to me ingame on my character "Lord's Servant" - don't forget the apostrophe.
Let's get some positive change here. :)
I have collectively compiled a list of quotes directly from those that matter from CCP and CSM. These quotes listed below may be a goodbaseline to formulate questions for the Q&A.
Please record the conversation with the officials and post it on soundcloud for those of us that can’t be there in person to listen.
CCP Falcon has stated that isboxer is not banned. Some of the things isboxer can do are banned. In CCP Falcons opinion on this question “I value the integrity of the game, and its overall health more than I value the numbers. (Umm don’t numbers pay for the bills?) I’d rather see 1 person playing with 19 of his friends, than 1 person using software or hardware to play solo while input broadcasting to 20 accounts. Eve is a game based around interaction with others, and the action and the action that comes from it. Well, that is my personal take on it, at least.”
What I have gathered so far out of several hundred pages in the forums from several different sites.
·CSM states that logging in a dozen clients at the same time is allowed.
·For example using isboxer to start all of them mining at once, with one click: not allowed.
·CSM stated that isboxer has other functions,such as arranging windows to let you move your mouse less between clicks,allowed under this ruling.
·Duplication of keystrokes is not the same as autorepeater
·CCP can detect your actions: Actions are unique and logged, logging accounts on an IP are logged, and owner of accounts.Basically, if you log in 10 accounts under one IP address all owned by you there is the chance that you can and will be monitored however. What is taken into consideration is the logged actions and time response it takes to hit those buttons or assigned keys.
·CCP can detect someone using mouse drivers to send multiple commands with one button.
I will update this as more official posts come along.
[1:40:17 PM] *******: aye
[1:44:02 PM] *******: ok shouldnt be a issue
[1:44:11 PM] *******: will probably be falcon and some one from security
[1:44:26 PM] *******: will be a week or 3 sinceheis super busy at the moment
Confirmed(I think?).
Everyone chill the fuck out, start working on questions please.
Feel free to join the ingame channel "Oatmeal" if you want to chat with other multiboxers etc etc.
Spread the word among people you know who multibox if they want to attend. Again, we need to STAY CALM and not flip a shit on CCP. Having more communication back and forth between us and them is only a good thing.
There's a lot of misinformation and hyperbole about multiboxers, and not much back and forth between us and CCP. This will hopefully fix some of that and we want to leave a good impression. :)
Looking forward to the sit down.
Just want to thank Lords for being able to organise stuff like this :D.
-- Vamps
I nominate Mosg and Lax to ask questions directly to CCP. I question any multiboxer cheerleading any decision to restrict multiboxing to a game where it was allowed for years. This is a massive change to the norm. Although it's CCP's right to change the rules, we should push back and not praise their decision to swap the rules on us after so many years. There have been many isboxer hate threads posted recently on the eve news websites. I feel this decision was made by the anti boxer lobby that recently has been very vocal on how they think multiboxing is illegal. With a 30 day ban being the first step CCP must be crystal clear on what will be allowed and what is not. A bullshit flow chart is not very clear on the many capabilities of isboxer.
I agree that CCP needs be be clear with what functions are allowed in isboxer considering the first offense being a 30 day ban leading to being permanent on a second offense. CCP is still a company. Despite this being a game and they can change policies at will, people still use real money towards a product. By changing policies which may result in a loss of product which you paid for and was previously allowed may possibly lead to legal issues. I'm positive they looked at this in a legal standpoint but this could be argued in court if someone would to take it that far. Banning say 50 boxers that had 10 accounts each means they acquired $66,000 from the intent that what people were doing were previously legal and not in violation. This is a grey point that needs to be adressed.
Questions of mine:
1. The use of hotkeys that round-robin
2. The use of video FX and dxnothing to see all characters and modules, overview, etc. on one screen
3. The use of click bars
....Quote:
Originally Posted by pinotnoir
what more crystal clear you want?
no matter how you do it, no matter what technology, you cant target same target across all accounts with just 1 click, you need an input per account, you cant duplicate it.
yes, CCP killed isboxing. lol@ videofx.
1 click/action per account, so you would have to (not sure what round robin is), still click in same location 10 times if you have 10 accounts.Quote:
Originally Posted by K'man
YOU ARE ALLOWED TO USE VIDEO FX AND DXNOTHING TO SEE ALL MODULES ETC< AND ALSO PASSTHROUGH KEYS through them! WHY do you even ask this!?!? you didnt read this thread?
Click bars are FINE.
I think that this came about from two major pushes: One, with the revamp to nulsec, player owned stations/gates etc, they're looking at mining and mineral production. This is a good way to reset and get a baseline for who produces what and in what quantities right now. Two, more than one of this season's CSM members are very vocal against multiboxers.
In any case, shrug.
Ok i understand why players get upset i did in wow little change to boxers. But going down the Legal route is just being silly do not say it there no point ever going down this road for a god game.Quote:
Originally Posted by K'man
Games change there rules all the time They given you more then we had in wow it was a change that happened in a Night (patch!!) They did not tell us or anything. Your getting a lot more out of the company then blizzard did or we got was ya we did it because of bots. and even to this date we don't know with work rounds is the right thing as blizzard said nothing. just we don't support boxing more then one account.
The TOS in everything in the would says they can do what they want when they want. And to be fair there not even banning you for boxing. they just changed a rule. Get round it quit. Everyone loses money all the time that is how the world goes round.
Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowfoot
;) Not exactly the response I was looking to receive but at least it cleared up my random thought process.
< Mod-hammer >
I know people are ticked, as is the case with any change like this, but people are getting out of hand. Watch the language, watch the flaming, watch the attitude or watch this thread magically lose about 10 pages of posts.
New people may want to read the site rules if you haven't.
< /mod-hammer >
Go eat some smashed taters or pumpkin pie. Unplug and find something to be thankful for and appreciate the people around you. Happy Thanksgiving.
Update post for those that were interested in refunds.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default...28#post5248928
Update post. Another interesting one.
https://forums.eveonline.com/default...10#post5249510
http://isboxer.com/forum/viewtopic.p...=6360&start=60
"Was actually banned for using Isboxer with broadcast on my 4 man mining team this week, the same day as the policy change announcement. They also banned every account I ever logged into this computer with (all but 3) and I petitioned.
Finally got a petition response and they said basically that using broadcast mode to control more than one client with the same mouse and keystroke was a violation of the TOS/EULA. I repetitioned because the policy is not in effect yet and they closed the petition.
Needless to say, after 9 years in EVE I am done. The game has changed too much (for the worse) and their new blanket ban policy is pissing me off."
Pulled off ISboxer forums
Edit: In other new seems like any mention of keyboard macros or isboxer is replied by an automated response
sent 2 support tickets, and got 2 replies very similar, nearly identical save the ISBoxer ticket, which came with an extra line saying any misuse would get banned come Jan
ISBoxer 41.10.1128.1 is now available for manual update. (changelog) Another update in the coming weeks will show an update notice when you start ISBoxer; this one you must find via Help->About ISBoxer, or any fresh download of ISBoxer.
- EVE Online: In January 2015, CCP will begin prohibiting the use of Input Broadcasting/Multiplexing. As of ISBoxer 41.10.1128.1, out of abundance of caution, Broadcasting will be locked down by default for all EVE Online profiles, new and old. Please do a fresh Export to Inner Space. To re-enable Broadcasting until January, or for use during CCP's stated-as-acceptable times (login, client settings, window positions, etc), un-check the new Character Set setting 'Disable capabilities to control multiple windows simultaneously, including Broadcasting and Action Target Groups (EVE Online)' and Export to Inner Space. Please take care not to broadcast to multiple EVE Online windows simultaneously during prohibited times beginning January 2015. (This setting should prevent it except within some advanced, custom configurations.)
- New Character Set option 'Disable capabilities to control multiple windows simultaneously, including Broadcasting and Action Target Groups' for use in games where simultaneous multiple window control has been prohibted. This setting will automatically apply for games where this is known to be the case, including EVE Online (as of January 2015, but applying as of now), Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, and Path of Exile.
Will we be able to broadcast ESCAPE to log out of the game since we can also use it to log into the game? Also, does the broadcasting ban prevent you from accepting trades on your characters in stations?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lax
I think those belong more in the Questions for CCP category than in the Questions for Lax category.Quote:
Originally Posted by pinotnoir
With regards to the setting which you're quoting and replying to, if enabled it entirely blocks broadcasting mode, Keystroke Action, etc from affecting more than one window at a time.
But for logging out of the game you can also set up a hotkey to just close all windows via a Window Close Action, so I don't think it's really necessary to broadcast Escape for that regardless of the actual answer to that question.
Practically what's gonna happen (imo) - if you log more than 1 account from same IP you get on the watchlist of CCP anti-cheat watchdog sub-routine. If the server records simultaneous input originating from clients on the watchlist, it will flag the event which will (hopefully) be reviewed and action taken. I inserted "hopefully" because few weeks ago I got banned by Trion for boxing Archeage even though I play Rift and Archeage was not installed on my PC - which smelled like computer-generated auto-response (my ban was lifted only after I wrote to a senior GM). Archeage and Rift share same launcher, meaning that most likely I got flagged just by logging in from same IP.
Thus, I think this new preventive (but not obligatory) feature in ISBoxer is cool.
I've spent the past few days crating a counter point letter (could be a freaking dissertation minus my lack of grabbing sources to all points) to CCP and the larger EVE community regarding input duplication and multiboxing in general.
It's in the final stages and I am looking for wider input on it before I declare it "done" and submit it to the various EVE news outlets, gaming websites and the community.
I realize that there is some in the multiboxing community that wish people to stay silent on the issue and hope the whole thing blows over, I perhaps shared a similar thought process myself during all the dozens of threads started throughout the years against multiboxing in EVE.
However, in my opinion, that position is no longer tenable for us. We either prove that we are worthy contributors to the game in all aspects or watch the mob call for further and further restrictions to be placed on us.
I'd love all comments, criticism, suggestions or just your general thoughts on the paper.
Please feel free to comment on the paper here, via the comments section on the document itself, through pm or email ShadowandLighteve@gmail.com
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...p=docslist_api
I cannot believe people read this as anti-multiboxing ... its clearly anti-automation (botting), and goes out of its way to the reader just thank.
Thanks for the quick reply Lax in this and the other duplicate posts.
I haven't had the chance to look it over yet (very busy), but let me put out an analogy.Quote:
Originally Posted by shadowandlight
Westboro Baptists, Pope Francis.
Both are religious, but one is quite different from the other.
Be more like Francis, and less like the Westboro Baptists. Raging and demanding doesn't make anybody like you or value your contributions.
You don't get anywhere by demanding and raging in public. Every change is always decided far ahead out of the public's eye.
Being connected to those people, and being part of those discussions goes a lot further than putting together a mob.
Behind the scenes rational discussion > publicly flipping a shit.
Public stuff doesn't really do anything - see most 1st world countries. ;)
Not a bad write-up, though it suffers from a few areas of myopia that I'd like to point out:
- It's generally frowned upon, when attempting to influence someone in control to reverse a policy they implemented, to directly or indirectly state that they are making irrational decisions. (i.e. Mob Rule, Tyranny of the Minority, etc.) Think very hard before telling them they're all ate up with the dumbass, unless you can prove the irrationality objectively and especially if you aren't prepared to suggest better alternatives.
- Using the argument that there are other products that do the same thing as most multiboxing software as a reason it will be ineffective to ban "legit" multiboxing doesn't make much sense to me. Looking at it from their side, if they're trying to get rid of botters/macroers, then it would seem to be a cost-effective means of reducing the workload on the Anti-Cheating Investigations Team to just ban everyone they detected multiplexing. Support resources are not unlimited.
- A point that hasn't been discussed much, arguably not due to a lack of questions from the multiboxing community, is why this change is actually taking place, or as you mentioned: what problem(s) are they really trying to solve with this ban? Until we know that in pretty good detail, questioning their judgment with regards to the "fixes" seems ill-informed since we're operating under a lack of information.
- You make a bit of the "it's so easy anyone can do it, you just need money/equipment" argument in there. I'd say that's a flawed argument for two reasons: A) what you and we here in the multiboxing community consider "easy" is literally incomprehensible to the vast majority of other gamers from a purely technical standpoint let alone the philosophical, and B) if it really were that easy then it stands to reason CCP would rather discourage it as a way to reduce server loads (obvious caveat about cost-benefit indicators).
The way I see it, from a we-have-to-run-a-business-here perspective, the amount of dev and support resources it would involve to modify and/or police the game in order to A) weed out bots/macros and B) mitigate the effectiveness of large multiboxed fleets is not insignificant. The simple/cheap solution is to do exactly what they're doing. That said, the PR war could go either way. If more people are made happy about this than the multiboxers it pissed off, then it's a net gain regardless of other considerations.
My 2 ISK, anyway. :p
Thanks for the input so far guys, I am trying to curb some of the more aggressive tones in my arguments and provide rational points of view based in facts.
Keep the ideas coming, I would like to get this out in an "official" format in a day or 2.
Avoid mentioning things like how we can get around CCP's new policy...like you did here in the eve forumsQuote:
Originally Posted by shadowandlight
"Could you speak to other features, it's very easy for those of us experienced in ISBoxer to get around the input duplication with other features. specifically:
- round robin keys
- keymaping
- video fx
- menus
- clickbars"
When you mention that we can work around policy, it will enforce the idea that CCP should just ban ISBoxer completely, while the idea is "why are they banning input broadcasting they (we) can just do their (our) best to work around it" its more "oh they can work around the ban on input broadcasting, lets just ban isboxer and be done with it"
Any mention of work around(s) are usually met with bitterness from the community, it's like you're rubbing it in their face
All this document is doing is getting all functions in isboxer bannable offenses... you think you're making a point why isboxing with multibroadcasting shouldn't be banned because it can be done with other functions...Quote:
Originally Posted by thedevilyouknow
ccp and isboxerhaters are reading a full expo on wich other fucntions need to be banned so you do not get extra advantages using software.
I multibox but this is what it comes down to:
1)i use no software and i control 10 clients vs I use extra software to control 10 clients - nothing really changes
2) I use no softwar and can control 4 clients effiencient vs I can control 10 clients with the software and gain 6 clients cuz of it \O/
3) i use 6 clients and have to manage a shitton of things vs I still control 10 clients with software and gain 4 clients and its just as easy i would control 1 client while keeping in mind i would go battshitcrazy if i had to clickfest on the 6 clients serperatly...
> note that i know how hard it is to set isboxer up perfectly and what happens when you fuck up BUT you are still onces ready with the setup and once you are running adding 6 clients to your control that you would not be able to do without it.
Lets start PRing and advocate to ccp to allow us to keep the options open and handle petition about multiboxing on a case by case view. The change will happen, its just a matter of damage control