CCP prohibiting input broadcasting/multiplexing beginning January 2015

[Lax]

[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.

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.

[Alex66]

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.

[bugme143]

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.

Exactly.
Took some time to browse the F&I forum to find a lot of posts regarding ideas on how to balance multiboxing and EVE. I grouped them into "Mining (ice, ore, gas), Anoms+Missions, Incursions, PvP, and Bombing.

Anoms+Missions had the fewest threads regarding ISBoxers, since any idiot can toss an AFKTar into a Sanctum and earn 60m isk/hour or whatever it is, and multibox missioning, even L5, is garbage income.
Next fewest was PvP, but most of it was filled with ISBoxer gank fluff complaining that their Fenrir with 20b in modules was ganked, followed by just about everyone in the thread saying that they would've been ganked even if we limited EVE to 1 client / computer.
Next was mining. A lot of interesting ideas, ranging from increased rat spawns and toughness and re-balance the bounties, to minigames on lasers. My personal favorites was Minigames on the lasers (reduce m3 amount, add minigame to reward non-afkers with extra yield/faster cycles) and one oddball suggestion (not in the forums, in mining chat) to implement a "interference" modifier to mining lasers so that you start to hit diminishing returns once you get to 50+ on a belt.
Next was incursions. Lots of complaints about boxers, but lots of rebuttals regarding training time, risk and numbers, and false comparisons (e.g. comparing BNI to PL or BL). One thing I did like was a reduction of ISK payouts and an increase in LP payouts, requiring a player to "work harder" for his full ISK return, just like the ESS idea for nullsec (on the record, I still thing the ESS was retarded, but I do enjoy the BRs of the carebears defending it).
Then, bombing. Fairly certain this was the largest of the groups because of the latest issue with the (supposedly (lolright)) reimbursed Rorqual. Lots of ideas, ranging from un-reversing the decloak change (remember when the boxers told CCP it wouldn't work?), to removing bombs (wasn't the rorq killed by torps only?), to some decent ideas such as increasing sig radius of bombers, or reducing agility again. My favorite was implementing a 4-digit arming-code that must be entered when a bomb is in space in order for it to explode. As for the issue with torps being unbalanced on stealth bombers, there isn't really much that CCP can do in my eyes besides increasing align time or increasing sig-rad to help "balance" them, and even then, I'd be skeptical as I've seen first-hand the effectiveness of insta-canes and Zealots used in anti-bomber roles, and I've seen them slowly disappear.

CCP wants to be taken seriously in the MMO world, but changes like the latest announcement remind everyone of the GTA V thing where a small bunch of vocal wingnuts got Target to pull the game after lying through their teeth in the petition article.

[pinotnoir]

Exactly.
Took some time to browse the F&I forum to find a lot of posts regarding ideas on how to balance multiboxing and EVE. I grouped them into "Mining (ice, ore, gas), Anoms+Missions, Incursions, PvP, and Bombing.

Anoms+Missions had the fewest threads regarding ISBoxers, since any idiot can toss an AFKTar into a Sanctum and earn 60m isk/hour or whatever it is, and multibox missioning, even L5, is garbage income.
Next fewest was PvP, but most of it was filled with ISBoxer gank fluff complaining that their Fenrir with 20b in modules was ganked, followed by just about everyone in the thread saying that they would've been ganked even if we limited EVE to 1 client / computer.
Next was mining. A lot of interesting ideas, ranging from increased rat spawns and toughness and re-balance the bounties, to minigames on lasers. My personal favorites was Minigames on the lasers (reduce m3 amount, add minigame to reward non-afkers with extra yield/faster cycles) and one oddball suggestion (not in the forums, in mining chat) to implement a "interference" modifier to mining lasers so that you start to hit diminishing returns once you get to 50+ on a belt.
Next was incursions. Lots of complaints about boxers, but lots of rebuttals regarding training time, risk and numbers, and false comparisons (e.g. comparing BNI to PL or BL). One thing I did like was a reduction of ISK payouts and an increase in LP payouts, requiring a player to "work harder" for his full ISK return, just like the ESS idea for nullsec (on the record, I still thing the ESS was retarded, but I do enjoy the BRs of the carebears defending it).
Then, bombing. Fairly certain this was the largest of the groups because of the latest issue with the (supposedly (lolright)) reimbursed Rorqual. Lots of ideas, ranging from un-reversing the decloak change (remember when the boxers told CCP it wouldn't work?), to removing bombs (wasn't the rorq killed by torps only?), to some decent ideas such as increasing sig radius of bombers, or reducing agility again. My favorite was implementing a 4-digit arming-code that must be entered when a bomb is in space in order for it to explode. As for the issue with torps being unbalanced on stealth bombers, there isn't really much that CCP can do in my eyes besides increasing align time or increasing sig-rad to help "balance" them, and even then, I'd be skeptical as I've seen first-hand the effectiveness of insta-canes and Zealots used in anti-bomber roles, and I've seen them slowly disappear.

CCP wants to be taken seriously in the MMO world, but changes like the latest announcement remind everyone of the GTA V thing where a small bunch of vocal wingnuts got Target to pull the game after lying through their teeth in the petition article.

Mini game or diminishing returns on lasers is a terrible idea. You cannot afk while multiboxing mining. You have to constantly change lasers on different ice/rocks, jetcan your ore, and haul it. The only way you can afk mine is with 1 toon on a large rock. When I am in the ice belt with perfect boost "23second cycles" the ice dies fast and I am always changing targets. If they messed with that it would not only discourage multiboxers from mining it would piss off the solo players too.

[bugme143]

Mini game or diminishing returns on lasers is a terrible idea. You cannot afk while multiboxing mining. You have to constantly change lasers on different ice/rocks, jetcan your ore, and haul it. The only way you can afk mine is with 1 toon on a large rock. When I am in the ice belt with perfect boost "23second cycles" the ice dies fast and I am always changing targets. If they messed with that it would not only discourage multiboxers from mining it would piss off the solo players too.

Thank you for teaching me more about ISBoxing. I never ISBox mined, and the miners who I attempted to talk to in-game treated me like a CODE agent, so my experience is very limited.

What if they introduced the minigame without reducing the yield? As long as a player (or boxer) could re-position it and it doesn't hog the focus on screen, I think that wouldn't cause any issues.

[pinotnoir]

Thank you for teaching me more about ISBoxing. I never ISBox mined, and the miners who I attempted to talk to in-game treated me like a CODE agent, so my experience is very limited.

What if they introduced the minigame without reducing the yield? As long as a player (or boxer) could re-position it and it doesn't hog the focus on screen, I think that wouldn't cause any issues.

Things you do as a miner in null are manage your hold, jetcan when needed, change crystals, target rocks, & watch local like a hawk. It does not need a mini game. If you are multiboxing it becomes a ton of clicking.

[bugme143]

Things you do as a miner in null are manage your hold, jetcan when needed, change crystals, target rocks, & watch local like a hawk. It does not need a mini game. If you are multiboxing it becomes a ton of clicking.

My only real mining experience came from a mandatory mining op in nullsec with Rorq boosts, Orcas, and guards/scouts.
Do mining crystals not auto-reload when they become depleted?

[moog]

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

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!

[pinotnoir]

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.

[spf]

<3 Moog