CCP prohibiting input broadcasting/multiplexing beginning January 2015

[Khatovar]

I wrote an article /paper against CCP's current direction against multiboxing and input duplication

http://www.dual-boxing.com/threads/5...ne-(very-long)

Please do not crosspost. This isn't MMOChampion or someplace where there's thousands of people posting new topics until threads drop into the ether of page 2. All you are doing by crossposting is inviting people to hold the same conversation across 2 threads. Merged.

[Alex66]

The essence of the change is CCP taking away a feature which they went on record for allowing it in the past - input multiplexing. They are doing it without giving a proper explanation.

Can you box EVE without it? Yeah. Same as you can box WoW or other games by reconfiguring your ISBoxer setup so that your spam key sends instructions to each client individually at a time. You just need to press your key faster, your DPS will take a hit, but it is still viable, albeit much less enjoyable. Menus and click bars are just visual representations of keyboard shortcuts, they are not in themselves the offenders. Neither is VFX - it is a windows feature. However, Repeater regions fall into the same cathegory as input multiplexing, thus it would be quite painful to lose this feature in EVE.

Blizzard and Trion did not take input multiplexing from us when they got unhappy with boxers - they determined the areas where boxing became objectionable and implemented in-game changes to address those - i.e. removing /follow from most PvP instances.

EVE is the game which is arguably most demanding MMO in terms of time and resources needed to become successful at end-game-level activities, so the CCP's unexplained U-turn on input multiplexing is objectionable at the very least, particularly for veteran gamers among boxers. I dont think we should just accept it and adjust, we deserve a detailed explanation and a chance to propose in-game adjustments that could alleviate CCP's and and other players' concerns on boxing. So I support a more aggressive stance towards the announced change, rather than telling the devs - "fine, we'll still do it, but differently".

[Ughmahedhurtz]

Blizzard and Trion did not take input multiplexing from us when they got unhappy with boxers - they determined the areas where boxing became objectionable and implemented in-game changes to address those - i.e. removing /follow from most PvP instances.

Unless I'm forgetting something, there is no place like this in EVE; everywhere is potential PVP. And generally speaking, there is no such thing as /follow or /assist in EVE the way those exist in WoW or Rift.

[Crayonbox]

My god, I haven't been keeping up with this topic after the first weekend, but this has seemed to have exploded on every forum.

For those of you that think this came out of the blue...

Seriously? The entire cloaking mechanic changes that was presented previously was specifically aimed at multiboxers. It had nothing to do with bombing nerfs or with bombers or whatever excuse faclon gave in public. The entire reason for attempting to push that change through was to curb multiboxng. This was obviously not going to work and it was a stupid idea so they retracted it and went back to the drawing boards.

They instead came and went with a ham fisted approach to ban key duplication completely.

I have gotten far too comfortable with key broadcasting and how easy it has been to multibox in eve. and I mean easy relatively compared to multiboxing before the introduction of ISBoxer or Keyclone or whatever broadcasting software people have used. Isboxer is more than a simple broadcast, and there are tons of tools at the user's disposal.

For those of you that are not inclined to utilize those tools and wish to simply stick to broadcasting, I recommend finding a new game to do that in. CCP will most likely not go back on this change in stance towards key duplication, and I am going to continue to play Eve with the assumption that there will be more changes against multiboxing in Eve. I will continue to play until I find that the effort is too much for my enjoyment. And at that point I will most likely simply find a new game to play.

As for those that are going out to other forums and attempting to create a mob to fight these changes.... Don't. All you are doing is bringing even more negative press upon this small group of players who have a different style of gameplay that they enjoy. Every group of players have their trolls and idiots, and we had that Sam Deathwalker guy for a while ( whatever happened to him anyway? ) and we have people like capqu, replicator, and amnzi. These are guys that strictly multibox for attention and for their own gain and not necessarily for the enjoyment of the challenge.

They display their gamestyle out in the open for every one and flaunt it, knowing that the players that can't achieve this kind of playstyle will definitely start gating on them.

Its 2am and I'm a bit exhausted so I'm going to cut this rant here.

[Alex66]

For those of you that are not inclined to utilize those tools and wish to simply stick to broadcasting, I recommend finding a new game to do that in.

What are the tools that can replace repeater region overview mouse broadcasting? Menus that require multiple clicks for alts to target the same ship which is horribly unreliable? Personally, I was unable to think of anything else, and I have been using ISBoxer's features in many games for many years. Just humor us and tell us what the solution is - and the drama will be over .

[Ughmahedhurtz]

Isboxer is more than a simple broadcast, and there are tons of tools at the user's disposal.

For those of you that are not inclined to utilize those tools and wish to simply stick to broadcasting,

What are the tools that can replace repeater region overview mouse broadcasting? Menus that require multiple clicks for alts to target the same ship which is horribly unreliable? Personally, I was unable to think of anything else, and I have been using ISBoxer's features in many games for many years. Just humor us and tell us what the solution is - and the drama will be over .

The context of the point as I read it was that CCP has/will banned broadcasting (which includes mouse-click-broadcasting). ISBoxer has several things that could facilitate pretty reliable multiboxing without any multiplexing, albeit less efficiently, which will or won't be tolerable depending on your personality/playstyle/patience/etc. Are you challenging another aspect of this? Either I'm misreading something here or you're being obtuse.

And no, the drama won't be over. It's EVE. There will always be drama.

[Alex66]

What I am saying is that there is no tool in ISBoxer that can replace mouse broadcasting with a degree of reliability required for EVE's dynamic gameplay when multiboxing. Crayonbox says there is, and I was asking him to give me an example and prove me wrong. Now I am asking you the same thing since you also state that "there are things". What are "those things" in ISBoxer? Menus or click bars with mouse sync mapped keys placed over clickable areas which you have to click x times? Placing VFX from each client next to each other and click each one individually? These things? It is "back to stone age" and just a notch above alt-tabbing.

I personally think that Eve boxing (well, maybe not smaller scale mining) will be crippled if CCP makes those changes and any action which can make them to reconsider is worth the effort.

[Ughmahedhurtz]

What I am saying is that there is no tool in ISBoxer that can replace mouse broadcasting with a degree of reliability required for EVE's dynamic gameplay when multiboxing. Crayonbox says there is

I'll let crayonbox answer but I did not get that at all.

I personally think that Eve boxing (well, maybe not smaller scale mining) will be crippled if CCP makes those changes and any action which can make them to reconsider is worth the effort.

I don't disagree that combat boxing will be largely crippled above a certain fleet size, probably around 5ish. But, "Any action?" "Make" them reconsider? Did you mean to say (but poorly worded it) that coming up with good ideas to persuade them that multiboxing in and of itself isn't evil and please come up with a better way to mitigate large-fleet-boxing, don't-care-how-it-affects-the-world malefactors without torching the gameplay of all the other Good Guy boxers, or are you saying that if they don't give us back broadcasting that we should "burn this bitch down?" It's important that you argue this well; I see about a 90% chance that it's over and there's no going back, and about 10% chance that they'll back off on obligatory punishment and reserve it for people being egregiously disruptive, but that 10% hinges on making a well-reasoned and respectful case throughout the multiboxing community. Tossing around imperatives and being a pain in the ass to deal with is going to do nothing but suggest that they made the right decision in the first place. Rest assured that the exodus of every multiboxer in space will be but a temporary hiccup to EVE.

To paraphrase a scene from Serenity: You are fooling yourself, Captain. Nothing here is what it seems. You are not the plucky hero, CCP is not an evil empire, and this is not the grand arena.

[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.

[Crayonbox]

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.