EVE Forums

Capture Portrait
  • Date of Birth: 2011-04-10 04:20
  • First Forum Visit: 2012-05-06 20:21
  • Number of Posts: 308
  • Bounty: 5,000 ISK
  • Likes Received: 118

Angrod Losshelin

Security Status 0.1
  • Viziam Member since
  • Amarr Empire Faction

Last 20 Posts

  • PvE fatigue: Phoebe for PvE in EVE Technology and Research Center

    TLDR lets break eve!

  • How do we increase PvP in C5 and C6? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Axloth Okiah wrote:
    Lets learn a lesson from the terribleness of C6 space. It sucks because it is too small and it is too easy to hit specific hole - both for offense and defense. Removing C5s or making a new, even smaller C7 space would be even worse.

    The solution might lie in the shattered holes, as was said before. Nerf "home" income, force people to farm other holes, make shattereds more profitable and more likely to get connected to. They should be the "gold mines" we might want to access by leaving the isolated safety of our homes and which also attract those who'd like to kill us. Make farming homesites and expos much less profitable, lets get rich by farming where it would actually be risky.

    I am Angrod and I approve of both of these messages.

  • How do we increase PvP in C5 and C6? in EVE Gameplay Center

    Honestly, there are only a few people complaining about WH PVP that I know of. I think W-space is in a good spot right now, but some groups who have grown too large complain that no one wants to fight a blob. Well....no ****... take a note from NoHo and split up and fight each other if this is an issue.

    I don't want to see anything make it easier for large groups to form and dominate everyone else. Current w-space allows for large groups and promotes banding together, which is fine, but it also means not many will fight them because they have alot more members to throw around and its more difficult to bring friends in.

    I don't blame large groups for growing large and using all of their members, because I totally would and I would say anyone who says otherwise is lying to a degree. However, it is also up to these groups to cull their own members or split up if they "fall victim to their own success"

    I like the current WH meta and would prefer to keep it than change it but if CCP can put in some cool new mechanics that make smaller groups more viable than large ones I am open to it.

    IDK, we see plenty of PVP, more is always better but not when we get outnumbered every single fight. We hide from those people for obvious reasons. If they want to bring smaller groups in we fight them just like anyone, but alot of groups like Lazer have a reputation within my group as "don't fight them they'll kick your trash everytime with overwhelming numbers" so we don't we don't like losing **** only to placate large groups and I don't think anyone does.

    I don't think Lazer or HK would like it any better if a full BL or PL fleet invaded their home and they couldn't call in any backup. They would get blobbed and ***** just like anyone else.

    Either way, I think people are just victims of their own success and need to get over it. Then again, I have never been that successful so I rarely run into that issue.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Proclus Diadochu wrote:
    (If you think multiply character training = multiboxing... lol wrong)

    I agree that multiple character training is definitely not multi-boxer friendly, more along the lines of alt friendly. I guess I should really rephrase the whole core mechanic thing into more of a multi-boxing friendly or enabling game mechanic. Does that definition suit you better? Either way, this game has a lot of mechanics that enable and encourage multi-boxing. Yes, these mechanics can be used by single players and thats fine, but they are also used and are very useful to multi-boxers.

    I would be happy to talk about my veiws on WH's and the NPE, everyone just seems to enjoy discussing multi-boxing more. I think the NPE should introduce both WH space and FW space. What about you?

    epicurus ataraxia wrote:
    leaves discussion, as one is unable to reason or discuss with one who believes their opinion is the whole sum of reality, no matter how absurd.

    Perception is everything and it defines reality to many people, no matter how limited their perception might be. I am fine reasoning and discussing, I have yet to hear anything to change my reasoning. Thus the nature of discussion is to attempt to point out or defend your reasoning to others. We are however, entitled to our own opinions no matter how un-popular they might be. If you are not willing to discuss and attempt to alter my reasoning while I attempt to do the same in return then I bid you farewell.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Proclus Diadochu wrote:

    The core of this game isn't "multi-boxing" and "alts", the core of this game is "multiplaying". This game, as with all MMO's are designed around the concept of social gameplay and multiplayer interaction. Multi-boxing and the use of alts is a player-designed answer to the multiplayer concept.

    I agree that CCP will never be able to eliminate multi-boxing, but your fundamental perception of this game is so terrible that it is becoming laughable. Seriously, and before you say that I have a problem with you personally (I don't), let me clarify that my persistence isn't against you as a person, but rather with your understanding of this game and your personal views of Eve. You really don't understand the game very well based on your opinion of the "core" of the game mechanics.

    As far as my fundamental perception of this game goes I am not sure what you are arguing about. There are a lot of mechanics that encourage multi-boxing. Fleet warp, the fact that no player can do anything themselves, the skill queue, PLEX, etc. I agree that multi-playing is what all MMO's focus on, however, you cannot argue that this game advertises multi-boxing with both the PLEX system and Power of Two.

    I am glad I am amusing you but at the same time, opinion is something we all have and you have yet to sway mine. I find yours a little appalling myself but either way, you play EVE and I play EVE.

    epicurus ataraxia wrote:
    There is one EvE. Many people. Many lifestyles. WE are EvE

    Your statements directly contradict your signature. Also, my platform is not to return input duplication, please read my platform on either my website or this thread.

    Delt0r Garsk wrote:
    Power of two is promoted as multiboxing.

    Exactly, this game promotes multi-boxing.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Delt0r Garsk wrote:
    I am very much behind better representation for the multiboxing community. Currently i feel that we are not represented at all. We have one CSM member stating that it is cheating while multiboxing! And ludicrous claims that 99% of the community want multiboxing banned altogether.

    But most of all it is the total silence on CCPs part. CCP know how many multibox and how many accounts they typically use at the same time, they know just how big this community is.

    How do you propose to even get traction that is clearly a thorny issue on both sides, players and CCP alike? And by traction i mean just some more honest and upfront discussion that doesn't descend into name calling and mud slinging. Even your thread here is already demonstrated how hard it is with just players, and the huge gulf of misunderstandings. In the official thread CCP have remained totally silent. Negligently so in fact.

    FWIW i have 3 accounts i use at once, but mostly just 2. I use a OS that would and can do anything isboxer can do just as a normal window manager software on linux (yea that thing called windows is 3rd party software your using to run eve people, even lowly windows has many tricks if you know what your doing). I have refrained from getting an extra 3 accounts because of the issue sounding this. 1, its the shifting sand of what i can do now, I may not be able to do in the future. 2, Total lack of clarity from CCP.

    I agree that a large part of the community is against third party applications but utilizes a ton of third party applications all of the time. I have thought about going to linux myself and using basically OS programming to accomplish the same thing as ISboxer, but still find my ISboxer easier to use and thus continue to use it.

    So, as far as real discussion I think it honestly has to start with CCP. The community and a lot of ignorant mob mentality will occur no matter what the issue is, multi-boxing or not. I see CCP's clarification and lack there of as the higher issue. I am not sure if we have a CSM member pushing for clarification or not, which is why I am running. This is appalling and downright childish not to respond to your playerbase.

    I will strongly disagree that 99% of eve wants multi-boxing removed, they are more in arms about how multi-boxing is being accomplished. This game is designed for multi-boxing and alts. To the very core, they advertise it as such, alot of basic mechanics are geared towards being alt friendly or required. The skill queue itself limits what you can do with one character. This is not going away and CCP will never remove multi-boxing completely but I think they need to pay more attention to it at the moment.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Proclus Diadochu wrote:

    4. It is cheating in a gaming environment.
    5. CCP changed the rules to remove it.
    6. IS Boxer made adjustments for Eve Online.
    7. What is left is fine with me.

    9. You misrepresent Corbexx's stance on new players and NPE in your interview.
    12. The End.

    So lets do this since we obviously disagree, it is not cheating if the game allows it and most games do, this one no longer does. So there fore input duplication is cheating currently.

    I have stated plenty of times that I am ok with the way things are now regarding input duplication, but alot of people are not. I am not happy about it but I understand that it will likely not change in the future. I chose to represent multi-boxing as a whole and there are a lot of questions as to why it was removed in the first place. If you notice I did not argue in my interview or mention that input broadcasting should be re-allowed. They made it cheating in this game and I understand that.

    I simply stated that Corbexx and the CSM/CCP agree that WH space is not NPE friendly and that corbexx has not focused on NPE regarding WH's, which he hasn't he's focused alot on other issues, which is also very ok. If Corbexx wishes to correct me that is totally fine and I will stand corrected.

    The End only serves to close a book, oddly enough it does nothing to an argument or debate. If you don't want to vote for me don't.

    I am running to see if the multi-boxing community would like better representation, I am also running to put WH's on the NPE map. If the community wants to see that happen, vote for me, it not don't.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    StupidGenius Charante wrote:
    Angrod Losshelin recently sat down with Cap Stable for an interview, listen here: http://capstable.net/2015/02/18/angrod-losshelin/

    You beat me to the punch!

  • a question for NON INCUMBENT CSM aspirants in Council of Stellar Management

    I'll respond to this quite simply by saying, if CCP wants to do it they will do it.

    Our job will not be to tell them how to develop but to advise when asked and help tweak ideas for the masses. If they want to bring back titans to AOE doomsday gods then they'll have reasons. Alot of "what if's" will solve nothing and not get you any closer to finding who to vote for. The key to finding a candidate for you is to look at those campaign threads and decide based on if their playstyle and logic match yours.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Lucas Kell wrote:
    It's not automation, it's replication, there's a difference. And to be quite honest, why does it affect you if someone else is replicating input? If you see 20 guys mining, or 2 alts mining, what difference does it make? If someone wants to consume 50 plex a month and keep CCP rolling in cash, I'm all for it. Only when it becomes botting or get used for RMT do I care.

    That said, Angrod seems to be in agreement with keeping the changes to ISBoxer rules in. What he wants is more communication between CCP and the multiboxing community, which I fully agree with personally. None of the CSM would take on that task when the changes were announced and people had questions, and CCP gave people the runaround, with the forum telling them to make a petition and the petitions telling them to post on the forum. If an when CCP make further changes to multiboxing rules, I'd like to know there's someone who will raise the concerns of what is quite a substantial section of the playerbase with CCP, even if the end result is the same.

    ^ This guy wins a prize for understanding it.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Phoenix Jones wrote:
    Phoenix Jones wrote:

    With all of that said, as you are representing the wormhole group, I do look forward to the townhall.

    We waited for you with cake and everything.

    I know, I feel bad about missing that. I got stuck trying to get my dang trailer down the mountain I live on. TDLR I had to have a friend bring his tractor up and pull my jeep and trailer out.

    I'll take any cake that is left over.

    Bellak Hark wrote:

    Here is your campaign ad.

    Thank you very much! I like it. Simple and effective! I'll post this on my website and see if CCP will let me add it to my CSM application.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Just finished my application to the CSM ballot!

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    I'll respond to each of you, Mr. Miton I understand and have read your views on third party applications. I understand you do not agree with third party application. I simply disagree with the statement "there's a REALLY big difference between running multiple accounts manually and using 3rd part tools to assist in running them" hence my response. Either way, I advocate for what CCP allows.

    Mr. Diadochu I agree that I am polarizing and that this is a very polarizing subject. However, you like many before get confused with the whole automation concept. I am not advocating for automation currently. Automation implies no player interaction, multi-boxing even with third party applications requires the same if not more interaction.

    I realize that not alot of the player base wants or even likes multi-boxing or third party applications. I am advocating for those that do, as well as other aspects regarding WH's, NPE, scanning, and the most recent issue I see with Ice in shattered frig wormholes. If you don't think I should be running don't vote for me, simple as that. Bottom line, mutli-boxing is not automation, many seem to be confused about this.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Phoenix Jones wrote:

    It's been said 100 times before, and it will continue to be talked about in the near future.

    With all of that said, as you are representing the wormhole group, I do look forward to the townhall.

    I will hopefully be there to talk about WH stuff, not multi-boxing just FYI. Yes, this will be a never ending debate lol.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    That argument makes more sense. So, I am more arguing for having the EULA defined better. However, let’s define what is legal currently:

    Multiple accounts - Legal

    Multiple accounts while using a 3rd party program to monitor them - Legal

    Multiple accounts while using a 3rd party program to send commands to every account at once by pressing one button. – Recently Against EULA

    Multiple accounts while using a 3rd party program to make decisions for you, so you are afk making a pizza (botting). – ALWAYS against EULA

    So, myself, I utilize legal approaches and multiple accounts while using a 3rd party program to monitor them. I don’t need a 3rd party program to send commands to every account at once by pressing one button but I also know that some are angry that this has been taken away.

    I would argue that a monitoring program is exactly what people are argueing about. Legal multi-boxing with ISboxer is monitoring and sending commands one at a time to your eve clients. I like your description a lot “can't input commands into that other account without first clicking it, bringing it to the front, and interacting with it, which causes me to lose control of my primary account (it's no longer in focus).” This is exactly what we use ISboxer for now.

    I understand people not wanting others to play solo, at the same time we were never meant to live in WH space. I do not agree with ruining others playstyles simply because you don’t like it. That’s what this boils down to. Ganking and hotdropping could be treated with the same acid of community misunderstanding and mob mentality. I agree that you are more than welcome not to like how I fly, I do not agree that you or anyone should take that away. Now CCP is the guardians of the game and they have the ability to do whatever they want. If they remove multi-boxing all together I’ll leave. Until then I will fight for my playstyle.

    To the Mr. Miton, http://www.bobinmyhole.com/multi-boxing-in-other-games/ is my simple response. You can do all of this without paying for it, you don’t necessarily gain any more advantage over someone running accounts manually. If there are 4 people running 4 ships they each have to react for one client, if there is 1 person running 4 accounts he has to react 4 times under the current EULA. Broadcasting commands was removed recently and as such is no longer a valid playstyle or argument for “we hate multi-boxers” now we are forced to react as fast as I can. Your corpmate seems to understand this, have him explain it to you.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Phoenix Jones wrote:

    Just my feelings on it. With that said, What part of the multiboxing community do you represent? What is it specifically do you want done or seen for Eve. I haven't really read an actual stance.

    I have quite a few stances on my blog and in my original post for CSM.

    - Small Gravity Capacitor Upgrade changes
    - Ice changes for ventures (still need to blog about this one)
    - NPE for WH's

    Multi-boxing specific:
    - Better PR for multi-boxers
    - Better EULA definition and enforcement
    - Provide a CCP - Multi-boxer conduit for discussion


  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Phoenix Jones wrote:

    Just my feelings on it. With that said, What part of the multiboxing community do you represent? What is it specifically do you want done or seen for Eve. I haven't really read an actual stance.

    Let me address your 3 main points. However, on a quick side note, I agree that social interaction is a nice function of EVE but not all players require or want such but still want to participate in parts of the game that normally require it. This is a social argument that CCP will need to address separately if this is a legitimate concern to them, I will not address any of your points with the premise that social interaction is required, because it simply isn't. (As much I do like and prefer it, some do not.) Slaves are a lot easier to manage than corp mates.

    All three of your points argue automation, let’s separate this out into 2 more solid arguments. Automation within EVE client and Automation Outside of EVE client. This debate can go on and on until CCP issues a static statement saying what is and isn’t in their mind automation (part of the current multi-boxer concerns). So, they have declared that input broadcasting is considered against their policies.

    You use the term automation like these programs are inputting commands for us. While that is correct in the case of input duplication, that is not necessarily the case of the status quo since the EULA update. Currently, you are required to enter a click or keystroke for each and every command to a client. I need to release a video explaining this to people to show them how it works currently and that may settle some opinions.

    So currently, the way I multi-box is I have ISboxer, same can be accomplished in multiple other program I simply prefer the interface ISboxer provides. I use ISboxer to arrange my windows so I can click on parts of each client in rapid order instead of alt tabbing. This is how the majority of multi-boxers currently using ISBoxer utilize it legally to assist in our interaction with the eve client. This setup takes hours and sometimes days to put into place and does not even then remove any of the “training” required to become proficient and effective. This does decrease our margin for error, which is the point of the program and setup. It does not however, make us better than any other player by default. That is on a personal pilot training level and not mitigated a program. Mistakes happen and happen a lot. That majority of the community sees only the “harmful” effects or the perfect pilot that lays waste to a poorly FC’d fleet or a fleet that has been trapped expertly by the multi-boxers allies. It is silly and downright stupid to blame the multi-boxer for being better than his 7 counterparts in a single player per client only bombing fleet. As far as automation goes, the limit of our automating capabilities go, round-robin is the only pseudo automated form of multiboxing that people have considered and it isn’t really that effective thus far.

    Finally, you like to combine automated multi-boxing into one phrase, that is botting and bannable by the EULA and not something multi-boxers are concerned about. Nothing is automated in multi-boxing using ISboxer and it hasn’t been. It requires user interaction for everything. I will also argue or more likely point out that WOW (largest/most successful MMO to date) and others such as EQ2 and RIFT allow multi-boxing and even allow input duplication with no game destroying side-effects. Multi-boxing isn’t automated, it doesn’t destroy popular games, and it does require a significant time investment to get good at.

  • Update regarding Multiboxing and input automation in EVE Communication Center

    Sugar Smacks wrote:
    Any key commands that lead to automation of playing should be destroyed.
    Any key commands that lead to multiple commands from a single source should be destroyed.

    Anyone that thinks otherwise has no basis for their argument as only failed games stand behind these decisions.

    I still wait to hear of a sucessfull game people were allowed to do this in.
    The fact is there is none.

    Actually the most successful MMO in existence World of Warcraft allows input broadcasting. ISBoxer does not provide any automation, autofire, botting, hacks or other cheating functionality. Top MMORPG publishers including Blizzard Entertainment, Trion Worlds, Sony Online Entertainment, Turbine, NCSoft and others all allow multiboxing with ISBoxer.

  • "Give Your Voice A Chance!" WINGSPAN//Chance Ravinne for CSM X in Council of Stellar Management

    I'd vote for you simply because you make good vids and you show some fun WH stuff.

  • CSM X (Angrod Losshelin) - New Players, W-Space, and Multiboxing. in Council of Stellar Management

    Ima Wreckyou wrote:
    Angrod Losshelin wrote:
    Multi-boxers are generally extremely worried about keeping their accounts active, which means following the rules. We need these better defined or we risk losing our hard earned accounts. Loopholes are bad because they become widespread and then become accepted and then we run into the same issue, CCP changes their minds, and people either get angry, lose accounts, or quit the game.

    We want definition, the majority of multi-boxers I have spoken with simply want to know why and what they can do. Most is clearly defined but alot is not.

    I am not sure if you gain much sympathy with your campaign if you basically support cheaters.

    Coming from .CODE who are basically eve terrorists. Lol. No, I do not support cheating and most multi-boxers don't either. We do not want to cheat we do not want to be viewed as such. In order to follow the rules the rules need to be well defined, we need communication and clarification from the rule makers, and they need to be enforced correctly and fairly. Simple as that.

Forum Signature

Check out my Podcast! My Blog!