The equality on line 3 is not equal.
The right side makes the negative sign disappear by squaring it, which makes you add 0.5 to 4.5 instead of subtracting it.
Anyway…
I’m not against solo play!
I just wish some forms of gameplay were more interactive and thus more profitable for the solo player without a dozen accounts.
CCP should do something about game loops that require multiboxing. Currently, to get into hauling you need two omega characters because of double wrapping. They should either make it impossible to double-wrap or make it unnecessary.
Unfortunately, people feel they need a scout to solo move a cap unless they are in a fleet, but that is a skill issue, and knowing how to multi-box a scout is much more legitimate than all the corps that use intel relays on alts.
It is mostly game design limitations that make multi-boxing an issue.
OH WOW. I didn’t know I needed to be on EVE for years and be on zKill to start a conversation on the forum.
It should be mentioned in one of those sticky threads so everyone is on the same page.
I’m so sorry to be so ineligible to be a forum member.
You’re an experienced player with years under your belt so I will take your word and believe that my OP is nonsense.
Very sorry.
I hope you will forgive me provided I delete the OP and never log in here again.
Be well and farewell everybody.
o7
@ISD_Traindriver Please delete this nonsense thread.
Thank you!
I promise I won’t be a bother anymore.
And since Multiboxing is a me problem, I’ll be looking for another online game, one that doesn’t have Multiboxing.
o7
Friend, you can make trillions of isk with an alpha character in Jita.
No reason to be discouraged.
Can @Mike_Azariah have your stuff? 
This derailed quickly … lol.
But I think this thread should stay, as the first couple posts are a good summary to use in case the Q pops up again in a few days 
3 is the hard limit. There is no great design in the context. CCP simply limited the multiboxing to that number. The downside is that they also made it ridiculously lucrative for the low risk it involves. Look at Poochven for actual abyssal mass multiboxing.
They tried that already. It harmed ships that have no drone bonuses but use drones as utility dps more than it did actual drone boats.
Even the new ratting in the form of Homefronts and other new HS PVE content is already being multibox farmed more than missions and anoms ever were.
This only improves the initial setup of the colonies. The maintenance, extractor head repositioning and goods pickup won’t be impacted by that. It would simply remove the need for an ungodly number of clicks.
It’s a soft limit.
If you wanted you could still multibox more than 3 accounts for that activity, in separate abyssals.
The reason people don’t do that is because one abyssal requires enough attention and interaction already to make multiboxing 4 or more accounts in abyssals impractical.
Not impossible, just impractical.
That is good design in my opinion: make multiboxing less practical instead of more practical than single boxing because of the level of attention and interaction required.
Such a change would still make it easier to scale up PI to multiple accounts than today, and because if that it is a step in the wrong direction if you ask me.
EVE should not change gameplay to be less interactive and more easily scalable, as that encourages more multiboxing.
EVE should do the opposite and make gameplay more engaging and interactive to make multiboxing at scale impractical.
Multiboxing won’t be removed from EVE, but the impact of multiboxing on the gameplay of others can be reduced.
But you’re not starting a conversation. You’re merely regurgitating erroneous hearsay from others that you don’t have the experience of the game to know the validity of. Thus inventing yet another ‘problem’ that this forum is famous for.
The whole point of the game is to have an impact on others. If we’re going to eliminate all inequality of impact then we might as well start introducing 5 year pig iron plans and calling each other Comrade.
I did not ask for elimination of impact.
I asked to reduce the impact of multiboxers on the effectiveness of solo playstyles because I believe it currently is unblanced too much in favour of multiboxing for certain low interaction and heavily multiboxed playstyles.
Or would you argue that mining HS ore in a solo barge is a good use of anyone’s time?
You forget that you do not need to multibox more than 3 accounts to rake in as much ISK as if you were controlling 20+ accounts. That’s the problem with Abyssals. They are just too profitable.
You can do that and still reduce the necessary number of clicks for setting up PI. But considering that you want “engaging gameplay”, you want to see even more clicks. The problem is that PI currently is not engaging and requires an ungodly amount of clicks AND is a mandatory activity for the economy. It combines everything bad in a game.
I’d say mining anything solo is a waste of time. The boosting mechanic vastly increases your output, as well as does having a ship to unload your ore into instead of having to repeatly warp off to deposit your harvest.
If you ‘reduced’ everything in Eve that is unbalanced…there’d be no point in playing. I mean, there’s me in lowsec up against people with 20,000 solo kills, years of experience, and T3 ships I can’t even fly yet. That’s unbalanced. Maybe I should call for people with more than 1000 kills to be ‘reduced’ in lowsec.
With two Omega accounts you have 6 permutations of two characters to log in. But ( as there’s a downside to everything in Eve as well ) that also means you have to train up the other characters and that detracts from speed of progress of the ‘main’. This spreading out of SP for those who want to multibox all their permutations means that chars like Altara actually have less SP than if that char had hogged all the SP from day 1. So multiboxing is not necessarily all huge advantages.
If doing abyssals with 20 accounts was not impractical, people would do it.
Saying that people don’t multibox 20 abyssal ships ‘because 3 is already too profitable’ is either naive or dishonest.
I agree with you that PI requires too many clicks for the amount of meaningful choices you make while setting up PI.
I think that if PI is reworked ot should both require less clicks and be more engaging and interactive.
While a reduction in clicks would make it more scalable, I think such a change should be combined with more depth and interaction for PI to make it more interesting for players who enjoy that kind of gameplay and make it less easily scalable to multiple accounts.
This activity isn’t mandatory, you can buy the PI for your industry needs from people who enjoy managing their production lines in PI.
That makes it mandatory. Someone MUST do it so that you can afford to not do it and buy the things on the market.
Just like mining is mandatory. However, the good thing with mining being mandatory is that it does not require this soul crushing level of clicking and management. Although it has gotten worse after Rattati’s and Psych’s Industry Rebalance and introduction of waste, different crystals and smaller rocks.
There’s only so much you can do with ISK and boatloads of ISK. If you can rake in as much ISK as you’d need to meet your goals, there is no need to do more. That’s not naive or dishonest, that’s just rational, common sense behavior.
“Multibox mining does not exist, because there is only so much you can do with ISK and boatloads of ISK. If you can rake in as much ISK as you’d need to meet your goals, there’s no need to do more.”
Does that make sense to you? No?
Then why would it make sense for abysssls?
Some people have big ISK goals. Titans, paying Omega for a dozen accounts, whatever.
Saying that people don’t multibox abyssals with dozens of ships ‘because they have enough ISK’ instead of because they are constrained by the level of attention and interaction necessary is dishonest.
