Is PC power directly connected with the Multiboxing increase?

Communications Center General Discussion
1

20 Years ago, I could run EVE on a 3000$PC, with decent specs

In 2000 I was still using a PentiumV or an AMDFX with 512Meg of Ram, and Matrox GPU or VoodooFX.

I could play Oblivion, but I had no Internet, so Eve was dream.

When finally I got a powerful PC with a 460GT 1gBVram that could play Crysis, I still didn’t have Internet. at 56kb yes…

From 2015 to 2025 we saw 12.000K $ PC reduced to 600$ M1 MAC.

Suddenly scalability was there for everybody, and Internet got fats and cheap everywhere, almost.

So A game made with idk… LAN parties in mind? or… DSL 1st GRADE Imternet. And Thousands $ PC. just to run it, became available the masses..

Now, the scalability of PC Power didn’t even reached it’s peak… yet…

Next year Mac Mini7 will be out, with 1TB Unified memory…

It could run 8 Monitors at once…

I’m not an AFK engineer, but I believe that running 10 of those Mac mini, could give you potentially

an 80 people fleet, just to mine all day…

Gankers? Same story… 40+ Fleets with a back up of other 40 to run in parallel…

Some things in Eve are scalable with PC power. Change my mind.

I’m not saying it’s a problem here, I’m just trying to predict what more powerful PC

could mean to Eve.

2

Correlation does not imply causation

3

@Gerard_Amatin #9 i believe??

4

Not entirely sure, I don’t see ‘Marauders’ explicitly mentioned but as some of his previous posts were about how Marauders got nerfed because of multiboxing, or how his Marauder got killed by a multiboxer, this may very well be complaint thread #9 on the topic.

At least there’s some variation in topic now. I am not too fond of mass multiboxing either and think he has a point for once:

Mass multiboxing is mainly limited by how many accounts a PC can handle, and with PCs getting better over the years this will be a growing strategy.

Or a growing problem.

5

My nephew and I fish old PCs out of the trash all day still. Some are only 3 to 5 years old but I have an old HP here 2012 ( no upgrades ) replaced the broken HDD with a SSD. It can run EVE on Linux OS. That one will soon be 15 years old. It has a small PSU, passive GPU, and 8 GB of RAM. Yet people toss it out. I fix them up and give them away free to senior citizens. They mostly don’t use them for anything other than social media on a browser. I feel getting them to play at least one graphic online game is the “acid test”.

Gaming and Window OS requirements is the largest reason for the need to keep PC hardware up to date. Please stop throwing these PCs out to the curb! Give them to a charity, school, or social program. My actions are funded by a government program, but it only pays me coffee money. I would still perform this action, if or when they defund the program.

o7

2 Likes
6

I could say that it was a strange parallel reality… sorry, stopped reading after the second sentence. Because you are not talking about our Universe:

Intel never released a processor called “Pentium V.” The Pentium line included models like Pentium, Pentium II, Pentium III, Pentium 4, and later variants (Pentium D, Pentium Dual-Core, etc.), but there was no official “Pentium V.”

1 Like
7

Don’t forget, the P3 clocked at the same speed as the first P4 had more compute…

8

Whilst PC power increase may mean you need less hardware to achieve the same level of multiboxing I don’t think the cost of PC power has ever been the limiting factor on multiboxing.

It’s more about how many clients one can watch/control at once, now without input broadcasting.

PCs are cheap, and for the lifetime of EvE always have been.

9

I discussed that on the other thread, game balance is wrong.

Big ships are a joke with this Large tracking.

But the opportunity to present my solution arised:
New module triple cannon for large ships - 3 small turrets in a single module delivering a rain of fire on small / medium targets, using the same tracking small turrets have.

Or, keep believing in a world where humanity conquered space, we gonna win orbiting the alien massive capital ship… I mean, some idiot said EVE represents the future so well, I almost lost hope replying…

EVE is so off the correct sci-fy nobody involved with space tech wants to get involved with it. Ships are all wrong to balance towards missions and multis, it should be the other way around, get ships back and then remove this idiotic bounties, way better balance.

I mean, depending on the end goal, ofc. If the end goal is to appease afk farmers, then working as intended.

That does not mean multis and farmers should go, that means the priority is getting the game enjoyable, but again, depends on the end goal. Lots of old farts will rage, but an opportunity to bring new blood.

Trade offs and hard decisions. PC power is just a correlation to a bigger problem, it just make it easier to scale.

Edit: Engineers can do everything even conquer death, but God forbid them from creating decent rotors… YEAH accurate as ■■■■! Damage application <> tracking, fix that ■■■■.

1 Like
10

There is this very popular known speech:

"
From the dawn of time we came…
moving silently,
down through the centuries.
Living many secret lives,
struggling to reach the
time of the gathering,
when the few who remain
will battle to the last.
No one has ever known
we were among you…..
until now.

Here we are, born to be kings
We’re the princes of the universe
Here we belong, fighting to survive
In a world with the darkest powers
"

That same exact thing will happen with the last remaining multiboxers when they field their massive fleets during the endgame of EVE.

11

Some things HAD to be said so often that it steps on the nerves of the devs until it hurts them badly and one of this is : MULTIBOXING AND MULTIACCOUNTING HAS TO GO…ONE account per ip…end of story…YOU CAN DO THIS…YOU DO IT FOR ALPHAS SO JUST DO IT FOR OMEGAS TOO…This is a massivemultiPLAYER game. not a massive multiACCOUNT game…make sure to bring the game back into its own genre by punishing people that play 20 accounts on one pc…simple as it is…account numbers that look good on paper are not everything…it’s damaging the game if only 5-10k players are behind shown ‘35k players online’…this is fake…and bad for the game…

12

Yes, but it’s the multiboxing increase that is connected to PC power.
When PCs were young multiboxing was impossible. Now that they’ve matured, one PC could multibox over a hundred accounts.
Enters A.I and let the fun begin…

1 Like
13

How and why exactly does AI enter here? Any automation is not allowed and bannable.

So for what purpose are you suggesting AI?

Also please name a GPU that features enough VRAM to support 100 clients. Just one model would be enough. Thank you!

14

You forget what the reason is for large guns to badly track smaller targets: it means big ships cannot easily punch down and need support from other players.

The current design is what allows a newbie in a frigate to be useful in a fight next to a veteran in a Titan.

Bigger in EVE isn’t better, and it shouldn’t be. It’s an alternative with more firepower, yet slower and requires more support to work well.

Your suggestion would make bigger better, and invalidates smaller ships.

Not a good idea.

1 Like
15

Bigger is better, that’s reflected on the cost no? I mean, that is kind the entire point of 200 threads since I joined… :sweat_smile:

Or, people can do like others and totally ignore PvE, then you have a point. I’m not sure it’s a good one, but that’s what is pushing the argument around.

EVE PvE is garbage anyway, people just don’t want to pay a sub.

16

Wonder if i can find @Shipwreck_Jones jones post about the ship sizes.

17

Ship Balance
Ship Balance1920×1080 148 KB

1 Like
18

No argument here, I was just saying they kind useless outside PvE because the lack of flexibility. Unless in fleets ofc, but fleets are a different topic.

One suggestion would be changes to warp core strength based on ship size.

But my opinion is useless, if people like it, so be it. I’m just answering thread #87589734 about EVE design, at least it’s not one about gank, lol.

19

Welcome to Queotzcatl’s threads.

2 Likes
20

He’s not always wrong, but he surely express himself in the worst possible maner.

I tried to tell him he’s observing the effect not the cause, I even posted some arguments.

Something like: If we have more guns, therefore we have more crimes… Yeah, we going to, but it’s not like the guns are going to act by themselves.

And that’s all I have to say about that topic. I don’t see PvE as a worth effort, just pay for the game, or do some other activity to get ISK, way better use of someones time.

2 Likes