It doesn’t even have to be a VPN or VM, I could simply be playing from three different computers. As far as CCP knows, there are three different people here playing. What are they going to do? Start requiring proof of residency just to play a game?
1 Like
So few people will actually do that, it’s completely irrelevant in the larger picture. No system needs to be 100% safe, perfection is the enemy of the good. If you really want to constantly switch between 3 real computers, have 3x mouse, keyboard, monitor (or some kind of input/display switch) on your desktop, go do it. It will be way less efficient than current massmultiboxing and self-limiting to 2 or 3 clients anway.
You seem to have failed to comprehend what you were reading.
1 Like
No, something small that would mesh well with the existing HUD. Nothing like thumb widgets for mobile games.
1 Like
oh no, i understood just fine.
I also understand that going down to my local pawn shop and picking up a handful of otherwise obsolete laptops is but one of a great many ways around the laughably easy to circumvent restrictions you’re proposing.
So far I haven’t really heard any reason mechanically besides “What If they still multibox?” scenarios.
Is there any reason mechanically this wouldn’t work?
Tank the economy? Iskflation?
1 Like
I’m not trying to be mean in any way shape or form, but how IT literate are you? I work as a Network Admin and try to avoid using jargon and such when discussing concepts with people who may not be as literate.
- IP address correlation
- MAC
- Geolocation Data
- Useage
- Hardware Fingerprinting
- Account Behavior Analysis
- Input Sync Patterns
- Data packet frequency
- Session Intervals/Times
- Play Times
- Human Delay Simulation
In today’s IT environment, just using a VPN isn’t going to keep you from getting detected. There is literally an entire industry that has evolved around tracking you online. CCP has both automated and non-automated tools that collect this information and use it to determine if you’re a bot, etc.
In short, all this information taken together will result it detection. Perhaps not right away, but the longer the end user kept it up, the easier they would be to detect.
Even anonymized data can be de-anonymized with enough correlative data and it WILL happen.
Edited for clarity.
2 Likes
Well spoken. I never really thought about that and yeah, it does making it rather glaring that there are multiboxers and by making it glaringly obvious, it likely feeds a bit into the annoyance some people feel. I’d just assume a fleet doctrine if I saw 20+ identical ships landing on a gate.
Apparently (according to a post on Reddit), the highest number of accounts owned by one person is… 2,600.
If you want to command multiple ships at once with a special UI to switch between the ships, have you considered flying a Carrier?
I… do fly carriers. Nice call.
1 Like
That is freaking obscene.
1 Like
Probably just a skill farm. 
1 Like
All of which ignores the simple fact of $$$ paid to CCP for each account.
Just muddy the waters of your proposal enough and keep multiboxing. Just with three online pilots per account rather than one.
You really think CCP is going to willfully cut their own income?
And again, you seem to be missing the point of the thread. It’s not about What If scenarios or the ToS.
Discuss the proposed feature. The mechanics, the results, the issues with the suggestion itself.
Do you know what I see when I browse these forums? Several people who seem like they live here shut down any and all suggestions without even giving discussion of the topic a real chance. Do I think this will ever get developed for EVE? Heck no, but discussion of things is how progress is made and ideas come to light.
Can you poke any holes in the mechanics of the suggested feature/change?
fine:
Total number of subscriptions plummet. CCP goes bankrupt, no more EVE.
Again, that’s not a discussion of the mechanic.
Pointing out that a proposed mechanic would cause financial hardship to the host game company should they implement said mechanic most assuredly comes under the heading of “discussing the mechanic”.
And that’s one of the longest sentences without punctuation I’ve ever written. I’m not sure where the commas fit in.
What is it you want?
is it:
A: An end to multiboxing?
B: The ability to triple your presence in game at no extra Omega cost?
C: A new UI specifically tailored for multiple online characters?
In which case,
A: this is potentially financial suicide for CCP if accompanied by some kind of voodoo to ban multiple accounts.
B: See above.
C: There’s a handy little third party program called EVE-O Preview that fulfills a similar function.
I never wrote how would UI for that look like. So again - what you are proposing sounds like character swapping in Genshin Impact. Which is stupid mechanic and I hate it.
So how would it look like then according to your idea? You press a button, ship goes poof and suddenly there is different character in different ship kinda like ship swapping via Orca? Or do you even show up in different system?
If it is instaneous, then it can be abused so easily for escaping. If it isn’t I see no difference between loggin-off safely or just quitting the account and relogging to other character on same account.
Anothr reason I multibox apart of what @QuakeGod named is that the game itself played with just one account is actually boring. Except exploration, it is very low apm and you just stare into space watching how ship does everything itself. Mining especially, but even in some pve content you watch and wait while ship is shooting to enemy npc. PvP is worst as it consist of 95% idle time where you wait for ■■■■ to happen. And then the fight is resolved in less than minute and you wait again.
Playing multiple characters at once defeats this issue. Some players might quit without ability to play multiple characters at the same time because they would get bored. And your suggestion does not help this.
All you need to remove multiboxing is to make this game higher apm. Barely anyone multibox in Albion Online which is game closes to EVE. And if they do it is immobile scout at area transition. Restricting multiboxing while not making the core game faster, more active and more interesting to play solves absolutely nothing,
I’m unsure why you’re so upset and refusing to simply discuss the proposed mechanic itself rather than CCP’s Tos/EULA and their financials.
Please stick to the thread topic.
Here, I’ll help you:
“Mephiztopheleze: I don’t think this mechanic would work because mechanically it would cause. . .”
Or
“Mephiztopheleze: I think this idea won’t pan out because the in game material economy would. . .”
And thank you for pointing out my run-on sentence. English isn’t everyone’s first language and many of us have discovered that English is a fairly difficult language to master.
Are you multilingual too?