They simply told people that they couldn’t use the full functionality available in the software, and that if they were caught doing so it would have consequences.
You can still use ISBoxer, what you can’t do is use features such as input broadcasting and some of the screen capture/display functionality.
Just as I can use a gaming keyboard with programmable keys, but not the more advanced functionality and scripts that come with it; I can still program the keys, as long as one keypress results in one action; I tend to assign them to the hotkeys ingame.
Okay, concession of that point. They just removed the primary reason for using ISBoxer which was input broadcasting, so they might as well have banned it
Pay to win is implying the player is using rl cash for their advantage. I PLEX 30 accounts with isk I make ingame and haven’t used real money in at least a year and a half. There is nothing stopping you from doing the same thing besides being bad.
If you don’t like it go play another game, crying on the forums cos you don’t want to git gud isn’t doing anything productive.
Hey [person], just because I am not the one paying the fee, means that the fee isn’t being paid!
What? An entire economy built around PLEX purchasing? Naw, come on man, that can’t be realistic. O-oh, it already exists? W-wait, that’s not what I meant desu-senpai~~~
Oh wait, no need. We all already know you’re talking about the multiple gankers that have been multiboxing for ages.
The same ones that stream themselves doing it so you can rage over them not using any programs
What does that have to do with multiboxing?
Nothing… it’s just another attempt to derail the thread sideways (again)
Read the post above mine for the relevant context.
Forum doesnt unfortunately tie the “reply” button below their post to ones own.
Ill fix that with a quote in the above post so you can see the context.
As to multiboxing relevancy, its significant whether multiboxers are buying subs from CCP, or buying them ingame for isk (as paid for with cash by someone else). A multiboxer is one person that represents a drain on PLEX as a multiple of how many accounts they run, thus raising the question of whether they sub those accounts with their own cash or someone elses.
You cant multibox without gametime, hence my point is relevant.
ALL costs are yours alone - they’re not split among multiple players if things go pear shaped.
Each ship Increases reaction time - especially if the ships have different functions. For example, if a multi-boxed scout and hauler get attacked at the same time in different systems, and if each ship were to be given one opportunity each to bug out, a single player would likely miss one of those opportunities and lose at least one of the ships, whereas two pilots might each get their ship free. It’s also possible that both ships might be lost, because the player’s attention is in the wrong place at the wrong time.
Loss of effectiveness. Plainly put, a single player is less effective than a well honed group of players. The keys to this are, lack of automation for the multi-boxer (which is against the rules) and the group of pilots needs to actually work together.
There are positives for multi-boxing.
The more passive the job, the easier it is to multibox without losing effectiveness: Mining, Hauling, Guarding from rats.
Alts don’t get bored. Guarding a mining op for hours for what again?
All the profits are yours.
No miscommunication between your ships - malicious or negligent.
So honestly, I think a player just exchanges one set of risks for another.
I view multi-boxing as any tool in an EvE player’s toolbelt. Judge the risks involved, and use the right tool for the right job.
If a player chooses to eschew a specific tool because of any manner of reasons, then I also think that’s fine. Some people add extra challenges to make the game more fun. I do this with Gadget.
But I do draw the line at forcing my voluntary challenge on others. That’s where I think the OP (not you, Anjyl) was going with this, and that’s not cool in my book.
Play EvE how y’all want to play, but don’t ■■■■■ when I play my way.
We’re all following the rules, and the sandbox is big enough for all of us.
–Gadget plays her way
Edit: replaced pilot with player as this is a thread about multi-boxing, and they are not interchangeable on this topic.
But multiboxing means you can ship down to, let’s say Vexor Navy Issues. Instead of having to field 1 Nestor, you can get the same job done more cheaply with 3 cruisers. Isn’t that actually LESS risk and LESS cost?
But how much EFFECTIVE reaction time is lost? Just because it takes an extra second or two to alt tab over and activate your next alt’s modules . . . well, that’s 4 seconds at the start of an engagement. Does that even matter?
Why are you comparing 1 pilot’s effectiveness to 3 pilots’ effectiveness? Was anybody claiming 1 pilot versus 3 pilots was unfair?
I’ll be honest… I’ve always been impressed with people who can use multiple accounts effectively in combat situations in this game.
I honestly can’t do it. I have multiple accounts… but I can’t effectively play with more than one at the same time. I might have alts AFK hauling in hi-sec or afk salvaging in a drone ship… but I can’t really manage to actively play more than one account… even in a ineffective manner. The closest I’ve come is slaving drones from one ship over to another while ratting… but that’s good if almost no management is needed after slaving the drones.
No it doesn’t. The player could have easily showed up with three Nestors. The OP could have been in a VNI, too.
Totally separate.
Depends on experience, computer(s), style of multi-boxing (classic or alt-tabbing), similarity of tasks/functions, etc.
Re-read, please, and try to understand the context of where you pulled this line. This is a risk of multi-boxing.
And it should read player not pilot, since this is about multi-boxing, but I think you got that. Correcting now.
–Multi-Gadget
yours for only 3 easy installments of 199999999 isk. Call now.
I absolutely concede this point. The multiboxer could definitely have shown up in 3 Nestors or 3 Ibises or even worse, 3 naked capsules filled to the brim with expensive implants. He could have even shown up with 3 haulers full of Vexor Navy Issues and ejected from the haulers and self-destructed his capsules. ROFL . . . what were we talking about again?
I also concede this point. If the multiboxer had been on a dial-up modem, he could have gotten his clock cleaned by the OP. If there had been a connection hiccup or he forgot to pay his internet bill, ::laugh out loud LOL::: Can you imagine if his house had been struck by lightning and his power went out? Wow. #relevant
Encountering a well honed fleet is a risk of boxing, period. Single, dual, tri, quad, multi, omni, non . . . if you are boxing, you run the risk of encountering a well honed fleet.
I feel like I’m misunderstanding you on the last point. WHAT is a risk of multiboxing that is not also a risk of just playing, generally?
1 player with 3 accounts each with a VNI… if he loses he alone loses all 3 VNI’s.
3 players with 1 account each with a VNI… loss is spread. Each player loses 1 VNI.
So you let others absorb some of the loss when you play with other players rather than multiboxing and handling all fleet roles yourself. That’s how I understood what he posted at least.
I completely agree. If it wasn’t clear I was stating my opinion regarding the issue, not that it should be universally enforced. That I view the social aspect of creating a fleet as an important aspect of game play, and base my opinion on that. Not that anyone is doing anything wrong with multi-boxing.
P.S. +1 for the correct use and spelling of y’all.
