The Multiboxing Debate: A Limit Of Ten Would Likely Solve Alot With Minimal Risk Of Unwanted Effects

(Implementation questions/issues aside, this assumes that it is either now or will be in the future possible to set and enforce such an arbitrary limit. Perhaps 8 or 12 is a better number for this or that reason but the main point is I don’t see either side of the “unlimited” or “just one” argument as being realistic if the goal is in fact to improve the health of Eve Online without inadvertently amputating the whole leg if perhaps its just the foot that’s gangrenous right lol anyways, the following I’ve copied and pasted from a comment I posted on one of Ashterothi’s YT clips titled “Multiboxing Proliferation is the Problem” and thought I’d share it here as well.) :upside_down_face:

Although I primarily single box out of preference (and because my pc is crap) I am not of the opinion that it should be disallowed entirely. There’s alot of what I think are pretty reasonable utilities for dual boxing with like solo hunting and market stuff for example, and maybe one for your blue scout you know, and you :face_with_peeking_eye: :index_pointing_at_the_viewer: yes YOU in the back waving your hand before you even say “oh Sargon real rich comin’ from a Highsec ganker la-maooo” only reason alot of us are multiboxing 5 or more accounts is because that’s now become the usual minimum threshold to gank even a minimum skill afk empty broken bot t1 barge and break even on zkill nevermind the actual drop chance, otherwise it just doesn’t happen. :man_shrugging:

On the other hand…

:laughing: :loudspeaker: You do not need 5-7-14 accounts to complete a PVE mission, and I’m fairly certain there would be no “Incursion community” if Incursions were meant to be min-maxed by one dude flipping through a three ring binder of isk/per hour spreadsheets with one hand and petting his cat with the other, with a quarter of their screen made up of eve-o-preview. :ok_man: I mean sure if that’s how they want to play but then to promote that as a optimal whatever makes no sense, either the market will nerf you into the ground or CCP having to try and force balance which as we know often has unintended collateral to some other gameplay that you usually cant even predict the consequences of until afterwards…

  • At this point I got tired of typing so yeah feel free to screech at eachother in the comments I guess…
    Ready… Set… GO! :explodyparrot:
1 Like

I don’t see the problem. People will just whine and find excuses why they don’t do well regardless. If this would get “solved” the same people would find something else to whine about because they’re just chronic whiners unwilling and incapable or realising they have control and agency, if only they put in effort.

Very similar to SJW demanding equality of outcome instead of realising there’s equality of opportunity.


There’s a big difference between permitting multi-boxing and favouring multi-boxing by enabling features and tools for it.

I would rather have more unique players than a player having more ships fielded. The game shouldn’t favour multi-boxing over single boxing or make it easier.

It’s just not my cuppa tea or what I call playing/enjoying the game, hardly challenging to field more ships then claim “I win”.


This thread is going places already.

You shouldn’t need more than one account to complete a single in-game task in general. Having patience skilled to V will do and no, I don’t buy the efficient ISK/hour mentality.


I’m not a fan of seeing “players” acting like bots, whether that is someone running 20 accounts or someone FCing 20 F1 monkeys.

Thing is that my opinion on that shouldn’t affect another’s options. CCP should make it less easy to afk grind because it competes with actual players doing the same thing, but outright limiting it is the wrong approach and only thought u by folks who can’t stand others doing better/more.

Players could take a more active role in punishing AFK farmers via PvP as well.


With PLEX prices this high, this problem will solve itself.

Black out proved the shoe is most definitely on the other foot. Botters & multiboxers are the biggest cry babies in this game.


I disagree. Having some content designed for groups/teams of players is a good thing. Players stick around longer when playing with friends.


without multiboxing miners, everything you enjoy flying and using would be so much more expensive.
ccp doesnt make tools for multiboxers, players do. There is greater risk for multiboxers than single players. risk = reward.
So far, all I see is people whining that other people can afford to, and have the time to multibox. That’s not even an argument.


I meant a single player multiboxing, not multiple players in a group activity.

There’s no difference as far as game mechanics are concerned.

So when you say this:

What in-game task are you referring to that requires multi-boxing but excludes group players?

solo mining a moon or anom. unless you’re schizophrenic, it’s just you there

I’m saying a player need not resort to running more than one account to complete a general task. If the player needs help, that is what corporations and fleets are for. For example, I try to do my own mission running or mining without having to run multiple accounts. If I need help, I’ll ask those I know.

That is my personal opinion and not to be taken as a general rule others must follow.

1 Like

Neither requires multi-boxing nor excludes group play.

Ah I got you.

1 Like

I apologize for being vague. I am at work trying to squeeze in EVE during my lunch and breaks and I wish I had more time to proof my posts. :slightly_smiling_face:

the word solo dictates that it does exclude group play. Multiboxers can solo a moon/anom/belt and make more than any single miner. Required, no. Smart, yes.

You’ve misunderstood the question. But since that question arose from it’s own misunderstanding we can probably let it slide.

Without multibox mining the value of minerals would be higher and it might actually be worth mining. Although I still wouldn’t do it.