Tuesday, November 25, 2014

I am like Prophet, No?

Back in September I charged that ISBoxer is equivalent to botting:

In essence, ISBoxer is just a bot that doesn't have a preset script to follow, but rather follows you.

This is why I think CCP is wrong on this issue and should change their stance. A bot is a bot is a bot. It shouldn't matter if the bot is independent or dependent on the player for their instructions, it still allows a single human to sustain larger operations over long periods of time with fewer mistakes than a human without using ISBoxer would be able to. It doesn't matter that it does not affect the economy or is not a tool of the Real Money Traders. Its a bot, and CCP should make it an exploit.
The number of commentors that disagreed with me was quite staggering, but one entity did agree with me: CCP.
Based on the discussion in this area and our will to be more clear and concise with the community regarding this part of our rules, we have decided to also apply this two-strike policy to prohibited forms of Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing as of January 1st 2015.
We would like to add, however, that we will not be taking action retroactively and will only be policing this policy as of January 1st, 2015.
Input Broadcasting and Input Multiplexing of actions with consequences in the EVE universe, are prohibited and will be policed in the same manner as Input Automation.

This includes, but isn’t limited to:
• Activation and control of ships and modules
• Navigation and movement within the EVE universe
• Movement of assets and items within the EVE universe
• Interaction with other characters



  1. I have been looking forward to this change for a long time.

    Short term: much rage and resultant tantrums, with a number of alt accounts dropped
    Med term: pricing volatility until new normal established
    Long term: better game

    One mind, one ship at a time.

    1. Well, Kung I agree in essence... but I still dual box! Granted I like that unlike ISBoxing, dual boxing is inherently moar risky... =]

    2. I dual box as well, mostly for fleet/gang boosting. But as I said: one mind, one ship at a time. What is being banned is one mind, several ships at the same time.

  2. I have to admit, I am stunned that CCP is moving forward with this. Pleasantly stunned, but stunned nonetheless. A truly gutsy move. The amount of sub hits they are going to take is huge in the immediate term. Given the current subs dropping for other reasons, a incredible thing do at this time.

    Looks like CCP has really woken up and making wholesale changes to the game. I have a feeling that the EA guy they hired and the investors are putting enormous pressure on CCP management to realign Eve as a more new player friendly and casual player friendly game.

    Maybe, just maybe, they will end up reversing out the carnage they wrought in high sec with all the changes this past summer and before.

    1. LOL one of the most negative positive comments I have ever seen... talk about passive aggressive. And it has taken you until NOW to notice that CCP is and has been making sweeping changes??

      Vince, jezuz man, can't you just say "Damn CCP, Good job!!"

      And it aint the EA guy they hired you yutz... you need to thank CCP Seagull...
      (like that's ever gonna happen).

    2. i believe it's a fact that anyone using ISBoxer was running multiple clients for free. How could that have possibly benefited CCP financially??? The only people it benefited were those purchasing plex for $$$ where their return would be greater because of the higher demand.

      remember, the affect here is to rid the game of what is in effect a cheat that probably has more applications that mere bomber runs, missioning, ice mining than i can think of...probably applications that border on exploitation that CCP is aware of

  3. Apparently CCP found some balls -or their bottom line is looking not-that-bad-after-all, so it's time to (guess what) ensure that 1 pilot = 1 command.

    Good riddance ISbox jockeys.

  4. Sorry, but if you read what CCP Falcon said, he did not equate the use of ISBoxer with botting. Also, CCP did not ban the use of ISBoxer, just the input broadcasting to multiple clients.

    That said, it's nice to see :)

    1. Yes, you can continue to use ISBoxer, but you cannot use ISBoxer (or any other software/hardware) to direct multiple clients with a single input. CCP Falcon was very careful to not equate ISBoxer with botting. He exactly described the behaviour that was unacceptable.

    2. I think that if you took the entire population who use ISBoxer and subtracted the number that don't use it at all for the soon to be banned activities you would come up with a population difference that looks like a rounding error.

      Also while there was no explicit link mentioned, CCP Falcon did decide to also reiterate other forms of client modification for automation (or simply BOTS) along with this announcement. Nothing more was really needed for the announcement, and it makes for a more compelling argument that these things are seen in a similar vein (facing similar consequences) to each other.

      That being said I cant wait to see your analysis of this, and I am also happy that its been done. Death to the boxed ice fleets.

    3. Very much this.

      Had he mentioned single products, intelligent EVE botter would have come up with other software which works similar. So they have to define general don'ts, and this very often sounds vague - but actually we all know what is meant by the new rules.

      I like it.

    4. i'm with eve-vov on this one. Just because he didn't come out and explicitly SAY isboxer is banned, doesn't mean what you think it means...legal jargon is always full of language that you must learn to not only speak but understand when reading as well. If you come at it from a legal point of view you'll notice CCP pretty much laid out bannable actions that ISBoxer falls right into by default.

  5. you did predict, and rightly so. To think people actually thought using a popular botting engine modified to use as something that 'seems legit' was legit. lol

  6. and you're right...a few people i've mentioned this to actually just don't understand my point: that a botting engine is what hides below ISboxer's innocent facade.


AddThis button