|
Rust Martialis posted:tl,dr: if Replicator kills you, petition the loss
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 20:47 |
|
|
Tippis posted:I know, and that's what makes it inconsistent and incorrect. Wait, so the GMs restoring Replicator's kills is inconsistent because the GMs have been restoring oodell's kills? They've also been restoring wheniaminspace and ammzi's kills, you know. Consistently, for months now. So how are they inconsistent?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:04
|
|
|
powers posted:I was repping a JB in a scimitar last month. Guess I'm getting a new scimitar. Yo Powers let me know if that works, i have some poo poo to get back from wheniminspace's runs in F2O  .
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:07
|
|
|
BMcDonough posted:So how are they inconsistent?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:09
|
|
|
Same thing happened when I lost a ship too, got it reimbursed . Its like hes doing an insurance scam service for everyone in ya0, get it while you can!
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:10
|
|
|
BMcDonough posted:Wait, so the GMs restoring Replicator's kills is inconsistent because the GMs have been restoring oodell's kills? They've also been restoring wheniaminspace and ammzi's kills, you know. Consistently, for months now. If it was reimbursable, what he's doing would also be bannable. It's not. Also, not everyone gets reimbursements.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
Bonfire Lit posted:If using ISBoxer isn't an exploit, why are they reimbursing the ships? If it is an exploit, why aren't they going after the users? Their position appears to be that the use of ISBoxer itself isn't something they wish to discourage, but its use in PVP is. i.e. They are unwilling to issue a position statement that makes the use of ISBoxer for mining (easily the most widespread application) an exploit. This, and their inability to say 'using ISBoxer in PVP is bad' is also consistent... at least, it's consistent with CCP being utterly incapable of doing the blatantly obvious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:13
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:Also, not everyone gets reimbursements. Actually, that seems to be a matter of approach - consistently. If you say you were killed in PVP, no reimbursement. If you say you were killed by an ISBoxer or someone using 3rd-party multiboxing software, reimbursement. That, however, is purely anecdotal at this stage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:14
|
|
|
mrmcd posted:CCP probably makes too much money on people with multiple accounts and isboxed mining fleets to really crack down on it. I'm sure they'd rather just quietly sweep it under the rug and refund an occasional loss for sperglord edge cases like replicator. The real reason is CCP doesn't police their gm's or set consistent policy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:15
|
|
|
Rhymenoserous posted:The real reason is CCP doesn't police their gm's or set consistent policy. Hell, why not both reasons?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:18
|
|
|
Multiple accounts are great. Isboxer is great. If you haven't tried it, you should give it a clear eyed look. I know it sucks to lose your poo poo; but I don't understand why losing your poo poo to 8 hounds is more annoying than losing your poo poo to 7 hounds and a manticore, and the number of actual human beings involved shouldn't matter to you. While isboxer or hardware repeaters allow theoretical synchronization, in reality you get client crashes, pointer desyncs, and other unique to multiboxing errors frequently enough that it's probably a wash. The guy multiboxing is having fun though, which is something that eve should probably embrace.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:20
|
|
|
Kuromyneko posted:Same thing happened when I lost a ship too, got it reimbursed Did they refund the skill loss?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:28
|
|
|
BMcDonough posted:Wait, so the GMs restoring Replicator's kills is inconsistent because the GMs have been restoring oodell's kills? They've also been restoring wheniaminspace and ammzi's kills, you know. Consistently, for months now. Bonfire Lit posted:If using ISBoxer isn't an exploit, why are they reimbursing the ships? If it is an exploit, why aren't they going after the users? Tippis fucked around with this message at 16:39 on Oct 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
Anias posted:Multiple accounts are great. Isboxer is great. If you haven't tried it, you should give it a clear eyed look. I've wondered why, as far as I can tell, he consistently attacks with most or all of his stealth bombers, even in situations where it would be safer to attack only with a few. Is this because of the way isboxer works?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:38
|
|
|
Daler Mehndi posted:I've wondered why, as far as I can tell, he consistently attacks with most or all of his stealth bombers, even in situations where it would be safer to attack only with a few. Is this because of the way isboxer works? It's the fundamental flaw of software multiboxing: it's all or nothing and it's a hassle to dynamically adjust what you employ (and how) to the current situation. That's also why the oft-used argument that it breaks the EULA because it is somehow better than “normal gameplay” breaks down on closer inspection.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
zombie303 posted:Did they refund the skill loss? Oh I took that while cloaked up so wasn't me who lost the t3. People need to read intel channel more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 16:50
|
|
|
Anias posted:Multiple accounts are great. Isboxer is great. If you haven't tried it, you should give it a clear eyed look. Eh, losing poo poo here and there is sort of meh. The only thing that really gets my knickers in a twist wrt to isboxer is the idea that a couple of isboxer-aided multiboxers can dunk a full battleship fleet. That should require a ton of coordination and nuance, and IMO setting up a few perches for your 16 personal bomber accounts doesn't meet that threshold. That said, emergent gameplay is cool, even/especially when it makes use of clever third-party tools.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
Anias posted:Multiple accounts are great. Isboxer is great. If you haven't tried it, you should give it a clear eyed look. It is considerably harder to organize eight humans than isboxing them. That said, I'm relatively indifferent on the subject, but I think CCP's gotta come down one way or the other. This half-measure thing where you can do it but your victims get reimbursed is untenable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
I think how isboxer works is that it copies the inputs from across multiple accounts, so when you warp it warps all the accounts, when you lock it locks all accounts onto the same target. I noticed he was locking up another ship then I warped in and started locking his one bomber, as this point he switched to me very quickly and started to scram me, at this point he did not seem to have a lock on the other targets. So running a fleet of isboxing ships in pvp might get a bit harder when multiple ships are trying to attack you and you are not able to scram them all at the time time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 17:23
|
|
|
For those asking if CCP refunds skill loss, the answer in the case of my wife's account was yes. She lost a Proteus to Replicator and was refunded the ship, and the skill loss.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 18:00
|
|
|
You're all ruining my immersion. I pretend he's a rogue drone with a better budget.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
eriktown posted:Well, not always. Bloodtears never used it. I used ISboxer for everquest. Was pretty boss mode with some helpful scripts. I wonder how many eve players use some kind of macro'ing. Edit: for the most part our raids where comprised of boxers. Beanage fucked around with this message at 18:17 on Oct 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 18:09
|
|
|
Cannon_Fodder posted:You're all ruining my immersion. That fits better to plukovnik/yoohun.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 18:10
|
|
|
SugarAddict posted:So, anyone have silly DPS fittings with the new nergeling weapons? And how do they compare with regular pure DPS fittings? They're complete garbage. 10% or less DPS gained, and a small boost in tracking, in exchange for shorter range and the complete removal of nearly all tank on your ship. In pretty much every scenario, just pull off your suitcase and put on another damage mod, and you'll have a better outcome. There's also a massive disparity between the missile and turret versions -- unlike turrets, launchers can't modify explosion radius/explosion velocity/range of missiles, nor their damage. So, in exchange for zeroed-out resists, all you get is a ~10% ROF increase. That goes from complete garbage to facepalmingly bad. If I were a betting man, I would say that whoever implemented this feature did not run the stats for these modules past Fozzie's desk before they hit Sisi. Kalenn Istarion posted:Who'd have thought a game full of spergs would have hordes of people not only willing but thrilled to shoot structures for hours and hours on end Eh, the structure nerfs aren't much of a nerf -- and it only applies to sov structures, not POSes. The cap mobility changes, however, will indeed turn Reavers from merely amusing into OH GOD COMEDY.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 18:29
|
|
|
Maybe someone in the development department has gotten confused between glass cannons and paper tigers?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 18:33
|
|
|
I just realized CCP's cunning plan: change supers so they can only fit blighted (ugh that name) equipment. Voila, balanced!
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 18:39
|
|
|
I don't really understand what CCP was thinking with those new glass cannons. First I was excited, but now it looks like you get something like 10-20% more damage for losing all your resists. That doesn't really seem very balanced. This way, blighted weapons seem to be not worth much. But I wait until I can actually try them out on SiSi. (I looked today, the stats were there, but nothing was seeded.)
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
I know replicator makes it obvious he's multiboxing but I don't know that people realize how hard it is to detect third party tools interacting with your software. Especially when you need to keep a low false-positive rate and avoid breach of privacy concerns. Blizzard spends a ton of resources keeping bots out of WoW and even they typically just resort to player reports combined with LCP movement tracking, which wouldn't be effective in EVE. e. LCP tracking TLDR: Gathering bots in WoW tend to re-travel the same general paths even with slight randomization built in, something that is almost impossible for humans to do even if they're trying to. By extrapolating a path out into connected planes and measuring the incidence you visit those planes in a particular order over time, you have a very reliable method that only needs server-side data and will almost never flag an actual player. Neither here nor there but fascinating imo. Above Our Own fucked around with this message at 19:10 on Oct 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 19:04
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be easy to detect ISBoxer on the basis of "everyone gets the same commands at about the same time"?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 19:54
|
|
|
ullerrm posted:They're complete garbage. 10% or less DPS gained, and a small boost in tracking, in exchange for shorter range and the complete removal of nearly all tank on your ship. In pretty much every scenario, just pull off your suitcase and put on another damage mod, and you'll have a better outcome. Is 10% extra dps worth it for Miniluv?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 19:57
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:Is 10% extra dps worth it for Miniluv? They're going to cost as much as faction guns so probably not.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 19:57
|
|
|
The "blighted" name is loving stupid, it sounds like some generic fantasy rpg bullshit. If they are going to keep the DPS bonus that low, its not going to be worth the EHP trade off. THe worst part is the decreased range, since the only time I would possibly be willing to trade massive amounts of EHP for DPS is when I would be sniping or otherwise out of range. E: Also what will the price be like on them? I am assuming it will be too expensive to just gently caress around with, basically adding very little to the game other than a new market entry. E2: Nevermind I just saw the post above mine, so they wont be used. Richard Bong fucked around with this message at 20:04 on Oct 23, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 19:58
|
|
|
wdarkk posted:Wouldn't it be easy to detect ISBoxer on the basis of "everyone gets the same commands at about the same time"? The question is: why on earth should they bother? What's to gain from detecting a program that is allowed? Should they also include complicated anti-sandboxing measures to detect whether or not you have Skype running on a different machine next to the one you're using?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 20:10
|
|
|
Tippis posted:The question is: why on earth should they bother? What's to gain from detecting a program that is allowed? Should they also include complicated anti-sandboxing measures to detect whether or not you have Skype running on a different machine next to the one you're using? He's basically asking "why not detect it so it can be banned"
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 20:17
|
|
|
FruitNYogurtParfait posted:He's basically asking "why not detect it so it can be banned" Why ban it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 20:51
|
|
|
blowfish posted:Why ban it? Because being blown up by a dozen ships flown poorly is very different from being blown up by 12 ships flown poorly. Somehow.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 20:54
|
|
|
With the nerf to cloaks then I consider the multi boxing issue solved. Personally I use isboxer for Jump Freighters and it's very handy at that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
It should be self evident why ISBoxer is idiotic and shouldn't be allowed in any sane universe. Really though it's just one item way down on a long list of reasons not to resubscribe to EVE.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 21:00
|
|
|
Chomp8645 posted:It should be self evident why ISBoxer is idiotic and shouldn't be allowed in any sane universe. Maybe it should, but it really isn't. In particular since it is a symptom, not an actual problem, and disallowing symptoms is about as idiotic a solution as they come.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 21:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 20:47 |
|
|
Tippis posted:Because being blown up by a dozen ships flown poorly is very different from being blown up by 12 ships flown poorly. It is highly unlikely CCP will ban it given people like replicator paying for 20+ accounts at a time.
|
|
#
?
Oct 23, 2014 21:16
|
|
