Re: Important update to EVE Online rules coming January 2015
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2014 9:32 pm
Bob... I wasn't talking about EVE. The service I was referring to was Lavish.
The world's top multiboxing software!
https://isboxer.com/forum/
barrenearth wrote:Bob... I wasn't talking about EVE. The service I was referring to was Lavish.
bob wrote:barrenearth wrote:Bob... I wasn't talking about EVE. The service I was referring to was Lavish.
My mistake, I should have re-read your earlier post. Just reading your later post that was not clear.
Putting some thought into the question of providing a refund for remaining Lavish subscription time. Who are you expecting to provide this refund? Lavish? It was not Lavish that changed the rules on EVE. Lavish has no control over CCP or their rules or their implementation of those rules. You can still use Innerspace/ISBoxer for other games, even though you may not desire to play them. You can still use ISBoxer/Innerspace on EVE as per the forum posts, even if it is a teeny bit more arduous.
How about an analogy. The smoking people of Ireland, NZ, Australia, UK (and potentially others) have not asked for refunds from tobacco companies when smoking was banned in restaurants, bars, theatres, workplaces, etc. In this case the governments have implemented a new rule, which affected some people, and the product has been rendered impotent in certain places; So should those affected people who have purchased that product and have remaining stock be able to claim a refund for their stock from Phillip Morris or BAT (or others)??
If anything you should be expecting CCP to compensate you for reducing the effectiveness of the 3rd party software that you licensed specifically to play their game with greater efficiency.
I am confident Lax would be more than happy to communicate with CCP, if they are willing, and perhaps he has already tried, or in the process, and perhaps he will chime in and let us know if that ever happens. There have already been changes to ISBoxer comply with the EVE rules as per CCP's forum post. I suspect he could go further and modify Innerspace to have a mode to never send a command to more than one game window too, and maybe that is on the radar. We will have to wait and see.
Your analogy is not a good one. A better one would be Tesla being a car company in America that makes cars with the expressed warranty that those cars are valid to be used on motorways in states across the country. Say one day that Michigan decides to ban Teslas from the roadways and declare them invalid for registration from the DMV...
Not at all advocating anything that extreme, just saying, the wait and see approach is not exactly what I would expect from a subscription based consumer model.
all we can do is assume until we are given information
lax wrote:Your analogy is not spot on because your analogy bans an entire product. CCP is not banning the product. Just stop using ISBoxer if you think that's the new rule; you don't even have to keep posting in that case.
They were very careful to be explicit about what is banned because they do not want to lose the subscriptions/plex purchases that isboxers make.
Kamikaze wrote:I would disagree that ISBoxer is anywhere near being banned.
CCP is a business. They develop this game to make money and money will always be the bottom line.
Game imbalances specifically with input broadcasting brought this about and all of us know that with a little more effort we can do as we've always done and continue to use isboxer profitably in game.
They were very careful to be explicit about what is banned because they do not want to lose the subscriptions/plex purchases that isboxers make. Even though some jump the gun and biomass all their accounts I would say that's a foolish move unless you just wanted to get out of the game regardless and used the change to make a big stink on the way out. I wouldn't stress so much. isboxer gives you tons of clever alternative ways to manage what you used to rely on broadcasting for.