Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 89 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 63 post(s) |
Catheryn Martobi
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 22:37:00 -
[751]
Originally by: Vortura
Originally by: Sully Kajahazuum
Originally by: Catheryn Martobi Saw someone mention removing local to curb bots. While I do agree we should be rid of local chat (at least in 0.0), it's not a solution for botting. Bots can be configured to keep a DirScan open and filter for probes or combat ships. As soon as they see one they take off.
Also, CCP can't get rid of local in highsec, too many people use it, then all the bots would just move to highsec and it would be even more barren.
If CCP has some sort of way of telling where botting is very frequent they could manually drop incursions on it until they come up with a more permanent solution.
You don't even have to remove local though. Just do what's done in WH's and have only people that talk show up in local chat. That way, if people want to say someting (for example in jita), there's nothing stopping them from doing so, but it would also mean that bots, (and lazy carebears :P) would have to be using the dscanner/wouldn't be able to predict when a ganking was gonna come. Having roamed the drone regions alot, this would things far easier then bubbling every belt/undefended pos lol.
What would stop a botter from having the scanner window open and continuaously scanning and when a shiptype pops up in the scanner to instruct the botter to safe and cloak up?
I personally would just prefer that CCP include a local process scanner and if it finds a process for an application that is known to create macros, then it terminates the EvE Client proccess, logs the API User ID, and bans the API User ID on multiple attempts. User would then need to create a petition to unban the account, and explain their actions and address the accusation of being a botter.
Process scanners can be too easily avoided by changing your bots naming conventions or simply hiding it. Most of the 'professional' botters have their own software where they could easily change the process name and recompile it whenever they wanted.
Preventing bots would be a lot harder than coming up with a solution that makes it too hard to make a bot, or allowing us to take care of the botters ourselves. More complicated ratting or mining seems like the most likely candidate at the moment.
|
Caius Sivaris
Dark Nexxus S I L E N T.
|
Posted - 2011.02.07 22:44:00 -
[752]
Originally by: Norxil
Quote:
CAPCHA stopped being useful for forums multiple years ago, Forum spamming by bots got that covered when OCR became a widely usable option. As has been discussed already, many BOTs use OCR extensivley.
Thats not true. I have yet to see any forum with CAPCHA being flooded with spam. Also Blogspot uses this to keep botter away which normaly flood the reactions with any blogspot topic. OCR only works with stuff like books and only if the text is clear. If you want OCR to reconize your own handwriting you need to train it and then it isn't optimal.
Poor you stuck in 2003...
http://caca.zoy.org/wiki/PWNtcha
|
gfldex
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 12:30:00 -
[753]
Originally by: Tom Gerard
Acording to my minmatar friend, who is a worthless scrapheap of human genetic garbage, like all their kind, CCP has no grounds to punish anyone legally for botting.
They can. Anybody who playes a game in some sort of league (CCP might need to register it as a leage first) can be charged with fraud if they cheat, take drugs, bribe ppl, etc. pp.
AFAIK, no gaming company tried that yet. Might be worth it.
At the other hand it could backfire because paying the game with a PLEX-for-ISK might be income and need taxing. State debts, you know.
|
Durnin Stormbrow
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 14:51:00 -
[754]
Originally by: Infinity Ziona If you really want to do something to stop bots. Then do what I suggested in an earlier post.
Create an alt, train it to use a basic cloak. Take it out in a frig to 0.0 (start in the drone regions)in a known botting system and then when you log off, go to work, sleep, load that afk guy and afk cloak in that system. This will completely remove the ability of all bots in that system from botting because the bots auto-dock / cloak if a nuetral is in their system.
It's actually much easier than that, and cheaper too.
Take a noob character fresh out of the box, put it in one of the T1 EW frigs, & fit 3 ECCM-Is for the appropriate race. Skills required are Racial Frig II, Electronics I & Electronic Warfare I. All 4 races are cap stable with no other modules or skills.
Think it ****es people off when a character with some skills & isk invested camps them out? Wait for the tears a day old noob in a few 100k isk of ship generates.
|
Dark Assassin15
Failed Diplomacy
|
Posted - 2011.02.08 15:05:00 -
[755]
Originally by: Kara Sharalien Edited by: Kara Sharalien on 06/12/2010 00:06:18 In this wall of text showdown, WHO WILL WIN?
Riverini, of Majesta Empire, got the jump on our challenger, Cyrus Doul, and has surpassed all expecations in the area of atrocious spelling.
HOWEVER, Cyrus has demonstrated considerable technique, and none could contest that his text is even more densely compacted and unreadable then his opponent, who made the critical fumble of including one paragraph break per three paragraphs!
This is sure to be an interesting matchup, back to you in the studio John!
^^ Priceless........
---
|
Aquila Draco
|
Posted - 2011.02.09 19:33:00 -
[756]
Originally by: Optimus Night For me it comes always back to this point:
Botters/Macros have an unfair advantage against "honest" players. This is a fact!!!
Everyone who opposes this must be affilated in some sort to Botters/Macros or is just plain stupid.
Just read this Interview: http://www.evenews24.com/2010/12/08/rmt-uncovered-the-interview/
"How much roughly you sold to players over the whole time period? (in isk and dollars/euros )
roughly in 9 months 1.2 trillion isk for around 55k euro"
Big alliances tolerate and/or use Bots/Macros. CCP knows this and does nothing against it(or we dont know about it) Tells me and every other honest player: No chance to suceed at eve without cheating
If I move to 0.0 sec I cant suceed ever cause Alliances will use isk which was generated through Bots/Macros to fight me. I cant win against this behaviour ever cause the hours a day me and other honest players play does never ever match the hours Bots/Macros can generate ISK.
This frustrates me. So why even bothering building up a industrial backbone over many months when I will never have the chance to succeed against those using Bots/Macros.
ATM I want to quit but hate to throw away all the time (and REAL money) I invested.
CCP? THINK! Ban those Bots/Macros and make the Game/client safe and fair to use for everyone. If this means that some parts of the game need to be changed/lost - so be it otherwise this will turn into bot online!
The backbone of this game are not the Bots/Macros.
We the honest players are the base of this game. We do pay your jobs. Without us Eve is nothing!
Loose some money banning and stopping the Bots/Macros and earn even more in making eve an even better and fair game as it is(was). Please!
nicely put.
|
Gareth Ultari
|
Posted - 2011.02.09 21:45:00 -
[757]
Originally by: Durnin Stormbrow
Originally by: Infinity Ziona If you really want to do something to stop bots. Then do what I suggested in an earlier post.
Create an alt, train it to use a basic cloak. Take it out in a frig to 0.0 (start in the drone regions)in a known botting system and then when you log off, go to work, sleep, load that afk guy and afk cloak in that system. This will completely remove the ability of all bots in that system from botting because the bots auto-dock / cloak if a nuetral is in their system.
It's actually much easier than that, and cheaper too.
Take a noob character fresh out of the box, put it in one of the T1 EW frigs, & fit 3 ECCM-Is for the appropriate race. Skills required are Racial Frig II, Electronics I & Electronic Warfare I. All 4 races are cap stable with no other modules or skills.
Think it ****es people off when a character with some skills & isk invested camps them out? Wait for the tears a day old noob in a few 100k isk of ship generates.
creative, an unscannable frig that would show up on d-scan and in local. Nice.
+1 for taking away local and delaying dscan in 0.0. PVPers would easily take care of the bots, no problems.
Would there be bots in hi sec? Sure. Who cares, the yield there is nothing compared to the yield these guys get ratting and mining in 0.0.
|
Elanor Vega
|
Posted - 2011.02.10 18:04:00 -
[758]
Originally by: Gareth Ultari
Originally by: Durnin Stormbrow
Originally by: Infinity Ziona If you really want to do something to stop bots. Then do what I suggested in an earlier post.
Create an alt, train it to use a basic cloak. Take it out in a frig to 0.0 (start in the drone regions)in a known botting system and then when you log off, go to work, sleep, load that afk guy and afk cloak in that system. This will completely remove the ability of all bots in that system from botting because the bots auto-dock / cloak if a nuetral is in their system.
It's actually much easier than that, and cheaper too.
Take a noob character fresh out of the box, put it in one of the T1 EW frigs, & fit 3 ECCM-Is for the appropriate race. Skills required are Racial Frig II, Electronics I & Electronic Warfare I. All 4 races are cap stable with no other modules or skills.
Think it ****es people off when a character with some skills & isk invested camps them out? Wait for the tears a day old noob in a few 100k isk of ship generates.
creative, an unscannable frig that would show up on d-scan and in local. Nice.
+1 for taking away local and delaying dscan in 0.0. PVPers would easily take care of the bots, no problems.
Would there be bots in hi sec? Sure. Who cares, the yield there is nothing compared to the yield these guys get ratting and mining in 0.0.
hmmm... WHO CARES? may be ppl that live and work in hi-sec... and thats majority...
|
pcydo
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 11:10:00 -
[759]
Free bump. In regards to http://www.evenews24.com/2011/02/12/the-rise-of-the-isk-printing-machines-a-case-study-on-bots/
|
King Kazma Usoko
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 12:36:00 -
[760]
Originally by: pcydo Free bump. In regards to http://www.evenews24.com/2011/02/12/the-rise-of-the-isk-printing-machines-a-case-study-on-bots/
i tell ya this stuff is sooo true and i dont know what ccp has done at all so far.
I mean it is sooo easy for us players to make up who is bot and who is not. Why does ccp fail so hard in eliminating bots.
I didnt believe so far that Ccp is accepting them because of the money they give em, thinking that they would never betray their honest playin players.
Now im not so sure anymore :-/
|
|
sarah mcjimmy
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 12:38:00 -
[761]
Edited by: sarah mcjimmy on 13/02/2011 12:39:14
Originally by: pcydo Free bump. In regards to http://www.evenews24.com/2011/02/12/the-rise-of-the-isk-printing-machines-a-case-study-on-bots/
very interesting read. shame CCP don't care enough to do anything meaningful about it
|
Othran
Brutor Tribe
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 13:05:00 -
[762]
Edited by: Othran on 13/02/2011 13:05:25
Originally by: pcydo Free bump. In regards to http://www.evenews24.com/2011/02/12/the-rise-of-the-isk-printing-machines-a-case-study-on-bots/
1 day bans.
Oh yeah you're REALLY serious about stamping out bots aren't you CCP?
Total unmitigated bull****. ALL CCP cares about is the revenue stream. Nothing else is a factor as has been demonstrated on HUNDREDS if not thousands of occasions.
I hope lots of people look at this and say "f*ck it may as well get a bot myself".
Spread the word to other sites
|
Crucis Cassiopeiae
Amarr PORSCHE AG
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 13:05:00 -
[763]
Originally by: pcydo Free bump. In regards to http://www.evenews24.com/2011/02/12/the-rise-of-the-isk-printing-machines-a-case-study-on-bots/
Here is topic about that article, started by the same author:
EveNews24.com DDoS issues and an update on our war on bots.
_______________________________________________
"Everybody's at war with different things... I'm at war with my own heart sometimes" (by 2Pac) |
Lord Evangelian
Gallente The White Mantle
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 14:02:00 -
[764]
Edited by: Lord Evangelian on 13/02/2011 14:02:22 http://www.eve-bot.com/
Get sites like this shut down....
The White Mantle | Join Channel: "Public [-TWM-]" |
Arec Bardwin
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 14:20:00 -
[765]
Originally by: Othran
f”*ck it may as well get a bot myself
Should be 100% safe if you don't engage in RMT activities.
|
Selinate
Amarr Red Water Syndicate
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 14:35:00 -
[766]
Feed?!?!
it should be FED!!!!!!!!!!!!!
(300 joke)
|
yani dumyat
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 14:36:00 -
[767]
Originally by: pcydo Free bump. In regards to http://www.evenews24.com/2011/02/12/the-rise-of-the-isk-printing-machines-a-case-study-on-bots/
Interesting article, particularly the conclusions that 3-5% of accounts are bots and that a bot is 10-15 times more industrious than a player.
3*10 = 30 97*1 = 97 97+ 30 = 127 (30/127)*100 = 23.6%
5*15 = 75 95*1 = 95 95+75 = 170 (75/170)*100 = 44.1%
Given that the metrics are imperfect I'll say that your numbers indicate that bots account for about 20% to 40% of assets entering the eve economy, whatever way you slice it those are f'ing huge numbers.
Originally by: Vortura
I donĘt think CCP wants to take care of botters. Think about it. In your list there are 82 individual accounts (there may be 83 to 85, but I couldnĘt tell the separation). Each count is paying 14.99 (or stimulating the EvE Economy through time card purchases). That is $1,228.18 a month income they would lose from those 82 accounts, or $17,750.16 a year. You can bet there are just say there are 3 x that many botters in all of EvE, 246. That is $3,687.54 a month or $44,250.48 a year of loss revenue. Seems like chump change, but in the grand scheme of things, everything adds up to thousands more.
The problem is far worse than this, lets go back to that 3-5% of players are bots number again:
3% of 300,000 = 9,000 = $135,000 per month / $1,620,000 per year 5% of 300,000 = 15,000 = $225,000 per month / $2,700,000 per year
With those numbers it's not looking like chump change any more, in fact it's hard to see how anyone at CCP could justify getting rid of the bots despite the horrible distortions they put on gameplay.
Then there's the plex factor, bots keep the price of plex down which means people can afford to run extra accounts. Let the price of plex rise too high and it becomes hard to justify that extra alt account and CCP loses more money.
To give CCP any kind of incentive to get tough on bots the solution must be business driven and aimed at providing around 2 million dollars income per year. That may be a tall order but I don't think it's impossible.
Changing gameplay mechanics so that players have a reasonable chance of killing bots combined with a revamp of the bounty system could well bring in the 10 to 15 thousand players needed to cover the income gap, bounty hunting is after all one of the coolest sci-fi professions and has good marketing potential.
Then you've got the the player retention factor involved in having a player policed game, the sort of satisfaction that comes from beating botters over the head with a big stick is why people hang around, as summed up nicely in the article:
Originally by: article This took a couple hours, but I found it more interesting and challenging than shooting at an IHUB.
The downsides to the above idea are the dev time it would take to implement (which is likely to be quite substantial) and the need for PLEX sinks to replace the botters.
Really I'm just throwing ideas and numbers about here, none of which are based on more than lay observations. It is clear to me however that rampant botting has the ability to kill a game, generally a slow painful death somewhat akin to cancer.
Any solution must be grounded in good economic sense and be able to cover income shortfalls to protect the game as a long term investment.
|
Vuk Lau
4S Corporation Morsus Mihi
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 14:44:00 -
[768]
I re-raised this issue to CCP AGAIN. Stay tuned.
|
Helicity Boson
Amarr The Python Cartel. The Defenders of Pen Island
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 14:50:00 -
[769]
Originally by: Vuk Lau I re-raised this issue to CCP AGAIN. Stay tuned.
I sadly believe that as long as CCP depends on botting subscription moneys to pay their overhead, they will be disinclined to perform anything but token measures to keep the community quiet.
They will never put in a real effort, since the bottom line for CCP is still, and will always be, staying in the black.
|
yani dumyat
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 15:11:00 -
[770]
Originally by: Helicity Boson
Originally by: Vuk Lau I re-raised this issue to CCP AGAIN. Stay tuned.
I sadly believe that as long as CCP depends on botting subscription moneys to pay their overhead, they will be disinclined to perform anything but token measures to keep the community quiet.
They will never put in a real effort, since the bottom line for CCP is still, and will always be, staying in the black.
The problem is as much about metrics as it is about income, botter subscription money is easy to calculate and bean counters love to have things they can point at and say, "This brings us XXX income per year."
What's far harder to measure is the negative impact of botting, how many industrial accounts get cancelled because people don't feel they can compete with bots? Miners for example often use 2 or 3 accounts so pushing one miner out of the game due to unfair competition has a disproportionate effect on CCP's income.
Problem is that there is no real way to know how many people have closed down their industrial accounts due to botting, there's nothing for the bean counters to point at and say "Arrrgh ban the bots" even if bots are having a negative impact on CCP's income.
It comes down to management having to chose between intangible concepts like the happiness of their players and solid figures like botters bring in XXX dollars. It takes a brave manager to go with their players instead of their accountant but ultimately accountants can not ensure a long term future for eve, only the players can do that.
|
|
Optimus Night
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 15:33:00 -
[771]
I really fell dumb.
I feel so dumb for playing the game as it is. These botters, no matter if rmt or not, earn so much isk that I never ever can outsmart them -> Never!! I can be the best PVP pilot out there but wont suceed ever cause these botters can invest hundreds of millions a day to pay several mercs.
It just makes no sense to play this game within the game mechanics cause you have no chance.
Yes CCP you earn millions cause of this bots and their main characters who rule 0.0 space. BUT you will loose all other honest players soon. You need to end this or Eve will die cause this problem gets bigger and bigger. People wont shut up. Soon Eve Online will be known as BOT ONLINE and new players wont join this game.
Its sad cause eve is the best space mmo out there. Please do your outmost to PERMA BAN all botters and make it your No.1 priority to make eve bot free!!!
I reported several bots in my home system ONO - 3 got a time ban other ones are still up and online 20 hours a day. I am frustrated and if this problem wont get solved I will leave EVE within the next months.
We need to keep this issue up until it is solved!!!
Maybe CCp will have some campaign to ban botters but its not enough! You need to push this problem everyday! Goal must be to get and keep Eve bot free. Even if it can be achieved 100% it is needed to try everything to reach such a goal.
|
Furb Killer
Gallente
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 15:41:00 -
[772]
The TL;DR is that most likely until there is a real alternative to eve if you want an open-ended player driven MMO (doesnt necesarily have to be space based for me) CCP will condone botting since they are also subscriptions. When legit players have an alternative they might realise they should do something about it.
|
Paul Mustaka Hekard
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 16:13:00 -
[773]
Really great article. Provided me with a solid feeling that CCP doesn't give a rip about this issue. Recently moved down to 0.0 and was sort of surprised to find out that some of my corpies hunt bot for sport; with the blue bots being the sweetest meat). When the bot thing is so pervasive, that you run into them on a daily weekly basis, things are out of control.
Unless CSM can throw the players a lifeline and try to talk some sense into CCP, this prob will continue. The author made it quite cleat that 1) bots are relatively easy to id (even with low-tech means), 2) their use is common, 3) the isk they make is HUGE, 4) consequences from CCP are negligable.
The advantage that the bot-moguls have over honest players is BS and unbalances this game to the point that the "reality" of how alliances hold SOV is suspect. While I want to believe that the majority are hard-working, honest players, I do wonder how many of these empires are propped up on the backs of the machines.
|
Pan Crastus
Anti-Metagaming League
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 16:47:00 -
[774]
Edited by: Pan Crastus on 13/02/2011 16:52:46
Originally by: yani dumyat
3% of 300,000 = 9,000 = $135,000 per month / $1,620,000 per year 5% of 300,000 = 15,000 = $225,000 per month / $2,700,000 per year
It's not that simple. Botters pay for their subscriptions with PLEX, i.e. their earned ISK. If they are removed, PLEX-RMTers will simply have a slightly harder time selling their PLEX for ISK (demand for PLEX will go down) and thus PLEX price will go down a bit. Which means that CCP might actually make more money if bots are removed due to
a) RMTers needing to sell more PLEX for the same amount of ISK b) RMTers needing to sell even more PLEX because they need more ISK (prices go up when bots are gone)
Also, do not forget the disproportionate server load bots cause: many times more than a player (whose subscription is not cheaper).
So, it's probably in CCP's best interest to remove bots and they know it. The only positive aspect for CCP is inflated PCU numbers, I hope they don't value that more than anything else.
How to PVP: 1. buy ISK with GTCs, 2. fit cloak, learn aggro mechanics, 3. buy second account for metagaming
|
Malas MiserableFaith
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 16:48:00 -
[775]
very nice topic
|
pcydo
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 18:10:00 -
[776]
Originally by: Pan Crastus The only positive aspect for CCP is inflated PCU numbers, I hope they don't value that more than anything else.
I would like to see PCB (Peak Concurrent Bots) metric.
It is a shame that unfair game mechanic is being advocated (not being dealt with) by CCP. Sometimes it makes me feel that bot development is sort of CCP underground work, for extra cash (bots do cost real cash).
|
Darth McDarth
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 18:13:00 -
[777]
Edited by: Darth McDarth on 13/02/2011 18:13:02 Not this thread again. I know botting is bad and all but...
ITS SPELLED FED FFS
|
Ger Tomard
Caldari Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 18:26:00 -
[778]
Nobody seems to mind there is ZERO proof macroland exists. If it there was proof CCP would have fixed it already. [QUOTE]I think the next time you make one of these bad threads on this character, or any alt, you will be having a nice vacation to help work on making better threads. [/QUOTE] CCP finally acknowled |
Gella Darru
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 18:30:00 -
[779]
Originally by: Ger Tomard Nobody seems to mind there is ZERO proof macroland exists. If it there was proof CCP would have fixed it already.
look at you! You are duuuuumb. Just wow.
|
Ger Tomard
Caldari Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan
|
Posted - 2011.02.13 19:15:00 -
[780]
Originally by: Gella Darru
Originally by: Ger Tomard Nobody seems to mind there is ZERO proof macroland exists. If it there was proof CCP would have fixed it already.
look at you! You are duuuuumb. Just wow.
If you have any proof send it to a GM, without proof this is all just slanders. [QUOTE]I think the next time you make one of these bad threads on this character, or any alt, you will be having a nice vacation to help work on making better threads. [/QUOTE] CCP finally acknowled |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 .. 89 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |