Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
NinjaSpud
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:14:00 -
[1]
OK guys, let me first set the rules of my thread:
1) No flaming. IMO Flaming is a two way street, most of the time, people only flame if the OP is attempting to say something stupid or irrevelent. So, I'll try not to flame your intellegence, if you try not to flame my ideas deal?
2) General sarchasim is accepted when appropriate. I especially love sarchastic jokes, but keep them where they are appropriate, I want to try to engage in a constructive debate, and I welcome all oponions.
So, here's the General inspirration behind this post:
IDK who would remember this, but back in the day there was a really good Sci-Fi series on called Babylon 5. I was a huge fan, and enjoyed watching the futuristic spaceship wars between the league of Human and Alien races vs the mysterious super advanced race of Shadows. I could get deep into nerding out, but IÆd rather point out the philosophical reasons why the Shadows where killing everyone.
You learn in the end, that they where an ancient race that had taken up the task of guiding all the newer and younger races in their development. You learned that their way of insuring that the young races where strong enough to endure the horrors of deep space, was to æawakenÆ every thousand years and ôKick over all the ant hillsö. By destroying everyone, they where insuring that resourcefulness and hard work would forge stronger races, and force people to rebuild into a better ôant hillö.
Now, obviously this is a brutal tactic, but like most brutal tactics, it was effective and the end result was a stronger civilization.
Take a step back, look at Eve.
IÆve read a lot of concerns lately that brining down a ban hammer on macro botters would collapse the eve market. Chaos would ensue and many would die. While these points may have merit, weÆre forgetting about the iron hands and strong back of our carebears. If botÆs vanished tomorrow, and trit prices suddenly hit 10isk per unit, wouldnÆt we also see a massive spike in player based mining? IÆm not gonna lie, if the banhammer was brought down on macro miners, there would be a change, and things would probably become more expensive for a while. But wouldnÆt the players rebound?
Banning the botters all out would, in my opinion, be the market equivellant of ôkicking over all the ant hillsö. But donÆt you guys think weÆre ready for it? Is Eve ready for that kind of revelation? Have we all become complacent and secure in our cozy made up environment that we fear such a thing happening?
Everyone agrees that botting is cheatingàand yet at the same time, it has allowed us (even the legit players) to build a mighty empire. Are you all ready for that to change?
Your thoughts?
|
Cyaxares II
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:17:00 -
[2]
so what you are saying is that once the ant hills have been kicked over the bots will return stronger and more resourceful?
|
baltec1
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:21:00 -
[3]
Crush the bots, adapt to what the market does and hear the lamentation of their women.
|
NinjaSpud
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:27:00 -
[4]
Originally by: Cyaxares II so what you are saying is that once the ant hills have been kicked over the bots will return stronger and more resourceful?
*facepalm*
*sigh* yup, you nailed it
|
Malaclypse Muscaria
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:30:00 -
[5]
Originally by: baltec1 Crush the bots, adapt to what the market does and hear the lamentation of their women.
This. But needs to be read with a heavy Austrian accent.
|
Jovan Geldon
Gallente Lead Farmers Kill It With Fire
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:32:00 -
[6]
Originally by: NinjaSpud let me first set the rules of my thread
U SO FUNNY
|
Zircon Nalelmir
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:36:00 -
[7]
I think there's a pretty simple solution to both types of botters, but it would change the game a whole lot.
1. Decrease respawn rates for minerals in highsec to once a week or so, or even remove all the minerals from high-sec entirely. Increase the number of belts in nullsec to comepensate for the influx of miners.
2. Change local to delayed local and replace the dscan with something that will still facilitate pvp without being gay for miners/ratters and easy to bot.
|
baltec1
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:38:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Zircon Nalelmir I think there's a pretty simple solution to both types of botters, but it would change the game a whole lot.
1. Decrease respawn rates for minerals in highsec to once a week or so, or even remove all the minerals from high-sec entirely. Increase the number of belts in nullsec to comepensate for the influx of miners.
2. Change local to delayed local and replace the dscan with something that will still facilitate pvp without being gay for miners/ratters and easy to bot.
Nerf the drone lands and you will get better results for minerals.
|
Pinaculus
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 17:52:00 -
[9]
The problem with botting is that it solves a very real problem. Namely, ratting and mining are boring but profitable. The solutions are obvious. Either make these activities less boring or less profitable. I would probably choose both, and nerf the amount of minerals in all warpable asteroid belts as well as the amount of ISK a bot can generate through ratting. Nerf these things to the point where bots can create enough wealth to buy their PLEX each month, but no more.
Then, up the amount of wealth in the non-bottable activites. Wormholes and Incursions are not easily bottable. Make them the go-to places for cash, rather than high-sec belts, rats, and level 4 missions.
0.0 is probably never going to have delayed local, so I'd guess this is the next best thing. Would make life hell for people that enjoy missions and high-sec mining, but maybe those things are too easy anyway.
|
Vincent Athena
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 18:01:00 -
[10]
Im wondering if killing all the bots will really increase mineral prices. For prices to increase there must be demand. But if ratting bots are killed, the isk they generate goes away and those bot users will no longer be able to buy the minerals needed to replace their SCs. Demand drops.
In any event CCP watches the economy. Fluctuations of a factor of 2 I would bet they let happen, let the players adjust to it on their own. If things get so bad as to make eve unplayable, CCP will adjust something.
Now ice products... killing bots will not reduce the demand for those.
|
|
NinjaSpud
|
Posted - 2011.03.30 23:54:00 -
[11]
let's stay on track here people
This isn't a "Post your idea on how to get rid of bots"...cause I think CCP heard that message.
This thread is for "What would happen if bots vanished tomorrow"
Would our cozy empires and 5000 pos's per alliance be maintainable without the mindless drones of macros chipping away at ice belts. Would supercarriers be as plentiful as they are now if trit costs exploded by a factor of 10?
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 00:04:00 -
[12]
Edited by: Akita T on 31/03/2011 00:06:31
OP more or less fits with what I would have to say on the subject. Just one thing...
Originally by: NinjaSpud IÆve read a lot of concerns lately that brining down a ban hammer on macro botters would collapse the eve market.
I wouldn't exactly call some increase in prices a "collapse"
Sure, *some* things would go up in price a lot, but others might weirdly enough go down. Ice products would surely go up, but then PI prices will tend to go down (unless they add new ways to use them, and IIRC, they said they would), while all T2 stuff will also go up (increased reacting cost). I seriously doubt the price of T1 ships would increase by more than 50% (a much more likely number would be another 25% or so), but then again, you never know.
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts _
|
NinjaSpud
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 00:09:00 -
[13]
Originally by: Akita T OP more or less fits with what I would have to say on the subject, and there's not that much extra to say or in a sufficiently different way. Just one thing...
Originally by: NinjaSpud IÆve read a lot of concerns lately that brining down a ban hammer on macro botters would collapse the eve market.
I wouldn't exactly call some increase in prices a "collapse"
HOLD ON...you're saying that if people who have the isk, have to give more of it to the ones busting their butt mining instead of the bot owners, that isn't a collapse?
*HEAD EXPLODES*
|
Neo Kuri
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 00:11:00 -
[14]
CCP thinks that players do what is easiest, whereas we actually prefer to do what is more profitable. If the former was true, i wouldn't be posting this at 2AM.
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 00:11:00 -
[15]
_
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts _
|
Neti Keire
Bene Gesserit ChapterHouse Sanctuary Pact
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 00:34:00 -
[16]
Originally by: baltec1 Crush the bots, adapt to what the market does and hear the lamentation of their women.
This. A thousand times this.
|
Barakkus
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 01:12:00 -
[17]
Remove all isk and force everyone to fly only the Ibis. - - [SERVICE] Corp Standings For POS anchoring
|
Hieronimus Rex
Minmatar Infinitus Sapientia New Eden Research.
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 05:44:00 -
[18]
If a simple bot can do something really well, doesn't this mean that activity probably wasn't all that fun/interesting/intellectually challenging to begin with?
Why, then, are bots such a terrible thing? If you like mining for its own sake, then you should mine even in a universe where you are the only human player, i.e. you shouldn't care about bots. If mining is only instrumental in achieving some other goal, then wouldn't the game be better if you could just get to that goal immediately?
Put another way, do boring repetitive activities improve the game?
|
Taedrin
Gallente The Green Cross Controlled Chaos
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 05:56:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Hieronimus Rex If a simple bot can do something really well, doesn't this mean that activity probably wasn't all that fun/interesting/intellectually challenging to begin with?
Why, then, are bots such a terrible thing? If you like mining for its own sake, then you should mine even in a universe where you are the only human player, i.e. you shouldn't care about bots. If mining is only instrumental in achieving some other goal, then wouldn't the game be better if you could just get to that goal immediately?
Put another way, do boring repetitive activities improve the game?
Just because you enjoy your job doesn't mean that you don't want to be paid a good wage. Miners may enjoy the ability to watch movies while they mine, but that doesn't mean that they want to mine for free. ----------
Originally by: Dr Fighter "how do you know when youve had a repro accident"
Theres modules missing and morphite in your mineral pile.
|
X Dead
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 06:24:00 -
[20]
It would definitely induce adaptation or demise - one at least two fronts.
Economic shifts would cause players to either adapt to the new circumstances or rage-quit and die. Those that don't adapt probably aren't suited to the culture of the EVE universe but as CCP I'd be keeping a careful eye on those sorts of impacts and have contingency plans in place to adjust the economy to lessen the impact if required. One risk with performing large pogroms on bots like they have done before is the creation of an economic shock severe enough that people quit before it stabilises.
The bots and botters, being direct targets of the negative environment would also adapt their methods or discontinue/reduce their behaviour (and die) as individuals. It's hard to say in the wider community sense but as somebody who works in security and technological fraud prevention I suspect it would result in an overall reduction as occurs when we perform similar activities in the Real World(TM). As a side note, you also should remember there are two layers of misbehaviour occurring here - those who buy/rent and then use the bots and those who build/sell/lease them. A hit on the former affects the latter and vice versa in a reinforcing feedback (c.f. botnets in real world).
In a nutshell, a reduction in bot effort/risk vs. profitability ratios occurs if the enforcement is designed and implemented correctly, which generally reduces the incentives to commit the offence in macro.
I suspect the security team in CCP isn't really tasked with this sort of analysis as from their presentation they are fairly narrow focused. What I do know is that when we do this in the real world these are just a few of the things we have to consider. Other things include other negative repercussions such as directed counter-attacks, the rationale and objective behind prevention (such as to prevent money laundering or just to demonstrate they care to customers), and so on - but those aren't being discussed here. We also don't aim for complete elimination, just reduction to manageable/acceptable levels.
|
|
F'elch
Wall Street Trading
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 07:18:00 -
[21]
Thanks for ruining the end of Babylon 5, you jerk!
|
Pandadora
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 08:59:00 -
[22]
Edited by: Pandadora on 31/03/2011 09:04:53 One could also say that CCP hit the anthill of botting right now...
|
Akita T
Caldari Navy Volunteer Task Force
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 08:59:00 -
[23]
Originally by: F'elch Thanks for ruining the end of Babylon 5, you jerk!
It's actually the part between half and two thirds of season four out of five seasons.
Also, that part first aired 13 and a half years ago. Spoilers no longer warranted. _
Make ISK||Build||React||1k papercuts _
|
Pappy Rockmunch
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 09:05:00 -
[24]
1. banning obvious botters (aka I mine/rat 23/7) is good as those are usually RMT related.
2. mass ban on botters will influence the eve market but not in devastating manner - in worst case scenario mineral prices go up, pvp people turn to mining for income from selling minerals or heavy mission running, increase of the mineral prices rises the ship and module production costs that brings ship/module prices up, pvp becomes too expensive pvpers downgrade their ships to bs->bc->cruiser->frigate from t2 modules to t1, the market overflows with expensive ships which will follow in a slow price degrade by the traders not to lose their income margin - market prices go down to acceptable level. pvp upgrade their ships frigate->cruiser->bc->bs modules t1->t2... the bot ban storm quiets down, less RMT more people play by the EULA rules.
3. if the scenario fails and mineral prices still go up - CCP intervenes by encouraging mining (imho they already gonna do it by limiting the anom spawns in null sec by systems true sec - mining becomes good profit as CCP's blog didn't mentioned degrade of hidden belts by systems true sec), for example seeding low priced hulks on market (imagine 10,000 hulks at 50mil each pop up on market).
4. after the initial 23/7 bot ban wave, bot operators will have to go stealth - quit botting or do less botting, CCP implements intelligence test for accounts that seem to be ratting or mining for over then 2 hour straight without breaking the repetitive routine, simple yes/no question or captcha challenge to see if there's a human behind the ratter/miner. thus decreasing bot activity and raise the profit option for human players.
5. eve becomes a better place - ccp has less bot petitions to handle more money goes into CCP wallets instead to RMT.
imho.
|
Chesty McJubblies
Gallente Center for Advanced Studies
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 10:43:00 -
[25]
Please keep discussions on botting to this thread, presumably.
Thanks.
|
Alty McExpendable
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 10:58:00 -
[26]
Originally by: NinjaSpud OK guys, let me first set the rules of my thread:
OK GAIZ LET'S ALL SIT DOWN AND BE NICE TO EACH OTHER AND...GAIZ, STOP IT, IT'S NOT FUNNY. IT'S NOT FUNNY GAIZ SERIOUSLY. CMON GAIZ BE NICE NOW
It was so worth the effort to log in just to post this.
|
DurrHurrDurr
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 11:09:00 -
[27]
I'll put it very simply.
H-Bot is a one time fee of $40.
A 23/7 botting Tengu makes about 4.5b/mo
You can pay for a lot of plexes with just one botting character.
|
Cheapo Hobo
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 11:10:00 -
[28]
Hold your horses boy!
I'm not trying to be funny here but I think the notion that our New Eden is ridden with so-called bots is highly exaggerated, if you know what I mean.
I'm not saying they ain't existing, but c'mon, it can't be that bad right?
|
Eastman Color
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 11:16:00 -
[29]
In your example the choice is Survive or die
In eve, hypothetically, if they wiped out all the bots and things did go mentalexpensivetimes making it "too hard" the choice would be Survive or quit
Quitting is a lot less harsh than death and I suspect CCP have a worry about too many people would take the quit option if the market suddenly took a massive shift.
I don't know, big change, scary, maybe if they had a competent economic what ever he is they could take an educated guess on the repercussions.
|
Mara Rinn
|
Posted - 2011.03.31 11:34:00 -
[30]
All the bots disappearing tomorrow won't have as much impact on the economy as the pending nullsec truesec nerf. Depending on how you make the calculations, somewhere up to 40% of anomaly income will disappear. Various factors will balance out this loss of ISK injection, clueful players will end up making much more ISK..
Bots will gradually evolve to become indistinguishable from sociopathic hermits who simply love playing the game.
-- [Aussie players: join ANZAC channel] |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |