EVE Search - C.C.P Ever think about Deputizing the client base?

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

C.C.P Ever think about Deputizing the client base?

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: [1] 2 :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Mak Gruber	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:39:00 - [1] CCP is overwhelmed with botters, as you all know. I know other games have "deputized players for certain tasks .. I think even ccp uses this for bug hunting. I personally believe if there was a system set up for players to join CCP in bot hunting and killing,that It would solve alot of problems. The player community is serious about this issue..and I think this could make a large impact if given the tools. Of course there should be a vetting process.... This idea isn't anything new either. whenever criminals overwhelmed law enforcement throughout history ...citizens where "deputized" to end the threat. So bring in the volunteers.
Bumblefck Kerensky Initiatives	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:41:00 - [2] This would be a golden key to the Gate of Immense Player-led Abuses -------------- ?
Mak Gruber	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:44:00 - [3] Originally by: Bumblefck This would be a golden key to the Gate of Immense Player-led Abuses Hence the need for a vetting process...which means everyone wouldn't get an automatic yes. No..they couldn't ban..... But they could get the evidence.
Sarmatiko	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:48:00 - [4] Edited by: Sarmatiko on 03/04/2011 20:56:39 Let me guess. You need invisible Polaris frigate to crawl through 0.0 in search of those filthy botters? How about NO? In other games i have seen these "volunteer bothunters from playerbase". Most of them got caught later for botting. And the only result they generated was forum whine. Simple example: There is bot MegaFarmer in some system in 0.0 His script automatically cloacks him/warps out to pos/ whatever else few seconds after you appear in local Your evidence is bull**** in that case and have no real power to punishment. There is a GMs and standard undisclosed procedures. Nothing else to discuss. Later you will get your "Report bot" button.
Jack Ascendus	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:51:00 - [5] Remove local, afk cloaking solved, botting in null solved.
Patient 2428190 DEGRREE'Fo'FREE Internet Business School	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:53:00 - [6] The community is not an effective police force by any stretch of the imagination ...Then when you stopped to think about it. All you really said was Lalala.
Pete 0 Bear	Posted - 2011.04.03 20:55:00 - [7] Originally by: Mak Gruber Originally by: Bumblefck This would be a golden key to the Gate of Immense Player-led Abuses Hence the need for a vetting process...which means everyone wouldn't get an automatic yes. No..they couldn't ban..... But they could get the evidence. Yeah, like thats going to work ffs. The vetting process is that good @ CCP that we now have to trust Ex-Goon leader Darius Johnson on security/bot problems ffs...... This is a guy who has stated that he "wanted to ruin EvE for everyone else (except himself/Goons)". way to go CCP.
Mak Gruber	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:15:00 - [8] Originally by: Sarmatiko Edited by: Sarmatiko on 03/04/2011 20:56:39 Let me guess. You need invisible Polaris frigate to crawl through 0.0 in search of those filthy botters? How about NO? In other games i have seen these "volunteer bothunters from playerbase". Most of them got caught later for botting. And the only result they generated was forum whine. Simple example: There is bot MegaFarmer in some system in 0.0 His script automatically cloacks him/warps out to pos/ whatever else few seconds after you appear in local Your evidence is bull**** in that case and have no real power to punishment. There is a GMs and standard undisclosed procedures. Nothing else to discuss. Later you will get your "Report bot" button. Let me guess...you live in your moms basement ...and venting your anger on a spaceship game is all you can do. Players already join for reporting bugs...and has worked out well. Anyone caught cheating would be fired..banned. But the good that would come from it, would far outway the few if any that tried to abuse. "I have seen these "volunteer bothunters from playerbase". Most of them got caught later for botting. Any proof of this...nooo of course not...your knee jerk reaction instead of any input is expected. Again..this wouldn't be a come one come all....and would be considered an honor...blow it you get fired. and it would add the much needed man power.
Hieronimus Rex Minmatar Infinitus Sapientia New Eden Research.	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:20:00 - [9] Originally by: Jack Ascendus Remove local, afk cloaking solved, botting in null solved. Such an obvious solution. Why CCP won't implement it is beyond me.
Sirion Fujiwara	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:20:00 - [10] Deputizing the player base!? Are you serious?? Giving semi-official powers to some players over other players? CCP have enough problems keeping their own paid staff in check( remember T20? If not, Google it...), let alone a bunch of wannabe vigilante's. Worst idea so far this year...

Andrian Caldar	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:37:00 - [11] I remember this: EVE's Devs and the Friends They Keep
EDISON CLONE	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:53:00 - [12] www.youtube.com/watch?v=mDSNd_w86Hw goes good with, www.youtube.com/watch?v=2G54xtSUEBU&feature=related
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:53:00 - [13] Originally by: Hieronimus Rex Originally by: Jack Ascendus Remove local, afk cloaking solved, botting in null solved. Such an obvious solution. Why CCP won't implement it is beyond me. Look at the threadnaught CCP are getting just from moderately reducing the anomaly ISK fountain that didn't even ISK 15 months ago. See those bear crying? Now imagine the noise if CCP said they were taking the comfort-blanket of local away.... Malcanis' Law: Whenever a mechanics change is proposed on behalf of "new players", that change is always to the overwhelming advantage of richer, older players.
Xercodo Amarr Daj'Juntar	Posted - 2011.04.03 21:55:00 - [14] /thread -------------------------------------------------- The drake is a lie
Internet Knight The Kobayashi Maru	Posted - 2011.04.03 22:10:00 - [15] Originally by: Xercodo /thread Beat me to the punch. I should add some vodka to it. ---
Mak Gruber	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:01:00 - [16] Originally by: Internet Knight Originally by: Xercodo /thread Beat me to the punch. I should add some vodka to it. I think ccp are quite happy whith the results of isd.....and I really think getting the players help in proving who botter's are, could be a success ,especially hulk / hauler mission bots. could some of the spaz's against even looking at the idea ...be botter's themselves? Judging by the sheer number of botter's......I think its very plausible.
Doug Drafto	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:08:00 - [17] CCP has little problem figuring out who the botters are. They just have little interest in cancelling thousands of accounts.
Steve Thomas Minmatar	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:12:00 - [18] Originally by: Patient 2428190 The community is not an effective police force by any stretch of the imagination this seriously people when Hulkagedon cant even make a noticable scratch in mineral production. . . .end of line. ---- If you think your too paranoid to play EvE... Then you clearly are not paranoid enough to play EvE (Alt list) Rico Lobo
Alotta Baggage Amarr Imperial Manufactorum Armada Assail	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:16:00 - [19] Originally by: Steve Thomas Originally by: Patient 2428190 The community is not an effective police force by any stretch of the imagination this seriously people when Hulkagedon cant even make a noticable scratch in mineral production. . . Hulkageddon was supposed to make a scratch in mineral production? I shall get on the line with Helicity immediately to find out why it didn't work Originally by: Valkoinen Heteromies I for one would love to be able to walk on stations and fly spaceships in the body of a little cute catgirl!
Mak Gruber	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:19:00 - [20] Originally by: Steve Thomas Originally by: Patient 2428190 The community is not an effective police force by any stretch of the imagination this seriously people when Hulkagedon cant even make a noticable scratch in mineral production. . . I think you would be very surprised what a few dedicated volunteers could get accomplished

Lykouleon Bad Kitty Inc.	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:20:00 - [21] Because it worked ~so well~ in Asheron's Call as well... Don't click on this. No, really, don't, it'll make your eyes bleed.
Xercodo Amarr Daj'Juntar	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:21:00 - [22] Originally by: Doug Drafto CCP has little problem figuring out who the botters are. They just have little interest in cancelling thousands of accounts. lolwut? -------------------------------------------------- The drake is a lie
dexington Caldari Baconoration	Posted - 2011.04.04 01:27:00 - [23] If CCP already know who the bots are, why don't they just not ban the accounts?, what good would it do to blow up the ships?. If what you want is immortal players flying around blowing up what they think is bots, then it sounds like a very bad idea. If you want to play police, then make petitions, you don¦t need a special in-game status to do that.
Mak Gruber	Posted - 2011.04.04 02:28:00 - [24] Originally by: dexington If CCP already know who the bots are, why don't they just not ban the accounts?, what good would it do to blow up the ships?. If what you want is immortal players flying around blowing up what they think is bots, then it sounds like a very bad idea. If you want to play police, then make petitions, you don¦t need a special in-game status to do that. Who in the hell said ANYTHING about blowing people up. Having a bot team requires many eyes.....giving certain players check up tools could be those eyes. See isd
dexington Caldari Baconoration	Posted - 2011.04.04 02:33:00 - [25] Originally by: Mak Gruber I personally believe if there was a system set up for players to join CCP in bot hunting and killing,that It would solve alot of problems. to me killing sounds like blown up ships...
BeanBagKing Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.04.04 03:07:00 - [26] read like the first 5 posts, sorry but I'm not going through every troll after. With that in mind, here are my thoughts. First, everyone seems to think this would end in a lot of player abuse. I have two things to say. First, players can only abuse a system if they are given control of it. As long as CCP is the one that hands down the punishment, then players should not be able to abuse it. That said, my second point, players will probably find a way to abuse anything, at least some of them will, this will come up again in a minute... I proposed this idea in features and ideas a long time ago, or at least something like it, here is my take. A new bounty system, from an RP standpoint it reads like... Quote: CONCORD has recently, and begrudgingly admitted that the problem of black market AI has gotten out of hand. To combat this threat they are calling on all capsuleers to report any suspicious behavior that their fellow pilots may be exhibiting. A reward of 10,000,000 ISK is being offered for intel leading to the successful capture and termination of any ships being controlled by illegal AI interfaces. It remains to be seen if capsuleers will turn each other in for this reward, or stick together and refuse to report their own. That's something for the RPbears :P but it spells it out alright. A player reports what he thinks is a bot to CCP, if CCP investigates it and determines that it is a bot, they get a reward. This could be tweeked, so that there are CONCORD penalties for false reporting (a player has to make pretty sure he sees a bot), something small, like drug smuggling penalties. This would add some level of risk vs reward when reporting a bot and keep people from just spamming report on everyone in local trying to get lucky. Perhaps rewards are increased with every successful report, so someone that wants to make a living at bot hunting could feasible do so. Medals could be handed out by CONCORD for those that care about such a thing. Most of you may not care enough about bots to report them, even for a reward, much less a medal. I guarantee though if there was some RP system put in place to get a reward out of bot hunting, there would be at least one successful corp formed around the idea. Anyway, these are just a few things that could possibly be done with such a system. I think the possibilities are there, they just need to be fleshed out and balanced.
yumike	Posted - 2011.04.04 04:00:00 - [27] Originally by: BeanBagKing I proposed this idea in features and ideas a long time ago, or at least something like it, here is my take. A new bounty system, from an RP standpoint it reads like... Quote: CONCORD has recently, and begrudgingly admitted that the problem of black market AI has gotten out of hand. To combat this threat they are calling on all capsuleers to report any suspicious behavior that their fellow pilots may be exhibiting. A reward of 10,000,000 ISK is being offered for intel leading to the successful capture and termination of any ships being controlled by illegal AI interfaces. It remains to be seen if capsuleers will turn each other in for this reward, or stick together and refuse to report their own. That's something for the RPbears :P but it spells it out alright. A player reports what he thinks is a bot to CCP, if CCP investigates it and determines that it is a bot, they get a reward. This could be tweeked, so that there are CONCORD penalties for false reporting (a player has to make pretty sure he sees a bot), something small, like drug smuggling penalties. This would add some level of risk vs reward when reporting a bot and keep people from just spamming report on everyone in local trying to get lucky. Perhaps rewards are increased with every successful report, so someone that wants to make a living at bot hunting could feasible do so. Medals could be handed out by CONCORD for those that care about such a thing. Most of you may not care enough about bots to report them, even for a reward, much less a medal. I guarantee though if there was some RP system put in place to get a reward out of bot hunting, there would be at least one successful corp formed around the idea. Anyway, these are just a few things that could possibly be done with such a system. I think the possibilities are there, they just need to be fleshed out and balanced. I fail to see how this is above & beyond what we have already shy of a little 'reward' for the player that reported it. (Which let's not even debate, Bot's are the issue creating isk for nothing, and you want to introduce a counter system that includes even more fake isk being created by gm's to be handed out to players? Not to mention the fact your quite right, people would pick up on it then have mailing lists filled with botter names to report then what - everyone gets 10mil?) Even if the suggested system was implemented, It's likely CCP wouldn't speed up the process any (As they typically ban in waves, and seldom solo-kill accounts it seems) Petition system already takes sometimes days to get a response, This would slow it down even more with so many double,triple and more reports for every single one. I think it would honestly be easier to let players flag someone as a bot or some such, and if they are flagged too much and don't promptly remove the flag (by doing some action, that wouldnt be able to be reproduced. Maybe talk to a specific agent within a few jumps of their location, Would have to be different in null) then enable suicide ganking on them without the sec status loss.
dexington Caldari Baconoration	Posted - 2011.04.04 04:16:00 - [28] Originally by: yumike I think it would honestly be easier to let players flag someone as a bot or some such, and if they are flagged too much and don't promptly remove the flag (by doing some action, that wouldnt be able to be reproduced. Maybe talk to a specific agent within a few jumps of their location, Would have to be different in null) then enable suicide ganking on them without the sec status loss. Would not be a bad idea to add a 'report bot' option, and remove the reporting from the petition system. Given player the option to gank other players marked as bots, would probably just result in groups flying around ganking afk players.
Doug Drafto	Posted - 2011.04.04 04:24:00 - [29] Originally by: Xercodo Originally by: Doug Drafto CCP has little problem figuring out who the botters are. They just have little interest in cancelling thousands of accounts. lolwut? You seriously believe CCP couldn't figure out exactly who is botting if they tried? All monetary transactions are logged between EVERYONE in the game, for one. Secondly any time you enter a system a bot npcer warps off... After a whole day of people entering and exiting a system and them cloaking and decloaking and warping off with exactly the same time delays between events... it gets pretty obvious. Thirdly they are usually in one single corp so if you know one of them you know pretty much all of them. Wake up, CCP doesn't give a .... thats the problem. They would rather have +10000 subscribers even if it trashes game play for many others. Thats the reality.
BeanBagKing Terra Incognita Intrepid Crossing	Posted - 2011.04.04 04:29:00 - [30] Originally by: yumike I fail to see how this is above & beyond what we have already shy of a little 'reward' for the player that reported it. It isn't much above and beyond it, but right now people have no real reason to "hunt" bots, it's not profitable and they get no recognition. Give them both and it will encourage people, a lot more than now. Originally by: yumike Bot's are the issue creating isk for nothing, and you want to introduce a counter system that includes even more fake isk being created by gm's to be handed out to players? No, GM's don't create ISK, CONCORD hands out "bounties". Yes, it is a matter of perspective, but ratting is just as "creating isk from nothing" as GM's handing it out for a successful report. Weave it into the game. And the key is that the isk introduced isn't -nearly- what is produced by botting, so saying it's "more fake isk" is not only deceptive, but downright false. Originally by: yumike Not to mention the fact your quite right, people would pick up on it then have mailing lists filled with botter names to report then what - everyone gets 10mil? Ok, so first person to report them gets the isk. The other people don't get the reward, but they don't get the penalty either. Encourages people to be fast and find new bots. Like I said, the idea isn't complete, but that's a very easy one to counter. Or first 2 people, or 5... Originally by: yumike Even if the suggested system was implemented, It's likely CCP wouldn't speed up the process any (As they typically ban in waves, and seldom solo-kill accounts it seems) I've seen no proof that they ban in waves and wouldn't ban a single account if it was reported. If they do, it may be only so they can follow the isk trail (so to speak) for a few days to catch as many as possible. tl;dr maybe, but [citation needed] Originally by: yumike Petition system already takes sometimes days to get a response, This would slow it down even more with so many double,triple and more reports for every single one. More people reporting bots is a problem? If there is any problem, it's that CCP's process isn't streamlined. If they did go through all the trouble of implementing player based rewards for finding bots, I would hope the backend could be upgraded as well. When reporting a bot, all reports, by all players, go under a common file/heading of that bots name. So basically they only see one file, but when opening that, can see a whole list of evidence gathered by multiple players, ordered by date (so they know who reported first, see above). Originally by: yumike I think it would honestly be easier to let players flag someone as a bot or some such, and if they are flagged too much and don't promptly remove the flag (by doing some action, that wouldn't be able to be reproduced. Maybe talk to a specific agent within a few jumps of their location, Would have to be different in null) then enable suicide ganking on them without the sec status loss. You wanna talk about something thats ripe for abuse.... This goes right back to what I said in my first post. If you want to limit the amount players can abuse a system like this, don't put the power in their hands. This does exactly that. Not to mention we're talking about bots anyway, so I just upgrade my bot to do some action if he's reported, as for "something that can't be reproduced", well, your using a computer to fight a computer, there isn't anything like that. Closest would be something like a captcha image, people have been suggesting these for ages depending on various things like highsec mining, time logged in, keyboard activity, etc. To sum up the arguments, they are immersion breaking, potentially deadly to actual players if they pop up at the wrong time, annoying, and just horribly bad for a vast number of reasons. No, the call has to be made by a human, and anything that potentially breaks the EULA has to be made by a human at CCP. The best you can do is encourage people to provide evidence to CCP.



Pages: [1] 2 :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online, the EVE logo, EVE and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to EVE-Search.com to use EVE Online and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, EVE-Search.com. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.