EVE Search - Reporting from the front line of the Bot-War

Check My IP Information

All Channels

EVE General Discussion

Reporting from the front line of the Bot-War

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

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]


Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 26 post(s)
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2011.04.05 14:42:00 - [1] Originally by: Pserad Pserad Edited by: Pserad Pserad on 04/04/2011 23:03:13 I am not condoning the botters, but I'm betting that many of the people who will be banned as casual bots aren't doing it to sell ISK, they are just trying to supplement income for their main accounts. Coming down hard on these enthusiastic players, who may pay to run 2 or more accounts is going to start hurting CCP's wallet when they drive those players away. Tough ***. No-one needs to cheat to play EVE, so I have zero sympathy for these "casual" botters". They want to play 'risk-free' EVE where all their losses are reimbursed by the bot fairy. If that's what they really* want, they can play on SiSi where everything ocsts 100 ISK. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2011.04.05 14:53:00 - [2] Originally by: Zangorus 17k botting characters gone for 2 weeks Where did you get this figure from? 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.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2011.04.05 16:30:00 - [3] Originally by: Othran Originally by: NinjaSpud The other website, the one that chesty got that quote from, has HUNDREDS of users. I'm going as far to say that they are just as popular as the other two websites. From now on they are "Website C" and I will montior them That website is currently the subject of a Nominet case. I was bored The naughty boy decided to pretend to be a non-trading individual which allows you to opt out your personal details from a .uk domain. Once the whois was populated it was rapidly apparent that the details weren't right - Nominet is now dealing with the registrar rather than the registrant to properly identify him. Once that's done if he does prove to be a UK resident then Trading Standards can come enquire why the website doesn't comply with the Distance Selling Regulations, and Revenue & Customs can come ask him why he didn't declare any of the Paypal income. If he can't be indentified then the domain will be suspended and then cancelled. I reckon he's got an annual income of maybe ú20k from this website which would be a rather nice tax-free income mmmm? I know I could do with an extra 20k a year for sure Personal information removed. Zymurgist Excellent. Report him to the Inland Revenue - they're currently rather keen on getting every penny from tax dodgers. This is exactly the kind of action that hits the botting community at it's heart. Especially if said community is also earning undeclared income from RMT ISK... 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.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous IMPERIAL LEGI0N	Posted - 2011.04.05 21:09:00 - [4] Originally by: Pserad Pserad Edited by: Pserad Pserad on 05/04/2011 19:47:49 Originally by: Aloe Cloveris I was pointing out how silly it is to think a business will take any offense to an undesirable customer leaving. I*** coffee shop refences I think it's safe to say that if every bot in the game left, CCP would certainly start to feel the hurt. I'm not so sure this is true. I think we can take it as read that botters are all supported by PLEX. Any PLEX they buy are already in game, so in the very short term, CCP feel no hit at all. In the medium term, the demand for PLEX would fall considerably, leading to an oversupply and a consequent price drop. This is the effect that most people think of. However consider the effect of "cheap" PLEX in an EVE where there are virtually no bots. There is less free ISK sloshing about the place, so prices generally would fall. People would need less ISK to compete with the botters, and they'd be relatively happier to sell their PLEX for lower prices - after all, you care about what you can buy in return for your PLEX, not the absolute number of ISK. In any case, the total size of the market for PLEX has shrunk, so the comparative value of PLEX would fall dramatically.... or would it? Imagine what would happen if PLEX fell to an equivalent value of 250 mill. I can tell you what I'd do: I'd buy up a dozen or so and store them up so I can keep playing for free. And I think a very large number of other human players would be more than happy to do the same. All those PLEX will be quite happily consumed by "real" players, even if it a price point a little lower (but not that much lower) that the botters are willing to pay. And as a side benefit, we'd also see more people playing for free, including people who might otherwise quit or else not be able to afford to play. In short: The fiscal consequences to CCP of a bot massacre are widely overstated. They would be limited to some temporary instability in the PLEX market, which would end when ISK-rich players warehoused PLEX for their own use or as a long term investment. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.04.11 16:37:00 - [5] Originally by: Cutlass Claire Edited by: Cutlass Claire on 07/04/2011 14:34:30 Edited by: Cutlass Claire on 07/04/2011 14:33:41 I can't say I agree with the majority of the posters here but at least it was fun reading. Just posting to set something straight. First of all; people play games to have fun and enjoy themselfs. As in most MMO's this also means you need to grind (money, ISK, rare drops etc.). To a certain extend this is considered acceptable. The problem some MMO's suffer is that the time needed for grinding being widely out of wack with time left for playing the game. Same goes for EVE. Reason why a lot of players use bots for ratting, trading and mining is because most of it is so damned boring it makes you want to poke your eyeballs with sharp pointy objects just to prevent your brain from going totaly numb. They are not A) greedy ** or B) lazy gits, they are actualy C) players who can't stand the mind boggling boring repetitive tasks of endless mining, trading or ratting just to have ISK to even play the game. This applies more for the newer players and less for the vets as they have alternate ways of making huge chunks of EVE money like moon mining (which is basicly fully automated). So instead of banning all the bots the devs at CCP might wanna tweak the game a bit so that the grind time and fun playing time is a bit more balanced. No, sorry, it doesn't quite work like that. You don't get to excuse cheating because the game is too hard for you. I do agree that the core ISK and wealth creation activities should be made more enjoyable and challenging, and that simply doing this would significantly reduce botting, but it's an "as well as" not an "instead of". 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.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.04.11 16:44:00 - [6] Originally by: Araknus Prime Edited by: Araknus Prime on 11/04/2011 12:17:58 *** Off topic warning *********** Originally by:** Othran Nominet case still open, takes them a while but they'll get there. As will HMRC, not as if you can lose that lovely paper trail at Paypal mmm? Unfortunately as Iceland has voted not to repay the debt to the UK tak payer caused by their terrible banking methods I wonder how concerned HMRC will be with someone who may be damaging a game owned by an Icelandic company :) News Article on vote not to repay (by the way that is tongue in cheek in case that is not obvious to some) I do have to ask myself if your have a vote to pay more tax or not who would ever vote yes to that? I want to have votes like that before they spend my taxes on stuff as well. HMRC dont care if you're selling belt-fed orphan processors to pet food companies owned by the descendants of Dr ***** so long as you're paying your taxes. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.04.14 08:44:00 - [7] So I read on a certain forum beginning with 'K' that the alliance leadership of a certain rouge-tinted overlordy kind has been permabanned for "sustained EULA violations"; 11 characters, including 2 with Titans. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.04.14 10:59:00 - [8] Originally by: Furb Killer That was for RMT though, not for botting (if it is correct). And CCP cares about RMT and not about botting (decreases their profit by plexes sold), while I care about botting and not about RMT (RMT is just moving ISK, the issue is how it is created. Yes you gain an unfair advantage by spending real money, just like when you sell plexes and buy a char). ROL space is literally seething with bots. In fact it's about all there is there. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Alcohlics Anonymous	Posted - 2011.04.14 13:28:00 - [9] I didn't say it was. Botting and RMT are related, though, and I thought it was interesting and entertaining news on a related subject. Death to cheaters. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.04.25 13:00:00 - [10] Originally by: CCP Sreegs We went after a new one today. HAPPY EASTER! Looking forward to a fresh bath of tears from this. 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.

Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.12 14:48:00 - [11] Originally by: Ingvar Angst Edited by: Ingvar Angst on 12/05/2011 13:45:39 With great thanks to GM Lelouch: Quote: Dollar figures cannot be provided but the financial impact of banning bots is smaller than you might think as a lot of bots are funded through illegitimate means to begin with. Accounts do not mean as much to most RMTers as they do to regular players so RMTers will often resort to stolen credit cards for funding their accounts. They are in other words oftentimes operating under the preconception that the accounts they are using will be found and banned eventually; if not through normal investigative efforts of our anti-RMT team, the account will be taken out of business when the credit card is chargebacked or when the owner of the credit card contacts us regarding the illegitimate payments. I wish more people would remember this when they spout off the "Oh CCP will turn a blind eye to bots because they just want the subs" line. Obviously not all bots are supported by stolen credit cards, but clearly a significant number are. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.15 08:14:00 - [12] Originally by: Elrica bloodbane Some bots have employed mercs. To target players who out them in local,and petition them. So do it quietly We get free wardecs if we petition botters? F12F12F12F12F12F12F12F12F12F12F12! 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.15 11:19:00 - [13] Originally by: first overlord what about not being able to play unless you pay with money for your account , would this not stop botting ? Maybe, but a large number of people maintain legitimate accounts with PLEX, and an equally large number of people don't buy ISK because they're able to sell PLEX. Whislt PLEX are useful for botters, they're also useful to CCP to fight RMT with. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.16 14:11:00 - [14] Originally by: Kittaria Darkstar Found a site on Face Book advertising bots that beat the incursion patch. FYI. Did you email the link to CCP Sreegs? 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.17 14:30:00 - [15] Originally by: Florestan Bronstein TM seems to cooperate closely with RMT stores - don't think ccp would like that. assuming this report is false an interesting question is: would ccp win by keeping the rumor alive (and striking fear into the hearts of some botters) or rather lose by further ruining its image with some of its customers here @Sreegs maybe you can enlighten us whether CCP would consider striking such a deal with bot writers? also as far as I have seen nobody has mentioned yet that Othran's favorite site has made a comeback. Why would CCP make an ongoing deal like that: they dont want to ban people for botting, they want people to stop botting. I could just about see them accepting a "plea bargin" in return for a client list - assuming that the client list was in fact of any use - but an ongoing deal to inform on new customers? What could they gain? 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.18 08:47:00 - [16] Leetcheese's argument seems to be that CCP's punishments for botting used to be ineffectual, so it's wrong that their punishments have been changed to actually be a deterrent. Naturally, the correct response it to point and laugh at a lying botter who got caught and now has a hurt butte about it. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.18 09:17:00 - [17] BTW the incident is especially delicious because Leetcheese is a director of TEST, an alliance that openly encourages the membership to bot, and actually has an alliance rule against reporting bots. It turns out he was reported by another TEST member.... 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.18 11:42:00 - [18] Originally by: HELIC0N ONE Originally by: Malcanis BTW the incident is especially delicious because Leetcheese is a director of TEST, an alliance that openly encourages the membership to bot, and actually has an alliance rule against reporting bots. Can we save the "[Alliance hostile to me] encourages botting/RMTing/hacking/satanism/puppy kicking/etc" rhetoric for CAOD please? All alliances are hostile to me, including a significant proportion of my own. In fact DC are the powerbloc which I loathe the least. So dont try and spin this as a "lolCOAD" thing. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.18 11:49:00 - [19] Edited by: Malcanis on 18/05/2011 11:51:15 Originally by: Florestan Bronstein Edited by: Florestan Bronstein on 18/05/2011 09:51:11 Originally by: Malcanis BTW the incident is especially delicious because Leetcheese is a director of TEST, an alliance that openly encourages the membership to bot, and actually has an alliance rule against reporting bots. let's see... The TEST alliance bylaws have five sections: Nice dodge attempt, but who said anything about TEST "bylaws", as if they are the only way that behaviours are encouraged or deterred. What about the alliance forums, for instance? Could it possibly be the case that botting is widely and positively discussed in there...? The fact is that TEST members are among the most enthusiastic botters in 0.0, and now that a director has been caught, he has been given a penalty strong enough to genuinely deter. Lets hope the other TESTies get the message. I do hope so, because I rather like the other things about TEST, and I've always thought it a shame that you thought it was appropriate and acceptable to bot. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.18 20:35:00 - [20] Originally by: Marrl Shadowfall Originally by: Malcanis but are they really any worse than most 0.0 alliances? No Test is literally the worst alliance in eve. They are also evil, i'm sure one of them also kicked my dog and now my dog needs an operation You're entitled to your opinion, of course, but it was your fellow goon HELICON ONE who said that, not me. Perhaps your warning would be better directed at him? 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.

Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.19 06:40:00 - [21] Originally by: Komen Edited by: Komen on 19/05/2011 00:32:47 Edited by: Komen on 19/05/2011 00:17:43 Secret ninja edit: Nevermind, already posted a couple pages back. Further edit: I wish to thank GM Loki for smashing a botter hard. I don't have a problem with this. What I hope is happening is that other botters are being smashed hard also - not just bans, but isk removal to the point of being severely handicapped. Not, it should "ISK removal of the ISK gained by cheating". The ban is the punishment. The ISK removal is merely to prevent the botter profiting from his cheating. The principle is exactly the same as when GMs remove RMT'd ISK. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.05.30 17:01:00 - [22] Originally by: CCP Sreegs Originally by: Iurnan Mileghere Edited by: Iurnan Mileghere on 30/05/2011 01:11:49 Originally by: CCP Sreegs We are starting to take a harder look at income generation however and will determine how to action once we've mulled over the numbers. Seriously, Sreegs, you have to stop using "action" as a verb. There's a perfectly good corresponding verb ("to act") and lots of others you can use. This makes me crazy. heh, is it not a perfectly valid use of the word? Action is a noun. Colloquially, it has been "verbed", There are already perfect good verb forms of the word, and not using them is rather clumsy, and has a corporate-speak feel to it. Side note: I have given up protesting my employers' use of "learning" as a noun: Dept manager: "What learnings did we get from this?" Malc: twitch Malc: Writes on his notepad: WHAT DID WE LEARN FROM THIS? NOT GOOD GRAMMAR, FOR ONE THING and spends the rest of the meeting illuminating and embellishing the sentence, and drawing pictures of stick men being stabbed with spears. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.06.08 21:51:00 - [23] Originally by: NinjaSpud Edited by: NinjaSpud on 08/06/2011 16:58:56 to continue where I left of in my previous post: Originally by: IceHound here is a short rundown of what our bots can, and cannot, do: they do not give an unfair advantage over other players. some players have more time to play than other players; this is NOT an unfair advantage. all the bot really does is give the player more "time". they do not have a "magic" get isk button; you cannot press a button and instantly get a billion isk. they do not perform any tasks more rapidly than a player. in fact, most tasks take longer for the bot to do than for a person. not all players who bot are doing so for RMT or other RMT related reasons. many of us only bot to pay for our subs through plex ( which were purchased by another player, from CCP, so CCP has actually received our $15, and we are not taking anything from them), or to fund our pvp activities. botters are not "trying to destroy" the game botters are not evil douche-bags who take pleasure is causing strife. there are, of course, many other misconceptions, but i either CBA to write them down, or just cant think of them atm. So, watcha guys think? Ask him if he thinks that it's an "unfair advantage" that the people who work part-time get paid less than those who work a 5 day week? 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.06.16 10:06:00 - [24] Originally by: Memorya Edited by: Memorya on 15/06/2011 13:18:17 "IF" CCP bans every single RTM'er and boters, next day CCP closes down. You like it or not, thats how it goes and thats why they will never ever ban all bot's, becouse they need MONEY. Botters dont make CCP any money. They run their bot accounts on PLEX, which real players would cheerfully buy instead. 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.
Malcanis Caldari Vanishing Point. The Initiative.	Posted - 2011.07.21 12:53:00 - [25] Originally by: Pius Piramonde Bots are reportedly the reason why mining is no longer a profitable activity. Get rid of the bots, and you stabilize the market, and bring back part of the game that many have abandoned. Got get 'em, CCP!!! Although mining bots don't help, it's more to do with the massive mineral influx from the Drone Regions. Which are themselves heavily botted. Mining income ran off a cliff when the drone regions were introduced in 2007. 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.

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.