| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 74 post(s) |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Comic Mischief
510
   |
Posted - 2012.03.01 17:45:00 -
[1] - Quote
The character transfer lock will have some interesting effects. Up to now the botters have tended to drive up the PLEX, first by having a pile of accounts that consume them, then via RMT. But they also consumed PLEX via character transfers. Now, all those ways of driving up the PLEX are gone. Will we see a PLEX price drop, or even crash? That depends on just how much of the PLEX market was bot driven, and how elastic it is. Interesting times ahead!
I was unaware of the pause in bot killing. That explains alot. Nice to see the system back in business. Keep up the good work Sreegs & Co!
P.S. can we get a higher resolution version of that picture? What is all that?
I am running for the CSM. Take a look at my ideas.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Comic Mischief
510
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 17:57:00 -
[2] - Quote
OK I got a question: "1000 to 2000 bans": Say one player has 5 accounts, 2 of which were botted, and you ban them. I know you an all 5 accounts, but how do you count that in your 1000 to 2000 total? Is that counted as
One ban because you issued a ban against one player,
Two bans because you banned 2 botting accounts,
Five bans because you banned all five accounts?
I am running for the CSM. Take a look at my ideas.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Comic Mischief
510
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:28:00 -
[3] - Quote
CCP Sreegs, at the last fanfest you had a content person on your team. Do you still have such a person now? Any discussions on changes to game content to make botting either harder or less inviting?
I am running for the CSM. Take a look at my ideas.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Comic Mischief
512
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 20:42:00 -
[4] - Quote
Gevlin wrote:Playing with the numbers
so you say that only 3% of the accounts which used bots were perma band because they would not change their ways. And those 3% equal to between 1k and 2k of players. Also any player caught using a bot once can never transfer or GÇ£SellGÇ¥ a character from their account.
This meant that be 33k to 67k players were caught using bots, and now have their character locked to their account.
Eve has a recovering 350k worth of subscribers, so 10% to 20% (Bold rounding) of eve's
player base has been caught using a bot and has stopped using these bots via one way or another.
To the looks of it 3 strikes would remove the possibility of False positives.
Unholy Rage banned 6200 Accounts in the summer 2009 requiring a lot of resources and had a few false positives that became public.
Not bad result from 1 team over a 3/4 of a year's worth of work. I am looking forward to the chart **** presented at Fan Fest.
I think he means 1000 to 2000 accounts received a ban of some sort. Most a 2 week ban, and 3% a perma-ban.
I am running for the CSM. Take a look at my ideas.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Comic Mischief
515
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 00:26:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Frabba wrote:I probably missed this earlier in the thread, but what happens to the other characters on the accounts which were banned for botting? Are they also going to be locked down? Yes. The account itself will be unable to transfer characters.
Not only that but Sreegs bans not just the character, not just the account, but every account owned by the player. Its the player that turned on the bot, and its the player that gets the ban.
That means if you have 6 accounts, bot on one, your characters in all 6 accounts get locked.
I predict much wailing and gnashing of teeth.
I am running for the CSM. Take a look at my ideas.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E.
Comic Mischief
519
|
Posted - 2012.03.02 14:55:00 -
[6] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Malcom Dax wrote:-----------
Releasing some sort of monthly statistics on the number of bans might be a good way to keep the playerbase informed as to the fact that this is ongoing. That's something we've discussed but we always end up back at the point where there's no context for the numbers. If we don't know the scale completely then the numbers really don't have much meaning. That said something is better than nothing so once we've had a few days to let this percolate we'll sit down and see what we want to do long term.
There is a bit of context for the numbers. Many players look at the concurrent users value, and that gives a scale to ban numbers. For example, currently we have an average of 31000 concurrent users, so if 1500 bot got banned and we assume they were running 50% of the day, then 2.4% of the "players" logged in at any given time were bots that just got caught.
Further context is obtained with time, as the ban data builds up. We compare the ban numbers to their history, look for trends. For example a declining rate of banning coupled with anecdotal reports of bots everywhere indicates someone at CCP needs to wake up. But a declining rate coupled with few seeing bots indicates the botters have decided to take their business elsewhere.
Finally, blogs and threads like this get buried with time. A player who joins in a month may never see it. What deters such a player from trying botting? At the moment just the EULA. Better would be some continuous, persistent reports of bot bannings. If we can deter players from botting, even once, the problem (and your problem!) is reduced. In addition if we deter players from trying botting then they do not buy botting software. As their income drops, that will deter bot software sellers from continuing to offer their product.
I am running for the CSM. Take a look at my ideas.
http://vincentoneve.wordpress.com/ |
| |
|