Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 74 post(s) |
Gogela
Freeport Exploration Loosely Affiliated Pirates Alliance
378
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:22:00 -
[61] - Quote
I like the part about locking all the botters accounts. Now I think I could see this working, or at least having an actual effect on botting. Good job CCP.
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
292
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:24:00 -
[62] - Quote
Marlona Sky wrote:Good job. Still would love for you to release some information on where, alliance, corp and or names.
Naming and shaming has been and will continue to be part of an internal dialogue but for the time being it's something we've been avoiding. I understand completely why people would want to see that but I also understand completely why it's pretty dicey to be doing it. As it stands the policy is not to do so. |
|
Dalmont Delantee
D.I.C.A.D. Solutions Black Thorne Alliance
18
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:26:00 -
[63] - Quote
Daedra Blue wrote:Bubanni wrote:Make it zero botting tolerance FFS! first strike, permaban! That is a LOSE-LOSE scenario. Because although illegal we still use the stuff they bot, and ccp still gets accounts payment. Turning them into legal players is a WIN-WIN.
And that is exactly how it would be sold to the board! |
Vincent Athena
V.I.C.E. Comic Mischief
510
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:28:00 -
[64] - 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/ |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
292
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:31:00 -
[65] - Quote
Vincent Athena wrote: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?
The team you're referring to was the ESTF which was a multi-disciplinary group of volunteers working on the problem in our spare time. The team is now formalized as a part of the development process and while I don't have a "content" person per se on the team I do have an ESTF-ish stakeholder group that I reach out to if we need things.
What you're asking about as regards content does happen and actually works both ways, where sometimes if a content change is being made we'll be consulted to ensure that it's not enabling terrible things. Best answer I can give as I don't have anything right this second to point at, but I'll mention it when I do. |
|
Woo Glin
GoonWaffe Goonswarm Federation
408
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:32:00 -
[66] - Quote
It would be interesting to see the distribution of suspected bots/bans by profession (mining/ratting/market) and the system security status. It would tie in well to a lot of the current CSM issues like isk inflation, supercapital proliferation, and improvement of mining as a career choice. |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
292
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:34:00 -
[67] - Quote
Woo Glin wrote:It would be interesting to see the distribution of suspected bots/bans by profession (mining/ratting/market) and the system security status. It would tie in well to a lot of the current CSM issues like isk inflation, supercapital proliferation, and improvement of mining as a career choice.
That'll be on my list for the graph elves to work on. I'm pretty surprised I've never built that chart before. |
|
eXeler0n
46
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:38:00 -
[68] - Quote
Good thing! It would be a nice idea to give them a -10 security status. So they have to work for the bad things they have done :) And everybody can shoot them ^^ And tag them as botters until they are outlaws :) Read this: http://www.quafe.de German Pirate Blog |
Bagehi
Association of Commonwealth Enterprises Test Alliance Please Ignore
56
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:40:00 -
[69] - Quote
How many accounts did the largest botting network that received a ban have? |
Devore Sekk
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:42:00 -
[70] - Quote
Bubanni wrote:Make it zero botting tolerance FFS! first strike, permaban!
Zero tolerance doesn't work anywhere, and it won't in Eve.
A warned player will either quit playing (so pointless to ban them) or start playing legitimately (a subscriber that would have been banned and probably wouldn't return). A small percentage will continue botting, and will eventually be gone. Many MMO players come from games where botting is officially against the rules, but seldom if ever enforced. No point dropping the hammer on them once they learn the lesson. |
|
s1n1ster m1n1ster
Beyond Divinity Inc
2
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:45:00 -
[71] - Quote
its all well and nice
BUT
preventive action so that botting isnt possiblt or atleast harder?
any news on that front?
|
Gevlin
EXPCS Corp SpaceMonkey's Alliance
110
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:46:00 -
[72] - Quote
That is nice to see the all the accounts are being tagged if one account is being botted. The Boosting alts, though they do no botting they do multiply the mining bots reward. A boosting bot does take a bit to train.
Please keep moving forward. I agree with several people: CCP needs to focus most of eve's recources on FIS, but the development of WIS still needs to continue, just as a slower and more efficient pace. In eve I wish to be more than just a machine. |
Carniflex
StarHunt Broken Toys
12
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:47:00 -
[73] - Quote
Devore Sekk wrote:Bubanni wrote:Make it zero botting tolerance FFS! first strike, permaban! Zero tolerance doesn't work anywhere, and it won't in Eve. A warned player will either quit playing (so pointless to ban them) or start playing legitimately (a subscriber that would have been banned and probably wouldn't return). A small percentage will continue botting, and will eventually be gone. Many MMO players come from games where botting is officially against the rules, but seldom if ever enforced. No point dropping the hammer on them once they learn the lesson.
Zero tolerance works fine if it involves capital punishment. Exactly 0% commit the crime second time ;) |
Asuri Kinnes
Adhocracy Incorporated Adhocracy
295
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:54:00 -
[74] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Good job. Still would love for you to release some information on where, alliance, corp and or names. Naming and shaming has been and will continue to be part of an internal dialogue but for the time being it's something we've been avoiding. I understand completely why people would want to see that but I also understand completely why it's pretty dicey to be doing it. As it stands the policy is not to do so. Not trying to quibble here, but seriously - in game sanctions for in game actions.
Since you've locked the character to the account now, there shouldn't be any problem. Unless I've missed something (because naming (in-game) names surely *can't* be illegal)!.
TY - love the blog/action/picture.
Wormholes: The *NEW* end game of Eve - Online: No Local. No Lag. No Blues (No Intell Channesl). No Blobs.
NEW FEATURE: NO INCARNA! |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
351
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:55:00 -
[75] - Quote
I got a question as well. Isn't "1000 to 2000 bans" a bit too little? Considering people usually have 2 or more accounts that'd be like 500 unique botting people. Doesn't it sound a bit too low? Considering that in some systems there are 10+ bots?
Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
303
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:57:00 -
[76] - Quote
Vaerah Vahrokha wrote:I got a question as well. Isn't "1000 to 2000 bans" a bit too little? Considering people usually have 2 or more accounts that'd be like 500 unique botting people. Doesn't it sound a bit too low? Considering that in some systems there are 10+ bots?
There's really no way to answer this. It's something that will have to play out with time. The last time around we were seeing that 2k average on a bi-weekly or so basis with low levels of recidivism but I suspect that locking the character transfers and some other goodies we're working on will reduce that.
Really time will tell. The only psychic prediction I can make with any reasonable accuracy is that I will be drinking entirely too much at Fanfest! |
|
Kane Hart
Sanitized Souls Sanctuary Pact
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 18:59:00 -
[77] - Quote
Jita Spammers are annoying but you can't really class them ass botters as much as you can class them as macro users who actually a lot of times are actually at their pc watching a moving and using a g15 and etc... The problem why I assume the developers don't ban the chat macroers is because there is a fine line there where it might be an aggressive action against actual scammers and cause a **** storm.
I saw a dev on jita chat the other day they seem to just lol at it just like most of us do. It's part of and how eve has been a long time.
I assume if they were going take action they would have to first do a famous dev blog announcing g15 keyboards and other things were extremely not tolerated.
As it stands now I assume CCP are going ignore it for ever and really the only way to cut down jita spam and macroers is to maybe stop falling into their scams? lol |
Tetragammatron Prime
Pink Sockers
22
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:02:00 -
[78] - Quote
Make it so 2nd warning they can no longer send isk, trade in station or create contract from the botting character!! |
Revolution Rising
Gentlemen of Better Ilk
85
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:02:00 -
[79] - Quote
Such an awesome thing the picture says it all for me.
Feel like opening a bottle of champagne ;)
Great job, keep it coming.
CSM7 Industry Voting Guide
|
|
CCP Sreegs
C C P C C P Alliance
303
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:03:00 -
[80] - Quote
Kane Hart wrote:Jita Spammers are annoying but you can't really class them ass botters as much as you can class them as macro users who actually a lot of times are actually at their pc watching a moving and using a g15 and etc... The problem why I assume the developers don't ban the chat macroers is because there is a fine line there where it might be an aggressive action against actual scammers and cause a **** storm.
I saw a dev on jita chat the other day they seem to just lol at it just like most of us do. It's part of and how eve has been a long time.
I assume if they were going take action they would have to first do a famous dev blog announcing g15 keyboards and other things were extremely not tolerated.
As it stands now I assume CCP are going ignore it for ever and really the only way to cut down jita spam and macroers is to maybe stop falling into their scams? lol
Sorry I keep missing this. It's not being ignored. It's also not my department. I'll follow up on it tomorrow. |
|
|
Kane Hart
Sanitized Souls Sanctuary Pact
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:03:00 -
[81] - Quote
Tetragammatron Prime wrote:Make it so 2nd warning they can no longer send isk, trade in station or create contract from the botting character!! Ahh so make them 100% useless so all they can do is spam local chat and help channel and harass the players and such :)? |
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
3348
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:04:00 -
[82] - Quote
Now when you said locked does them mean they cant bio mass either?
|
Kane Hart
Sanitized Souls Sanctuary Pact
10
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:05:00 -
[83] - Quote
CCP Sreegs wrote:Kane Hart wrote:Jita Spammers are annoying but you can't really class them ass botters as much as you can class them as macro users who actually a lot of times are actually at their pc watching a moving and using a g15 and etc... The problem why I assume the developers don't ban the chat macroers is because there is a fine line there where it might be an aggressive action against actual scammers and cause a **** storm.
I saw a dev on jita chat the other day they seem to just lol at it just like most of us do. It's part of and how eve has been a long time.
I assume if they were going take action they would have to first do a famous dev blog announcing g15 keyboards and other things were extremely not tolerated.
As it stands now I assume CCP are going ignore it for ever and really the only way to cut down jita spam and macroers is to maybe stop falling into their scams? lol Sorry I keep missing this. It's not being ignored. It's also not my department. I'll follow up on it tomorrow. Thanks, But my suggestion is give them idiots a warning if you guys do plan on doing things. They been allowed to do it for years and It might be slightly wrong to ban everyone without some kind warning but then again you gave isk botters a fair warning to stop or be ***** slapped before so haha you guys are pretty fair.
Thanks :) |
Vaerah Vahrokha
Vahrokh Consulting
351
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:06:00 -
[84] - Quote
I don't eat into the "they abandon account at first ban". Maybe now, they try dump it on the market fast but surely it will change after characters get un-transferrable. In the future they will keep a pool of new alts "growing" and keep the flagged accounts till they are busted
Shandir wrote: I personally think that when a botter has multiple accounts, you should strip the botting account dry of all ISK (possibly even leave them negative if they transferred any out you can't reclaim) and any items they could potentially sell, as well as stripping any ISK that was transferred via any method between accounts/characters. Probably should be more lenient to single-account botters, as they are more likely to just up and leave, but still try to strip any botting related ISK and don't be light on the estimation.
With what said above, CCP will want to keep those who only got caught once and "smarted up" (most will be casual botters that will get scared to sh!t). Money is money.
Thus, going out to great efforts nuking the bejeezus of their assets and money would push the casual botters much more into quitting than what CCP probably wants to.
I can foresee a penalty but not above a thresold that will make casual botters rage quit. Auditing | Collateral holding and insurance | Consulting | PLEX for Good Charity
Twitter channel |
Devore Sekk
Royal Amarr Institute Amarr Empire
4
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:09:00 -
[85] - Quote
Carniflex wrote:Zero tolerance works fine if it involves capital punishment. Exactly 0% commit the crime second time ;)
Except for the innocent and semi-innocent who get caught under that bus. Which is the point. The big stick is there. If a bigger one is needed, I'm sure CCP can build one. |
KrakizBad
Eve Defence Force Fatal Ascension
384
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:09:00 -
[86] - Quote
Any comment on whether market bots were also hit? Inquiring trading minds want to know! http://blog.beyondreality.se/Incursion-hose Remove all incursions from hisec |
Jarnis McPieksu
362
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:15:00 -
[87] - Quote
KrakizBad wrote:Any comment on whether market bots were also hit? Inquiring trading minds want to know!
As a trader, I can say from how the market has changed in Jita, yes.
|
Jita Alt666
940
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:17:00 -
[88] - Quote
Great blog. Good to see the nuking is active again. Nice to see characters locked to account after first warning. I would encourage you to keep this permanent but understand the need to not state that categorically in a thread being read by 300000 aspies.
Asuri Kinnes wrote:CCP Sreegs wrote:Marlona Sky wrote:Good job. Still would love for you to release some information on where, alliance, corp and or names. Naming and shaming has been and will continue to be part of an internal dialogue but for the time being it's something we've been avoiding. I understand completely why people would want to see that but I also understand completely why it's pretty dicey to be doing it. As it stands the policy is not to do so. Not trying to quibble here, but seriously - in game sanctions for in game actions. Since you've locked the character to the account now, there shouldn't be any problem. Unless I've missed something (because naming (in-game) names surely *can't* be illegal)!. TY - love the blog/action/picture.
Introduction of naming and shaming will open up another area of meta gaming that most players will dislike. |
Andrea Griffin
149
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:18:00 -
[89] - Quote
CCP Sreegs, you are my favorite developer. No offense to the rest of the CCP crew, they're great as well, but you hold a very special place in my heart. CCP Sreegs is my favorite developer. |
Steve Ronuken
Fuzzwork Enterprises
258
|
Posted - 2012.03.01 19:18:00 -
[90] - Quote
naming and shaming introduces a whole DPA issue. I'd pretty much say 'They can't do it', from a legal perspective. FuzzWork Enterprises http://www.fuzzwork.co.uk/ Blueprint calculator and other 'useful' utilities. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 .. 13 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |