Curse

Light And Peace · Aug 27, 2010, 05:48 PM // 17:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tullzinski

Quote from Gaile:
We are reviewing the parameters for bot detection, as we do after nearly any false positive. I feel that you should not be overly concerned about the other account. There were particular elements involving your own account that, from your description, would not be a factor in a review of your alternate account. Therefore I feel quite sure that account would not be blocked for botting.

How can you say for certain that macros really are not the issue? What "particular elements" do you think gaile may be refering to? If not macros then what else were you doing? Using macros in PVP vs PVE?

My son was farming the crap out of TOPK with the exact same builds you were using during the same timeframe and has had no issues. I personally have farmed the living crap outta this game for 5 years and never ever have had an issue.

Not buying your diagnosis doc! My money is still on the macros.

IMHO Stay away from macros and stay ban free!

It wasn't the macro, if fact, the alternate account doesn't have an assassin. It might be that. The alternate account has the same macro because it's on the same computer with has the same hardware and I have dervs on both accounts. Capish?

Please make an effort to read thoroughly instead of rendering a moot opinion on a situation that has been proven by their own words an ERROR. Thusly, it wasn't the macro. Elements or not, it wasn't a banning factor.

In other words, be constructive.

Oh, and if you have an issue with my particular case, why don't you PM me? I'm more than happy to take my personal case and and discuss it with you there.

fires element · Aug 31, 2010, 11:36 PM // 23:36

since i have only read every few pages of this post and it appears that anet's stance on texmod is that it is ok in its "original" form. so my question is where do you find the "original" form or how do you know that the ones on wiki are "original" forms and won't result in a ban?

Karate Jesus · Sep 01, 2010, 01:22 AM // 01:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by fires element

since i have only read every few pages of this post and it appears that anet's stance on texmod is that it is ok in its "original" form. so my question is where do you find the "original" form or how do you know that the ones on wiki are "original" forms and won't result in a ban?

There's no real way, and honestly Anet's ability to detect whether or not you're using the "original" form of Textmod is unlikely.

Honestly, they can't even distinguish between MAC addresses, even though they can read IPs. They don't have the best tools in the world, and it shows in their bot-detection techniques and bannings.

Black Metal · Sep 01, 2010, 01:29 AM // 01:29

if anyone, at this point, is trying to draw very fine lines about where they think legal and illegal differ, and want to step right up to that line, I sure hope they don't have any strong attachments to that account

*Darcy* · Sep 01, 2010, 01:44 AM // 01:44

What ArenaNet was saying is that at this time they have no problem with the TexMod in use. But they are reserving the right to object in the future if alterations are made or even if another program appears with the same name.

Many of us on guru have used TexMod to work on our Cartography titles, myself included. As long as the program is only affecting what you see on your computer, it is fine. If someone adds a bot program to a TexMod version and you use it, then watch for the ban.

The basic rule is no program is permitted that allows you to play the game without interacting with the keyboard. Macros are an iffy area so with those you are taking a chance. But TexMod is not a bot program, nor is it a macro. It doesn't let you walk the edges without constantly directing your character, it just shows where you haven't been yet.

Chthon · Sep 01, 2010, 02:12 AM // 02:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by fires element

since i have only read every few pages of this post and it appears that anet's stance on texmod is that it is ok in its "original" form. so my question is where do you find the "original" form or how do you know that the ones on wiki are "original" forms and won't result in a ban?

Check the checksum!

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Guide...-game_graphics

Aba · Sep 01, 2010, 03:52 AM // 03:52

I recall someone posting this, after me saying Anets basic rules on third party programs.

Quote:

Please stop telling other people how they should play the game they paid for, and leave it up to the developers of the game to decide what the rules and their enforcement of them will be. Thank you. Using third party software is not supported, may result in termination if it is used to break the rules, and is used at your own risk. That is not the same thing as being forbidden altogether.

Which brings me to what Black Metal said earlier

Quote:

if anyone, at this point, is trying to draw very fine lines about where they think legal and illegal differ, and want to step right up to that line, I sure hope they don't have any strong attachments to that account

I think a lot of people need to read that over and over till the light comes on..

Gill Halendt · Sep 01, 2010, 08:30 AM // 08:30

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karate Jesus

There's no real way, and honestly Anet's ability to detect whether or not you're using the "original" form of Textmod is unlikely.

Their ability to detect TexMod is unlikely, whichever the version.

TexMod is pretty much a launcher. It reads textures in the graphic card buffer and replaces them on the fly. The scene is rendered as intended, then TexMod kicks in and swaps the chosen texture, producing alterations to the local visualization.

There's no way Anet could detect such a process, since it doesn't interact with the client-server operations in any way.

That's if you use the "original" TexMod. Modified versions could come with other optional tools, such as bots. Or GWCA bots could rely on TexMod for optional features. Those tools could well trigger a ban, not TexMod itself.

*lemming* · Sep 01, 2010, 11:27 AM // 11:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

There's no way Anet could detect such a process, since it doesn't interact with the client-server operations in any way.

Theoretically, wouldn't a memory scan work?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

That's if you use the "original" TexMod. Modified versions could come with other optional tools, such as bots. Or GWCA bots could rely on TexMod for optional features. Those tools could well trigger a ban, not TexMod itself.

No such things exist.

axe · Sep 01, 2010, 12:58 PM // 12:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Black Metal

if anyone, at this point, is trying to draw very fine lines about where they think legal and illegal differ, and want to step right up to that line, I sure hope they don't have any strong attachments to that account

Quoted for emphasis and not only this, but they were banning MULTIPLE accounts relating to a banned account. I know several people that had multiple accounts banned even though they only ran the bot program on one account.

In other words, if you are attached to any of your accounts, dont see how far you can push it.

Gill Halendt · Sep 01, 2010, 01:00 PM // 13:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Theoretically, wouldn't a memory scan work?

Sure thing, but they just can't do it.

They're not allowed to scan your local memory without prior approval. Even if they do, they're likely not allowed to store and use the results against you.

Also, TexMod running in memory doesn't imply you're using it to mod Guild Wars, or that you're using it with any mod at all. TexMod is a texture ripper/modder that works with any D3D application, so, detecting TexMod in memory isn't enough.

Scanning processes to check wether TexMod is running and also launching Guild Wars is definitely something they can't do. Even just for the extra burden it would cause to the client/server communication, multiplied for all the clients connected at the same time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

No such things exist.

Mine was just hypothetic speculation. Since I never had any interest in bots or bot-like programs, I don't know for sure, just trying to figure out how a "tainted" copy of TexMod could cause an account ban.

Karate Jesus · Sep 01, 2010, 02:23 PM // 14:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

Mine was just hypothetic speculation. Since I never had any interest in bots or bot-like programs, I don't know for sure, just trying to figure out how a "tainted" copy of TexMod could cause an account ban.

It can't. If Anet bans an account that was only using TextMod, then it means that the account also fit some of their other bot-behavioral rubrics.

Honestly, Anet's support has a hard time telling the difference between 3rd party programs, and anything that uses .dll injection will probably send up a red flag almost immediately.

And there's no such thing as a corrupted version of TextMod being used to bot; however, there are ways to automate processes that don't involve .dll injection or game manipulation in any way (so they're undetectable short of character behavior), and are being heavily used now to do basic processes like farm for Nic, run a sin in RA, etc.

Gill Halendt · Sep 01, 2010, 03:08 PM // 15:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karate Jesus

It can't. If Anet bans an account that was only using TextMod, then it means that the account also fit some of their other bot-behavioral rubrics.

Honestly, Anet's support has a hard time telling the difference between 3rd party programs, and anything that uses .dll injection will probably send up a red flag almost immediately.

TexMod doesn't use .dll injection anyway.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karate Jesus

And there's no such thing as a corrupted version of TextMod being used to bot

I was pretty sure there wasn't one even before.

I was just replying to this:

Quote:

Originally Posted by fires element

since i have only read every few pages of this post and it appears that anet's stance on texmod is that it is ok in its "original" form.

fires element in turn likely refers to the in game conversation with GMs, when they claimed they had a shortlist of "tolerated" 3rd Party Programs. They also underlined that those wouldn't cause a ban in their "current, original form".

So, I said: TexMod, for how debatable its use can be, is likely safe, as it's not detectable (in its current form) by any reasonable means.

There are no "corrupted" or "tainted" versions of TexMod that I know. Only way for TexMod to become dangerous is if it was bundled with some (hypotetical) bot, or a necessary component of some bot. Then again, the subsequent ban would actually be caused by the bot itself and not TexMod anyway.

So, you say there is no bot working with TexMod. As I tought.

But still, there are multiple download sources for TexMod. The archive could contain a perfectly fine copy of TexMod, and who knows what else. Any unaware user could inadvertently launch stuff and end up being screwed. Not by TexMod itself, but by something else they downloaded together with it.

fires element · Sep 01, 2010, 04:25 PM // 16:25

so downloading texmod from the official wiki won't/shouldn't result in a ban since those are considered "original" forms of the program?

i apologize for the paranoia but i just don't want to be banned for using texmod since it has been said thats its ok but then there are people that claim they only used texmod and still got banned

Chrisworld · Sep 01, 2010, 05:11 PM // 17:11

TexMod modifies textures on the fly as they are put into memory by Direct X (memory = your physical RAM) I fail to see how it even touches GW or even gives the remote chance of a possibility you will get banned. Your DAT/EXE is NEVER modified.

TexMod =/= Game Modification

I've used TexMod on OFFLINE games before, forced a shut down to see if it made the mod stick in game files and it didn't. This is all the proof you need that texmod works with game textures in RAM just like if you went and screwed with jpg's in your browser cache and reloaded a webpage.

*lemming* · Sep 01, 2010, 07:02 PM // 19:02

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gill Halendt

Sure thing, but they just can't do it.

They're not allowed to scan your local memory without prior approval. Even if they do, they're likely not allowed to store and use the results against you.

If they were to change the EULA to cover for it, 99% of people wouldn't even notice.

Chthon · Sep 02, 2010, 03:28 AM // 03:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

Theoretically, wouldn't a memory scan work?

It would. Of course, it would also be the sort of ridiculous privacy breach that would lead me to uninstall instantly and boycott NCSoft permanently. (If I weren't already boycotting NCSoft permanently in response to their terrible handling of security issues...)

maxxfury · Sep 02, 2010, 03:34 AM // 03:34

Diditn diablo 2 start using some software that scanned your task manager to see if you had the old pindlebot running?!

I believe it was called "warden"...

If they can do it without issue, can anet not also?

Karate Jesus · Sep 02, 2010, 03:52 AM // 03:52

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxxfury

If they can do it without issue, can anet not also?

They technically could....but then they're in a difficult grey area. Kind of like when Sony installed rootkits on peoples' computers w/o their knowledge and got sued.

And Anet doesn't have the staff, tools, money, or know-how to actually get something like that into their client.

*lemming* · Sep 02, 2010, 03:58 AM // 03:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by maxxfury

Diditn diablo 2 start using some software that scanned your task manager to see if you had the old pindlebot running?!

I believe it was called "warden"...

If they can do it without issue, can anet not also?

That's correct; they also use it in WoW and WC3 afaik.

There's been some uproar about Warden being invasive, but for the most part, nobody cares - as long as it's in the EULA.