Curse

Missmelady · May 29, 2010, 06:20 AM // 06:20

Well the Op answered his own question. If you were using ksmod or texmod as well as a macro this is very typical bot behavior. My guess is they kept a tab on you from the red resign days of hero battles and had your account flagged for said resign macro. I would also guess that you had the ksmod active while you were using the resing macro so in other words there is no proof that you were actually sitting at the computer during this time. Therefor the use of ksmod is not against Eula but the use of such mods, Texmod and ksmod, may be mistaken for bots when using a macro. Remember THEY DO BAN FOR MACROS because technically it is a 3rd party program even though its done with your mouse and or keyboard.

As for the Innocent parties. No one is innocent that got their acc banned. Anet had more than enough proof to ban you. They did not ban on whims. By the way standing in a RA match and just typing /resign at the start cause you do not get a monk is technically match manipulation as well

Did that test with an alt acc for 2 weeks and the alt acc got perma banned. All I did was join games as a w/mo and type /resign in ra for about 2 weeks straight using a macro on my desktop mouse while I played on my laptop. I believe about the 15th day of doing this I was kicked from the game and attempted to log back on and it said my acc had been perma banned. yada yada. I emailed support and recieved a human response of the account had been banned for match manipulation. remember all I did was stand in Ra and /resign.

And for all those that participated in red resign days, you are all very luck you did not get permad for it because that is also technically match manipulation

Atro · May 29, 2010, 06:32 AM // 06:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by majoho

EDIT: and for OP, you used a keyboard macro, that's considered botting.

He was possibly using one of these (ZBoard), whoever made this had to get Anet/NCSoft's ok to do this right, so if they banned for this, is it wrong for them to?

Missmelady · May 29, 2010, 06:40 AM // 06:40

Just because a keyboard that ncsoft/anet supported has a macro button on there does not mean that they have to support it in their games

That is like norton saying that it will stop all viruses/trojans/malwars from getting to your computer if you buy it, but when you go download p^rn and get a trojan or malware from it your like but norton said it wouldn't happen.

And to be completly honest if he has to use a resign macro to type /resign for him he is not telling us the entire story and is leaving bits and peices of it out. I would be willing to put a stack of armbraces down on the fact that he is not telling us all the info

majoho · May 29, 2010, 06:42 AM // 06:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElementalShadows

He was possibly using one of these (ZBoard), whoever made this had to get Anet/NCSoft's ok to do this right, so if they banned for this, is it wrong for them to?

Anet gave out G15's as well, but using the macro functions in gw is not allowed, because it's considered automated = bot.

Atro · May 29, 2010, 06:44 AM // 06:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by majoho

Anet gave out G15's as well, but using the macro functions in gw is not allowed, because it's considered automated = bot.

Well lol, I think thats just dumb on Anets part, its like they were asking to ban people.

Missmelady · May 29, 2010, 06:51 AM // 06:51

Actually it was not anet it was ncsoft that supported said stuff and since ncsoft owned anet at the time they put gw stuff on it seeing as it was ncsofts prized mmo at the time. Therefore we can just assume that there terrible idea of putting a macro on it was part of there buisness ideas that we have become so accustomed to

Atro · May 29, 2010, 07:03 AM // 07:03

Ah ok, I still don't think people should have been banned for the keyboards, only if they knew if it was the keyboard that made the person suspicious.

Well Im outta here.

Bonehead · May 29, 2010, 07:05 AM // 07:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feathermoore Rep

But my main point is that, spam all you want. aNet has CLEARLY stated MULTIPLE times, blog and forum posts, that they WILL NOT release any information upon the method of discovery because they clearly don't want different hacks to be released. If you tell even just one person how they got caught, it'll find its way to ears of the hack programmer, and they'll find a new method.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Femmefatal

Of course we all know by now those that get banned lie out their teeth about it and they are innocent and they didn't do anything and they don't know why they got banned. Anet has the proof there's more to the picture than the OP is telling or that Anet has to tell. They are not oblidged to show the OP or anyone why. They have the final say and I'm glad they all got banned as the game will be a much better place for a little while until the next group starts it all over again. Let them cry all they want, just don't let them back in.

The provided boldness is, in all meanings of the term, stupid. You can't stop murders from happening by not providing evidence on how a killer was caught. Likewise, by not giving information out, you're not magically going to stop or even hinder the creation of bots or hacks. The publicity of these bannings tells enough to the programmers to know that their old methods no longer work, and thus they're all ready working on new methods. Hell, they were probably all ready working on new methods prior to the ban, incase any event like this invalidated their old methods.

Feathermoore Rep · May 29, 2010, 07:11 AM // 07:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonehead

The provided boldness is, in all meanings of the term, stupid. You can't stop murders from happening by not providing evidence on how a killer was caught. Likewise, by not giving information out, you're not magically going to stop or even hinder the creation of bots or hacks. The publicity of these bannings tells enough to the programmers to know that their old methods no longer work, and thus they're all ready working on new methods. Hell, they were probably all ready working on new methods prior to the ban, incase any event like this invalidated their old methods.

Thats the point by not giving out their hand, the programmers are constantly on their heels because of the fact that aNet could know about new methods tested as well as the popular methods. Its about wasting their time and slowing them down, you'll never completely stop them. But this will slow them down. You stop murders by arresting people, who have generally done something (or been framed for it :-p). You then have to prove your innocence. P

cormac ap dunn · May 29, 2010, 07:26 AM // 07:26

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonehead

The provided boldness is, in all meanings of the term, stupid. You can't stop murders from happening by not providing evidence on how a killer was caught. Likewise, by not giving information out, you're not magically going to stop or even hinder the creation of bots or hacks. The publicity of these bannings tells enough to the programmers to know that their old methods no longer work, and thus they're all ready working on new methods. Hell, they were probably all ready working on new methods prior to the ban, incase any event like this invalidated their old methods.

to quote myself (i know, tacky right?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn

I would think the only ones interested in which bots got people banned are a) botters looking to see which bots to avoid b) bot makers looking to see what to avoid making in the future c) trolls trying to encourage said botters and bot makers because they enjoy havoc and lack the simple ability to play due to boredom, stress, or a generally awful personal life...

milan · May 29, 2010, 07:45 AM // 07:45

I'm the king of Sweden, I'm also member of parliament for SW Wiltshire and no, I did not have sex with that woman....

Just because I post it on a forum does that really mean it's true?

Banned for textmod, never used a 3rd party program blah blah blah, seriously just how stupid do you think we are and just what do you think you're gong to gain by saying it?

I was born at night but not last night.

Bonehead · May 29, 2010, 08:05 AM // 08:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn

to quote myself (i know, tacky right?)

It's amazing how you group me with (any of) three groups to which I don't belong. I neither botted nor was I banned. Hell, after the January 7th update, I stopped running KSMod because I felt that injecting the .dll would cause more harm than do good. I'm not going to defend my motives for my post, just because you'll easily and tackily dismiss them.

This is on top of the fact that you are completely ignoring my argument and going after me instead. Good try, sir, your fallacy didn't hold.

cormac ap dunn · May 29, 2010, 08:31 AM // 08:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonehead

It's amazing how you group me with (any of) three groups to which I don't belong. I neither botted nor was I banned. Hell, after the January 7th update, I stopped running KSMod because I felt that injecting the .dll would cause more harm than do good. I'm not going to defend my motives for my post, just because you'll easily and tackily dismiss them.

This is on top of the fact that you are completely ignoring my argument and going after me instead. Good try, sir, your fallacy didn't hold.

to clarify, that statement never originally involved you, was not set as an attack, and clearly never lumped you into any of those groups, i simply restated that I felt that was the status quo, now, as to your attack on the intelligence of the statements YOU decided to bold...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonehead

You can't stop murders from happening by not providing evidence on how a killer was caught. Likewise, by not giving information out, you're not magically going to stop or even hinder the creation of bots or hacks.

I believe that you are intelligent enough to get that the specific bots used would not HELP anyone in a positive way in the community by being revealed. This is no trial, Anet is both judge and jury and Dhuum was the executioner. the details of the bans are not for the community to know at this time by their choice, we can huff and puff and attack and point as many fingers as we like, but in the end, they can do as they please with the information. people are getting paranoid that every statement on these threads is an attack. and topics like this quickly degenerate into who can troll in the grandest way. calling one individual stupid, or an idea, is just base and low. Assume only that Anet has their reasons, assume innocent people will be set right, and assume that alot of negative people were taken out of the game.

Bonehead · May 29, 2010, 08:53 AM // 08:53

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feathermoore Rep

Thats the point by not giving out their hand, the programmers are constantly on their heels because of the fact that aNet could know about new methods tested as well as the popular methods. Its about wasting their time and slowing them down, you'll never completely stop them. But this will slow them down. You stop murders by arresting people, who have generally done something (or been framed for it :-p). You then have to prove your innocence. P

As much as I would like to entertain a proper argument right now (I can't formulate it), I will say this: The programmers should be on their heels regardless of whether they've been using a method they released 5 months ago or just last night. Methods become out-dated with time. That's a simple fact.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn

I believe that you are intelligent enough to get that the specific bots used would not HELP anyone in a positive way in the community by being revealed. This is no trial, Anet is both judge and jury and Dhuum was the executioner. the details of the bans are not for the community to know at this time by their choice, we can huff and puff and attack and point as many fingers as we like, but in the end, they can do as they please with the information.

To clarify: I would like to know how they sniffed out people who botted. On the surface, it just looks like they checked for injected .dlls. All I want is a confirmation or denial of that. And none of that "We can neither confirm nor deny that we used that method" rubbish.

ArenaNet is entitled to do mostly whatever they want. The fact that they can do things doesn't bother me. I'd like to know how they did it, and in some cases why they did it. I ask this about anyone or anything I see, in which I see it do something of which I am not familiar. Banning bots is very familiar to me, as well as the justification. What I want to know is how.

Whether programmers analyze enough of what happened and make several well-educated guesses, or the method of detecting illegal third-party modifications is published in a textbook about networking, at some point that knowledge will become available.

shoyon456 · May 29, 2010, 08:57 AM // 08:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonehead

To clarify: I would like to know how they sniffed out people who botted. On the surface, it just looks like they checked for injected .dlls. All I want is a confirmation or denial of that. And none of that "We can neither confirm nor deny that we used that method" rubbish.

The minute good it could have by shutting some people up and satisfying your curiousity is outweighed by the good that has been done and can continue to be done by bots being banned and unsure of how to evade Anet's methods.

This is why these automated responses are understandable to me. You either botted, match manipulated, or whatever. As long as they classify it, thats all that needs to be said by Anet.

EDIT: If he has a resign macro, it leads me to believe he's engaged in sort of PvP match manipulation.

aspi · May 29, 2010, 08:58 AM // 08:58

Maybe you used your /resign macro a bit too much?

cormac ap dunn · May 29, 2010, 09:01 AM // 09:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonehead

To clarify: I would like to know how they sniffed out people who botted. On the surface, it just looks like they checked for injected .dlls. All I want is a confirmation or denial of that. And none of that "We can neither confirm nor deny that we used that method" rubbish.

ArenaNet is entitled to do mostly whatever they want. The fact that they can do things doesn't bother me. I'd like to know how they did it, and in some cases why they did it. I ask this about anyone or anything I see, in which I see it do something of which I am not familiar. Banning bots is very familiar to me, as well as the justification. What I want to know is how.

Whether programmers analyze enough of what happened and make several well-educated guesses, or the method of detecting illegal third-party modifications is published in a textbook about networking, at some point that knowledge will become available.

i understand the desire to tear into a topic of interest, i truly do, but to make these things public at this time feels like a mistake to me, no matter if the programmers making bots have already found a solution, why let them pin down their mistakes, why give them full disclosure of ANY fact regarding the nefarious bots they introduce? though it may satisfy curiosity in you, it may satisfy the wallet of a bot maker as well.

Iuris · May 29, 2010, 09:04 AM // 09:04

In my work, I face situations similar (not computing but costumer related) situations as Ante is now.

3700 accounts banned mean that there will be at least hundreds of complaint E-mails coming into the company. Support will have a few people to process them all. Typing a custom answer to each would consume more time than is realistically to be expected. So, someone good at writing will write a well composed general answer that addresses the majority of the questions/accusations of the time and this message will be sent out.

However, this does NOT mean that the initial mail is ignored. It is read, after all, legitimate support mails will be coming in all the time.

However, remember: Anet did not go and ban people on weak cases. They have the data, they know WHY people got banned. They've already got enough data to make them sure a ban was warranted.

In this case, Anet is the only one deciding the issue - so they don't have to account for themselves. They don't have to perform a whole trial. The trial would be in case someone actually went and did what the law expects would be done: he'd go and file a law suit. HERE, the court would demand all the EULAs, would demand all the data Anet has on the incident, and the whole world would know. But that would be a bit more serious. It'd take some more effort than writing a short Email about how innocent one is.

Zarion Silverarrow · May 29, 2010, 03:33 PM // 15:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by majoho

At some point I was a little sympathetic to you but seriously stop going on and on with it.

And yes Anet is NOT a democracy they are both the judge and the jury, that's how these kinds of things are.

Blame YOURSELF for botting even if it was only just for one minute, it's not Anets fault you "wasted" $150 - and I bet you probably had your $150's worth of fun already.

Seriously, just stop.

EDIT: and for OP, you used a keyboard macro, that's considered botting.

When did I blame anyone else?

and same thing,it doesn't matter here if I botted or not,if I even used textmod. What matters is that the message is automated (and that is not a biggie),but the message tells you to "f*ck off,never message again"

I understand they are flooded,but thats not a good support message nonetheless.

Femmefatal · May 29, 2010, 05:19 PM // 17:19

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bonehead
To clarify: I would like to know how they sniffed out people who botted. On the surface, it just looks like they checked for injected .dlls. All I want is a confirmation or denial of that. And none of that "We can neither confirm nor deny that we used that method" rubbish.

ArenaNet is entitled to do mostly whatever they want. The fact that they can do things doesn't bother me. I'd like to know how they did it, and in some cases why they did it. I ask this about anyone or anything I see, in which I see it do something of which I am not familiar. Banning bots is very familiar to me, as well as the justification. What I want to know is how.

Whether programmers analyze enough of what happened and make several well-educated guesses, or the method of detecting illegal third-party modifications is published in a textbook about networking, at some point that knowledge will become available.

In a nutshell it's none of your business. Read the EULA you agreed to. They don't have to tell you anything. They can do anything at their whim not yours. You aren't entitled to anything but a License to play this game. That is all nothing more. You are neither a spokesperson for the people or of any legal authority to them. They can ignore you like flies on refuse.