Curse

AtomicMew · Apr 26, 2010, 03:18 AM // 03:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karate Jesus

a well programmed AHK bot can do compared to the Mo/W's.

Just saw this but LOl "AHK" and "advanced."

Regulus X · Apr 26, 2010, 08:09 AM // 08:09

A bigger problem than identifying bots:

ACTUALLY REPORTING THEM.

Countless are the players I've seen in RA that've turned a blind eye and LOLOLOL'd while they hacked & slashed through matches while simultaneously feeding a known bot. I've reported countless SF ele bots and asked the rest to follow suit (back when they were around by the dozens), and yet they would always say, "lolwut?", "how do you know?", "Who's botting?" (after having flooded team chat with the name of the botter) *ignores alert and continues hacking & slashing*, etc... etc...

...so it's the player's fault more than anyone else that botters still around and plaguing RA, and other areas.

Sankt Hallvard · Apr 26, 2010, 09:08 AM // 09:08

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regulus X

A bigger problem than identifying bots:

ACTUALLY REPORTING THEM.

You are under the false impression that /report is there for any other reason than to give the QQing kids a tool to feel they have control so they won't pop up on anet's site filing complaints about their egos being hurt in pvp.

I get reported a lot, yet I never bot or leech. And I never report anyone myself, that only ends up with dishonorable hex for me. Besides the idea of people reporting each other is so far from a civil society it disgusts me. Nazi-germany is SO 1940.

Elephantaliste · Apr 26, 2010, 10:22 AM // 10:22

If you consider botting acceptable, never reporting them makes sense... but not everyone agree on that.

That doesn't mean they are kids, fascist, racist or whatever...

Paradise Lost · Apr 26, 2010, 10:47 AM // 10:47

There was a botting ranger in our team in RA just now. He rupted the enemy warriors dev hammer 3 times in a row, causing the warrior to obviously call out that he was using a bot and that he would send a screenshot to Anet. He never reported the bot ingame, as there wasn't enough time before the end of the match i assume.

I assume if someone gets reported for botting, it doesn't show up in the chat like being reported for leeching does?

Ive very rarely ever seen anyone get banned at all, there are loads of times when screenshots have been taken, in gvg of bots, and posted on forums especially QQ. Even the poster states they have sent the screenshot to Anet. But the botter never gets banned and it still botting the next week.

So how effective is actually reporting them in the first place i wonder? Both ingame report, and screenshot sending?? Not very good at all i think. Whats your views?

RiceCream · Apr 26, 2010, 05:28 PM // 17:28

I think the interrupt bots are more of an issue than this monk bot as they negatively affect overall gameplay. the only time i've complained about having a monk on my RA team is when i am a monk, plus the interrupt bot is used in ha, gvg and ra.

Animate · Apr 27, 2010, 08:48 AM // 08:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jarge

Rupt bots are easy to fake-out.

No they are impossible to fake-out. Try to fake-out a monster's interrupts in PvE and you will see why. I can easily tell you are just saying this without having ever played against an interrupt bot and tried faking him out yourself. I've had the pleasure a couple of times lately in RA and it's like playing against a monster in PvE....

Increasing bots appearing in an online game has always been one of the first sure signs of the game dying for good.

drunknzelda · Apr 27, 2010, 11:29 AM // 11:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by Animate

Increasing bots appearing in an online game has always been one of the first sure signs of the game dying for good.

How about the trollfarm bots outside of Droknar during the first months of GW? I believe there were monk bots for UW aswell, from before the Prot Bond nerf.
Of course, this is several years ago so I'm not entirely sure of anything.

lishi · Apr 27, 2010, 11:38 AM // 11:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by drunknzelda

How about the trollfarm bots outside of Droknar during the first months of GW? I believe there were monk bots for UW aswell, from before the Prot Bond nerf.
Of course, this is several years ago so I'm not entirely sure of anything.

To be fair, everyone know those bots where from gold selling company some of the could be own by some "normal player" but that was a minority.
Normal player where staying away from the for fear of bans, now you see even people running on their main account bots for title.

Just watching the number of chestrunner bot in boreal station make me want stop to go for the title (or bot myself)

Kopa The Demon King · Apr 27, 2010, 11:48 AM // 11:48

I say we all play a rousing game called BOT OR NOT and just report the guys ourselves, its about all thatll be done about it anyways. You can count it as botting and you cvan count it as leeching seeing as the player isnt doing anything, just report for both, and be done with it.

Martin Alvito · Apr 27, 2010, 01:09 PM // 13:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

While mass ban will not exactly resolve the situation they are needed, sure you will need something other then just bans to fix the problem. Like in real life you will need both the carrot(incentive to honest citizen) and the stick(prison) the same you will need on the virtual world.

This argument does not imply that the societal costs from enforcing the law are greater than the societal gains from enforcing the law for any given law.

Enforcing an anti-bot regime has large opportunity costs. It requires personnel that could be doing other productive things. Redesign, however, carries much smaller opportunity costs relative to the prospective benefits. You just need a programmer to implement a specific fix once. The enforcement regime requires constant attention.

This is another major reason why attacking the problem from the incentive side is much more effective. Not only do you institute a permanent solution, but the labor costs of that solution are lower.

Unfortunately, it's obvious that Marketing runs ANet, and as a result many sensible solutions never make it onto the table because Marketing has some bad preconceptions about what people actually want.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephantaliste

If you consider botting acceptable, never reporting them makes sense... but not everyone agree on that.

Reporting the bots is never individually rational, as long as there are other suckers out there that report the bots. Using /report takes away my hourly ragequit. That's costly. It's simply the collective action problem at work.

The /report system has always been a terrible idea that clearly was instituted by someone that never took a basic course in economics. The data that you will get from a voluntary reporting system like that is going to stink for a variety of reasons.

lishi · Apr 27, 2010, 02:04 PM // 14:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Alvito

This argument does not imply that the societal costs from enforcing the law are greater than the societal gains from enforcing the law for any given law.

Enforcing an anti-bot regime has large opportunity costs. It requires personnel that could be doing other productive things. Redesign, however, carries much smaller opportunity costs relative to the prospective benefits. You just need a programmer to implement a specific fix once. The enforcement regime requires constant attention.

But redesign won't be enough, no matter how you can redisign, a competent bot will be more efficient then a normal player.

For example you could say that the reward xxx will be only available to people who complete a mission. Clearly since anything can be h/h you could design a bot to help a h/h team to complete the mission. It won't be fast as a normal player, but since the bot dont sleep it eventually will surpass the real player.

Kattar · Apr 27, 2010, 03:11 PM // 15:11

DO NOT MENTION THE NAMES OF ANY BOTS.

How do you not get this by now? HOW?

Karate Jesus · Apr 27, 2010, 04:00 PM // 16:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kattar

DO NOT MENTION THE NAMES OF ANY BOTS.

How do you not get this by now? HOW?

are not the names of specific bots. They are methods/programs used to implement botting. If you type those names into a search, you wouldn't be able to easily find any specific GW bots.

Removing posts that have those names is asinine, considering that most GW players who would bot know them by now.

I could list a few sites that host the bots and how many downloads they've regularly had, but that would be inappropriate. Let's just say....it's a lot.

Kattar · Apr 27, 2010, 04:10 PM // 16:10

Quote:

If you type those names into a search, you wouldn't be able to easily find any specific GW bots.

My results indicate otherwise. That's all I care about. We will not allow the dissemination of any information that could lead to bots, directly or indirectly. That is the policy of this site and as such is not open to interpretation or contestation.

List nothing specifically. Nothing.

If you'd like to discuss this further, pm me. Otherwise, I see no need to address this again.

Nekodesu · Apr 27, 2010, 05:04 PM // 17:04

This isn't just in RA, this happened to me in JQ.

The monk would follow me around, as a henchman/hero would. It would heal me when I sacrificed health, it would heal my minions. It never pre anything but it was definitly a bot. Not many days since this happened and me and another person reported it.

Martin Alvito · Apr 27, 2010, 10:58 PM // 22:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by lishi

But redesign won't be enough, no matter how you can redisign, a competent bot will be more efficient then a normal player.

That just isn't true. GW rewards time > skill. In that regime, you are correct that bots win.

If you set up a regime that legitimately rewards skill > time (as the game was advertised, and to some extent originally was), then there is no reason to bot. The key point is that you cannot reward repetition of tasks. Any time you do that, there is an incentive to bot. If every goal is a one-off (with nested goals for doing the same task faster, for instance), then designing a bot isn't worth the time investment needed to design it.

It's harder to design a PvP regime that does not reward botting, because the game would have to be sufficiently strategic that flawless execution confers no advantage. That really isn't what the PvP crowd wants, at the end of the day.

BlackSephir · Apr 27, 2010, 11:36 PM // 23:36

The sad part is that a quick look at what these bots do tells me they're better monks than 90% of monks in RA.

Turbo Ginsu · Apr 28, 2010, 12:27 AM // 00:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by BlackSephir

The sad part is that a quick look at what these bots do tells me they're better monks than 90% of monks in RA.

So is my dead grandmother. And she's dead.

I for one am passionately anti-bot, have never used a bot in any game, ever, have had entire clans destroyed just by the accusation.

-However- Zahr's last few posts, just as an example, point out that not botting in a logical world, is, well, illogical. Regardless, I still won't bot, but it really does champ my ass to see that aNet don't give a redresign ass about it. That is hands down just SG.

Kattar · Apr 28, 2010, 02:45 PM // 14:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zahr Dalsk

Might want to delete the posts linking to the related website then ^ ^

Pretty sure I don't see any links in this thread. Haven't had any reports of them either.

So...