Curse

Chthon · Oct 25, 2008, 09:43 PM // 21:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arduinna

People, calm down.

-Gaile has said it's okay to use G15 macro's.

-Players used these macro's to facilitate HFFF

-Players got banned because of their bot-like behaviour

-Anet now rolls back the bans because those banned people pointed out it was okay to use G15 macro's, according to Gaile.

-To avoid any more confusion, Anet takes a clear stance on botting: using a bot, or any other form of automated input (even G15's), from now on, will got you permabanned.

There really isn't anything more to this issue.

Quoted for correctness.

I don't have any problem with a-net's actions here.

Nessar · Oct 25, 2008, 10:42 PM // 22:42

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arduinna

People, calm down.

-Gaile has said it's okay to use G15 macro's.

-Players used these macro's to facilitate HFFF

-Players got banned because of their bot-like behaviour

-Anet now rolls back the bans because those banned people pointed out it was okay to use G15 macro's, according to Gaile.

-To avoid any more confusion, Anet takes a clear stance on botting: using a bot, or any other form of automated input (even G15's), from now on, will got you permabanned.

There really isn't anything more to this issue.

Pretty much sums it up. At least someone read through the first post

XiaoTheBlade · Oct 25, 2008, 11:24 PM // 23:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by fgarvin

Whatever, dude. Unless ANet supplies its players with a list of these super naughty words, the player can not reasonably be expected to be able to follow UA. Are there different lists/rules depending a on server's region?

"Fag" is bad, right? Is it bad on a Euro server? Would I even know if a Chinese/Korean/Japanese/Brazilian/Thai/Polish player used a bad word? I've played in the German districts, and I'll be damned if I know if anyone used a bad word or went by an offensive name.

ANet, give us the lists, or don't enforce the rules.

And for all of you who spent less than a second thinking about the above statement and came up with the brilliant idea that doing that would allow people to walk the fine line between using good and bad words/names, think longer....

On topic: Who cares about bots...they're not hurting other players in any way. With regards to HFFF, one would have to bot 24/7 on several accounts for a very long period of time to have even the smallest impact on the GW economy.

The boss 'Dupek the Mighty' springs to mind...

Jenn · Oct 25, 2008, 11:50 PM // 23:50

I think it's a good one-time call to clear up issues with macro-ing HFFF. That being said, most players should know what constitutes botting; if you don't do the work, you are probably botting.

Riot Narita · Oct 25, 2008, 11:55 PM // 23:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessar

Pretty much sums it up. At least someone read through the first post

People keep QFT-ing that post as if it is something magic and profound.

Why? I see nothing in the OP that says the people in question were using G15 macros or any other sort of macro. It says they were using bots. That's BOTS not macros.

But they decided it was OK this time because the lazy cheaters... I mean the "poor dears" may have "felt they had no other choice". In fact, they did have an alternative choice: Do it the hard way. It's not impossible, and plenty of people have done it.

Daenara · Oct 26, 2008, 12:48 AM // 00:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

People keep QFT-ing that post as if it is something magic and profound.

Why? I see nothing in the OP that says the people in question were using G15 macros or any other sort of macro. It says they were using bots. That's BOTS not macros.

But they decided it was OK this time because the lazy cheaters... I mean the "poor dears" may have "felt they had no other choice". In fact, they did have an alternative choice: Do it the hard way. It's not impossible, and plenty of people have done it.

QFT. At least someone has read the first post.

Seriously, if they are excusing the macro users, they should refer to them as macro users. Not bots. That is confusing the issue.

Lucky Shot Pat · Oct 26, 2008, 12:59 AM // 00:59

Is ANET at least re setting the Kurz and Luxon titles on these accounts and deleting the money? At least that would make it somewhat fair to the people who actually worked for the titles that these guys just used bots for.

TurinPT · Oct 26, 2008, 01:01 AM // 01:01

People remember how international Droks was a while back? take a look at it now.

GW players have no reason to complain about botters, anet is doing its job.

BuD · Oct 26, 2008, 01:12 AM // 01:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lucky Shot Pat

Is ANET at least re setting the Kurz and Luxon titles on these accounts and deleting the money? At least that would make it somewhat fair to the people who actually worked for the titles that these guys just used bots for.

Id like to know this too, at least this would somewhat rectify the situation...somewhat

Targren · Oct 26, 2008, 01:48 AM // 01:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

Why? I see nothing in the OP that says the people in question were using G15 macros or any other sort of macro. It says they were using bots. That's BOTS not macros.

Quoted for emphasis. Can we get some confirmation on the whole G15/N52s being not-allowed anymore?

Molock · Oct 26, 2008, 02:48 AM // 02:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by MirkoTeran

That will be a nice f*** you to all the players earning the titles before the update. Way to go.

I know a few Saviors and it really doesn't look like they care tbh..

About the G15 thing.. of course those people shouldn't be banned. Actual botters however should be perma-banned however.

Robbert Monga · Oct 26, 2008, 03:04 AM // 03:04

Quote:

Originally Posted by Abnaxus

This is called Slippery Slope:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slippery_slope

Besided the fallacy of your answer, we have two opposite approaches.

no, I'm sorry, you the one who twisted my argument around and then argued against it as if I am idiot and need help figuring out what "socialist" is. My point is dead simple.

Quote:

You think that achieving something is "earn" something.

I don't think I earn something from a videogame.
I just enjoy and try to "complete" the videogame.
That's why I go for titles, because for me it's just completing things in game.

I quiet honestly cannot be bothered to care what difference you put into earn and achieve.
I have put some effort into this game. I got my cute little trophy for it, and I'd like to keep it tyvm.
Making that trophy into junk that absolutely everybody have, and that is worth fraction of what it was when I got it, does not jive well with my enjoyment of this game.
You can take defensive stance or accuse me of having no life all you want, that doesn't change my point a tiny bit.

Shadowmoon · Oct 26, 2008, 04:28 AM // 04:28

Good move on Anet part IMO. Gotten most of my r12 kurzick b4 the HFF, the good old sin runner days. But I still talked to alot of people who went on this title quest, so i know the short cut that were made. I remember that responce from the GM when the macro function asked if it would count as botting. Basically it said it was ok as long as it required human input. Because of this, it justified auto flaging scripts. Basically this was a script that once called for, would auto matically flag heros to the quest location, while firing there skills. Because this required human input to start the script every minute, alot of people thought it was OK by that GM standards. This was probably the "botting" people were banned for. I can understand this misunderstanding. 2 weeks is a good hard stance while at the same time saying we understand.
Personally i don't see this as a bot, if your going to do the same repeative task, who wouldn't naturely create a single command that reduced it down. This is like my weapon swap macro that i used when i BB sin, just much longer. It become a bot is when it auto zones, auto flag, auto take reward, then auto dumps faction, ie when it requires no human input at all, and become completely automated.
Basically now Anet has clearified that those types of scripts are not acceptable now, which is ironic, because it right b4 the update which makes doin those task not worth it.

Lycan Nibbler · Oct 26, 2008, 04:39 AM // 04:39

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shadowmoon

Basically now Anet has clearified that those types of scripts are not acceptable now, which is ironic, because it right b4 the update which makes doin those task not worth it.

WHERE is this clarification people in this thread keep speaking of?? ALL I see is Regina saying that Bots are against the EULA (well duh - werent they always).

Nowhere do they say what type of bots were being used that they are "letting off on a case by case basis" or any definition of what is a bot - without this clarification update, the previous official anet announcement on G15s etc stands surely?

The fact that anet are using this "case by case" basis does nothing to clear the muddy water here I am afraid unless we started a database of what people were doing that were permabanned and what ones were doing that got changed to 2 week ban.

ALF71BE · Oct 26, 2008, 04:51 AM // 04:51

I don't agree with shortening the bans to two weeks.

If they bot then please ban them forever. It will also benefit ANet's pockets since addicted people will buy more accounts.

Nobody "needs" to bot any title, because titles aren't needed at all. No matter how big the grind is. Not only that, but most max titles have very few advantages over one close to being max, which can require around 40% less grind. If they do "like" the "prestige" status they come with, then they'll work for them. Perhaps they won't max them but will have a high tier in it. If they don't like that, then let them QQ and ban their botting accounts.

If you can't stand the grind, then just don't go for it.

Ineeda Felcher · Oct 26, 2008, 06:55 AM // 06:55

Thank you Regina, it is good news to know Anet is working on a solution and is forgiving when people sometimes make mistakes.

To the others that are not. Next time, in real life, please don't take a second chance if one is ever offered and never ask for forgiveness.

Jenn · Oct 26, 2008, 07:28 AM // 07:28

Quote:

Originally Posted by Miss Drops Az

WHERE is this clarification people in this thread keep speaking of?? ALL I see is Regina saying that Bots are against the EULA (well duh - werent they always).

It was something that Gaile Grey said to try and clear up confusion awhile back, and I remember exactly what demona was talking about; botting could be described as something like, "an afk process." So anything fully automated would be out of the question, which I guess led people to believe that macroing is okay, because you need to press a couple buttons to activate a script, and you have to be there to do that once a minute or so, plus zone, etc.

I can't recall perfectly, but I think it's a thread that Gaile Grey started on Guru (might be on the wiki, too?).

Quote:

The fact that anet are using this "case by case" basis does nothing to clear the muddy water here I am afraid unless we started a database of what people were doing that were permabanned and what ones were doing that got changed to 2 week ban.

I agree that there have been a lot of muddy waters dealing with these incidents, mostly because the "clarification" players received a while back was not clear enough.

I personally don't care how people choose to play their game (i.e. bots or not), but I think in the interest of preserving standards, any 3-rd party (yes, that includes keyboards) means of simplifying gameplay should be illegal, and players do it at their own risk. I don't know if I support permanent bans, but even 30 day bans... I could work with that

.

Riot Narita · Oct 26, 2008, 07:58 AM // 07:58

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ineeda Felcher

Thank you Regina, it is good news to know Anet is working on a solution and is forgiving when people sometimes make mistakes.

To the others that are not. Next time, in real life, please don't take a second chance if one is ever offered and never ask for forgiveness.

"Forgiveness" might be an option if something is a genuine "mistake"

But running a bot is no innocent "mistake". It is a deliberate act, the perpetrator KNOWS it's wrong, and knows the possible consequences. But they do it anyway. This does not deserve "forgiveness", it deserves a permanent ban: Exactly as advertised.

False Healer · Oct 26, 2008, 08:16 AM // 08:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hissy

"Forgiveness" might be an option if something is a genuine "mistake"

But running a bot is no innocent "mistake". It is a deliberate act, the perpetrator KNOWS it's wrong, and knows the possible consequences. But they do it anyway. This does not deserve "forgiveness", it deserves a permanent ban: Exactly as advertised.

Only little children ever make "innocent mistakes" but as adults we know better and yet we still make mistakes none the less, right.

Regina said only a "small number of players were banned" well there is a heck lot more bots than that HFFFing and they were reversing some of them "case by case" so Anet knows something and well if they didn't tell us then it is none of our damn business.

Laylat · Oct 26, 2008, 10:11 AM // 10:11

I title hunt for completness. I'm glad to hear that other, better options will be available. Some of the posts where people flip out are very funny indeed. You guys need to chill.