open All Channels
seplocked Features and Ideas Discussion
blankseplocked easy to implement, high sec anti bot mechanic, with player rewards.
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Author Topic

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.21 19:02:00 - [1]
 

Edited by: betoli on 21/02/2011 22:10:33
Edited by: betoli on 21/02/2011 20:50:51
Edited by: betoli on 21/02/2011 19:03:48
I posted this in the other thread but its contrary to the OP's suggestion (which is good but lots of work). So I'm reposting it standalone for a bit more visability.

Subtitle: how to create a mechanic that allows players to deal with bots, which are frequently in npc corps in high sec, and prima facie invulnerable without manual intervention by CCP and GMs.

Originally by: betoli

Why not use a method that rewards players to catch bots. This would lead to a new high sec mini profession.

- A player who suspects a bot, can target the ship and right-click "report criminal". This costs a fee to concord, and you need to be within 5000m. If there is a ship in the system that can legally kill the target ship, the reporting is ignored.

- The target ship now receives a blinky item on the neocon, an audible warning, and a 'suspect' timer starts. The pilot can cancel the timer by opening the neocon panel and responding to a bot-proof challenge (the old hard to read characters or audio that message boards use). If he does this he can't be reported as a suspect for another 2 hours (or longer if found to be prone to abuse).

- if the target ship does not respond to the challenge, and does not aggress or is agressed (ie he's not engaged in PVP) for a fixed period (say 1 minute), then concord dispatch a ship.

- The concord ship will not neut, nor open fire, but will scram, and web. It will also protect the ship with uber RR.

- if the ship agresses anyone or does anything to cause themselves to be killable by another player (who doesn't also have a suspect timer) concord fly off.... unless its illegal, in which case they just blow them up. If the pilot responds to the challenge concord fly off.

The ship is now able to keep mining, but unable to fly away.

- If after a reasonable amount of time (30 minutes?) and the ship has not responded to the challenge, or done anything to indicate it has a human like entity controlling it. Concord forcibly eject the pod, and tow the craft to the nearest npc station, where it is impounded for a further 30 minutes (in order to allow an appeal) and then given as reward to the reporting player complete with ore.

- Optional: The pod remains scrammed in space until its owner gets in touch with CCP and makes approapriate grovelling noises.

- Optional: A ship with active autopilot can't be reported to protect slow afk ships from griefing.

Advantages: No ccp manual intervention, new way of making isk for humans, doesn't stuff up alt accounts mining in the background, not mining specific, could work for ratters and missioning bots with a bit of thought.

Disadvantages: You have to be very careful about any loopholes that would allow a ship to be granted immunity by concord, when there are others about who would like to legally kill it. Only really works in highsec because of the concord involvement.




Doctor Carbonatite
Corporation for Public Broadcasting
Posted - 2011.02.21 19:40:00 - [2]
 

This would be a great way to grief afk autopilots.

Jerid Verges
Gallente
The Scope
Posted - 2011.02.21 19:48:00 - [3]
 

Captchas are dumb, many bots are capable of answering them. Most miners afk for 3/6 mins due to strip cycle and cargo hold.

Hirana Yoshida
Behavioral Affront
Posted - 2011.02.21 19:49:00 - [4]
 

Edited by: Hirana Yoshida on 21/02/2011 19:53:43
Originally by: Doctor Carbonatite
This would be a great way to grief anyone, any time.

Fixed it for you.

People are moronic idiots in general and I wouldn't trust the player-base, mature as it may be comparatively, to engage in anything but despicable fashion was such a thing implemented.

It would be spammed at every gate and every station cluster-wide. Oly thing that prevents it is to make rather high (as in several million), but that kills the idea itself ....

All we need is a reporting tool like that we we have for ISK spammers. It proved extremely effective and thanks to threat of perma-ban for abuse, never saw the "normal" human behaviour manifest.
That and making alliances/corps accountable for large scale botting operations.

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.02.21 19:51:00 - [5]
 

Would be an even better way to get advantage during ganks. Also, you would have to include a provision for false reports.. such as Concorddokken for someone falsely reporting two people consecutively.

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.21 20:49:00 - [6]
 

Edited by: betoli on 21/02/2011 20:58:20
Originally by: Doctor Carbonatite
This would be a great way to grief afk haulers.


Depending on whether you see that as a good thing or a bad thing (I wasn't sure!), its easily bypassed

a) either disabling the mechanism if AP is enabled

or

b) making sure the 1 minute before concord arrive is enough for a slow ship to travel the 12.5km between arrival at the gate and jump. So at 50m/s it needs to be 250 seconds.

or

c) concord don't stop gate jumping in which the 30 minutes is plenty.

I'd prefer a) as its pretty obvious if someone is on AP anyway, and 250s is long enough to cycle miners and warp off (though it would nerf mining ammount/hour a bit).

Originally by: Hirana Yoshida

People are moronic idiots in general and I wouldn't trust the player-base, mature as it may be comparatively, to engage in anything but despicable fashion was such a thing implemented.



Neither would I - but thats why I suggested a 2 hour interval between reporting. That could be increased - even to 24 hours at which point a player would only have to type in the code once a day - hardly a big deal (they can always get a corp mate to report them to deactivate it).

Quote:

It would be spammed at every gate and every station cluster-wide. Oly thing that prevents it is to make rather high (as in several million), but that kills the idea itself ....



Yes, it would - certainly open to more anti abuse mechanisms though but I think the timer is enough - even at 2 hours, personally.

Quote:

All we need is a reporting tool like that we we have for ISK spammers. It proved extremely effective and thanks to threat of perma-ban for abuse, never saw the "normal" human behaviour manifest.



It takes human effort - I'd rather CCP were programming features than hassling legitimate AFK miners. If they had the resource to do this I am sure they would already. ISK is diffent - they can see whether someone did it immediately, detecting a bot is hard. If they get it wrong they are in petition nightmare land...



That and making alliances/corps accountable for large scale botting operations.


npc corps....

editing the OP to reflect the comments

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.21 20:56:00 - [7]
 

Originally by: Feligast
Would be an even better way to get advantage during ganks. Also, you would have to include a provision for false reports.. such as Concorddokken for someone falsely reporting two people consecutively.


false reports just result in concord flying off.

not sure how you think gankers gain advantage - they can't interact with a player ship without concord dropping protection. So there isn't an advantage for a ganker or rr'er to abuse the mechanism - at least thats the intent - as I said it needs to be loophole free in that regard, so please shout with specific mechanisms that it could be used for PVP abuse.

Feligast
Minmatar
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
Posted - 2011.02.21 21:28:00 - [8]
 

Originally by: betoli
Originally by: Feligast
Would be an even better way to get advantage during ganks. Also, you would have to include a provision for false reports.. such as Concorddokken for someone falsely reporting two people consecutively.


false reports just result in concord flying off.

not sure how you think gankers gain advantage - they can't interact with a player ship without concord dropping protection. So there isn't an advantage for a ganker or rr'er to abuse the mechanism - at least thats the intent - as I said it needs to be loophole free in that regard, so please shout with specific mechanisms that it could be used for PVP abuse.


PvP requires some very fast decisions to be made, and clicks. HAving the ability to distract your opponent by reporting them as a botter, the same way you can distract by opening a conversation with them, gives an advantage. Distraction can be a very big thing.

Tippia
Caldari
Sunshine and Lollipops
Posted - 2011.02.21 21:55:00 - [9]
 

No. Capchas are already easy to break for bots especially if there's money to be had in doing so and only serve to thoroughly annoy humans.

Being able to annoy people on demand is a horrid idea.

betoli
Gallente
Posted - 2011.02.21 22:22:00 - [10]
 

Edited by: betoli on 21/02/2011 22:23:06
Originally by: Feligast

PvP requires some very fast decisions to be made, and clicks. HAving the ability to distract your opponent by reporting them as a botter, the same way you can distract by opening a conversation with them, gives an advantage. Distraction can be a very big thing.


Remember this is high sec only. But point taken, in high sec, there are 2 PVP situations - legal and illegal. For the illegal, this becomes another aspect in suicide ganking - tbh I'm not sure it matters if something flashes in your neocon - learn to focus ;-). For legal, I think its reasonable that the mechanism is disabled if someone in-system can kill you (or someone who jumps into the system it should be cancelled automatically).

That could lead to bot circumvention strategies, but they would have to say, can-steal every now and again to maintain killable status. That in turn leads humans to try to trip them up by can flipping them.

Are captchas tou annoying/too crap? I don't know - I guess its a continually evolving war, I certainly don't *like* them, but I wouldn't be ****ed off by a 2 hourly challenge if it solved the problem. But if there is no semi-automatic way of determining the humanness of a player, then I also suspect all anti-bot methods will fail....

oh we are allowed to say "crap" :-D


TharOkha
Posted - 2011.02.22 12:48:00 - [11]
 

Bots are now so advanced that they can macro belt ratting so capcha wouldnt be a problem for them. The only and one solution so far are hulkageddons.

Lork Niffle
Gallente
External Hard Drive
Posted - 2011.02.22 13:04:00 - [12]
 

Originally by: betoli


Are captchas tou annoying/too crap? I don't know - I guess its a continually evolving war, I certainly don't *like* them, but I wouldn't be ****ed off by a 2 hourly challenge if it solved the problem. But if there is no semi-automatic way of determining the humanness of a player, then I also suspect all anti-bot methods will fail....





Captchas are broken, and I'm sure just because you aren't annoyed by a 2 hour test, no one else won't be. I certainly will.

The only solution is one that doesn't detrimentally affect legitimate players in ANY way. Your idea does affect us.

Barbara Nichole
Cryogenic Consultancy
Black Sun Alliance
Posted - 2011.02.22 13:20:00 - [13]
 

My only concern is that mining is boring.. I can't count the times I've fallen asleep at the wheel and woke up with drool on the keyboard. The last thing I need is some competitor petitioning me to death while I dream of sugar plum fairies.





 

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only