These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Missions & Complexes

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Regarding AFK Complex Farming

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Welfare Scrub
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#321 - 2012-08-09 22:04:20 UTC
CCP Sreegs wrote:

Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.


So to clarify this is OK for belt ratting but not ok for COSMOS?
Kyle Frost
Inagawa Kai
#322 - 2012-08-09 22:08:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Kyle Frost
Shinobi-san wrote:

I do not want any fear or bans (even while they're not for me) in paid game I play to relax.

This is not rage, you misunderstood.
I am perfectly calm.
Also I'm perfectly serious.

Dictating rules with fear and not game mechanics is the thing I'll not pay for - simply because I do not need that ****.



I call bullshit! As if this thread didn't have enough already... X

You look as serious as a chimp with a clown nose and a water pistol. Bear You are not gonna quit, you are gonna keep donating your $$ like a good little minion... although i suspect you are paying for your gametime with ISK.

No fear or bans in a paid game... You think because you pay for the game that allows you to prevent other people from playing? They are paying customers too, aren't they? Furthermore, if you honestly experienced FEAR after reading CCP's announcement, then your problems run deeper than game mechanics...

Last but not least - CCP does not use fear to dictate rules. Compared to other companies, CCP are a bunch of kind-hearted softies. I think icelanders don't know how to be scary. I mean, look what happens when they try to act tough, or even joke and pose as tough. Read my earlier posts - CCP lifts bans for cooperation and good behavior... what kind of fear tactic is that?! Shocked

Let the gun do the talking!
Suqq Madiq
#323 - 2012-08-09 22:13:53 UTC
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Why are there 16 pages here?


Goons.
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#324 - 2012-08-09 22:14:09 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyke Orlieveit
Welfare Scrub wrote:
CCP Sreegs wrote:

Anyone who was performing the activity I'm referring to in the news item has most likely already been banned for doing so. Another item about the belt ratting bit is that in the scenario you paint the amount of income gained is basically nothing. In the scenario we're specifically discussing in this thread you are making a lot more money. By a factor of a whole bunch.


So to clarify this is OK for belt ratting but not ok for COSMOS?


Yep. You can belt-rat until you fall asleep at your keyboard and suffer a horribly embarrassing lossmail whilst you drool and type "fvdusvf fe bauvfbref/v rkea" in local as you roll on the keys when your sleep-deprived mind tried processing the alarm sounds..

But if you behave like a bot, expect scrutiny.

Suqq Madiq wrote:
Emperor Salazar wrote:
Why are there 16 pages here?


Goons.


I resent that remark!
Chainsaw Plankton
FaDoyToy
#325 - 2012-08-09 22:14:24 UTC
kyofu wrote:
Sreegs, I have a question. You stated logging in at downtime, placing drones, going afk until next DT is unacceptable. I get that. I get that this was posted to warn a specific subset of players who engage in the most extreme form of this behaviour and essentially farm PVE bounties 23/7 while afk, making a substantial amount of ISK.
;
What I am confused about is where the dividing line is. This exploit has no red flag: there is no third party software, no single complex it is being applied to, there is no one factor to say "because this was used, this behaviour is exploitative" so where is the dividing line between acceptable and unacceptable?

For example, what if I log on 5 hours after downtime and log off 2 hour before, but other than that my behaviour is identical and I am AFK, or seem afk? (so 16 hrs a day, 5 days a week)

What if I am engaging in the same behaviour except that I am not AFK, I assume an interface command every once in awhile will make me safe?

What if I am on an alt that is looting wrecks?

You said a shower and feeding yourself is fine, but what if I am going to a restaurant? What if something unexpected arises and I simply forget to log off all night? Must this happen several times in a row, or perhaps a certain number of times over the course of a week/month before I have to worry? I know I've had people show up at the door just as I get out of the shower and forgotten to log off...

Is there some trivial magic number where the detection algorithm rolls over and says yup, its been 15 hours, 37 minutes and 12 seconds, its DEFINITELY a bot, *FLAG*.

I don't necessarily need answers to these specific hypotheticals, as they are meant to be demonstrative. Just a general explanation of even the grey area when we should start to worry that the risk of being flagged exists, as the detection algorithm is obviously more sophisticated than if afk farming for > 22 hours a day for 7 days a week, *FLAG*

I worry this post will come off as though I am preparing for future rule lawyering, or a way to utilize this exploit without getting flagged, but what I am actually trying to do is distinguish where my legitimate behaviour may not be considered legitimate. A lot of the confusion and questions I read is because while you only give one specific example of this behaviour, there is a lot of grey area where this overlaps legitimate behaviour that is worrying. A half hour of this behaviour is allowable, 23 hours is not. What about 5 hours? 10? 15?

I am actually just finishing getting skills for an ishtar exactly for playing in this way. I play a lot at work, and as such I need to be able to afk very abruptly for unknowable lengths of times when customers come in or situations arise. I don't want to be otherwise occupied with a customer while my brain is staring at the clock thinking oh ****, how long to I have before I risk getting banned? Maybe I can distract them and get back to the computer and loot something...


so you go afk to take a shower, are you making 10-20mil/hour when in the shower? and going out and forgetting to log out are you still making 10-20mil/hour? If I'm in a drone boat and I go afk my income is going to stop in the next 20 mins because everything in the room will be dead

@ChainsawPlankto on twitter
Shinobi-san
Epsoo Consequence
#326 - 2012-08-09 22:22:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Shinobi-san
Tyke Orlieveit wrote:
The game mechanics in question, from what I understand from previous posts here, are buried in garbage that's the same grade of code as POS'. They're wary as **** about messing with that, for concern of what breaks
I kinda pay them for their devs to do their job, right?
And the fact that they do not do it right doesn't seem right for me.
Quote:
they have addressed it now.
How come? The mechanics are still in place, unaddressed. They just added more fear.
Quote:
"Fear" has been a well used tool for a long time, for the banning of players that exploit, and where the game mechanics can fail
I do not want to see this "tool" to be used where I try to relax.

Exploits should be dealt with careful design of protocols and software.
Proper mechanics can not fail - believe me, I know what I say. I am security expert and I live this stuff. I know how to design code that does exactly what is written in specification (and this can be proved mathematically). Also I know how to write good specs, and protocols.

Quote:
We are dealing with a playerbase that thrives on the edge
this is exactly what makes it interesting.
But now this edge will be lost, albeit partially, bit by bit.
This is not interesting, so I'll quit.
Quote:
In honesty it sounds like you're looking for a way out anyway
No, I was not motivated to quit before I saw this clear sign of chinese server.
I like freedom, a freedom to do what game allows me to.
Now they showed they're taking this freedom from us.
So I am not motivated to stay anymore.

All of this happened before, and will happen again.

Yes, I think in one or two years I'll ask a friend of mine in what direction CCP will drive this server. Depending of his answer I might check it out again.
But there is one problem.
He quit because of recent patches and the factual death of solo pvp.
He's in WoW now, but I think he'll be back, so he should know by then....

p.s. golden ammo? unholy rage? I do not know what you're talking about.
Shinobi-san
Epsoo Consequence
#327 - 2012-08-09 22:27:14 UTC  |  Edited by: Shinobi-san
Kyle Frost wrote:
You are not gonna quit, you are gonna keep donating your $$ like a good little minion..
oh, I see you're talking for yourself, buddy? :-D
Quote:
You think because you pay for the game that allows you to prevent other people from playing? They are paying customers too, aren't they?
Please re-read my pre-previous post carefully.
Quote:
what kind of fear tactic is that?! Shocked
business tactic? Or trying to keep good face with bad game? Or maybe the classics - the good and the bad cop?
Subrahmaya Chandrasekhar
#328 - 2012-08-09 22:32:19 UTC
Well, I hope this news post nightmare will be handled internally at CCP with appropriate administrative action, so that it does not occur again. As just another customer, I know I was T'd off and invested many hours of my time reading through all these posts. The story behind it, of course, was a truly amazing tour-de-force of ingenuity on the part of one man. O7
Wolodymyr
Breaking Ambitions
#329 - 2012-08-09 22:40:49 UTC
This hasty patch has the potential to bring an amazing argument up.

If this algorithm based purely on being AFK for long stretches of time then it will also flag AFK cloakers.

It will start with someone complaining in a petition or on the forums, "Hey my cyno alt was cloaked up in Fountain for the last 3 weeks straight and now my account got flagged for cheating!"

Then someone will point out, "Well if leaving the game on continually to get something done is an exploit what s the difference between AFK ratting, and AFK pvp."

And then the most ridiculous flame war on the Eve forums will begin!

I honestly think PoCo based sov is a good idea https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=1417544
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#330 - 2012-08-09 22:45:52 UTC
Shinobi-san wrote:
I kinda pay them for their devs to do their job, right?
And the fact they do not do it right doesn't seem right for me.


You counter this with the comment below, referring to you being a security expert.

Shinobi-san wrote:
How come? The mechanics are still in place, unaddressed. They just added more fear.


Shinobi-san wrote:
I do not want to see this "tool" to be used where I try to relax.


By both quotes above, You seem very focused on this "Fear" aspect within a digital environment. Please elaborate.

Shinobi-san wrote:
Exploits should be dealt with careful design of protocols and software.
Proper mechanics can not fail - believe me, I know what I say. I am security expert and I know this stuff. I know how to design code that does exactly what is written in specification (and this can be proved mathematically). Also I know how to write good specs and protocols :-)


I'm not even going to begin with pointing out what it wrong with what you have said.

I would be confident enough to say that no 'Security Expert' would ever make such a statement about a legacy bit of software, created in 2003, that has gone through many gradual and significant changes, and has been hosted on so many different bits of hardware, and that is being re-written and adapted to a more modern environment as time passes, that the code is bulletproof as it changes.

"I know how to design code that does exactly what is written in specification" - Specification means jack **** when exposed to the real world, beyond a good guide and a hope it holds. If it was that simple, that pure, we wouldn't have to worry about a lot of exploits that are out there, and I'm sure a lot of actual experts out there would call you on exactly the same thing. Theory is a wonderful thing.

In fact, I'm bored. I'm calling you out on this. Cite your code. Cite your specs / protocols you have drafted and written yourself, put them to the community's scruitiny.

[TBC]
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#331 - 2012-08-09 22:47:12 UTC

Shinobi-san wrote:
this is exactly what makes it interesting.
But now this edge will be lost, albeit partially, bit by bit.
This is not interesting, so I'll quit.


So you're moving on from boredom.


Shinobi-san wrote:
No, I was not motivated to quit before I saw this clear sign of chinese server.
I like freedom, a freedom to do what game allows me to.
Now they showed they're taking this freedom from us.
So I am not motivated to stay anymore.

All of this is happened before, and will happen again.

Yes, I think in one or two years I'll ask a friend of mine in what direction CCP will drive this server. Depending of his answer I might check it out again.
But there is one problem.
He quit because of recent patches and the factual death of solo pvp.
He's in WoW now, but I think he'll be back, so he should know....

p.s. golden ammo? unholy rage? I do not know what you're talking about.


So, it's racially motivated rather than anything else.

And if your freind has gone to WoW for an improvement in gameplay, I'm not certain EVE is for them.

If you don't recall the NEX store anger for "Pay to win", also known as the Golden ammo issue, and the Unholy Rage bannings, ( Linked here as I'm nice http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&bid=687 ), then I'm very surprised.

Unholy rage was used as a "fear" tool to worry botters for a long time, until they recently turned it into a more frequent event rather than a massive banhammer orgy.
Andy Landen
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#332 - 2012-08-09 22:55:40 UTC  |  Edited by: Andy Landen
If I am understanding all these posts, it seems like CCP is pointing at doing a particular COSMOS mission (which I don't know about) and any others (which they don't know about) which allow 24/7 AFK ISK through respawns (how much time between them anyway?). Farming this and similar missions actively 24/7 is okay, but AFK is not, and somehow they have figured out a way to tell if you are AFK or not ... [pilot's webcam comes on covertly and CCP looks at an empty chair for more than 20 minutes] Guess he is AFK farming. OR [CCP looks and sees the pilot actively enjoying himself or herself] Oops. Didn't want to see that ..

PS: By third party software, is CCP including self-recorded mouse and key strokes using AutoHotkey or other similar software for playback?

"We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them." Albert Einstein 
Allataria
State Protectorate
Caldari State
#333 - 2012-08-09 23:01:08 UTC
And yet the multiboxing of miners continues to be allowed by CCP. They are doing the exact same thing with going afk from multiple instances of the game. How is this considered fair play? Why arent multibox miners being banned? Its a third program running behind the client playing the game for them!
Shinobi-san
Epsoo Consequence
#334 - 2012-08-09 23:02:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Shinobi-san
Quote:
You counter this with the comment below, referring to you being a security expert.
Excuse me?
Quote:
legacy bit of software, created in 2003, that has gone through many gradual and significant changes, and has been hosted on so many different bits of hardware, and that is being re-written and adapted to a more modern environment as time passes, that the code is bulletproof
First, we were talking mainly in context of game mechanics, no?
Second, the only thing among those you mentioned, which can not be easily fixed now-a-days (from the cost PoV), is the hardware. All other aspects are doable.
Quote:
If it was that simple, that pure, we wouldn't have to worry about a lot of exploits that are out there
Oh, seems like you've been spoiled by buggy winblows, my friend... Too bad.
Quote:
Cite your code. Cite your specs / protocols you have drafted and written yourself, put them to the community's scruitiny.
Sorry, but this is impossible because I signed an NDA.

Instead I'll refer you to this paper and maybe also this longer and wider one.
Matius Toskavich
State War Academy
Caldari State
#335 - 2012-08-09 23:19:39 UTC
Mmmm Juicy tears...

Risk free, easy mode, afk ISK etc etc you have all heard it before and said it yourselves. Roll
Tyke Orlieveit
Republic Military School
Minmatar Republic
#336 - 2012-08-09 23:21:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Tyke Orlieveit
Shinobi-san wrote:
Excuse me?
Quote:


Yes?

Shinobi-san wrote:
First, I was talking mainly in context of game mechanics.
Second, the only thing among those you mentioned, which can not be easily fixed now-a-days, is the hardware. All other aspects are doable.


What, instantly? Whilst providing new content. Sure.

In fact, If you're that good, http://www.ccpgames.com/en/jobs might appreciate you

Shinobi-san wrote:
Oh, seems like you've been spoiled by buggy winblows, my friend... Too bad.


http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/02/leap_second_crashes_airlines/

Every OS, and all code, will break. Nothing is perfect.


Shinobi-san wrote:
Sorry, but this is impossible because I signed an NDA.
Instead I'll refer you to this paper and maybe also longer version of it.



"seL4: formal verification of an operating-system kernel" by Gerwin Klein

Wait.

Operating system kernel.. I'm going to be really lazy and link back to http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/02/leap_second_crashes_airlines/

Could you be be a little more specific in your point, and why you're linking someone else's pdf, except for claiming "NDA".

Also, I'm not re-editing time after time after time when you keep changing your original post.
Shinobi-san
Epsoo Consequence
#337 - 2012-08-09 23:30:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Shinobi-san
Tyke Orlieveit wrote:
What, instantly? Whilst providing new content.
Now you're too referring to "the door" they showed us, right? ;-)
No I don't think i needed _that_ content. Did you?
Quote:
http://www.ccpgames.com/en/jobs might appreciate you
You're kidding, right?
I doubt they'll be able to pay my rates, besides last years I'm consulting one of major internet players, so no need to change anything yet :-)
Quote:
Every OS, and all code, will break. Nothing is perfect.
You're kinda wrong.
Some mathematical statements are just these - "perfect" statements.[/quote]
Quote:
Wait.
Operating system kernel.. I'm going to be really lazy
Yes, ignorance is like this - disguises itself as laziness at times.
And yes, even kernels, my friend, and even hypervisors and stuff.
Kyle Frost
Inagawa Kai
#338 - 2012-08-09 23:33:38 UTC
Shinobi-san wrote:
First, we were talking mainly in context of game mechanics, no? Second, the only thing among those you mentioned, which can not be easily fixed now-a-days (from the cost PoV), is the hardware. All other aspects are doable.

Oh, seems like you've been spoiled by buggy winblows, my friend... Too bad

Sorry, but this is impossible because I signed an NDA.
Instead I'll refer you to this paper and maybe also this longer and wider one.


CCP has dealt with this issue with professionalism and they have used all the right tools for dealing with the offenders and also for addressing the players concerns shown on the forums or elsewhere.

I can state this with certainty and confidence, because I am in-fact a respected expert in the field of online gaming, online marketing, and PR. I am highly educated, I have years of experience, and I have worked for some of the best companies in the business. Believe me, I know what I say! (I am currently working on the Drive Through in Burger King, but that’s beside the point)

Unfortunately, I can not share any of my experience or my extensive knowledge on this matter with you, because I have signed an NDA. Instead, I will refer you to this paper

Let the gun do the talking!
Shinobi-san
Epsoo Consequence
#339 - 2012-08-09 23:39:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Shinobi-san
Tyke Orlieveit wrote:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/02/leap_second_crashes_airlines/
Now I clearly see you're kidding :-)
Linux servers
LINUX
SERVERS

L I N U X

just-for-fun UNIX-wannabe project driven by Brownian motion, w/no universal specs or directions, one chief dictator who even can not review all the code he approves... Good joke.

p.s. The way this forum agonizes is fun by itself (it says they're ganked). Stability, eh?
Stauffenberg Jettingen
Federal Defense Union
Gallente Federation
#340 - 2012-08-10 00:48:40 UTC
Ok, so EVE creates a game and wants to punish people for following the rules of the game. Sounds marxist. As the old saying goes...DON'T BLAME THE PLAYER, BLAME THE GAME!!!