These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Solution to Bot Mining

First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#41 - 2013-03-26 20:21:47 UTC
Corbin Cummings wrote:
How about random captcha to prove we are not bots

All those would do is annoy real players. Many OCR programs can read with CAPTCHAs. For those case where they cannot, there is a service in India where a person will solve it for a tiny fee. All the bot has to do is detect it and send it over.

Note that a bot is world chess champion
A bot can drive rover on Mars.
A bot is world Jeopardy! champion.
Google has bots driving cars in traffic.

We have come to the point in the development of computers where a bot can play games better than humans. Trying to make the game unplayable by a machine, yet is still fun for humans, will fail. The issue has to be dealt with in a different way.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Unsuccessful At Everything
The Troll Bridge
#42 - 2013-03-26 20:23:07 UTC
Remove standard belt rats.
Insert Sansha Incursion BS spawns
Bots = Gone.

Since the cessation of their usefulness is imminent, may I appropriate your belongings?
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
#43 - 2013-03-26 20:30:05 UTC
Change the noob corp rules and war dec rules some, and you would get rid of a lot of the bots. Blink Kick people out of the noob corp @ about 6 weeks maybe into an NPC corp that can be war decced. Make it more difficult to avoid wars. Eve is supposed to be harsh, so make it harsh.
Umega
Solis Mensa
#44 - 2013-03-26 20:31:53 UTC
The best solution, imo.. is give more power to the players to handle precieved bots.

This is already an option outside of highsec.. whether or not it actually happens is irrelevent to this particular discussion. The ability to unload upon a bot in <0.5 is strangely less risk adverse.

Barge/exhumer changes, along with universal killrights.. have caused more people to shy away from ganking. The raise in gank numbers is simply the result of an influx in playerbase, coupled with the 'blue donut' effect (lets avoid the political crapscape of that sigment, plz).

In my ventures.. I'd strongly argue that the vast majority of HS bots are tucked into NPC corps. Why should they not be? If I was running bots.. I'd most certainly be using NPC corps. There is the foundation of the problem.. that can be fixed rather simply. In a manner that a new bot program can't alleviate.

I'm not advocating the complete removal of NPC corps. They serve a purpose.. both has a beginner base, and a transistion point. And also.. being I enjoy the rich lore of EVE, they serve an 'RP' purpose to some of us. But something needs to be done to these safe havens. Hell.. you can even argue about the number of gankers and griefers that use the safety net of NPC corps as well. It isn't fair, or the EVE-way, either way you look at it.

Something needs to be done about NPC corps.. a compounding, growing tax rate.. that also effects ore somehow. Or simply a time limit you can dwell within one.

Maybe even..

Some sort of FW-effect. Different corps vs one another.. Creodron vs Ishkone for a rough, non-canon example. You're subjected to that war.. whether you like it or not doesn't matter. If you want to be a part of that corp.. just as player run corps.. you best be prepared to fight for what you own and what you want. Obviously implement safety time frames for new players, and ppl kicked from corps.. number out of ass, 6 weeks for greenhorns.. 1 day for 'vets'.

Don't like it? I don't care. I really don't like bots.. or NPC corps for that matter providing such amnesty. Kill two birds with one stone.

 Ume-Pro Studios
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#45 - 2013-03-26 20:33:52 UTC
ian papabear wrote:
never understood the driving force behind banning botters, doesnt affect my game.

So so not true.

They strip belts, making it hard to find ore.
They sell to the market, driving down prices ( which is good or bad depending on your play style, but either way its an effect).
They add server load slowing the game for everyone.
They pay for their accounts with PLEX, thus driving up the PLEX price.
Some RMT, thus reducing CCP's sales of PLEX which means less money for CCP, less money available to improve the game.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Vincent Athena
Photosynth
#46 - 2013-03-26 20:39:39 UTC
Umega wrote:
The best solution, imo.. is give more power to the players to handle precieved bots.

This is already an option outside of highsec.. whether or not it actually happens is irrelevent to this particular discussion. The ability to unload upon a bot in <0.5 is strangely less risk adverse.

Barge/exhumer changes, along with universal killrights.. have caused more people to shy away from ganking. The raise in gank numbers is simply the result of an influx in playerbase, coupled with the 'blue donut' effect (lets avoid the political crapscape of that sigment, plz).

In my ventures.. I'd strongly argue that the vast majority of HS bots are tucked into NPC corps. Why should they not be? If I was running bots.. I'd most certainly be using NPC corps. There is the foundation of the problem.. that can be fixed rather simply. In a manner that a new bot program can't alleviate.

I'm not advocating the complete removal of NPC corps. They serve a purpose.. both has a beginner base, and a transistion point. And also.. being I enjoy the rich lore of EVE, they serve an 'RP' purpose to some of us. But something needs to be done to these safe havens. Hell.. you can even argue about the number of gankers and griefers that use the safety net of NPC corps as well. It isn't fair, or the EVE-way, either way you look at it.

Something needs to be done about NPC corps.. a compounding, growing tax rate.. that also effects ore somehow. Or simply a time limit you can dwell within one.

Maybe even..

Some sort of FW-effect. Different corps vs one another.. Creodron vs Ishkone for a rough, non-canon example. You're subjected to that war.. whether you like it or not doesn't matter. If you want to be a part of that corp.. just as player run corps.. you best be prepared to fight for what you own and what you want. Obviously implement safety time frames for new players, and ppl kicked from corps.. number out of ass, 6 weeks for greenhorns.. 1 day for 'vets'.

Don't like it? I don't care. I really don't like bots.. or NPC corps for that matter providing such amnesty. Kill two birds with one stone.

Easy for the botters to get around: Start a new account, train to Barge, mine until the day you must enter a player corp. Continue to mine until the first war dec. Then start a new account and abandon the old one.

Know a Frozen fan? Check this out

Frozen fanfiction
Milan Nantucket
Doomheim
#47 - 2013-03-26 20:42:00 UTC
Its rather easy actually... make a dueling option... you obviously can't turn it off or ignore it...

I roll up in a belt where I see a miner shooting at the roids.... I submit a duel request... now the other client gets the request but the answer boxes are all different... mox up the order... yes being the default with 10 or 15 sec countdown... boxes are Yes | NO | NO | NO

Player clicks no or decline I know it ain't a botter and you mix up the answer boxes. Next time it could be No | Yes | Yes | Yes
Umega
Solis Mensa
#48 - 2013-03-26 20:47:05 UTC
Vincent Athena wrote:
Umega wrote:
The best solution, imo.. is give more power to the players to handle precieved bots.

This is already an option outside of highsec.. whether or not it actually happens is irrelevent to this particular discussion. The ability to unload upon a bot in <0.5 is strangely less risk adverse.

Barge/exhumer changes, along with universal killrights.. have caused more people to shy away from ganking. The raise in gank numbers is simply the result of an influx in playerbase, coupled with the 'blue donut' effect (lets avoid the political crapscape of that sigment, plz).

In my ventures.. I'd strongly argue that the vast majority of HS bots are tucked into NPC corps. Why should they not be? If I was running bots.. I'd most certainly be using NPC corps. There is the foundation of the problem.. that can be fixed rather simply. In a manner that a new bot program can't alleviate.

I'm not advocating the complete removal of NPC corps. They serve a purpose.. both has a beginner base, and a transistion point. And also.. being I enjoy the rich lore of EVE, they serve an 'RP' purpose to some of us. But something needs to be done to these safe havens. Hell.. you can even argue about the number of gankers and griefers that use the safety net of NPC corps as well. It isn't fair, or the EVE-way, either way you look at it.

Something needs to be done about NPC corps.. a compounding, growing tax rate.. that also effects ore somehow. Or simply a time limit you can dwell within one.

Maybe even..

Some sort of FW-effect. Different corps vs one another.. Creodron vs Ishkone for a rough, non-canon example. You're subjected to that war.. whether you like it or not doesn't matter. If you want to be a part of that corp.. just as player run corps.. you best be prepared to fight for what you own and what you want. Obviously implement safety time frames for new players, and ppl kicked from corps.. number out of ass, 6 weeks for greenhorns.. 1 day for 'vets'.

Don't like it? I don't care. I really don't like bots.. or NPC corps for that matter providing such amnesty. Kill two birds with one stone.

Easy for the botters to get around: Start a new account, train to Barge, mine until the day you must enter a player corp. Continue to mine until the first war dec. Then start a new account and abandon the old one.


I'm not very computer savy.. but wouldn't CCP be able to detect, through IP or something, computers consistantly doing this.. thus allowing more concrete proof to throw down bans, even bans on address coming into their servers?

And it is a start in the right direction, it does provide effective results. Player Bot-bob is going to lose a month or two of productive ore mining from rebuilding a new miner toon. It's not just the ability to get into a barge.. but the SP to harvest higher amounts of ore per cycle that vanish and need to be rebuilt too.

 Ume-Pro Studios
Ersahi Kir
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#49 - 2013-03-26 21:00:29 UTC
Milan Nantucket wrote:
Its rather easy actually... make a dueling option... you obviously can't turn it off or ignore it...

I roll up in a belt where I see a miner shooting at the roids.... I submit a duel request... now the other client gets the request but the answer boxes are all different... mox up the order... yes being the default with 10 or 15 sec countdown... boxes are Yes | NO | NO | NO

Player clicks no or decline I know it ain't a botter and you mix up the answer boxes. Next time it could be No | Yes | Yes | Yes



Obviously you don't understand a very simple concept.

Bots can be programmed to push a button. You're more likely to kill a real player via a misclick then you are to kill a bot once programmed correctly.

One thing I learned from another game (ffxi) is that many things done to reduce botting actually increased it. Add excessive/annoying clicks and you're more likely to drive legitimate miners away and leave only botters behind, because they're not bothered by excessive/annoying clicks.
Kathern Aurilen
#50 - 2013-03-26 21:02:15 UTC
Ersahi Kir wrote:
Fractal Muse wrote:
I thought the solution was joining the New Order of Highsec (www.minerbumping.com).

Player driven emergent gameplay in progress.



They're not really focused on solving the "bot mining" problem. They're more focused on harassing non-bots to tear farm.

Please correct me if I'm wrong.
I would gladly support the new order if they really did provide a anti botting service in eve, but all the grand talk and claims they espouse is just that talk. I would gladly buy a permit and even join in on the anti bot fleets in a support roll of some kind.

They only target real miners for their tear extortion rackets.

No cuts, no butts, no coconuts!

Forum alt, unskilled in the ways of pewpew!
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#51 - 2013-03-26 21:10:28 UTC
ian papabear wrote:
never understood the driving force behind banning botters, doesnt affect my game.


Bots reduce miner income by at least 50%
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
#52 - 2013-03-26 21:27:56 UTC
baltec1 wrote:
ian papabear wrote:
never understood the driving force behind banning botters, doesnt affect my game.


Bots reduce miner income by at least 50%


Bull. Back when EVE hit the milestone of 10k players online at once (and bots were not as rampant as they are now) Tritanium prices were 2.00/unit if you were lucky, they are closer to 5 now.

If anything they are increasing income, my cataclysms are selling very well Twisted

Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them.
Domina Trix
McKNOBBLER DRINKING CLAN
#53 - 2013-03-26 21:29:35 UTC  |  Edited by: Domina Trix
I Love Boobies wrote:
Change the noob corp rules and war dec rules some, and you would get rid of a lot of the bots. Blink Kick people out of the noob corp @ about 6 weeks maybe into an NPC corp that can be war decced. Make it more difficult to avoid wars. Eve is supposed to be harsh, so make it harsh.


WTF has that got to do with bots? where does your claim of changing war dec rules will reduce bots come from? I suspect you just wanted to drag up the dead horse of changing wardecs again.

Quote:
We already have them. Seems untanked retrievers are the in thing right now and they are oh so profitable to pop. No we simply want the mack to be balanced correctly with the other barges.


I have never really understood that, the yield from a procurer (the tanky barge) is the same as a retreiver the only difference is the ore hold is half the size. Just make double the trips, a very reasonable payoff for having a ship that discourages gankers.

Two of the defining characteristics of a carebear are wanting other players to play the way the carebear wants and whining on the forums for the game to change when they don't. Yet I see more threads on these forums from gankers than I do miners whining about wanting the game changed to suit them.
Dersen Lowery
The Scope
#54 - 2013-03-26 21:34:11 UTC
ian papabear wrote:
never understood the driving force behind banning botters, doesnt affect my game.


Read this.

Besides placing an undue load on CCP's game and driving down the value of several professions within EVE, botting is a direct threat to both CCP and its customers to the extent that it hooks into the illegitimate RMT market.

Ersahi Kir said an important thing: bots are machines, and the great appeal of machines is that they automate tedious and repetitive things. The more makework you add to mining, the more likely it will be that people will use bots to mine. It would not surprise me if CCP consider the Retriever and the Mackinaw to be successful precisely because they are so easy to manage that there is very little incentive to automate them.

Compare L4 missions--the current system is very, very easy to farm--anomalies, and market trading. All of those involve significantly more moving and targeting than belt mining does, and all of them are frequently and heavily automated. In particular, market trading involves so much tedium that it's mostly automated in RL, never mind EVE.

Proud founder and member of the Belligerent Desirables.

I voted in CSM X!
Angelique Duchemin
Team Evil
#55 - 2013-03-26 21:56:38 UTC  |  Edited by: Angelique Duchemin
baltec1 wrote:
ian papabear wrote:
never understood the driving force behind banning botters, doesnt affect my game.


Bots reduce miner income by at least 50%


Perhaps but then they also reduce the non-miner spendings by a comparable amount by putting more raw materials into the market. It's not like they ate the trit they mined.


If they all vanished then veldspar and tritanium prices would go up. High-sec mining would become more profitable than ever and the incentive for real players to move to high sec would increase as high sec would become even more profitable.


I oppose botting on principle but I doubt they do any real harm to the game itself.

Market bots make it harder for people to "Play the market" (professional leeching anyway) and mining bots flood the market with materials that reduce the prices for consumers at the expense of the the profits of the rest of the miners.

It's like the Chinese production industry. Yes it's all immoral and stuff but do you think an IKEA office chair could be built in the west and still sold at $20? What's $20? Half an hours worth of work with all social fees?

The very sun of heaven seemed distorted when viewed through the polarising miasma welling out from this sea-soaked perversion, and twisted menace and suspense lurked leeringly in those crazily elusive angles of carven rock where a second glance shewed concavity after the first shewed convexity.

Sentamon
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#56 - 2013-03-26 22:05:51 UTC
Corbin Cummings wrote:
If drones did not automatically go after Pirates/rat and each rat had to be manually targeted then mining barges could not survive. Therefore; making it impossible to BOT MINE. Or even AFK mine.

How about random Captcha to prove we are not bots.


Someone here is new to mmo bot programs I see. Roll

0/10

~ Professional Forum Alt  ~
Sidrat Flush
KarmaFleet
#57 - 2013-03-26 22:19:52 UTC
When Eve had 10K players (characters - Alts Online remember this) - and the price of tritanium was at the low point of 2.0 wasn't due to the lack of bots but rather a few more reasons:

* No capital ship parts requiring insane amounts of low end minerals
* The npc seeded items that gave minerals a max value due to the refining amounts. I believe Shuttles were one such item, there were others keeping the price of minerals very very low.
* Very few ship types and a lower base of characters at the higher skill level required to pilot the biggest of ships available at the time.

I have no doubt there were bots back in 2003-4-5; as the player base grew so did the bot numbers and with more visibility in the systems of New Eden they're easier to spot.

Its time to stand up against the bad empire based CEO telling falsehoods about what new characters can accomplish and pushing them towards an in game experience of drudgery and loneliness keeping them in the shadow of ignorance for at nest their own profit at worse apathy towards all the experiences that Eve has to offer.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#58 - 2013-03-26 22:20:41 UTC  |  Edited by: baltec1
Domina Trix wrote:
baltec1 wrote:
ian papabear wrote:
never understood the driving force behind banning botters, doesnt affect my game.


Bots reduce miner income by at least 50%


Bull. Back when EVE hit the milestone of 10k players online at once (and bots were not as rampant as they are now) Tritanium prices were 2.00/unit if you were lucky, they are closer to 5 now.

If anything they are increasing income, my cataclysms are selling very well Twisted


When we hit the ice belts prices quadrupled. We also found that around 60% of the barges we ganked were clearly bots in caldari space.
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
#59 - 2013-03-27 00:06:28 UTC  |  Edited by: I Love Boobies
Domina Trix wrote:
I Love Boobies wrote:
Change the noob corp rules and war dec rules some, and you would get rid of a lot of the bots. Blink Kick people out of the noob corp @ about 6 weeks maybe into an NPC corp that can be war decced. Make it more difficult to avoid wars. Eve is supposed to be harsh, so make it harsh.


WTF has that got to do with bots? where does your claim of changing war dec rules will reduce bots come from? I suspect you just wanted to drag up the dead horse of changing wardecs again.


Easy... they cannot hide in noob corps any longer and keep clear of war decs, making them easier to kill via wardec without having a major fleet like you do now to gank them. And no, it wasn't a stealth war dec whine, nor what it to beat a dead horse as you suggest, it was about getting those bots who try to jump corps just because they get declared. That's what it has to do with what I said. Have a nice day!
I Love Boobies
All Hail Boobies
#60 - 2013-03-27 00:09:03 UTC  |  Edited by: I Love Boobies
Whoops, double post. Cry