Botted Stats

[spawningmink]

Bring back stat caps.

this is pretty stupid tbh because within the first month we all had atleast 2 capped chars stat caps suck, they should just find a way to combat botting

[joojoo1975]

I'm going to correct you on this one.
it took a day to get a few million LP.

were you areound for W2 or 3?

I remember buckets and bots making roads, bots doing the wheat/flour thing. but never did I hear about a person/bot gaining a Million LP in a 24 hr period?

[Ysh]

B. Hard advantage cap (e.g. player only ever has X% advantage over another regardless of stat. Low end player know he always has X% disadvantage but do not need to compete in stat grinding with high end player (X should be low numbers so he can still compete in combat with good strategy), but high end player must compete against each other to tilt their advantage versus other high end player between +X% and -X%). In other word, it is basically like hard stat cap, but what is cap grows based on highest statted player in game. But no matter how low your stat is, it is only ever at most X% worse than best player's stat.

Or maybe there is some thing I am missing here?

Poor idea. This way 2 (or 3, or 4) fresh spawn players always beat one. So some botter will just spawn 10 alts, learn rage in 24 hours and write a combat assistance bot. Put that with auto aggro and auto chop-chop-chop near all your gates and you are ruined.

What stops botter now from grinding 10,000s stat and write combat bot with auto aggro and chop-chop-chop near all your gates? Only thing this changes is how easy it is to produce the character. Issue with botter is that it is already easy for him to produce these high stat character, may was well just make it easy for every man so botter have no advantage.

~

~
B. Hard advantage cap (e.g. player only ever has X% advantage over another regardless of stat. Low end player know he always has X% disadvantage but do not need to compete in stat grinding with high end player (X should be low numbers so he can still compete in combat with good strategy), but high end player must compete against each other to tilt their advantage versus other high end player between +X% and -X%). In other word, it is basically like hard stat cap, but what is cap grows based on highest statted player in game. But no matter how low your stat is, it is only ever at most X% worse than best player's stat.

Or maybe there is some thing I am missing here?

This is a very old fight and generally one people like to bring up saying "stat progress IS balanced"
no....no it's not.
speed combat has always been a % the higher you are the higher % until a max of 15%? but only for speed.
BUT the kicker was all the bots would have TONS of Hp.
meaning you can take your titan and go take out a small army of noobs.

The term titan came from just that. a Dude who had a ton of stats to the point he didnt care about defence.

Then when you did die, you can go back to your q 500-800 crops eat and basically get back into action in less then a few hours after your q500-800 cuiros popped.

Limit HP disparity in same way.

[chocolaterain]

I never understood why jlo never ban botters. It isn't particularly difficult to spot a botter considering the nature of this game.

Have they ever made clear why they don't do that? I don't recall reading anything about (not) banning botters.

Wurm Online does it and it's pretty much macro free tbh.

[Ysh]

I never understood why jlo never ban botters. It isn't particularly difficult to spot a botter considering the nature of this game.

Have they ever made clear why they don't do that? I don't recall reading anything about (not) banning botters.

Wurm Online does it and it's pretty much macro free tbh.

I hear bots are a problem in this game, so why don't you ban them?
We get this question a lot, as well as the related question...
And, also, why don't you ban custom clients while you're at it?
... and the short answer to both those questions is that we can't. Bots and custom clients are both, in the philosophical fundamental of things, only means of generating server input, and as long as the server input they generate is technically legal, there is very little about it that stands out as being obvious and easy targets for anything resembling a "ban". Bots and custom clients are, in short, hard to impossible to meaningfully detect, and the means of detection can usually be circumvented.
... but all other games ban bots?
They may be trying to. Whether their efforts match the results is another matter entirely.
... so what's your take on them, then?
Our philosophy has been, and remains, that we – rather than spend our time fighting losing battles – should focus on building a better game with fewer incentives to bot. We try to take botting as a sign of a broken game mechanic, rather than as a sign of broken players.
... and what about the custom clients, again?
We feel strongly that the design of coherent and optimally functional user interfaces – what the client fundamentally is – leaves plenty of room for personal tastes. No one size fits all, and if you're unhappy with the standard size we provide, we take no issue with you retooling it to suit your own preferences.
My dog ate my character. U resurrect pl0x?
No.

[chocolaterain]

[snip]

I see. By the looks of it their alternative approach hasn't been that successful either. I know we're technically in alpha but it's been nearly 7 years now and the factions still manage to bot tons of lp and stats. Wasn't this obscure fate system supposed to help prevent that somehow?

[Ozzy123]

Just add different scalling for PVP and PVE, that way in for example archery :

Hunting with 1000 perc can do a lot of damage to animals
but
1000 perc in pvp wouldn't do much more damage than 500perc

so like, lets say right now it looks like :
100perc = 100dmg
500 perc = 500dmg
1000perc=1000dmg

(I know its not like that, but lets just assume)

Make it like :
in PVE :
100 perc = 100dmg
500 perc = 500dmg
1000 perc =1000dmg
in PVP :
100 perc = 100dmg
500 perc = 300dmg
1000 perc = 400dmg

Or just work with the numbers, I think its a very good idea. Could do the same with STR or even with openings. Fuck the botters, before you make all the features that bots have useless (like with the study tables for example) botters will already have unbeliveable advantage over normal players, well, actually they already do.

If we get something like that in the game new players will be able to catch up to old players and old players will have something to do, they will progress slower but still.

[shubla]

I encourage all methods of botting.
Everyone should bot as long as devs are not punishing for it.

[Saergof]

Guys, I have one silly (very silly) word for you: captcha.

From the down of time bots were distinguished being unable to perform certain class of tasks. If one will decide that he want to get rid of bots in his project, he has to do 2 things, both well-known.

1)Distile a formal criteria enough for a bot suspicion with certain degree of success.
2)Implement a human-passable test.

Then the algorithm will throw 2) when the 1) criteria has met.

The "captcha test" does not have to be that string where you have to type a word from a picture, it is a matter of creativity, obviously.

On the other hand, as I see it, the problem with bots not the bots themselves, but the game mechanics, which currently may be formalized enough to be dealt only with a kind of mathematical function (a bot). And as far as devs are trying to solve the problem of game determinism, not sticking to arbitrary decisions like strict antibot policy, I think they're take the best approach in the long run. In the short run, on the other hand, we are all suffering, couldn't argue with that.

[shubla]

Guys, I have one silly (very silly) word for you: captcha.

From the down of time bots were distinguished being unable to perform certain class of tasks. If one will decide that he want to get rid of bots in his project, he has to do 2 things, both well-known.

1)Distile a formal criteria enough for a bot suspicion with certain degree of success.
2)Implement a human-passable test.

Then the algorithm will throw 2) when the 1) criteria has met.

The "captcha test" does not have to be that string where you have to type a word from a picture, it is a matter of creativity, obviously.

On the other hand, as I see it, the problem with bots not the bots themselves, but the game mechanics, which currently may be formalized enough to be dealt only with a kind of mathematical function (a bot). And as far as devs are trying to solve the problem of game determinism, not sticking to arbitrary decisions like strict antibot policy, I think they're take the best approach in the long run. In the short run, on the other hand, we are all suffering, couldn't argue with that.

Captcha has been suggested multiple times.
It annoys many players and is easy to go around.
https://www.google.fi/search?q=captcha+solving+service