Anti-Botting Agreement

[Old Duck]

Its like the open only powerplay topic, where every power leader swears blind that all their people are in open, its the other side that is hiding in PG/solo.

Not to mention that "their people" may only be a subset of their allies. I don't belong to any player groups, but I still do BGS and even PP on occasion. In BGS, I tend to side with the underdog against these crazy-big PGs that think they own the galaxy. But I rarely broadcast that I'm helping, I just pick the faction I want to support and run INF missions, etc. Now if I were so inclined, I could employ a bot army to this end, and nobody would know it's me but me. This assumes these bots are real and not figments of people's imagination.

Disclaimer - just because I could do something doesn't mean I would do something. I don't care enough about BGS to risk getting banned from ED, so I won't be using these bots. Heck, I don't even want to install Dr. Kaii's graphics customizer, because I'm extra paranoid about installing 3rd party software, and a bot capable of driving a spaceship is just as capable of stealing my passwords! Instead I'll play Space Engineers (go ahead, drink) where building bots is a feature rather than a bug

 

[Agent-137]

Not to mention that "their people" may only be a subset of their allies.

This is exactly the point of the agreement. "To not benefit from 3rd parties using scripted commanders in Elite: Dangerous."

If a subset of your allies appear to be using bots to damage an enemy, those in the agreement would work to undo the damage the botting allies are causing.

This is nothing like the open-only argument, and everything like the anti-5C argument. Regularly pilots work with friends, neutrals, and even enemies to defeat 5th Column actions.

 

[Old Duck]

This is exactly the point of the agreement. "To not benefit from 3rd parties using scripted commanders in Elite: Dangerous."

If a subset of your allies appear to be using bots to damage an enemy, those in the agreement would work to undo the damage the botting allies are causing.

I still don't understand how people are identifying these bots. If I'm a bored, retired pilot who can play the game for 10 hours straight, are you going to call me a bot? I'm not, btw, but clearly there are players who are "human bots" when it comes to games like ED.

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

I still don't understand how people are identifying these bots. If I'm a bored, retired pilot who can play the game for 10 hours straight, are you going to call me a bot? I'm not, btw, but clearly there are players who are "human bots" when it comes to games like ED.

No. Someone who plays this game on an outright dangerous schedule is not a reason to even suspect botting in the firstplace, let alone determining that and identifying it as such.

It's a lot more complicated than that, and there are a lot more clues and patterns. Of course, sharing this openly might just give the botter(s) pointers on how to best avoid detection.

 

[Old Duck]

No. Someone who plays this game on an outright dangerous schedule is not a reason to even suspect botting in the firstplace, let alone determining that and identifying it as such.

It's a lot more complicated than that, and there are a lot more clues and patterns. Of course, sharing this openly might just give the botter(s) pointers on how to best avoid detection.

I just find this whole "bot army" thing hard to swallow. Is it one guy with 100 copies of ED running in virtual machines, or is it 100 guys each using a script to fly missions while they are asleep? Does each guy write his own bot, or is there a "BGS Bots" market on the dark web where people are downloading premade bots for ED?

I probably shouldn't poke fun at this topic, as it seems many of you take it quite seriously. It just feels conspiratorial. But since I don't have any skin in this debate, I'll zip my lips and just watch from afar with amused curiosity.

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

I just find this whole "bot army" thing hard to swallow. Is it one guy with 100 copies of ED running in virtual machines, or is it 100 guys each using a script to fly missions while they are asleep? Does each guy write his own bot, or is there a "BGS Bots" market on the dark web where people are downloading premade bots for ED?

I probably shouldn't poke fun at this topic, as it seems many of you take it quite seriously. It just feels conspiratorial. But since I don't have any skin in this debate, I'll zip my lips and just watch from afar with amused curiosity.

It being hard to swallow is partly why they've not been banned, I don't blame you for that, but for some of us who've been watching them for a long time, seeing what they do, the same patterns and clues, it goes beyond reasonable doubt, imo.

 

[Old Duck]

It being hard to swallow is partly why they've not been banned, I don't blame you for that, but for some of us who've been watching them for a long time, seeing what they do, the same patterns and clues, it goes beyond reasonable doubt, imo.

Well, I do find this topic very intriguing, hence my presence here. I'm not that interested in BGS, but automation is a hobby (and was once a job) of mine - not bots for games, as I prefer to play my own games, but IRL things that would otherwise be boring. I guess this is another reason I'm such a Space Engineers nut (there "botting" is part of the game). As for ED, automating the entire process of accepting a mission, flying that mission, and finishing that mission, with all the variables therein (interdictions, busy traffic, planets in the way of SCA, etc), that's pretty advanced automation, especially if the bot author is working with the same interface a human would (ie - a non-hacked version of ED).

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

Well, I do find this topic very intriguing, hence my presence here. Not because I'm that interested in BGS, but rather because automation is a hobby (and was once a job) of mine - not bots for games, as I prefer to play my own games, but IRL things that would otherwise be boring. I guess this is another reason I'm such a Space Engineers nut (there "botting" is part of the game). As for ED, automating the entire process of accepting a mission, flying that mission, and finishing that mission, with all the variables therein (interdictions, busy traffic, planets in the way of SCA, etc), that's pretty advanced automation, especially if the bot author is working with the same interface a human would (ie - a non-hacked version of ED).

Yeah, if you dig deep enough you can find more than one article on programmers/enthusiasts creating ED bots as a personal project or hobby, and they tell you how they work. Always emphasizing though that they're not for sale and stuff like that. Some of them are pretty advanced.

 

[Misaniovent]

I would like to assume it is a given than any organized group in this community would not utilize bots, work with commanders who do, or benefit from them knowingly. But that's not the case — so we signed this agreement in the hopes that doing so will publicize the significance of this issue, that it has been significant for years, and that Frontier has so far not been able to make effective progress in resolving it.

Of course, we don't assume that groups that haven't signed are suspect. And if groups decline to sign, then that's an opportunity for the experts signed to this agreement to explain that this is a real issue and not one imagined in frustration.

 

[Jane Turner]

I would like to assume it is a given than any organized group in this community would not utilize bots, work with commanders who do, or benefit from them knowingly. But that's not the case — so we signed this agreement in the hopes that doing so will publicize the significance of this issue, that it has been significant for years, and that Frontier has so far not been able to make effective progress in resolving it.

Of course, we don't assume that groups that haven't signed are suspect. And if groups decline to sign, then that's an opportunity for the experts signed to this agreement to explain that this is a real issue and not one imagined in frustration.

Absolutely to both paragraphs

 

[Cmdr *Hawk*]

As I read through this, I was working out what I was going to say. Then I got to Misa's post. Nuf said.

... but since I'm here, Jane made an excellent point earlier on. Once the bot has moved on, after kicking you out of half a dozen of the systems you and your mates had spent months working on, there's a real tendency to try and forget the near-rage-quit-event and go back to normal. So the bot moves on and does someone else. Hopefully we can work together to find ways to counter the effects, marginalise the use and bang politely but insistently of FD's door.

 

[Agony_Aunt]

This is exactly the point of the agreement. "To not benefit from 3rd parties using scripted commanders in Elite: Dangerous."

If a subset of your allies appear to be using bots to damage an enemy, those in the agreement would work to undo the damage the botting allies are causing.

This is nothing like the open-only argument, and everything like the anti-5C argument. Regularly pilots work with friends, neutrals, and even enemies to defeat 5th Column actions.

Ooof, i'm not sure i'd have the motivation to do that. Working against my own faction/power to counter someone running bots. I'd be willing to back off from contributing though.

 

[Sysmon]

Not to mention that "their people" may only be a subset of their allies. I don't belong to any player groups, but I still do BGS and even PP on occasion. In BGS, I tend to side with the underdog against these crazy-big PGs that think they own the galaxy. But I rarely broadcast that I'm helping, I just pick the faction I want to support and run INF missions, etc. Now if I were so inclined, I could employ a bot army to this end, and nobody would know it's me but me. This assumes these bots are real and not figments of people's imagination.

Disclaimer - just because I could do something doesn't mean I would do something. I don't care enough about BGS to risk getting banned from ED, so I won't be using these bots. Heck, I don't even want to install Dr. Kaii's graphics customizer, because I'm extra paranoid about installing 3rd party software, and a bot capable of driving a spaceship is just as capable of stealing my passwords! Instead I'll play Space Engineers (go ahead, drink) where building bots is a feature rather than a bug

One would think the EULA would be enough to deal with botting. It would have to be enforced, of course.

S

 

[Mrjupp]

I just find this whole "bot army" thing hard to swallow. Is it one guy with 100 copies of ED running in virtual machines, or is it 100 guys each using a script to fly missions while they are asleep? Does each guy write his own bot, or is there a "BGS Bots" market on the dark web where people are downloading premade bots for ED?

I probably shouldn't poke fun at this topic, as it seems many of you take it quite seriously. It just feels conspiratorial. But since I don't have any skin in this debate, I'll zip my lips and just watch from afar with amused curiosity.

Then perhaps you should read this THESIS. https://core.ac.uk/reader/52107380

 

[Old Duck]

Then perhaps you should read this THESIS. https://core.ac.uk/reader/52107380

LOL, I could write my own bot in less time that it would take to read that epistle. I'm not looking to get a PhD in the subject, just looking for some evidence behind the myth. Someone PMed me some compelling arguments, so I'm good.

 

[Jane Turner]

New group/squadron signatories since yesterday:

The Alliance Deepspace Organisation, Just 4 Fun, The 12th Fleet, The Prismatic Imperium, The Kamadhenu Chapterhouse of Inquisition and Imperial Enforcement Division

Please share the link. There are some big gaps presently.

 

[Mysteron]

The Dark Armada officially signs up for and supports this noble cause.

 

[Chaparral]

From my point of view, the only way to reveal the presence of bots is to establish a public record of each individual commander's activities in game.

Perhaps FDEV have their hands full and can't evaluate commander activities, but the flesh engine that is the community would probably be very clever at sifting through the data to find offenders.

Maybe you and I are paranoid about our individual data.

Fine, assign an encrypted code to each commander, and make the info public relative to those encrypted tags.

Let the community do its data voodoo, and report the likely subjects by encrypted tag to FDEV.

Maybe I'm weird, but I would kind of like to see a leaderboard on mail hauling by commander or even enccrypted tag anyways.

 

[Just Paul]

From my point of view, the only way to reveal the presence of bots is to establish a public record of each individual commander's activities in game.

Perhaps FDEV have their hands full and can't evaluate commander activities, but the flesh engine that is the community would probably be very clever at sifting through the data to find offenders.

Maybe you and I are paranoid about our individual data.

Fine, assign an encrypted code to each commander, and make the info public relative to those encrypted tags.

Let the community do its data voodoo, and report the likely subjects by encrypted tag to FDEV.

Maybe I'm weird, but I would kind of like to see a leaderboard on mail hauling by commander or even enccrypted tag anyways.

I saw stuff that suggests that some groups already do that. Only they use the "encrypted tag" combined with some other data sets to not only unmask but also to track their opponents. Seems to me very close to violation of multiple tos' and against the spirit of the game.

As I read through this, I was working out what I was going to say. Then I got to Misa's post. Nuf said.

... but since I'm here, Jane made an excellent point earlier on. Once the bot has moved on, after kicking you out of half a dozen of the systems you and your mates had spent months working on, there's a real tendency to try and forget the near-rage-quit-event and go back to normal. So the bot moves on and does someone else. Hopefully we can work together to find ways to counter the effects, marginalise the use and bang politely but insistently of FD's door.

Do you have any proof that it was bots and not just a group who likes to cause chaos or even was hired to do that? There are a few groups around who only do bgs attacks and as everybody knows attacking is easier than defending. That includes kicking you out of a system, if you know what you are doing.


It seems quite reasonable to agree to not use bots and report suspected bots to FDev. Wouldn't have an issue to sign up to that. It's against the EULA and nothing would change for me.
But the part about undoing the damage done by alleged bots. Not proofed bots, just alleged. Who will be the authority that some suspicious activity is actually a bot and not somebody who understands the game mechanics better and/or is more determinant? Does the aggrieved party need to wait until FDev says it was definitively bots or is just an accusation enough to trigger that part of the agreement? Seems to be quite a slippery slope if there is no real proof needed.
Why not also add a ban on shared accounts and/or using game exploits? Some groups, even large ones, are happy to use them and at least the former is against the EULA too.

I read quite a few the-bgs-is-not-doing-what-I-believe-it-should-so-it-must-be-bots accusations thrown around. Still have to see proof of it similar to the PP ones a few years back.
For example: We had some insight into what our previous opponents assumed we were doing and they were so far off from the truth it was almost laughable.
Also in some recent bgs tests I got some very unexpected results which contradict assumptions and guides made by others and they were reproducible. I can bet that there are many more interesting things to be found that are not public knowledge yet. I love science.


Disclaimer: Everything written is my personal opinion.

 

[Northpin]

Since FD does not seem to do proactive work to prevent botting (or generally speaking cheating) and they do rely on reports, the only thing such agreement should aim for, should be to increase awareness and educate people on spotting and reporting botters to FD
With the mention that they should also work to instill and increase responsibility regarding those reports, else they will have a detrimental effect by raising quite an amount of boys who cried wolf.