Proposal Discussion Anti Botting Agreement Idea 3.1 Player incentivised, VR compatible in-station "not-a-literal-Captcha"

[gorankar]

As long as I am not overly inconvenienced by the methods used, no more than a mouse click or three at the most, I am fine with measures that helps others feel like the game is a square one.

That said, I am going to be honest. I suspect botting is far less effective and prevalent than it's being made out to be. I also suspect multiboxers are, at least sometimes, being mistaken as bots. I don't think there are enough bots in the game that better detection and removal will make any difference in the winners and losers PP/BGS wise. I think players in different modes/platforms/ and time zones are just beating the people that think it's bots.

 

[Riverside]

I mean, sure thing. It's okay to be skeptical, but my threshold is different. As it was mentioned earlier, if we go by "absolute undeniable proof" with enough proof to convict them of magnicide in the hague, asking this out of players is a bit strange since there's no way we can provide you with said proof. We don't own the company, we can't do those kinds of analytics.

The thing is though, if you think this isn't at least suspicious enough to warrant some raised eyebrows, in truth you're not being honest with yourself, that or willfully ignoring the evidence for reasons I wouldn't be able to guess.



This isn't even necessary, it should probably only be applied to accounts that are suspicious. And to come to the conclusion that something is suspicious, well, it is far easier to do that, than to start handing out permabans which could end up with innocent CMDR's in the crossfire.

The short of it... is that 99.9% of commanders wouldn't ever be bothered by such a thing, because they'd never encounter it. Human beings don't complete 1000 missions a day in the same system for 6 months straight, 24/7, with 40 other accounts in the same system doing the exact same thing.

I don't know who you are, what faction or group you represent by your use of 'we', but I can tell you that 1000/40 = 25 missions per system, per day & the squadron I'm in each player regularly exceeds that & has done for years. I think the most I've personally done in any one system was 50 missions in a day, spread across 6 factions to undermine a controlling faction, normally my mission count would be a multiple of 20 of course. In a 192t Frag Python, in open, and I regularly work 5-6 systems per day out of 40-50 I have an interest in. Only having 3 wars to work per day (whether contested or not) would be a light day for me.

 

[Tividar]

The basic problem with trying to reduce automation is that automation represents successful innovation to get rid of boring stuff. Adding pointless randomness to inhibit automation doesn't make a better game - it makes a game less fun.

One example: System jumps are repetitive with little novelty. Prime candidates for automation. ED should have added a safe automated system jump feature along with a much more fuel and time efficient manual mode (possibly based on Beowulf Shaeffer's journey to the center of the Galaxy in Crashlander).

P.S. More than a little irony this post showed up immediately after I post about AFKing CZs.

 

[Caydran]

Well, it still boils down to "prove you are human and at the controls" which is what "Captcha" was designed to do.

So, at certain game "breakpoints" you need checks to "prove you are human and at the controls" detection which makes sense to game-play and users.

You suggest OCR which is unworkable on any level and detecting or preventing bot actions seems too difficult.

That's going to be a hard one to solve.

From the start of computer gaming, we, as a society have become so use to modding games that now, we have a game where the producers, owners of the IP, don't want the code modded or modified, without sanction and prior approval. Third parties have produced software in association with this game which comes close to modding without violating the TOS and EULA and are often misrepresented as automation software when in fact, they are not and adhere to the owners TOS and EULA as well as being sanctioned by the company.

Software classed as Elite game automation, i.e. bots, violate the owners TOS and EULA, but it will not prevent those who develop and deploy it from finding willing users.

As an alternative to Captcha, and since VR also has a microphone as do most headsets, a "voice recognition" or "voice phrase" challenge at certain game breakpoints where you need a "prove your human and at the controls".

Another idea is to use a tactic fighter jets use when challenging an airliner in flight to prove a pilot is at the controls. The fighter pilot will tell the airline pilot to "slow down" and "lower the landing gear". An in-game challenge could do something similar.

Oh,, Seven....

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

So you have proof?

The point being that if FDev sees that, they can probably say with some degree of certainty: "This is sus". What actions they take from then on is up to them. It's not up to me.

Is this unfair?

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

I don't know who you are, what faction or group you represent by your use of 'we', but I can tell you that 1000/40 = 25 missions per system, per day & the squadron I'm in each player regularly exceeds that & has done for years. I think the most I've personally done in any one system was 50 missions in a day, spread across 6 factions to undermine a controlling faction, normally my mission count would be a multiple of 20 of course. In a 192t Frag Python, in open, and I regularly work 5-6 systems per day out of 40-50 I have an interest in. Only having 3 wars to work per day (whether contested or not) would be a light day for me.

Riverside, I meant per account. Those numbers with a combined effort are normal and achieved every day, by us, by our (very real ahd human) opposition, by people elsewhere. That is more than doable. You still seem to think I'm just guessing bots because we happened to find opposition.

There have been people opposing us for 4-5 years. We've lost, too, and badly. We always took the L, because it was always real players.

In truth, facing real players is sometimes a good break from fighting easy random traffic and NPC's. Sometimes it's a bit frustrating, especially when you lose... but accusations of bots don't fly around just because you lose. I hope you understand what I mean... never in those situations did we suspect bots.

When people like the Alliance folk or us start talking about bots, it's because we're seeing strange behaviour that is off the charts, very suspicious, and sometimes obvious (even with provokation).

As I said earlier it's okay if you don't think the proof provided in the press, forum threads, reddit and years of documentation is enough. But let's not be dishonest and pretend there is no reason to be at the very least suspicious enough to call the bluff.

 

[Misty_Dark]

As a console player I can't help but ask, but how much control do programs such as VA and the like give over a ship?

If it's enough to fly a ship, the supposed botting might be so bad because FD is allowing their use (even though they technically violate the EULA), and the botters are likely taking advantage of it, knowing that FD can't use the information that these programs are running to ban them, as they might end up banning non-bots.
That could be why FD needs manual reports from players.

Any such tools all works by the same mechanics, they can send various keystrokes, button strokes etc so instead of pressing, a series of keys presses, like A D D <ENTER> D D D <ENTER>, these programs can do the same. So Elite do not need any special integrations etc, you will just use your existing keybinds.

And the smarter software, can read the log-file Elites have, and look for specific events, and that can trigger to send a series of keys presses.

This can be done with consoles too (well not reading the log file), but there are some more hardware level protection you need to take into account...


so if you use Voice attack and tell it "landing gear", voice attack will now press your key for landing gear, so instead of you pressing "G", you simply have to say "landing gear", and voice attacks presses that key for you.

And if you get adventurous, you send send serious of keystrokes, like asking for landing permission, so you say landing permission, voice attack sends the keystrokes to open left panel, move two tabs to the right, and move to the request landing permission and press enter. then closing the left panel, and all uou have to say, is "wibbly dibbly" that is the obvious phrase for requesting landing! now some things can go wrong with these sorts of series of button presses, as next time you say "wibbly dibbly", you might not be in the left most tab in the left panel, and what happens then? there are ways around that, there several clever people who have figured out most of these problems for us, if we do not want todo it ourselves...

 

[Misty_Dark]

Well, it still boils down to "prove you are human and at the controls" which is what "Captcha" was designed to do.

So, at certain game "breakpoints" you need checks to "prove you are human and at the controls" detection which makes sense to game-play and users.

You suggest OCR which is unworkable on any level and detecting or preventing bot actions seems too difficult.

That's going to be a hard one to solve.

From the start of computer gaming, we, as a society have become so use to modding games that now, we have a game where the producers, owners of the IP, don't want the code modded or modified, without sanction and prior approval. Third parties have produced software in association with this game which comes close to modding without violating the TOS and EULA and are often misrepresented as automation software when in fact, they are not and adhere to the owners TOS and EULA as well as being sanctioned by the company.

Software classed as Elite game automation, i.e. bots, violate the owners TOS and EULA, but it will not prevent those who develop and deploy it from finding willing users.

As an alternative to Captcha, and since VR also has a microphone as do most headsets, a "voice recognition" or "voice phrase" challenge at certain game breakpoints where you need a "prove your human and at the controls".

Another idea is to use a tactic fighter jets use when challenging an airliner in flight to prove a pilot is at the controls. The fighter pilot will tell the airline pilot to "slow down" and "lower the landing gear". An in-game challenge could do something similar.

Oh,, Seven....

voice challenge is not foolproof and what about people who are mute?

And if we are dealing with bots, all of these things you have said, can be detected and ACTED upon by the bot software.

 

[Jmanis]

Good thing the BGS just provides a living, breathing universe, otherwise botting might be a problem.

 

[Riverside]

Riverside, I meant per account. Not with the forces of all 40 pythons combined. That is more than doable. You still seem to think I'm just guessing bots because we happened to find opposition.

Lol. There have been people opposing us for 4-5 years. We've lost, too. Never did we suspect bots, really. What we are seeing with bots vs what you think we're seeing is just off the charts in scale.

Yeah. They probably think you are using bots too

I only have one account, I compete against multi-boxers, I compete against players that use private groups & just blindly follow orders handed out from a central core of players, I definitely compete against players that use external tools that allow them to see far more info & have far fewer opportunities for mistakes than the game provides for me.

otoh because I don't have an inara account (or any others other than this forum) I don't show up on the traffic reports of those external tools, and probably only on the in-station traffic report as two-three Pythons, one in, back to cash in & maybe collect more missions, and a third time if I take a second round.

I'm not saying botting doesn't happen, I'm saying (as others have) what's the difference between a multi-boxer, a botter and just lots of (BGS) novices being directed by a central team or person? There's no difference, the effect is the same. I am in competition with multiple Cmdr accounts across (potentially) all modes, time zones & platforms, if some don't really understand why they are doing what they are doing & just blindly do what they're told functionally that's no different to me, I just have to do more 'clever' work to compensate, same as everyone else. It is satisfying to out-think your opposition, particularly when they have a numeric advantage, and bots are easier to out-think than players.

Using external tools to automate stuff is a huge grey area, one I don't go into at all, one that players using voice attack dip into, and one where at the extreme end some players take advantage of how relatively simple & consequence free this PEGI7 game we all enjoy has become.

All you can reasonably expect to to is lead by example & let others do their worst. And if you don't like what they are doing (whether that be botting or CLogging) just report them & get on with your game.

Faction support is tending towards being incredibly grindy & that's not because of bots, it's because of large scale organisation using increasingly sophisticated external tools to analyse & communicate, and worry about minutiae instead of whether you are still having fun.

And yes, I do think you are just guessing bots because it's a possible solution. It could be, it isn't worth disrupting anyone else's game for though, it's just edge-case stuff not an endemic (and inevitable, and unavoidable) exploit like discord & chatrooms, which I accept and just don't use myself.

I am against cheating, and I think FDev do a poor job of discouraging it even allowing for the desire to avoid naming & shaming but if you had evidence that 40 accounts were doing 1000 missions each per day, you reported that & it didn't stop I don't think you are competing against bots, you are competing against players like me.

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

Yeah. They probably think you are using bots too

I only have one account, I compete against multi-boxers, I compete against players that use private groups & just blindly follow orders handed out from a central core of players, I definitely compete against players that use external tools that allow them to see far more info & have far fewer opportunities for mistakes than the game provides for me.

otoh because I don't have an inara account (or any others other than this forum) I don't show up on the traffic reports of those external tools, and probably only on the in-station traffic report as two-three Pythons, one in, back to cash in & maybe collect more missions, and a third time if I take a second round.

I'm not saying botting doesn't happen, I'm saying (as others have) what's the difference between a multi-boxer, a botter and just lots of (BGS) novices being directed by a central team or person? There's no difference, the effect is the same. I am in competition with multiple Cmdr accounts across (potentially) all modes, time zones & platforms, if some don't really understand why they are doing what they are doing & just blindly do what they're told functionally that's no different to me, I just have to do more 'clever' work to compensate, same as everyone else. It is satisfying to out-think your opposition, particularly when they have a numeric advantage, and bots are easier to out-think than players.

Using external tools to automate stuff is a huge grey area, one I don't go into at all, one that players using voice attack dip into, and one where at the extreme end some players take advantage of how relatively simple & consequence free this PEGI7 game we all enjoy has become.

All you can reasonably expect to to is lead by example & let others do their worst. And if you don't like what they are doing (whether that be botting or CLogging) just report them & get on with your game.

Faction support is tending towards being incredibly grindy & that's not because of bots, it's because of large scale organisation using increasingly sophisticated external tools to analyse & communicate, and worry about minutiae instead of whether you are still having fun.

And yes, I do think you are just guessing bots because it's a possible solution. It could be, it isn't worth disrupting anyone else's game for though, it's just edge-case stuff not an endemic (and inevitable, and unavoidable) exploit like discord & chatrooms, which I accept and just don't use myself.

I am against cheating, and I think FDev do a poor job of discouraging it even allowing for the desire to avoid naming & shaming but if you had evidence that 40 accounts were doing 1000 missions per day, you reported that & it didn't stop I don't think you are competing against bots, you are competing against players like me.

I mean, yeah, that's fair. Personally, before thinking of "captchas" that set the alarm off for a lot of people in the forums (because why would they want to be annoyed in order to solve a problem that doesn't concern them, or a problem that some think might just not be a problem at all?) I'd ask FDev for better information in the boards so that we can better identify botting or strange behaviour.

I sound like a broken record by pointing out that thread, but there's even video evidence that botting exists and has been used for years. These accounts are (for the most part) active today, while some appear to no longer exist (maybe banned? please see the thread as well, it's acknowledged there!). And in every episode that we have suspected bots, which we have done multiple times, with a lot of other big and experienced factions, there's a trail that leads back to some of these very same accounts with publicly known names that has been documented since 2018.

There are pretty clearn patterns in results, traffic, etc... that lead me to believe we're indeed facing bots. And it was all but confirmed for me when a certain account showed up

I think I'll stop trying to convince you though... you're not impressed with the evidence, and that's okay. But there is evidence and everyone is free to look at it and make up their own minds, this forum discussion notwithstanding.

Groups representing 17k people have thought it big enough of a problem to acknowledge it, and this initiative doesn't come out of people's imagination, that's for certain.

Looking at it from another perspective, it wouldn't hurt in the slightest to provide better information in-system to help clear out these doubts. In my case, I hope said information that would hopefully be provided in-game confirms my suspicions, in your case, you might think it a good thing because it would prove you right. Nonetheless, helping to clear out this would probably be best for everyone, and would lead to a better understanding of the whole thing.

 

[Riverside]

I think I'll stop trying to convince you though... you're not impressed with the evidence, and that's okay. But there is evidence and everyone is free to look at it and make up their own minds, this forum discussion notwithstanding.

Not only am I not convinced by the evidence (that this is a widespread problem that needs to be addressed) I have seen people attribute work to bots that I know I did, in open on PC, where if those that made the accusations actually had some representation, would meet me & be able to discover my motivation & find a diplomatic solution, in the game

You realise that 17k number will INCLUDE these 'bot accounts' too right?

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

Not only am I not convinced by the evidence (that this is a widespread problem that needs to be addressed) I have seen people attribute work to bots that I know I did, in open on PC, where if those that made the accusations actually had some representation, would meet me & be able to discover my motivation & find a diplomatic solution, in the game

You realise that 17k number will INCLUDE these 'bot accounts' too right?

I really don't think the fact that some clueless faction accusing you of botting is equivalent to an essay of evidence regarding bots in open-play back in 2018 and these accounts still doing the exact same thing in 2021. That's probably not just me either!

 

[Riverside]

I really don't think the fact that some clueless faction accusing you of botting is equivalent to an essay of evidence regarding bots in open-play back in 2018 and these accounts still doing the exact same thing in 2021. That's probably not just me either!

I wouldn't call either the AEDC or TCF clueless. Be careful what you assume

I have a great deal of respect for TCF, I like the way they play, they are tough cookies & display good camaraderie. They are the kind of group I could see myself joining if I agreed with their ideology & were a more social player. The AEDC are... green. But they do know what they are doing & can show flashes of brilliance.

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

I wouldn't call either the AEDC or TCF clueless. Be careful what you assume

I have a great deal of respect for TCF, I like the way they play, they are tough cookies & display good camaraderie. They are the kind of group I could see myself joining if I agreed with their ideology & were a more social player. The AEDC are... green. But they do know what they are doing & can show flashes of brilliance.

Ahaha, yes, I guess I made a mistake by assuming. Both AEDC and TCF aren't clueless at all. I know I said I didn't want to convince you anymore, but I do have a hard time coming to terms with AEDC or TCF accusing you of botting by generating 4 pythons of traffic or by them not getting the results they wanted.

I'm curious where you got the information that they thought your actions were the results of botting, without knowing it was you. You said you're not in any discord servers, and the only other big-deal accusations of botting date back to 2018. It's probably okay if you don't tell me, it's just a bit weird.

 

[Riverside]

it's just a bit weird.

The thread in a nutshell

There's a thread in the BGS section called 'Alliance Factions!' or something (cba to find it) that should provide some background to the AEDC story, I met an AEDC player (they were docked) in Beta Comae Bernices I think, he had no idea who I was & struck up a conversation, they were complaining about bots & I asked which systems, he named a few I had flipped. I rattled off a few more I had done & he said I took the game too seriously. I said I was glad he didn't take it so seriously, because it meant I would beat him

Annoyed at the 'bot' accusation I then broke protocol & told him my next target, Wolf 393. I flipped it, retreated them & expanded the faction I put in control a few times just to press home the point, I did it alone. The Squadron I am in usually makes a point of having only a single player work any given system each day, although it's not always the same player each day (for variety).

The TCF one was the election that gained them Azeban Orbital. Their leader used it as an example of bots operating in the region, I knew it wasn't bots & having helpfully explained this (and how I knew) came under attack. The attack was fended off & I directed their expansion efforts (with the assistance of a friend) for a while until I was satisfied they had come to appreciate that I wasn't bluffing.
ETA The impression I got from their leader was that others had told him it was bots.


So no, I don't think bots are a big problem, but false accusations of botting are

 

[LeoBartlet]

More than 17,000 commanders have signed up to an anti-botting agreement. So at least some see it as an issue.

17000 individual players have signed the agreement or player groups "representing" 17000 commandos have signed the agreement?

Irrelevant really as your agreement is completely unenforceable.

 

[LeoBartlet]

So no, I don't think bots are a big problem, but false accusations of botting are

Those who constantly shout bot this bot that remind me of twitch streamers who shout stream snipe the moment someone kills them in a game.

 

[Stealthie]

You know how, when people moan about the faff of requesting docking, Fdev said "we wanted to make docking a procedure rather than an action"?

Seems like that could be the basis for a means of preventing botting and, ideally, a basis for dramatically expanding the way we can interact with NPCs in general.

Set it up so that requesting docking initiates a dialogue that requires a couple of simple responses (a bit like the dialogue that you get, asking you to choose a side when you enter a CZ) and it could be enough to hinder a lot of bots.
Expand that system to include all our interactions with NPCs and you've got a way to improve things like piracy, bounty-hunting, combat, mining etc.

 

[Riverside]

You know how, when people moan about the faff of requesting docking, Fdev said "we wanted to make docking a procedure rather than an action"?

Seems like that could be the basis for a means of preventing botting and, ideally, a basis for dramatically expanding the way we can interact with NPCs in general.

Set it up so that requesting docking initiates a dialogue that requires a couple of simple responses (a bit like the dialogue that you get, asking you to choose a side when you enter a CZ) and it could be enough to hinder a lot of bots.
Expand that system to include all our interactions with NPCs and you've got a way to improve things like piracy, bounty-hunting, combat, mining etc.

As the game development has progressed it has become less of a process, not more. Understandably so, and the game is more popular for it. Not necessarily a better, richer game to play, but more acceptable to the mainstream & I don't think that's going to change, or should for this.

Most players probably don't use the logs for anything though, maybe voice attack. I don't use them at all, I have never looked at them nor felt the need to. Removing that sophisticated, parsable game interface would help I think, although of course I am sure that would be unpopular with the same players that want botting removed