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

[Caydran]

Can't FD monitor suspect accounts to see

If an account plays ED 24/7, then surely that's a hint of something's out of the ordinary. Couldn't FD detect that?

Should be easy to detect. My bank knocks me off-line in less than fifteen minutes of no activity. This is easily implemented on most any server.

Ahh, yet another reason console trumps pc

PC's Rule, Consoles Drool over what a PC can do.

 

[gorankar]

If they can replicate a mission with hacks, they don't need bots. They just need alts and a VPN. Which would be a much simpler, and frankly, more believable scenario than bot armies.

 

[gorankar]

Ahh, yet another reason console trumps pc

It would be the only reason, but since I know of several Xbox ED exploits in use, coupled with the shared galaxy between platforms making a BGS/PP exploit or cheat on any platform effect all of the others, it's not even that.

 

[Misty_Dark]

Ahh, yet another reason console trumps pc

Not really, it is just a bit more complicated to run a bot on a console... a modified controller and a PC with webcam is what you need hardware wise, and of course the bot software...which could be the same that runs a bot... no need to modify your console... only a controller.

 

[Lightspeed]

"asking for irrefutable proof is disingenuous at best"? Yeah, let's not ask for proof, why would we ever want to prove something? Let's just base all our decisions on assumptions, I mean, what's the worst that could happen?




I know it is, I just did a Google search for Elite Dangerous bots .... didn't find any, but in the results of all the useful LEGAL 3rd-party tools, I did find one trainer for Elite Dangerous (no, I won't share the link, and no I don't use them) ... but no bots.



What's my angle? I just want proof. I want to know that you and others want to make changes to the game, for the right reasons, because I am having serious doubts about that. I have been here a long time, I've seen nearly everything on this forum, and I am still here despite all the trolls and (words I can't say, thanks forum profanity filter) and people who don't have this game's best interests at heart.

The OP of this thread, a Moderator of this forum, has talked about introducing a game mechanic which, if you prove you are human, you get rewarded .... and others are supporting that, and either you don't see what's wrong with what you are suggesting, or you do see what's wrong with what you are suggesting, but try to gaslight and bully people like me, for merely asking for proof, because you don't have this game's best interests at heart.

So, again,for the umpteenth time, I ask .... and will keep banging this drum .... where is the proof bots either are being used or are a problem?

You are not going to get "proof" ... this is a shady subject at best and 'proof' and contact with FD about it has to take place behind the scenes. The existence of 'cheats' may or may not including 'botting.' It is semantics to argue on this definition, but I suppose one is using hacks, and mods to existing code, the other is using automated processes to achieve a result. Both are cheating. But FD have said in the past that, while they are aware of some cheating going on, it is small in numbers.

To say it does not exist, is a little disingenuous and I do wonder why you keep beating this drum. FD have said:

"When it comes to taking actions against accounts we have identified as using cheats, we review every report on a case by case basis. While there has been a level of discussion regarding these cheats within the community recently, we can assure people that the number of people using these are a very tiny number of players. We are still working on new and improved ways of stopping these cheats and tracking and measuring activity now and in the past.

We strongly advise that no player runs Elite Dangerous using a cheat client, hack, software mod etc as this will put your account at risk now, and in the future."

It exists. The argument being expressed in this thread is that it may be more prevalent, or rather more effective in certain systems where the BGS is manipulated, than FD might be aware of or admitting to. And positive suggestions are being offered to overcome it.

Source: (nothing new, it was back in 2019)

 

[Exiledkhallisi]

Should be easy to detect. My bank knocks me off-line in less than fifteen minutes of no activity. This is easily implemented on most any server.



PC's Rule, Consoles Drool over what a PC can do.

Nah... the difference really isnt that big.

60FPS+ locked ps5. No real need to replace hardware except for "i want" and a fraction of the bots/cheating. Level playing field ie everyone uses the same hardware.

 

[Alien]

To say it does not exist, is a little disingenuous and I do wonder why you keep beating this drum.

It exists. The argument being expressed in this thread is that it may be more prevalent, or rather more effective in certain systems where the BGS is manipulated, than FD might be aware of or admitting to. And positive suggestions are being offered to overcome it.

Source: (nothing new, it was back in 2019)

As I have made quite a few posts in this thread, I am open to the possibility I have said something that could be construed as "bots are not used in Elite Dangerous"
However, I am fairly sure what I've actually been saying is that I'd like to see proof that bots are being used and that it is a problem.

The closest I have seen to that, in this thread, is "it can't be proven", which means you (generalisation, not you specifically) expect me to simply take your word for it that there is a bot problem. I'm not saying there isn't, but you are saying there is. I'm asking for proof.

If you make a claim, and someone asks for proof, and you go "um ... well .... there is no proof" then you shouldn't be surprised when people don't support your cause.

EDIT: Let me give you an example of proof. A year or two ago (I forget how long ago) a player tried to bring to Frontier's attention the problem with trainers being used in Elite Dangerous. Despite his efforts to get through to them the scale of the problem, they would not take it seriously. So he used a trainer, got into a Beluga (I think, it was a big ship) and blocked the docking slot of Jameson Memorial in Open mode .... for about an hour (I think, it may have been longer).

He was banned (or shadow banned) but he had proven his point, and Frontier might have made changes to how they detect cheating (we don't know, because Frontier rightly don't talk about the specifics of what they can detect).

Do you see now why proof is needed of bots and if it's a problem? You (generalisation) merely saying it's a problem, is not good enough. You have to PROVE to Frontier it's a problem ... ideally without getting banned. You can't even prove it to me.

 

[Bottom Hat]

As I have made quite a few posts in this thread, I am open to the possibility I have said something that could be construed as "bots are not used in Elite Dangerous"
However, I am fairly sure what I've actually been saying is that I'd like to see proof that bots are being used and that it is a problem.

The closest I have seen to that, in this thread, is "it can't be proven", which means you (generalisation, not you specifically) expect me to simply take your word for it that there is a bot problem. I'm not saying there isn't, but you are saying there is. I'm asking for proof.

If you make a claim, and someone asks for proof, and you go "um ... well .... there is no proof" then you shouldn't be surprised when people don't support your cause.

Some people have created religions out of this sort of thing!

 

[Melanthes]

Yeah, apparently (though this might be speculation) the P2P nature of the game can be exploited to send repeated actions to the servers, so that bots aren't necessarily completing 50 missions, they just do it once... and it counts multiple times. That plus their constant effort doing this all day, translates into off the charts results

Or your calculations are wrong, but that's not possible, right?

 

[KKomrade Sylas]

Or your calculations are wrong, but that's not possible, right?

Maybe, but I was under the impression you learnt something from your stay in here

 

[Esteban]

I admit that I haven't read all 12 pages of this thread, but, since this is a collection of players' thoughts on the matter...

How big of a problem is this? The reason I ask is that the proposal to require everyone do something in response to the problem isn't all that appealing to me as a matter of how to solve problems.
Whether you 'care' about the BGS or not isn't the consideration, imo. If you play the game without cheating, inclusive of meddling in the BGS or not, it's unfortunate that you have to make a concession to cheaters. I certainly expect that the cheaters are in the vast minority. If I'm mistaken, then I suppose this is moot.

I wish I could propose an actual solution It's not an easy task with little real knowledge of inner workings.
Perhaps I'll have a brilliant idea; that's a stretch. Perhaps more reasonable to expect is that this principle weighs on a solution.

Thanks for posting a mechanism to allow us to offer thoughts about this.

 

[Jane Turner]

There is also an alternative explanation: that OPs faction just aren't as good at BGS as they think they are.

Of course that's possible, but do you think that the 146 groups, all powerplay commands and now 18,000 individual that have signed up ahead of us are also crying wolf?

 

[Riverside]

Of course that's possible, but do you think that the 146 groups, all powerplay commands and now 18,000 individual that have signed up ahead of us are also crying wolf?

They are not signing up to a captcha-like system, they are just happy to agree not to use bots (and help out if evidence of botting is found). That can be done without believing botting is actually a significant problem.

 

[Jmanis]

Of course that's possible, but do you think that the 146 groups, all powerplay commands and now 18,000 individual that have signed up ahead of us are also crying wolf?

Yes? People, particularly on the Internet, and even more particularly on video games, are generally pretty prone to being led astray.

Also, it's a bit of a false leap to suggest all those signatories have actually experienced botting.

 

[znôrt]

Also, it's a bit of a false leap to suggest all those signatories have actually experienced botting.

they are all bots

 

[Rubbernuke]

I imagine that the amount of signatories is really an indication the lack of faith people have in FDs obfuscated investigations. Whatever is done the end result is the same- you'll never know the outcome unless you see the action you were facing stop. It does not help that many systems in ED have to be picked apart and guessed at where doubts begin to materialize.

 

[gorankar]

Of course that's possible, but do you think that the 146 groups, all powerplay commands and now 18,000 individual that have signed up ahead of us are also crying wolf?

It seems a large number of humans tend to claim "hax" whenever they lose. When they win it's fair play, when they lose despite trying their best, they suspect cheating.
Without serious evidence of widespread botting, it's hard for some of us to believe it. I would need relatively conclusive evidence of multiple players performing the same action in the same systems supporting/attacking the same faction(s) and doing it every day for more that 8 hours at a time day after day in a robotic fashion. The bot commanders themselves would need to be stripped down, almost nothing to them except what's needed to be a good bot. I understand those that believe botting is a big issue have a bit of a serious road block into providing evidence in support of their claim, in that a lot of that evidence can only be provided by Fdev. And good luck with that. That has to be a bit maddening for you, I get that, but we are not going to just accept "we said so".

 

[Hoopes81]

Of course that's possible, but do you think that the 146 groups, all powerplay commands and now 18,000 individual that have signed up ahead of us are also crying wolf?

But what does this prove?

I've already seen the leader of the group CI thinks is using bots against them declare his support for this in the other thread.

 

[Schmack]

How about creating better content so people who are actually playing want to do the things botters are automating? You get thousands out mining brainlessly for hours on end just to see a meaningless numerical increase in their mostly worthless credits but for some reason working to affect the BGS with these mundane, boring and tedious actions can be be better done by the obviously Sasquatch level clandestine bots.

 

[Riverside]

How about creating better content so people who are actually playing want to do the things botters are automating? You get thousands out mining brainlessly for hours on end just to see a meaningless numerical increase in their mostly worthless credits but for some reason working to affect the BGS with these mundane, boring and tedious actions can be be better done by the obviously Sasquatch level clandestine bots.

The evolution of the game has gone the other way though with fewer random threats interdicting in supercruise, the addition of auto-launch & supercruise assist. All changes aimed at making the game more accessible to novice players, all also making automation a little easier.

otoh the more sophisticated log files do nothing to help the novice, more mainstream player & serve only to allow players to automate things like managing large territories & spotting small problems before they become big ones.
That removes the fog of war, and diminishes the game for all but those who capitalise on that.

Others apparently go even further and apply cutting edge AI technology to literally read the screen & react with sophisticated feedback loops for the purpose of being a thorn in the side of those large player groups that probably could just chill out a bit & respect the boundaries of others instead of going all tinfoil hat, theorycrafting conspiracies.