"Player follow" will get you banned

[Crush]

Do you want to eliminate botting in the game? Start by eliminating the special bot clients the devs and Gm's have (it's supposed to be top secret and hardly no one knows about this client but it does exist, it's a patch really)

You shouldn't believe everything some kids with need for attention tell you.

A secret conspiracy between developers to create a bot client for personal use? That's just ridiculous. Why should you cheat in a game when you have the power to change it in any way you can?

As a developer you could cheat in much better ways:
- The tmwAthena developers could easily sneak in a patch right into the server which allows them to dupe stuff.
- Even the scripters could do that. There are several non-obvious errors you can make when scripting NPCs which allow a player to dupe items or money. It happened frequently in the past that such errors found their way onto the main server because of sloppy QA, so there is plausible deniability when one would do it intentionally.
- Some long-time developers (like me, for example) have the rights to spawn money and any item they want with @commands or even have direct access to the database allowing them to manipulate inventory data directly.

And the GMs are in it too? You are electing the GMs. Do you really think that all the people you trust so much that you make them GMs would just keep silent about that?

[amarant24]

This rule is mega flawed. If I were attacking a monster and someone else was attacking the same monster with the "go attack" feature in 4144 GM's could see that as a follow however if follow wasn't turned on then we'd both get banned and we weren't botting no automated features were turned on, no follow no nothing. DAMN IT make a dummy proof plan as obviously the dummy that came up with it didn't think things through correctly. Use the KISS method KEEP IT SIMPLE STUPID. This stuff happens with the official client. Gosh help people prevent Carpal Tunnel and use some automated features. Is it a requisite to have carpal tunnel to play the game or at least set a goal to get it in the long run?

[yourmistakes]

the amount of retardation i have read in this thread is simply astounding. i think my brain is bleeding.
stop splitting hairs.
stop with the hypocrisy.
stop with the conspiracy theories.
stop trying to muddle points which have already been clarified several times.
basically use your brain and stop being tools.

[amarant24]

@Crush Dude the patch for botting is a patch to 4144's manaplus... it's a fact that it exists because it's even in a topic here in the forums. Aurora Council , Phoenix Council (which is a branch of this Aurora Council) people don't know too much about it because they don't really search the forums. I've gotten my hands on this patch which is why I know it exists and I don't really care about keeping it a secret. I'm not sharing it because I respect the creator of this patch but I chose to not keep this subject a taboo secret that no one talks about because it's childish. Yes Modified clients exist, No the follow rule won't change these clients purposes or hinder anyones actions. Bot stacks can easily still be made and GM's or devs aren't around nearly as much as they should be to stop this type of incident.(incident=botting afk).

Make the right friends in the game and they'll share the patch with you. It's the way it works.

[amarant24]

@ Mistakes You criticize the thread and hypocritical things being said and you're the first hypocrite. You're a known botter You're the one acting all high and mighty here as if you're such a good boy that always follows the rules. Why don't you stop kissing ass? You're a dev you're already got all the power you need! If the rules were so clear then there wouldn't be people asking for so many clarifications.

[Crush]

Oh, you mean Manabot? That one is hardly a secret...

But how do you jump to the conclusion that GMs and Devs are using it?

[Piateluca]

People should make that client public

[Crush]

It is public. Google is your friend. They are even complying with the GPL and publish the sourcecode. Because it's open source it isn't unlikely that there are some customized versions around, though.

But that doesn't matter, because our GMs aren't morons.

[Piateluca]

lol please, im talkin about the super mysterious client!

[yourmistakes]

Edit: more response/post ratio

@ Mistakes You criticize the thread and hypocritical things being said and you're the first hypocrite. You're a known botter =.

you're a known breather because you have breathed.

You're the one acting all high and mighty here as if you're such a good boy that always follows the rules.

you must be Duck retarded if you think i've ever had the pretense of being a good boy.

Why don't you stop kissing ass?.

it's not anyone you know and i think you mean french kissing.

You're a dev you're already got all the power you need!

since when am I a dev? can someone clarify this for me?

If the rules were so clear then there wouldn't be people asking for so many clarifications.

they are abundantly clear. "No botting"

[Big Crunch]

Seems this thread has run its course and degenerated into mud slinging

[mistergrey]

amarant24:

1- Mistakes is not a dev.
2- Phoenix Council is not a 'branch' of Aurora, it is most of the members of Aurora, who left after issues in the original guild.
3- It does not manner what client anybody uses, it is how you use software that makes it a problem or not.
Your information here has a lot of gaps, or false areas, so perhaps getting your facts straight might help. As I told Ledmitz, you shouldn't take what you hear from somebody as gospel, as they only ever tell you their likely biased side of things, regardless of how true/false that side may be.

I think there have been enough conspiracy theories and fingers pointed here, can we please bring this back on topic to: the follow issue?

[Ledmitz]

Oh, so much to say and ask. First off here is a link to wikipedia's definition of Open Source Software...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open-source_software

And here are some interesting quotes from it...

"3. Derived Works - The license must allow modifications and derived works, and must allow them to be distributed under the same terms as the license of the original software."
(It looks to me that I may ask for a copy of any client and that it must be given or there is a breach in the Open Source Agreement) ?

"The license must explicitly permit distribution of software built from modified source code."
(same point - secret client must be made available to all) ?

"5. No Discrimination Against Persons or Groups - The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons."
(I assume this means botters too, as they are a group of people)

"6. No Discrimination Against Fields of Endeavor - The license must not restrict anyone from making use of the program in a specific field of endeavor."
(This would include botting, I assume, as it is an endeaver in the field of botting)

"10. License Must Be Technology Neutral - No provision of the license may be predicated on any individual technology or style of interface." (ok.. so this surely means I am allowed to bot now, right? ... it sure is my style of interface)

From what I gather in all of that; Not only is botting allowed, but AFK botting too. I know that is not a good thing and surely there is a workaround or loophole that actually protects Server Administrators in some way and lets them have some choices, at least... but basically, if you are going to use this software or even add to it, whether you be a server admin, dev, gm or player, that you have to abide by the terms of the Open Source Software Agreement.

Topic closed!

I'm tempted to do exactly that.

I was going to predict that. In fact, I still will.

o11c wrote:DarkestLight wrote:however we are banning the use of macros that players made to fit their needs.By definition, a macro takes user input and then generates an action. As such, no macros are banned.mac·ro/ˈmakrō/Noun: A single instruction that expands automatically into a set of instructions.Something like thisPlayer presses F key while targeting 'X player', in response:Player checks 'X players' location <----- Line 1Player moves to 'X players' locationIF:Player checks if 'X player' is attacking---Player targets closest monster------Player attacks---Return to line 1Thus banning follow has banned a macro, or is my definition not good enough for you?I will follow your rules, but point blank this rule needs to be removed OR you are banning a macro.I'm fine with both cases but its either or...

OK, if 1 party is correct, then the use of a macro is being banned. If the other is correct then there are still plenty of automated functions that many use that are not being penalized.
i.e. auto ingrav, betsanc, asorm, all spellrepeat functions would also be bad. These are all reccurring macros too. For that matter, moving between points in bot mode would also be the same, would it not? Autoattack .. the list goes on. The point is where does it stop? As it is... if i am trying to sell something in the game and I advertise in general too often, it is spam (not really. It's called flooding. Spam would be me trying to actually sell you something in real life or direct ppl to another url.) But in any event, I am trying to do something 'in game' wheras a conversation about what's for supper may be happening.... technichally.. the idle chitchat is the flooding as it may not pertain to the game and takes up so many lines that no one has seen my ad so I have to repeat.
The point is... folks around here are hung-up on some mighty strange stuff and even take this bot thing a little too personally. But no player wants to get in the 90 lvls and worry about what they can and can't do for fear of a ban. I have so many questions now that I feel it would be best to just go back to the original client again. The problem is.. no one else is going to... so I guess I have to keep this one now in order to keep up, which is the only reason I ever tried any other client in the first place.

yourmistakes wrote:
i see lots of botters bitching here. allow me to clear up a common misconception. botting is not only afk activity.

Correct.. no more auto ingrav for you! NEXT!


I don't know how to go far enough back to quote Mr.Grey, but I gotta say this... you shut me down on that last one... and you did it tactfully and with style. If I am to assume your entirety based on those comments, you deserve GM. I will have to stay on my toes around you, i see.


There is a solution to all these problems, you know... other than perma-ban, i mean. I propose a duncecap. It would be ugly and stand out like a sore thumb. In addition it can only be equipped on another player by a GM. On top of that, it could cause minuses in stats.. to be fair... -5, -10 or even more, in all stats and would automatically disappear once a certain amount of exp had been reached... or maybe leave stats alone and simply make the exp goal to get the hat off and finally get real exp again.

And hey.. maybe for smaller crimes, turn someone into a frog for a duration of gameplay time. Believe me, I am good at annoying people, as you may have noticed. This is a fun and much more passive way to deal with these problems. Not only that, but these annoying topics would stop coming up and GM's could actually have fun punishing people... giving then even MORE incentive.
Punish in game... punish in game.. (repeat) .. everybody now!

[yourmistakes]

there is a big difference between automating certain spells and automating everything a character does. the latter is botting.

[o11c]

Just because you are allowed to modify the client, doesn't mean you can use that client to break rules of a server to which you connect.

Mistakes, can you explain this "automating certain spells" thing? I assume it refers to automatically casting "#ingrav" after you run out of shots.
If this is in response to an action the player takes (trying to attack) it is definitely a macro. OTOH, if it is in response to the magic attack ending, it is only indirectly a response to the player's action of attacking, so debatably falls under "automation", although not under this latest explicit definition.

Also Ledmitz: please learn to use the [ quote ] button properly.