automated clients

[Kestrel]

Well I'll be damned, I've been playing the wrong game all this time.
I should've spent all those countless hours writing a bot instead of actually playing the game.

TMW: made by botters for botters. Scratch that, might as well rename it to The Bot World.

[Cassy]

rename it to The Bot World.

No, no, it's still The Drama World, because:

• People love to make huge issues out of small ones and to overreact
• People love using a harsh tone when writing a post cause it's so easy to hide their faces in the internet (while in real life most of them would never dare talking like this face to face)
• People love running around in circles with discussing and accusing this and that instead of bringing reasonable solutions
• People love saying all/many of TMWC and devs are weird when actually just 1-2 talked about one issue
• People love saying all/many players are weird when actually just 2-3 talked about one issue
• People love making TMW look like being created for botters by botters when this actually only counts for just a few of them

You should think about number 1 and 6 after your previous post and this thread.
Others (withouth mentioning names) should think about the other points as well

~♪

I can understand it, you have a point. Do you know why I care? I've seen example how current rules can discourage [harmless] experiments with client. If you can face draconian punishment on slightest mistake, it discourages learning client internals and screws development attempts. That's why I think amount of guilt should be considered when making judgement. At the end of day it's not even automations what is bad (guns do not kill people, unless "real" AI created). It's unfair advantage over others that counts. I mostly care about 2 scenarios: botting for XP/loot (no fun to compete with machines at grind) and unfair battles (3 sync'd chars can pwn one char for sure). I don't think those who botting for months should face same punishment as someone who forgot some #betsanc refresh while drinking coffee. IMO single punishment for all cases does not works well and does not leads to best results.

t3st3r got a point here... though I think it's very hard to find reasonable different levels of punishments for the different levels of (ab)using automation.
I'm not sure if this is even possible without creating another drama...

[Kestrel]

People love to make huge issues out of small ones and to overreact

There's nothing to consider, botting is a guillotine offense in all MMORPGs.
You're literally breaking the spirit of the game at that point.

[Cassy]

People love to make huge issues out of small ones and to overreact

There's nothing to consider, botting is a guillotine offense in all MMORPGs.
You're literally breaking the spirit of the game at that point.

That point was meant in general.
Botting sure is a big issue.
Still I think you (and others) overreact by the way they talk or open a new ironical thread.
That doesn't help to solve this problem and only brings fire into the discussion -> more drama... I hope you see what I mean.

[Kestrel]

That point was meant in general.
Botting sure is a big issue.
Still I think you (and others) overreact by the way they talk or open a new ironical thread.
That doesn't help to solve this problem and only brings fire into the discussion -> more drama... I hope you see what I mean.

The solution has and will always be the banhammer.
I won't stand for these apologists who are wrecking this game by condoning this type of behaviour.

If you can't take the heat, then pack your bags and go home.

[Cassy]

The solution has and will always be the banhammer.
I won't stand for these apologists who are wrecking this game by condoning this type of behaviour.

I'm not sure if you read the whole thread but let's at least take this part from t3st3r:

I've seen example how current rules can discourage [harmless] experiments with client. If you can face draconian punishment on slightest mistake, it discourages learning client internals and screws development attempts. That's why I think amount of guilt should be considered when making judgement. At the end of day it's not even automations what is bad (guns do not kill people, unless "real" AI created). It's unfair advantage over others that counts. I mostly care about 2 scenarios: botting for XP/loot (no fun to compete with machines at grind) and unfair battles (3 sync'd chars can pwn one char for sure). I don't think those who botting for months should face same punishment as someone who forgot some #betsanc refresh while drinking coffee.

So are you really serious about swinging the banhammer in all cases by giving the reason "I won't stand for these apologists who are wrecking this game by condoning this type of behaviour"?
If you had said that swinging the banhammer in all cases because it's hard to make a general fair set of judgements depending on the level of abusement I would most likely agree or least find a point in your opinion, but giving this reason is... without wanting to attack you... it seems just weird to me.

A little side note to underline my opinion:
I don't use any type of automation (except things like auto-follow and imitation in town for fun (and only fun)) because I just don't like it.

If you can't take the heat, then pack your bags and go home.

I had a feeling that you won't understand so I'll try it again:

Sometimes it seems that no one realizes that the drama making people leave the game is mainly caused by the inability of many to discuss things in a calm and neutral way and not in a harsh way with accusations and flamings about problems without at least even thinking about how to solve them.

People bringing the heat should reconsider what they are doing (note that I didn't say "pack your bags and go home").
Besides if you were talking to me and not in general I can tell you that I can take and already took damn much heat

[Nard]

Sometimes it seems that no one realizes that the drama making people leave the game is mainly caused by the inability of many to discuss things in a calm and neutral way and not in a harsh way with accusation and flamings about problems without at least even thinking about how to solve them

How can you say that? This thread and many others include solution proposals which are, sometimes rightfully, brushed aside because the authors don't have "the big view", are not official contributors or are just considered as noobs (not to say worse).

People bringing the heat should reconsider what they are doing (note that I didn't say "pack your bags and go home").

This exactly what t3st3r and I ask for and, almost surely, many silent players. This also why we did not point anyone to public; it is supposed to be GMs and TMWc's job. The bad with a to much general speech is that everyone may feel concerned though it is not the case. Such topics should not occur in my opinion, If they happen, it is because a problem exists. Negating this is just refusing to see reality as it is.

[Cassy]

How can you say that? This thread and many others include solution proposals which are, sometimes rightfully, brushed aside because the authors don't have "the big view", are not official contributors or are just considered as noobs (not to say worse).

Do you maybe think I was only referring to (some) players? Cause I was referring to (some) TMWC members and devs as well (you just gave examples of why).
Also note the part you quoted was meant in general and in Kestrel's case, not for this whole topic (I thought this was obvious, sorry if it wasn't).
We have many examples of where people do not bring solution proposals and only bring fire instead.

[Nard]

Do you maybe think I was only referring to (some) players?...

NP Cassy, your last post seemed ambiguous to me, that's why I replied. MadCamel's last answer was not on this point. By the way, we all need to take into account that a new forum contributor may also express his feelings before he knows the game enough to become a game contributor. In my opinion posting in this forum is the first step to a wider contribution, or to stay silent...

[Hello=)]

There's nothing to consider, botting is a guillotine offense in all MMORPGs.
You're literally breaking the spirit of the game at that point.

I wonder how many GMs you've meet in other MMORPGs to get their views. From what I've seen, it's guillotine offence only for those who dares to bot in hardcore ways, getting obvious advantages over others. In less severe cases GMs usually resorting to warnings before swinging banhamers, because every banhammer swing causes noticeable damage to project as well. At the end of day, goal is not to ban everyone (though empty server lacks offenders for sure). Goal is to keep climate sane and pleasant for players. And it's unlikely that banning someone for minor AFK activity which had no obvious gain would actually serve this goal.

[Nard]

Unfortunately it seems that with the noticeable exception on MadCamel, none among the players who use(d) automated clients have courage enough to express their opinion in this thread. Probably they think that the topic will be forgotten?

[Freeyorp101]

Give me time. As always, there is a lot of history here.

The prevailing interpretation four years ago was that automation was acceptable as long as there was still a human involved, as a human could be doing any of the actions performed anyway. There is no magical way to determine whether or not someone was using automation, so GMs merely performed a simplified turing test to see if there was a human playing.

Botting was then defined only as unattended activity:

(and by botting I mean ANY AFK activity in game)

Botting as we define it (and we've carefully defined it) was never allowed.

So non-afk botting is not actually botting? So let's give it a new term to avoid confusion.

Automation. AFK automation is botting and is illegal.

Automation is fine as long as you are present to respond to the GMs. If you don't respond to the GMs within 2 minutes, you are considered botting and will be dealt with as described above.

To quote an old global thread "Punishment for Botting" (now hidden in the parking lot, perhaps this could be restored to visibility with a note saying that the old interpretations no longer apply?), punishment was more severe for unattended characters performing complication actions, rather than just leaving a rock on the attack buttons on the keyboard or such:

1. You are NOT using a script for "botting":

first time: A permanent ban. A reduction of the punishment - reset of your levels - is possible if you want to play again.

second time: A second reset is impossible. Your account is lost and will stay banned.


2. You ARE using a script for "botting":

first time: Your account is lost and will stay banned. A reset is impossible!

This interpretation persisted until not long after Platyna returned, during discussion regarding the then popular yet still third-party 4144 patch for unattended activity (as it was then defined, botting). Alons requested clarification as to exactly which penalty should apply. My post, the eighth in the thread, may provide some insight as to the prevailing logic right before the rules were amended:

That the character in question was botting has already been determined, days ago now.

As I understand it, what is up for discussion is the severity of the penalty in this case - whether it should be treated as primitive AFK activity, with a reset available, or where modifications were used to assist AFK activity, with no reset available.

Since the character had modifications present that hindered detection I believe the latter type of penalty (with no option of reset) should apply.

If there is intention for the team to give special treatment to the modifications present in the 4144 client then this should be stated publicly. However, I am aware of no such plans, and I would be against such special treatment anyway, regardless of how popular it may be. I have no problems with third party modifications (I even regularly use a number of changes in my client that I made myself.) But I would not give popular modifications special treatment when it comes to determining penalty (to be specific, whether the milder penalty for primitive AFK activity should apply) for modification-assisted unattended activity.


---Freeyorp

For the record, my personal modifications consisted of:

• A command window (a window with a selection of buttons that would perform spells and GM commands; you may find screenshots from CapitanAwesome around the forum of him using a similar modification I made for him to ease common GM tasks)
• A "bunny" mode that would make the character sit after walking, making it look like the character hopped around (this also predated anything resembling crazy moves by quite a bit )
• A modification to the client's item pickup code, which, when the pickup item key was pressed, would pick up the nearest item within five tiles, moving if necessary, rather than simply picking up any item that was directly underneath the character or on the tile that was directly in front of the direction the character was facing.

These were all interface changes requiring user input for all actions rather than automation, and I had been working to fix up the former and the latter for inclusion into the mainline client prior to the manasource split. Jaxad also wanted me to put in "bunny" mode, but I wasn't so sure it would have been appropriate, given how confusing it might be, were it to be inadvertently enabled.

Platyna then posted, referring to the aforementioned global "Punishment for Botting" topic, and correcting the interpretation we had been going by.

Hm. I am pretty astonished as I have read this:
http://forums.themanaworld.org/viewtopi ... 12&t=10818

Which was never consulted with me at all, and clearly against the policy I have already stated; that everyone deserves a second chance and no one deserves a third one.

In the post above you did several mistakes:
1. You assumed you are able to find out if a player uses script or not. You can't and assuming your omnipotence make us all look silly.
2. You opened the way for excuses. No, we don't want to hear excuses, as there are no excuses for botting.
3. Due to above you obfuscated the rule, this is not acceptable, rules are supposed to be clear, now nothing is clear (one gets banned, he used script, he said he has fallen asleep, whatever).
4. You posted something that is complete contradiction of what I told several times on public, which makes us look silly.

Please fix the situation ASAP - LOLKILER has to be unbanned, with char reset (everything besides quest items, one of each).

Besides you think about me as an authoritative *****, re-read your posting in this thread - due to obfuscation of rules, you are not sure yourself how to act.

Regards.

This ruling also established many aspects of the punishment for botting, which, after initial disagreement, persist today:

Well...AlOnS just pointed out that you are suggesting a full char-wipe. So EVERY botter will lose ALL his stuff and levels. This means it is like deleting the WHOLE character. I do not think this is right and I am not going to do that to anyone. A reset of levels is fully sufficient as a punishment for first time botters in my opinion!

This also led to the first amendment since the rules had been established in 2007, the addition of the single word "also", covering automation in addition to unattended activity:

"2. No bots (and by botting I mean ANY AFK activity in game)."

"2. No bots (and by botting I also mean ANY AFK activity in game)."

As with everything GM related, the time of the first application of the new punishment, as well as the hiccups, is immortalized forever in the GM logs.

[2010-06-01 16:09:54] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @charwipe lollkiller
[2010-06-01 16:10:09] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @charstats lollkiller
[2010-06-01 16:12:41] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @charreset lollkiller
[2010-06-01 16:12:47] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @charstats lollkiller
[2010-06-01 16:28:38] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @l meister eder is my character
[2010-06-01 16:28:52] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @l this wipe command does not work properly
[2010-06-01 16:29:00] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @l it does not delete items
[2010-06-01 16:31:33] botcheck.gat(27,18) Katze : @l maybe I'm just unfamiliar with the right commands

Of course, people managed to make things work soon enough. Ever since, the punishment has been a full character wipe, for each and every botter under the new (or perhaps very old, for those around when Platyna was sole GM? I am not old enough to remember for sure) broader definition, without exception.

I hold no strong opinions about the matter, but I hope this provides context and the necessary explanation of days past.

I'm totally in the running for the word count contest, honest

---Freeyorp

[prsm]

My observations so far:

-no one wants botting
-there are many clients out there with many diffent features, including ones with automation
-we can't stop people from using there own clients or modified clients
-we can't make people share the clients they use or the code written for it

So we are no further ahead than when I started this forum.

[Platyna]

Platyna once fired all the GM's and let anarchy rule, she thought the experiment went well, I did not. We had mass botting and abuse, I think we all agree that is not a game we want to play in.

What a bullshit. The only GMs I fired were Delasia and her BF.

Regards.

[prsm]

Maybe fired was the wrong word, what is the correct terminology for "decided to have no active GM's"?