The Mana World Forums

Demon was banned for botting.

After receving a report from a player that there was a bot in the ice cave, Demon was observed acting in typical bot form.

As soon as I became @visable, Demon stopped, sat down, then said 'AFK.' and i warned that stopping and claiming to be afk was not a valid defence if he continued once i left.

I then went @invisible and Demon continued immediatly.

The character was banned for botting.

This player MAY NOT RECIEVE a level reset as the bot activley tried to circumvent a bot check from a GM.

Cappy =)

CapitanAwesome wrote:i warned that stopping and claiming to be afk was not a valid defence if he continued once i left.

Why isn't it?

Because bots can be made that pretend they're not bots when a GM approaches... but of course, you know this

Nooblets wrote:

CapitanAwesome wrote:i warned that stopping and claiming to be afk was not a valid defence if he continued once i left.

Why isn't it?

Because when I witness someone activly killing monsters, while I am @invisible or through a proxy char, who stops, sits and then says "AFK.", when a GM appears, only to resume killing the very second the GM char leaves (or in this case, goes @invisible) is quite obviously NOT afk and therefore has failed the bot check.

Cappy =)

LtCl. KILGORE wrote:

Soul Menhir wrote:Because bots can be made that pretend they're not bots when a GM approaches...
but of course, you know this

No I don't, honest ...

What are those "Bots that pretend they're not bots" ?

You mean a "Lying Bot" ???? OMFG !!!

--Please don't ban me, I'm not trolling, just asking a question in Court House about those new "Bots that pretend they're not bots"--

This is not a discussion forum, please keep comments on topic and VALID to the issue at hand.

I know "This is NOT a discussion forum" but here are a few words on the subject

Ok before you read the rest of this post please read this post: http://forums.themanaworld.org/viewtopi ... =12&t=9021

Now that you have read that i would like to say that i am Demons brother. I would not lie to get him out of trouble, but i would like to say that i was standing behind him (him being Demon) (he was at his computer) and he responded to CapitanAwesome's, but CapitanAwesome banned him anyway.

Now i would like to ask, What is going on, you say one thing but do another? He was at his computer which implies he was 'FK' which implies he should not have been banned.

~BBB

baseballboy wrote:Now i would like to ask, What is going on, you say one thing but do another? He was at his computer which implies he was 'FK' which implies he should not have been banned.

The screenshot shows Demon stating "afk" almost immediately after Capitan became visible, and ceasing activity accordingly. Capitan clearly outlined that he suspected Demon of circumventing bot detection, and would ban should the character resume activity the moment he left. Capitan turned invisible, Demon resumed attacking. Ban, as stated and outlined in the screenshot and logged using @t.

GM log wrote:[2010-01-05 07:18:36] 020-3.gat(47,42) CapitanAwesome : @t demon, you cant instantly be afk as soon as i walk in, if i leave and you continue to kill, you will be banned

Says it all, really. This was explained in the first post.



---Freeyorp

He still replied to CapitanAwesome though.

It also say on CapitanAwesome's client that !@#$ is talking, stated it was stated in IRC that !@#$ is demon

[20:14:29] <BaseBallBoy> Chicken -> Rooster -> Mr. Wilson -> Mrs. Wilson -> Tametomo. -> $Sushi Man$ -> Demon -> Dark_Mage -> !@#$

Which still means he wasn't afk

either way he wasn't afk

CapitanAwesome wrote:[...]and i warned that stopping and claiming to be afk was not a valid defence if he continued once i left.

---Freeyorp

With the use of sophisticated bots becoming more and more common, players need to expect the methods used to detect bots to also change, as well as the definition of a bot.

After lengthy discussion, the method used to determine the AFK'ness of Demon in this situation was perfectly valid.

This ban will not be lifted.

CapitanAwesome wrote:With the use of sophisticated bots becoming more and more common, players need to expect the methods used to detect bots to also change, as well as the definition of a bot.

After lengthy discussion, the method used to determine the AFK'ness of Demon in this situation was perfectly valid.

This ban will not be lifted.

I would like to suggest that in the future you add a order to move to another location before they start attacking. When this becomes part of the bot coding the requirements can be changed.

Well im Demon and I did reply and as far as i know ---ONLY--- afk botting was against the rules but i do have a bot but i was watching it you only showed the screenshot where i wasnt talking... I think you have something against me anyway

baseballboy wrote:I know "This is NOT a discussion forum" but here are a few words on the subject

Ok before you read the rest of this post please read this post: http://forums.themanaworld.org/viewtopi ... =12&t=9021

Now that you have read that i would like to say that i am Demons brother. I would not lie to get him out of trouble, but i would like to say that i was standing behind him (him being Demon) (he was at his computer) and he responded to CapitanAwesome's, but CapitanAwesome banned him anyway.

Now i would like to ask, What is going on, you say one thing but do another? He was at his computer which implies he was 'FK' which implies he should not have been banned.

~BBB

Time to add my grain of salt. Sorry to say BaseballBoy, but your brother got caught botting before. I remember quite well, since I'm the one that caught him. So either ways (unless TMW rules changed) he should stay ban, since it's his second offense.

Regards,

doorsman, actually you caught him twice, but what i am saying is that he did reply to CapitanAwesome, therefore he shouldn't have been banned.