Armory and bots...Blizz lying to us?

#0 - June 25, 2007, 1:27 p.m.

I thought it was interesting to find when i looked up on the Armory some of the more resilient gold farmers on my server that seem to evade being removed for whatever reason that i should find on many occasions many of the same named bots on many different servers.

I find it nearly comical that Blizzard doesn't actually ban the accounts of these botters but simply removes the particular bot...i guess getting the continual stream of money from these botting and gold selling operations is too great to resist and Blizz turns a blind eye...only superficially removing some here and there to make it seem like they are banning accounts when in fact from what i've seen they are not.

A bot on my server named [Removed]. All TEN Dwarves...all hunters (bots race and class of choice)
[Removed]

[Removed] a bot thats been on my server for months. While these all may seem to not be bots, more then likely they are. They aren't all hunters but yet they are all Dwarves...how often do you see a Dwarf Rogue?
[Removed]

[Removed]...again not all hunters, but all Dwarf.
[Removed]

[Removed] on my server. On Armory there are SEVENTEEN with the same name...all Dwarf Hunters.
[Removed]

[Removed] on my server.
[Removed]

[Removed] on my server (the 2nd letter is alt+651). I'm assuming alot of them do this with letters to throw reporters off.
[Removed]

[Removed], a permanent resident of Deadwind Pass near Kara.
[Removed]

[Removed] on my server...The reason i can tell it's the same botter coming back on after a particular one is banned is that they usually use a name that's very similar, for instance there's another bot on my server named [Removed]...D [Removed] il. I see this all the time. On the armory notice how there is nearly three pages of Dwarf Hunters, and almost every other class except the ones they can't be are Dwarves...see warriors-pallys.

[Removed]...33 results...all Dwarf.

[Removed] on my server..i was apparantly successful in getting this one removed..but it seems there are plenty more. Mostly Human in this case. They seem to like to stick to one race i'm guessing so they can use a premade way-point program or maybe so its just easier if its repititious.

IF you dont think i'm right in the previous paragraph have a look at my next example.

[Removed] on my server is a Troll Hunter....have a look at the armory results for this name.
Only FOUR out of 66 results are NOT Trolls.

Another Example..[Removed], Troll Hunter.

There was one on my sever named [Removed]...Take a look at a few different versions of the same basic name.
[Removed]

When you start digging a bit it's staggering how many there are. Surely they can't possibly have that many credit card accounts as to have this many bots at once if Blizzard is banning their accounts like they say they are...which means simply that Blizzard really doesn't ban the accounts, only single toons on the account. Greed indeed is a powerful thing.

The GM's are hardly a reassurance that something will be done. The theatrics when they answer a ticket are all nice and well but really isn't needed and is quite annoying now. It's a report and a hope that maybe...just maybe something will be done.

I would suggest that Blizzard needs to rethink this stratagy. You might make half your profits from these operations, but it has seeded an overall feeling of discontent among the real players of this game. Sure most people dont really care much about bots or even know that its going on, but the in-game economy suffers because of it and only adds to the tedium of having to level against a computer killing all of a particular mob, or the guy who bought all his gold and breezes by while you have to grind.

In the end the real players will move on and all that will be left are the bots...who then having nobody to sell gold to will move on as well, but maybe its just a mad dash to see how much can be raked in before it all collapses. Enjoy the ride.

Syndri

#48 - June 25, 2007, 5:37 p.m.

There is no way that you, as a player, can effectively confirm--without a shadow of a doubt--that these characters are using third-party automation software to progress through the game. Finger-pointing is unfortunately a near-sighted act and will not truly benefit your cause, Heman.

Now, I'm unable to detail the process by which we detect the presence of such software, nor am I able to note how we reprimand those found to be using it; however, I can say that our primary goal as a company is to maintain the integrity of World of Warcraft. Period. Lying to our player base and turning a blind-eye to such exploitative activity would counter this goal in the most egregious of ways.

If you witness a character which you believe to be "botting," please report this behavior to the Game Master department; we'll be happy to forward the information on for appropriate investigation. And before you state that reporting serves no purpose, let me direct you here: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=110416004&sid=1

To quote:

"In the US and Europe, we recently banned several thousand accounts associated with the use of botting programs that fully automate player actions, such as killing and looting monsters. We take these attempts to bypass the rules and standards of the game extremely seriously, and we will continue to aggressively monitor all World of Warcraft realms in order to protect the service and its players from the negative effects of cheating."

Suffice it to say, if you violate the Terms of Use, we will take action.

Syndri

#54 - June 25, 2007, 6:06 p.m.

Q u o t e:
I disagree.

When you have a group of unguilded, level 60 dwarf hunters with randomized names and boar pets running around in a perfect stop-sign pattern for hours and hours on end, killing everything, I'd say it's proved beyond a shadow of a doubt. (The fact that they pass up enemies only slightly out of their attack range in favor of continuing down their pre-defined paths just seals the deal).

Unfortunately, you have no tangible evidence to definitively support this accusation. It's only speculation until you can attach a line of code, for example, to the witnessed behavior.

While experience and critical reasoning are valid methods of detection, they are not enough in this business; we must be absolutely certain and we must be able to prove our certainty with physical evidence. This collection of indisputable evidence takes time to gather, Greyman, specifically if you consider that we must collect it without exposing our means and methods of discovery.

Syndri

#93 - June 26, 2007, 4:13 p.m.

Q u o t e:
Like a previous poster said, our reports should not lose credibility cause we do not have access to the same information as Blizzard.

I believe you, along with many of your fellows, have misinterpreted my statement. Allow me to clarify.

At no point did I discredit player-submitted "bot" reports; on the contrary, Browning, I encouraged their submission. If they were, in point of fact, so useless to our campaign against exploitative activity, we would not continue to ask players to please, please, please create a ticket should any suspicious behavior be witnessed, nor would we take such care in those tickets' subsequent handling.

When a report is received regarding suspected use of third-party automation software, this information is immediately forwarded to our Hacks Team for further review; this team, in cooperation with various other departments, leads our efforts against those who wish to exploit the game. They are our four-star Generals, our strategists, and, at times (and perhaps more accurately), our Special Forces. They are the guardians of the Terms of Use in the most rigid sense, and have been granted the responsibility of investigating all occurrences of possible, yet severe violations.

While it would be quite convenient for Game Masters to penalize suspected "botters" immediately, it would be ultimately counter-productive. In the business world, such as the one in which Blizzard Entertainment operates, educated guesses, even ones which are made with absolute certainty, are not valid testimony; if an account is closed for active use of automation software, we must be able to back that accusation with undeniable evidence. This evidence comes as the result of vigorous investigation, not simple observation. It is quite likely that we will arrive at the same conclusion as our players; however, unlike our players, our research will have produced tangible data to which we can later defer disputes, defenses, and possible litigation.

It's matter of accuracy, my friend, not credibility.

Syndri

#100 - June 26, 2007, 8:07 p.m.

Q u o t e:
I have stopped reporting botters because nothing seemed to happen to these people (oops, i mean botters)...5 or so botters, daily reports, for about a few weeks, still farming away in the same spots 2 months after the fact...so i came to the conclusion that you guys just don't care in some way or another...i tried my hardest to improve my server and clean it up, to depend on blizzard to help me help you, just to see it fail...i simply gave up on it

"While it would be quite convenient for Game Masters to penalize suspected "botters" immediately, it would be ultimately counter-productive. In the business world, such as the one in which Blizzard Entertainment operates, educated guesses, even ones which are made with absolute certainty, are not valid testimony; if an account is closed for active use of automation software, we must be able to back that accusation with undeniable evidence. This evidence comes as the result of vigorous investigation, not simple observation. It is quite likely that we will arrive at the same conclusion as our players; however, unlike our players, our research will have produced tangible data to which we can later defer disputes, defenses, and possible litigation. "

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=112416062&sid=1&pageNo=5#93

"In the US and Europe, we recently banned several thousand accounts associated with the use of botting programs that fully automate player actions, such as killing and looting monsters. We take these attempts to bypass the rules and standards of the game extremely seriously, and we will continue to aggressively monitor all World of Warcraft realms in order to protect the service and its players from the negative effects of cheating."

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=110416004&sid=1

Syndri

#102 - June 26, 2007, 8:17 p.m.

Q u o t e:
seems to me you guys make it out to be harder than it should be...it's easy...just like a shooter game...you see a person running around in circles head shotting non stop for an hour straight, it's blatent

It's easy to point at an object and say that it exists. It's not easy, however, to prove that it does.

Syndri

#107 - June 26, 2007, 8:24 p.m.

Q u o t e:
it's also easy to point at an object and know for a fact what it is...i'm not cross-eyed when it comes to that specific object

You're missing the point.

We require proof, and that proof is acquired through investigation. While deductive reasoning and experience can perhaps successfully suggest the use of third-party automation software, Defart, they cannot prove its existence nor can they serve as viable evidence should the closure of an account come under scrutiny.

Syndri

#110 - June 26, 2007, 8:28 p.m.

Q u o t e:
yes, it's proof enough...what do you want? me to go to their house and take a photo of it?

No, it's not.

I'll accept payment in lines of code.

Syndri

#113 - June 26, 2007, 8:31 p.m.

Q u o t e:
seems to me like you're also making an easy issue to be out to even a harder one.

And we've come full circle.

Syndri

#134 - June 26, 2007, 9:43 p.m.

Q u o t e:
Syndri, besides being incorrect, the model you're defending doesn't work.

I've regularly spoken with members of our Account Administration team. Trust me, the model is more correct than you might realize. While we do have the right to close an account without reason or prior notification, it not a practice of ours to do so. Account actions are based on evidence, not assumption or speculation.

There's also the desire to understand how automation software works within our own programming. This, in and of itself, requires time to do so properly.

Syndri

#137 - June 26, 2007, 10:10 p.m.

Q u o t e:
Syndri, you are a more patient individual than I.

If by patient you mean stubborn, then I would whole-heartedly agree. ;)

Vrakthris

#170 - Nov. 9, 2007, 12:47 a.m.

Syndri quoted it in a thread yesterday or the day before, that is probably why it was resurrected.

I'll lock it though, it probably should be allowed to rest.