Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 7 post(s) |
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
23527
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:53:00 -
[91] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:So I guess you RL name is Tippia and I can google you RL address just like that? You probably can, but that's not the point. The point is that we're talking about real people, not characters. You are apparently unable to see the difference. GÇ£If you're not willing to fight for what you have in GëívGëí you don't deserve it, and you will lose it.GÇ¥
Get a good start: Newbie skillplan 2.2. |
Prince Kobol
1970
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:54:00 -
[92] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:Short sighted? Because I can see a difference between in-game character and RL person?
Let me put it this way, let just say CCP do realise the names of x number of characters who have been banned for purchasing illegal isk or involved in RMT.
That player was in a major alliance. Somebody in that alliance knows the real life name of the person before the character and what country he lives in. They decided it would be funny to post this information on reddit / SA Forum / K.com etc
Now you now longer have the separation between the in game character and real life, and as we all know to well there are some people who play this game who really really really can not separate between the two.
So yeah whilst many people would love CCP to name and shame those who are banned for things RMT, just purely from a business point of view the risk is simply not worth it.
Think about this way, how long has RMT been around for and how many companies have you ever seen have a name and shame policy?
|
Prince Kobol
1970
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 14:57:00 -
[93] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:Tippia wrote:Schmata Bastanold wrote:Short sighted? Because I can see a difference between in-game character and RL person? No, because you can't. So I guess you RL name is Tippia and I can google you RL address just like that?
No but I bet there are people who play Eve who know Tippa's real life name, where he/she lives and what he/she does for a living.
Like I said in my previous post, if Tippa was banned for RMT those people might just think, hey **** it, I am going to tell everybody and then post that information.
Now Tippa would be very pissed that CCP released that information and might decide to take them to court.
Whether Tippa would have any case I honestly have no idea, I am not a lawyer, however as a company why would you even put yourself in that position? |
Rhivre
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
780
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 15:00:00 -
[94] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:Tippia wrote:Schmata Bastanold wrote:Short sighted? Because I can see a difference between in-game character and RL person? No, because you can't. So I guess you RL name is Tippia and I can google you RL address just like that?
Are you implying that there is no way that from a character name anyone can get a RL name? Fluffy Bunny Pic! |
Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
2360
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 15:06:00 -
[95] - Quote
I am really dense as a bucket of concrete because :bigger picture: and "what if psycho will wait under your bed" arguments do not convince me here. If we would think about RL psychos we wouldn't do most of what we do in-game on daily basis.
But ok, no point of arguing further. I won't convince you, you won't convince me because I am wrong for obvious reasons but that's fine with me. Now I hope nobody from this thread is going to be tomorrow at Warsaw meetup, it could get awkward :) Eve Online Overview Wizard: Forum thread Homepage
|
Prince Kobol
1972
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 15:17:00 -
[96] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:I am really dense as a bucket of concrete because :bigger picture: and "what if psycho will wait under your bed" arguments do not convince me here. If we would think about RL psychos we wouldn't do most of what we do in-game on daily basis.
But ok, no point of arguing further. I won't convince you, you won't convince me because I am wrong for obvious reasons but that's fine with me. Now I hope nobody from this thread is going to be tomorrow at Warsaw meetup, it could get awkward :)
Oh crap, now you know where I live...
Your kind of right, it is ridiculous, however that is the world we live in. A world where anybody will take anybody to court for stupid reasons and win.
Here is an example.
A woman in the UK is taking her council to court because her dog injured itself whilst running in long grass chasing a cat. Her argument is that the area was open to the public and its the councils responsibility to ensure it is maintained and you know what, she will most likely win.
Again, if you were CCP would you really put bother to name and shame knowing the risk even if it is very small. You gain nothing by it by doing it expect the possibility of court action, regardless of how small. |
Jenn aSide
Smokin Aces.
7395
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 15:21:00 -
[97] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:I am really dense as a bucket of concrete because :bigger picture: and "what if psycho will wait under your bed" arguments do not convince me here. If we would think about RL psychos we wouldn't do most of what we do in-game on daily basis.
But ok, no point of arguing further. I won't convince you, you won't convince me because I am wrong for obvious reasons but that's fine with me. Now I hope nobody from this thread is going to be tomorrow at Warsaw meetup, it could get awkward :)
Oh crap, now you know where I live...
I don't think you're dense as concrete, I think you really aren't considering the bigger picture, probably due to a hatred of the people in question (RMTrs, botters).
Sorry to go all real life again, but back during my 'rookie' year I had a kind of similar incident where I had to watch a real life bad guy basically get away with something because while I and any other reasonable person could believe he did it, i couldn't PROVE (beyond a reasonable doubt) that he did it.
I was so mad I asked my former trainer (a veteran who's time on the job was by then measured in decades) a question that I now know is very stupid: "Why do these *expletive* criminals get all these rights???"
He looked at me like I was the dumbest person on earth (I was) and said to me "son, criminals don't get rights, EVERYONE gets rights, because everyone HAS rights. Sometimes people think it's a good idea to take those away because they believe someone did something monstrous, but even then they still have rights you need to respect, not for the monster, but for all of us".
16 years later and I know he's right and feel like a fool for saying what I said. Well, CCP isn't a government and EVE isn't real so the stakes are no where near as high as what I deal with in real life, but the same basic principle applies, the integrity of the system is based on CCP treating every customer the same, that includes keeping private business matters between a customer and the company private.
Doing otherwise opens up a Pandora's box that no one wants and if you know lawyers like I know lawyers, if CCP did it otherwise and someone really got hurt (because REAL MONEY is involved), bye bye EVE. |
|
CCP Peligro
C C P C C P Alliance
241
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:28:00 -
[98] - Quote
Benny Ohu wrote:the graphs talk about ratting, mission, mining and market bots. which of those categories includes factional warfare complex bots? is there such a thing as a fw bot? have there ever been large numbers of them?
There are FW bots out there for sure, and we have some extra checks in place for those. They aren't overly prevalent at the moment. They fall under mission bots for the automated ESTF system, which only accounts for an estimated 20% of our bans; so you are far more likely to be caught in a manual sweep. We have bits and pieces of detection code just about every activity in New Eden, and we are constantly making improvements and additions to this arsenal.
As for whether or not there were large amounts of them at some point, I'd say yes they used to be more popular, a few years ago perhaps. Historical data on types of bots used is something we've talked about in dev-blogs and presentations before. It's very interesting to see how these numbers change over time, with changes to the game by CCP, and also as a result of in-game events, driven by players.
Valterra Craven wrote:Tippia wrote:Valterra Craven wrote:And yet, I see nothing here about people that bot but don't RMT. Eh? So pages 14GÇô17, 27, 31, 33GÇô37, and 39 (and maybe even 51GÇô53) count as nothing? I stand corrected. My slide processing part of the brain took a crap this morning. CCP Peligro wrote: The Smackdown
Thanks for the long winded reply, I appreciate the time it took you to craft that post. I'm sure a "hey stupid, did you misunderstand what was on the slides here, here, and here?" would have been equally sufficient :X
No worries at all, I'm here to answer questions! The slides are 56 pages long and it's quite a lot to digest. The more misconceptions I can clarify the better! This is very much a topic of awareness and communication on CCP's behalf.
Ryuu Towryk wrote:I like hammers. Let's drop some more!
You got it!
Vincent Athena wrote:Questions: (Note, you may have to pass it on to the economics team)
How big an ISK sink is all that banned ISK, relative to the various sinks and faucets currently in the game?
When looking at the health of the game's economy, do you in fact consider banned ISK to be a sink?
Very interesting question. I'll have to get back to you on this one. It's not a traditional ISK sink, but ultimately the results are the same; vast amounts of ISK and assets removed from the game world entirely.
Rankan wrote:CCP Peligro wrote:
All in all, we've banned roughly 30,000 bots since the beginning of 2013
So your really saying 30,000 accounts have been banned. Do you have numbers on how many were paid accounts and how many were 14 or 21 day trials? Seeing the number of Ventures, I suspect there are a lot of trial accounts being used. Oh and Good Work btw.
Thank you! And yes, I should have said 30,000 accounts instead. That is the number we are measuring in this case.
Trial account abuse is something we take very seriously. It's not allowed, as per the EULA, and we will usually permanently ban trial accounts abusing bots right off the bat. Ventures are very popular even on paid accounts, it's a specialized mining ship, which is also easily obtainable through the tutorial. There are some stats on the average age of banned accounts in our fanfest presentations, I've seen this go from 6+ months to an average of ~2 months or so. This limits botters options in terms of using more advanced ships. It's also resulted in botters requiring more accounts to compensate, which in turn (usually, anyways) makes them easier to detect.
CCP Peligro - Team Security |
|
Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
2372
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 16:47:00 -
[99] - Quote
Do you ban in batches or periodically or on daily basis when you confirm offense? Did you ban any accounts today? :) Eve Online Overview Wizard: Forum thread Homepage
|
|
CCP Peligro
C C P C C P Alliance
241
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 17:22:00 -
[100] - Quote
Schmata Bastanold wrote:Do you ban in batches or periodically or on daily basis when you confirm offense? Did you ban any accounts today? :)
We ban on a daily basis, and the automated system is running at all times. The ESTF caught and banned 15 accounts overnight.
Our first attempt at larger sweeps and batch-banning was "Unholy Rage" back in 2009. Here's an interesting read on that subject, by CCP Grimmi (Lead GM Grimmi, at the time): http://community.eveonline.com/news/dev-blogs/unholy-rage/
We found that large sweeps like this had a decent immediate impact, but it was not sustainable in the long run. A "slow-burn" approach has since been adapted, which I prefer.
As an example, this "methodology" if you will, allows us to apply constant pressure to illegitimate operations within EVE Online, such as organized RMTers. This has proven to be more efficient in terms of actually getting rid of these groups, as they will struggle with rebuilding once we crack down. They are there to make money, and if we make that hard enough they will often leave in search of "greener pastures".
CCP Peligro - Team Security |
|
|
|
CCP Peligro
C C P C C P Alliance
242
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 17:30:00 -
[101] - Quote
Val'Dore wrote:Your graph is missing the absolute most important numbers: PLEX on banned accounts.
We have these numbers handy, PLEX is something we monitor very closely. As a result of this, we've found that most RMTers and botters tend to either sell or use their PLEX immediately.
I will discuss publishing these numbers in a future dev-blog, but for now they are actually included in the "ISK worth of assets located on banned accounts" graph shared here. CCP Peligro - Team Security |
|
Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
2376
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 17:50:00 -
[102] - Quote
I guess it was already answered somewhere in related devblogs but I will ask anyway: is there a chance of getting on your radar by normal innocent market transaction? I mean situation when I genuinely fit new ship for my lowsec derp and one or a few modules I buy happen to be sold by character on account connected to RMT/botting? I don't know if they actually sell something as ordinary as burst rigs and stuff like that or they go after high end items giving huge profits but what if? Or the hell with ordinary, what if I fit purple/green/blue golem?
On the other hand I can't imagine bot/RMT hunting without pretty solid automatic ways of minimizing false positives. And those market bots must make thousands of transaction per day so in short time you would get everybody flagged :) And you probably can say much in this subject because that could reveal too much on your way of detection. Eve Online Overview Wizard: Forum thread Homepage
|
RomeStar
Brave Newbies Inc. Brave Collective
463
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 18:05:00 -
[103] - Quote
Just like Colombian ******* CCP is only going to catch a small pct of RMT and in the end the cartel responsible for it will always come out ahead unless CCP can drain real bank accounts in RL. Signatured removed, CCP Phantom |
Reiisha
Splint Eye Probabilities Inc. Dawn of Transcendence
619
|
Posted - 2014.07.29 18:22:00 -
[104] - Quote
Ralph King-Griffin wrote:CCP Peligro wrote:Tippia wrote:CCP Peligro wrote:Greetings, honorable spaceship pilots, I'm sorry, but I think you may have misposted. This is EVE General DiscussionGǪ That aside, yay, graphs! That 5-digit-liked posts count... o/ o/ Tippia is the General discussion logic automated defense system, or possibly a raptor of some nature that preys upon the belligerent misinformed.
Still only ranked #2....
If you do things right, people won't be sure you've done anything at all... |
Zappity
Stay Frosty. A Band Apart.
1269
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 06:13:00 -
[105] - Quote
Out of interest, are you able to tell if any if the chat spammers in Jita bots? I'm thinking especially of those with perfectly consistent timing intervals. Just curious. Zappity's Adventures for a taste of lowsec. |
Anthar Thebess
622
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 10:44:00 -
[106] - Quote
Nemah Xadi wrote:Anthar Thebess wrote:Can you make information about what alliances are being in top 10 of RMT? This could be very funny, and could persuade few people to check their members more often. Northern Associates, Brothers of Tangra (b0t) and Greater Western Co-Prosperity Sphere will obviously be the top three. The largest rental alliances. How many normal players would pay billions/month for systems just so they can sit and rat all day...
Sorry but if you create alt alliance to hold renters - you are also responsible for their actions. The moment you accept them to your alliance, the moment you get isk from rent.
I agree that disbanding main alliance is wrong , as those are totally different people. If someone is giving place for someone else to use bots, or aquire isk for RMT and if this person/organization is gaining isk because of this. Then i think this group can be held accountable at this level for other people actions.
If we have alliance that is constantly having issues with botting or RMT , and after a warning emails sent to whole alliance nothing changes . Then this alliance should be disbanded without possibility to recover all stuff connected to SOV ( if it holds sov).
CCP cannot favourite big alliances , or ignore some of them - as they are renter alliances.
RMT/Boting at high levels in alliance , after sending warnings , more or the same people still are doing RMT/Boting , next warning ... still issues.
"Because of braking rules (etc) this alliance is being disbanded ...now: Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption |
Schmata Bastanold
Black Rebel Rifter Club The Devil's Tattoo
2395
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 11:03:00 -
[107] - Quote
inb4Tippia :) Eve Online Overview Wizard: Forum thread Homepage
|
ImYourMom
Republic University Minmatar Republic
47
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 11:34:00 -
[108] - Quote
Over 7000 people got a first warning for ISK Buying, that's a lot. Do you not then see a problem with the game is so many people buy ISK? Risk v Reward perhaps?
Also why didn't you name and shame the alliances that were botting? (slide 34)
|
Kitty Bear
Disturbed Friends Of Diazepam Disturbed Acquaintance
1383
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 16:06:00 -
[109] - Quote
ImYourMom wrote:Over 7000 people got a first warning for ISK Buying, that's a lot. Do you not then see a problem with the game is so many people buy ISK? Risk v Reward perhaps?
Also why didn't you name and shame the alliances that were botting? (slide 34)
I think that boils down to accountability.
How would you feel if you were judged and vilified based entirely on the actions of a 3rd party ? Actions that you possibly had no knowledge of. |
Serene Repose
1456
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 18:18:00 -
[110] - Quote
Clicked expecting a CODE rant, left impressed.
Schmata Bastanold wrote:inb4Tippia :) very sly I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility toward every form of tyranny over the mind of man.-á |
|
ImYourMom
Republic University Minmatar Republic
47
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 18:23:00 -
[111] - Quote
Kitty Bear wrote:ImYourMom wrote:Over 7000 people got a first warning for ISK Buying, that's a lot. Do you not then see a problem with the game is so many people buy ISK? Risk v Reward perhaps?
Also why didn't you name and shame the alliances that were botting? (slide 34)
I think that boils down to accountability. How would you feel if you were judged and vilified based entirely on the actions of a 3rd party ? Actions that you possibly had no knowledge of.
I disagree entirely.
The eula got changed to make alliances accountable and those are significant percentages over just 2 alliances they should be called out.
|
Nemah Xadi
Hedion University Amarr Empire
8
|
Posted - 2014.07.30 18:31:00 -
[112] - Quote
ImYourMom wrote:I disagree entirely.
The eula got changed to make alliances accountable and those are significant percentages over just 2 alliances they should be called out.
Everyone knows who those two are anyway.
Not saying renter serfs and their masters should not be whipped... |
Marc Durant
61
|
Posted - 2014.07.31 11:17:00 -
[113] - Quote
Lovely work although I'm not a fan of the new 3 strikes rule. 2 strikes should be enough; they get the message the first time, if they do it again they're obviously too stupid to poop and will do it a 3rd time anyway. Yes, yes-áI am. Thanks for noticing.
|
Tantin Ra
Dark of Night Industries
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 09:28:00 -
[114] - Quote
So how does the policy work? if someone bought isk multiple times but stopped before he got a warning message from a CCP GM would those times fall under the first strike? |
Anthar Thebess
652
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 10:51:00 -
[115] - Quote
Tantin Ra wrote:Can a GM please clarify the strike policy. Does pre RMTing before the warning is it counted in strike one? What is the difference? Just don't do it. Support Needed : Jump Fuel Consumption Support Needed : Faction Crystal Changes |
Tantin Ra
Dark of Night Industries
0
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 18:17:00 -
[116] - Quote
Anthar Thebess wrote:Tantin Ra wrote:Can a GM please clarify the strike policy. Does pre RMTing before the warning is it counted in strike one? What is the difference? Just don't do it.
How it matters is if someone where RMTing before the first strike message stop in compliance to the first strike message and they don't count those pre RMting before that as part of the first strike then why give those players a hope that they can rectify their mistake. |
Rhivre
TarNec Invisible Exchequer
789
|
Posted - 2014.08.09 18:40:00 -
[117] - Quote
ImYourMom wrote: The eula got changed to make alliances accountable and those are significant percentages over just 2 alliances they should be called out.
well, before you go on a witch hunt, there is additional info that would be needed:
1) How does the population of those 2 alliances compare to the other 8? This is to make sure the equivalent of "This city of 20 million people has more crime than these 10 towns of 10k do, the city is much more dangerous" is not happening
2) of the 17000 bans for macro use, how many does that slide represent, as it does not seem to show the chars that are not in an alliance at all, so before the pitchforks get fired up, that would be useful.
3) Related to (1), what % of the alliance population does each of those segments represent. Take Alliance 8 for example: 4% of the alliance numbers, but, if that represents 20% of that alliances population then that is a significant number, and maybe the pitchforks should be waved at them, instead of if say, Alliance 1 (21% of the alliance related bans) bans only represent 5% of that alliances population.
Now, this information CCP has, but has not released in sexy graph form, although, I would like to see the "Not affiliated to any alliance" added to the Alliance bans graphic
Fluffy Bunny Pic! |
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 [4] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |