Page 5 of 6
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 10:10
by Amberlee
So basically what Laurel is asking for is another function that could easily be botted to avoid
Isnt that a bit counterproductive to the entire matter at hand?
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 10:46
by Laurel
Draugor wrote:Laurel wrote:Cherek wrote:I think your idea of rewards for activity is interesting Laurel, for example. So let's focus on discussing the idea itself?
If it's interesting (and I have been mentioning carrots instead of sticks countless times before), then why not alfa test this approach instead of another stick? Give people incentive, not penalties.
As on the logic of a boulder blocking an attempt to bot: currently that's not a punishable offence (attempt to bot but failing to do so), so why even bother?
Fighting for those long hours against the same trolls/ogres/elves/shitsmth, your hand starts to itch - you think you are going to hit Irk instead of the troll if you do not <control hand> soon.
You start hitting Irk instead of the troll - you are going to slam him hard soon, if you do not <control yourself> soon.
You start hitting everyone in the team - you are going to run yourself against their weapons if you do not <take control> soon!
You start taunting your team and they start focusing you, instead of the troll ... etc. etc.
Combined with the inability to kick from team + vast randomness in commands required (they need to be short and visible though!) + inability to execute team commands = much better results than another number challenge disguised as a boulder.
Way way way to easy to just make a trigger to "controll myself"
If its supposed to have any affect at all, it needs to be something thats not piss easy to trigger
That's why I wrote the last sentence ... you could read it instead? ;p
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 11:25
by Draugor
Cause making 10 triggers for each one is a problem
Multiple line things would be required, or we could just illegalize botting as a whole and really punish them HARD, create a wizard that only goes nuts on bots. And no, not short
Visable? Oh yes, perhaps make them into
***** *****
***** *****
***** *****
**************
***** *****
***** *****
Kinda words etc, very visable and more or less impossible to make code for, however a riddle of 2-3 lines like the one presented previously is a great way to do it, easy riddles, make a ton of answers and randomize
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 11:34
by Laurel
Roger - playing from phone (and I mainly do) severely limits the amount of information you can clearly see on your screen. People died (pvp and pve alike) due to playing from phones and not being able to react as good as if they were using a comp.
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 11:41
by Draugor
Laurel wrote:Roger - playing from phone (and I mainly do) severely limits the amount of information you can clearly see on your screen. People died (pvp and pve alike) due to playing from phones and not being able to react as good as if they were using a comp.
So we should allow for botting etc cause they play from a phone? Wont short stuff be even harder for you to see on a phone than huge letters? Atleast with the huge letters you can see that something is there and ask what it is? Since its usually a wizard initializing and watching you when it comes. The wizard could then inform you and you can properly answer the question, you'd have gotten both big letters and an explanation, if you miss both... well I hope we start removing all combat XP from bots
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 14:58
by cotillion
Why complicate things so much?
Just make an exit where teams don't follow.
The solution is the same for the botter. A trigger or giving out of game client control to the leader.
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 16:19
by Cherek
cotillion wrote:Why complicate things so much?
Just make an exit where teams don't follow.
The solution is the same for the botter. A trigger or giving out of game client control to the leader.
That's very easy for an AFK team member to trigger though? Or for the leader to provide commands to the AFK team member, which is very commonly used. "ask <team member> move behind, kill second troll, climb ladder" etc.
Exits that teams don't follow can work though, but I think it needs to be done "Nerull-style" to truly work? That is, with some type of random command for that exit, a unique command that only each player can see, and is different every time, and only accepts one single answer. So you simply cannot setup a trigger to follow no matter what, or even tell your leader what your specific "puzzle" is, because if you do, it resets and you get a new puzzle.
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 17:07
by Laurel
Cherek wrote:That's very easy for an AFK team member to trigger though? Or for the leader to provide commands to the AFK team member, which is very commonly used. "ask <team member> move behind, kill second troll, climb ladder" etc.
Weren't "ask triggers" considered rule breaking and punishable???
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 17:25
by Draugor
Laurel wrote:Cherek wrote:That's very easy for an AFK team member to trigger though? Or for the leader to provide commands to the AFK team member, which is very commonly used. "ask <team member> move behind, kill second troll, climb ladder" etc.
Weren't "ask triggers" considered rule breaking and punishable???
Used to be, should still be, should be very illegal since they make it very very easy for bots, perhaps we should make a check for people saying something and the same command beeing executed the very same second, that could warrant a check, like a couple of secs after, will be a bother if someone is actually giving legit commands but it will slow bots down alittle if they use them
Re: How about putting it into the open to discuss instead?
Posted: 11 Dec 2015 17:35
by Cherek
Laurel wrote:Cherek wrote:That's very easy for an AFK team member to trigger though? Or for the leader to provide commands to the AFK team member, which is very commonly used. "ask <team member> move behind, kill second troll, climb ladder" etc.
Weren't "ask triggers" considered rule breaking and punishable???
If they were it must have been a very long time ago? I do not think we have had ask triggers, or any triggers on the list of rules for many years. I know we had a pretty lively discussion about it on the forums a little while after I became AoP, with people arguing back and forth.
Also, if we made it illegal it's so simple to just add some delays and/or be creative with how you give the commands to get around the rule anyway. But mostly I think we need less rules, not more, so if this used to be a rule, I do not mind it's gone. The rules rules we have about botting and PVP already cause a lot of issues, and takes a lot of time to handle, so the more coded solutions the better in my opinion. Which is why I think the idea of preventing botting instead of punishing botters is an idea worth exploring.
Or of course, just let botting be free. I put the question out there a while ago, but there was a lot of resistance against doing that. Although some were positive too.