Since last month’s update, we’ve actioned over 261k additional accounts for botting. In Patch 29.6, we also introduced system changes to combat bots and other exploitive gameplay patterns on a more regular, proactive basis.
Quick question, does Blizzard populate the low ranks with bots due to low player activity at those rankings?
I ask because virtually all of my matches in Standard up until Gold 10 were against clear bots using the same cards/decks, with terribly optimized playstyles.
3 Likes
I think you are playing against player bots that farm gold, but I do also think that Blizzard uses bots in the very lowest of rankings, so it might depend on what your rank and/or MMR actually is
1 Like
How do bots farm gold? I don’t think that players are dumb enough to use bots on their main accounts since it would be banned.
1 Like
That’s correct. They aren’t main accounts. They are disposable accounts for streamers to god-draft arena and stream something impressive. Then the account is discarded
3 Likes
Really? Thats dumb. I didn’t even know that Hearthstone even had a large streamer-base enough to warrant the dozen or so bot accounts that I have come across.
1 Like
My understanding is that there is a large audience in China for this style of content
2 Likes
Oh, that makes a lot of sense then. Blizzard should really do something, because these bots make up nearly all matches from bronze to gold.
1 Like
they actually have to be. ive been contemplating asking the same stupid question. but it doesnt feel stupid match after match versing the same class and same decks AGGRO AGGRO perfect mulligan also. like what is this game lol
1 Like
This game is horrible, bots in EVERY game for Arena. Blizzard DO IP BANS / DO HARDWARE BANS / BLOCK CHINA FROM PLAYING ON US SERVERS!!!
1 Like
Here is just one of the bots (first game):
(https://i.imgur.com/bor3yEY.jpeg)
1 Like
Another Bot:
(https://i.imgur.com/CvV3v02.jpeg)
1 Like
This ^.
I have a thread going where I am discussing the amount barcoders (players who buy bot accounts sold with an Arena super-draft) in Arena right now. Barcoders outnumber normal players in Arena these days.
10 recent Arena opponents:
https://imgur.com/a/x5o1AbK
So glad that you keep posting how hundred of thousdands of bots still run rampid in the game.
How about you add something into the game that will actually enhance the intregrity rather than posting about bots that just keep coming back no matter how many times you ban them.
4 Likes
Another Bot:
(https://i.imgur.com/wGD2ge3.png)
Returning player - haven’t played in last 3-4 years. Nearly every casual or standard game I’ve played is against bots. Presumably bots thin out as you rank up, but honestly, I probably won’t stick around to find out.
To borrow a meme lingo from Super Mario Maker 2, the answer to “do the bots thin out as you rank up” would be “Yesn’t.”
HS has OFFICIAL bots, now. No, that wasn’t a typo. They ACTUALLY deploy OFFICIAL bots for their ranked matches at bronze or below (possibly even silver). They’re painfully awful. Literally, you might remember the “practice against the innkeeper” mode that existed years ago. (maybe it still does) They play like that. It’s atrocious.
As you rank up, THOSE bots drop off. I don’t think I’ve ever played against one from Gold on up. BUT, at an inverse ratio, are the CHEATER bots. You know, the ones you’re actually thinking about in the conventional sense. The “players” who buy a throwaway account and just have the program automate it. These are often referred to as “barcoders” because they literally just represent a fiscal transaction (see the posts above in this topic talking about that).
So, official bots drop as rank increases, but barcoders rise. It’s… not a good look for Blizz.
Welcome to the world of IT where everything can be automated and hacked.
You would like the developers of a game to be able to prevent pirates from coming to their game while bank cards, which are nevertheless “highly secure” (in theory) by the most competents, cards more importants than a game, manage to get hacked ?
You’re misconstruing two irrelevant topics here.
Cybersecurity, much like “real world” security, is built on the idea that “most people” have limited resources, and are only going to put up a “reasonable” amount of effort even with said limited resources. So, you create a “barrier of entry” that makes it “unreasonable” for “most people with limited resources” to breach security WITHOUT getting caught.
Emphasis on “WITHOUT.” You don’t actually WANT to keep the thieves out of the museum. What the hell would THAT do? You’d never know who was actually going to be thieving! Prisons would be empty! Courts would actually be EFFICIENT! This would literally RUIN modern capitalism. Dead serious, not a joke.
You instead just want to make it unreasonable for the art thief to escape the museum or damage the art while attempting their theft. Token “wannabes” might get deterred by the random “mall cop” style security guard, or the “camera” that might not actually work. But those who actually manage to get serious about it, will find themselves locked IN the exhibit once an actual alarm is tripped.
Cars are largely surrounded by glass. Retail store fronts are largely surrounded by glass. Most houses have glass windows at ground level. Glass isn’t exactly the hardest thing to break, all things considered. That said, leaving your car running and unlocked while dashing into the convenience store REALLY isn’t a smart thing to do. Leaving the cash register unattended isn’t a smart thing to do. Leaving your windows unlocked and your doors wide open while your wallet sits on your kitchen table, isn’t a smart thing to do.
You make it “REASONABLY” deterring for “most people” and you’re safe a significant majority of the time.
These concepts apply to the digital world as well, via cybersecurity. Fun fact, an INCREDIBLE amount of infrastructure is still running variants of Windows that have been EoL for decades. Hospitals, banks, gas stations. To say nothing of random retailers.
Some legal in a suit somewhere crunched some numbers and went “it’s more likely to cost more to upgrade, than it’s worth in lawsuits when stuff gets hacked.”
And it’s all because of the fundamentals: reasonable deterrence against people with limited resources to expend before getting caught.