I was talking about people that think a handful of GM’s would be enough to actively police the Classic servers.
Lol. I merely held you accountable to your own self-rightous standards. You accused one person of trolling because they were speculating on the total number of Classic players, whilst you did the exact same thing. At which point you made some excuse and left the thread.
You still haven’t provided a source to your allegation that Blizzard bans tens of thousands of Classic bots monthly. I’m starting to think you are “propagating misinformation” like a “Russian bot”.
2 Likes
I provided plenty of easily verifiable data to support my claims in that thread. You and other posters made absurd claims that were incredibly easy to refute. I’m sorry that a few facts apparently set you ablaze.
Categorically untrue. You speculated using data from 2006.
Nice. Try to gaslight and change the argument from you making unsubstantiated remarks, to my reaction. I see you’ve done this before.
3 Likes
I don’t think anyone expects it to stop bots as a whole but it would make a serious dent.
Blizzard’s “actions” refer to suspensions or account closures. I elaborated further on my post here:
I should have said “Keep in mind, they ban or suspend tens of thousands of bots every month.” here:
The nomenclature on these forums commonly used by the playerbase is different from what Blizzard usually uses. Most of the time, players using the word “ban” may be referring to temporary or permanent bans. Temporary bans are referred to as suspensions by Blizzard.
Do you want me to go back and edit my post, or do you want to savor it to use in future threads as some sort of a “gotcha” moment?
That was a GLOBAL number. Not US specific.
2 Likes
This was never about a “gotcha” moment. This was about challenging the fact that you call out and report other people for speculating in lieu of official facts, whilst you yourself do the same thing.
Again, I don’t doubt that Blizzard banned as many accounts as they say they did, noting as you have that “ban” could mean several actions including temporary suspensions. But I do have serious reservations as to how many bans were related to actions in Classic versus actions in Retail, which supports a free trial which would encourage use and testing of bots which would easily inflate the number. Likewise, Kaivax’s response is vague, at best, referencing the work of Blizzard’s global anti-cheat team.
I don’t seriously think that Blizzard isn’t trying at all. But like many others, I don’t feel Blizzard is doing as much as they could or should - noting that botting is a complicated issue.
On that point, Blizzard certainly hasn’t inspired faith in making hyperbolic statements that combatting the botting problem would require a team the size of a small developing nation.
4 Likes
Then get a GM with eyes on it and ban, ban, ban.
If Blizzard can’t figure out how to fix their problems there’s not much to be said there. But they need eyes in this game in the meantime.
2 Likes
You claimed that an estimation of 228,000 active Classic players was not “unreasonable” and was a “fair assumption.”
Responding to you this much was already very foolish of me.
blizzard.com##article[data-user-id="653390"]>div[class="row"]
I never reported anyone in that thread for their baseless speculation about active players. I report posts that propagate damaging misinformation about Blizzard systems or policies. This will be the last time I ever respond to you, I’ve added the above custom script to my uBlock filters.
And here I was thinking we were finally breaking down some walls and having a good, clean discussion.
It’s a shame we live in this world where people actively want to live in their own echo chambers. Counter intuitively, it’s that very attitude which allows misinformation to spread.
2 Likes
I’m going to give you the same advice someone gave me - just ignore that guy.
5 Likes
I truly, truly wish you and others would do just that. Allow me to call out blatant misinformation without having to deal with the subsequent argumentative fallacies that follow.
Irony truly is lost on this man.
1 Like
It wouldn’t even require that imo. The high numbers they post are a global number, 1 per 5 servers would be at least semi ideal but i think even 3 working their way through the high pop zones on a server a day would make a huge dent in the issue. What i was saying wasn’t to completely remove them which i think is impossible but it would be far more than what we have now. Maybe their ban process is ridiculously long as well.
2 Likes
Very well could be a painful verification process.
Wait those are bugs? Never seen them in my life
It doesn’t have to be convoluted at all. GM’s used to have the power to instantly have eyes on any and every part of the game. GM’s could watch DM or AQ or wherever the problem is, briefly record the hack, then ban. If the ban is contested, the evidence is reviewed.
This is as fair as anything that’s happening now and vastly more effective. And it’s instant.
The reason hacks, bots and cheats are allowed to continue for months at a time has nothing to do with Blizzard wanting to be fair or “investigate.” It certainly doesn’t have anything to do with figuring out how these things work. The idea that Blizzard sits around for months, “hurr durr how does this bot work,” is insane. It’s all right there on google where, gasp, you can actually download the thing.
Blizzard simply doesn’t care enough to do what they need to do. There’s nothing else left.
7 Likes
100% true.
Blizzard absolutely could fix these hacks server-side, which should be the first priority.
These hacks are widely available to the public. Blizzard absolutely could whack a mole these early on anf instant ban.
But they intentionally don’t. So the question is this: Why?
3 Likes
Hacks and real cheats for sure but paining here with such a broad brush is difficult because I was also speaking of RMT, and that’s hard to detect because the gathering process is disposable. Killing the accounts that are intentionally laundering the gold is the hard part to catch.
Although it’s possible to choke the supply with a continuous effort
1 Like