Jump to content


Anonymizer = Bots


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

pecopad #1 Posted 22 November 2019 - 03:39 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 29775 battles
  • 2,262
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

Am I just the only one who thinks that this Anonymizer stint is just an excuse to make it easier for WG to introduce bots in the game.

 

Not that I'm against playing with and against bots,I would just rather know who they are.



tajj7 #2 Posted 22 November 2019 - 03:42 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 28447 battles
  • 16,706
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    03-30-2014

If you are not against playing with/against bots, why do you need to know, especially if you can't tell? 

 

On EU and RU servers for the forseeable future I can't much need for bots in the random queues as populations are easily high enough even at low server population times, but considering many players play worse than bots I don't see it much of a problem if WG snuck them in. 



TungstenHitman #3 Posted 22 November 2019 - 03:46 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 30766 battles
  • 6,065
  • [B_M_G] B_M_G
  • Member since:
    08-28-2016

I highly doubt it. There could and probably is bots in this game already, you just wouldn't know it. How would you currently know if they are a bot or not? If you got WOTLIFE or WOTLABS all you see is players with X amount of battles and their win rates. If WG conformed each "bots" to contain itself within a realistically human and random amount of battles per day, then you would never actually know and of course from playing against them in HomeFront, they can come in different grades of performance without any obvious sign they are a bot. 

 

So no, I would highly doubt this anonymizer was added to conceal bots. What I believe this is, is WG's response to an ALMOST promise they made last year to remove XVM from the game and lets not forget, this is something the playerbase has been ranting about for ages and ages so... now that WG have actually listened to its customers and delivered something on what their customers asked, its tinfoil hat time? Pfffff lol! I mean sure, anythings possible but I don't think they ever needed this just to add bots. 



Sirebellus #4 Posted 22 November 2019 - 03:47 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 23531 battles
  • 1,089
  • Member since:
    02-04-2016
They already use Bots on the American Server and they are clearly labelled as such (using names that start and end with a colon - : Bot Name : )
So why should they go to such elaborate lengths to sneak them in on other servers ?

CmdRatScabies #5 Posted 22 November 2019 - 03:56 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38551 battles
  • 5,391
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View Postpecopad, on 22 November 2019 - 03:39 PM, said:

Am I just the only one who thinks that this Anonymizer stint is just an excuse to make it easier for WG to introduce bots in the game.

Yes you are.  You are very special.



Flicka #6 Posted 22 November 2019 - 03:57 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 23473 battles
  • 249
  • [CELL] CELL
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011
From all the screaming in chat I think they are already all over the game.

TANKOPPRESSION #7 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:00 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 49508 battles
  • 1,017
  • Member since:
    04-25-2012
:teethhappy:Hang on shouldnt this thread be called  : Anonymizer = Bots = Rigged MM .

BR33K1_PAWAH #8 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:08 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 7664 battles
  • 1,732
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    04-11-2018
This days bots even create threads on forums about themselves. Boi oh boi, technology surely have gone a long way.

CmdRatScabies #9 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:23 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38551 battles
  • 5,391
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View PostBR33K1_PAWAH, on 22 November 2019 - 04:08 PM, said:

This days bots even create threads on forums about themselves. Boi oh boi, technology surely have gone a long way.

Well that is actually quite possible these days.  And given there are only three topics - rigged MM, arty whinging and general arguing for the sake of it - quite easy to code I'd have thought. 



jabster #10 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:24 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12771 battles
  • 26,279
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 22 November 2019 - 03:23 PM, said:

Well that is actually quite possible these days.  And given there are only three topics - rigged MM, arty whinging and general arguing for the sake of it - quite easy to code I'd have thought. 


No it isn’t.



CmdRatScabies #11 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:27 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38551 battles
  • 5,391
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View Postjabster, on 22 November 2019 - 04:24 PM, said:


No it isn’t.

Yes it is.  

 

See  type 3 dialogue.



Miepie #12 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:28 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 4761 battles
  • 1,408
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-19-2018

View Postjabster, on 22 November 2019 - 04:24 PM, said:


No it isn’t.

STFU noob. Ur stats r <SYNTAX ERROR> #walletclosed #nerftvpvtu



jabster #13 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:33 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12771 battles
  • 26,279
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostCmdRatScabies, on 22 November 2019 - 03:27 PM, said:

Yes it is.  

 

See  type 3 dialogue.

 

View PostMiepie, on 22 November 2019 - 03:28 PM, said:

STFU noob. Ur stats r <SYNTAX ERROR> #walletclosed #nerftvpvtu


Oh no it isn’t.

 

And panto season closes in where Les Dennis gets to think what might have been.



Miepie #14 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:36 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 4761 battles
  • 1,408
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    05-19-2018

View Postjabster, on 22 November 2019 - 04:33 PM, said:

 


Oh no it isn’t.

 

And panto season closes in where Les Dennis gets to think what might have been.

I am a fish. I am a fish. I am a fish. :(



8126Jakobsson #15 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:48 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 80873 battles
  • 5,620
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014
Sure, why not. Hiding your handle behind a second handle makes you a bot in my eyes anyway so what's the difference. Does it still count as PvP? Will there be help offered in case of existential crisis? Can anonymized handles be reported as offensive? Questions. 

NUKLEAR_SLUG #16 Posted 22 November 2019 - 04:50 PM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 34502 battles
  • 4,863
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View Postpecopad, on 22 November 2019 - 03:39 PM, said:

Am I just the only one who thinks that this Anonymizer stint is just an excuse to make it easier for WG to introduce bots in the game.

 

Not that I'm against playing with and against bots,I would just rather know who they are.


*edited*


Edited by YoseiGunshi, 22 November 2019 - 07:47 PM.
Be respectful


SaintMaddenus #17 Posted 22 November 2019 - 05:14 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 38854 battles
  • 2,801
  • [WJDE] WJDE
  • Member since:
    03-04-2011
does anyone remember the user that communicated effectively with pictograms?  I miss them.

fwhaatpiraat #18 Posted 22 November 2019 - 05:50 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 60189 battles
  • 2,068
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    05-04-2013
I see plenty of 'players' that seem too stupid to be programmed bots. They probably are human beings, but you really start feeling bad for them. Not really btw.

vasilinhorulezz #19 Posted 23 November 2019 - 03:30 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28686 battles
  • 2,078
  • Member since:
    09-26-2014

View Postpecopad, on 22 November 2019 - 03:39 PM, said:

Am I just the only one who thinks that this Anonymizer stint is just an excuse to make it easier for WG to introduce bots in the game.

 

Not that I'm against playing with and against bots,I would just rather know who they are.


:facepalm:



Inappropriate_noob #20 Posted 23 November 2019 - 03:37 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 17506 battles
  • 5,354
  • Member since:
    09-23-2011

View Postpecopad, on 22 November 2019 - 03:39 PM, said:

Am I just the only one who thinks that this Anonymizer stint is just an excuse to make it easier for WG to introduce bots in the game.

 

Not that I'm against playing with and against bots,I would just rather know who they are.

Why,so you can comment or abuse them in chat?






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users