Jump to content


Why WG isn't banning bots?


  • Please log in to reply
49 replies to this topic

hellhound6 #1 Posted 29 April 2020 - 11:52 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 10070 battles
  • 245
  • Member since:
    10-01-2015

Hey guys

Randoms are full of bots, I mean real bots.

Why WG isn't banning them? I don't think that its hard to detect



LethalWalou #2 Posted 29 April 2020 - 11:57 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35446 battles
  • 3,232
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012
Define 'bot'

SovietBias #3 Posted 30 April 2020 - 12:03 AM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 40691 battles
  • 1,990
  • Member since:
    06-10-2013
Why don't you compile a list with names and timestamps and send it to support ?

Balc0ra #4 Posted 30 April 2020 - 12:16 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 77299 battles
  • 23,316
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

Real? Got a replay of those real bots?

 

I mean I see the odd one now and then on lower tiers. Because they can hide among the bad longer. But on tier 5+? I can't say I've seen nothing but Steve there for ages. It's not like 7-8 years ago, when you had at least one Lowe on each team idle or waypoint farming. And you could see those a mile away.

 

But, even if WG removed everyone right now. There is nothing preventing more or new bots from appearing tomorrow is there?

 

View Posthellhound6, on 29 April 2020 - 11:52 PM, said:

Why WG isn't banning them? I don't think that its hard to detect

 

Kinda like cheaters? As everyone that has come here seems to detect more then WG ever did just by getting hit. Sure I see many bad players move to one bush and fire on the odd thing. But does every one of them bot? Doubt it. It's just Steve being bad. In the old days the easiest way to spot them was to bump into them. Block their waypoint. Steve just fires at you.

 

Now WG has their ways to see bot usage. But if no usage is proved. Should they still ban everyone? 


Edited by Balc0ra, 30 April 2020 - 12:19 AM.


NUKLEAR_SLUG #5 Posted 30 April 2020 - 01:14 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 36972 battles
  • 6,119
  • [FISHY] FISHY
  • Member since:
    06-13-2015

View Posthellhound6, on 29 April 2020 - 11:52 PM, said:

Hey guys

Randoms are full of bots, I mean real bots.

Why WG isn't banning them? I don't think that its hard to detect

 

I don't think you would know a bot if you saw one. 



Yaccay #6 Posted 30 April 2020 - 07:08 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 36994 battles
  • 2,535
  • [4TL] 4TL
  • Member since:
    11-21-2012

Because bots are even better than (some) players.

Therefore WG is not going to ban by performance as it would effect real players.



imendars #7 Posted 30 April 2020 - 07:36 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 14339 battles
  • 1,164
  • Member since:
    04-17-2014

View PostBalc0ra, on 30 April 2020 - 02:16 AM, said:

... But if no usage is proved. Should they still ban everyone? 

 

Yes, ban everyone, ban everything! Ban, ban, ban, BAAAAAAN!



Noivilbo #8 Posted 30 April 2020 - 07:38 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 15429 battles
  • 341
  • Member since:
    11-12-2012

View PostBalc0ra, on 30 April 2020 - 01:16 AM, said:

Real? Got a replay of those real bots?

 

I mean I see the odd one now and then on lower tiers. Because they can hide among the bad longer. But on tier 5+? I can't say I've seen nothing but Steve there for ages. It's not like 7-8 years ago, when you had at least one Lowe on each team idle or waypoint farming. And you could see those a mile away.

 

But, even if WG removed everyone right now. There is nothing preventing more or new bots from appearing tomorrow is there?

 

 

Kinda like cheaters? As everyone that has come here seems to detect more then WG ever did just by getting hit. Sure I see many bad players move to one bush and fire on the odd thing. But does every one of them bot? Doubt it. It's just Steve being bad. In the old days the easiest way to spot them was to bump into them. Block their waypoint. Steve just fires at you.

 

Now WG has their ways to see bot usage. But if no usage is proved. Should they still ban everyone? 

 

There is no proof of bots and cheaters getting banned. Privacy Policy mate

06:38 Added after 0 minute

View PostNUKLEAR_SLUG, on 30 April 2020 - 02:14 AM, said:

 

I don't think you would know a bot if you saw one. 

They are easy to distinguish if you know what you are looking for

06:39 Added after 1 minute

View PostSovietBias, on 30 April 2020 - 01:03 AM, said:

Why don't you compile a list with names and timestamps and send it to support ?

No proof of bans will be provided - you have to take their word for it :trollface:



ilmavarvas #9 Posted 30 April 2020 - 07:59 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 24082 battles
  • 892
  • [PR-22] PR-22
  • Member since:
    01-08-2014

View PostYaccay, on 30 April 2020 - 07:08 AM, said:

Because bots are even better than (some) players.

Therefore WG is not going to ban by performance as it would effect real players.

 

True, never seen real bot with WR under 46% and PR under 2500, but what comes to real humans(?) playing the game, well... :trollface:



qpranger #10 Posted 30 April 2020 - 08:34 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 38889 battles
  • 6,442
  • [HAMMY] HAMMY
  • Member since:
    12-25-2013
Wargaming loves bots with credit cards.

1ucky #11 Posted 30 April 2020 - 08:42 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 92262 battles
  • 2,028
  • [THRIL] THRIL
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

View PostYaccay, on 30 April 2020 - 07:08 AM, said:

Because bots are even better than (some) players.

Therefore WG is not going to ban by performance as it would effect real players.

I haev clic !!!! Butt : shell well NOT comm out ...

Y ?????

 

It effect my pefformuns !!!

 

Wtf Wg ????

07:43 Added after 1 minute

View Postqpranger, on 30 April 2020 - 08:34 AM, said:

Wargaming loves bots with credit cards.

We like to say "bards".


Edited by 1ucky, 30 April 2020 - 08:44 AM.


1ucky #12 Posted 30 April 2020 - 08:54 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 92262 battles
  • 2,028
  • [THRIL] THRIL
  • Member since:
    11-05-2013

View PostNoivilbo, on 30 April 2020 - 07:38 AM, said:

They are easy to distinguish if you know what you are looking for

Well duh, we all know we're looking for tanks.

But how does that help?

08:02 Added after 8 minute

View PostLethalWalou, on 29 April 2020 - 11:57 PM, said:

Define 'bot'

Three letter word, starts with a B, ends with a T, has an O somewhere in between. Rhymes with a pot that's maybe filled with snot, or not. Swedes have a weird name for it: "böt".



Frostilicus #13 Posted 30 April 2020 - 09:08 AM

    Colonel

  • Clan Diplomat
  • 23911 battles
  • 3,711
  • [-ZNO-] -ZNO-
  • Member since:
    07-12-2011

View Posthellhound6, on 29 April 2020 - 10:52 PM, said:

Hey guys

Randoms are full of bots, I mean real bots.

Why WG isn't banning them? I don't think that its hard to detect

 

No, they're not "full of bots"



splash_time #14 Posted 30 April 2020 - 09:13 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 16499 battles
  • 2,051
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    02-20-2018

View Posthellhound6, on 30 April 2020 - 01:52 AM, said:

Hey guys

Randoms are full of bots, I mean real bots.

Why WG isn't banning them? I don't think that its hard to detect

 

So you kinda admit that you're a bot as well. :D



shikaka9 #15 Posted 30 April 2020 - 09:14 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 78498 battles
  • 2,404
  • [-SJA-] -SJA-
  • Member since:
    02-27-2013

bots are children of WoT 

 

 



Cobra6 #16 Posted 30 April 2020 - 09:29 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16624 battles
  • 18,493
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostLethalWalou, on 29 April 2020 - 10:57 PM, said:

Define 'bot'

 

Well I think that he lumped bot programs and 'humans functioning on the mental level of a bot program' on the same pile. :D

 

Cobra 6



LethalWalou #17 Posted 30 April 2020 - 10:44 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 35446 battles
  • 3,232
  • [OISPA] OISPA
  • Member since:
    09-17-2012

View PostCobra6, on 30 April 2020 - 08:29 AM, said:

 

Well I think that he lumped bot programs and 'humans functioning on the mental level of a bot program' on the same pile. :D

 

Cobra 6

 

Yup. Exactly what I thought too. If that was the definition of a bot then I would agree that one can see many of them in every battle. 



JocMeister #18 Posted 30 April 2020 - 11:03 AM

    Major

  • Player
  • 29237 battles
  • 2,831
  • Member since:
    08-03-2015
Because the bots inflate their server population. So there is no incentive for them to actually deal with them. Besides most of the actual players are so bad most people wont spot the difference between a bad player and a bot. So it doesnt really matter that the bots are there.  

Isharial #19 Posted 30 April 2020 - 04:44 PM

    Major

  • Player
  • 25781 battles
  • 2,693
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-19-2015

View PostJocMeister, on 30 April 2020 - 11:03 AM, said:

Because the bots inflate their server population. So there is no incentive for them to actually deal with them. Besides most of the actual players are so bad most people wont spot the difference between a bad player and a bot. So it doesnt really matter that the bots are there.  


the 1st part is kind of pointless from a business standpoint. You are in the end paying for server space and computing power to run those bots... in the numbers that people seem to think WG use, they'd be spending an awful lot on doing so...

 

the 2nd part, is most likely what is reality. generally a well coded bot would look essentially no different to a player and would probably sit well within the 47-49% bracket completely hidden from view.... obviously there are bots, but I've rarely ever thought "that's a bot". 

if your making a bot to sell accounts or grind credits, you'll really want to make so that you aren't caught.. not that you stand out like a sore thumb

 



ChestyMorgan #20 Posted 30 April 2020 - 04:52 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 12715 battles
  • 279
  • Member since:
    01-26-2014
If only they could work out who was a bot & just put them in with arty? :teethhappy:




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users