- A simple vote system that requires all of the players in the game to vote. This will tag the reported player as a possible spammer.
- After the third tag (in a different game with different players), the player will get the real mark.
- A marked player must go through a CAPTCHA before being able to chat to people. It must be done in every game.
- A marked player will lose his mark after 3 days.
- A mark also applies 1 minimum tag for everyone else on that IP, so two more tag is enough for someone else on that IP to get a mark. When the second mark on the IP is given, all accounts on that IP is given 2 minimum tags. That results in a zero tolerance. One tag and you are marked instantly. When an account loses its mark, all minimum tags created by it will disappear.
- 1 tag disappears every 5 hours, excluding minimum tags.
- Creating an account requires a correctly answered CAPTCHA.
- If an account is detected to be marked for over 75% of its total activity (minimum 7 days), it will be locked and require e-mail authentication (or security question answer) + CAPTCHA.
We're implementing a similiar system in an MMO project I'm involved with to combat automated players. Although ours relies more upon behaviour pattern analysis; human reports are factored in, albeit of minor contribution to the outcome (abuse is always on the cards whenever there's an emotional agent involved unfortunately)
I see no reason why the same principles cannot be applied in Diablo, other than limiting factors such as the proven programming ineptitude of Blizzard.
Those things don't work, I got this funny little program where you can insert download links like megaupload, rapidshare etc.
Most of these have captcha's. The program however can guess what has to be inserted correctly 9/10 times.
Surely a bot program could insert that.
It's true that many widespread CAPTCHA implementations can be systematically solved but that's not to say all are especially when it's an ad hoc solution.
Um... Yeah, so... I've never seen this many bots with so much spam to say for so long before. The instant one leaves, another enters. I'm not even talking last ladder spam, when it was usually three lines. I'm talking:
[enter]
****************************************************************
[insert advertisement] in the new ladder!
hi,
[insert more advertising]
[insert more advertising]
[insert more advertising]
****************************************************************
[leave]
It's gotten to the point where it's not uncommon for the same bot to re-enter the same game multiple times.
I don't wanna continue to pay for a game that I already freaking bought... end of story. A pay to play basis would ruin D3 for me, it sucks and I hate it. Besides, giving only online support for a game doesn't warrant the right to collect monthly fees for it. They will need much much much more than that and the diablo universe, as it is right now, won't support monthly patches and content additions. Besides, I couldn't care less about bots right now, I lock my games tightly and when I do host games it's for trading.... a thing that I will not have to do in D3 thanks to a built in action house :). So to anyone who wants P2P in D3, I say " YERK" and " IT just won't happen young smurf".
The bots should be stopped at account creation. Requiring email validation, maybe a clever CAPTCHA, and other preventative measures are already being used for the majority of forums and internet applications where botting is an issue. Server moderators and admins will have to be vigilant against bots, much like with what Blizzard does with WoW bots and scripters.
Although this is a side note, Wikipedia is a great source for information, and has even been put up against Britannica. That's not to say I would quote Wikipedia directly in a formal research paper, but discrediting Wikipedia because it is from Wikipedia is bad, mmk? Not to mention the variety of valid, citable sources found at the bottom of nearly all good wiki articles.
The day universities accept Wikipedia as a "soft" source is drawing near (and I imagine APA and MLA will both have standards for citing such a document, like citing a revision number. All wikis contain edit history for every single article, from its creation to current revision. The point of citing sources is not to prove your credibility, but to allow readers to find the "horses mouth" as it were). As a paid writing tutor, I come across a lot of older students who are rather vehement against using internet sources of any kind; I predict such sentiments regarding wikipedia will be held by our current generation in 40-50 years when the usage of it will be commonplace among even formal research papers.
It is no less credible a source than any other non-databased article. And refuting someone's argument because they invoke wiki information, especially informally, is rather droll.
[/HR]
As far as the efficacy of preventative measures go for Diablo III, I can only give a personal experience: after years of playing WoW and coming into literally NO contact with spammers, I trust Blizzard knows what they're doing. Diablo II's dated system requires only a little effort to bypass currently, as some people I know could attest to.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I see no reason why the same principles cannot be applied in Diablo, other than limiting factors such as the proven programming ineptitude of Blizzard.
It's true that many widespread CAPTCHA implementations can be systematically solved but that's not to say all are especially when it's an ad hoc solution.
Um... Yeah, so... I've never seen this many bots with so much spam to say for so long before. The instant one leaves, another enters. I'm not even talking last ladder spam, when it was usually three lines. I'm talking:
[enter]
****************************************************************
[insert advertisement] in the new ladder!
hi,
[insert more advertising]
[insert more advertising]
[insert more advertising]
****************************************************************
[leave]
It's gotten to the point where it's not uncommon for the same bot to re-enter the same game multiple times.
Anything beyond that becomes draconian at best.
CD-keys are sold seperatly these days, about 5-8$ for both keys
Which Final Fantasy Character Are You?
Final Fantasy 7
The day universities accept Wikipedia as a "soft" source is drawing near (and I imagine APA and MLA will both have standards for citing such a document, like citing a revision number. All wikis contain edit history for every single article, from its creation to current revision. The point of citing sources is not to prove your credibility, but to allow readers to find the "horses mouth" as it were). As a paid writing tutor, I come across a lot of older students who are rather vehement against using internet sources of any kind; I predict such sentiments regarding wikipedia will be held by our current generation in 40-50 years when the usage of it will be commonplace among even formal research papers.
It is no less credible a source than any other non-databased article. And refuting someone's argument because they invoke wiki information, especially informally, is rather droll.
[/HR]
As far as the efficacy of preventative measures go for Diablo III, I can only give a personal experience: after years of playing WoW and coming into literally NO contact with spammers, I trust Blizzard knows what they're doing. Diablo II's dated system requires only a little effort to bypass currently, as some people I know could attest to.