Restate your concise proposal for how to reduce botting in EVE, here and now, for the benefit of others so they dont have to dig through the rest of the trolling you have done here.
I can recall most of your comments from memory. And when not can I scroll up and read it again.
Why canât you? Do you have a problem with the forum format?
My proposal is here:
Elaboration on the minigame mechanic here:
Where is your concise proposal?
You still refuse to answer the simple question:
- What would YOU do to reduce botting in EVE.
This getting ludicrous.
Are you somehow psychologically incapable of answering a simple, direct question, even when its seminal to topic and your participation in it?
Iâm not going to repeat myself unless you tell me that you have issues with the forum format or some mental health issue, Salvos.
He cant do it 
He cant answer a simple, specific, ontopic question.
Its almost like you have nothing, and are just trolling here.
I linked mine.
Where are yours?
I already have. I even got Likes for it.
Seeing how your proposal reminds me of a crayon drawing made by a child, I better repeat myself for you.
Iâm saying the best way is to provide a great game, which is fun for the players, doesnât make any compromises to their fun (which gets more players in), and to fight bots through a hidden detection system, even with crude assumptions if necessary, to make it impossible for botters to fight against it and to leave them guessing as to why theyâve failed.
2 Likes
That means absolutely nothing.
Its like a chimpanzee typed random words on a keyboard.
It has no head, no tail, nothing concrete or of any substance.
Really?
HURRDURR 
Seriously? Thats what you have to offer?
Making a great fun game for players is the best way to stop botting?!
Is this how your mind processes problem solving?
My 2nd point in strategy in data collation/crunching specifically means âhiddenâ CCP tracking of inhuman rates of client activity. Its like you didnt even read them, theink about them, and still are just pounding your keyboard with nothing of any real substance to provide.
Yes, it is. Fighting bots is a necessity for a gamer maker, but so is getting players into the game and keeping them. Youâll have more than one problem to solve. Or fighting bots is all youâll ever do before your game shuts down.
Im done with you.
Either you are shilling for bots, or just limited.
Youâll be back. Once youâve accepted that what I say makes sense, and you already know it but hate to admit it, will you come running and arguing again, keep ignoring my comments and keep calling me a troll, as you have done before. 
2 Likes
Back on topic with constructive, enactable proposals of actual substance:
Proposal to reduce botting in EVE:
Its a three pronged strategy:
-
Institute Delayed Local in Player NS to enable more bot hunting, with less intel to bots. This makes it easier for players to hunt/destroy botting ships.
-
Crunch client sent data in terms of duration/frequency/repetition of activity, so that âinhumanâ rates are flagged by a program for CCP staff to review, per instance, and abject clear inhuman botting duration/frequency autobanned pending appeal. This makes it easier for the small security staff to parse data for suspect activity.
-
Institute a system of minigame popups, which occur when activity duratiin/frequency/repetitiin becomes suspicious, in circumstances that they wont paralayze a player, but will stump a bot. This prevents true-afk botting, which is the most harmful to EVE, its balance and economy,
Elaboration on minigame mechanic:
I propose a list of random/interactive/dynamic popups which would require expanding a bots programming quadratically, so as to solve a randomly generated/interactive/dynamic mini-game, instead of a static predictable pop-up.
The minigame popups can be designed to include dynamic, random colors, morphing, motion, and other random dynamic parameters. They will be trivial for a human to solve, but a bot program would have to be very complex to be able to solve any of these, as randomly generated, with random elements, in each instance.
Restrictions on the rate/conditions of the minigame pop-up can be set so that they do not endanger/interfere with a present player, but will incapacitate a bot till it solves them.
CCP can cycle in new minigame popups periodically, thus forcing bot programmers to adapt with effort/time, until the next set of new minigame popups.
Inb4 bot shills troll again, whilst offering nothing of their own.
Iâm not so convinced that a bot couldnât solve something like the hacking minigame, but with the scanning down anomalies is difficult enough for players, let alone bots, it leads me to another idea.
What if all piloting was manual? We get rid of approach, orbit, keep-at-range, etc. Maybe warp-to fleet members would have a minimum radius of 30km, or similar.
Itâs stupidly easy to bot mining if you can just double-click from one asteroid (whose entry can be statically positioned on the screen) to the next.
This unduly impairs non-botters, and basically strips EVE of its core navigation/flight commands.
It also sounds like a great way to fly spaceships, like EVE Valkyrie.
Do you endorse removing approach/orbit/keep range etc?
If it was done by you, meaning in the most unimaginative way, no.
If it was done by oplek, and assuming he wants to turn his idea into a new way of flying ships in EVE, in a way similar to EVE Valkyrie perhaps, then yes.
1 Like
Do you endorse the above, as it is stated?
Yes or no.