What does this means?
Thatâs just plain wrong. Youâre making the assumption of that the bots need local to operate, which is not true. Itâs one of those nonsensical statements that the âremove localâ supporters have been throwing around to support their argument, but that everybody who knows development sees as false.
Even people like me, who donât do bot development, or even AI development in any real capacity, can think of ways to adapt bots to work without local. People who actually know those fields will have no trouble with it.
Itâs also worth pointing out that CCP - a group of developers - who are ultimately responsible for deciding any changes, will know better than anybody how false this argument is. So it kind of baffles me why people are continually arguing it. You may be able to fool non-technical people who support your arguments from the start, but none of the people whoâs opinions actually matter will be fooled by it.
If you want local removed I suggest you focus on other arguments, because this one isnât going to help your case.
Recent evidence strongly suggests that bots donât do well without local.
While if local didnât exist bot makers would use other mechanics like deep scan that becomes much harder to tell friend from foe.
Which means a lot of the less sophisticated bots would become obsolete, and their users would have to go legit.
Additionally a bot always mushing deepscan at perfect intervals is likely to flag much easier than a bot that just reads local because itâs a lot more data for ccp to read.
Itâs certainly not a proven fact, but in this line of thing youâll never get those on behavioural prediction. But there is evidence and logic to support it.
They donât do well without local now, because they are all coded assuming they can rely on local. If you remove that precondition, they will be adjusted accordingly. - You never code something to be more complex than it has to be.
I literally covered that in my post.
Go read it. Then explain how you are reliably detecting foes without local and without false positives from your own blues. As a bot who isnât asking questions on voice comms.
I really need to go write a blog post about this, or something. I keep having to explain this same thing over and over again.
Hereâs one of the threads I went over this in detail. Good place to start.
Doesnât account for people with covert cloaks, cynos in and then standard cloaking, down times, As you listed doesnât cover wormholes.
Oh, and now you are paying for an omega account per gate since alphas donât have cloaks.
So like I said, show me a reliable method.
Youâre not seriously expecting me to provide a fully detailed âhow to make a functional botâ essay on the forums? Because, I really donât want to do that. - The core of this is: you are describing basic logic puzzles, and developers excel at solving those, and making programs that exploit those solutions.
Without local things would get a little more dangerous for bots, for sure, but bot makers donât give a flying fart about ship losses, and will happily throw them at you en masse to keep the ISK flowing. Theyâd keep on tweaking their tactics, update their bots, and just keep on going.
Let me put it another way as well. How much of your time would you be willing to spend swatting botting VNIs out of the skies, knowing full well that nobody cares and you arenât actually preventing the bots from making ISK? Youâre literally competing against a computer program, that doesnât get salty, that doesnât get tired, and that doesnât care one bit about what you are doing. Theyâd basically just be factoring our efforts into their ISK/hr calculations, and modifying their methods to maximize their ISK despite what we are doing.
I mean, if they got an army of 50 VNI bots out, each costing 100m, and making 60m/hr. If you manage to kill on average 1 VNI per hour from that pool, thatâs 100m/hr they have to make up to cover your efforts. Which is literally just adding 2 more VNIs.
Botting exists because people make money from RMT. Remember that most of these botting companies donât operate in Europe or the USA, they operate from countries with a median income far lower, so botting becomes a lucrative job.
The second reason botting exists is because the game has too many activities that donât require actual thought. Mining, ratting, FW plexing and courier missions are all trivial to automate. Honestly courier missions shouldnât even exist and defensive FW plexing shouldnât exist either.
The third reason is that with free to play alpha accounts the investment cost of a bot account have dropped to virtually zero.
The fourth reason is that CCP slashed most of the team responsible for dealing with botting.
2 Likes
It means that brexit will be harmful to Great Britan,they KNOW it but do it anywaysâŚsimply because it was emotionally decided by misinformed peopleâŚ
Trump is another exampleâŚthe usa is actually paying the priceâŚ
Great Britan will pay the price in the futureâŚ
It would be interesting to know if any sort of active gameplay-mechanic for mining could be implemented without the need for recoding the whole game.
Are you British?
By the sounds no completely going off topic
1 Like
Maybe, but EU is harmful too, EU is a nightmare to my countryâs budget, itâs liberal regulations have negative influences. For example, before EU it was strictly prohibited for a french company to produce on foreign soil and import back in France. Now they can and they are closing plants. Closing plants harms the small businesses that were providing services in the area around the plants. My neighbor has closed his transport company due to Eastern Europe competition. The wages were too high, only matching the cost of living, and he couldnât lower his costs so he had to lay off 25 people. So F**K EU.
Economically?
1 Like
I know itâs your pet peve.
True. I believe the fw bots use d-scan.
âŚand Iâm pretty sure we shouldnât be talking about brexit. RL life politics and all. Especially a topic as controversial as brexit.
1 Like
Why do people do this or that? because they can.
Receive 10 very lengthy, well thought out responses clearly dictating why your post is wrong.
Ignore it all and pick a single sentence regarding a side note and respond to that instead.
Ah, never change dryson bennington.
Btw youâre still a shareholder of code. Might want to clear that up with james315.
Was going to post how stupid this is, but then I saw Dryson did it.
No just informedâŚ