A form of bot that was removed a bit ago was relay ones. Too many problems, the fix was a discord relay that was censored and monitored, making it easier on everyone.

My suggestion here is the same for turret bots, which give players with pcs or multiple devices a advantage against players who do not. Slap a ban on turret bots from vendetta until the tactical mode is available.

How do you differentiate turret bots from possible actual pilots?

Usually their names. Their stats show also. Low licenses yet alot of pks only log in when a player does and is always with them...etc

There's no way to tell that. I could just make a few levelled up alts with proper names and use those as turret bots.

Inc has already said that its not possible to remove them.

*evil grin*

Sure there is.

Captchas.

Bwhahaha

Captchas are already in VO.

I am aware. Which, perhaps, makes for an easier implementation.

He said that? As I was told..

"As for multiple accounts.. time was that the only way you could really use a capship was with multiple accounts. Conflict Diamond did that with the very first Trident ever built. So, no, we don't explicitly prevent that. Nor did we prevent concurrent account trading back before capships existed. It's a pretty uncommon case, and probably not something to get upset about."

I believe there is a lack of effort. And not a lack in a ability on the matter. Players being able to control turrets on a scale like this that a huge part of vo can't compete with is a huge problem. It's pretty concerning to me that they toss abuse like this to the side as a "uncommon case". A few players who do it just to sit in a sector and use their turret bots to make it nearly possible to be touched or move through the sector. I believe this is a problem worth looking into even if Incarnate is being insensitive to the situation it causes.

Sometimes I act as a gunner for other people. How can you differentiate me gunning for someone else, and a so called turret bot?

I just referenced it recently in the Toxicity thread:

What I am saying is that I pursue things that I can fix, rather than things that I cannot.

- I cannot guarantee with certainty that players cannot "fake" or "script" other faux-players as turrets, in ways that I cannot detect. If you think "real people" should be able to man turrets and fire at you, then you have to accept the possibility of bots, because they are infeasible to prevent.

- I also cannot handle the administrative load of trying to cite or ban anyone who is suspected of doing that kind of activity. Especially when it may become difficult to prove, at some point.

Sooo.. YES, in fact, I took the path of trying to fix that issue through gameplay changes, something that was beaten to death in another thread. I did this, because it would have value as a fix (whether people had scripted turret-bots or not), rather than acceding to your infeasible and naive request of somehow "preventing" people from running turret-bots, while still allowing real people to play turrets.

What I said about concurrent account trading previously was also true, it doesn't negate the above. It's just different aspects of the same issue.. I do tend to prefer resolving things with gameplay changes instead of administrative action (that's true regardless of the situation), I especially prefer it if "preventative" action has so many downsides as to make the gameplay goals infeasible (like, say, preventing real people from playing as turrets), and if administrative action requires full-time people to run around and maintain a database of character names "they think might be bots, but aren't really sure".

I mean, I can force a captcha on all turrets at all times, every couple of minutes. Will you want to deal with that, as "human" turret controllers?

Or, you can just openly ban it from gameplay. And anyone caught gets a temporary ban.them

Instead of asking HOW to stop it. Ask WHO is doing it. And if they continue the appropriate punishment is dished out

You're clearly not reading what I'm writing.

- I also cannot handle the administrative load of trying to cite or ban anyone who is suspected of doing that kind of activity. Especially when it may become difficult to prove, at some point.

I am, but as you Said it's a UNCOMMON case. And it's only a handful of people. And it's pretty clear who the people are doing it, being able to name them off on one and hand and people that verify also. It's generally a simple fix, making it a known rule that turret bots is against the rules would stop most from doing it so openly where it really affects large groups of peoole. The people that don't stop should be given a warning, if they continue a temporary ban, continue then a extended ban, if they continue then it'd fall to you decide what kind of punishment is next. Seeing as this is only a problem with capital ships "difficult to prove" wouldn't be that difficult. As there isn't a huge number of capital ships in vo that are in greyspace, still to big? Well players wouldn't use turret bots against players in monitored space. So that limits the usage to greyspace. And that's a even smaller percentage of where trident users are, still to large? Well, I'm not sure how much information you can check as far as players in system go. But a capital ship with four turret gunners in the same system as that player only when that player Is on is a big sign also. If even that is to big a radius..Maybe the fact turret bots are only online is when the user of the bots is online. Which I believe you can also tell from what area, the IP, etc.

The general idea is to make it harder for turret bots to be effective and make it even less worth it if they know they get in trouble (bans and warnings etc). You may not be able to erase the problem completely, but no one breaks the rules if the price for doing so if caught is huigh enough.

Pretty easy to me to spot, and very easy to prove and check the legitimacy of the accounts. And it being a "uncommon" case means you'll have to cite/ban anyone doing that kind of activity.

This isn't operating a Discord relay. This is a fundamental game mechanic, of people playing as turrets, which is inherently a part of VO.

You really, really want to frame everything in the sense of "the game as it is right now". I'm looking ahead at an expansion launch, the possibility of other methods of capship acquisition (and commonality of capship usage), likely a big change in concurrent players, etc.

I have zero interest in creating some new situation where there's an expectation that we're going to chase after "fake turret players" because people happen to be upset, or are suspicious, or want to open a bunch of tickets. I'm already trying to get away from that kind of BS with the "report" system.

So, I've said I'm happy to discuss addressing issues through gameplay changes (tweaking turret weapon properties, energy systems, etc), or making fundamental alterations to things such that there is no administrative oversight.

And, aside from that, we're probably eventually going to have some kind of system for global turret control in general (be it the "Tactical View" concept I sketched at a previous point, or full-bore automation, or some combination thereof).

But I am absolutely not going to do what you are requesting, IronLord. It is not in our best interests.

Okay, what about reducing the time captchas pop up then?

That only affects unpaid & lite accounts

For that to be effective, it would have to be almost constant. Like every couple of minutes.

It would basically make operating a turret, as a human being, nearly pointless as well. Because in the middle of trying to combatively use the turret, you'd have a captcha pop up. And they'd be separate, for every given turret.

Perhaps a better idea is for you to describe the actual problem you're trying to solve? Like, what specific case of players using automated turrets is causing gameplay issues, for you?

For me, it's when players sit on top of sedina b8 wh and use their turret bots to spam swarms at us while we try to pew

Seriously? Can't you just like.. fly into Sedina B9 and fight there?

Anyway, aside from that, trying to take your issue at face value, it seems like there would be more benefit to adjusting the individual weapon, as opposed to trying to find some way of preventing people from having faux-turrets.

There are also older discussions like this one, and the previous debate about whether cap-swarms should have limited ammo.

Those debates have greater value than simply asking for me to keep track of every player who "might" be using bot-turrets, and take administrative action.

Maybe put the capswarm damage back down where it started so players being shot have a better chance of surviving.