Bots - The Technical Reasons Behind Them

starkerealm

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

Well, I have seen one programmer (not ZOS programmer) and a lot of people that claim to know how to design MMO's correctly.

First I seriously doubt the problem is as simple as everyone is making it out to be. I also seriously doubt that the server "completely" trusts the client. I am sure there is some trust involved, and I don't doubt that there is an attempt by ZOS to use client side movement and possibly even more. There are a significant number of advantages to doing that. There are certainly a number of risks.

Technically you've seen more than one programmer say it. I just didn't bother to announce that I got a degree in programming a decade ago, and did very little with it at any of my subsequent jobs.

The client side movement is actually fairly easy to observe first person. If you lose connection... you can actually test this by just yanking the ethernet cable out of your PC, if you want. You can still move around, for quite some time. Now... that could just be the client, but, when you reconnect the cable and resync, the rubber-banding is fairly limited, or non-existent. By the way, if you leave it disconnected for too long, the client will kill itself, and you'll be reverted to your last known location.

Now, in a system with server side authentication, you'll be snapped back to the position you were at when you disconnected. Sometimes this will update, depending on the architecture, sometimes it won't. Also, with a sever side system, it's fairly common to be outright frozen in place on a disconnect, again, you can't tell the system where to go, and if the server doesn't okay it, it's not taking any chances.

The second piece of evidence is the bots. Or rather, what the bots are doing. Their ability to teleport is dependent on being able to send false data to the server. If the server was actually crunching their movement data, then this wouldn't be possible, but because that's handled client side, the server accepts the new location data... basically without reservation. Again, you can see this everytime a bot runs through a wall, flies, or beams up.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

I expect ZOS is working on resolving the risk issues.

I hope so. I'm just worried that this will be a very intensive process.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

To state that the ZOS programmers are stupid is stupid. Typical attacks by people that have never done design and want to make themselves sound important. Designing complex systems is not done by stupid people.

Well, there's a lot here, so first, no, stupid people can and do build very complex things all the time. Often overly complex and faulty things. Having actually done system analysis and design for a living, I can assure you, it does happen.

That said, I don't think the programmers were stupid. I think they had a very difficult problem set in front of them and they came up with the only solution they could.

The issue is, Zenimax wanted a lag free launch. That's, actually not possible. I'd explain all the issues, but in terms simple enough for you to actually understand, when you launch an MMO you overload your server. It doesn't matter how popular you think it's going to be, you'll always get a surge of people that will overwhelm you.

This is why they used the system the did. If the client dictates everything, lag is going to be a much smaller problem. It allows you to shuffle a lot of processing power onto the end users. Remember, in a normal MMO, lag is everyone telling the server where they want to go and what they want to do, and the server has to figure out how all that works together. But, in this case, if the clients are trusted, then it actually solves that problem. The server doesn't have to think, it just has to keep a running tally of where everything is.

I wouldn't call the designer who thought of this stupid, it's actually pretty clever in it's own way, but it is also incredibly naive. There is a reason my first networking class started with the motto, "never trust the client."

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

ESO works with very few bugs compared to other MMOs when they were 1 month old. I expect ZOS is trying to architectural changes (design) and the result is a swarm of bot programs taking advantage of the new design. I also expect ZOS designers will make the necessary changes to address the problems.

Again, as a non-programer, I'm sure this doesn't sound like a big deal to you. But, massive changes to a project's network architecture, post launch is a major undertaking.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

Also, just a note - a large percentage of the posts in this thread are focused on the teleport, subterranean, and flying bots - which while visually interesting have little to do with the bot issue, other than cosmetics and making it a little harder for players to report them.

Okay, you're not a programmer, and you don't understand what this means from a networking standpoint... cool.

This is actually a symptom of a lot of problems, again, this indicates that (at least) character position and movement are under client control, and not server.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

Farming could just as easily be done using normal player mechanics (run over and click).

This is true, and there are bots doing it this way. There's a lot of ways to automate that kind of behavior, and that happens with most MMOs. Those guys are a pain, but the teleporters and fliers are symptoms of a much bigger problem.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

The Ultimate spamming is a more serious problem, allowing power leveling easier and boss loot harvesting easier - note I said easier. Even if they had to user normal player mechanics, they could still do it, it would just be slower.

Those are actually symptoms of, again, the same thing. If your ultimate charge was being moderated by the server there's no way you could simply lock it in place. This is behavior you frequently see with memory editors. In single player games, that's fine, but this is an MMO. And the server should be the one tracking your ultimate charge, not your client.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

Whenever I read someones opinion and they result to name calling and denigration I consider the source, and if any of them have ever been involved in a successful multimillion dollar project - I expect the answer is no. And I expect all the "haters" here are just that - "haters" with nothing but hiding behind a screen to support their claims and insults.

Believe it or not, that's up to you. I know what I'm talking about, and I know what I've done with my life. You don't, and the NDAs I've signed along the way mean I'm not going to tell you what I've done. It'd just cost me way too much money to satisfy your curiosity. Sorry kid.

Ramthor

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

To state that the ZOS programmers are stupid is stupid.

I don't think ZOS programmers are stupid but someone in management and decision making clearly may be called that. Can you imagine the following dialog taking place?

"Hey, I don't care what you programmers say! We advertised a lag free game with hundreds of characters in one place fighting epic battles and this is what we will deliver. We never said there won't be any bots!"

"But sir, this will ruin the game!"

"I'm sure you will find a way to remove the bots eventually."

I think we are still waiting for the "eventually" to happen, if ever.

starkerealm

Ramthor wrote: »

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

To state that the ZOS programmers are stupid is stupid.

I don't think ZOS programmers are stupid but someone in management and decision making clearly may be called that. Can you imagine the following dialog taking place?

"Hey, I don't care what you programmers say! We advertised a lag free game with hundreds of characters in one place fighting epic battles and this is what we will deliver. We never said there won't be any bots!"

"But sir, this will ruin the game!"

"I'm sure you will find a way to remove the bots eventually."

I think we are still waiting for the "eventually" to happen, if ever.

Also eerily similar to every discussion with legislators advocating mandatory backdoors for law enforcement. I... kinda wish I was joking about that.

EDIT: Honestly, this sounds more like a case where someone went, "but the server has to process all that data."

And our fictional manager said, "then why not have the player's games handle it."

This does have the fingerprints of interoffice passive aggressiveness all over it, now that I think about that.

Chirru

Simple solution or not. My opinion is, it does not matter.

Right now the bots are still confined to the lower to mid-range levels. But this will change with the new extension. The general outcry following this might damage the reputation of the game greatly.

ZOS ,in my opinion, better get their act together rather quickly. Band-aid measures will not be enough.

starkerealm

Chirru wrote: »

Simple solution or not. My opinion is, it does not matter.

Right now the bots are still confined to the lower to mid-range levels. But this will change with the new extension. The general outcry following this might damage the reputation of the game greatly.

ZOS ,in my opinion, better get their act together rather quickly. Band-aid measures will not be enough.

I didn't realize that the pre veteran endgame was considered low level.

Drachdhar

Teleporting and flying bots. Not yet seen any. The automated bot trains running around in every area of the game often farming in quest areas is a pain in the ass though.
Probably reported like a 100 of em already, or at least pointed out where they are.

This might sound cynical... But what if ZOS do not yet pull all their might into stopping this is due to the fact that the botters buy alot of keys? That is one theory i've heard flying around. Every time a botter is banned, they buy a new key = more money. Scary thought.

/Lag free is a bit of an overstatement... At least for EU players who still have their server across the pond somewhere.

//All respect to programmers, they are often the bunch who work hardest on any game project. At least going by the game programmers I know personally.

KerinKor

Thechemicals wrote: »

Again Blizzard is exceptional at this above all other companies.

Which is why there are no bots in WOW at all .. er .. wait .. their PVP forums are FULL of complaints about BG bots being worse now than ever. Blizzard did stomp WOWGilder which is more than anyone else other than Square Enix is concerned but that was due to where the hack writer lived, it's unlikely to ever happen again.

I don't know what you're referring to about 'encryption' but it's largely irrelevant as the bots have access to the data before and after encrypting. If you're saying ZOS don't use SSL to protect client/server communications then I'd be appalled but don't believe it's true.

starkerealm

Drachdhar wrote: »

Teleporting and flying bots. Not yet seen any.

Give it a little while. They're getting progressively more brazen. First time I heard someone in zone talking about flying bots, I thought they were joking. A couple days later one went zipping over my head.

Still hadn't seen a teleporting one first hand until last week.

Ulsterman

Drachdhar wrote: »

This might sound cynical... But what if ZOS do not yet pull all their might into stopping this is due to the fact that the botters buy alot of keys? That is one theory i've heard flying around. Every time a botter is banned, they buy a new key = more money. Scary thought.

Because they very often pay with stolen credit cards, and that money might easily be returned to the original owner once he discoveres the theft.

starkerealm

Ulsterman wrote: »

Drachdhar wrote: »

This might sound cynical... But what if ZOS do not yet pull all their might into stopping this is due to the fact that the botters buy alot of keys? That is one theory i've heard flying around. Every time a botter is banned, they buy a new key = more money. Scary thought.

Because they very often pay with stolen credit cards, and that money might easily be returned to the original owner once he discoveres the theft.

Yeah, this is the thing a lot of people kinda miss. The entire point of the goldsellers is to launder stolen credit cards into real money.

Xuxilbara

A lot of insightfull information - I'd say that's pretty interessting, if it weren't kinda sad.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO

starkerealm wrote: »

Believe it or not, that's up to you. I know what I'm talking about, and I know what I've done with my life. You don't, and the NDAs I've signed along the way mean I'm not going to tell you what I've done. It'd just cost me way too much money to satisfy your curiosity. Sorry kid.

Well, first you made the assumption that I am not a programmer, but I will stack my 35+ years of design, coding and system analysis up against your decade. If you would like to also exchange client names, I will be glad to do that also.

Second I have spent a significant amount of time working on 3d VRs for the past 6 years.

Client side movement is desirable for many reasons, and it is"claimed" to be impossible to achieve by many, for some of the reasons you have given but most of the reasons are much more technical. I applaud ZOS for attempting to push this design.

And I stand by my statement - most people that call others stupid are stating a point of view and not a fact. There are always disagreements in designs, and there are certainly arguments that border on religious vigor around how things "should" be done. But, the fact is that significant change takes place in the industry when someone pushes the envelope. That someone is almost always berated by people that quote their college professors. But stating that something can not be done does not make it so.

As far as your "never trust the client" - that sits right beside many other "laws" that have fallen over the years. And "trusting" is not the same as designing with client side movement - the client can do the movement and collision calc's and still not be "trusted" by the server.

(BTW - most of my background is in client server design).

GreySix

starkerealm wrote: »

Still hadn't seen a teleporting one first hand until last week.

Reported a teleporting bot in Stros M'Kai last night, along with a subterranean bot.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO

starkerealm wrote: »

Yeah, this is the thing a lot of people kinda miss. The entire point of the goldsellers is to launder stolen credit cards into real money.

Nothing is ever as simple as "the entire point". There are a lot of reasons - and stolen CC's are just one of them.

starkerealm

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

starkerealm wrote: »

Yeah, this is the thing a lot of people kinda miss. The entire point of the goldsellers is to launder stolen credit cards into real money.

Nothing is ever as simple as "the entire point". There are a lot of reasons - and stolen CC's are just one of them.

Yeah, I probably shouldn't have phrased it that way.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO

GreySix wrote: »

Reported a teleporting bot in Stros M'Kai last night, along with a subterranean bot.

I was on the EU server last night and reported 15 to 20 bots of various flavors on khenarthi roost. Wish there had only been two.

I was in need of some Iron Ore.I managed to get 35 ingots worth in 2 hours, while at the same time getting 2 stacks of Rawhide (bots don't like to farm that, it is too much work) and a stack of Jute - don't know why they don't take as much Jute, since it is easy. There must be less of a market for Jute than Iron Ingots.

I was in Davon's Watch last night on the NA server, and there were numerous (at least a dozen) bot trains of 2 to 4 bots killing quest NPCs. I reported all of them also.

I guess my point is, there are bots, and I wish ZOS would do something about them sooner rather than later. But, until they do I will spend a significant amount of my game time reporting them.

PharmaChief

What if we were asked to type a simple pictogram, say 3-4 letters, everytime we used a wayshrine or changed zone or entered a dungeon... that way bots would be unable to move around fast, making farming for them much harder. It would also keep them away from high level areas and dungeons.
I know it sounds bad but we do have to wait for loading anyway and that could be done during that loading screen time...

starkerealm

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

BTW - most of my background is in client server design.

Great, then we are in fact, each other's natural predator. And, incidentally, why I got the hell out when I did.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO

PharmaChief wrote: »

What if we were asked to type a simple pictogram, say 3-4 letters, everytime we used a wayshrine or changed zone or entered a dungeon... that way bots would be unable to move around fast, making farming for them much harder. It would also keep them away from high level areas and dungeons.
I know it sounds bad but we do have to wait for loading anyway and that could be done during that loading screen time...

I disagree with any "solution" that puts the burden on the player. And, what you are suggesting is basically Captcha - which in order to be effective (not foolproof but effective) becomes very hard for some people to get right. Imagine your account got suspended because you mistake a zero for an "O" (exaggeration, but the idea is my point)

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO

Despite all the good ideas around stopping bots on EOS, the only 100% effective solution is for NO ONE TO BUY from Gold Sellers - don't buy gold, don't buy power leveling services, don't buy period. And that is not going to happen.

My "solution" would be an "Invitation only" membership into the MMO. And anyone that gets caught cheating/breaking TOS would be banned, and the player that recommended or invited the cheater would be banned also -

Now, that is brutal - lol - and won't work either, but I would feel so much better seeing the jerks being banned.

So, back to reality - what we can hope for, and should expect EOS to provide, is that the Bot's and RMT (real money transfer) become "hidden". By hidden, I mean the average player would only be slightly aware of their presence - if they are aware at all. As others have said, they exist in all Successful MMOs - the difference in that here they are blatantly "in your face" and affecting our ability to play the game the way we want to.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO

starkerealm wrote: »

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

BTW - most of my background is in client server design.

Great, then we are in fact, each other's natural predator. And, incidentally, why I got the hell out when I did.

Vorkk8383

The big issue is people buying from these gold sellers. If people weren't buying gold, they wouldn't be making money and would leave. Now, people always want things done fast and such. They want a horse ASAP and more bank and bag space and need money for repairs.

The economy is SO screwed up at the moment.

I think that a way to eliminate people's ''want'' for more gold is to try to fix some of the economy a bit. Lowering the prices of repairs (especially at lower levels or making the items more durable is the first thing I'd do). I would cut the prices of skill changing drastically. I would also give 20 slots per upgrades for the bank space. Keep the same amount of upgrades available at the same prices but if you get 20 instead of 10, people won't feel the pressure to have the gold ASAP. Yes, you can have mules. We all get that. Still, it's a bit annoying to go back and forth. I do it. I have my mules. Having more bank space is still practical. For the bag space, I would lower the prices in half. Even with maxed out bag space, I'm selling every 30 minutes. I'm a looter. What can I say?! Most people are. We also need to loot everything to get that gold. Finally, make enchanting a bit easier. As of now, it's the toughest skill and people buy runes. These runes go for quite a bit. Also, reverse the nerf to motifs and rare motifs. Don't make them super duper common but they are too rare now.

None of this will get rid of all the bots. However, if X amount of people don't feel the need to buy gold anymore due to this, it's less money for the gold sellers and therefore, less bots will show up. Why show up if there's less money to be made? They will concentrate on something else.

Of course, there needs to be major changes on how the system itself works...encryption and such. I still think that tackling it from both ends is the best. From the player side by making it so they don't feel such a need to buy gold and from Zeni's side by blocking them as much as possible.

Now, I know that a lot of you will say ''gold is so easy to make, especially at higher levels''. Some people have a really easy time making gold. Others are basically incapable even if told how to do it step by step. Also, you don't start with a ton of bag, bank space and no horse. Yes, there is the 1g horse but a lot want a different color and all horses can get 50 feedings max. If you made the 1g horse obtainable in the other colors and gave it 70 feedings (which is essentially what the 40k horse ends up with) (they start with 20 feedings and you can add the 50 that every horse can have so 70), it would again eliminate the want for gold so badly. Most people can manage 250g even on their first day. They will be spending for 70 feedings every day at 250gold. To make it fair, maybe reduce the cost of the 50 feedings that you would give to your 42k horse. Having the imperial edition, I found the 1g horse pretty useless. Why would I spend 250 gold times 50 to have a horse with 50 skillups when the 40k horse also needs to be fed 50x. So I'd spend more time and money by doing it both ways. I just saved up until I had my 40k and bought that horse. A lot of people realize this but they want the 40k horse NOW...not in a week or two.

So dealing with human greed is something that I feel could accomplish a lot. Also, I think that Zeni should make it clear that the companies that post often steal credit card info. It's not worth having to deal with canceling your card, calling credit bureau... If you buy a power level, they will often use your account for illegal activities and get you banned or they will simply steal your account. This may scare some sense into some players. It's all true too.

Lastly, if they don't want to have GM's around 24/7 for a month or two which would really put a dent in the gold sellers/farmers etc, they can hire players who can only ban people selling gold in the zone chat. These players would be guides or whatever...they would get a free sub for doing this work x hours per week. They couldn't abuse their power because if they did, they would get banned themselves. They would have to sign some form that basically says they can only ban someone selling gold in chat and if they ban anyone else, they will be banned and sued, etc. Also, these people wouldn't be allowed to say that they were guides and would be on some invisible account while working. If you don't want to pay the GM's to do it zeni, a few free subs could help you put a huge dent in the zone chat gold sellers/spammers.

GreySix

Really think they'll have to take down the game long enough to transfer the majority of control to the server-side.

That would require a copy of the entire game being redesigned on a mirrored server (think $$$ and time).

Then they could deal with at least the hackers en-masse, if not the botters.

starkerealm

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

So, back to reality - what we can hope for, and should expect EOS to provide, is that the Bot's and RMT (real money transfer) become "hidden". By hidden, I mean the average player would only be slightly aware of their presence - if they are aware at all. As others have said, they exist in all Successful MMOs - the difference in that here they are blatantly "in your face" and affecting our ability to play the game the way we want to.

Ironically, they had the perfect situation to do exactly that. When the bots were clustered in the delves. If they'd simply generated a fresh instance, and sent new players to that, the bots would have been mostly contained, undetected, and could have been dealt with by the GMs.

Instead they stuck the lockout timer on the bosses, made it global, and turned the bots lose into the world. D'oh.

mike.crewsb14_ESO

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

And "trusting" is not the same as designing with client side movement - the client can do the movement and collision calc's and still not be "trusted" by the server.

(BTW - most of my background is in client server design).

Then how come you can't see the overwhelming evidence that Zenimax trusts the client far too much, and your caveats and nuance just don't apply here?

PharmaChief

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO wrote: »

PharmaChief wrote: »

What if we were asked to type a simple pictogram, say 3-4 letters, everytime we used a wayshrine or changed zone or entered a dungeon... that way bots would be unable to move around fast, making farming for them much harder. It would also keep them away from high level areas and dungeons.
I know it sounds bad but we do have to wait for loading anyway and that could be done during that loading screen time...

I disagree with any "solution" that puts the burden on the player. And, what you are suggesting is basically Captcha - which in order to be effective (not foolproof but effective) becomes very had for some people to get right. Imagine your account got suspended because you mistake a zero for an "O" (exaggeration, but the idea is my point)

I don't like throwing the burden to the player (that includes me also) either. But the burden is already to the player. The presence of the bots makes the game less fun and sometimes painfully exhausting. (having to watch bot flying over your head or antagonizing with them for kills and resources). On the other hand reporting them is more time consuming than what i suggested.
Of course its Zenimax job to fix this but a temporary solution such as this could work and drive bots away until a better solution appears.
And no, a typing mistake would only force us to try again and certainly not suspend our account... besides there are variations of pictograms that are easy for the human eye but still unrecognizable by computer programs

aleister

krix_ost wrote: »

ZeniMax has chosen to use Client Side Trust for many of the work load for the game. This does have advantages because every computer can do their own calculations and send that to the Server for Updating. However, it seems this data is not being encrypted (which adds overhead and complicates network delivery). As hinted above.

If true, this is astonishingly naive of them. And besides, if the client-side approach was for performance reasons, it sure as hell isn't working. This is the laggiest, most unresponsive MMO I've played in the last 10 years.

Shillen wrote: »

lewty72 wrote: »

I would happily go without my mod's if it meant their would be no bot's in the game as for me a limited UI is better than not been able to complete a quest because of the 6/8 bots camping a boss.

Not me. I can't even play without addons. Their default UI is beyond terrible.

Yes, this would be the straw that breaks the camel's back for me. The default UI is far too limited. Doing something like this shouldn't be necessary any way.

j.frank.nicholsb14_ESO

starkerealm wrote: »

Instead they stuck the lockout timer on the bosses, made it global, and turned the bots lose into the world. D'oh.

Yeah, sadly... I am totally against punishing players to cure the problem. Before the bots showed up, I was really enjoying the changes in the game dynamics in EOS vs other MMOs. It was "fun" playing with other players around - unlike WoW where other players were more like competition, here I did not get that feeling at all. Now, since the nerfing ZOS did to "help" the bot problem, the game feels less responsive and the presence of other plays is less amusing...

Oh well, we will see where they take it.

ZOS_EveP

This topic has been moved to General Discussion.

Tarwin

I think this is one of the best threads I have seen on this board. Very enlightening on the bot situation for us people that are perplexed by the current situation