Jump to content
You need to play a total of 20 battles to post in this section.
BarnacleCollector

WG ignores botters and TKers

65 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

Members
483 posts
23,440 battles

A day or two before Christmas, I saw a botter on my team. A few games later I saw him again. Both times, he rushed straight into the enemy and died. He was pointed out to me by someone else in the first game, who had seen him before. I checked the guy's account and his join date was 30-11-2019. He had been playing for three weeks and in that time he had done over 3000 battles. By the time I reported him about two weeks ago, he had passed 4500 battles. I got the usual worthless reply from WG, about how I don't need to report such things because the automated system will detect botters. If the system's so good, how did that guy bot around the clock for three weeks? I've seen another guy bot for months in the past two years, and WG did nothing. Well, today I checked the guy's account stats again, and he's at 6500 battles. Almost 39% win rate, with 11 500 average damage. And of those 6500 battles, he survived 138 (consistent with the behaviour I witnessed). He hasn't been banned. I doubt WG even "investigated" like the worthless reply said it would do. This guy's a bot. 6500 battles since 30 November, with those performance stats. That adds up to about 135 battles per day. Assuming 10 minutes per battle (which is too short, but anyway), that means he's playing 22.5 hours a day. Hellooo??? Think, McFly!

PM me and I'll tell you his name, so you can see for yourselves. I've got replays as well.

By the way, WG, not only are you never getting money from me again, but I'll tell everyone I ever meet to never touch your games.

  • Cool 8
  • Boring 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8,259
[GWG]
[GWG]
Supertester
27,189 posts
14,754 battles

More likely a leveling service and matches per hour are more important than doing well in them. Go in and sink, back to port and launch another ship.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10,389
[INTEL]
Members
13,459 posts
37,334 battles
35 minutes ago, BarnacleCollector said:

This guy's a bot. 6500 battles since 30 November, with those performance stats. That adds up to about 135 battles per day. Assuming 10 minutes per battle (which is too short, but anyway), that means he's playing 22.5 hours a day. Hellooo??? Think, McFly!

WG loves bots. They cause collapses which put players back in the queue. Hence botters are never dealt with.

I've also stopped spending. I spent a little in the fall when it looked for a few weeks like CVs were going to revert to their pre-0.8.0 numbers, but now the game is flooded with them, and I regret that. It's sad to see what the devs have done to what would have been a great game. I'll still around for the final wipeout when they shove submarines into Randoms. 

  • Cool 8
  • Boring 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,307
[WORX]
Members
11,457 posts
19,196 battles
1 hour ago, BarnacleCollector said:

, I saw a botter on my team

If you suspect and you have evidence, then report to CS... Let them investigate...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
199
[ANKER]
Members
373 posts
6,430 battles

Playing Co-OP

Me to my Fellow Teammates ( Hello Team )

Team Reply    ( Ahoy! )

Playing Random

Me to my Fellow Teammates ( Hello Team )

Team Reply (.... ... ................... .... ............. ..... ) No replY , No communication ..

 

:cap_win:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
920
[USCC]
Members
3,074 posts
14,326 battles
13 minutes ago, 9TenSix2Eight said:

Playing Co-OP

Me to my Fellow Teammates ( Hello Team )

Team Reply    ( Ahoy! )

Playing Random

Me to my Fellow Teammates ( Hello Team )

Team Reply (.... ... ................... .... ............. ..... ) No replY , No communication ..

 

:cap_win:

Most Random players lose 50% or more of their matches, most cases more... thus it makes them salty, and so it should, who likes to lose over and over and over.
PVE players win 95ish % of all their matches, thus making them happy, and pleasant to play with.  :cap_tea:

  • Cool 4
  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,936
[WDS]
[WDS]
Members
3,900 posts
11,670 battles
49 minutes ago, SpudZero said:

Most Random players lose 50% or more of their matches, most cases more... thus it makes them salty, and so it should, who likes to lose over and over and over.
PVE players win 95ish % of all their matches, thus making them happy, and pleasant to play with.  :cap_tea:

Never really thought about it like that but it’ probable has some truth to it . Honestly though almost everyone time someone says good luck or hello in a random game  he gets a response . Might not be the one he wants but he usually gets a response .

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,508
[RKLES]
Members
12,557 posts
14,317 battles
7 hours ago, Taichunger said:

WG loves bots. They cause collapses which put players back in the queue. Hence botters are never dealt with.

I've also stopped spending. I spent a little in the fall when it looked for a few weeks like CVs were going to revert to their pre-0.8.0 numbers, but now the game is flooded with them, and I regret that. It's sad to see what the devs have done to what would have been a great game. I'll still around for the final wipeout when they shove submarines into Randoms. 

People are panicking over the idea of subs, I on the other hand have added several lines of DDs to my port including keeping various tiers of the lines like I often like to do. That way I have good choices to go sub hunting in. And I intentionally sailed my Halloween subs at various ranges to the depth charges hitting the water, and even a good few meters away you could take good amount of damage, and if you took a direct hit well you were either sunk or barely alive thanks to such a hit. And that is with presumably OP versions of subs and with bots launching those charges. You get tech tree subs with humans dumping depth charges into the water and subs could end up not having that great of odds of survival.

WOT Blitz has demonstrated with some of the latest light tanks that they are willing to give the players the options to use unprotected novelty tanks that pretty much are kamikaze tanks as their chances of survival are so low. Lol think I am running 5% survival ratio in the few battles I have played in some of those. But then again I do prefer having / using well armored tanks and ships. But the point remains WG can end up adding the option for players to practically be using vehicles that have little to no chance of surviving the battle, but can hit hard for at least a brief period of time.

Edited by Admiral_Thrawn_1
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
164
[PUDEL]
Members
337 posts
1,596 battles
1 hour ago, SpudZero said:

Most Random players lose 50% or more of their matches, most cases more... thus it makes them salty, and so it should, who likes to lose over and over and over.
PVE players win 95ish % of all their matches, thus making them happy, and pleasant to play with.  :cap_tea:

So that's why everyone dumped on me, saying that the laws of averages applied to *them*, too... :Smile_teethhappy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6,103
[FOXEH]
Banned
14,364 posts
20,016 battles
3 hours ago, Admiral_Thrawn_1 said:

People are panicking over the idea of subs

Players hate anything that can kill them without them being able to hit back. It's why CVs are so universally hated, and it's why DDs are so universally hated. Players feel like any ship attacking them should take the same risk of being damaged as they do. Now WG is going to introduce an entire line of ships stealthier than DDs, and able to hit harder and faster than CVs, that you won't be able to see. There is going to be a salt fest over this that will make the CV rework look like a speed bump.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3,508
[RKLES]
Members
12,557 posts
14,317 battles
39 minutes ago, Umikami said:

Players hate anything that can kill them without them being able to hit back. It's why CVs are so universally hated, and it's why DDs are so universally hated. Players feel like any ship attacking them should take the same risk of being damaged as they do. Now WG is going to introduce an entire line of ships stealthier than DDs, and able to hit herder and faster than CVs, that you won't be able to see. There is going to be a salt fest over this that will make the CV rework look like a speed bump.

Not if the sub torps are as short ranged and difficult to score hits with as the Halloween subs were. Halloween subs may have had 8km torpedoes, but you certainly could not hit anything at ranges beyond 5km or less felt better. And that means they will get detected and fall under attack in Randoms. Which is why I think subs will be weekend and Holiday weapons much like CVs as you need lone ships wandering around to prey on, not escorted ships that are likely gong to work together to counter your attacks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,429 posts
10,494 battles

Banning a player will not stop them from playing - they just use another email address.  There is no effective way to actually ban anyone in on online game.  TKRs are dealt with automatically and is effective.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9,789
[SALVO]
Members
25,508 posts
27,483 battles
1 hour ago, Umikami said:

SOME Players hate anything that can kill them without them being able to hit back. 

Fixed that for you.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,110
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,764 battles
8 hours ago, BarnacleCollector said:

Assuming 10 minutes per battle (which is too short, but anyway), that means he's playing 22.5 hours a day. Hellooo??? Think, McFly!

Obvious bot.

Unfortunately,  WG does not devote a lot of resources to bot monitoring...so response time on such things is really long.

Which inevitably leads to...

8 hours ago, BarnacleCollector said:

By the way, WG, not only are you never getting money from me again, but I'll tell everyone I ever meet to never touch your games

...and...

7 hours ago, Taichunger said:

I've also stopped spending. I spent a little in the fall when it looked for a few weeks like CVs were going to revert to their pre-0.8.0 numbers, but now the game is flooded with them, and I regret that. It's sad to see what the devs have done to what would have been a great game. I'll still around for the final wipeout when they shove submarines into Randoms

Management decisions (resource management, and game meta strategic direction) have real world revenue consequences.

2019 showed WG senior leadership making serious mistake after serious mistake...anyone going to be held accountable?

@Sub_Octavian

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,429 posts
10,494 battles
5 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

2019 showed WG senior leadership making serious mistake after serious mistake...anyone going to be held accountable?

I would be willing to bet that they are not seeing a revenue drop they way you and other think they are.

Edited by CylonRed
  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,110
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,764 battles
1 minute ago, CylonRed said:

I would be willing to bet that they are not seeing a revenue drop they way you and other think they are.

I would be willing to bet the potential revenue loss by their choices is a positive number.

They could be making MORE money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
312
[BB35]
Members
554 posts
4,457 battles

I've played a lot of different MMORPG's over the years, they all have had bot problems, it's not going away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,689
[PVE]
Members
4,676 posts
20,617 battles
8 hours ago, BarnacleCollector said:

A day or two before Christmas, I saw a botter on my team. A few games later I saw him again. Both times, he rushed straight into the enemy and died. He was pointed out to me by someone else in the first game, who had seen him before. I checked the guy's account and his join date was 30-11-2019. He had been playing for three weeks and in that time he had done over 3000 battles. By the time I reported him about two weeks ago, he had passed 4500 battles. I got the usual worthless reply from WG, about how I don't need to report such things because the automated system will detect botters. If the system's so good, how did that guy bot around the clock for three weeks? I've seen another guy bot for months in the past two years, and WG did nothing. Well, today I checked the guy's account stats again, and he's at 6500 battles. Almost 39% win rate, with 11 500 average damage. And of those 6500 battles, he survived 138 (consistent with the behaviour I witnessed). He hasn't been banned. I doubt WG even "investigated" like the worthless reply said it would do. This guy's a bot. 6500 battles since 30 November, with those performance stats. That adds up to about 135 battles per day. Assuming 10 minutes per battle (which is too short, but anyway), that means he's playing 22.5 hours a day. Hellooo??? Think, McFly!

PM me and I'll tell you his name, so you can see for yourselves. I've got replays as well.

By the way, WG, not only are you never getting money from me again, but I'll tell everyone I ever meet to never touch your games.

Ah........  I have several friends that have since left the game but, they, sometimes as a division, all night long rushed the caps as a division intentionally.....  Just to see what they could or could not do.  Match after match after match.  Some players enjoy the rush of "gauntlets of fire" versus the hide and seek of normalized play.  Some players I know to this day, do exactly what you said above as a "protest" of a lack of game quality from our host. 

And, games are measured by the player densities on their servers....  Throughput = revenue.  Notice, the word "quality isn't in that formula.... 

Report whomever you like.......the really bad botters will get caught at some point.  We all are botters sometimes when we are in an event and focused on a specific task.....   Take the shoot down airplanes requirement.  Do you have any idea how many players entered a match without Carriers and "just sailed in a straight line to die as fast as possible?"  So, they could as fast as possible, get into a match with a carrier..........which, they avoided every thing necessary to "just shoot down planes..."  Or, the secondary hits where you see a Tirpitz on autopilot at half speed and no main guns shooting???? 

It's just a game: treat as one and either have fun or play less........that seems to work for me.

  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
5,429 posts
10,494 battles
3 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I would be willing to bet the potential revenue loss by their choices is a positive number.

They could be making MORE money.

Based on a few people in a forum that represents less than 3% of the ENTIRE NA player base and ignores all other player bases...   I think you give WAYYYYYY to much strength to a minority of the player base.  If there is any dip - unlikely - it would be VERY small.  Small enough to be insignificant

Edited by CylonRed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
925 posts
4,023 battles
5 minutes ago, CylonRed said:

I would be willing to bet that they are not seeing a revenue drop they way you and other think they are.

This is likely true.

2 minutes ago, Daniel_Allan_Clark said:

I would be willing to bet the potential revenue loss by their choices is a positive number.

They could be making MORE money.

1) Assuming that the company resources it takes to keep players from closing their wallets makes up for the difference.

2)  Also, I have to wonder (not casting any doubt on the OP's statement), how many players who announce they are "closing their wallets" are actually "closing their wallets"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
820
[ANK-A]
Members
1,341 posts
11,024 battles
1 hour ago, Umikami said:

Players hate anything that can kill them without them being able to hit back. It's why CVs are so universally hated, and it's why DDs are so universally hated. Players feel like any ship attacking them should take the same risk of being damaged as they do.

DDs are universally hated??  ...and for not being able to hit them??

That's laughable.  DDs usually die first, and are the most vunerable ship in the game.

Are you that is what you really meant to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
820
[ANK-A]
Members
1,341 posts
11,024 battles
12 minutes ago, surratus said:

This is likely true.

1) Assuming that the company resources it takes to keep players from closing their wallets makes up for the difference.

2)  Also, I have to wonder (not casting any doubt on the OP's statement), how many players who announce they are "closing their wallets" are actually "closing their wallets"?

Maybe they do or maybe they don't but it has got to have an effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
101
[O_S_D]
Members
120 posts
11,737 battles
28 minutes ago, Asym_KS said:

We all are botters sometimes when we are in an event and focused on a specific task.....   Take the shoot down airplanes requirement.  Do you have any idea how many players entered a match without Carriers and "just sailed in a straight line to die as fast as possible?"  So, they could as fast as possible, get into a match with a carrier..........which, they avoided every thing necessary to "just shoot down planes..."  Or, the secondary hits where you see a Tirpitz on autopilot at half speed and no main guns shooting???? 

I think what ASYM_KS said here is the truth. A lot of times, (in CO-OP especially) it is to get a specific task done as quickly as possible because of the time restrictions imposed on the tasks. As far as Wargaming and its finances go, you can fight by closing your wallets but the fact is, Wargaming is a multi Billion dollar company. They have a lot going on. I am sure closing your wallet will have a small effect, but it is like pulling a hundred gallons of water from the ocean. It really has no effect. They can absorb that. The REAL reason people stay is because they have money invested in this game. Ships, Permanent Camos and Doubloons and you have a LOT of personal time invested with grinding and so forth. So fight all you want. It will not matter. As long as you have people in their pocket doing their damage control and keeping the Red Bull flowing. You are wasting your breath. Good luck.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,110
[TARK]
Members
7,331 posts
2,764 battles
38 minutes ago, YouSatInGum said:

DDs are universally hated??  ...and for not being able to hit them??

That's laughable.  DDs usually die first, and are the most vunerable ship in the game.

Are you that is what you really meant to say?

DDs are actually not the most vulnerable ship in the game...that honor goes to light cruisers.

The fact that there are many players who dont understand how to use a DD to its potential does not mean the ship ITSELF is more vulnerable...

The number of suicidal DD players I see in matches (and I play carrier so I see the whole battle through the map mode) is depressing.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×