Unless you can pull out some evidence that proves your innocent, which considering the case is nigh impossibile, i highly doubt any accounts will be un-banned. Until then i fully expect that you will get automated replies, until either you A) give them some evidence or B) write in sooooo many times, that they tell you to stop or give in.
You've already been found and caught cheating in some manner, which is speculated that the graphics.dll injection is main cause. Its not their duty to explain or show how they caught you. Plus they've already said that they can't tell us how because it'll get leaked to the public and they don't want the hacks to find new ways around it.
Emailing Support - Why are we doing it?
Feathermoore Rep
Zarion Silverarrow
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn
From a support standpoint yes, but i think it was done to send a deliberate VERY public message; Don't break the rules! From that aspect, it was spot on! Would-be cheaters are now certain of what happens,and i think that was the point really!
|
Gattina
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kumu Honua
The only question that would matter to me is:
Did someone who has NOT lost their account to botting sent in a request and been sent these same responses? THAT would show that they aren't even investigating before responding. All this shows is that they pre-wrote canned responses. They have always used canned responses. |
Zarion Silverarrow
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gattina
yes i did and couple of my friends we all got same responses
|
cormac ap dunn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zarion Silverarrow
Then,that guy that said A-net just did it to "please the mindless masses"has a point. You disagreed with him...(I think)
|
I Rogue Syndicate I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gattina
yes i did and couple of my friends we all got same responses
|
Kumu Honua
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gattina
yes i did and couple of my friends we all got same responses
|
If that is true, then Regina has some splaining to do as well as some support ass to be kicking.
cormac ap dunn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I
which if true, further shows a lack of proper decision making as it is now having an ill-effect on the non-botting community...
|
Sir Cusfreak
no one is writing to support to say "good job!" - so, it can be reasonably assumed by support that EVERY ban-related email is writing to attempt to get thier account unbanned. They arent interested in doing that, so you get an auto-response. Its not unreasonable.
I Rogue Syndicate I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn
that or the botting community has swamped their resources and this is THEIR fault
|
Gattina
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kumu Honua
You sent in a request saying "My account was banned, but I didn't bot at all! Can you check to see if it was a mistake?" or something similar, and they sent you the canned response that you botted and they have evidence?
|
Kumu Honua
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I
Who let it get to this point? Who's in control of the game and servers?
|
Retarded self delusion.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Gattina
no my friend got banned so i wrote them to try help him out and i got same replies as those who got banned
|
I'm talking about those who never botted at all and are clean sent in a request saying they their account (That is not banned) got banned asking if they would investigate.
If THAT garners the canned response then there's something wrong.
cormac ap dunn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I
Who let it get to this point? Who's in control of the game and servers?
|
I Rogue Syndicate I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kumu Honua
That's like saying that DDoSers aren't at fault because the company they are DDoS'ing let it get that way.
Retarded self delusion. |
Ghost Dog
Good question, why are people emailing support when they know they cheated?
How many innocent players can be chocked up to all out denial or attempting to save face for their "friends", how many of those "friends" are naive as hell and really think they're online acquaintance didn't cheat.
Probably all of them, I may sound naive myself but it's more like jaded at a gaming generation that thrives on exploits and cheats.
How many innocent players can be chocked up to all out denial or attempting to save face for their "friends", how many of those "friends" are naive as hell and really think they're online acquaintance didn't cheat.
Probably all of them, I may sound naive myself but it's more like jaded at a gaming generation that thrives on exploits and cheats.
majoho
As far as I know the first response from ncsoft was always an automated message.
Kumu Honua
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I
If the company found out about the issue but let it continue for a long period of time without taking the proper steps to stop it as quickly as possible... who's fault is it then?
|
Some sites don't invest in anti-ddos. Why? It costs money and you can usually simply wait out a DDoS.
So a company can "do nothing" and still end out ahead. It's STILL the fault of the criminals.
I Rogue Syndicate I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn
well, until you invent viable time travel, your going to have accept that they did it NOW. My suggestion is try not to vilify Anet for taking action at all, they could have just said screw it and focused solely on GW2, but they acted.
|
Zarion Silverarrow
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by majoho
As far as I know the first response from ncsoft was always an automated message.
|
I Rogue Syndicate I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kumu Honua
It would be the fault of the lawbreakers.
Some sites don't invest in anti-ddos. Why? It costs money and you can usually simply wait out a DDoS. So a company can "do nothing" and still end out ahead. It's STILL the fault of the criminals. |
cormac ap dunn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I
If the company found out about the issue but let it continue for a long period of time without taking the proper steps to stop it as quickly as possible... who's fault is it then?
|
I Rogue Syndicate I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn
still the cheaters fault for cheating man, always has been, always will be
|
Zarion Silverarrow
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kumu Honua
It would be the fault of the lawbreakers.
Some sites don't invest in anti-ddos. Why? It costs money and you can usually simply wait out a DDoS. So a company can "do nothing" and still end out ahead. It's STILL the fault of the criminals. |
"John shot Peter,he was left bleeding out. David was beside him and all he did was wait it out. The only guilty one here is John."
In this case with A-net...I think it is mainly the HARDCORE BOTERS' fault,not the curious botters' fault...maybe A-net in some way,like the one that guy describe about taking action in a slow way,instead of popping out Dhuum all of a sudden and banning 3.7k people in an instant.
Inde
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Kumu Honua
It would be the fault of the lawbreakers.
Some sites don't invest in anti-ddos. Why? It costs money and you can usually simply wait out a DDoS. So a company can "do nothing" and still end out ahead. It's STILL the fault of the criminals. |
Major sites are brought down all the time with ddos, it's why it's so effective.
Skyy High
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I
If the company found out about the issue but let it continue for a long period of time without taking the proper steps to stop it as quickly as possible... who's fault is it then?
|
As for "innocents" getting the canned response: support is getting inundated with probably hundreds of emails a day right now. How the hell do you expect them to get back to you at this time? Give it a week or so, try again, and if you really are innocent (which, face it, doesn't look terribly likely considering how many QQ-ers there are around here, and how long this banswipe has been in the making) maybe they'll actually get around to sorting through the mess.
Every time you ever say "ANet sucks because X", ask yourself if you could do any better if faced with a similar situation. Say someone lost a bike, and you advertise that you found it. 100 people show up at the same time, throwing receipts at you and yelling information about the bike to try to convince you that they're the real owner. That's what it'd be like to be support right now.
Zarion Silverarrow
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Skyy High
They said why they were waiting: so they could collect as much data as possible about the types of bots being used, so they could decisively ban as many as possible in one swoop, so the botters wouldn't have time to go "oh crap they're onto us, best stop botting for a bit until a new one comes out". Really simple.
As for "innocents" getting the canned response: support is getting inundated with probably hundreds of emails a day right now. How the hell do you expect them to get back to you at this time? Give it a week or so, try again, and if you really are innocent (which, face it, doesn't look terribly likely considering how many QQ-ers there are around here, and how long this banswipe has been in the making) maybe they'll actually get around to sorting through the mess. Every time you ever say "ANet sucks because X", ask yourself if you could do any better if faced with a similar situation. Say someone lost a bike, and you advertise that you found it. 100 people show up at the same time, throwing receipts at you and yelling information about the bike to try to convince you that they're the real owner. That's what it'd be like to be support right now. |
Sir Cusfreak
Quote:
| In this case with A-net...I think it is mainly the HARDCORE BOTERS' fault,not the curious botters' fault...maybe A-net in some way,like the one that guy describe about taking action in a slow way,instead of popping out Dhuum all of a sudden and banning 3.7k people in an instant. |
Its good and right.
And this argument that they should have acted sooner and got fewer is REDICULOUS. They did it perfectly. if they found 3700 more over the next 2, 4 or 6 months and got 'em all then, again, that would be fine as well.
They did it right.
And I bet they liked it too. And that's ok. I hope THEY, at least, had a Dhuumsday Party, even if we didn't get one.
cormac ap dunn
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zarion Silverarrow
The problem isn't that we are getting an automated response,its what the message actually is. Its telling you to just NVM it and move on...is it that hard to put in the message "We are busy,contact us later."
|
Schnellburg
What is unfair is that they say all 3rd party programs are against the Eula, but then go back and say some are. There shouldn't be any grey area at all. Either they are all against the Eula or they all are not.
Kumu Honua
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I
You're funny... You don't seem to realize that it is quite possible for there to be two wrongs happening at the same time... While yes, there could be one wrong which is started by the bad guys... but the response (or lack there of) by the victim can quite easily turn into a wrong as well...
|
The blame rests squarely on the shoulders of the criminals. The company can of course react in order to alleviate the problems.
I dunno, perhaps they could ban all the accounts of those who cause the infraction?...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Inde
Um, sorry to hijack but there's just not "anti-ddos" that you can "invest" in out there. It's simply a matter of having more resources than the attackers. I don't care what software comes up when you type in "anti-ddos" in a search engine either.
Major sites are brought down all the time with ddos, it's why it's so effective. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schnellburg
What is unfair is that they say all 3rd party programs are against the Eula, but then go back and say some are. There shouldn't be any grey area at all. Either they are all against the Eula or they all are not.
|
Zarion Silverarrow
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sir Cusfreak
there is no difference in hardcore, softcore, bot-curious, dabblers or 24/7 botters. They all did the same thing, and they all got the same thing. If youre told "dont bot, and dont use 3rds if they alter the file", then dont. What could possibly be more simple than that?
Its good and right. And this argument that they should have acted sooner and got fewer is REDICULOUS. They did it perfectly. if they found 3700 more over the next 2, 4 or 6 months and got 'em all then, again, that would be fine as well. They did it right. And I bet they liked it too. And that's ok. I hope THEY, at least, had a Dhuumsday Party, even if we didn't get one. |
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn
maybe thats the point, maybe you WON'T get the account back, and maybe you should move on
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schnellburg
What is unfair is that they say all 3rd party programs are against the Eula, but then go back and say some are. There shouldn't be any grey area at all. Either they are all against the Eula or they all are not.
|
amaretto creme
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schnellburg
What is unfair is that they say all 3rd party programs are against the Eula, but then go back and say some are. There shouldn't be any grey area at all. Either they are all against the Eula or they all are not.
|
I Rogue Syndicate I
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by cormac ap dunn
maybe thats the point, maybe you WON'T get the account back, and maybe you should move on
|
Instead, please contact support followed by automated emails saying the decision is final...
I guess I just have too much empathy for the innocent.... and know the feeling of being run in circles by ill-managed companies...
To simply say that our method is 100% full proof when it comes to computer software just seems silly to me... god know's the best software companies in the world never send out software with flaws in it.. lol
Zarion Silverarrow
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by I Rogue Syndicate I
Then why make the business decision to tell your customer's to contact support to begin with? If there is absolutely NO chance of getting your accounts back at all... why put your support department through this? To save face? If they want to look "HARD" about this why not just straight up say "Sorry.... decision made... if you're a botter you're gone.. if you were accidentally banned.. sorry... it's for the better good of the game... too bad so sad... WoW is ----> that way"
Instead, please contact support followed by automated emails saying the decision is final... I guess I just have too much empathy for the innocent.... and know the feeling of being run in circles by ill-managed companies... To simply say that our method is 100% full proof when it comes to computer software just seems silly to me... god know's the best software companies in the world never send out software with flaws in it.. lol |
Gennadios
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Schnellburg
What is unfair is that they say all 3rd party programs are against the Eula, but then go back and say some are. There shouldn't be any grey area at all. Either they are all against the Eula or they all are not.
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Code of Conduct
You agree not to use any hardware or software, including but not limited to third party tools, or any other method of support which may in any way influence or advantage your use of the Service which is not authorized by NC Interactive, including but not limited to the use of 'bots' and/or any other method by which the Service may be played automatically without human input
|
This should be taken as an "authorization," since such statements were never made with regards to the targeted bots, the bannings were justified.
Imaginos
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sir Cusfreak
I would agree with you if there was any support to be given, or if there was anything different going on between banned accounts. there's not - one answer is entirely encompassing. An alteration (injection) WAS made, and that is enough. "but it was only..." isnt worth pursuing.
I propose another question to the community here: How much of ANET's current GW1 resources SHOULD be spent on these support emails? A second scan/evaluation for each account? a personalized "on the night of April 15th at 2:14 am your account exited Bergen Hot Springs for the 400th time since logging on" ? NO. If theyre going to spend money and use resources, it should benefit the players, not the banned souls. Its a waste of time and money to respond to each cheater, and the fact that they issued the invitation to contact them is a credit to thier professionalism, but, again, a gesture only. The fact that they respond to botters with a bot is a credit to thier greatness - it's a perfect ending; subtle, classy, and entirely appropriate. |
Feathermoore Rep
No they CLEARLY say they do not condone the use of thirty-party programs. However they acknowledge that some exist and are used for non-enhancing means (aka affecting the gameplay or economy) . These they notice their use and choose to ignore those using. They will not suspend or ban you for using them, but if something goes wrong at the same they will not offer you any support. AKA if it screws up your game or something and you get banned, your going to be out of luck, unless you have hard evidence to disprove the ban.
Imaginos
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Risus
I understand what you are trying to say, and saying that they have absolutely no margin of error is completely obnoxious on ArenaNet's part, but the fact is that almost all 3700 accounts banned would be appealed despite the fact if they botted or not, simply because everyone thinks "Why not give it a shot?" There is no physical way ArenaNet could sift through all of those emails and figure out which ones even have a shred of legitimacy without being set back at the least a few days, which they are already pressured on time as it is.
I feel sorry for all the people that did get banned, but I suggest that you find another way to contact ArenaNet other than e-mail if you truly were wrongfully banned (phone would be the next best choice, interaction with a real human via voice would be much more legitimate than an email). Edit: I just had to add this, it's too epic to leave out. |
Instead of saying "tough shit we don't give a rats ass about you" they could say "we will be reviewing your case, though it may take upwards of a few weeks before we get back to you due to our current workload of requests".
Imaginos
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zarion Silverarrow
Yea,and I think A-net is just to uptight to ever admit an error. They are having fun (Dhuum,Regina's posts,etc),mocking us with automated GTFO mails,and finding out they have a power over most of GW's players. Were they can say X person is a botter,and it is true,no matter what. Got a problem? no no NO! you are wrong period lalalalalallalalal....reminds me of peter from family guy
|
With the lack of care for customers why would anyone buy a new copy of GW? Or support GW2?
Sir Cusfreak
Quote:
| If its so right,why are they being overflooded with mails? That makes it wrong. |
You cant seriously believe that the amount of "I didn't do it" or "it was only a LITTLE botting..." emails means ANYTHING besides there are a lot of people who want thier acccounts back...right? cause thats all it means. number of emails doesn't make right or wrong...