|
On June 08 2012 19:42 Roggay wrote: LoL has a system where everyone can judge cases of people being reported (for a lot of things, mainly feeding or bm) at a "tribunal" and you gain a small reward for every case where you were right (I think the cases approved by the majority are then passed to a riot employee who validates the judgement or not). Altho im not quite sure how it works (never done it myself), the idea is a great one and could prevent a lot of unnecessary work from Blizzard. They just need to find appropriate reward for the people doing that (cosmetics?). The Lol Tribunal is not really about cheaters. It is about to punish players who leave the game early go afk or insult other players. It is there to punish not acceptable behaviour. Not everyone can partizipate only players who reached level 30.
|
I am somewhat skeptical of any system which largely requires player input - I just don't think everyone is rational enough to be objective about their own games. For example, a few weeks ago (before all this went down) I played someone on ladder who called me a hacker and spent the entire game abusing me, all because my scouting drone killed his scv building a barracks, in his base, at the start. Things like me going to kill his third, after I scouted it with a mutalisk (and it was beyond the normal time to take it anyway) were for him, evidence that I hack. He made it very clear he was going to report me and send my IP to an anti-hacker group to fuck up my computer - or something. Now, this guy was clearly sociopathic and an idiot, but under this proposed system it would only take me running in to two more such people on ladder to have my account suspended, when I have never hacked in my life.
|
Until something is done, I encourage you to scroll through the hackers last matches list and PM the people they've played against.
I've been doing that after watching the replay. I'm in diamond so normally they are quite bad at using map hack. I also only PM people when I'm 100% sure. Normally it's when they, in multiple occasions, look at your main and all expansions(even ones they havn't scouted) through the fog of war.
I've also noticed that if you're in a huge lead versus most maphackers, they end up dropping out of the game instead of playing through it all.
PM'ing them will(hopefully) help until a good change comes along.
PS: very well written. Thanks for the good read OP! ^_^
|
Do you really think Blizzard will support a game which has no monthly fees like WoW ? Even for WoW they do nothing against bot. I will not talk about Diablo II. :-)
Blizzard only cares when you buy the game, and maybe about the marketing of the product too.
Your solution seems nice, like hippies' dreams during the 60-70's.
If you want to avoid hackers, find a community, play custom against your friends etc. If you want to be serious about what you say you would send a mail or an online petition to blizzard.
Good luck in your lost croisade.
|
On June 08 2012 19:56 Assirra wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 19:53 MrCash wrote:On June 08 2012 19:42 Roggay wrote: LoL has a system where everyone can judge cases of people being reported (for a lot of things, mainly feeding or bm) at a "tribunal" and you gain a small reward for every case where you were right (I think the cases approved by the majority are then passed to a riot employee who validates the judgement or not). Altho im not quite sure how it works (never done it myself), the idea is a great one and could prevent a lot of unnecessary work from Blizzard. They just need to find appropriate reward for the people doing that (cosmetics?). LoL is also a free game and has a lot of flexibility with their ability to punish people. I agree there should be a means to punish certain things, that's what the reporting was intended to do to begin with. To be honest, I have my skepticism about the whole "ban in waves" even occurring. Almost feels like the reporting is there purely to function as a placebo button, to keep people content, while at the same time avoiding any conflict with a paying customer (meaning never actually punishing anyone). That's pure speculation of course, simply that I've never heard of anyone actually getting banned or punished via this. Only thing I've heard was the announcement of future, stricter, possible punishments... and that one guy that got dropped to bronze. You might want to check out that GM hacker thread here as well, since said GM hacker now is in bronze. Blizzard works on it but they got so much work and investigation you cannot expect it to get done fast. Something like a report function can be very abusive if you don't properly investigate.
I agree absolutely, same can be applied to the whole LoL system of banning as well. Ultimately, the company running the game is responsible for making proper precaution and decision. My perspective, at this time, being that in two years, I've literally never heard of this actually happening to anyone. The reporting is not all that different from the LoL system anyway, minus the tribunal, which is basically way to save on labor by the company (pretty clever move). I understand it's an additional expense, but it feels like if there is someone responsible for authorizing bans in Blizzard, it's one person, with a full time position and other responsibilities, who is expected to do this one day a month or even season. Also, due to his other responsibilities, can easily dismiss or postpone the "ban cycle" until the next month/season.
Again, this is simply how this whole thing feels. I've only encountered people who I felt were hacking two or three times and don't really care that much, there will be petty and weak people everywhere in life who try to cheat and I don't expect a higher authority to get rid of them for me every time. However, clearly a lot of people do care and to be fair, it is becoming an important industry issue with eSports growing by the day.
|
On June 08 2012 19:58 TENTHST wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 19:53 SimDawg wrote: What about a new ladder? I have a huge lack of technical expertise but if it happened in BW why not now?
Imagine all the active laddering moving to a place where hacks are actively monitored and scanned, the map pool is competitive and responsive to the community. Sounds awfully nice to me. An alternate ladder is completely out of the question, just like LAN. Blizzard was very careful about how they set up the legal boundaries of SC2 and made sure that they would be in total control for the life of the game. Like I said above, if the ladder fails here, the game dies with it.
Just out of curiosity, is it a thing that is technically prohibited, like LAN, or is it a legal issue? Because technically people don't need to interface with Bliz or profit off the new ladder.
|
|
On June 08 2012 20:05 SimDawg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 19:58 TENTHST wrote:On June 08 2012 19:53 SimDawg wrote: What about a new ladder? I have a huge lack of technical expertise but if it happened in BW why not now?
Imagine all the active laddering moving to a place where hacks are actively monitored and scanned, the map pool is competitive and responsive to the community. Sounds awfully nice to me. An alternate ladder is completely out of the question, just like LAN. Blizzard was very careful about how they set up the legal boundaries of SC2 and made sure that they would be in total control for the life of the game. Like I said above, if the ladder fails here, the game dies with it. Just out of curiosity, is it a thing that is technically prohibited, like LAN, or is it a legal issue? Because technically people don't need to interface with Bliz or profit off the new ladder.
An alternate ladder is more of a massive structural expense more than anything. Setting that up would require investments into programming and additional servers. I don't see any "control" loss or any operational conflicts for blizzard. Other than running a extra ladder, whatever that entails. While implementing LAN would cost additional programming expense, originally and now, it remains an issue of losing sales. Much like WC3, where programs like Hamachi made it possible to play LAN games world-wide over the internet. You can imagine how much lost sales this can easily create.
|
Blizzard definitely has to do something about this, because their ladder IS the game right now. People lose the interest in playing in the ladder and the game dies. However I don't necessarily agree that it's something solely in Blizzard's hands.
I think they should make some kind of middle-man system, where players have their own place to discuss if someone is hacking through replay analysis. Players would only be able to discuss on the specific "thread" if they had downloaded and went through the whole replay. If enough players vote on the issue (let's say 50) and there's a good percentage of players that think the guy is guilty (let's say 75%), then the complaint is formally and automatically passed on to a Blizzard employee, that analyses the evidence himself and punishes the player accordingly.
What this does is it solves the logistics problem of having a huge team of employees dealing with every single complaint, while streamlining and automatizing the banning process, making it easier and quicker to ban a hacker.
|
On June 08 2012 20:09 MrCash wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 20:05 SimDawg wrote:On June 08 2012 19:58 TENTHST wrote:On June 08 2012 19:53 SimDawg wrote: What about a new ladder? I have a huge lack of technical expertise but if it happened in BW why not now?
Imagine all the active laddering moving to a place where hacks are actively monitored and scanned, the map pool is competitive and responsive to the community. Sounds awfully nice to me. An alternate ladder is completely out of the question, just like LAN. Blizzard was very careful about how they set up the legal boundaries of SC2 and made sure that they would be in total control for the life of the game. Like I said above, if the ladder fails here, the game dies with it. Just out of curiosity, is it a thing that is technically prohibited, like LAN, or is it a legal issue? Because technically people don't need to interface with Bliz or profit off the new ladder. An alternate ladder is more of a massive structural expense more than anything. Setting that up would require investments into programming and additional servers. I don't see any "control" loss or any operational conflicts for blizzard. Other than running a extra ladder, whatever that entails. While implementing LAN would cost additional programming expense, originally and now, it remains an issue of losing sales. Much like WC3, where programs like Hamachi made it possible to play LAN games world-wide over the internet. You can imagine how much lost sales this can easily create.
Right, don't mean to beat a horse everyone is telling me is dead, but its impossible for someone to code a LAN mode for SC2 in his spare time, right?
My question is more...is it possible for someone/people to code an alternate ladder in their spare time? Or is it going to be technically impossible to code without Blizzard's help?
|
On June 08 2012 20:00 Uracil wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 19:42 Roggay wrote: LoL has a system where everyone can judge cases of people being reported (for a lot of things, mainly feeding or bm) at a "tribunal" and you gain a small reward for every case where you were right (I think the cases approved by the majority are then passed to a riot employee who validates the judgement or not). Altho im not quite sure how it works (never done it myself), the idea is a great one and could prevent a lot of unnecessary work from Blizzard. They just need to find appropriate reward for the people doing that (cosmetics?). The Lol Tribunal is not really about cheaters. It is about to punish players who leave the game early go afk or insult other players. It is there to punish not acceptable behaviour. Not everyone can partizipate only players who reached level 30. Yes I know that, I'm just talking about the concept.
I'll explain more in detail what I mean : The goal in sc2 would be to filter between the good reports (where the guy has a legitimate suspicion about his opponent) and the bad ones (where the guy is just angry to have lost). They could implement something like a system on bnet where you can upload your replay(s) and your comments about it. Then people at the trial could watch the replay(s), maybe with the timestamp of the comment directly in the replay. Of course you would have to hide all names to the jury to keep the fairness and maybe limit this feature to master and up, and set a limit to a trial/week. Then this judgement would be passed to Blizzard employees and based on that they could concentrate on the ones with the highest suspicion of cheating and have a fairly good idea of where to look at.
|
In an RTS with this many units you are currently bound to stick with the current multiplayer synchronization which has the gamestate on each machine and only sends the input and such to the server.
HoN, LoL, DotA etc. won't have peaks were there may be multiple thousand units within the game, Starcraft 2 does. And good internet connectivity is still a big issue in a darn lot countries.
|
On June 08 2012 20:10 howLiN wrote: Blizzard definitely has to do something about this, because their ladder IS the game right now. People lose the interest in playing in the ladder and the game dies. However I don't necessarily agree that it's something solely in Blizzard's hands.
I think they should make some kind of middle-man system, where players have their own place to discuss if someone is hacking through replay analysis. Players would only be able to discuss on the specific "thread" if they had downloaded and went through the whole replay. If enough players vote on the issue (let's say 50) and there's a good percentage of players that think the guy is guilty (let's say 75%), then the complaint is formally and automatically passed on to a Blizzard employee, that analyses the evidence himself and punishes the player accordingly.
What this does is it solves the logistics problem of having a huge team of employees dealing with every single complaint, while streamlining and automatizing the banning process, making it easier and quicker to ban a hacker.
Yea this is the kind of thing I was talking about. Good idea.
|
Blizzard should take a look on how DotA2 fixed hacking, it´s impossible to map hack for example.
|
On June 08 2012 20:10 howLiN wrote: Blizzard definitely has to do something about this, because their ladder IS the game right now. People lose the interest in playing in the ladder and the game dies. However I don't necessarily agree that it's something solely in Blizzard's hands.
I think they should make some kind of middle-man system, where players have their own place to discuss if someone is hacking through replay analysis. Players would only be able to discuss on the specific "thread" if they had downloaded and went through the whole replay. If enough players vote on the issue (let's say 50) and there's a good percentage of players that think the guy is guilty (let's say 75%), then the complaint is formally and automatically passed on to a Blizzard employee, that analyses the evidence himself and punishes the player accordingly.
What this does is it solves the logistics problem of having a huge team of employees dealing with every single complaint, while streamlining and automatizing the banning process, making it easier and quicker to ban a hacker.
People look at this in a really funny way I think. Blizzard is not charging us monthly fees. You bought the game, you played single player and also have multi-player. I bought Max Payne 3, played campaign, and multi-player is an extra perk, that I honestly don't care much for and overall am still very happy with my purchase. Comparably, SC2 has given me an amazing campaign experience, plus an unparalleled multi-player experience, no other game can replace that for me right now. Compared to Max Payne 3, SC2 has yielded 30x the return for the cost.
I agree with you, as well as many others in this thread, in the thing I want and would like blizzard to do, I simply find it funny how entitled everyone sounds to these perks. Blizzard wants to improve the game as well, they are making quite a bit of money from people simply maintaining interest in the game and it being an eSport. So I'm also not saying we should be kissing their feet in gratitude for working on this.
Just want people to be a bit more realistic with their expectations is all. Edit: And to clarify, this post being one of the better, more realistic expectations.
|
On June 08 2012 20:17 MrCash wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 20:10 howLiN wrote: Blizzard definitely has to do something about this, because their ladder IS the game right now. People lose the interest in playing in the ladder and the game dies. However I don't necessarily agree that it's something solely in Blizzard's hands.
I think they should make some kind of middle-man system, where players have their own place to discuss if someone is hacking through replay analysis. Players would only be able to discuss on the specific "thread" if they had downloaded and went through the whole replay. If enough players vote on the issue (let's say 50) and there's a good percentage of players that think the guy is guilty (let's say 75%), then the complaint is formally and automatically passed on to a Blizzard employee, that analyses the evidence himself and punishes the player accordingly.
What this does is it solves the logistics problem of having a huge team of employees dealing with every single complaint, while streamlining and automatizing the banning process, making it easier and quicker to ban a hacker. People look at this in a really funny way I think. Blizzard is not charging us monthly fees. You bought the game, you played single player and also have multi-player. I bought Max Payne 3, played campaign, and multi-player is an extra perk, that I honestly don't care much for and overall am still very happy with my purchase. Comparably, SC2 has given me an amazing campaign experience, plus an unparalleled multi-player experience, no other game can replace that for me right now. Compared to Max Payne 3, SC2 has yielded 30x the return for the cost. I agree with you, as well as many others in this thread, in the thing I want and would like blizzard to do, I simply find it funny how entitled everyone sounds to these perks. Blizzard wants to improve the game as well, they are making quite a bit of money from people simply maintaining interest in the game and it being an eSport. So I'm also not saying we should be kissing their feet in gratitude for working on this. Just want people to be a bit more realistic with their expectations is all. And to clarify, this post being one of the better. more realistic expectations.
I just don't want what happened in BroodWar to happen again in SC2. 5 years after release, the BW ladder was totally unplayable.
It's a good thing that ICCUP popped up, or else BW would have died long ago. Unfortunately, Blizzard owns all the rights to SC2, making an alternate ladder completely impossible.
|
On June 08 2012 20:17 MrCash wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 20:10 howLiN wrote: Blizzard definitely has to do something about this, because their ladder IS the game right now. People lose the interest in playing in the ladder and the game dies. However I don't necessarily agree that it's something solely in Blizzard's hands.
I think they should make some kind of middle-man system, where players have their own place to discuss if someone is hacking through replay analysis. Players would only be able to discuss on the specific "thread" if they had downloaded and went through the whole replay. If enough players vote on the issue (let's say 50) and there's a good percentage of players that think the guy is guilty (let's say 75%), then the complaint is formally and automatically passed on to a Blizzard employee, that analyses the evidence himself and punishes the player accordingly.
What this does is it solves the logistics problem of having a huge team of employees dealing with every single complaint, while streamlining and automatizing the banning process, making it easier and quicker to ban a hacker. People look at this in a really funny way I think. Blizzard is not charging us monthly fees. You bought the game, you played single player and also have multi-player. I bought Max Payne 3, played campaign, and multi-player is an extra perk, that I honestly don't care much for and overall am still very happy with my purchase. Comparably, SC2 has given me an amazing campaign experience, plus an unparalleled multi-player experience, no other game can replace that for me right now. Compared to Max Payne 3, SC2 has yielded 30x the return for the cost. I agree with you, as well as many others in this thread, in the thing I want and would like blizzard to do, I simply find it funny how entitled everyone sounds to these perks. Blizzard wants to improve the game as well, they are making quite a bit of money from people simply maintaining interest in the game and it being an eSport. So I'm also not saying we should be kissing their feet in gratitude for working on this. Just want people to be a bit more realistic with their expectations is all. I'm not demanding that to Blizzard, I'm just describing a way that the problem may be solved. And what I said about ladder being the sole reason the majority of people play this game, I don't think it's that far off. Ladder has a big weight to everyone that plays Starcraft, and any problem that may arise in it is more serious than problems in other areas of the game. Ultimately, it's ladder that draws people into the game, and it's the system that I feel Blizzard needs to be more protective about.
|
|
It is my honest opinion that Blizzard does not give a fuck about hackers, so what they ban one now and again and that guy goes and buys another copy of sc2 to start hacking on again. Guess what, blizzard just made money. If hackers were instabanned then the hackers would just stop playing and choose another game to hack, meaning that blizzard would not profit from them again. Leaving it the way it is, where it barely effects the pro-scene which is the only tiny bit of sc2 that bliz actually gives even half a shit about means dolla dolla.
|
On June 08 2012 20:12 SimDawg wrote:Show nested quote +On June 08 2012 20:09 MrCash wrote:On June 08 2012 20:05 SimDawg wrote:On June 08 2012 19:58 TENTHST wrote:On June 08 2012 19:53 SimDawg wrote: What about a new ladder? I have a huge lack of technical expertise but if it happened in BW why not now?
Imagine all the active laddering moving to a place where hacks are actively monitored and scanned, the map pool is competitive and responsive to the community. Sounds awfully nice to me. An alternate ladder is completely out of the question, just like LAN. Blizzard was very careful about how they set up the legal boundaries of SC2 and made sure that they would be in total control for the life of the game. Like I said above, if the ladder fails here, the game dies with it. Just out of curiosity, is it a thing that is technically prohibited, like LAN, or is it a legal issue? Because technically people don't need to interface with Bliz or profit off the new ladder. An alternate ladder is more of a massive structural expense more than anything. Setting that up would require investments into programming and additional servers. I don't see any "control" loss or any operational conflicts for blizzard. Other than running a extra ladder, whatever that entails. While implementing LAN would cost additional programming expense, originally and now, it remains an issue of losing sales. Much like WC3, where programs like Hamachi made it possible to play LAN games world-wide over the internet. You can imagine how much lost sales this can easily create. Right, don't mean to beat a horse everyone is telling me is dead, but its impossible for someone to code a LAN mode for SC2 in his spare time, right? My question is more...is it possible for someone/people to code an alternate ladder in their spare time? Or is it going to be technically impossible to code without Blizzard's help?
Even if it's possible to code a separate ladder, who is going to pay to run all those servers? I would guess it is, I've seen crazier things done before. The ladder isn't stored on your computer and it's not a pure Peer-to-peer connection and play. To change the game that much probably is not possible, but I'm certainly not interested in looking through the code to figure that out.
|
|
|
|