test content
What is the Arc Client?
Install Arc

Suggestion: extra chat settings

artanisenartanisen Member Posts: 159 Arc User
edited October 2013 in General Discussion (PC)
this idea some what in
regards to the gold bot spam.

Would like to suggest to add extra chat options
to allow players to manually set a level range for there chat
like for example i would like to set my chat to level 10-60
which will allow me to only see chat text from those with in
that level range.

i know for those who are level 60 would like to see only level 60's
players for looking for group channel for grouping up for epic dungeons.

another suggestion but i know this one would be kinda iffy
have an option to let your chat only be seen by your faction
during gaunltgrym pvp.. not sure if its set that way or not already
"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
"Great men are almost always bad men."
“If God is all-powerful He cannot be good, if God is good He cannot be all-powerful!”
Post edited by artanisen on

Comments

  • craeh1craeh1 Member Posts: 135 Bounty Hunter
    edited October 2013
    at this point goldseller bots level to the enclave, to enter zone-chat and start spam.
    If theres a "chat level range", the most goldsellerbots will level to a higher level and spam.
    Actually theres nothing working at best - by blocking words "sell gold", they will write "sel1 g0ld"

    Also beginners will leave the game, cause it seems totaly dead.

    what may will work, is ca chatblock with identical textmassages within a short period of time will result to a X min chatblock - seen in other games.
    It will be hard to solve, since l33tspeaking bots and comon users meet up.
    Tired of running dungeons with exploiters and cheaters? /Channel_Join NW_Legit_Community to play the right way!
  • j4k06sj4k06s Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 71 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    I like the idea about chat level filter.

    But a server filter to block anyone who tries to write the same text 2 times in a row would be great. I don't see any one being affected by that... besides gold spammers and impatient kids.

    About beginners leaving the game before being able to shout at the whole zone. I don't see the problem. Beginners would get the same message as now when they tries to send a personal message to somebody and not being high enough level. "You must be level 10+ to use zone messages" or something like that.

    And i really don't get why anyone can shout to the whole zone but you have to be level 12('ish) to write personal messages.

    I would love for the PWE to use identification on users to ban using more solid information other than just an account name anyone can create and level up to shouting level in 15 min. How about credit card or hardware information like HD/motherboard serial? They do have full access to the computers running the game.
  • runebanerunebane Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    j4k06s wrote: »
    But a server filter to block anyone who tries to write the same text 2 times in a row would be great. I don't see any one being affected by that... besides gold spammers and impatient kids.

    The problem is that it won't affect the gold sellers at all.

    I hung around PE a bit and blocked dozens of goldsellers. Each one spammed their line 3 times. All different accounts. They were already cut down to 3 last time it wash changed. Dropping them to 2 won't stop them either. An auto block? No effect. They just mass create accounts.

    Even if the game could add some super great filter. They'd just find a way around it and get back to spamming.
    Halgarth's Legacy - NWS-DSTGFZHFR
  • sockmunkeysockmunkey Member Posts: 4,622 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    The filter needs to be client side. Let people set up their own key words to block. If a message contains a blocked word it filters the entire message. At least client side people can react faster to spam and the spammers wont even know they are being blocked. So they are less likely to keep inventing ways to get around it.
  • j4k06sj4k06s Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 71 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    A client side filter would be very nice. But it is very important to keep a global filter. It would be way too big a task for everyone to create their own filter.

    Maybe a little off topic:
    As I have written before. Let people pay 1 cent to play. That way a credit card would be verified and when someone spams, all accounts related to that credit card could be suspended.

    Alternatively, use hardware id to ban computers. Be sure not to allow the game to be run on virtual PCs to avoid easy spoofing. This would stop most "casual spammers".
  • runebanerunebane Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    j4k06s wrote: »
    Maybe a little off topic:
    As I have written before. Let people pay 1 cent to play. That way a credit card would be verified and when someone spams, all accounts related to that credit card could be suspended.

    Will never happen. It'd cancel out one of the biggest benefits (from the companies viewpoint) of being ftp. Which is that anyone can log in and give the game a try. If you start out asking for CC info, even for a penny, it starts putting potential customers off.

    Again, the game already has a global filter. There have been forum posts made by players who triggered it accidentally. It does no good. The spammers burn through a few accounts finding ways around it, then spam on until its changed.

    Client side filters (in addition to the global ones we already have) is a pretty good idea. The spammers wouldn't be able to test to see what works and what doesn't for every player.
    Halgarth's Legacy - NWS-DSTGFZHFR
  • j4k06sj4k06s Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 71 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    OK, forget about credit card check. How about the hardware identification? That should be able to stop some of them...

    I do like the idea of a client side filter. I might tweak it to take most of the persons spam. But a lot of people have no idea of how to use things like that and might block way too many normal persons in there filter.
    It could be nice if it included a list of blocked messages and the ability to change the filter and view the changes to the list (in real-time). That would make it easier to find the perfect settings.
  • runebanerunebane Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    j4k06s wrote: »
    OK, forget about credit card check. How about the hardware identification? That should be able to stop some of them...

    Couldn't really say on that. I've heard there are ways around that, but I'm not knowledgeable enough to know about them. I was playing Planetside2 a bit after it released there were rumors that they were using hardware bans on cheaters there. Of course, it didn't help much. That doesn't mean it wouldn't help here. Just don't know.
    Halgarth's Legacy - NWS-DSTGFZHFR
  • esteenaesteena Member, Neverwinter Beta Users, Neverwinter Guardian Users Posts: 1
    edited October 2013
    OR they can do like every MMO on our beloved earth, and add a 20 seconds delay restriction to whoever sending messages in zone/trade/lfg chat.

    So you can send 1 message every 10~20 seconds. It have been in every MMO i played so far.
  • tcarncetcarnce Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 976 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    artanisen wrote: »
    this idea some what in
    regards to the gold bot spam.

    Would like to suggest to add extra chat options
    to allow players to manually set a level range for there chat
    like for example i would like to set my chat to level 10-60
    which will allow me to only see chat text from those with in
    that level range.

    i know for those who are level 60 would like to see only level 60's
    players for looking for group channel for grouping up for epic dungeons.

    another suggestion but i know this one would be kinda iffy
    have an option to let your chat only be seen by your faction
    during gaunltgrym pvp.. not sure if its set that way or not already

    +1

    very good thinking.
    it would probably not be as good for new players who ask where the mailbox is.
    but that vs goldsellerfree. i`ll choose anytime for that, and the new ones just have to explore a bit :D or be lucky to meet one that didn`t found the option yet :)

    pvp should be 1 side only yes.
    i don`t see the point of it strangers posing like monkeys and stuf on there.
    it`s certainly a thing i would like not to see.
    and if they want to talk to friends in it they just could use whisper.
  • tcarncetcarnce Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 976 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    sockmunkey wrote: »
    The filter needs to be client side. Let people set up their own key words to block. If a message contains a blocked word it filters the entire message. At least client side people can react faster to spam and the spammers wont even know they are being blocked. So they are less likely to keep inventing ways to get around it.

    sounds nice in theory,but they can just ad a random variable in the text and will get through the filter.
  • sockmunkeysockmunkey Member Posts: 4,622 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    tcarnce wrote: »
    sounds nice in theory,but they can just ad a random variable in the text and will get through the filter.

    They would have to know they are being blocked. Before they can invent ways to get around it. Having a system client side would deny this to them. They would have no way to know what my setting are. Or what your settings are or thousands of other personal individual settings.

    They would be reduced to shooting in the dark. With no idea who or how many can even see it.
  • tcarncetcarnce Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 976 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    if we know there`s sych a system, they know.
    they don`t have to know their blocked.
    they `ll ad random variable/
    for example if you put www in your filter, they can add different things random between it.
    like:
    w,ww
    ww.w
    w#ww
    it can go up to thousands/millions of different combinations
    they can do w1ww ww2w ww3w w3w2w
    realy goes over a billion if done well.
    and it`s all automated.

    it`s also prety easy, they don`t have to be rocket scientists for it.
    how much i`d like to see it to be possible.
    the level filter i`d like to see most.
    because i think it`s most effective.
  • runebanerunebane Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    tcarnce wrote: »
    if we know there`s sych a system, they know.
    they don`t have to know their blocked.
    they `ll ad random variable/
    for example if you put www in your filter, they can add different things random between it.
    like:
    w,ww
    ww.w
    w#ww
    it can go up to thousands/millions of different combinations
    they can do w1ww ww2w ww3w w3w2w
    realy goes over a billion if done well.
    and it`s all automated.

    it`s also prety easy, they don`t have to be rocket scientists for it.
    how much i`d like to see it to be possible.
    the level filter i`d like to see most.
    because i think it`s most effective.

    While it may be able to go up to "thousands of combinations" you seem to be forgetting that the regular filter wouldn't be going anywhere. They'd only get three or so tries. With both filters it would certainly slow them down. If they do get through, its rare and they'll be banned. If they don't, no one noticed them anyway.

    Level filter wouldn't even phase them. Especially since leveling is so easy in Neverwinter. Say Cryptic/PWE made it level 15 to chat in zone (like they do with sending tells). They'd just make up a bot program to level batches of characters in a foundry. They'd have replacement accounts/characters leveling up to 15 while the others spammed. If it was level segregated chat (like EQ2) they'd do the same for each separate chat category.
    Halgarth's Legacy - NWS-DSTGFZHFR
  • tcarncetcarnce Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 976 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    the www is just an example. they don`t even have to use www.
    al that`s needed is the sitename do. come
    it`s possible to cut that stuf up which goes through any filter.
    unless you want to see all text gets filtered.
    the banning part is not something goldsellers worry about, because they have automated accounts ready before others are banned ;p

    i would set my filter to 60 only eventualy.
    so would be perfect.
    disable it for group chats in skirmish events.
    and might do the same for event areas.
  • runebanerunebane Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Again, setting your filter to 60 would do nothing. If blocking all but 60s became a trend, they'd just let their spammers bot for a few days to 60 then spam. Accounts are free and leveling is easy. They'd just have 'batches' of characters leveling up days in advance. So they'd be ready, when needed.
    Halgarth's Legacy - NWS-DSTGFZHFR
  • tcarncetcarnce Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 976 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    at least they re less tempted to do it like you say. because that high lvl can generate some automated ad`s ;p
    a banned 60 hurts them more then a banned lvl 15.
    gives them more work, more electricity costs.
    but ok, done with explaning the obvious.
    takes more time also, because they can`t put up an unlimited number of bots at the same time.

    out
  • sockmunkeysockmunkey Member Posts: 4,622 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    tcarnce wrote: »
    at least they re less tempted to do it like you say. because that high lvl can generate some automated ad`s ;p
    a banned 60 hurts them more then a banned lvl 15.
    gives them more work, more electricity costs.
    but ok, done with explaning the obvious.
    takes more time also, because they can`t put up an unlimited number of bots at the same time.

    out

    Not in the least, they loose 60's all the time and it does little to phase them. What do you think they are using to farm the gold and AD that they sell with? Level 60 bots, they have them by the dozens. And often they get banned for botting. That has done little to stop them. Why would anything else change that?
  • tcarncetcarnce Member, NW M9 Playtest Posts: 976 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    one more time for the obvious reason, it cost them time.
    now i`m realy gone, useless chat ;p
    majority of bots aren`t even in pvp.
  • melodywhrmelodywhr Member Posts: 4,220 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    like we have forum mods, i'd like to see active in-game mods who have the ability to ban gold spammers on the spot. a lot of us already report spammers as it is.
  • artanisenartanisen Member Posts: 159 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    Here go's another thought.

    why not limit the text box to 45 letters or 60 letters.

    and if someone saids anything about guild recruiting messages.
    they do not need to be that long.
    "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."
    "Great men are almost always bad men."
    “If God is all-powerful He cannot be good, if God is good He cannot be all-powerful!”
  • runebanerunebane Member Posts: 0 Arc User
    edited October 2013
    melodywhr wrote: »
    like we have forum mods, i'd like to see active in-game mods who have the ability to ban gold spammers on the spot. a lot of us already report spammers as it is.

    By itself it wouldn't make any difference.

    Here is why: They have unlimited accounts. Everytime you report one of those spammers it adds their handle (not name) to your ignore list. You never see anything from that account again, unless you take it off your list. I can sit there and ban them for hours. But since they have endless accounts it never even seems to slow down the spam. Even if Cryptic/PWE had someone in chat 24/7 banning them we wouldn't even notice.

    What they need to do is find a way to keep them from getting/using unlimited accounts. Then they could focus on adding mechanics that would stop the ones that do get through. I have no idea how they would do that without hampering regular account creation though.
    Halgarth's Legacy - NWS-DSTGFZHFR
Sign In or Register to comment.