Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

hearthstone Hearthstone Bot Bans Expire

5 posts in this topic



Back in late October, Blizzard announced that they were banning player accounts that had been identified as having utilized one of the various third-party applications being used to automate gameplay. The duration of the ban for botting was three months, and that time period elapsed effective today.


Numerous types of botting programs exist, and have continued to be available. The significant ban wave last fall appeared to have decreased the number of accounts being run using bots, which had become an increasingly prevalent frustration for players on the ranked ladder.


Shortly after the bans were announced, Kripparian stated in an interview that he felt the existence of bots was interesting, and that their algorithms becoming more refined could actually pose some interesting possibilities for testing new decks or practicing ladder play against a more complex AI.


The ban wave was primarily being used to protect Blizzard's game economy, as well as to improve the ladder experience (particularly for players who were logging on to play late at night, where bots would be running and substantially fewer 'real' players would be online).


Blizzard's bot detection remains very accurate and quite aggressive, so the likelihood of a mass resurgence of piloted accounts is unlikely. Still, a lot of players whose collections were built using these bots could theoretically be re-entering the game's ecosystem today.


Have you seen many (any?) players obviously botting recently? Thoughts on the bans expiring? Let us know.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm one of those who has (had) no idea that Hearthstone was even 'bot-able'.  Maybe I need to get out from under my rock.

How would I know if I was playing against a non-human?

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess I'm one of those who has (had) no idea that Hearthstone was even 'bot-able'.  Maybe I need to get out from under my rock.

How would I know if I was playing against a non-human?


It can be difficult, but a lot of the bots run very simple decks to program algorithms for (minion-driven, aggressive styles - Hunter, Shaman, and Warlock are the most common), and they'll act in odd ways - turns that last strangely long or short, a lot of obviously unnecessary hand-checking, strange choices of minion attack order, etc.


Older bots were much more obvious; a lot of the behaviors that gave them away have since been altered. They're a known quantity that Blizzard's anti-cheating mechanisms are scanning for now, too, though, so you're probably seeing a lot less of them in general.

1 person likes this

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting, if you bot in World of Warcraft you get perma-banned on the first offense with little to no hope of an appeal working. but if you get banned for botting in Hearthstone you get all your cards back after 3 months.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

I heard some of them discontinued their project after the ban wave, which is a good thing. Can't believe ppl actually pay for these things, I mean you play to have fun, if you just want to watch a bot play the game for you then why don't you just watch some streams? It's more fun than a brainless bot.

But the sad news is that some of these bot programs have big companies supporting them cause they sell the bot for a fortune. They get smarter and smarter everyday so it's getting really hard to detect them manually by playing against them. I remember at the start it was so obvious, you could detect bots by watching what they hover over, and yeah it was nothing! without even hovering over a card they would play that card. And they never hover over anything in the middle of your turn. But you see none these days, guess they've added some hovering over cards option or something.

And even worse, no matter how Blizzard strengthen their bot protection, the bot guys bypass it. I mean bots release more updates than Hearthstone.

One thing that Blizzard can do to botters is what we see a lot in WoW, bots running into walls or objects for hours and even when you whisper them they don't answer back. In hearthstone blizzard should find some ways to trap botters and make it obvious to a player so the player can report them immediately.

But these things need some kind of culture-building of some sort, like player MUST report bots. Not like WoW where you see 6 players in bg running together and taking the exact same path with the exact same mounts to the exact same base or objective, and then no one even bothers to report them!

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Similar Content

    • By L0rinda
      The Hearthstone Championship Tour enters the final phase today, October 26, with the Hearthstone World Championship.
      After a long year of qualifying events, the World Championship is finally here. The sixteen qualifiers will be playing for their share of a million dollar prize pool, with $250,000 going to first place.  There will be four groups of four players, and the top two from each group will advance to the single elimination knockout stage. Each match will be played as the best of seven Conquest. The groups and players' deck archetypes are listed below.

        Cydonia: Malygos Druid, Secret Hunter, Tempo Mage, Mid Shaman, C'Thun Warrior
        Thijs: Malygos Druid, Secret Hunter, Questing Rogue, Mid Shaman, Zoo Warlock
        Handsomeguy: Malygos Druid, Secret Hunter, Malygos Rogue, Mid Shaman, Control Warrior
        Jasonzhou: Malygos Druid, Miracle Rogue, Mid Shaman, Zoo Warlock, Nzoth Warrior

        Bbgungun: Token Druid, Secret Hunter, Tempo Mage, Mid Shaman, Zoo Warlock
        Naiman: Malygos Druid, Tempo Mage, Face Hunter, Mid Shaman, Yogg Warrior, 
        Che0nsu: Malygos Druid, Secret Hunter, Mid Shaman, Zoo Warlock, Dragon Warrior
        Hamster: Token Druid, N'Zoth Murloc Paladin, N'Zoth Preist, Mid Shaman, C'Thun Warrior

        Amnesiac: Malygos Druid, Face Hunter, Tempo Mage, Mid Shaman, Control Warrior
         DrHippi: Malygos Druid, Face Hunter, Tempo Mage, Yogg Warrior, Mid Shaman
        Yulsic: Malygos Druid, Mid Hunter, Tempo Mage, Mid Shaman, Zoo Warlock
        Breath: Malygos Druid, Face Hunter, Tempo Mage, Mid Shaman, Yogg Warrior

        HotMEOWTH: Malygos Druid, Face Hunter, Tempo Mage, Mid Shaman, C'Thun Warrior
        Pavel: Malygos Druid, Tempo Mage, Malygos Rogue, Mid Shaman, C'Thun Warrior
       DDaHyoNi: Malygos Druid, Secret Hunter, Tempo Mage, Mid Shaman, Yogg Warrior
        OmegaZero: Token Druid, Tempo Mage, Totem Shaman, Zoo Warlock, Dragon Warrior
      There will be one match from each group per day, and the first match starts at 18:00 CEST on 26 October, live on Twitch.
    • By Zadina
      We are all expecting the announcement of the next Hearthstone expansion at BlizzCon 2016. And we might have just gotten the very first hint about it!
      Υesterday night, the @PlayHearthstone account on Twitter posted the following image. This may be nothing at all or it may be an actual clue about the upcoming Hearthstone expansion.
      Τhe disclaimer of the image reads:
      In World of Warcraft, Gadgetzan is a Goblin city situated in the desert of Tanaris, in the southeast corner of Kalimdor. Gadgeztan used to be a mainland city, but after the Cataclysm hit Azeroth it now enjoys a beach and the sea.
      Redditor BillHicksBoiii noticed three days ago that the domain has been taken by Blizzard. It's difficult to theorise what the expansion could be, though. The obvious link is Goblins, but we've already had the Goblins vs. Gnomes expansion. Unless we are getting a revamp...
      You can also notice a pirate ship in the background of the image, so perhaps a pirate themed expansion?! Moreover, as we've already said, Gadgetzan was one of the cities affected by the Cataclysm. Basically, once Deathwing was awakened, he caused the whole world of Azeroth to change dramatically with earthquakes, tsunamis, the invasion of his forces and just his very own presence. Since Deathwing was originally corrupted by the Old Gods, the first expansion we got this year, it is possible that this expansion may be about Deathwing, his following the Twilight's Hammer or the Cataclysm.
      Of course, all of this is still in the realm of speculation. The image might mean nothing at all! What do you think?
    • By Damien
      This thread is for comments about our N'Zoth Resurrect Priest Wild deck.
    • By Damien
      This thread is for comments about our Velen OTK Priest Wild deck.
    • By Stan
      Ben Brode confirmed the 2 game win streak to be unintentional and explained why he's not satisfied with the Ranked Ladder System.
      The developer team listened to the community and they will be making adjustments based on simulation systems that help predict changes that would do to the population curve. Here's what Brode had to say.
      Ben Brode
      Seeing some comments here about how people are enjoying easier laddering due to this bug, and hoping we leave it unfixed. I thought I might chime in and talk about the ladder a bit, and hopefully get some feedback! We have been discussing the ladder system a lot recently - we're not 100% happy with it.
      Here are some things we are currently discussing:
      Rank 18 players are higher ranked than 50% of HS players. That number doesn't make you feel like you are in the top 50%, and that's a missed opportunity. We try and counter this by telling you all over the place what the mapping is to the rest of the population, but it'd be better if expectations and reality matched here.
      We've received feedback that the last-minute jostling for high Legend ranks at the end of a season doesn't feel all that great.
      We've received feedback that the ladder can feel like a grind.
      We are reanalyzing the number of ranks, the number of stars per rank, the number of bonus stars given out at the start of the season, and other parts of the system.
      We are developing simulation systems that let us predict what changes to the ladder would do to the population curve. If we inflate too many stars, the whole population ends up in the Legend bucket and while that might feel great for a single month, the entire system falls apart eventually. People who played waaaay back may remember when "3-star master" was the pinnacle of achievement, and it meant nothing because so many people ended up in that bucket. With better simulation tools, we are planning on trying a lot of crazy things. Iteration is important in design, and getting the tools to iterate quickly is very important.
      Something I want to emphasize is that while I think we can improve the ladder, the metric for that improvement isn't necessarily any one player's individual rank increasing. Players want the better rewards (and prestige) associated with high ranks, or the Legend card back, so any change we make that increases the chances of those are likely to be perceived as "good", at least for the short term. But part of what makes the ranked ladder compelling is that exists to rank players. If you want to see how you stack up, ranked is the place to do it. So while some inflation might improve the experience, we need to be careful and make sure we end up with a system that makes people feel rewarded for increases in personal skill or for finding a new deck that breaks the meta.
      Have you considered not making the fall in rank so severe in the start of the new season? When I was a new player at rank 21 it didn't feel good to lose against a wicked good deck all the time with my inferior cards.
      Yes, that's what I meant by this: We are reanalyzing [...] the number of bonus stars given out at the start of the season.
      We think it's a reasonable direction to explore in, but in general it's hard to predict the results on the population distribution among the ranks. Hoping to do some simulation there and make sure there aren't other, better options, too.
      Is this really that bad considering legend has its own internal ranking system?
      Yes, I think so. Imagine just one bucket and we sort by MMR. There aren't breakpoints with rewards as you increase in skill. There isn't an obvious way to communicate with others about how good you are. It's also difficult to know if you are bad or good. (Is Legend 135003 good? What about Legend 27809?)
      The way we communicate our skill or progress is important. Ever heard a friend say "dude! I got to rank 5 this month!"? What is that achievement in a world where everyone is in the same bucket? Watching discreet rank buckets go by (and feeling that progression) and feeling the thrill of reaching a new rank that you've never hit before... those are pretty important, I think.