Jump to content
The Official QONQR Community Forums
Gadgerson

Cheater Checking Chart Feedback

Recommended Posts

Please not on the implement. Automatic score for the multiscope that makes on the email to your support for to investigate. No need for the players to do the check and submit. If score 90 or bigger send email oautomated. Do not give the molesters power in that method.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

if you are storing our location data on your servers do you realize that's a huge security breach?

i'm not gonna go into all the examples, but my biggest concern other than someone knowing when i'm away from home is how far away...

example: someone found out you play this game. someone reads all your unsecured posts and blogs about how to track down a player. someone uses that info to track you and all of a sudden sees you are launching more than 25km from your "home" for a few days.

friends aren't always friends forever...

what's to stop them from breaking in or worse?

heck you've seen the news about huge corporations having their networks breached, how secure is yours?

and who can run these checks? heck you don't even need an email or birthday or SIM to make an account, would you have any accountability other than a username for who is running checks on other players?

there is always cheating in life... but people play your game to get away from what stresses them out and enjoy their downtime... some people get hooked and you profit from that.

i'm honestly shocked you guys admitted you have the location of our past 6k to 10k launches saved.

so if you had a security breach, someone would essentially have access to everywhere we've been presumably with timestamps.

i dunno what to say to this, but you do realize you have a large military and govt. population that might not want their info stored ANYWHERE?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i dunno what to say to this, but you do realize you have a large military and govt. population that might not want their info stored ANYWHERE?

I don't work in a field where my location could compromise my career or anything like that, but Kirra brings up a good point. I knew I was playing a location based game when I signed up and I figured that some data collection was going to occur about my whereabouts, but this is certainly across the line. I allow Google to collect and store my data, as well as Microsoft and several other giant companies. The difference between this and that is night and day. They aren't a start up with a network of questionable servers that are constantly overloaded. They aren't a small team of individuals with few checks and balances as to who access this info. I'm totally cool with a system recalling past location info and analyzing it as metadata, but allowing broad access to just anyone is not okay with me. I feel like Kirra does for different reasons, but at the end of the day, I spent money on this game and energy on the community, I'd hate to have to quit because of something that YOU EVEN SAID is unlikely to help much in catching cheaters or eliminating request.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a "paying" player and this is EXACTLY the type of thing I want my $$ used for! No more Command Centers and other "upgrades" that make it impossible to sneak attack opponents zones (one of the best parts of the game that has been destroyed by the mass use of the CC.) Expose the cheaters!! Give us honest players a way to prove our innocence! I love it. Get me in on the beta!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This seems extremely useful as an internal tool but it has a lot of privacy implications if made public as other people have mentioned.

Maybe rather than trying to make the info publicly available you could focus on making the "cheater check" as fast as possible on your end? If you put a "report a multi-scoper" button on the portal - usable only by level 100s with the NFL rule in place - which automatically ran the check and only notified you if flags are raised. Let the reporting player know the results of the check, e.g. "Definitely not a multiscoper" (devs/Gadgerson don't even see these), "We checked them out and they were not multiscoping" (along with a note from the person who did the check), "Mutliscopers, banned on 5/5/55". You're still going to get some support emails but you will with any tool and this way the analysis will already be done so you can look at it and tell the complainypants to shut up.

You methods aren't public, privacy concerns are reduced, and you should spend a lot less time dealing with this stuff once the tools are in place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no Beta. Our two person staff (one of which does all the cheater checking requests) was only proposing this as a possibility with full knowledge that not everyone would like it, but with the hopes that people would also supply ideas. This idea has been pulled, but we still need a solution to our volume of support emails. Thanks for your many thoughtful and great replies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the multi scopers get on and cry about how it's a bad idea and the idea gets pulled, lol.

Here's the best way to fix the problem, adapt. Change the rule to 1 account per device. It is virtually impossible to prove that someone with multiple devices isn't multiscoping. If someone has 10 iPhones and wants to create 10 accounts and actually has the time it would take to maintain it then have at it. I understand the intent of the rule but you can't really police it so it's pointless. The rule causes more problems than it solves, modify it in a more realistic manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have the initial criteria to flag up a possible multi-scoper, could you not create a bi-weekly/monthly report which then requires further investigation? This takes away the biggest timesink, us...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

DrClaw makes off a good point! If you catch multiscoper, you already say they just tell you "we own the restaurant together as family company" and no ban happens. Only honest player who confess to multiscope get bans. The dishonest player just use one of the excuse you listed as accept.

Multiscope is impossible for enforcement. Open it up and allow for many devices. The extra phones will be spread well inbetween the faction I do not think one faction has more old iphones/ipads than other faction. I might have 3 more accounts if you do and my enemies also have the three more account. It balances on the bigger scale. Plus I will buy up cubes for to upgrade scopes on my 3 more accounts so you make faster game features.

Also...by advertise you have all location data saved on us for week/month, you make yourself target for the hackers now. Not wisdom in that! Hope for good security.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I personally could care less what others do with their scopes. I've encountered a few nefarious and unscrupulous operatives but find the bulk to be decent hearted individuals. For those few willing to give up a part of themselves to gain a slight advantage I say "you will get your come-up-ins."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, Marthos brings up and interesting idea. What if you could use the same account across many scopes? Scopes supposedly deploy the bots directly (from what little lore i understand) and there wouldn't be a need to keep up with multiple accounts, increasing the load on your servers. Why don't you:

Allow multiple scopes to register to each account (say up to 3 per).

Each scope may share the username but carry individual bot loads

Each scope must be upgraded independent of other scopes' upgrades

Each scope must carry their own payload and special bot typs

But each player would share credit and cubes across all devices.

Having 3 scopes then becomes wicked expensive to upgrade and maintain...

having players assign each device a priority number would allow you to transfer the scope in the instance of getting a new phone, but could only take place once every 60 days (unless support approves)

-Primary Scope may not be transferred again until 2/31/2014

-You may transfer Secondary scope at this time.

-You may transfer Tertiary scope at this time.

This forces players to rely on their primary scopes for most things while still giving the non cheating players the same type of edge that the multiscopers have now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you have the initial criteria to flag up a possible multi-scoper, could you not create a bi-weekly/monthly report which then requires further investigation? This takes away the biggest timesink, us...

To do this you would have to compare every player with every other player which quickly becomes unmanageable as the number of players increases (O[n2]). Even if you were to just compare players that operate "near" each other determining the player's locations and proximity has the same issues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My two cents.

1st to you people worried about someone"stalking" you. Maybe you didn't realize it yet, but it is ALREADY pretty easy to get someone's location within a 10 mile radius if you pay attention. So if that worries you, switch factions to destroy your bots and then stop playing.

2nd, to you people obsessed with the multi scopers. Maybe you just don't know how to qonqr properly. If you work with your teammates and communicate, a multi scoper just means twice as many kills. I love multi scopers. So maybe if you spent less time worrying about how many phones people have and more about how to qonqr, this wouldn't be an issue.

3rd, this is a good idea to prevent multi scopers. Yes, it may teach people how to cheat better, but trust me if a person cheats once they will do it again possibly. So no measure will completely get rid of it. Maybe a couple tweaks will improve it, but overall its a good idea and I look forward to its implementation.

4th, I think we need to add an attack with a range greater than 400 miles. Off topic, but still a good idea.

Thank you. You may now return to your regularly scheduled programming.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the feedback we have seen so far, I am pulling back on releasing the chart. We will likely still move cheater submission to an online form that must pass a "possible/unlikely" suite of tests (not just proximity). Including the proposed level 100 and 30 day restriction.

There was much feedback in the posts and I will address some of the concerns.

- Yes we maintain some location data in our rolling logs. This is why we can only analyze your recent activity. We have gotten many angry messages over the past year that analyzing cheaters has to be over several months, not just a few days, but we don't do that.

- We are a location-based game, we do need to have your location. We at least have a good excuse for asking for your location. I am often shocked how many applications I download (or cancel) who require access to my location, but have nothing to do with mapping.

- We restrict network access to our database, use encrypted communication between your phone and the game servers, and use strong authentication to protect our database. QONQR does not require any identifying information to create an account. It may seem that security would be less important to such a small company, but consider that a breach might put an end to our company, and my past 4 years of work would have been for nothing, security is important to us.

- The goal of this initiative was to fee up our time currently spent on support, not to increase our support costs. We already spend way too much time on cheater checking, and with our increasing player growth, we need to find a better solution. We receive many reports that require investigation, often from paying players who think they are spending money to combat someone with several phones and angry at the prospect of being cheated.

- We do ban players we find that are cheating, including paying players. Recently we banned 3 accounts, with one of the accounts having spent enough money to put him in the top 100 of revenue generating players.

- Support requests are the single biggest daily obstacle to new features.

We will continue to work to make the game better. I appreciate the community feedback. This is why we ask. At this point, I feel like we have received the feedback we were seeking. There is no longer a need to speak out against the privacy concerns with exposing the chart. I have pulled down the blog post. I will leave this thread open, as long as it is constructive. Please don't turn this topic into a battle of words over who is cheating and who doesn't know how to play QONQR, or I will have to delete the thread.

Thanks again for your feedback.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Silver, it sounds like you've hit your maximum level of what a two person team can do. And the daily chores are stunting your progression. You have an amazing community chomping at the bit and many millions of people who haven't even heard of Qonqr and they don't know it, but they love QONQR already. So many of us are gifted with various skill sets, you have a diverse group at your diaposal. Have you guys discussed the possibility of crowd sourcing any of your work? I know personally if I had some way (besides the recruiting I do and buying cubes) to help you guys grow, I'd give you an hour or two a day. I'm guessing I'm not the only one who would be willing to help push you guys into the next level. I'd hate to see you guys get stuck because you can't get past the menial garbage. Anyway, if I can help, you have know where to find me ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LMAO! That last one was from me. I am at my friend's house (sadly she not her type of game) and forgot to log her out of the autologged in thing on the forum before posting. Sorry I got excited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To do this you would have to compare every player with every other player which quickly becomes unmanageable as the number of players increases (O[n2]). Even if you were to just compare players that operate "near" each other determining the player's locations and proximity has the same issues.

In my mind this can be done in SQL but it all depends how simple the criteria is to determine who gets flagged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is there a way to utilize the community's resources to help alleviate stress on your end?

aka i can leave my computer overclocked to 5ghz and my gpu's in tri-sli with my fios running at its 100mbps "folding" for evga and then they link us up with university servers that are doing cancer research and kick us back some evga bucks every month and make it competitive by offering prizes for the highest contributors.

not saying this in a cheater catching respect, but you have a great community of players, and we have some massive rigs at home that could maybe help your team process data on the unencrypted side.

just a thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personally I like the idea of an online submission process that would just give me a result of "Possible" or "Unlikely" for multiscoping through some sort of automated process. I don't need or want all the details, just the result. I trust the developers enough that if I could drop it at an "unlikely" result and never bother support. If you had to run this check, and get a "Possible Multiscoper" result before you could submit it surely it would cut back on the false reports. Of course I am not a programmer so I don't know how hard this would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with making the rule 1 account per device? Wouldn't that solve 90% of the problem and free up your time to work on other things? If the rule stays how it is now it is with the understanding that it requires 1 person working full time to enforce it. If you can't commit to that type of manpower, change it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with making the rule 1 account per device?

This would move the playing field in favour of those with the most devices. It might also have an adverse effect on cube buying as someone who previously bought cubes for refreshes could have 4 devices and have a full launch every 5 minutes or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BB, I would agree with you if the intent of the game was to create an even playing field, but it's not. The design intent of the game is to encourage spending by strongly favoring those who spend more. That may be the biggest reason to keep the "one device" rule, if someone who spends was able to use multiple accounts then the amount they spend would probably go down. To me, when the devs imply that they don't like multiscoping because it gives some players an unfair advantage it is a bit disingenuous. The reality is it gives some players an unfair advantage that doesn't result in $$ in Qonqrs pocket, and that's the reason for the rule.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's wrong with making the rule 1 account per device? Wouldn't that solve 90% of the problem and free up your time to work on other things? If the rule stays how it is now it is with the understanding that it requires 1 person working full time to enforce it. If you can't commit to that type of manpower, change it.

It makes me much more powerful to spend $100 to get a cheap smartphone and use it for a second account than it would to buy a big cube pack, plus a lot of us developers have smartphone emulators which we can use to have and infinite number of devices/accounts. Having 2 accounts also makes you more than twice as powerful because you have perfect communication and can use strategies that require perfect timing. If you've ever played against multiple people who were sitting in the same room you know what I'm talking about.

BB, I would agree with you if the intent of the game was to create an even playing field, but it's not. The design intent of the game is to encourage spending by strongly favoring those who spend more. That may be the biggest reason to keep the "one device" rule, if someone who spends was able to use multiple accounts then the amount they spend would probably go down. To me, when the devs imply that they don't like multiscoping because it gives some players an unfair advantage it is a bit disingenuous. The reality is it gives some players an unfair advantage that doesn't result in $$ in Qonqrs pocket, and that's the reason for the rule.

A player can only spend so much money before they run out. That's usually the best strategy to use against cubers, make them spend as much as possible and keep it up until they can't/won't spend any more. You can multiscope forever though because it doesn't cost you anything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×