Feedback talk:Gaile Gray/Archive Support Issues/Sep - Oct 2011

Support Issues
Current Support Issues Support FAQs NCMA Security Feature Bot Ban Details Contacting Support Account Security Death Counts Xunlai Tournament House Support Issue Archives Botwatch

Bots being given their accounts back

Hi Gaile,

I'd like to raise an issue that I've been encountering recently whenever I report bots. I have found that an increasing number of bot accounts that I was told by support were terminated, are back and are continuing to bot. Whenever I re-report the names, I am told that no violation can be found (even though violations were found initially) even though those accounts are clearly still botting. In particular, ritualist bots that I have found in the asian districts of Zin Ku Corridor. They differ from the generic bots in the international district (they are solo bot farmers instead of the id1 bots which are 7 hero bots) but it is still clear they are bots. For one, they still kneel at the statue of grenth despite the voice of grenth already being there (what human does that?) and I was even able to bug them up by making it so that the voice of grenth doesn't pop up when they kneel. They will run into a wall or to the temple acolyte when that happens (again, what human does that?).

Support can't seem to find any evidence against these kinds of bots and these bots are continuing to bot after their accounts are given back. Now the real problem is that, this is starting to happen with the generic bots aswell! We all know about the masses of bots that flood the international districts of ToA and there are also many in Zin Ku Corridor. I am noticing a vast increase in the number of these generic 7 hero rit bots that are having their accounts returned to them and I am worried that they are catching on to the techniques of the more advanced bots from the asian districts.

If support can't find a violation against obvious bots, it means that those bots are UNDETECTABLE and this is a huge problem. I am also aware of a certain other technique that some botters use to avoid permanent bans. They bot using one IP and play on another so that in the event that they get banned, it looks like they were hacked and then the account is returned to them. Support won't address that little trick I just described.

So, there are two methods bots use to cheat permanent bans. One, use the little trick from the above paragraph and two, use undetectable bots (like the asian district botters are doing). The undetectable bots are increasing in number and Anet is going to have to do something about this because sooner or later, ALL bots will be undetectable. 60.234.197.191 02:42, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

We've moved this discussion to the official forums now, and I think we've had some great progress in nailing the botters you wrote about. We're also looking a redefining some of our internal processes, with a very positive result! I'm going to archive this because I do think the GWSF is the best place to discuss this sort of issue. Thanks. -- Gaile 20:09, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Mutual Account Sharing

→ moved from Feedback_talk:Gaile_Gray

I've scanned most of the archive(s) for a clear answer, but I've either missed or simply not otherwise seen a blunt yes or no. My wife and I are newly married. We've each had our own account since before our marriage. We obviously share. When one of us is unavailable for a decent amount of time, for whatever reason, and the other is playing, and would like to use something we know the other has, we typically log in to the other's account and enlist a trusted third-party to transfer whatever it is we want. To be honest, we also occasionally switch account usage for fun. This method of account sharing between the two of us is mutual, and would be confirmed as such if ever asked of either of us. However, from time to time, we receive news of others whose accounts have been banned due to account sharing. Regardless of mutuality and the best of intentions, should we stop? 76.106.245.213 17:48, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

generally your not to do that. it goes against the ELUA if I remember correct. but because you aren't doing anything malicious then I honestly see no problem with it... I know someone will comment. I also suggust looking on the new official support forums, I believed it has been answered there Ocren

Did so, just now. I searched the forum for a clear answer to the circumstances and found none, so I submitted my inquiry. EULA states "Only one person may use an account." That is quite blunt and leaves no room for exception. Thank you for your time. Now, however, I would like to ask of Gaile her thoughts on the matter. Unfortunately, the Account Support section of that forum seems the closest to but still an inappropriate place for such a discussion. The same applies here. Where would be best to ask of her opinion? 76.106.245.213 04:49, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Probably send a PM on the forums. If you've made a post, then someone from the ANet staff will get to it regardless, but Gaile will definitely get it if you send her an email or a PM.

However I'm going to give you my two cents on the issue here. If more than one person is allowed to use an account, then it's more difficult to tell when someone's account has been hacked or if it's simply being used by another authorized party. And if the ownership of the account is disputed between the multiple parties when something happens with the account, it just gets worse. --ஸ Kyoshi 17:06, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

That is understandable. When there is more than one person using an account, by their own choosing, they cannot simply say "Someone else is using my account, please fix it." I understand that the process becomes more trouble than it is worth when you have to make certain allowances and distinguish between those allowances and the malicious party. I'm embarrassed that I hadn't considered that scenario. We'll be sure to stop doing so. Thank you for your input. 76.106.245.213 00:44, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I feel I must point out that there is a big difference between mutual sharing at the same house compared to an account hack. I allow my wife to use my account if she so desires (She hardly does), and it is pretty much the same as you logging them on and walking away from the computer. The IP is the same, no random locations for login, and hacking is normally done to multiple accounts from the same IP. On their end they can see all the logins and where they were done from, but mutual sharing of this type wouldn't make checking for a hacker any harder. Just my two cents. --Kairu 16:21, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Unfortunately, we don't play on the same computer because we usually play together. So, while close/similar, the IP isn't the same. 76.106.245.213 16:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

I assume you use a router? That would make your IP's identical to their system. Anyway, they won't care about different IP's. You forget that people play at public places like Collage Campuses all the time, and the IP's will change every time you connect to the network. There will also be many users with the same IP. You also travel, and use different computers, it's normal for the IP to change anyway. :P --Kairu 17:02, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

That's the problem. Since she plays on a laptop, she can take it anywhere. In doing so, the IP address used to log in may change. I don't want to bring any unfavorable attention to that. 76.106.245.213 17:43, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Mkay, this is the last I'm going to say because I'm starting to feel like I'm trying to force you guys to share, which is not what I am trying to do. The scenarios out there that are completely legit according to EULA overshadow small time sharing between a husband and wife. The main reason sharing is frowned upon so furiously is because people tend to share a single account, or share their password with a then friend who screws them over at a later time. While it is in the EULA that sharing is not allowed, I'm sure you will get an unofficial "That's fine" or an official "That's fine as long as you don't come crying when the person sharing your account screws you over". It's the same with TexMod. --Kairu 19:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks again for the help. 76.106.245.213 00:34, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I want to clear up some misconceptions that might have been left by the above.

The short version is that ANet is never going to say that account sharing is okay, regardless of the circumstances. However, neither are they going to target people for sharing. The only time we should expect them to act is when there are other violations. In more detail:

1. On the official forums, Gaile specifically said, "You are essentially asking me to sanction that which we do not sanction, and I trust you’ll understand I couldn’t (and wouldn’t want to) do that." In other words, ANet will never tell you it's okay to share accounts.
2. EULA aside, most countries/states/provinces have laws that give spouses communal ownership of property, including all sorts of accounts. I'm not sure that ANet can have a policy that bans spouses from sharing.
3. In the above, Gaile points out that the only time that ANet cares about account sharing is when there's an issue, e.g. one player does something wrong, or there's a bad break-up, or whatever. When there is an issue, ANet will not be sympathetic to the but someone else used my credentials argument.

– Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 18:43, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. That's the gist of what I was trying to explain. And I hadn't seen the official reply. --Kairu 18:45, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank you, indeed. That was what I was trying to have clarified. 76.106.245.213 04:15, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the links and synopsis, TEF. Helpful, as always. I'd just like to add one thing: A married couple accessing one another's account is one thing. It's not allowed, but it's not inherently evil. After all, they own their own accounts, they're extremely unlikely to get involved in an account ownership dispute, and they're not trying work-arounds that inflict unfair costs on the company. People who share an account to avoid paying for the game are a costly element, because not only are we paying more for bandwidth and other associated costs in keeping that account running, but those sorts of shared accounts are likely to incur very high support costs when they go into account dispute (and, just FYI, often ended up terminated.) Word to the wise: The game is free to play -- buy your own copy!!  :) --- Gaile 18:34, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

There are only so many ways I can thank someone. I'm running out of things to say. ^_^; 76.106.245.213 20:41, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey, we're good. :) -- Gaile 21:19, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Monster Inconsistency

After being redirected here from https://forum.guildwars.com/ by "Mod Jamie", I figured I would reiterate my original post there, and see what happens.

I recently read an article by Jeff Grubb, specifically, http://www.arena.net/blog/mr-sparkles-a-tale-of-the-asura

After digging around attempting to find the correct place to formulate my question, I came to this forums/sub-forum. If there is a better place for this, do tell me and delete/lock this, but this was the best I could find. Repeatedly in the above article, Jotun are referred to as being “Lesser kin to the Giants”. This led me to http://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Jotun, which also states, “The jotun are giant humanoids who have been seen living in the Shiverpeak Mountains. They are a fallen race of giants, once having been wise and peaceful they now survive as savages in their ancestor’s citadels.”

Now, the official and unofficial wiki’s for Guild Wars make no direct mention that Jotun are Giants, nor any claims that they are related to them. (http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Jotun) Roughly 2 years ago I did some testing myself, and after coming to the conclusion that while Jotun use Giant Stomp, and have Stun Immunity, as far as Guild Wars is concerned, they are Ogres. A fact, which took a month until people ceased to revert them to being labeled “Giants”.

Now, this leads me to the conclusion that Jotun in Guild Wars are assigned the wrong race, and should be reassigned to “Giant” category, rather than “Ogre”. If I’m wrong, I’m wrong. However, the conflict between in-game skills/abilities, as well as statements on the GW2 Wiki and this recent article, and their actual in-game racial category seems like a bug. Furthermore, to avoid mentioning this in another topic, while I’m on the subject of monsters and bugs they contain, Eye of the North is absolutely riddled with them. Specifically, Plants in Eye of the North do not take bonus damage from either fire or slashing, which seems like an obvious bug/oversight. To a lesser extent, All centaur outside of Eye of the North have 20 bonus armor against cold damage, and all ranger centaur have 30 less armor against earth damage. Again, this feels like an oversight.

The concept of specific monsters having specific strengths and weaknesses was obviously not phased out in Eye of the North, as Destroyers all hold a weakness to Cold, and a strength against Fire.184.179.78.65

Game mechanics don't always follow lore directly, nor do elemental weaknesses always have to make sense (though I don't know whether it's a bug or not). As far as reporting bugs, the forum bugs section should be the best place to put it. This page is for people to ask Gaile for help when NCsoft Support is being finnicky or something, so I don't know why you would have been directed here for this topic (unless you mean you were directed just to the wiki and not this specific page). Maybe bring the bugs up on Feedback talk:John Stumme, or better, create an account and make a page in the feedback portal, but I'm honestly not sure where the lore bit should go. --ஸ Kyoshi 16:42, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Yep, Kyoshi is correct -- this really isn't the spot for this discussion. Since the suggestion for where to place it was made more than 10 days ago, I'm going to archive this one. Thanks. -- Gaile 20:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

gamerevision

→ moved from Feedback_talk:Gaile_Gray

Hi, Gaile,
just recently I was told you could — cosmetically and client-only — obtain a GM tag. Since I was interested in how it worked I looked some things up. During my search I stumbled over [edited to remove link]. That's horrible and in each and every way unacceptible! If you browse the rest of the forum you'll see many a people buying/selling bots, items and accounts (there was a Zaishen Rank 12 account being sold for like 400€). Please, do something about that since I now cannot trust any stranger on the servers ): 88.152.25.23 04:33, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

It's awesome that you found this group, but it may be more quickly received by the support team if you send them the link through support. I'm not exactly sure if they can do anything based on a forum, but it couldn't hurt :D ~FarloTalk 04:45, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Awesome? It's aweful! ):< I powertraded to like 8,500 and these people just buy that within the blink of an eye for some 150 €. 88.152.25.23 04:47, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

I understand your concern. But the last thing I want is to host a link on my page to a site that encourages people to breach the User Agreement through the purchase of in-game goods. Most of the promoters and advertisers are far more interested in stealing your account than in making a few bucks selling you ectos. And both account theft and in-game item sales are wrong. The point is, between "give me your credentials so I can add your gold to your account and avoid detection" and the various Trojans, key loggers, and other identity-thieving properties that these companies and individuals slip into the system, the sales, or "sales," are dangerous on many levels. Two things are very common: (1) Purchase gold or in-game items and get your account terminated for doing so; or (2) make a purchase and find your account was stolen by the person to whom you gave your money. (There's an irony there, pay someone to steal your account? It happens!)

Our support team is more than happy to hear about these promotions and will whatever action is appropriate and feasible. In addition, I accept emails through this wiki. And either of those options would be the means to get us information about these sites, just as you should use those means of communication to share information about exploits, cheats, and hacks. -- Gaile 18:32, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Reply to archived section

→ moved from Feedback_talk:Gaile_Gray

Sorry for the link, although I didn't realize it was an advertisement because it was not uploaded by the original poster, and it contained no instructions on how to download the program. Could you please clarify why it was deemed "not allowed," does it actually steal account information?--204.45.13.74 20:11, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

No worries. We just like to be very careful about links, as some people unwittingly are lead to download malware through their being posted here.

If you'd like to track the conversation, I moved it to the Support Issues page. And thanks for asking, because I forgot to put a redirect! :) -- Gaile 20:15, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Chat application for Android?

→ moved from Feedback_talk:Gaile_Gray

As I'm sure you are aware, there have been some rumors about a new application that lets you chat in Guild Wars from an Android phone. I have not personally used it yet, but I would like to inquire about ArenaNet's stance on these third party programs.

If I understood your previous postings about TexMod and KSmod correctly, then I would expect this to fall into the category of "Use at your own risk and do not come asking for help if it sets your cat on fire," but I would appreciate any sort of clarification.

I hope it's ok if I link to the youtube video that was posted on the forums by somebody testing out the app. (Edit: Link removed.) 03:22, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Some guild mate just showed me this picture (link removed) so there would appear to be an iPhone version as well! -204.45.13.74 03:30, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Your assumption on ANet's stance is at best correct and at worst stricter; they will not forbid it, but you're not under their protection anymore, and if they detect it doing things they don't like you'll probably get banned. I'm not entirely sure how this would work without logging in your account (and a character) and sending chat messages that way.

However, upon a quick Google search (link removed) tells me it's somehow possible otherwise (not that it's saying much that I'm wrong about mobile applications) and that apparently ArenaNet has already said it's not allowed. --ஸ Kyoshi 19:31, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

No, it's not allowed. Yes, it can result in account termination. No, it's not ok to link to an advertisement for this program. I will remove the links. -- Gaile 19:46, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

I need to add another thought: This app only works if you provide every speck of information required to access your account. Notwithstanding assurances from its anonymous developer (whom you personally cannot hold accountable), regardless of any offer to let people look at the source code, do you really want to put your account ID, your character name, and your Guild Wars password into an external program of any kind? Really?? -- Gaile 20:07, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I fully agree: Requiring all of this information to access an account is supicious, and that's part of the reason why I did not try the program.

The thread Kyoshi had linked says that players actually got banned for trying out the program. I guess you are right then, it must have been doing something horrible that ArenaNet did not like.

I still wish someone would create a legit version, it doesn't look that difficult since even the bad guys were able to do it.--204.45.13.74 20:56, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it's entirely possible that the program intersects with the game in ways that would result in account termination. On your wish, though: Our dev team is positively brilliant. Who knows what the future will bring? In the meantime, it's my personal opinion that the benefit of this isn't worth the risk. I can check into the more corporate opinion. :) -- Gaile 21:00, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

That would be amazing to have, at least one that's official. Unless it's created by A-Net, I don't think it'd ever be "legit". Since they're developing a GW2 app that's going to have way more than just chat, maybe we'll get it for GW1 for next year's birthday? One can only hope ;) ~FarloTalk 01:45, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm not sure why my link was removed, as it was just a Guru thread detailing a discussion, not an advertisement. --ஸ Kyoshi 16:02, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, Kyoshi -- it just seemed best to remove links that could -- because they are outside our overview -- contain links in the current timeframe or in the future. No wish to stifle the conversation, I just want to act with care until we know more about this app. Thanks for understanding. -- 66.162.136.17 21:21, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Sounds to me like ANet should test this application with a demo account, and buy it from the developer if its any good. Then after a code inspection and probable legal and security related changes, we could have an official version that is allowed and that we know won't steal our account info. -- Kirbman 17:45, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Heck, they should hire the developer.--195.37.186.62 02:00, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

I wouldn't go that far. The app most likely just mimics the login process and fakes you being somewhere. It's a sloppy process and is full of issues, which would be why users are getting banned. It would raise bot flags in the system since the user is obviously not using a proper client. If ANet were to do it they would be able to achieve much better results with a much simpler process. The only limiting factor is if they want to take the man power out of somewhere else to develop it. --Kairu 13:21, 5 October 2011 (UTC)

Don't tell me some of you actually believe this? It's such an obvious fake, Guild Wars cannot run on a phone because it is programmed for x86 PCs.-- User:KneelBeforeMyWisdom 06:51, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Look at the first screenshot in the history, and compare the login button with the real one.

vs.

Terrible attempt at Photoshop, I say busted!-- User:KneelBeforeMyWisdom 06:54, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

You guys do know that Blizzard has apps to talk in guild chat and similar from phones? It doesn't run the entire game on the phone, simply the chat. This thing for Guild Wars is obviously similar. -Auron 07:43, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

I never said it runs the entire client. All the app needs to do is mimic what the PC client would do to log in, and leave the character in whatever district it logs in to. It can be done on a phone because the app doesn't need to display anything that the PC client does. All it needs to do is tell the server that the character is standing still, and interpret/send chat data. It isn't hard to do, but would be very obvious to any type of protection algorithm running on the server side. --Kairu 13:28, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

World of Warcraft works on the phone because Blizzard programmed it for Android architecture: [1]

Guild Wars chat is impossible because ArenaNet code is x86 architecture, it cannot run on a phone, ever.

Compare the screenshot from the post it's obviously photoshopped:

WoW: Fake:

The bar at the top is a different color for example, fail.-- User:KneelBeforeMyWisdom 16:35, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

You not have an android phone bro? I've had two, my first had the "grey" version shown in the "faked" pics whereas my new one has the black version. It is dependant on phone manufacturer I believe. Devi 21:29, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) You're obviously a little confused. The author of this app wouldn't be using any of ArenaNet's code. They would have written their own code (specifially for a phone) that sends and receives packets from the servers (login/game) the same way the official client does. 89.108.110.170 16:52, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

^ what this guy said. The app is not "fake." ArenaNet doesn't support the app, but that does not mean the app itself doesn't function. Blizzard coders wrote a chat app that people can pay for that runs on a phone. Some third party people wrote it for Guild Wars. Neither one uses the actual game client to do the chatting, so the fact that Guild Wars itself can't run on a phone is completely irrelevant. -Auron 05:00, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, I misjudged this app. It makes sense if it's not using the official client.-- User:KneelBeforeMyWisdom 09:54, 8 October 2011 (UTC)

I have used this application myself, and had my account banned for using it. The application works perfectly, even only in alpha stages. There is no reason for accounts being banned for it, it's completely legit. I personally found it very useful, being able to log into a client to chat to people in game when I wasn't able to get to a computer to play the game. --The preceding unsigned comment was added by 92.12.44.111 (talk) at 19:07, October 9, 2011 (UTC).

The reason it's bannable is because it's a 3rd party application that's accessing the servers and acting as if it were a game client. The problem isn't only that it's not safe for the users (possible password theft, etc.), but that ArenaNet doesn't want anyone accessing the game except through the GW client, which is entirely understandable. That said I do agree that it's an awesome little application and I wish ArenaNet would either hire the guy or do it themselves for GW1, the mobile app for GW2 is probably one of the best out-of-game ideas they've had. ~FarloTalk 22:56, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

I have also used the application, it's awesome, but my account has been blocked for it. I don't understand why NCSoft is treating this the same way as the bots. Shouldn't they be happy that the community is enhancing their game? --Lynie 13:48, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Honestly? No. There is a very fine line when it comes to thing like this, TexMod walks the line by not changing/replacing the client itself (And not doing more then reskinning, which provides no advantage). This phone client actually replaces the game client, cannot be properly monitored and is not in control of the Guild Wars team. While this one may be harmless (as far as we know it might not be!), there is no guarantee that this or any other replacement client made in the future will be harmless. --Kairu 16:38, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

My suspicion is that one of ANet's anti-bot measures is monitoring for valid packets that aren't sent in a "normal" order, e.g., activating a skill without asking the server if that skill is recharged first (as a bad example; I have no idea how GW works internally because I'm too lazy to reverse engineer anything more complicated than a Reuben). A side-effect is that applications like this get flagged as malicious.

On that note, there are plenty of IRC, MSN, AIM, and other chat applications for Android and other phone operating systems. GW is a terrible chat client, use one of those. –Jette 17:15, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Kairu: Chat gives you no advantage 'at all', for it does not even interact with gameplay. I don't know how the programming works but, from what I was told, this was an automatic block caused by too many people logging in with the same hardware information; and the update released on the same day has apparently fixed this, because I have been using the app on my second account for the past 2 and a half weeks without an issue. So there were no "bot flags", or anything like that. I'm not sure if this was already posted, but there are some videos of the app on youtube: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh0T3giifAE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xxxCo3HDIK8 Hope that information helps speed up the process.--Lynie 19:32, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

You misunderstand. There is no process to speed up here. Yes, in the end they may (Huge chance here, I doubt it will happen) decide to unban the associated accounts, but that is not the focus of my posts. The issue is that ANet does not have control of the application. It is untested, it is unsafe, it is unauthorized, and it is a bannable offense to use it. End of story. Apart from whether or not you think it should be allowed, or how well you and others have tested it, the app is against the EULA and may be harmful. Accounts still have a chance to be hacked, botting actions could still be implemented at a later time. --Kairu 19:41, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't know the app's creator personally, only through someone in my guild, but why do you assume anyone would go through so much effort and create such a polished app to 'hack accounts'? Accounts get 'hacked' by chinese phishing spam, not by people who love the game and create awesome mods.--Lynie 19:49, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

This may be far-fetched, but don't AN have iPads and not Androids? This would be the reason you got banned. That, or the fact that their chat app that they will release with Guild Wars 2 was supposed to be paid, and they fear they might lose revenue to a free app.--76.73.16.122 19:57, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

76.73.16.122: .. wow, good observation, but I very much hope ArenaNet is not that childish.--Lynie 19:59, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

there's no "may be" about it, and anet has ipads because theyre the best tablets on the market right now, end of, and lynie, why do you assume this guy wouldnt hack ever? you said yourself youd ont know him personally, chinese phishing spam is just a stereotype and not at all indicative of what you'd find if you actually checked your spam mail every once in a while, nor is it by any means the only way people try to hack into accounts 24.130.140.36 20:35, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Yikes. Ok. I am trying to explain this in a way that isn't rude, I promise, but it's getting hard.

Issue A: It was not made by ArenaNet. This is a major point! It wouldn't matter if the late Steve Jobs had made the app, or if the source was posted and had been gone through with a fine toothed comb. ArenaNet did not make the app, and there within lies the first problem.

Issue B: ArenaNet has no control over the app. They cannot make sure that it does what the developer says it does, and in the end this can drastically effect the end user, resulting in bans or potential hackings. You can claim to know someone that knows someone that knows the author, but how many people get hacked by their best friends? And how do you know that the person knows the person that knows the author. I'm sorry, but that is a horrible reason to assume that malicious code has never and will never be implemented. If the author waits a few months for the app to take off and have thousands of users, they could implement the code and poof thousands of hacked users. Or if the malicious code is already there they have all the accounts already!

Issue C: This program interfaces with the game server. However unlikely it may be, the app could cause problems on the server side that were unintended.

Issue D: The app uses images and sounds from Guild Wars. This is copyright infringement.

Issue E: The app is not the original, unmodified game client. It isn't even a modified game client. It is either an interface that connects to a remote server running a modified client or a bot, or it just echos packets pretending to be the original game client.

I could actually list a number of other issues but I wont since these cover pretty much the larger issues. In the end, use it all you like, but don't be surprised when you are banned/hacked and any ban handed out for this isn't reversed. --Kairu 20:42, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

If you read the reply from Gaile, she does say they were offered to view the source. That resolves the first issue, but I still do agree the posters who suggested that ArenaNet should hire the developer or in some other way take control of the application.--Lynie 20:49, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

The reason Gaile mooted that point is that source code can be changed. He could have a clean version to show everyone and a malicious one to release. As well intentioned as the author may be to show the source code, you can't be 100% sure that the source is what the app really is. Trust me, I'm a programmer.

In all honesty they would be better off having the app removed due to copyright infringement and create their own. The one the author came up with is a very hacky solution. --Kairu 22:10, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

You keep mentioning that the app uses hacky code, yet you admitted to not having access to the source code. Do you have anything at all to back that up, or are you just rambling because you have no idea how you would do it yourself? What you've been saying this whole discussion doesn't make much sense unless you actually were involved in the development of this app. If that's the case, you should have pointed it out.

(Reset indent) Changing the source code of an open source application is not something that you can hide. People can build it for themselves and notice the mismatch in the binaries.--88.198.55.109 22:42, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

ANet doesn't care if the code is hacky or not; they only care that it's not under their control.

If you really want ANet to buy the code and/or hire the coders, then tell them what you are willing to give up to have that. Hiring a new developer means dropping something else. Are you willing to delay the release of GW2? Not have new costumes/hats for Wintersday? Not see part 3 of WoC released? Not see Beyond move to Elona? See also the Feedback space for hundreds of ideas that people also want to see in the game (and I'm sure at least a dozen are high-demand and cheaper than vetting & running a chat program).

A simple reading of the EULA and official ANet statements makes it clear that they can ban people for using 3rd party apps. I'm not sure why it continues to surprise people that they can get banned for trying something out without understanding the implications. 75.37.17.249 23:21, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

As a programmer I know how he did it, and I have explained it already. There is only one way (There is no API), and it is a hackey way. Basically he monitored the packets being sent when you log in, and when you chat. Then he replicated them. Not that difficult, but very very hackey. The ANet team could very easily whip something better together, and they have no need to hire the original author. They might in the end, but only if they are being nice. Anyway, I'm done arguing.

Let me lay out the facts: You can (and in the end will) get banned for this, they will not remove the ban, you are never going to get an ok on this app. Gaile already said all this above. --Kairu 14:48, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

I think you meant to reply to 88.198.55.109, so I moved your post--ZyngaFail 15:23, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

:D TY. I hadn't caught that. I had edit conflicted with you and didn't pay attention hours later when I resubmitted it. Sorry! x.X --Kairu 15:50, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

(Reset indent) I tested the app in the Android SDK emulator. Here's the steps if you want to check for yourself:

1. Get the SDK from http://developer.android.com/sdk/index.html

2. Download the system.img containing the Android Market from http://techdroid.kbeanie.com/2011/01/android-market-on-emulator-22.html

3. Once you copied system.img to the proper path, start the emulator and clear the cache of the Android Market app as well as the data from the Google Framework Services

4. Restart the emulator, and then it lets you find the app on the Android Market

I then looked at the network packets with Wireshark, and it only connected to 64.25.39.21, 64.25.39.82 and 64.25.39.44 which according to http://whois.arin.net/rest/net/NET-64-25-32-0-1.html are assigned to NC Interactive.--ZyngaFail 08:56, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey guys, why is this argument still going? None of this concerns Gaile or her/ANet's stance on this application. If you want a similar app created by ANet, put it in the Feedback space. If you want ANet to approve any third party application, well, good luck with that; Gaile has said (if I read her post properly) that she'll be checking with the team to figure out whether the program is something that should result in a ban, and it seems to me that's about all you can hope for right now. --ஸ Kyoshi 19:12, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Support Ticket #111003-002754

Hi Gaile, I hope you can help...

My account got shut down on Monday evening (Brit time) as someone may have gained un-authorised access. I've contacted support and other than a response telling me how to gain access to my NCSoft Master Account, I've heard nothing. (That isn't the issue. I can get into NCMA just fine). I'm unable to post on the GW forums since all my accounts are tied to that NCMA and they've all been shut down for my safety. I would have posted on the support forums if I could..

I've given all information: Name, DOB, Address, Char names, Access Keys (my prophs key is long gone, unfortunately), Debit card info, paypal info, Phone number, roughly when I bought the game, the last thing I bought from the store and the serial code for that, and the transaction ID with Paypal.

I didn't really want to air my dirty laundry in public by posting here (so Hi everyone who knows me!), but I'm running out of options. The last response I got told me "We'll get back to you in 24 hours" and it's been longer.

Can you provide me with any help? I've given all the info to prove I'm me, and I just want my babies back ;_;

Thanks! Fae 06:02, 7 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey there, Fae. I did check into your ticket while it was in-progress and I note that everything is just fine for you now. Let me know if I can help in any other way. -- Gaile 17:19, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

Players getting inside info about GW?

I have a theory that devs tell friends to buy up things themselves before we find out about it. they seem to run a loose ship. remember those reg pig minis that couldn't be given away for free were going for 10-15k the week before the trade in was known. more recently booze spiked a couple weeks before the timer was lifted. here's a hint booze never spikes. it gradually goes up as supply dwindles. also people were stalking up on party points 2 weeks before there was a title. Now people are stalking up on diamonds and buying them by the stacks. Am i really over thinking this or could this be true? If it is true this is a big unfair advantage and who ever is spilling the beans needs to stop it. (166.192.6.43 23:29, 15 October 2011 (UTC))

Conspiracy theories are always more interesting than the truth. Prices for drink did not spike just before the switch. I was one of the people unlucky enough to max the title just before the timer was lifted, so I was very interested in drink prices. Kegs were going for 11-12k, 1-pt for 80-85g and 3-pt for as low as 220-225g. Even if the dev team had given advance notice, it takes a lot of players to influence the supply. There's no way that hundreds of potential sellers were hoarding without one of them giving away their secret.75.36.182.197 00:13, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

I have a theory that devs tell friends how to fly unto their own power! As a member of the "in crowd" I can tell you that they don't tell us dick about the economy (believe me, I've tried). If anything, we get blindsided more than most people since the developers go to some lengths to make sure we don't get much of an unfair advantage. –Jette 22:02, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

Your theory is entirely unfounded and without merit. Those of us who work at ArenaNet are extremely careful not to make revelations that would give anyone an advantage and are also careful to not take advantage of inside knowledge to our own benefit. I have (figuratively, at least) bitten my tongue until it bled to avoid giving even a hint of such information; I am sure that every other employee is equally careful. And stop and think about it: Giving inside info -- while not as heinous as insider trading on Wall Street -- is still a very bad thing, and because having an employee do something like this could damage our company's reputation, an individual's job could be in jeopardy in doing so. Can you honestly believe that any of us would be nuts enough to risk our livelihood and our company's reputation in such a manner? -- Gaile 23:13, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Trading Steam games of in-game gold.

Recently I've seen some players offering to gift Steam games in exchange for in-game gold, like this. Since Guild Wars does not participate in the new Steam Trading feature, I was wondering if this would be considered Real Money Trading, and the possible measures we fellow citizens should take in case this behavior breaks any rules. MithTalk 14:47, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

I believe it would be. It technically isn't trading "real-world" items, but it is exchanging items in the game for items managed/made by another company and outside of the GW world, so I think it would fall under that category. I'm fairly certain, but having an answer from ArenaNet directly would be nice since I can't seem to find the real-world trading clause in the EULA/ToS. I'd suggest posting in the official forums or contacting support to get a direct answer. ~FarloTalk 18:06, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Generally, it's fair to simply report stuff to ANet and let them worry about the details. We all know the downside of ANet not publishing a list of what does/does not constitute a violation (is TexMod ok? not?), but the upside is that means we can err on the side of reporting too much. ANet will investigate the report and respond appropriately. If it's something new (as this might be), they might have to decide internally if it matters to them or not. Otherwise, they will already have clear guidelines on whether it breaks the rules...even if they didn't share those details with us. – Tennessee Ernie Ford (TEF) 20:53, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Already reported. The user got kicked out of that group, and has been reported by many users on Steam, and I some have told me they have also reported him to ANet. I took the liberty of making a little warning in the Steam forums that I hope helps a little. MithTalk 22:59, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

Just to provide info on this subject: Yes, it is not acceptable to offer to "buy" Guild Wars accounts for Game XYZ codes, or Game ABC currency, or gift cards to your local Slurpie Station. :) Please feel free to submit a ticket to support or you can select the player making the advertisement, type /report, and then use "spamming" as the reason code. The team looks at those reports and sorts out the actual spamming incidents from those other chat-related breaches that they also need to review and act upon. In fact, you could even use "offensive chat" as the reason for the /report and the team will see the breach. The point is to report these miscreants and let us take 'em out of the game. :) Oh, and if you do send a report via a ticket, could you please provide the date, time, and character name involved? Thanks again. -- Gaile 22:30, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Come crying to you again, Gaile

Dear Gaile:

I come to you crying for help again. It was very foolish of me. Last year, I was wrongly banned for RMT which you helped me resolved the situation and returned my game status. What happened, I suspected was me falling to the scheme of 100 Platinum/100 Gold trick, while I was trading Ectos.

Now it happened again. I wasn't banned or anything. I was scammed... Sold two stacks of ToT for 72 gold while it was agreed for 72 platinum. I am really speechless by my stupidity, and would like nothing more than to get my gold back.

I know Anet usually doesn't help with this kind of thing, and based on my last time's experience, the perpetrator usually gets away with a suspension, thus I have not tried contacting support yet. I just want my items or my gold. Should I actively pursuit support? Is it going to work magic this time? Please advise me.

I am solely to be blamed for my own mistake, but gosh I need your help on this. Again. Many many thanks Hellswung 21:53, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Drat, I hate hearing that and I'm sorry you were victim of that swap. We made game mechanics changes years ago that drastically reduce the instances of this happening, but even not unfortunately it does take place from time to time. :(

We aren't able to replace the items or gold lost in these situations, but if you could see it in your heart to submit a ticket to support we would have the ability to take action against the so-and-so who did this to you. That protects other players, which is a good, socially responsible thing to think about. Oh and also, there's this little known issue of what I call "Repeat Offenders." Did you know that we have parameters for taking action on accounts beyond a formulaic "This issue earns a X-day suspension?" If there are other incidents on an account, the player gets a longer time out. And most importantly, if we see the player has a history of scamming or other unacceptable behavior, the account may be banned. And if you know me, you know that when I use the word "banned" I truly mean banned, as in terminated, permanently closed, bye-bye and adios.

So for the good for your fellow players, please do report misbehavior and we'll handle it from there. Thanks -- Gaile 22:39, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Dear Gaile:

Thank you for your support. I guess in this case the most I can do is to diligently report this incident and have the perpetrator caught. I will do my part, and I have to say personal revenge is part of the reasons as well.

However, as you can tell it is a very frustrating matter for me, may I have your word that when I submit this ticket, that you will take some time (I know how busy you are as community liason) to see to it that Anet technical staff really take a good look at this guy's gaming activities/behaviors and catch him for all the shady things he did.

My best wishes and heart felt thanks to you Hellswung 05:22, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

If you send me your 12-digit incident number, you can be assured I will review the ticket and do all that I can to see that the matter is handled properly. I appreciate your confidence in me, but I can assure you the team is very good about detecting scammers and cheats. However, yes, I will be happy to lend my eyes to a review of the situation, as well. -- Gaile 15:30, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

I will certainly do that. Thank you very much for your effort. It really means a lot to me, and to the community as well, I am sure.Hellswung 11:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Support Ticket #111026-000192

Dear Gaile Gray :

I have discover here and your support forum post "How do I contact Support?" too late,this make me haven't use the email account associated with my Guild Wars account to send mail to the support group from the earliest.Because I don't understand the procedure of account recover,I feel my Support Ticket look like so confused (etc,I have added data and positive evidence more than once or I have changed back the support account email or login name associated with my GW account )

I have change and add back all data for the fastest possible service regarding issues now.

Will this influence process for recover my account??I'm so sorry about that I make inconvenient to the GM or Support Group.... Jokersoul21 21:51, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

My account have recover now, support team have a high efficiency !! Thank all staff of A net again Jokersoul21 21:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Very glad that the team could assist you. :) -- Gaile 17:11, 27 January 2012 (UTC)