Permanent bots

[WaterEnt]

Hosting bots were initially introduced or should have been introduced in Wc3 because not everyone was able to host for themselves back in the day. Also, they improve the comfort, reduce delay, unite the scattered user base of different realms/platforms and provide further functionality enhancing the experience of the game Blizzard had neglected over the years. However, this was soon abused and users installed automatic bots that would permanently spam the game lists. As for their motivation, I can only guess that they wanted to promote specific maps, groups/services and playing their favorite map at any time without having to wait for the game to fill from zero. Since like none were taken down, the number just kept increasing, which led to the disastrous scenario we face today:

• the bots shove each other around in BNet and block regular games/slower bots on Garena
• standard public hosting has become impossible
• a lot of the games never get full and still are there 24/7
• the map market is extremely forced and limited (few bots have a map rotation)
• there are DotA bots on Garena outside of the DotA dedicated channels, although they are already granted ridiculously overwhelming space
• renting hosting bots monetizes an alien asset and puts users up against each other
• arbitrary banlists

[matdas]

• the bots shove each other around in BNet and block regular games/slower bots on Garena
  I know nothing about garena
• standard public hosting has become impossible
  It was impossible in the past too. If host lost connection, everyone dropped the game unless someone else could host.
• a lot of the games never get full and still are there 24/7
  This is true. Which is why we have a suggestion section to change maps. There is also a random map bot.
• the map market is extremely forced and limited (few bots have a map rotation)
  We have a section where you can upload your own map and host it using ENT hosting bots (BTW its free
• there are DotA bots on Garena outside of the DotA dedicated channels, although they are already granted ridiculously overwhelming space
  I have zero knoweldge on this
• renting hosting bots monetizes an alien asset and puts users up against each other
  Bot renting are for those who want to "Own" the bot to do as they please. All other services are free. You can host using ENT.
• arbitrary banlists
  Ban list is there to prevent people from ruining games. IE: map hackers get banned for a year. Team killing, item stealing/destruction also ruin games, thus having a ban list tells the users that they did something wrong and should not do it again. If they fail to read up on fair play, and continue to break the rules, they become banned for longer.

Hi there, I fail to see the point to this complaint, but I will do my best to respond to your points (in red)

[Yondaime]

This too me does not look like a complaint therefore I shall move it too suggestions.

[uakf.b]

I don't see a suggestion here. There's already a host bot, Ent)Rand, which hosts random maps each game. You can host your own games on ENT in multiple locations if you want, or you can obviously press create game in Warcraft III.

[WaterEnt]

I know nothing about garena

It's not about Garena in particular. If you host in BNet or LAN, wc3 displays only the 20 newest games at a time. Well, in BNet, it updates periodically. In one way or another, games that are not rapidly being rehosted have their visibility strongly restricted.

It was impossible in the past too. If host lost connection, everyone dropped the game unless someone else could host.

That was still quite possible. Also human hosts gave the game an individual touch, had to lure with an interesting title, often could take leadership/tell about the map. This led to misbehavior as well, yes, but personalized bots give even more control in doing so.

Bot renting are for those who want to "Own" the bot to do as they please. All other services are free. You can host using ENT.

Of course, I am saying it sells advantages and outsiders are forced into the (even if free) bot system (which is not awknowledged by Blizzard btw).

Ban list is there to prevent people from ruining games. IE: map hackers get banned for a year. Team killing, item stealing/destruction also ruin games, thus having a ban list tells the users that they did something wrong and should not do it again. If they fail to read up on fair play, and continue to break the rules, they become banned for longer.

Yes, but who tells that this cannot be abused? On what base can we judge and evaluate who behaved maliciously? This would be less of a problem if the user was excluded only from the games the one who invoked the ban is hosting AND attending. It's another matter with auto-hosts which take up slots and may even potentially tell other bots of the ban.

If I were to make a suggestion, but I dunno how you are entangled there, it would be to refrain from perma bots/limit it and promote more map rotation. Also, I am not specifically tackling ENT here, though it does its share, rather indicating the problem and appealing to the users.

[EdgeOfChaos]

Please explain what you mean by "refrain from perma bots/limit it".

As for the map rotation, there's already Ent RAND which hosts a random game from a list. And there's public hosting for users.

With public hosting, you can still give the game an individual touch, choose your map, choose how to play it, but it has none of the inconveniences of hosting regularly through Battle.net.

BTW: our banlists are absolutely NOT arbitrary. Any ban can be appealed and reviewed by another mod, which is how we defend against abuses.

[supersexyy]

Seems like your suggestion is to get rid of the bots so people can explore new maps. People aren't exploring new maps primarily because the player base is so small - and the game is so old.

Also most people will disagree with your suggestion - I definitely prefer auto hosted maps over waiting 10 minutes to play a game.

[Random260]

I agree with the writer of this topic and on behalf of all the hosters. That ent shouldn't be allowed to autohost. Who is to say people would like the games ent host on garena (Not everyone likes it. The whole point is to play a map you want to play and in doing that host yourself rather then guessing whether people like it or not). That is why we shouldn't autohost on garena. If people want a fast filling game they should just pub there own game on garena. And how come only certain games are on garena and some aren't? In saying that why not put all the hostbot on ent in garena (Pretty dumb question however you get my point). I could right a 1 page opinion however I have already done that. This is a very quick response. And there is a lot of flaws.

Supersexy. I am not suggestion remove ent hostbot all together. I am just suggesting to only allow public hosting bots on garena. And how come other ent autohosting maps should get an advantahge in filling then the other ent maps hosting on battle.net. Alot of people would prefer map "a" on battle net over map "b" on garena. So at the end of the day nobody would be happy with autohosting a certain map on garena.

Also the ent)rand should stay and public hosting bots.

[supersexyy]

I believe only a small amount of maps auto host with Garena - namely the slow filling maps.

[WaterEnt]

Please explain what you mean by "refrain from perma bots/limit it".

Either avoid them altogether, only host if you are attending the game yourself. Or limit the number of games/simultaneously active auto-hosts to a max of half the slots available. Also give temp-bots higher priority. Perma bots should only be a replacement for the lack of individual hosting.

As for the map rotation, there's already Ent RAND which hosts a random game from a list. And there's public hosting for users.

Yes but it gets easily overshadowed by the sheer mass of other bots.

With public hosting, you can still give the game an individual touch, choose your map, choose how to play it, but it has none of the inconveniences of hosting regularly through Battle.net.

If you attend your game and are able to be seen, yes.

BTW: our banlists are absolutely NOT arbitrary. Any ban can be appealed and reviewed by another mod, which is how we defend against abuses.

Then you force that judgement. You have to consider that the bots are hosting in networks that do not belong to you. So even your trustworthiest mods hold no authority there.

Seems like your suggestion is to get rid of the bots so people can explore new maps. People aren't exploring new maps primarily because the player base is so small - and the game is so old.

Perma bots, not bots in general. The only chance to promote new maps at the moment is to perma-bot them. And that's also part of the reason why low quality maps get attention because the authors and the player base of them have the mind to set up such bots. Plus you educate the public with that kind of supply.

I am from a community in which we have to play among ourselves to a great extent. We organize funmap evenings where we meet up and play in private every 2-3 weeks because it's practically impossible to have proper games in public.

And again, for clearance: I am targeting perma host services in general. Nowhere have I restricted my points to ENT or specifically attacked it. But you are part of the system, therefore I hope you can perceive your own position, reflect on it and do take a look at the overall scenario to help improving it. Maybe you/your user base even has the contacts.

[supersexyy]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, but I strongly disagree. I love auto hosting and maps filling quickly.

[Random260]

Then why not use public hostbot to host.

[supersexyy]

Because the auto host bots fill up very quickly as people know exactly which game name and # to enter once added to their friends list.

[Random260]

Not always. Autohosting feels slower. Because if a new game comes out they would want to join. The don't know whether it is good or bad

[teller55]

@Random260 ENT doesn't autohost on GArena, the Public Use Bots are currently the only bots we have that do bridge to GArena, so your suggestion has always been in place...