Quote:
Originally Posted by charon007
Well at least with RUbot i know i'm never gonna get caught  . With your work remains to be seen  . Give it a week or 2 and if u have 5 more buyers u'll raise to 20  . And yea actually i don't have to bot for moar than 1 month ^^.
|
This is completely ignorant.
AFAIK, RuBot has not released specific details about how it works. If the author or any distributor of RuBot wants to answer detailed questions or send me an NDA and the source I'd be happy to see just how "ban-proof" it really is, but I very much doubt it has anything special which prevents it from being detected versus the other bots which are out there.
If I'm proven wrong I'll even pay a subscription to RuBot, that's how much I doubt it has any genuinely special protections. In fact, I am quite sure RuBot does some things which are very much detectable (just like every bot does). By the way, "player detection" as an anti-ban feature is worlds away from "never gonna get caught". I'm talking about something worth $10/mo, some real hardcore protection.
You can think of botting as analogous to a real-world arms race... the sky is the limit and "good" can only really be measured relative to what the enemy is doing-- everyone plays their cards close and when it comes time to do battle, secrets are unveiled. If a game creator got serious about cheat detection they could probably catch -any- bot. The flip side of that coin is that bot creators make new accounts, adapt to the techniques of the company, and then have "undetectable" bots-- at least for the time being. If the company wants to ante-up, then it becomes another round of bans and more work for bot creators. This could go on until the bot creators give up (extremely unlikely), or until the company has no more financial resources or motivation to support the "war" (much more likely). Even if a company spent an exorbitant amount of money, there are so many shades of "bots" that some would surely still exist.
No bot is ban-proof. If anything, bots with the fewest users and least exposure are least likely to be banned (signature scan), because the game company would have to look harder to find them, or use a less common and probably less-effective strategy. If the company wants to make a statement, they will go after the bot with the biggest market share, which paints a giant target on bots like RuBot. Bots like Immons' bot are much less consequential if they have substantially fewer users.
Also for what it's worth, all 4 of charon007's posts are suspiciously pro-RuBot. Calling someone greedy over a one-time fee in favor of $10/mo is just ludicrous and a big blinking red-flag that there is some serious bias, too.
There is risk in using
any bot. You bot at the risk of your account and any legal action the company might want to take against you, however likely or not. Some bots are better than others. I've never heard compelling evidence in favor of RuBot.