Where Do We Draw The Line With Bots?

[Autumn Annayah]

So I've been playing this game for a very long time and we've gone from little to no bots to having a bot for everything. Some of the things bots can do for the game as a whole are overall positive. They can make recruitment easier, post things from the forum onto your discord server  automate banks, readily pull up a nation's info, etc etc. I've taken notice now that there are bots that tell you when alliances or individual nations are militarizing now. That should be a great thing given knowledge in a very powerful tool in this game right? I don't think so. Bots tracking militarization completely take out any element of surprise blitzing or catching your enemy off guard in general. I personally feel like bots that interfere with how the war side of the game plays directly are a problem. But where if at all do we draw the line with bots? Just kinda throwing my thoughts out there. Lemme know what yall think 

[Velekk Hemlock]

It's just a compilation of already present data. If it wasn't a bot it'd be someone slaving over a spreadsheet or even more accurately checking alliance score. Frankly, I don't think a bot processing the information in a digestible manner is the root of any issues. 

[Lucianus]

Before we did that, large alliances had their milcom check militarization updates daily, and in other times more often then that. Basically we made a bot do what a human did before, but don't think people won't track militarization if the bots stop doing so. If the bots don't track militarization, Milcom departments will. 

[Jacob Knox]

The line is drawn where it crosses from information and automated banking to playing the game for you (declaring wars, playing baseball games, making trades, etc). That's where I (and the rules) say the line is. Because all of the information is readily accessible to anyone who wants to spend some time looking for it. I already spend literal hours some days doing my job as Head of MA/Milcom, so pardon if I'm not too enthused at the thought of having to spend an extra few extrapolating data to check militarization levels (among other things).

[Hredhaan Singh]

3 hours ago, Jacob Knox said:

The line is drawn where it crosses from information and automated banking to playing the game for you (declaring wars, playing baseball games, making trades, etc). That's where I (and the rules) say the line is. Because all of the information is readily accessible to anyone who wants to spend some time looking for it. I already spend literal hours some days doing my job as Head of MA/Milcom, so pardon if I'm not too enthused at the thought of having to spend an extra few extrapolating data to check militarization levels (among other things).

9 hours ago, Velekk Hemlock said:

It's just a compilation of already present data. If it wasn't a bot it'd be someone slaving over a spreadsheet or even more accurately checking alliance score. Frankly, I don't think a bot processing the information in a digestible manner is the root of any issues. 

Makes sense to me.

[katashimon13]

On 6/3/2022 at 1:32 AM, Autumn Annayah said:

stuff

we had this discussion a couple months ago 😧

rawr

[darkblade]

On 6/3/2022 at 3:32 AM, Autumn Annayah said:

So I've been playing this game for a very long time and we've gone from little to no bots to having a bot for everything. Some of the things bots can do for the game as a whole are overall positive. They can make recruitment easier, post things from the forum onto your discord server  automate banks, readily pull up a nation's info, etc etc. I've taken notice now that there are bots that tell you when alliances or individual nations are militarizing now. That should be a great thing given knowledge in a very powerful tool in this game right? I don't think so. Bots tracking militarization completely take out any element of surprise blitzing or catching your enemy off guard in general. I personally feel like bots that interfere with how the war side of the game plays directly are a problem. But where if at all do we draw the line with bots? Just kinda throwing my thoughts out there. Lemme know what yall think 

bots are there to help you, not do the job for you. gov should know how to work their departments without bots before they start using them to help out with tasks, otherwise departments functionality will rely on technology that isn't guaranteed to work all the time which will be a fun mess to deal with if said technology fails. it's also the same with members. take raiding for example, members should know how to raid without using a bot so they at least know how the process works. otherwise when the bot goes down, so does your raiding. it's a potential problem for newer alliances that doesn't get brought up that much because the focus is usually on growth instead of making sure players and gov are trained properly.

Edited June 5, 2022 by darkblade