BOTS please fucking BAN there IP ADDRESS

[chickyboy17]

Ban this bots for it cause lag and failure to your system maybe that's why there are so many internal problem.

[chickyboy17]

Too many bots, please fix GM

[chickyboy17]

Tasha

Can you please work with it while there are still online so that you can track the ip address of the bot.

[NearLawlet]

Tasha is just a nobody acting as a Project Manager to attract players with her looks alone (even though she's nowhere near that cute nor elegant in my opinion).

If she's worth half of her look, she'll know better than to issue a preset "Sorry for the inconvenience" apology and instead think up a way to actually fix the problem then compensate affected players for their mistake. God knows how many raid runs have failed, or the amount of tickets and FTG points that were wasted for nothing.

That's what they get for hiring someone who can only take selfies as Project Manager.

[Pentium3]

GM fix this server gonna down cannot enter the portal

[SanctiusDN]

LMAO SO MANY HAHAHA .. that idiot thinks Magni Reward is Back

[NASALord]

Tasha We being left out for 8 hours with no any notice or announcement on how you guys going resolve this. At least some announcement? You guys seems don't care about us. Why would player spend on ED with poor management skill? Could you please ask your GM to take some action?

[MeshPolygon]

IP Ban? Is that feasible? We are banning a hardware, and then this hardware happens to be a CGN, woah XD. Please be reminded that some ISPs, like PLDT and Globe, already deployed Carrier Grade NAT(CGN)/Large Scale NAT(LSN) *(RFC 6598, IANA-Reserved IPv4 Prefix for Shared Address Space) into their networks to help conserve IPv4 address space and support IPv4 growth until IPv6 is fully deployed. This results to a group of subscribers sharing a single public IP address or sharing from a small pool of public IP addresses. The latter is the case for PLDT, a CGN subnet has a small pool of public IP addresses that each one of them translates to different users. Wanna ban an IP address that was assigned to CGN network which translates to a whole lot of subscribers in it which has a chance that it also host a group of DN players as well?

AFAIK, depending on the banning method, innocents might get hurt. If it's just IP Ban by IP blocking, it's fine, they just won't be able to access the servers. Useless on botters that are in a dynamic network addressing scheme, just change IP and viola. Else, if they preferred to flag account ban by IP address(IP-based account banishment), on that botter in a CGN network, and add a very unfortunate case, if any other innocent DN players are also translated with the same public IP address as the botter, they'll get flagged altogether. Now, should we still go on this way, along with the risk of collateral damage?

All they can do is jerk their necks on manually monitoring and banning them if they don't wanna use or even develop an effective anti-botting feature.

PS nice column squad, keep it together, watch your sectors.


some other infos if you like to know more ^_^.

[APNIC] About Carrier Grade NAT (CGN)

Disclosing my previous IP address assignment and PLDT CGN subnet configuration to let you guys know how PLDT do things and give an idea how large the network is.

Address:   100.65.81.35          01100100.01 000001.01010001.00100011
Netmask:   255.192.0.0 = 10      11111111.11 000000.00000000.00000000
Wildcard:  0.63.255.255          00000000.00 111111.11111111.11111111
=>
Network:   100.64.0.0/10         01100100.01 000000.00000000.00000000 (Class A)
Broadcast: 100.127.255.255       01100100.01 111111.11111111.11111111
HostMin:   100.64.0.1            01100100.01 000000.00000000.00000001
HostMax:   100.127.255.254       01100100.01 111111.11111111.11111110
Hosts/Net: 4194302               

Subnets

Netmask:   255.255.128.0 = 17    11111111.11111111.1 0000000.00000000
Wildcard:  0.0.127.255           00000000.00000000.0 1111111.11111111

. . .

3rd subnet
Network:   100.65.0.0/17         01100100.01000001.0 0000000.00000000 (Class A)
Broadcast: 100.65.127.255        01100100.01000001.0 1111111.11111111
HostMin:   100.65.0.1            01100100.01000001.0 0000000.00000001
HostMax:   100.65.127.254        01100100.01000001.0 1111111.11111110
Hosts/Net: 32766                 

. . .

Subnets:   128
Hosts:     4194048

Version 0.35.2 2005/07/07

100.64.0.0/10 is allocated for the use of CGN, addresses ranging from 100.64.0.0 to 100.127.255.255 with a total of 4,194,304 available addresses. Now PLDT subnetted it with /17 (255.255.128.0, 7 borrowed network bits), dividing it into 128 smaller subnets with 32,766 available host addresses each, a total of 4,194,048 available addresses (minus subnetwork addresses and broadcast addresses)

[Cisco Systems] Network Binary Math Explained

[launcelot]

They should just use the bug they found (causing everyone to be locked in Saint Haven) and make it as a feature. When no one is able to go to dungeons, the bots will pile up, GM walks in, mass bans the stuck bots.

[BananaCredits]

Not able to understand a single technical stuff you saying up there, but for a newbie myself I doubt your idea will be implemented as well in these two part: " GM walks in" and "mass bans the stuck bots". They just seem to don't care about their game anymore LOL.