Loading...

Top
PFQ Banner

This is PokéFarm Q, a free online Pokémon collectables game.

Already a user? New to PFQ?

Server performance and desyncs

Forum Index > Core > Announcements > News Archive >

Pages: 123··· 7891011

QUOTE originally posted by Terabbit

QUOTE originally posted by cursed-spaghetti

snip
Users who were locked were required to contact the Support Centre to resolve the concerns and have their account unlocked ^^' Additionally, account locks do not prevent users from accessing their account and is typically accompanied with an email, assumingbthe correct email is connected to your account.
Thanks for the quick reply and all the work staff have been putting in today! Must have just been related to the lag fixes, then.
Niet [Adam]'s Avatarhypermode-12.pngNiet [Adam]
Niet [Adam]'s Avatar
admin1.pngbooster.pnghypermode.pngarceus.pngd+.png
@Grumpy Kitwurm: Your post can be summarised as "banning people was outrageous, you should have just stopped them from making interactions temporarily instead..." What do you think the lock did? Even if we had a feature to lock only interactions, how would that have been any different to what was done? The only way it would have been different would have been different wording, but it wouldn't have been any less "punishing" of an action. We have gone over how the wording was bad. We needed urgent action for what looked like a DDoS attack on the server. My UI is not to blame for this, it was caused by CSS codes distributed among the community that caused the game to behave in a way that was not deigned for, and that looked like a deliberate attempt to crash the server. It was only after the action was taken, when I had time to further examine and analyse the data (since I actually could access the server after the lag was removed!) that I was able to identify the CSS being used and how to adjust the game to work with it. It is not my responsibility to make PFQ work with arbitrary CSS injected by users. It is a privilege you enjoy that I do not take measures to lock the UI in place. If you don't realise that hammering the server with requests risks increasing server load, that's also not my issue. I'm happy to educate on this, as I am here, but that is again not my responsibility. Some of your points are valid, but others are so off-base... Effectively what happened is that players have been "modding" the game, pushing its limits, and the game finally pushed back. I will continue to work to enable the kind of gameplay people want, but when it crashes the server every night, that cannot continue. @cursed-spaghetti: to be completely clear you weren't locked, you may have just been suffering the effects of lag.
Clip from Pokémon anime, re-lined by me
-- OMNOMNOM!
Featured story: Injustice Feedback welcome!
RainyStarLeaf's AvatarRainyStarLeaf
RainyStarLeaf's Avatar
master.pnge.png

QUOTE originally posted by Niet

@Grumpy Kitwurm: Your post can be summarised as "banning people was outrageous, you should have just stopped them from making interactions temporarily instead..." What do you think the lock did? Even if we had a feature to lock only interactions, how would that have been any different to what was done?
Not to be a bother, just subscribed to the thread, but grumpy kitworm did suggest instead of locking the players for hours, to pause their interactions for a short amount of time. I think something like that with a pop-up that says ‘you are overloading blahblahblah’ or something too. They said pausinf interactions, not locking people from their accounts entirely :(!! I know its in the past and most people are out of the situation, but surely you would understand how distressing thinking you’re banned from your favorite game is?
Please send me Miltank or Hypno so I can collect them‼️‼️
—I also collect farm animal pokemon! Cows, bulls, cats, goats, chickens, pigs, etc! Any farm animals!—
Niet [Adam]'s Avatarhypermode-12.pngNiet [Adam]
Niet [Adam]'s Avatar
admin1.pngbooster.pnghypermode.pngarceus.pngd+.png
Given that we already have two different popups that warn of interaction overload that get routinely ignored, I question how well such a thing would have worked. Especially since interactions had nothing to do with it. The word "interaction" (or related terms) do not appear anywhere in the detection code that was used for the banwave. It was entirely based on the fact that normal gameplay follows specific patterns of actions, and the affected users were exhibiting patterns that were completely inconsistent with normal gameplay. This, ultimately, was caused by the injected CSS removing the need to even look at what you were doing to "play" the game, and resulted in excessive calls to certain endpoints that did not make sense. At the time, it looked like a deliberate attack, and action was taken accordingly. After investigation concluded (again, only made possible by the lag being reduced) it was rolled back and affected users compensated. Within 40 minutes, not "hours." (Mostly, depending on response times from the user and position in the ticket queue)
RainyStarLeaf's AvatarRainyStarLeaf
RainyStarLeaf's Avatar
master.pnge.png

QUOTE originally posted by Niet

Given that we already have two different popups that warn of interaction overload that get routinely ignored, I question how well such a thing would have worked. Especially since interactions had nothing to do with it. The word "interaction" (or related terms) do not appear anywhere in the detection code that was used for the banwave. It was entirely based on the fact that normal gameplay follows specific patterns of actions, and the affected users were exhibiting patterns that were completely inconsistent with normal gameplay. This, ultimately, was caused by the injected CSS removing the need to even look at what you were doing to "play" the game, and resulted in excessive calls to certain endpoints that did not make sense. At the time, it looked like a deliberate attack, and action was taken accordingly. After investigation concluded (again, only made possible by the lag being reduced) it was rolled back and affected users compensated. Within 40 minutes, not "hours." (Mostly, depending on response times from the user and position in the ticket queue)
Then when an account seems to start acting in a way you detect give them a warning that explicitly says if they do not manage correctly they will have their account locked. WARN people. And it was hours from when the locks were first placed. Maybe 40 minutes after they made a support token, but not even that. My friend who was locked it had taken 3 hours to get resolved. And the compensation was barely anything for how scary it would be to tjink you might be banned??? For hours??? And on a interactions bonus day??? I just wish you would at least admit how much of a disruption it caused, and warn people in the future if the site continues to get overloaded :(
Mirzam's Avatarhypermode-12.pngMirzam
Mirzam's Avatar
helpinghand.pnghypermode.pngarceus.pnga.png
I don't know a ton of details on either side of this, but I do want to comment as a programmer that making it very public what the anti-cheating software is looking for is... risky. People can use that info to design their bots to evade the detection. It's a delicate balance. In this case, how would the warning be delivered anyway? The pages were allegedly not being allowed to complete loading, and people are famously bad at reading or fully understanding warning and error messages. (No shade, I did this just the other day with a door alarm irl...) It does seem to me that staff may want to use more protective language during the initial investigation phase, ex "Some accounts have been disabled due to unusual actions that were causing excessive server load", if that much was clear at the time. But tbh I wouldn't be surprised there are people who would be upset by that too, who'd still want to know what's happening and why before anyone has all the answers. And there would definitely be people who weren't banned but felt like they were at risk because they didn't understand, or underestimated the scope of the issue. I'm not going to pretend I'd have been doing great if it was me. Due to my own issues I'd probably be having a private freak out. But I don't think expecting extra warning in this specific case is fair.
Niet [Adam]'s Avatarhypermode-12.pngNiet [Adam]
Niet [Adam]'s Avatar
admin1.pngbooster.pnghypermode.pngarceus.pngd+.png
I would also like to note the following: it seems like a number of you aren't quite grasping just how serious things have to be for them to "look like a DDoS attack". The reason I am saying this is to emphasise how bad it was. It was literally crashing the server and ruining the game for everyone - including those doing it. We could not investigate the root causes because I could barely access the server myself - that is what "denial of service" means in DDoS. "Sending a warning" to what seemed to be potential attackers trying to nuke the game would be little more than congratulations and encouragement to continue if they were indeed malicious attackers. I fully agree that the wording was excessively harsh, and I apologise for any distress caused by it. But I must ask that you try to understand just how severe this situation was. We would not have taken such drastic actions if we did not believe it to be the best course of action out of a very limited set of options that were all drastic.
NoBrainCells's AvatarNoBrainCells
NoBrainCells's Avatar
grandmaster.pnge.png
Hi @Grumpy Kitwurm, I agree with a lot. I was one of the users caught up in this. Don't want to clog this all with a wall of text so putting this in a hide box. Hopefully that's alright

For context I was in call with my partner and mindlessly clicking away as I was distracted. Paired with the one click for fields css + QOL, I can see what happened and how excited and distracted fidgeting tapping brought this about. I will say first and foremost that the mods responded relatively quickly and we're polite and clear in informing me to be mindful of my clicking habits in the future, which I absolutely will. My friends were here advocating on my behalf when I did not ask them to (Sorry guys, I really didn't mean to cause trouble D:) because they were just as confused as I was. Looking over the rules I really could not find anything related to my ban which simply stated: "Your account is currently locked, Reason: Botting. Expires: Indefinite." - I had no idea what I did or what this entailed, so I immediately contacted support. Couldn't check my fields, hatch eggs, or interact with others. Spooky! In the 3 hours it took to get resolved (I understand it was a big investigation of course) I had time to realize how much I'd liked Pokefarm - until it was ripped from me for playing the game. I've only been playing for maybe 2 months now? But I now regularly have a lot of fun with my friends on here and communication on and about this game has brought us together. I've started trying to learn BBC from the ground up. This feels like a proper community. Although the ban was temporary and, again, everyone I interacted with was polite, the email saying I was permanently banned for botting with no further details really shook me up. Funnily Enough I had a party full of eggs ready to hatch and when I was let back in my first hatch was a shiny. To tie it back to your post, I am definitely demoralized knowing that at any point in the future I, or anyone else, could be banned as a "suspected" response with limited details as to why - and all progress could be lost. This might never be the actual case, but this event sets a strange precedent. I am even a bit weary to post this. I really do not want any qualms, but I want to speak my mind on the issue.
Overall On the pros: Affected users were compensated, and that was great. Staff responded pleasantly, that was great. Thank you Cele and Terabbit for your help, genuinely! On the cons: While jumping on the issue swiftly was good, it just came at the expense of, if I recall correctly, 35/42 innocent accounts. With very little explanation. That is my main gripe. Now all this yammering would be useless if It didn't come with some suggestions, so here are some ideas for future navigation of similar events. For the future: I understand why there was a ban thrown in as a quick response, but If there is a reason to ban a set of users in this context could there be more explanation in the actual reasoning of the ban? My main qualm is that there was little communication as to what the ban entailed.
Example
- Reason: Botting And - Reason: Suspected botting. Please contact support for more information/to resolve this. Both convey entirely different things. And rather than assuming guilty until proven innocent, it's more of a "Hey our systems are reading strange behaviors, please be aware that xzy" and so on / allow room for actual investigation. This would greatly help navigate any upset on the playerbase whilst stopping the issue in it's tracks. I am a relatively new player, I had no clue. So I was left terribly scared a month or so of progress was lost. There would be far less upset if people were informed what they were being suspected of - at least I certainly would have been. What do you think? Would this be feasible? :)
💬
Hello. My name is Ida Wire. I am not from this platform, but you can can certainly make my time here easier by tossing me a berry. Do be wary of Dr. Data.
y.png [ Journal ] ☆Art by me☆ ☆ground.png [1,788] points.☆
Niet [Adam]'s Avatarhypermode-12.pngNiet [Adam]
Niet [Adam]'s Avatar
admin1.pngbooster.pnghypermode.pngarceus.pngd+.png
Yes. In future, if this ever happens again, I will be significantly more mindful of the wording used. I can promise that! c:
NoBrainCells's AvatarNoBrainCells
NoBrainCells's Avatar
grandmaster.pnge.png
Thanks so much! :D

Pages: 123··· 7891011

Cannot post: Please log in to post

© PokéFarm 2009-2024 (Full details)Contact | Rules | Privacy | Reviews 4.6★Get shortlink for this page