View Full Version : Do You want PunkBuster in Armed Assault?
Point of existence of this poll is simple - to know if You (players, admins, fans, haters) want PunkBuster to be in Armed Assault.
Please take in mind that cheating is KILLING MP GAMING and purpose of PunkBuster is prevent cheating
(of course it's impossible to prevent cheating completely but it's possible keep it under level where it start killing game itself).
Just to avoid some 'false' informations, 'myths' and 'rumors' there is short summary of PB:
pluses:
- fully option-able for both players and server admins (if You don't want use it, You can disable it)
- OS platform independent for both client and server (supported platforms are (?NT4?),w2K(w3k), wXP 32/64, Vista32/(64 soon) Linux 32/64 and Mac)
- was developed with 56k modem transfers in mind
- can be updated independently on game updates to counter cheats
- updates to client and server components are independent and automated too
- manual updates via tool PBSETUP to all games installed on computer or network shares, available for Win, Linux and Mac, read more... on this page (http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=pbsetup.php)
- no additional cost to customer beyond basic game price they paid in shop
- defends not only against game engine based cheats but also against modded drivers and directx/opengl based cheats etc.
- server admins can utilize custom variable and files checks beyond PB basic ones
- server admins can utilize PB for autokicking based on TK or score (depends on game)
- extends existing and adds various admins features thus improves server control
- provides remote screenshot feature of player's ingame screen
- various levels of bans GUID temporary, GUID permanent, hardware permanent across all PB supported games
- secure , PB uses one way hashes and that disallow to collect any privacy sensitive informations about player / server
- any PB action done at server is stored in PB server logs
- any PB action done at client is stored in PB client logs (option-able)
- as bonus there is encrypted UDP based remote control via tool PBUCON, exists for Win, Linux and Mac, read more... on this page (http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=pbucon.php)
- used in 25+ multiplayer games
minor minuses:
- increases bit CPU usage of both server and client (1-5%) due to generation of one way hashes and anti-cheat scans (classical trade-off for higher security) *
* - since system service in PB client 1.5 utilizes multiple cores (offloading workload onto least used one)
- need player machine to be run with certain OS Privileges, 99% of systems can easily resolve this by following help entry in PB's FAQ at official website **
** - since client 1.5 PB use system service which fully remove these needs & PB is now Vista32/64 compatible along w2K, wXP32/64 ..., read more ... on this page (http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=pbsvcfaq.php)
major minuses:
- increase bit cost of game to produce (but nothing in compare with cost of useless anti-piracy protections)
for more informations read please following information sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punkbuster
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punkbuster_Hardware_Ban
official website (with list of supported games and latest versions) :
http://www.evenbalance.com/
for more generic anti-cheat discussion visit this thread:
http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=46505 (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=64;t=46505)
thanks for taking part in this poll, if You want post Your opinions feel free but please try avoid hateful and whine-full ones ...
[this post and poll was approved by moderator]
EDIT: updated informations about pluses / minuses to reflect PB development since this was posted ...
gandalf the white
Sep 6 2005, 15:17
I think it will make modding (unit replacements) very difficult.... so no http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
No. In addition to those cons mentioned, such "high level" anti-cheat systems work like a huge invitation for people to try to break it. Even I would propably be interested into trying to break it simply because of the challenge if it were there :P
The game should use its own methods to do it, ones that suit the game better and are also integrated into the game better. A generic system used in such massively popular games as Punkbuster is used now would only mean that there would be many many times more people "working" on breaking the Armed Assault "protection", because when someone would break the protection on one of those popular games it would be broken in Armed Assault at the same time.
Though, not that I personally care that much about it anyway, I have never encountered a cheater online in OFP (Propably because I do not play on public servers).
Balschoiw
Sep 6 2005, 15:42
Quote[/b] ]Though, not that I personally care that much about it anyway, I have never encountered a cheater online in OFP (Propably because I do not play on public servers).
Same here. I guess I remember one or two incidents while playing at leagues but else...nada.
I´m not for Punkbuster and I doubt BIS would implement it anyway. They have done it on their own and I don´t think they will go for something that is not perfectly embedded into their program. Apart from that it´s just a matter of time until Punkbuster opens its "treasure chest". The more games delivered with it the more attackers who want to get rid of it.
Hawkeye 1985
Sep 6 2005, 15:49
I voted for No too
I know this Programm from Americas Army and not very like it..
the updates needs a lot of time and sometimes i would be kicked without a reason by this programm..
[Off-Topic]
Hey Kegetys will you upgrade DXDLL for AA ? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif
[Off-Topic End]
Acecombat
Sep 6 2005, 16:10
I agree with kegs we dont need Punkbuster its already compromised by many people and their knowledge already of the program will make it easy to break it , much better to have a unique custom made for OFP anticheat thingy inside it.
[Offtopic]
I for one hope we dont need Dxdll for AA otherwise what would be the differences between it and OFP http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
DBR_ONIX
Sep 6 2005, 16:15
Voted no, as pointed out, such a widely used thing means more people trying to break it.. If someone cracks it for some other game, the same idea applys to OFP, which isn't good. (Say "This is uncrackable" or similar, and you'll get [i]x[/x] times the ammount of people trying to crack it...)
- Ben
I think it will make modding (unit replacements) very difficult.... so no http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
You seriously don't know how PunkBuster works , it's NOT going to made modding difficult in any way ...
please LOOK at the games PB supports , 50% of them have modding communities, mods and it works flawlessly ...
please do some research before posting something like this ...
I agree with kegs we dont need Punkbuster its already compromised by many people and their knowledge already of the program will make it easy to break it , much better to have a unique custom made for OFP anticheat thingy inside it.
[Offtopic]
I for one hope we dont need Dxdll for AA otherwise what would be the differences between it and OFP http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
PB itself wasn't compromised in any critical sense ...
... what was compromised are these game engines (read fault of developers of these games)
anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ?
correct answer ... You have no chance ...
No. In addition to those cons mentioned, such "high level" anti-cheat systems work like a huge invitation for people to try to break it. Even I would propably be interested into trying to break it simply because of the challenge if it were there :P
The game should use its own methods to do it, ones that suit the game better and are also integrated into the game better. A generic system used in such massively popular games as Punkbuster is used now would only mean that there would be many many times more people "working" on breaking the Armed Assault "protection", because when someone would break the protection on one of those popular games it would be broken in Armed Assault at the same time.
Though, not that I personally care that much about it anyway, I have never encountered a cheater online in OFP (Propably because I do not play on public servers).
Noone prevent developers to implement theirs own AC system ...
some games (e.g. BF2) already have own internal AC which results into additional layer to PB ...
anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ?
correct answer ... You have no chance ...
How about another theoretical game, I will make something like DXDLL or Fwatch for Armed Assault... How is Punkbuster able to know if it is a cheat or not?
Correct answer is, it doesn't. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ?
correct answer ... You have no chance ...
How about another theoretical game, I will make something like DXDLL or Fwatch for Armed Assault... How is Punkbuster able to know if it is a cheat or not?
Correct answer is, it doesn't. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Answer is quite simple ... cooperate with EBI developers http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
the america armys players know the answer
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif NOOOOOO
the america armys players know the answer
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif NOOOOOO
I will ask You question , which servers You like to play at in America's Army ?
with PB or without PB ...
we speak about public (not private locked servers http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif ...
Answer is quite simple ... cooperate with EBI developers http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Its already difficult enough to do such things, having to add extra things just for them to be compatible with an anti-cheat method would be too much extra work. Plus, if there is a "back door" in Punkbuster that would allow such mods to be made compatible with it, I seriously doubt that it does a very good job at protecting a game against cheats; What whould be stopping the cheats to use the same back door?
Answer is quite simple ... cooperate with EBI developers http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Its already difficult enough to do such things, having to add extra things just for them to be compatible with an anti-cheat method would be too much extra work. Plus, if there is a "back door" in Punkbuster that would allow such mods to be made compatible with it, I seriously doubt that it does a very good job at protecting a game against cheats; What whould be stopping the cheats to use the same back door?
yes it is questionable ... but hey TeamSpeak Overlay, Ati Tray Tool, Fraps etc works ...
of course technically u can flag them as similar to cheat ... but does PB do it ? no ...
sure ... DXDLL works like cheat ... and in fact there are same ways working cheats ... and PB already stop them ...
anyway ... DXDLL method is not usefull for modern MP gaming (meant as making it "safe")...
and You said You like to play on private servers ... then it's simple ... disable PB there and play with Your new DXDLL for ArmAs ... how simple
it's OPTIONABLE!
finarvas
Sep 6 2005, 17:27
No, as said it's much better to leave anti-cheat to the game itself.
No, as said it's much better to leave anti-cheat to the game itself.
Then it will be first game i'm aware of to be capable reach that goal ...
No thanks. I trust BIS more than I trust punkbuster.
Nope.
Punkbuster is a broken concept.
You can't verify anything on a computer owned by the cheater. Things have to be server side only.
It's not that easy to stop the cheaters. Right now it's so easy to cheat in OFP that only real losers bother to do it.
When it's harder to cheat more talented people will make cheats.
Nope.
Punkbuster is a broken concept.
You can't verify anything on a computer owned by the cheater. Things have to be server side only.
It's not that easy to stop the cheaters. Right now it's so easy to cheat in OFP that only real losers bother to do it.
When it's harder to cheat more talented people will make cheats.
I fail to see how You going to check DX crack server side ?
How You going to discover player is using cheat allowing him see people with neon textures or see thru buildings ....
server side? ... sure that's possible for stuff You can verify and control server side ... but not in this case ...
What about the people who are harware banned for reasons of there own and changed the mines about what they did long ago in another game... and now are totaly clean of there actions http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif they would not be able to play MP.. [Not reffering to me]
I persoanly hate punkbuster.. i get kicked from games for having my game contrast to bright and so on.. its stupid http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
Im sure BI have there new games based a new in dev anti-cheat system or something simler maybe.. which will be just as good hopefully
What about the people who are harware banned for reasons of there own and changed the mines about what they did long ago in another game... and now are totaly clean of there actions http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif they would not be able to play MP.. [Not reffering to me]
I persoanly hate punkbuster.. i get kicked from games for having my game contrast to bright and so on.. its stupid http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
Im sure BI have there new games based a new in dev anti-cheat system or something simler maybe.. which will be just as good hopefully
Hardware bans are ONLY for these who cracking PB and directly altered PB software operations and are in violation of PB EULA ...
And even GUID or HWUID banned they STILL can play ...
at servers without PB ...
it's optionable !
P.S. what have contrast / brightness kick to do with PunkBuster that's ADMIN made and added CHECK ! Not PB default !
Nope.
Punkbuster is a broken concept.
You can't verify anything on a computer owned by the cheater. Things have to be server side only.
It's not that easy to stop the cheaters. Right now it's so easy to cheat in OFP that only real losers bother to do it.
When it's harder to cheat more talented people will make cheats.
I fail to see how You going to check DX crack server side ?
How You going to discover player is using cheat allowing him see people with neon textures or see thru buildings ....
server side? ... sure that's possible for stuff You can verify and control server side ... but not in this case ...
A player who can't see another player should not have information about where that player is.
Nope.
Punkbuster is a broken concept.
You can't verify anything on a computer owned by the cheater. Things have to be server side only.
It's not that easy to stop the cheaters. Right now it's so easy to cheat in OFP that only real losers bother to do it.
When it's harder to cheat more talented people will make cheats.
I fail to see how You going to check DX crack server side ?
How You going to discover player is using cheat allowing him see people with neon textures or see thru buildings ....
server side? ... sure that's possible for stuff You can verify and control server side ... but not in this case ...
A player who can't see another player should not have information about where that player is.
You still need provide that informatiosn if he fires , moves and generate sound of visual effects to that client too ...
yes u can kill many things server side but not all ...
DBR_ONIX
Sep 6 2005, 19:08
How about another theoretical game, I will make something like DXDLL or Fwatch for Armed Assault... How is Punkbuster able to know if it is a cheat or not?
Correct answer is, it doesn't. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
So, why increase the price of ArmA by including it? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
I still think the "Hey, that game uses PB, I can't cheat PB, I'll buy that cause I can cheat even on PB-protected servers, which I learnt form [somegame]" is an important point..
About the hardware ID ban, isn't there programs about to fake that?
I think FADE works well, it's not a punch-in-the-face you-can't-play-this, but rather a slow, subliminal game-stopping-working. (Yeh their not the same thing, but it's the general idea that I like http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif)
- Ben
Acecombat
Sep 6 2005, 19:18
I agree with kegs we dont need Punkbuster its already compromised by many people and their knowledge already of the program will make it easy to break it , much better to have a unique custom made for OFP anticheat thingy inside it.
[Offtopic]
I for one hope we dont need Dxdll for AA otherwise what would be the differences between it and OFP http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
PB itself wasn't compromised in any critical sense ...
... what was compromised are these game engines (read fault of developers of these games)
anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ?
correct answer ... You have no chance ...
So you mean to say PB is useless if the games engine has a fault? The why do we have PB http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif .
Oh and if you cheated in directx and made yourself invisible or something , i'll have you kicked asap nothing a good IP ban cant fix, cheat that http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif .
I agree with kegs we dont need Punkbuster its already compromised by many people and their knowledge already of the program will make it easy to break it , much better to have a unique custom made for OFP anticheat thingy inside it.
[Offtopic]
I for one hope we dont need Dxdll for AA otherwise what would be the differences between it and OFP http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
PB itself wasn't compromised in any critical sense ...
... what was compromised are these game engines (read fault of developers of these games)
anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ?
correct answer ... You have no chance ...
So you mean to say PB is useless if the games engine has a fault? The why do we have PB http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif .
Oh and if you cheated in directx and made yourself invisible or something , i'll have you kicked asap nothing a good IP ban cant fix, cheat that http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif .
if the fault affects PB functionality then usually You need first developers of engine to fix the problem before You can do anything about from PB side of problem right ?
or what are You trying to say?
also who there said anything about making self invisible ... that's not possible if server is correctly programmed and engine rendering and maps are ok ...
IP ban? hmm ever heard about dynamic IPs?
first, pb its not our decision! second, pb its optional for each server(on/off)! third, its not so fool as many would believe(the most probs are game producer errors like open gates and a lot of unprofesionalism)! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif i voted for pb!
Acecombat
Sep 6 2005, 19:28
I agree with kegs we dont need Punkbuster its already compromised by many people and their knowledge already of the program will make it easy to break it , much better to have a unique custom made for OFP anticheat thingy inside it.
[Offtopic]
I for one hope we dont need Dxdll for AA otherwise what would be the differences between it and OFP http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
PB itself wasn't compromised in any critical sense ...
... what was compromised are these game engines (read fault of developers of these games)
anyway what about theoretical game , i will crack my DirectX and cheat ... how You going to find me or stop me in OFP/OFPR ?
correct answer ... You have no chance ...
So you mean to say PB is useless if the games engine has a fault? The why do we have PB http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif .
Oh and if you cheated in directx and made yourself invisible or something , i'll have you kicked asap nothing a good IP ban cant fix, cheat that http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif .
if the fault affects PB functionality then usually You need first developers of engine to fix the problem before You can do anything about from PB side of problem right ?
or what are You trying to say?
also who there said anything about making self invisible ... that's not possible if server is correctly programmed and engine rendering and maps are ok ...
IP ban? hmm ever heard about dynamic IPs?
I understand if the games engine has a problem but its not that easy to cheat through there unless PB does its job. How do you cheat via a game engines? Change files , edit things? I am no expert but thats the way i think it will happen , so isnt it PB's job to verify that everyone has the same version of everything and therefore no one is able to cheat?
As for the invisible thing well you mentioned directx and its used in graphical stuff and u mentioned how you going to find so i thought u were saying invisible http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif , my bad for mis reading it.
And i believe theres a thing called IP rangeban , ive seen it in action on forums where yuou can ban a persons full IP range which i believe means that his whole ISP's IP is banned. I've seen a few people suffer from it and they could log in no matter what from the same ISP after being banned that way.
Montignac Mayor
Sep 6 2005, 19:44
I voted no
I dont want punkbuster in arma (i saw ppl cheating in punkbuster enabled games), besides punkbuster continues giving problems to many players
i prefer a really good coded id system (thats the way they have taken i think) so dont need to ban ip or ip ranges just ban a id so no others players get banned just for using the same isp of a stupid cheater kid
I don't mind if PB comes with the game or not, because I will continue playing in my private server with a few friendly and trusted clans (and pb disabled, don't want false pb kicks). and I wanna say that everybody will have a chance to play in my server until you make your first cheat. I'm sure there will be a system to ban arma Id's instead of Ip's or nicks.
Anyway... we only play coops, if you wanna cheat in a coop mission, I'm sure the cheater will get really bored, no adrenaline because he/she is invencible or whatever.... poor cheater, he will miss the best of the ofp.. sorry ArmA.
Flaber
xnodunitx
Sep 6 2005, 23:16
I vote no because many ofp community members use addons which would no doubt be seen as mods in PB's eyes thus not letting that work.
bigsouth1981
Sep 7 2005, 00:07
I vote "HELL NO"
My reasons for this are very similar to the great point Kegetys made earlier in this thread about how more people will set out to crack PB if its implemented. I have never played OFP in multiplayer ( I know.......I deserve a thrashing!http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif despite it being my favourite game of all time, although someone mentioned earlier how thay have only ever seen one or two cheats playing online. I think this is due to the fact that due to its realism, thus slower pace, OFP doesnt appeal to the majority of the "Bunnyhopping Counterstrike" dicks, who exploit the games they play in the first place. Americas Army is riddled with cheating bastards, IMO its possibly the most frustrating game ever made (on par with counterstrike). This will never happen to OFP. You only have to come on this forum for an example of the kind of smart, intelligent, friendly, mature and COOL friends and foes you will be playing against. Roll on Armed Assault.
Just one more thing, I was trying to convey to a collegue ( another Soldier of course) just how groundbreaking OFP was (and still is to a certain degree). I used to sit for hours just fucking around on the editor, practising bombing runs on groups of motionless civillians,........er..nice. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Andy http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif
xnodunitx
Sep 7 2005, 00:59
Heh yeah,no 8 year old immature kids here,I remember playing bf2 once and there was one person on my team shooting me and calling me a newbie,I don't know why,so afterwards the server switched me over,it was 25 US vs 18 MEC,well he called me a p*ssy for bailing out of a plane later in the game but got really pisssed when I stole his teams AH-1Z and killed em all.
Even funnier was one time that I threw a grenade under the crack of the "hangar" where they store the F-15,it killed him and another guy and he got pissed,saying I resorted to spawn killing,for 1 you never spawn in the hanger,2 it was at the rear and 3 they had been walkin around for 5 minutes,yeah thats some real spawn killing,I swear bf2 is just sometimes great for laughs,especially since that kid was typing in all caps the whole time. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
No thanks.... Just leave the "Voteable Admin". This has helped more than any anti-cheating tool.
since Kegetys said no I will say it also http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
shinRaiden
Sep 7 2005, 05:16
A hypothetical...
what if - and Vista will require this as an intregral part of DRM - games are set to use PVP-OPM... they'd be able to see if you're a high-gamma cheater on night missions by pulling your monitor settings...
A hypothetical...
what if - and Vista will require this as an intregral part of DRM - games are set to use PVP-OPM... they'd be able to see if you're a high-gamma cheater on night missions by pulling your monitor settings...
that'd be great.
For sure cheaters can totally ruin mp missions... I've seen it many times and the lesson was; choose the server wisely and maybe play only coop missions. So, servers where obvious cheaters are allowed to play will not see me there anymore. My last serious attempts at playing OFP online were in Spring and every attempt was stopped by a cheater (obviously wrong server choices) so I decided to give online playing a rest...
Getting multiple tanks spawned in front of your eyes, or getting thick fog just when you are aiming at an incoming enemy tank with your RPG launcher aren't the kind of things I am looking for from multiplayer gaming.
But.
What comes to how Armed Assault / Game2 will detect cheaters: I really hope it is not a system which kills innovative modifications like DXDLL or fwatch. The game developers of Bohemia Interactive Studio are also learning from the mods made by the community. Seeing what the community does to the games they developed will help them to get ideas of what the community wants to see in their games, no? DXDLL and fwatch are good examples. But time will show what we'll be facing in the future. Maybe we don't need any mods because the games will be so good right from the release, no?
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
That's a no vote for PunkBuster. The anti-cheat methods BIS will implement will be at least as good as any Buster. Because it's only a matter of time when someone breaks it, no matter if it's a Buster or Bohemia Interactive Studio's own Busta-system.
Madus_Maximus
Sep 7 2005, 10:40
PunkBuster sucks. (I voted no btw if you can't guess) I cant stand PB, I get kicked if I don't manually update it once a day in games that use it. I even got kicked off my OWN server once on Raven Shield! It also detects gamma settings and kicks you if it's too high like someone else said.
Anyway, if it detects modified dx files then howcome it doesn't kick all BF2 players who play different games? EA released modified dx files with BF2 as a quick lazy way (by that I mean rather than FIXING the game itself) to get a little extra performance, which in turn screwed up some other games. Since installing BF2 and the drivers you HAVE to install (unless you have the newer ones that came out since release... which fixed things! YEY) some games simply don't work.
Homeworld 2 wouldn't work for me with these damn files! It seems PB allowed these "modified" files because EA paid them to, but generally it hates anything thats modified and isn't the same as the servers copy.
Also as Keg said, the more games that use it the more people will try and hack it, and as it's a common code for all games and the same or similar system, if one is hacked then it's a matter of time before they're ALL hacked.
TrIn@dOr
Sep 7 2005, 11:47
A game without any anti-cheat software, is like playing against a bad code game!!
A game without any anti-cheat software, is like playing against a bad code game!!
That isnt what this poll is about..
It's about choosing for PB, or BIS developing it's own (GTA:SA style) Busta..lol
Thunderbird
Sep 7 2005, 13:03
Definately no , not for cheating or something but it will make harder making changes in the cpp and other files and to use them online.
in any way , I think it's too late , I'm pretty sure ArmA is finished http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Regards
Thunderbird84
I voted no, don't get me wrong , but I see no reason why BIS should spend their money on PB. I've been playing OFP online for 2.5 years now (at least 3 times a week) and I have never ever seen one cheater, why is that? Because I dont play with random people.Whoever I play with I immediatly try to get to know and thats the best counter-measure against cheating. I have to agree with the others,you can put in as many anti-cheat measures as you like ,if you continue to play with immature people in a anonymous atmosphere and you play fast-paced and imo mindless missions (hexenkessel and the likes) you will always meet cheaters. What BIS should rather do is to make sure that there are as few as possible features in ArmA that allow for competitive behaviour (Stats and that kind of stuff). And for all the league-gamers I just can say,make missions where the single person is totally irrelevant (large-scale missions).Instead of using a lot of money to prevent cheating,why not create communities where cheating is not a question at all.Might sound a bit naive,but that is how I see it
Note: Many players that post on this forum don't or have never played in leagues.
Cheaters cheat so they can win (leagues.) That's is why you probably have seen only a few. In the 4 years i've played this game now, I think in at least 200 games (as in: maps / round) i've seen a cheater, and im not kidding..
imported_bör
Sep 7 2005, 14:16
I've seen a cheater once. I played CTI with 2 friends in an Abrams, when suddenly a Hind showed up. Comm gave waypoints, driver drove like mad and I put thousands of bullets in the heli - the heli pilot obviously didn't really know how to fly, he never hit us. That wouldn't mean anything, tank MG is not the most accurate weapon, but then I hit the heli with 2 sabots... he stayed alive. Then we died because the driver to stuck on some house and the heli finally hit us.
But apart from that I've never seen a cheater.
Definately no , not for cheating or something but it will make harder making changes in the cpp and other files and to use them online.
in any way , I think it's too late , I'm pretty sure ArmA is finished http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Regards
Thunderbird84
There is never late to implement solution like PB ...
i.e. Far Cry , Doom 3 etc ... they implemented PB long time after release when it was clear that "default" engine protection failed
gandalf the white
Sep 7 2005, 15:15
I've seen a cheater too, in a coop. He turned himself invisible and we all used him as a living shield http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif .
DBR_ONIX
Sep 7 2005, 16:49
Heh yeah,no 8 year old immature kids here,I remember playing bf2 once and there was one person on my team shooting me and calling me a newbie,I don't know why,so afterwards the server switched me over,it was 25 US vs 18 MEC,well he called me a p*ssy for bailing out of a plane later in the game but got really pisssed when I stole his teams AH-1Z and killed em all.
Even funnier was one time that I threw a grenade under the crack of the "hangar" where they store the F-15,it killed him and another guy and he got pissed,saying I resorted to spawn killing,for 1 you never spawn in the hanger,2 it was at the rear and 3 they had been walkin around for 5 minutes,yeah thats some real spawn killing,I swear bf2 is just sometimes great for laughs,especially since that kid was typing in all caps the whole time. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
"Do You want PunkBuster in Armed Assault?" - not "How much BF2 sucks" http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
Quote[/b] ]Oh and if you cheated in directx and made yourself invisible or something , i'll have you kicked asap nothing a good IP ban cant fix, cheat that http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif .
Nothing IP spoofing/proxy can't get around http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
Anyway, one last time, as people are going into parrot mode : If PB is incorporated, people will 1) take it as a challange to break, 2) use the same exploit for other PB-enabled games (AA/BF2 etc) for OFP, 3) Think "I can cheat AA: O when PB is running, I'll try it out in this game too"
Slightly of-topic thing, but anyway : what anti-cheat thing does Valve/CS:S use?
- Ben
VALVe uses VAC2 (an internal solution).
It's far less effective than PunkBuster, and has been cracked/bypassed numerous times.
You can't really compare America's Army with this (or any other) game.
It has such a big cheat problem because people can make infinite accounts,
without loss of money (seeing how accounts are free).
In America's Army, all you have to do is create a new account, which will give you
a new GUID, thus bypassing your ban (excluding hardware bans, of course).
I (obviously) voted Yes.
Espectro
Sep 7 2005, 20:14
Punkbuster has been breaked alot of times, but has been updated each time, opposit of some other anti cheat messures... Trueth is, when AA is done, BIS will have its focus on game 2, and will therefor not be able to (Even if they wanted to), support arma with anticheat programs, the way that an external program such as PB can.
So I voted YES.
Also, for the ones afraid it would kick in against addons etc. PB will only check files that you and the server use. Of course wont it allow you to play with a different version of an island or sounds than the server. But all addons/mods that are being played on a server, will be perfectly legal.
i personally think that AA needs a anti cheat software added to it rather have to go on a server that has a filechecker running and still someone spoils the game via cheating.
i play BF2 and PB seems to be doing its job in that game all u see in the game at moment is stat paddlers (exploiters of the game) that arent really cheating just exploiting a bug so PB wont kick them.
whatever happens and whether BIS adds PB or anything else to the game as a anti cheat, cheaters are not going to stop trying to think of ways around it
I dont see the need for PB, what Flashpoint has at the moment seems to be doing it's job as i have never seen a cheat in Flashpoint. I only play coops mind you which i guess isn't the sort of game type people cheat in, so maybe it is more of a problem then i think. Personally though, i dont think there's any need in adding PB, as it's bound to be broken, and if you dont update it to the version a server is running then it may mean you will get kicked and have to go and download the new version, so i dont think it will be worth it. AA is bound to have cheats in it, but i think after a few months of it's release they will all go back to Counter Strike, with PB implemented in AA or not.
benreeper
Sep 8 2005, 03:45
I'm with Kegs, because he is Kegs.
Seriously, I vote no because OFP is a different game from those others.
Firstly because the game has AI in it and most others don't. People who play those other games HATE when their games have AI in them because beating AI gives you no props. They want to beat YOU and brag about it.
Secondly, Flashpoint games are huge and I don't want the performance hit. I'd rather play large games with friends rather than small games with cheaters.
--Ben
Cpt Viper
Sep 9 2005, 15:03
I voted No.
I've been playing OFP for 2 years and 2 months now, and never, ever saw a cheater.
Basicly, because i only play with my friends, and i know them, they don't cheat. As someone else said earlier, that's the countermeasure against cheating.
Like other people say aswell, updating PB etc, will only make ArmA more annoying when playing online, and getting kicked for something you didn't do...
So, a big, fat, NO
- Viper
xnodunitx
Sep 9 2005, 17:21
might be hearing a few
"omg he killed me in 1-3 shots! cheater!!" heh...
Berghoff
Sep 9 2005, 18:12
I can't say I have played many games with PB but I used to play Americas Army and only had one problem with PB, so I guess its better for ArmA to have its own anti-cheat system.
I voted No to PB in ARAS and NGPCG.. as has been said it would just encourage more cheaters.. I started playing OFP when I was twelve.. If PB had not allowed me to play OFP online (because back then I didn't have admin account) then I probably would have stopped playing a long time ago... Imagine if OFP ran PB, but some servers didn't run it because they didn't like it...Now I've played on both PB and non-PB servers in different games, and players on non-pb servers are generally paranoid all the time.. thats not something I've ever want to see in ARAS or NGPCG..
I certainly hope BIS is doing something to help prevent cheating in their NGPCG.. but it will probably ultimately be up to the players to squash cheating.
Punkbuster has been breaked alot of times, but has been updated each time, opposit of some other anti cheat messures... Trueth is, when AA is done, BIS will have its focus on game 2, and will therefor not be able to (Even if they wanted to), support arma with anticheat programs, the way that an external program such as PB can.
So I voted YES.
Also, for the ones afraid it would kick in against addons etc. PB will only check files that you and the server use. Of course wont it allow you to play with a different version of an island or sounds than the server. But all addons/mods that are being played on a server, will be perfectly legal.
Thats really the main problem that PB would cause in OFP,
you see, there are just too many ppl using mods and addons which acturaly changes the files in the game, a simple model replacement would not be allowed, not to talk about what happen on mods like ECP.
so in the end you have got a not-so-effective anticheat system, and it killes almost all the freedom the game have http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
xnodunitx
Sep 10 2005, 08:31
Yep,currently on OFP online you have people running around with Y2K3,FFUR,ECP,and original flashpoint,similar but not the same and I'm sure PB would have a field day with this.
deanosbeano
Sep 10 2005, 09:00
personally i would not like to see it added, simply because of the hassle i have had with it in the past.the servers i play ofp on are co op and to cheat in there is simply ,beyond all reason and we all know how to see who is doing it anyway, with teamspaeak and kegs spectator script ,i think we already got a good way to monitor it. of course in public servers with 24 rambos and no teamspeak it maybe different http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif.
.kju [PvPscene]
Sep 10 2005, 09:21
well in my view there is a lot of invalid arguments floating around ..
still i think a BIS solution would be better for several reasons (some pointed out already) and i think BIS does understand now the importance of cheat protection !
SHWiiNG
Sep 10 2005, 12:17
WHAT .. who doesnt want punkbuster.... imean i always read threads on these forums.. about people complaining about cheaters... i i know how annoying it is when during a game you find out that someone has an unfair advantage.
If PB checks files , how would it check an addon made by the community to see if it was the same version as the server had ?
If it relies upon file sizes , whats to stop me from opening up the .p3d and altering it for my own advantage , but keeping it the same size file and re packing it ?
If this is the case , then perhaps make a packing tool that issues a unique number or code to the addon when originaly packed , and if any alterations are made the number would be different .
DBR_ONIX
Sep 10 2005, 12:40
Thats really the main problem that PB would cause in OFP,
you see, there are just too many ppl using mods and addons which acturaly changes the files in the game, a simple model replacement would not be allowed, not to talk about what happen on mods like ECP.
so in the end you have got a not-so-effective anticheat system, and it killes almost all the freedom the game have http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
No, aslong as the server has the same mod, thus the same files, it will be fine, but that's not the point..
Look how many people hate PB, it has to be for a reason (It kicking/banning them incorectly), people still manage to cheat etc..
Quote[/b] ]
If it relies upon file sizes , whats to stop me from opening up the .p3d and altering it for my own advantage , but keeping it the same size file and re packing it ?
It'll not rely on file-sizes.. Only extreeeeeemmmly old cheat "prevention" does this, chances are it'll use a CRC check of the file. Which are hard to fake..
- Ben
whats a CRC check ? is that a check at a binary level ? 0's and 1's etc ?
checks Google (http://www.mindworkshop.com/alchemy/crc.html)
Thats really the main problem that PB would cause in OFP,
you see, there are just too many ppl using mods and addons which acturaly changes the files in the game, a simple model replacement would not be allowed, not to talk about what happen on mods like ECP.
so in the end you have got a not-so-effective anticheat system, and it killes almost all the freedom the game have http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
No, aslong as the server has the same mod, thus the same files, it will be fine, but that's not the point..
Look how many people hate PB, it has to be for a reason (It kicking/banning them incorectly), people still manage to cheat etc..
dont forgot that you just cant tell every server/player to use or not using ECP and other Client side mod http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
x Flashpoint x
Sep 10 2005, 16:07
Why would anyone want to cheat anyway http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif You only cheat yourself.
I can never tell who's cheating in games anyway, i am too bizzy runing around like a headless chicken http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif
Dwarden
Sep 10 2005, 16:58
Punkbuster has been breaked alot of times, but has been updated each time, opposit of some other anti cheat messures... Trueth is, when AA is done, BIS will have its focus on game 2, and will therefor not be able to (Even if they wanted to), support arma with anticheat programs, the way that an external program such as PB can.
So I voted YES.
Also, for the ones afraid it would kick in against addons etc. PB will only check files that you and the server use. Of course wont it allow you to play with a different version of an island or sounds than the server. But all addons/mods that are being played on a server, will be perfectly legal.
Thats really the main problem that PB would cause in OFP,
you see, there are just too many ppl using mods and addons which acturaly changes the files in the game, a simple model replacement would not be allowed, not to talk about what happen on mods like ECP.
so in the end you have got a not-so-effective anticheat system, and it killes almost all the freedom the game have http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
wrong ... u can configure PB to accept any file change You as admin want to be used for game ... this include also allowing multiple versions of 1 file (e.g. low res, med res, hi res texture or model file etc)
another of typical PB related myths ...
Dwarden
Sep 10 2005, 17:02
If PB checks files , how would it check an addon made by the community to see if it was the same version as the server had ?
If it relies upon file sizes , whats to stop me from opening up the .p3d and altering it for my own advantage , but keeping it the same size file and re packing it ?
If this is the case , then perhaps make a packing tool that issues a unique number or code to the addon when originaly packed , and if any alterations are made the number would be different .
PB using modified MD5 hashes ... not size ... please visit official website before starting another "rumour" ...
xnodunitx
Sep 10 2005, 17:57
What if its an OFP enthusiast with alot more addons than on the server,would PB kick or ban them simply because of that?
Espectro
Sep 10 2005, 18:03
No, but it would kick him, if he used an altered version of a specifik addon. That is different from what the server is using
Big Ofp Fan
Sep 11 2005, 04:07
no PunkBuster is not an "Must Have" for ARMA. PunkBuster is slow down the connection. But, i must say this, I've used PB only in a LAN an there was a great stuttering of conection if it is enabled. Over Internet I can't nothing say about it, I never play online with a 56k http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif .
I've been playing Quake 3 for years. The last patch (Oct 2003) included Punkbuster. So what happened? Well a hell of a lot less cheaters for a start! I used to see two per week, and since then I've seen about four total. It stopped nearly all cheating.
There have been a few problems everynow and then, with people getting kicked from servers etc. Maybe once a month someone I know will get any error. But it's a very small price to pay compared to games being constantly ruined by bots/hacks (and there were a LOT of hacks for Quake).
Some servers I play on have PB switched on, others have it switched off. There is NO difference in ping. However having either the client or server end with PB switched on but poorly configured can add a lag spike everynow and then. For LAN I just switch it off...because if someone is hacking you can just go smack them http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
The biggest problem people have had is updating. PB have a little program called PBweb, which (for me and most people) has always worked very well).
The arguement that having PB will cause more people to try and hack it is totally false. Less people will try because it is harder. Never underestimate how lazy people are http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif Why bother hacking PB, when you can just hack another game with less protection?
DBR_ONIX
Sep 11 2005, 13:16
Why bother hacking PB, when you can just hack another game with less protection?
Simple. Because it's a challange http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
- Ben
Dwarden
Sep 11 2005, 14:35
Why bother hacking PB, when you can just hack another game with less protection?
Simple. Because it's a challange http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
- Ben
Yah and as reward they receive nice HW ban thru all PB supported games http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif) must be definitely encouraging http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Why bother hacking PB, when you can just hack another game with less protection?
Simple. Because it's a challange http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
- Ben
Yah and as reward they receive nice HW ban thru all PB supported games http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif) must be definitely encouraging http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
real-deal hackers thinks that differently most of the time
the more challange and more chance the get caught, the more encourage they get, not to be notice, not to be found, hacking PB is surely not a thing a real-deal hackers would do as they seek for a much more challanging thing to do, but also sure as hell lots of heckers would like to crack PB b4 becoming a real-deal one
(yeah maybe you get HW ban but who cares? you have already cracked it b4 it get you, and for those sorry a$$ who just use their works....well they are "sorry a$$" as i called) http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
p.s.no i am not a hacker but its just kind of easy in fact to understand how they think
Dwarden
Sep 12 2005, 06:07
Why bother hacking PB, when you can just hack another game with less protection?
Simple. Because it's a challange http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
- Ben
Yah and as reward they receive nice HW ban thru all PB supported games http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif) must be definitely encouraging http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
real-deal hackers thinks that differently most of the time
the more challange and more chance the get caught, the more encourage they get, not to be notice, not to be found, hacking PB is surely not a thing a real-deal hackers would do as they seek for a much more challanging thing to do, but also sure as hell lots of heckers would like to crack PB b4 becoming a real-deal one
(yeah maybe you get HW ban but who cares? you have already cracked it b4 it get you, and for those sorry a$$ who just use their works....well they are "sorry a$$" as i called) http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
p.s.no i am not a hacker but its just kind of easy in fact to understand how they think
still that does mean they need use new CD keys => more cash for publisher / developers at least ...
as the old ones are banned
PrivateNoob
Sep 12 2005, 16:31
Americas Army is riddled with cheating bastards, IMO its possibly the most frustrating game ever made
Well consider AA to be a free game, its no wonder there are alot of cheaters there. They only have to download it. Second, its a fast action game that attracts this kinds of FPS cheat-players. Third; I think there are hackers/cheaters that just wanna mess with the game because its made by the US army. This is just what I think, I have no proof! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/nener.gif But Im not sure PB would be a good or a bad thing for Aras. Some kind of anti-cheat it gotta have anyway, Im sure BIS have thought of this already.
Espectro
Sep 12 2005, 17:04
I also hope that you have to register your cd-key to play online
DBR_ONIX
Sep 12 2005, 19:19
I also hope that you have to register your cd-key to play online
Nhoo!
HL2 had this, and the ammount of people that complained about it... Bad idea..
If you start totaly locking down the game, more and more people will try and hack it..
As for people saying about hardware ID bans, again, these have been defeated, and are easily obtainable if you look about..
Incorprate a retenia block in the game, people'll get their eyes changed.... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
I think the best way to get fewer cheaters is not hype the games.. Acctualy, the best way is not to release it, but don't do that http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
Anyway, 100 vs 55 in favour of no PB.. I think it's kinda conclusive? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
- Ben
StealthTiger
Sep 12 2005, 23:50
Anyway, 100 vs 55 in favour of no PB.. I think it's kinda conclusive? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
- Ben
In as far as those that voted.. I'm sure there are more members than have voted.
A quick search indicates that there are around 32,500 past and present members registered on the Bis forum http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wow_o.gif
DBR_ONIX
Sep 13 2005, 20:51
Yeh, but many of them will be inactive, and several thousand have never posted etc http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
But the general impression from everyone I've talked to/read something writen by etc someone who's "been involved" with PB, hasn't liked it.. Mainly cause if people don't mind it, they dont speak about it.. But theres an awful lot of people that have minded it http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
- Ben
Stealth3
Sep 13 2005, 22:00
It will interfer with mods.
Dwarden
Sep 14 2005, 01:46
It will interfer with mods.
... explain ... enlight us ... how http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif)
Stealth3
Sep 14 2005, 02:38
Well It does interfer with a lod of mods in COD, and it happened with BF too.
Although it will have its good sides too since obviously there will be cheaters in ArmA or OFP2. There are little in OFP because its not a JIP game. There is always an admin to get rid of cheaters. But it will be different with ArmA.
Since OFP addon folder is often a melting pot of addons, all mixed up, Im not sure how Punkbuster will handle it. And we don't know if it won't be the same for ArmA. Plus if cheaters are really a huge problem, BIS can always implement Punkbuster with a patch.
Moving Target
Sep 14 2005, 19:35
if PB is incorporated 90% of servers wont use it i bet. It has too bad a reputation.
Nothing better than the good old #kick/#ban
Dwarden
Sep 15 2005, 02:11
if PB is incorporated 90% of servers wont use it i bet. It has too bad a reputation.
Nothing better than the good old #kick/#ban
well ... i doubt about this ... any solid server hosting company knows (or should http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif) how use PB ...
and PB will allow any mod to run if it's "configurable" for file hashes ...
of course D3D hooks or tricks like actual OFPR dx dll will fail ...
but hey it's so easy disable PB http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Zombie_Mod
Sep 18 2005, 09:35
Well It does interfer with a lod of mods in COD, and it happened with BF too.
Although it will have its good sides too since obviously there will be cheaters in ArmA or OFP2. There are little in OFP because its not a JIP game. There is always an admin to get rid of cheaters. But it will be different with ArmA.
Since OFP addon folder is often a melting pot of addons, all mixed up, Im not sure how Punkbuster will handle it. And we don't know if it won't be the same for ArmA. Plus if cheaters are really a huge problem, BIS can always implement Punkbuster with a patch.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif
Now that is the funniest comment I've heard in a while.
Very little cheaters in OFP???
You should try the All-seeing-eye servers mate, there's 100s of cheaters there.
Older players like myself, who appreciate a good game of Hexenkessel CTF or TNT St Pierre CTF and are prepared to wait for the player lobby to fill, can't enjoy the game as some 13 year old takes umbrage by being shot too much and then deploys a cheat.
End result: random suspects get kicked off, maybe banned from servers for no reason (ie: me)
Anything that helps gets rid of the cheating arseholes is worth it in my opinion.
Not all of us want to join a clan you know, on our own wee private server...
-Bilko-
Sep 18 2005, 17:35
Aye, PunkBuster would probably be a good idea, but that program spoiled BattleField 2 for me, at the start of every round I got intense lag for around 5 mins while PB scanned my HDD.
I think they should just make the core files uneditable, so that only mods can be used to cheat, that would make them easier to detect, maybe the game could scan each mod you install to ensure there's no malicious code?
gandalf the white
Sep 18 2005, 18:14
maybe the game could scan each mod you install to ensure there's no malicious code?
Machines cannot think creatively like the modmakers can... the way Liberation 1945 mod did their configs... I dont think it would pass trough Punkbuster's defences.
However, the current problem with tanks ( T34 beating the crap out of a M1) might be solved that way though... "equal values, or no values at all" http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif
DBR_ONIX
Sep 18 2005, 22:05
I think they should just make the core files uneditable, so that only mods can be used to cheat, that would make them easier to detect, maybe the game could scan each mod you install to ensure there's no malicious code?
Thats very hard to do, and would need constant updating/research.. Just like virus scanners... I don't think so http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
If that happened, you'd get more cheats, as people would need to make new ones to get around the anti-cheat scanner thing..
Besides, it's more touble than it's worth..
Checking the hash of the files being used, and comparing them to the server (By being used, I mean ANY pbo that is being used, or any script etc). Surely that would stop any cheating, short of DX hooks etc.. As the PBO with cheat scripts would be compared to the servers version, which isn't there..
Because it's being used (not just it's there. If that were to happen, you'd get missing file on server messages for all addons/mods.. yuk), it must be something bad (I can't think of a reason a client would use a PBO that the server doesn't.. Only if it's running a script from it.. hmm)
Probobaly an awfull idea, inwhich case, the above text you just read, does not exists, and you never read it.. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
- Ben
Azzurith
Sep 19 2005, 18:55
I have been kicked from lots of games for no reason. Most to do by the game itself. The only way to stop cheating is to play on a Lan with people that you know won't cheat. Any other way is like visiting Vagus. Take your chances! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
Acecombat
Sep 20 2005, 08:14
Quake 4 to use Punkbuster (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/09/19/news_6133895.html)
One more to PB's list.
Last night i was playing AA on an OFFICIAL server when someone who was cheating quiet blatantly sniping 2-3 people at once in different places http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif , HACKED the server somehow when people decided to vote kick him out he hanged the whole server and everyone had to disconnect as the game was totally stuck. I hate this kind of losers.
And the official army server was running PB updated http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif .
blackjack[VS]
Sep 20 2005, 15:35
i dont play other games then ofp lately (last 3years... ), so i'm really out of loop with anticheats measures. from all the opinions here i could state that PB is not very efficient, and the worst part is the fact of causing errors/kicks when ur loading other addons/packs.
when i look to ofp and remember the endless,but gladly "peacfull", error messages caused by diferent addons use by diferent players in the same server, i just cant acept new extra problems to solve caused by a anticheat aplication.. big fat NO to that! i dont wana be kicked just cause i'm using addon xpto...
like someone said , the old kick/ban classic will probably do the job well... (it did for ofp didnt it? )
i play coop on a private server, so i'm glad that i dont have to deal with cheating faguets... sometimes we open the server to gamespy and at the 3rd day we cant just have more patient to the dam kids that tk and then quit... id ban solved our problem. at least they need a new ofp copy to play there.
thr last time we opened the server, we add 2 new decent players to the guest list, so it wasnt bad at all...
i would sugest bis to follow ofp tactic...something like:
1-release the 2nd best game from all times soon (1st ofp http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/inlove.gif)
2- release a 1st version full of glitches and errors
3-patch it 3 months later and solve 50% of problems
4-release final patch that fixes the game "enough"
this way ,maybe 50% of the cheating FPS players will let us alone, and the other 50% would be fairly treated by "us". the true bis target players. the players that get worried to improve and not destroy a game.
sory if went out of topic a bit...but this (nice) thread made me lost focus on the new game major concerns, like game engine, scripting, addon making, sound, fun!
i really just hope that we dont get invaded by those cheaters... but its better to get rdy, and ask bis to protect us the best way they can.
and off course, after kegetys "no" , my poll lost the "yes" button. looks like my mozilla recognized his signature and went nuts!! ) j/k
EvEnLeaSe44
Sep 22 2005, 12:13
punkbuster means no addons and mods correct?
Murmur2k
Sep 22 2005, 12:18
Punkbuster slows everything down if you ask me. I think the OFP community is a bit more mature than most others and most MP games are in a controlled environment such as with a Clan on a private server. If they implement punkbuster then make it optional to use so that environments where trust is exercised punkbuster can't spoil things.
Dwarden
Sep 22 2005, 16:48
punkbuster means no addons and mods correct?
wrong ... You can have addons and mods ... ie see other dozen games using PB for years ...
SpecOp9
Sep 22 2005, 18:31
If it works, then I say sure. But that doesnt mean AA should'nt have it's own anti cheat system.
nah don't add PB, it's worthless, like a condom with the tip cut off serves no purpose what so ever, it might stop some cheats but it can't keep up.
Quake 4 to use Punkbuster (http://www.gamespot.com/news/2005/09/19/news_6133895.html)
One more to PB's list.
Last night i was playing AA on an OFFICIAL server when someone who was cheating quiet blatantly sniping 2-3 people at once in different places http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif , HACKED the server somehow when people decided to vote kick him out he hanged the whole server and everyone had to disconnect as the game was totally stuck. I hate this kind of losers.
And the official army server was running PB updated http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif .
Since Quake3 uses it, this was a no-brainer. If you've seen any of the shakey-cam footage of Quake4 from QCON then you may have noticed they had PB switched off there http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
shinRaiden
Sep 25 2005, 05:59
How would you implement an anti-cheat system in the OFP environment? There is lots of discussion about server-side management, with requests for more PB-like integration, but is that really the full answer?
OFP is such a modder's game with the ability to run raw dynamic content, that it lends itself readily to advanced hacking methods, which often are similar in logic if not functionality to development steps.
The biggest problem I see is to develop content you'd need to disable some or all of the anti-cheat measures to avoid being PB'd. Frankly, the only way you could play MP then would be to have a very strict clean install, with a few premier mods that are relatively stable. The majority of the mods being chaotic or anarchistic in release management would seriously impact the functionality of a PB-style anti-cheat system.
On the other hand, perhaps implementing it would force the community to manage their addons at a higher quality level.
I doubt though that BIS would license an external system like this though, they seem to prefer to develop as much as possible in house, even when there's modules on the market already.
Overzealous anti-cheat systems that slows down the game and get you permbanned for having mods/custom hacks/weird display drivers while doing worth shit preventing actual cheating? No thanks.
The only anti-cheat solution is to stick to servers you are familiar with and stop playing with random 12-year-olds.
Dwarden
Sep 25 2005, 17:53
Since Quake3 uses it, this was a no-brainer. If you've seen any of the shakey-cam footage of Quake4 from QCON then you may have noticed they had PB switched off there http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
sure ... they will have switched on something what is not yet finished ... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif) ...
that's like await that car prototype on trade show is 100% functional ...
and Q4 is just one many upcoming ...
How would you implement an anti-cheat system in the OFP environment? There is lots of discussion about server-side management, with requests for more PB-like integration, but is that really the full answer?
OFP is such a modder's game with the ability to run raw dynamic content, that it lends itself readily to advanced hacking methods, which often are similar in logic if not functionality to development steps.
The biggest problem I see is to develop content you'd need to disable some or all of the anti-cheat measures to avoid being PB'd. Frankly, the only way you could play MP then would be to have a very strict clean install, with a few premier mods that are relatively stable. The majority of the mods being chaotic or anarchistic in release management would seriously impact the functionality of a PB-style anti-cheat system.
On the other hand, perhaps implementing it would force the community to manage their addons at a higher quality level.
I doubt though that BIS would license an external system like this though, they seem to prefer to develop as much as possible in house, even when there's modules on the market already.
thats kind of sure, as unlike many other games other which made profit the first place, BIS is more likely to work on its own dream, and that force them to work most of the thing inhouse, just to fit their dream
PB is wholly useless.
In CS it was ineffective; the only cheats it detected were week old noobs who thought downloading year old hacks would fool everyone into thinking they had pro skillz.
In AA it was illustrative; not only did it completely fail to stop any cheating, but it became the major route for exploits, allowing servers to be crashed, players to be kicked, text flooding and so on. In something like 6 months, a single update was released that only managed to stop the exploits allowing people to mass-kick.
In Q3A it was the same. It was a hassle for legitimate players and did nothing to stop cheats.
I can't think of any others, but why would BIS possibly want attach that fucking useless bit of software to AA.
Madus_Maximus
Sep 26 2005, 11:32
The OFP game style is one of those things that really makes most cheats useless anyway, and very easy to detect by the other players on the server. e.g. if someone won't die from say 4 shots and has no sign of blood then you know something is amis, or if they never seem to reload, or have things that you know aren't in the mission like a tank. The game itself is an anti-cheat system of sorts because it's not a massively fast paced shoot at whatever moves whilst running around like a moron jumping all over to avoid being hit straifing in a circle crap.
I hope they don't use PB, but use their own. That way it'll be harder to hack because it's less well known. All PB games use the same core coding and it's everywhere. At least if BIS made their own they'd know the code inside out and be able to quickly see what has been exploited and find a fix for it (more work for good old sleep deprived Ondrej... poor sod).
PunkBuster is the cheap lazy way out. Look at who use it, it's mainly the big gaming devs, and we all know most of the big boys are lazy when it comes to content *coughea* so why would they bother making a cheat thing that works themselves when they can use one thats already there and exploited already so they can then say they're making a new addon pack to "fix" it.
Dwarden
Sep 26 2005, 12:30
PB is wholly useless.
In CS it was ineffective; the only cheats it detected were week old noobs who thought downloading year old hacks would fool everyone into thinking they had pro skillz.
In AA it was illustrative; not only did it completely fail to stop any cheating, but it became the major route for exploits, allowing servers to be crashed, players to be kicked, text flooding and so on. In something like 6 months, a single update was released that only managed to stop the exploits allowing people to mass-kick.
In Q3A it was the same. It was a hassle for legitimate players and did nothing to stop cheats.
I can't think of any others, but why would BIS possibly want attach that fucking useless bit of software to AA.
please stop using PunkBuster CS version first ... it's like compare game from 2000 with game from 2006 ...
PB in CS was program w/o any tie or access to game engine code thus limited like hell ...
yet it was still more effective than VAC.
Also PB for CS was not much different than Cheating Death in that times ... do You complain same about CD ? By this style You will need to complain about "any" anticheat software ...
In Americas Army is problem completely different as PB can't stop problems which are coming from mistakes directly in game engine code ...
so if You wanna whine and cry about ... send comments to AA dev team not EBI dev team ...
i suggest You reconsider what are You saying after new AA version release and PB updates to match that version ...
And seriously w/o PB ... AA or Q3 "public" multiplayer will be already turned into unplayable mess (You sure noticed Q3 sourcecode is freely available by ID and as cheat programmer You can find there even more than is known about Unreal Engine 2.5)
and WTH is Your problem anyway ... PUNKBUSTER IS OPTIONABLE ... that mean ADMIN and PLAYER can DISABLE IT!
Including it is "bonus" NOT curse ! ...
Seems like people will whine about anything anytime ...
Dwarden
Sep 26 2005, 12:35
The OFP game style is one of those things that really makes most cheats useless anyway, and very easy to detect by the other players on the server. e.g. if someone won't die from say 4 shots and has no sign of blood then you know something is amis, or if they never seem to reload, or have things that you know aren't in the mission like a tank. The game itself is an anti-cheat system of sorts because it's not a massively fast paced shoot at whatever moves whilst running around like a moron jumping all over to avoid being hit straifing in a circle crap.
I hope they don't use PB, but use their own. That way it'll be harder to hack because it's less well known. All PB games use the same core coding and it's everywhere. At least if BIS made their own they'd know the code inside out and be able to quickly see what has been exploited and find a fix for it (more work for good old sleep deprived Ondrej... poor sod).
PunkBuster is the cheap lazy way out. Look at who use it, it's mainly the big gaming devs, and we all know most of the big boys are lazy when it comes to content *coughea* so why would they bother making a cheat thing that works themselves when they can use one thats already there and exploited already so they can then say they're making a new addon pack to "fix" it.
In game like Armed Assault
which is mainly about ability to cover and aim ...
will be cheats very valued and demanded ...
due to ability then see thru "objects, terrain, vegetation" or radars or aimbots and aiming helpers (ie for hi angle grenade trajectories) ...
trust me if ArmAs is at least as popular as OFP/OFPR then there will be TONs of cheats and any "public" server will be infested ...
and
internal anti-cheat is nice dream ... but will be BIS developers able update it daily or weekly when "cheater release spree" happens ? ...
PB updates on based multiple level system ...
silent backgroudn updates like antivirus software (small definitions) then main definitions and scan modules then program itself (server and client standalone again) ...
olemissrebel
Sep 26 2005, 13:36
It doesnt matter if i want or or hate it, we all know BIS won't use it.
Kam2000
Sep 26 2005, 16:03
I voted yes!!!
I don't care if it's PB or others anticheats but the important is that we MUST have a good anticheats or the game will dead after about... uhm... maximum 2 weeks!
And will be the same of OfP now!
ufff... always the same discussion but never a good action!
I'm bored! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif
Moving Target
Sep 26 2005, 21:32
The OFP game style is one of those things that really makes most cheats useless anyway, and very easy to detect by the other players on the server. e.g. if someone won't die from say 4 shots and has no sign of blood then you know something is amis, or if they never seem to reload, or have things that you know aren't in the mission like a tank. The game itself is an anti-cheat system of sorts because it's not a massively fast paced shoot at whatever moves whilst running around like a moron jumping all over to avoid being hit straifing in a circle crap.
completely agree with you, the only problem comes when people spawn tanks everywhere, and crash servers.
However, as has been touched on before, some addons are not as stable as possible, and thus might cause conflict with PB as it sees a potential cheat. Last point is the amount of addons people have, after 3 years my addon folder has grown to 1 1/2 GB. Is PB going to have to trawl through this to find errors in .PBO's?
PB is wholly useless.
In CS it was ineffective; the only cheats it detected were week old noobs who thought downloading year old hacks would fool everyone into thinking they had pro skillz.
In AA it was illustrative; not only did it completely fail to stop any cheating, but it became the major route for exploits, allowing servers to be crashed, players to be kicked, text flooding and so on. In something like 6 months, a single update was released that only managed to stop the exploits allowing people to mass-kick.
In Q3A it was the same. It was a hassle for legitimate players and did nothing to stop cheats.
I can't think of any others, but why would BIS possibly want attach that fucking useless bit of software to AA.
please stop using PunkBuster CS version first ... it's like compare game from 2000 with game from 2006 ...
PB in CS was program w/o any tie or access to game engine code thus limited like hell ...
yet it was still more effective than VAC.
Also PB for CS was not much different than Cheating Death in that times ... do You complain same about CD ? By this style You will need to complain about "any" anticheat software ...
In Americas Army is problem completely different as PB can't stop problems which are coming from mistakes directly in game engine code ...
so if You wanna whine and cry about ... send comments to AA dev team not EBI dev team ...
i suggest You reconsider what are You saying after new AA version release and PB updates to match that version ...
And seriously w/o PB ... AA or Q3 "public" multiplayer will be already turned into unplayable mess (You sure noticed Q3 sourcecode is freely available by ID and as cheat programmer You can find there even more than is known about Unreal Engine 2.5)
and WTH is Your problem anyway ... PUNKBUSTER IS OPTIONABLE ... that mean ADMIN and PLAYER can DISABLE IT!
Including it is "bonus" NOT curse ! ...
Seems like people will whine about anything anytime ...
Well, uh *scratches head* thanks for that incoherent fanboy rant. I still fail to see the point of including PB at all if it is ineffective in practice, irrespective of the [incorrect] reasons to which you ascribe the failure.
P.S. CD was just as impotent as Punkbuster. That they both failed to stop cheating does not justify the failure, nor does it help much at the current time.
I voted yes!!!
I don't care if it's PB or others anticheats but the important is that we MUST have a good anticheats or the game will dead after about... uhm... maximum 2 weeks!
And will be the same of OfP now!
ufff... always the same discussion but never a good action!
I'm bored! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif
If games get killed "in couple of weeks" if theres no effective anti-cheat system there should be no popular games at all. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
Quote[/b] ]
It doesnt matter if i want or or hate it, we all know BIS won't use it.
Good, because BIS knows they should'nt waste any time or money on this crap.
for me PB is kind of "better then none" way on the anti-cheating, not really THAT useful, as even the game might/might not get MIA "in couple of weeks", i am pretty sure that PB is going to be cracked within one or so week(s), and as i said b4, you cant really get the real a$$hole who do these kind of crap http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
Col. Rotten
Sep 27 2005, 17:07
I voted No on PB.
I play sometimes on public servers and I don't mind if people cheat. That will be a reason for me to leave a server because it will be not much of a challenge playing against people who use cheats.So I try to remember people who cheat are not doing something illigal. On my own server I am used to let the hammer of Justice fall. I haven't banned someone and I probably never will. So no PB. we don't need it at all
for me PB is kind of "better then none" way on the anti-cheating, not really THAT useful, as even the game might/might not get MIA "in couple of weeks", i am pretty sure that PB is going to be cracked within one or so week(s), and as i said b4, you cant really get the real a$$hole who do these kind of crap http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
Just a question, have you used dxdll or any modifications that modify the default game itself?
I voted no, in the case of adding some sort of security protocal to the game, a much better idea would be, to have a "Steam" sort of thing that you can edit MOD to run off of also so that my idea, n2m the updates are automatic saving the hastle of game version messing up.
But as to PunkBuster, no, its been cracked so I no longer trust it.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif @<hidden> TKC HACKERS
Dwarden
Sep 28 2005, 18:32
I voted no, in the case of adding some sort of security protocal to the game, a much better idea would be, to have a "Steam" sort of thing that you can edit MOD to run off of also so that my idea, n2m the updates are automatic saving the hastle of game version messing up.
But as to PunkBuster, no, its been cracked so I no longer trust it.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/pistols.gif @<hidden> TKC HACKERS
btw what does Steam have have with PB ... Steam = content delivery solution (digital online data distribution) ... NOT anticheat ...
and VAC2 , well noone except authors knows how it works but surely it's not much different from PB http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif (ie not unbeatable or perfect)
PB itself was cracked ? public ? where ... got any code ? k thx
well the Steam delivers constant anti-cheat updates so therefore it dosnt have to release a new patch every week...
anyway, PB is broken to people who know how to defend against it, all they do is block access to the modified file and then PB cant scan it and dosnt therefore do anything.
Dwarden
Sep 28 2005, 20:42
well the Steam delivers constant anti-cheat updates so therefore it dosnt have to release a new patch every week...
anyway, PB is broken to people who know how to defend against it, all they do is block access to the modified file and then PB cant scan it and dosnt therefore do anything.
Steam (read VAC2) delivers anticheat updates at same basis like PB:
- main core updates before You are even able play game...
- background (silent) updates for detection rules
and there is another difference when Steam master servers are down u can't play MP ...
but you still can play MP if PunkBuster master servers are down ...
so i see no point in that compare with because they totally different ...
i think You mismatch VAC2(anticheat for Source engine) with Steam (content delivery network/complete solution)
about these "avoiding solutions" http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
well seems You not heard about silent (delayed) bans and Hardware ID bans right http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif) ...
OFPDude
Sep 28 2005, 20:52
NO times 100,000,000 !!!!!!!
I dont use anything that won't allow me to play games without being logged into windows under an administrators account. Punkbuster boots you from games.
Steam is a total waste of time and lies about how far it's update progress is.
Above all, none of em work....cheats and hackers can get round these systems in no time....software can be reversed engineered and is too easy to crack.
Software Anti-Cheating systems don't work period !!!! they just add more latency and waste harddisk/cpu resources.
Dwarden
Sep 29 2005, 04:52
NO times 100,000,000 !!!!!!!
I dont use anything that won't allow me to play games without being logged into windows under an administrators account. Punkbuster boots you from games.
Steam is a total waste of time and lies about how far it's update progress is.
Above all, none of em work....cheats and hackers can get round these systems in no time....software can be reversed engineered and is too easy to crack.
Software Anti-Cheating systems don't work period !!!! they just add more latency and waste harddisk/cpu resources.
You can play fine w/o admin or power user account ...
another person who failed to even look on what rights are need and how set user to have them ...
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif
Scruffy
Sep 30 2005, 13:59
I can understand both sides here, but I have also voted "no". The simple reason is that with my current OFP install I think I wouldn't be able to play on any server.
From modified islands over custom animations and selfmade replacement configs to altered addons (sounds, config settings, etc.), I don't think PB would ever let me play like that.
And I don't think that's only my OFP, at least some anims and a skypack are somehow standard (one of the hundreds of variants) and since release I and nearly everyone I know haven't ever played without DXDLL.
wrong ... u can configure PB to accept any file change You as admin want to be used for game ... this include also allowing multiple versions of 1 file (e.g. low res, med res, hi res texture or model file etc)
I want to see the admin who fiddles with the settings so that only half of the common addons are going to work. Poor guy http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
I think only the tweaked configs for some planes (from mouse to joystick sensitivity) would get me kicked before I see the welcome message. And if it is allowed to modify a file it's easy to abuse that right, so why the check anyway?
and WTH is Your problem anyway ... PUNKBUSTER IS OPTIONABLE ... that mean ADMIN and PLAYER can DISABLE IT!
Including it is "bonus" NOT curse ! ...
Actually I think not many Admins would disable it on a public server, so your somehow forced to activate it to find a decent server without limiting your choice.
Another thing would be the performance. Think about you actually managed to find a server with that full conversion mod you liked and it runs that CTI. Just thinking about my performance if PB tries to check all those addons and scripts... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif (Actually, even thinking about it without PB makes me shiver http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif)
And yes, I have seen cheaters, but as I play mainly coop surviving a few hits from a 30mm or playing further as a corpse are, especially with KEGs spectator script, pretty obvious. And an id ban is a good choice and already there without PB.
It's already hard to find a server running with the addons you like and there are enough problems with missing/incorrect/modified addons already. If its modified you get and you get a message the others can see it and decide if they want to believe you it's not a cheat.
On the other hand I see the problems with league play and competitive maps like hexenkessel, but as I normally don't play these the negative effects overweigh for me.
As a conclusion I would say that no protection hasn't yet bin broken and PB or any other for ArmA will be the first to achieve that. So I would prefer an advanced system from the one already in use, there's no way to 100% protect a game and there are enough people who can ruin it without a cheat.
Freedom and diversity before security I say http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
for me PB is kind of "better then none" way on the anti-cheating, not really THAT useful, as even the game might/might not get MIA "in couple of weeks", i am pretty sure that PB is going to be cracked within one or so week(s), and as i said b4, you cant really get the real a$$hole who do these kind of crap http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
Just a question, have you used dxdll or any modifications that modify the default game itself?
thats the reason i vote no my friend, OFP based engine games are heavily scripted game(not the kind of MOH type you know...i mean, you should know), and as it is already unstable enought for normal MP use, i just wonder how PB is going to work in such
it might be better (on anti-cheat matter) then none, but together with OFP style of handling addons/missions/whatever, it is just useless IMO
I vote "no". Reasons have already been mentioned.
hell yes, I want...need a reason ? just play several maps online and see for yourself.....
Serberus
Oct 3 2005, 10:51
Every time I have used Punkbuster it kicks me. I dont even know how to cheat.
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/mad_o.gif
hell yes, I want...need a reason ? just play several maps online and see for yourself.....
Hell no, need a reason? Just play several games that feature these anti-cheat systems online ...
Moving Target
Oct 3 2005, 21:25
hell yes, I want...need a reason ? just play several maps online and see for yourself.....
Hell no, need a reason? Just play several games that feature these anti-cheat systems online ...
Anti-cheat? What anti-cheat? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
Zombie_Mod
Oct 4 2005, 16:47
hell yes, I want...need a reason ? just play several maps online and see for yourself.....
Hell no, need a reason? Just play several games that feature these anti-cheat systems online ...
What, like Quake 3 - the most successful online deathmatch game?
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif
Maybe you kids have your own private clans, but for the more casual player who DOESN'T want to devote much of his time to a clan and private server, we have to use Gamespy or All-seeing-eye to find matches.
And guess what? They're jumping with cheats.
You can't say you can spot a cheat, because even innocent people are being kicked for being too good.
Tell me, oh wise ones, how do you tell, out of 16 players, who's using the "create tank" cheat? Or who is using the "everyone gets 50% damage at start" cheat? Or the "guns move up and down themselves" cheat?
You can't. Therefore it is important to have a trusty anti-cheat system. Something is better than nothing.
You people in private clans are being completely SELFISH.
You can't. Therefore it is important to have a trusty anti-cheat system. Something is better than nothing.
The point here is that something might not be better because OFP is supposed to be customizable and you can forget about stuff like (purely hypothetical) DXDLL2 that adds those wonderful DX11 effects to the outdated armed assault engine.
Or not to mention those people who get e-stoned for having PB or some similar hopeless hack label them cheaters for no good reason.
Quote[/b] ]
You people in private clans are being completely SELFISH.
No, we are just being pragmatic.
Moving Target
Oct 5 2005, 07:16
"even Balance has announced that the cost of hacking on PunkBuster servers has just gone up significantly. PunkBuster now computes Hardware GUIDs for various pieces of hardware on players' systems while playing on PunkBuster servers.
They now use multiple private one-way hashes so that no serial number information for individual computers can be determined by admins or anyone else who may try to obtain this information from a Hardware GUID (and as always, no personal information of any kind is examined, stored or transmitted by PunkBuster). When players raise a violation that corresponds to hacking or interfering with PunkBuster's normal operation, we now (in addition to Global PB GUID bans) are Globally banning the new Hardware GUIDs across all games supported by PunkBuster (including games supported in the future). So punks who are determined to cheat so badly on PB-enabled servers that they try to hack PunkBuster may now need a new computer in addition to a new cdkey in order to return to PunkBuster servers.
As with previous PB GUID Global bans, the new Hardware GUID bans are permanent and will not be lifted. As always, players who are affected by these Global bans will still be able to play on non-PB servers. Honest users should never "test" hacks that claim to interfere with PunkBuster. We have successfully tested this new feature set over the past few weeks for a few supported games and will be rolling it out to all supported games over the next few days and weeks. Additionally, PunkBuster servers will be updated to signify whether kicks for Global bans are for PB GUIDs or the new Hardware GUIDs. "
sound good, but i want to know what else they scan your system for and who they give that information to? Also, what happens if you get unfairly global banned for cheating in AA? Surely they should know now that 99% of people will not stand by and watch there PC's being blacklisted.
"Moving Target" i suggest You educate self what is one-way hash before posting again ...
Zombie_Mod
Oct 5 2005, 14:06
You can't. Therefore it is important to have a trusty anti-cheat system. Something is better than nothing.
The point here is that something might not be better because OFP is supposed to be customizable and you can forget about stuff like (purely hypothetical) DXDLL2 that adds those wonderful DX11 effects to the outdated armed assault engine.
Or not to mention those people who get e-stoned for having PB or some similar hopeless hack label them cheaters for no good reason.
Quote[/b] ]
You people in private clans are being completely SELFISH.
No, we are just being pragmatic.
OFP is also supposed to be multiplayer and if you leave the game wide open to cheats, then it'll be a dead duck.
DXDLL is an exploit that exposes a "feature" in Flashpoint anyway. OFP wasn't exactly *designed* to allow that extensibility, Kegetys and wossisname must have been up all night with the tools from sysinternals.com studying how the flashpoint system loads DirectX http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
I remember talking to Keg and Fearsumm a while ago about it.
If BIS were using the COM object Library properly (and they can't have been, as they were using Win32 LoadLibrary to load the DirectX library into memory, instead of properly using CoCreateInstance to create the COM interface) then DXDLL wouldn't have been possible.
You know you can use the DXDLL concept to cheat, too? Kegs and Feersumm used CRC32 to determine the texture that is being rendered - how difficult would it be, to say:
IF SoldierTexture being rendered
RENDER pure white (or yellow) texture all over
END IF
And make the soldier stand out? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Luckily Kegetys and Fearsumm did not release their source code otherwise no doubt this type of thing would already have appeared. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/mad_o.gif
guerilla [MCY]
Oct 5 2005, 16:04
i dont know if punkbuster is the right solution but after playing bf2 since the demo and not seeing 1 cheater since, while playing ofp the chance is allmost 50/50, i had to vote yes. For the Coop/Addon players around who fear having troubles with it, i suggest the "disable but" as mentioned x times before. you guys know the bug being shot by AI's throught bushes. just imaging it happens all the time or did you ever asked you why noone plays those nice MOD's around and ppl leaving this game not only because its old? Allmost all competitive leagues have died because of cheats, ppl have even started to cheat themself to combat those cheatos as their last solution and after seeing this vid http://univerchy.rigolage.com/kick%20the%20cheaters.wmv (20Mb) of the latest tkc-pack, i really asking myself where's the fun left. for me punkbuster is a total win/win situation for all kind of ofp players at the end even with all those unproven negative aspects of it. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/goodnight.gif
[OGN]DarkPhantom
Oct 9 2005, 07:13
Still comes down to one thing... yes or no
We have been running OFP for many many years on my Aussie/NZ servers and had no problems with cheaters, so why start now??
When AA is released there will be no Punkbuster on my servers.
DarkPhantom @<hidden> Oct. 09 2005,09:13)]Still comes down to one thing... yes or no
We have been running OFP for many many years on my Aussie/NZ servers and had no problems with cheaters, so why start now??
When AA is released there will be no Punkbuster on my servers.
Simple answer to your question "Why start now?"
Becouse on arma will be JIP, and cheaters will migrate as unstopable virus!
Dwarden
Oct 12 2005, 02:51
DarkPhantom @<hidden> Oct. 09 2005,10:13)]Still comes down to one thing... yes or no
We have been running OFP for many many years on my Aussie/NZ servers and had no problems with cheaters, so why start now??
When AA is released there will be no Punkbuster on my servers.
i give You "fast" compare (or insight on possible future) with one "soon to be released game" ...
it's named "F.E.A.R." i sugguest You visit VU games Communit y Forums ... people even use cheats on MP beta and MP demo in rapid increasing ammounts (if first day you have 1 cheater at end of week it's 100) ... yes there are cheats for game before it was released ...
and for sure F.E.A.R. is not so moddable like OFPR / ArmAs ...
with ArmAs it will be same within some week... wallhacks, aimbots, ballhacks, radarhacks, skinhacks, whatever ...
sure people like You who plays max at private servers don't care but what about new players or people who are not part of "VIP" communities with servers ?
Disable PB on server ... great ... that's why it's optionable ... but imagine if there is no PB or something like PB ... any public server will be doomed ...
and even private servers will be in danger ... is that guy just good or cheating ? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
meyamoti
Oct 12 2005, 09:34
"oh noes he cheats! He keeled me with 1 shot to the head!"
Quote[/b] ]meyamoti Posted on Oct. 12 2005,05:34
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"oh noes he cheats! He keeled me with 1 shot to the head!"
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif (thats a GOOD ONE) Yup! I saw it! You peeked from the same hidey-hole you always do and he shot you 5 times in a row... MUST be a cheater! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/nener.gif
I'd like to think that both the game and the community are of a sort that discurages cheating. We don't do much death-match type stuff, so the kill/killed score doesn't matter as much. The coop missions compete against AI "YEAH! Robbie-Robot, I SCHOOLED YOU!..." Not much satisfaction to be had here. Capture the flag is IMO, probably the only game type that will be hit hard by cheaters. And then, due to the team oriented play, the cheater has to watch out for his/her own teammates throwing up a warning. This game just has a good nature about it.
Quote[/b] ]meyamoti Posted on Oct. 12 2005,05:34
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"oh noes he cheats! He keeled me with 1 shot to the head!"
http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/rofl.gif (thats a GOOD ONE) Yup! I saw it! You peeked from the same hidey-hole you always do and he shot you 5 times in a row... MUST be a cheater! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/nener.gif
I'd like to think that both the game and the community are of a sort that discurages cheating. We don't do much death-match type stuff, so the kill/killed score doesn't matter as much. The coop missions compete against AI "YEAH! Robbie-Robot, I SCHOOLED YOU!..." Not much satisfaction to be had here. Capture the flag is IMO, probably the only game type that will be hit hard by cheaters. And then, due to the team oriented play, the cheater has to watch out for his/her own teammates throwing up a warning. This game just has a good nature about it.
CTF and CTI are the main cheater playground if i am not wrong
A&D/C&H are quite likely to be cheater playground as well but with the few number of them, i just wondered
and cheating in COOP.................lets see, well the "YEAH! Robbie-Robot, I SCHOOLED YOU!..." speech not only lack of satisfaction, it also makes you looks like a complete dog.......well i need to admin that some of the cheater are quite smart and creative in some matter(got to see their "creative work" like sandbags towers, always give me a real good laught)
[TS]Varg
Oct 14 2005, 10:30
Vote YES!!!!
Or Multiplayer community dead in max 1 month.
You don't make the same error on Operation Flashpoint. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif
Jack Boots
Oct 20 2005, 04:44
Sorry if this has been posted alreadly, I voted yes, as anything that might defeat the mighty TKC whos hell bent on ruining our game.
<link removed>
Dynamax
Oct 22 2005, 06:28
how about going with valve, and their steam software.
that VAC anticheat is really good and it's self updateing.
wouldnt mind having ArmAss and OFP2(game2) sitting with HalfLife2 in my steam window.
i voted NO for PunkBuster. i call it game buster since all it does is mess up the games. i didnt like it in Raven-Shield and i dont want it in OFP.
Balschoiw
Oct 22 2005, 09:05
Quote[/b] ]how about going with valve, and their steam software.
Please no. I don´t want to be forcewd to connect to the internet every time I open up the game only to find out that I need to wait 1 hour or more to download the latest additions on ISDN.
Steam is neither user-friendly nor a solution to anything. It´s more or less just an extended copy-protection I don´t want to have on my comp.
Punkbuster also gets a NO from me. We just don´t need it.
From over 4 years of playing OFP online I only can remember 2 or 3 incidents with cheaters who were uncovered in a sec and banned for a lifetime.
Jack Boots
Oct 22 2005, 23:39
I suppose I would really like AA to be free from 3rd party software and rather really on implementing its own software to stop cheats
.kju [PvPscene]
Oct 24 2005, 17:20
Observer 3 Module (http://virtualbattlespace.com/store/product_info.php?products_id=37&osCsid=7f8a7f48e6667e6ffdc53193b2c23a95).
i utterly hope that BIS is aware that replay function is a very very important addition for combating the cheat scene (of leagues) !
(apart from a lot of other benefits of a replay function - see starcraft, warcraft3, quake series etc).
BIS please use the technology at hand and add this to ArmA !
you and your fans will be thankful for a lifetime. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/thumbs-up.gif
sicilian
Oct 25 2005, 06:09
Yes Q this would be great but I think for inner game structures it is already too late. But let's not forget to hope!
As a hint on a general topic:
Common Anticheat Enhancements For All BI Games (http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard311/ikonboard.cgi?act=ST;f=60;t=46587)
It's always the same as it comes up here. People who usually play coop or in private sessions don't want to get any cheat solution because they never or not often have made experiences with cheats.
As the leading post says PB would be an OPTIONAL thing and therefore no "must be" for the privates and coop servers!
But please explain me why we should not got such a solution at all? There are so many servers out there where you can easily find a cheater on. Don't close your eyes people!
We need a better supported ant cheat solution!
PB is optional so don't care!
I voted no. I've had too many bad experiences with PB in games like CS and RtCW where PB would simply kick me out of server for no reasons, aborting server connection although I had PB enabled and even banning me from server because I used custom models http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/mad_o.gif.
If BIS is going to add some anticheat support, I hope it's going to be optional for server admins. The biggest advantage of PC games is their customization, a feature that shouldn't be removed or limited.
P.S. I've never seen a cheater in OFP, perhaps I play with the right people http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif.
P.S. I've never seen a cheater in OFP, perhaps I play with the right people http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif.
From apart of the pvp communtiy of ofp I would have to strongly disagree with that comment. I see one every night im on ofp last night there was one that made a script that made made smoke rise into the sky looking like northern lights lol not a bad cheat but made the game unplayable the night before someone was firing shilka rounds out of a g36a I could go on and on.
Put it this way if bis does not do somthing about the cheats in AA the pvp side of things are doomed from the start. Things are changed so easily in addons and scipts without the file checkers picking it up, making the game riddled with cheats all have to do is just look at a certain site to see what a laugh they think the filecheckers are in ofp and i agree with them. The certain site even has trailers of them cheating.
Basically AA NEEDS good anitcheat protection even if it is pb. aswell as the way the filcheckers check for files drastically changing.
Antichrist
Oct 26 2005, 08:51
Hell no! PB is a buggy piece of crap!
Dwarden
Oct 26 2005, 13:08
how about going with valve, and their steam software.
that VAC anticheat is really good and it's self updateing.
wouldn't mind having ArmAss and OFP2(game2) sitting with HalfLife2 in my steam window.
i voted NO for PunkBuster. i call it game buster since all it does is mess up the games. i didn't like it in Raven-Shield and i don't want it in OFP.
well first ...
original VAC was complete disaster ... last year was not working at all there was over 250 working VAC 'enabled' cheats ...
now ... VAC2 i in place for "Source engine" games ...
but there are some major "BUTs"
- admins and clients got only option to "on / off" and that's all
- except Valve programmers no one else (most likely) got "damn" idea IF and HOW exactly it works
- there are already some "VAC2" enabled cheats but it's quite hard to say how VAC2 is effective because it's using quite LONG delay before ban happen ...
- no "remote" screenshot like features or addition AC stuff
- cost of "Steam / VAC2" license is not going to be cheaper than PB
- You are limited to use Steam/VAC2 which is forcing u to use "latest" build always and that's not going to work so well with game like FlashPoint (while with PB reconfigurability u can manage to run multiple Armed Assault builds as admins/clients need (sometimes people dislike last build because e.g. it's crashing them or so, while in Steam u can't do anything about u need wait till it's fixed next patch (in other words u screwed up)) ...
Dwarden
Oct 26 2005, 13:28
When i reading posts above i always wonder ... does anyone here play more than 1-2 game? or is admin of more than 10 servers? i mean ...
for example ... people speak about "script" cheats in OFP® ... of course that are cheats too but ... this stuff can be simple "ELIMINATED" by correct game server programming (client CAN NOT do that because server simple refuse to accept such data/script to be executed from client)
it will be probably possible to "partially" cover this through PunkBuster like combination of file / variable check but ... that's not where PB should aim ...
when You look at anticheat like PB or Hradba (used now Vietcong 1 and 2 made by United Admins for Pterodon) You need to take in mind main reasons are to prevent D3D hooks, various unauthorized overlays (like radars or aim helpers), file injections, memory edits (sure game itself can cover this but there are so many techniques to mess with memory so it can be hard cover all by default), textures messing (wallhacks, brighthacks, neonhacks), external aimbots (using color of uniforms etc to aim and so on), speedhacks etc ...
when people speak about "PB" or whatever AC ruined the game ... what and how mean ruined ?
just some bit CPU/HDD stress because of file hashing or memory variable checks ? if you compare PB and Hradba ... u get very similar "resource increase" because of this ... u can't avoid it ... no matter what type of file hashing u use , u need to dedicate some CPU cycle and some HDD I/O and some memory to do it ... it's all about keep it in acceptable level ...
or just because people are unable to read FAQ/README how setup some accessrights?
even tried to think that there is reason why theirs process/service need such level of access ? w/o that AC itself will be useless locked in limited user mode w/o chance to access memory/files whatever ...
i mean let say you got something extremely expensive stored in bank and one day bank will decide to implement new security solution , as result they will scan ur fingerprint and eye retina.
First that will take time than before just using some ID card,
second it's bit unpleasant and
third You can always think omg they collecting some of private data about me what about they will try spy on me (u known big brother, selling the info to 3rd party and such paranoi stuff)
Now , i doubt You will take Your time to call or visit someone of bank board of directors of any chief in lead and WHINE about "hey man, this new security stuff is taking my precious time and i feel uncomfortable because of that and maybe You also storing some private identification data about me (omg spy*ware* whatever) ... i would like to see this ...
so maybe ... think about the bank example then about how the HELL made AC enough effective in todays world of multiple platforms, multiple operation systems with multiple level system of access rights on thousands various hw / sw configs ...
if You manage to made something better than PB / Hradba / VAC2 / Wache and so on ... then i wonder how come u not already billionaire http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
... PunkBuster is now going to be implemented into F.E.A.R.
Quote[/b] ]... will be available for F.E.A.R. in an upcoming game update patch.
never is too late to implement some AC solution ...
ACES_KEVIN
Dec 5 2005, 02:40
I vote no to Punkbuster, and think that BIS could come up with a more unique way to prevent cheating.
Or at least make a efficient way to permenently ban cheaters.
Just my 2 cents tho! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
in meanwhile PB was added to RS4:Lockdown, Prey, FEAR, COD2 and some others are on horizont ...
so keep discussing and voting on this important topic ...
$kelet0r
Mar 8 2006, 10:04
was cheating a problem in operation flashpoint online in the past?
i voted for punkbuster - some protection is better than none and while cheating exists in for example BF2 - I've yet to see the extent of the frightening amount i saw in CS 1.6 in punkbuster protected games
I played Americas Army over internet and every problem with join to game was in PB!!! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
I hate PB http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif
Punkbuster? Hell no. For 3D FPS kids games like CS and DoD fine but NEVER on Armed Assault.
i really dont care much for this disscussion about what AC to use and what not.. that fact is, OFP needed a good AC and ArmA better have one included..
the last time i saw someone cheating in OFP was when i was playing CTF Tanks...
the game is tanks only, there are no aircraft of any kind on the map.
this guy was in htere spawning helicopters and blowing everyone up, and the worst thing was that we couldnt see the player as he was invisable.
stuff like this piss me off and make it so i dont even want to play.
like i said above.. i dont gave a damn about what AC is used.. just use something that works!!! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
I voted yes long time ago!
The PB is the most used anti-cheat system around the planet.
It will be nice if BIS agrees to integrate it into ARMA or even game 2 but leaving the game without such protection is not wise at all.
As I noticed many people complaining about PB maybe will harm their gaming experience, PB is easy to troubleshoot and you can find nice documentations and related FAQs if you faced problems with it.
To be honest it’s the only thing that makes cheating harder in games these days! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Sniperwolf572
Mar 8 2006, 11:43
IMO Only thing that needs to be implemented to the current system is the "Client Screenshot" option from PB, anyways, PB is bad mmkay?
$kelet0r
Mar 8 2006, 12:22
well punkbuster is better than no AC and there are very few commercial products available other than it
having BIS invest months in creating their own AC may be a misuse of resources particularly if they find that punkbuster would work well
ParaGraphic L
Mar 8 2006, 12:40
I'd say no to punkbuster or any other allready excisting AC software.
Offcourse there most be some kind of protection but i'd rather see a programm from BIS or this community.
I played other games that had many cheat issues, the community made their own AC tool and it worked perfect. They knew everything about the games issues and where able to fix them. Also it was updated the very second they noticed someone got through the security.
armandobronca
Mar 8 2006, 12:51
was cheating a problem in operation flashpoint online in the past?
i voted for punkbuster - some protection is better than none and while cheating exists in for example BF2 - I've yet to see the extent of the frightening amount i saw in CS 1.6 in punkbuster protected games
Lol
Loads of players stopped playing flashpoint because of cheaters. And that include some mod-makers http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif
As bis stated before they are developing their own AC system, so obviously PB will not be in arma.
$kelet0r
Mar 8 2006, 13:58
was cheating a problem in operation flashpoint online in the past?
i voted for punkbuster - some protection is better than none and while cheating exists in for example BF2 - I've yet to see the extent of the frightening amount i saw in CS 1.6 in punkbuster protected games
Lol
Loads of players stopped playing flashpoint because of cheaters. And that include some mod-makers http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif
As bis stated before they are developing their own AC system, so obviously PB will not be in arma.
really?
do you have a source for that?
FCOPZ-Illuminator
Mar 8 2006, 14:16
really?
do you have a source for that?
Oh ja, one example.
Our Squad don't play OFP since 2004, because a lot of cheats and cheaters. At this moment we only play "Joint Operations" (PB include) and hope "Armed Assault" will have a good cheater protection.
Our squad isn't the only one.
$kelet0r
Mar 8 2006, 17:48
Quote[/b] ]As bis stated before they are developing their own AC system, so obviously PB will not be in arma.
sorry man i meant this
joint ops? i really should get it seeing as its dirt cheap now but well Battlefield 2 is too damn fun http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
armandobronca
Mar 8 2006, 22:32
Quote[/b] ]As bis stated before they are developing their own AC system, so obviously PB will not be in arma.
sorry man i meant this
joint ops? i really should get it seeing as its dirt cheap now but well Battlefield 2 is too damn fun http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
From ofp.info interview:
Quote[/b] ]
: Will you add more features and options for dedicated servers, especially concerning anti cheating/server crashing measures?
A (V.B): Yes.
To be honest, that really dont mean PB will not be in arma.
Btw if PB is going to be added to the game, PB developers will need time to get it ready. And arma is wip...
mh... a working anticheatsystem is already present for ofp and under further development and research by clans and the alsr. so i dont know any cheatpack (what includes the so called betas up to 1.26c) that works anymore when this tool is serverside running in the background and additionally maps are prepared to stop cheating with their own techniques!
to prevent any upcoming pleasant anticipation it must be said, that i guess that it wont go public until arma is out! besides, if arma comes out equipped with a similar system and closes the few holes known from ofp:1985 that make cheating cheap, there won't be a further need to proceed the developement of this community anticheatsystem, that is still for eyes only.
meanwhile it is working as a honeypot and it has already catched and locked out more than 30 cheaters in about 6 months at one single server, absolutely autonomous and automatically.
so lets wait what anticheatsystems arma will bring with and lets hope they'll be effective. but if those systems will fail or become somehow or other ineffective (and we do all hope that it won't go that way) we have something in readiness...
mh... a working anticheatsystem is already present for ofp and under further development and research by clans and the alsr. so i dont know any cheatpack (what includes the so called betas up to 1.26c) that works anymore when this tool is serverside running in the background and additionally maps are prepared to stop cheating with their own techniques!
to prevent any upcoming pleasant anticipation it must be said, that i guess that it wont go public until arma is out! besides, if arma comes out equipped with a similar system and closes the few holes known from ofp:1985 that make cheating cheap, there won't be a further need to proceed the developement of this community anticheatsystem, that is still for eyes only.
meanwhile it is working as a honeypot and it has already catched and locked out more than 30 cheaters in about 6 months at one single server, absolutely autonomous and automatically.
so lets wait what anticheatsystems arma will bring with and lets hope they'll be effective. but if those systems will fail or become somehow or other ineffective (and we do all hope that it won't go that way) we have something in readiness...
problem is ... to have complete anti-cheat protection You need not only well done server (all what is possible should be calculated, controller and revalidated by server not client)
but also client and with client side part of AC ... (to prevent DX hooking, content messing, code injections and so on) ...
30 cheaters in 6 months ? lol ... You get that in day-week on any popular FPS ...
there is another problem with 3rd party "only" external solutions (clan written , some game fan etc) is "trust" especially if it contain some sort of autoupdate and stability ...
due to lack fo info it's very hard to get image if there will be real improvements or just some changes in how server handle scripting (like fc "DENIED" to prevent well know "spawning" cheats etc)
Quote[/b] ]problem is ... to have complete anti-cheat protection You need not only well done server (all what is possible should be calculated, controller and revalidated by server not client)
but also client and with client side part of AC ... (to prevent DX hooking, content messing, code injections and so on) ...
both types (serverprotection und clientverification) would be there if we (this is what some folks a trying to do and was meant by saying "development and research") merge all the code together, what is for sure possible and focused in a public release!
Quote[/b] ]30 cheaters in 6 months ? lol ... You get that in day-week on any popular FPS ...
dude, this system was mentioned and titled as a community project, so what community are we speaking about- lol˛!!!! i think it is a nice ammount of catched cheaters if you would have noticed the average of 500 players per day in ofp multiplayer matches nowadays!
Quote[/b] ]there is another problem with 3rd party "only" external solutions (clan written , some game fan etc) is "trust" especially if it contain some sort of autoupdate and stability ...
that is true but maybe you become the man that have the knowledge to monitor whats going on, when this system is running?! i guess lots of ppl will do it just to prevent hostile code on their systems. but maybe we open the sources to some trusted eyes that can say whether it is going to be a leak or not! "stability at autoupdate" - nice - you take majors seriously who are patching their games up to the moon, but you don't "trust" ppl like us...
Quote[/b] ]due to lack fo info it's very hard to get image if there will be real improvements or just some changes in how server handle scripting (like fc "DENIED" to prevent well know "spawning" cheats etc)
true and was pointed out before!!!
Ronin Warrior
Mar 10 2006, 11:30
Adding PunkBuster to ArMa would be completely pointless, as there are many people who already cheat in PunkBuster servers. All you need is a private cheat, i.e. one that nobody else has, and it will never catch you http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif
And please, no posts arguing this point,I can easily point anyone to many sites that offer these cheats for download(but I won't-so don't even ask http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/mad_o.gif ), or supply you with the code, if you are a programmer. Some of the stuff currently availabe is: anti PB screenshot, Hardware un-ban, Hardware spoofer. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
Anyway BIS should make their own anti-cheat, if they intend to use one. PB is already cracked as well as VAC, we need something new and improved. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/help.gif
Dwarden
Mar 10 2006, 21:36
Adding PunkBuster to ArMa would be completely pointless, as there are many people who already cheat in PunkBuster servers. All you need is a private cheat, i.e. one that nobody else has, and it will never catch you http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif
And please, no posts arguing this point,I can easily point anyone to many sites that offer these cheats for download(but I won't-so don't even ask http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/mad_o.gif ), or supply you with the code, if you are a programmer. Some of the stuff currently availabe is: anti PB screenshot, Hardware un-ban, Hardware spoofer. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif
Anyway BIS should make their own anti-cheat, if they intend to use one. PB is already cracked as well as VAC, we need something new and improved. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/help.gif
that's already nothing new ... you can break ANY anticheat sooner or later ...
it's all about how well is coded, how easy to implement, how fast can be updated, ease to use for both players and admins, customizable for admins ...
you mentioned VAC ... but VAC is completely "VALVE" controlled ... as admin u get close to zero options (not even PB screenshot feature or ability adjust detections for files / variables etc) ...
it's known PBSS code is unperfect (rooting for D3D8/9 weaknesses) ... over time there were some improvements to that so let's hope they were not last ... DX10 could aid this again
HW spoofers ... they not so "easy" and "working" as claimed on many cheat forums ... 99.9% of cheat users never get 100% working one ...
completely new? well try it... You need go into kernel itself ... as low level drivers are still weak ... talk to MS about Vista http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
**warning - ramble **
JoinInProgress and a good fair admin is all you need to stop cheating. with join in progresds it doesnt matter so much if you kick or ban someone in a key position, teyll be replaced.
I have never, ever seen somebody cheat in OFP mutliplayer. not once. Granted I don't play tournaments, but if somebody cheats in a tournament you're ore likely to know who it is (if it's a well organised one).
The OFP community is just too close, one of the few communities where you can remember most of the people you see in forums, or in online games. It's just not a place for cheaters.
Maybe I'm living in a dream world, but I think the community alone is the only thing that can stop cheating. No armor can stop every weapon. If you make a defense, the cheaters will make something to break it. But if you keep the doors open, they're more likely to be civil.. and anyone who does hack a game with no protection will probably be forgetting to add their own protection from being indentified..
Also.. the amount of people that get modified file errors is uncountable, There are so many addons and mods for ofp that it's lmost impossible to keep track of them all, and nobody has the same settings as the server most times. Gettin the right addons to run an mp mission is hard enough as it is, with punkbuster it would be almost impossible.
drakaan
Mar 13 2006, 12:57
i agree totally with Dwarden 'cheating is killing MP games etc'!
too many hackin, cheatin ho's out there who think its fun to do these things.
some of the things ive read in these forums about people openly admitting that they would be sooo tempted to hack something if it was put in place to stop cheaters is beyond belief. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
lets hope i never win the lottery cause i would be sooo tempted to pay someone to hunt down the hackin, cheating ho's http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
Games are not cheap to buy and there may be some kids out there who cant afford to buy game after game to have them spoiled time after time by cheating fags. Of course cheating will never be stopped but Punkbusters i believe will help....
Have fun and stop the cheaters http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
A lot f the advances made in the operation flashpoint mod community were driven by the challenge of breaking down the walls of a slightly obtuse engne. When I first installed flashpint i never imagined that half of the stuff released for flashpoint was achievable. But the challenge is what drives people to do what they have done with OFP.
For example, a few years ago, back in the v1.30 patch I think it was, I downloaded a few scripts for fast roping. These were designed for v1.00 of OFP and used the 'allowDammage' command, which wa taken out in the first patch.
With the loss of that command people started believing a fast rope script would be impossible, so I set out to prove them wrong.
If you setPos a unit from a height above 7 metres to the ground the unit will be damaged, even if u setPos him down again below 7 metres, it still registers as a high fall.
I figured out that if I could setPos a vehicle just above the ground the exact same time the unit was supposed to come off the rope, put the unit in that vehicle and make him jump out again, then OFP wouldnot register it as a fall.
It was a pretty crazy workaround, but it worked, although not many people ever downloaded it, and BAS later used the same method... But the point is, the drive to break the barrier is what made me create the script. The same thing goes for hackers. Real ones anyway.
With a limitted and non-hyped protection system produced by BIS, those hackers won't be around to try and break the protection. With well known and over zealous protection systems like PunkBuster, they will try as hard as they can to break it. Purely for the challenge.
Having no challenge in the area of hacking with ArmA, they'll be more content to play the game without cheating (in theory) because then they have another kind of challenge.
And the other kind of cheaters, basically n00b players who aren't good enough to play without cheating, they'll be the kind of people that will forget to change their IP, people who you can slap with an IP ban.
This is all in theory though, and psychological theory is far from fool proof. Especially when you don't take much toime to do the theorizing. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
With a limitted and non-hyped protection system produced by BIS, those hackers won't be around to try and break the protection. With well known and over zealous protection systems like PunkBuster, they will try as hard as they can to break it. Purely for the challenge.
Having no challenge in the area of hacking with ArmA, they'll be more content to play the game without cheating (in theory) because then they have another kind of challenge.
And the other kind of cheaters, basically n00b players who aren't good enough to play without cheating, they'll be the kind of people that will forget to change their IP, people who you can slap with an IP ban.
This is all in theory though, and psychological theory is far from fool proof. Especially when you don't take much toime to do the theorizing. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
Not everyone considers the PB as a challenge, people usually cheats to gain superiority over the other players or in clan wars or they just write cheats to be famous or for money!
Leaving the door open in such manner without strong anti-cheat system or something like it is a true suicide.
If every software firm specialized in the game industry brought such topic to public discussion and built their final decision upon it, I doubt that you would see all those PB supported games at evenbalance site.
Quote[/b] ]they just write cheats to be famous or for money!
That would be like becoming famous for driving your car to work if the protection was limitted.
Ofp does not have a very advanced AC system, yet you barely see any cheating. Anyway, in turnaments I don't see what'sstopping somebody refereeing the games in spectator mode n kicking cheaters.
A good commnity is always the best defense against cheaters.
I say a definate no to PB.
Also hate waiting to play because of PB updates http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
That would be like becoming famous for driving your car to work if the protection was limitted.
Ofp does not have a very advanced AC system, yet you barely see any cheating. Anyway, in turnaments I don't see what'sstopping somebody refereeing the games in spectator mode n kicking cheaters.
So you think the amount of cheating in ofp is almost unnoticeable? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Quote[/b] ]A good commnity is always the best defense against cheaters.
xCess? I don’t know how you evaluate a good gaming community or bad one, but in big gaming communities around a popular game there will be also smaller communities around, there cheating is usual practice.
Quote[/b] ]I say a definate no to PB.
Also hate waiting to play because of PB updates http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
You making the PB looks like Microsoft update, I used to update those tiny PB files manually by executing the PB updater. That was never a problem the PB is not VAC after all.
You can evaluate community by it's forums. OFP is the most civlised and helpful community I've seen, and cheating doesn't to be an issue, so changing the protection system doesn't seem to be an issue either.
IMHO
NeMeSiS
Mar 13 2006, 22:47
You can evaluate community by it's forums. OFP is the most civlised and helpful community I've seen, and cheating doesn't to be an issue, so changing the protection system doesn't seem to be an issue either.
IMHO
Then you didnt play enough MP on public servers... http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
I play MP exclsively on pub servers, except when I'm helping to test.
But if the cheating problem is bigger than I thought I'd still prefer an AC system by BIS than Punkbuster. BIS is about the only software company I actually trust in any way whatsoever. And in my eperience I've seen much more cheating in America's Army and CS:Source than OFP (in which i've seen none)
Dwarden
Mar 14 2006, 00:20
xcess ,
reply to Your post Mar. 13 2006,13:21:
problem is You always speak about game from past OFP/OFPR but not about future. By Your ratio Armed Assault ends with just bunch of hardcore fan players , i doubt this is what BIS is looking for . W/o being too optimistic let say target is min.2500 players at anytime / day online at public servers after release ...
reply to Your post Mar. 13 2006,22:36:
I already repeated multiple times in this thread PB is mod friendly (see BF1942, BF2, RTCW:ET etc) and if You need to utilize some "changes" beyond PB reconfigurability or break engine apart with D3D mods etc. You can always disable PB completely (server option) ...
so fearing PB will "drop" modding ability is wrong (plus You can apply same fear factor on any other AC solution)
about PB attracting cheaters and code breakers ... You wrong again... if BIS introduce own system and ArmAs become popular game THEN as result it will attract real code geniuses in cheat community why ? (because new system = new challenge) ...
so Catch 22 ... it will attract no matter what AC You going to use ... only what COUNT is game popularity (OFP/OFPR was NOT so popular in terms of MP numbers for masses) ... less popular game less cheats ...
reply to Your post Mar. 13 2006,23:23:
are You aware this "waiting for updates" got reason ? ... You sure don't want cheaters using custom / old versions of PB http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
got problems with speed (defined to please 56k users) ?...
just use manual update (EvenBalance got specific tool for) at x mbit speed ...
and remember worst cheater is that one You can't discover at first look (aimbots with misfire rate, wallhacks / skinhacks , radar hacks not abused blindly) ...
you never saw cheater? ... prove it ... how You know? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
drakaan
Mar 14 2006, 08:23
yeh it is much harder to detect a cheater now but you know when you know http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/crazy_o.gif
as for there not being many cheaters in the ofp community...i would like to know where XCess plays cuz we could maybe all go there and play http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/whistle.gif
you maybe need to visit here: <link removed>
Its fags like these who have killed the game that we love and fags like these who will try to disrupt AA and any other popular game that is released (they call it fun), i have a different word for it but wont post it http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/biggrin_o.gif
Placebo
Mar 14 2006, 08:30
Don't post that link on the forums please.
I play MP exclsively on pub servers, except when I'm helping to test.
But if the cheating problem is bigger than I thought I'd still prefer an AC system by BIS than Punkbuster. BIS is about the only software company I actually trust in any way whatsoever. And in my eperience I've seen much more cheating in America's Army and CS:Source than OFP (in which i've seen none)
The PB is the best solution on the hand currently for Arma or game2, if the people in BIS have the time and recourses to develop and maintain powerful anti-cheat system like the PB by themselves well why not, but that’s a true headache! http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
drakaan
Mar 14 2006, 09:36
sorry about the link m8 didnt realise
dachrinne
Mar 14 2006, 10:25
Quote[/b] ]Also hate waiting to play because of PB updates http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/icon_rolleyes.gif
then get something faster than 56k
in my opinion, the choice has to be made looking to other online mp fps that are on the market... every damn game has a punkbuster support, or his own anticheating countermeasure...
dont wanna lag when connecting? just join un-protected servers... and have fun...
tell me how can manage a tournament, with prizes, when there can be half of teams using wallhacks, and aimbots and whatever they want...
u cant even take demos in ofp (obviously, u can in all other fps that came out b4 ofp... but who cares? who ever saw another fps... whats quake? counter strike? its just 150k ppl playing it... not that much...)
ppl make mods for every game, also with cheat support... and the difference... is just that everyplayer runs the same scripts and map... not the ones of his choice...
u dont really need an evenbalance punkbuster... valve, for example got his own VAC...
I always wondered, about how was possible to program a client sided fps... ofp was... and everycheat is possible... and more you lag, more ppl u hit in a "lag temporal space" totaly desynched from other players... thanks to this clientside decisions...
arma will be diffrent in that? will my client send the ammount of damage that my cheated gun just did? or maybe just send vector and class of weapon? who will decide who got hit first between x (30ms latency) and y(450ms) http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/huh.gif the y client? or maybe server?
if not, will be a great single player simulation... nothing more
$kelet0r
Mar 22 2006, 10:25
the sensible consensus is that Arma must have some form of updatable Anti Cheat software
Whether it goes down the untested and more time consuming route of designing its own or decides to use a commercially available and popular program like Punkbuster is up to BIS - ultimately it is commercial sense that will dictate what happens nothing else
DMarkwick
Aug 10 2006, 19:36
To say that cheating won't be prevalent on ArmA is being a bit optimistic, I would guess this optimism comes from looking at the state of the OFP community.
Remember, OFP is a game over 5 years old, the kids don't wanna know about it. It's too tactical, and the game is seen as rather "clunky".
ArmA, when released, will be bought by the kids (or more likely downloaded) and the cheating subsection will emerge. To be sure, there will always be more straight players than crooked ones, but as we all know it only takes one goon to ruin a server. Until ArmA leaves the top 20 and becomes the domain of tactical players again, it will be like this. And it's no great surprise that BIS would rather the game stay as popular as possible for as long as possible http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
So anti-cheat mechanisms are to be welcomed I think. PB is not so bad.
Remember, OFP is a game over 5 years old, the kids don't wanna know about it. It's too tactical, and the game is seen as rather "clunky".
Armed Assault is going to be "tactical" also as far as i know.
ps. Imo punkbuster is one big pile of crap.
I think BIS would have more success by creating their own anti-cheat rather than using a well established system like punkbuster. The reason is simple, punkbuster just doesn't work and it is well known by the cheat programmers. They know how it works and how to get around it, every time a change is made to it's cheat detection abilities they work around them and compromise not just one game but all games based on it. Systems like punkbuster are magnets for cheaters.
The very best way to combat cheating is to build those safeguards and mechanisms into the game engine itself. Many cheats exploit bad programming in the original game - not many game developers consider security in the same way that an OS or internet browser developer would.
Other cheats exploit the interface between the game and the lower level software/hardware. That's not hard to solve either, it just would require cooperation between hardware/OS manufacturers (NVidia, Microsoft etc). We all know M$ is lousy on this front!
Heatseeker
Aug 10 2006, 23:13
@<hidden> Aug. 10 2006,21:17)]
Remember, OFP is a game over 5 years old, the kids don't wanna know about it. It's too tactical, and the game is seen as rather "clunky".
Armed Assault is going to be "tactical" also as far as i know.
ps. Imo punkbuster is one big pile of crap.
But it has its good ideas, like pbss (screenshot). I think Arma has great MP potential and the new netcode and gamemode will atract a lot of players for the big battles, plus it will be our new game, i wouldnt like to see it abused and left to the dogs..
I think there should be an efective protection system, to ensure that the players have a good MP experience, because the open endness of the game will leave it very open for exploit http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/confused_o.gif .
Protecting code is impossible, having a legitimate way to catch the ofender and ban their i.p. and CD key sounds more efective, pbss allows you to take and submit a screenshot of the possible ofender, wich will give you evidence if he's cheating or not, with this a "Great list of MP assholes" can be made and the information passed on betwean server admins http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif .
DMarkwick
Aug 10 2006, 23:58
@<hidden> Aug. 10 2006,22:17)]
Remember, OFP is a game over 5 years old, the kids don't wanna know about it. It's too tactical, and the game is seen as rather "clunky".
Armed Assault is going to be "tactical" also as far as i know.
Um, yes it is going to be tactical. Was there some wiggle room for doubt for you? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
Quote[/b] ]
ps. Imo punkbuster is one big pile of crap.
PunkBuster may not be perfect, but it's pretty far from a pile of crap. Unless you need to cheat, natch.
Certainly the most effective way to dissuade cheating is to permanently ban a confirmed cheater from all servers. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/band.gif
This generally means a central server registration of all banned CD keys which game servers periodically connect to and update their ban lists against. (This method is lower bandwidth and puts less strain on the central server than checking every player as they connect against the central server.)
Espectro
Aug 11 2006, 09:16
Sure, Ill host a "Great list of cheaters" page including screenshot and IP/CD-key for servers to be updated.
Heatseeker
Aug 11 2006, 10:51
Sure, Ill host a "Great list of cheaters" page including screenshot and IP/CD-key for servers to be updated.
One problem might be making the IP's and CD keys publicly available.. i believe thats illegal. But this way is definetly the way to go, all other file checking solutions fail and scaning files from all the players conected to a server sounds a little too much for the server, especially since Arma will handle a large number of players.
Metal Heart
Aug 11 2006, 11:10
Not the cd-key but the player id generated from the cd-key which cannot be converted back to cd-key (you wouldn't probably get the whole cd-key even if you had the correct algorithm).
Ronin Warrior
Aug 12 2006, 23:51
I really must support the idea of BIS making their own anti-cheat system, but in order to do that they would have to do a LOT of research into how game hacks are made. i.e. memory hacking, DirectX hooking and engine hooking. I think it would take at least a year to R&D a comprehensive anti-cheat system.
On the other hand, Punkbuster would be a waste of time and resources. Not only has Punkbuster been hacked to pieces by game hackers, but all games protected by Punkbuster become immediate targets for the hackers that hack other Punkbuster games.
Also if the PBSS(Punkbuster screenshot) has been disabled in all the other Punkbuster protected games, there is no reason at all that the same couldn't be done with a different version of the in game screenshot type of protection.
Obviously, some sort of anti-cheat software IS needed, but unfortunately nothing currently exists that can realisticly stop the cheaters.
The only decent thing currently available is the ability for an admin to follow a player around in game and judge if they are playing legit.
Aussie Dave
Oct 12 2006, 08:57
I really must support the idea of BIS making their own anti-cheat system, but in order to do that they would have to do a LOT of research into how game hacks are made. i.e. memory hacking, DirectX hooking and engine hooking. I think it would take at least a year to R&D a comprehensive anti-cheat system.
On the other hand, Punkbuster would be a waste of time and resources. Not only has Punkbuster been hacked to pieces by game hackers, but all games protected by Punkbuster become immediate targets for the hackers that hack other Punkbuster games.
Also if the PBSS(Punkbuster screenshot) has been disabled in all the other Punkbuster protected games, there is no reason at all that the same couldn't be done with a different version of the in game screenshot type of protection.
Obviously, some sort of anti-cheat software IS needed, but unfortunately nothing currently exists that can realisticly stop the cheaters.
The only decent thing currently available is the ability for an admin to follow a player around in game and judge if they are playing legit.
As a game server administer for a ISP, i have had to remove games where the anticheat is not updated anymore due to the wallhacks, underground, flying, ammo and server crashing hacks.
I have worked closely with Pterodon in updating anticheat software, but sadly Pterodon was taken over by IS and there was no more support for vietcong.
Michal "Erik" Janacek
lead programmer, PTERODON CEO made the anticheat Hradba is the Czech word for castle wall. Back in the Dark Ages, Czech castles used very thick Hradbas along their outer perimeter to stop the peasant hordes who attacked with helicopters on their heads.
Here's the last Hadba update readme file:
Quote[/b] ]HradBa Anti-cheat readme
Please feel free to report any HradBa problems or any working cheats at http://help.pterodon.com
HradBa history
=== v206, 2004-10-26 21:00 gmt ===
- updated online
- added new detection #151 and #152 for Direct3D altering ( new detection methods that works against the new VcHook version )
Thanks to Gaming Soldiers Australia clan, especially to {GSA}Aussie Dave for reporting on and providing us with the cheat
- blocked "wolf ears" sound cheat
=== v204, 2004-06-22 16:30 gmt ===
- updated online
- added new detection #150 for Direct3D altering
=== v203, 2004-06-17 9:15gmt ===
- updated online
- added detection #149 for Direct3D altering ( detects VcHook, 3D Analyzer and any other cheat that would alter d3d rendering )
=== v202, 2004-01-25 ===
- part of Vietcong and FistAlpha patch v1.60
- support for both Vietcong v1.60 and FistAlpha v1.60
- reprogrammed flying and super jump detections, cheat detections #3,#26 and #27 are disabled now, there are new detections #147 and #148
- fixed Spectators false detection #141
=== v201 ===
- several testing versions for beta testing, not available for public
=== v200, 2004-01-02 15:30gmt ===
- part of Vietcong FistAlpha installation
- the same functionality as v112
=== v117, 2004-01-02 15:30gmt ===
- updated online
- fixed one HradBa exception ( the server continues to run, but HradBa was disabled because of internal error )
- new detection #146 - it happens when there is #130 ( speedhack ) detected 5 times in a short time ( a few minutes ). When #146 is detected, player is kicked out from the game, so speedhackers will no more disturb in the game.
- #130 - detections and 'ignore' messages are written into special log ( hradba\cheat130info.txt ), to make hblog.txt better readable
- #128 - description improved - added info some viruses can cause this detection ( reported by several players )
=== v116, 2003-12-22 11:15gmt ===
- updated online
- fixed server crashing ( mostly seen during map changing but could happen during normal gameplay too)
- #130 - improved - made less sensitive for speedhacks ( some players have problem with false detections), made more sensitive for slowhacks ( some undetected cheaters appeared)
- #133 - fixed false detection in TT mode
- #141 - false detectin fixed
=== v115, 2003-12-19 10:10gmt ===
- updated online
- #130 ( speedhack detection) is enabled. There should be no false detections now.
- Fixed problem with false #133 detections in Bahnar and Ambush maps
- Improved #27 ( Flying detection) to eliminate false detections
- Added possibility to set data flow limit (bytes per second) for HradBa PureServer tests. HradBa v114 can cause lag sometimes, this new limit can make PureServer tests running longer, so cheating players will be able to be in the game for some time ( max is 2 or 3 minutes on lowest settings), but HradBa shouldn't cause in-game lag anymore. Please check ServerDataFlowMax in hb.ini file
- Added support for HradBa readme ( yes, this file :-) )
=== v114, 2003-11-21 17:36gmt ===
- updated online
- #26 - disabled because false detections, we will investigate it more and enable it later
=== v112, 2003-11-21 ===
- part of Vietcong patch v1.41
- #128 - explanation is written to the console
- #130 - is ignored, server logs it to find false detections, we will enable it again when it's fixed
- #132 - improved timeout detection
- #133 - more info is written into hblog.txt to help us to find possible false detections
- hbconnect.txt logs all attemps to connect to the server including client IP adress
- hblog.txt is not cleared when HradBa starts, so the whole history is there
=== v100, 2003-11-14 ===
- part of Vietcong patch v1.40
The game will need a anticheat, as far as i have seen PB is updated often and does work.
Here's the lastest cheaters we have caught in FEAR with PB.
GSA-XGN (http://www.xtremegamingnetwork.com.au/Forums/showthread.php?goto=newpost&t=7324)
Dwarden
Oct 12 2006, 09:17
Hradba was developed in cooperation with United Admins , as any other AC solution it was defeated multiple times
was one or rare well done ACs, imho it was abadoned quite early and needed more often updates ...
I'm a big fan of Punkbuster, while imperfect, it is the the most versatile anticheat tool I have ever had the pleasure of using.
However I'm not sure how compatable this would be to a non generic game engine.
Pierrot
Oct 12 2006, 14:34
Does Punk Buster tolerate user sound mods in multiplay? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
If it does, I agree PB in ArmA. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
Dwarden
Oct 12 2006, 18:08
u can see tons of moddable games using PB, it's no problem u can define hashes for various files, multiple hashes for same file etc etc
cain2001
Oct 12 2006, 20:32
So anyone heard anything with bis about this? Seems like Bis use their "Own" stuff. Would be shame to have another 3 years ruined... again.
SniperAndy
Oct 12 2006, 21:30
There is to many PB cheats out there to have PB in ArmA
Whatever people say about PB it still finds and kick/bans cheaters. I prefer to let PB use 1-5% och my ps's cpu than to have to let cheaters walk all over me in public servers or ladder servers.And the reason to vote no simply cause you never see any cheaters since you NEVER play on a public server must be the most retarded reason i have ever read. PB is not perfect, but it's a hell of alot better than nothing at all, and to trust that a company that never ever wrote a cheat detecting software ever before can do a better job than a company that survives solely on makin anticheat softwares is borderline insane to. Implement PB and atleast have the best protection you can get.
Does Punk Buster tolerate user sound mods in multiplay? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/wink_o.gif
If it does, I agree PB in ArmA. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/tounge2.gif
The server admin decides what Punkbuster does and does not allow. he could set it to check sound files or not check soundfiles as he see's fit.
If you were worried about people amplifying the footstep sounds of removing background noise, which has the same effect you could set Punkbuster to scan for it. If you were not bothered by it, you could set it not to.
[JW]Mutant
Oct 13 2006, 16:23
As a admin for BF2 I have found that it would be almost impossible to police people people using hacks and cheats.
When PB is set up properly it is fantastic.
PB screen shots show up everything and I for one would be disappointed if it was not used.
mickuzy
Oct 13 2006, 18:03
id be happy with or without it
I really hate humans sometimes. This shouldn't even be an issue, but some assholes don't want good clean fun. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/mad_o.gif
I guess I would be FOR some kind of anti-cheat, because I don't want to have the thought of someone cheating to cross my mind when playing this game.
As a LAN player, and a co-op player, it makes no real difference for me on this game.
Punkbuster is my anti cheat solution of choice, but I have no particular call for one with this game.
[ZG]BUZZARD
Oct 14 2006, 00:19
I voted for no because of my experience in BF1942 - it stopped auto-updating which it should do no matter what, and I ended up having to update it manually... I did it twice, then had enough of it - so I DON'T want in in ArmA. Plus, unlike other games, I just KNOW that ArmA won't even be forgiving to dispense 0.1% of CPU power to run it, so forgettaboutit, will ya?
I'd like to know if BIS has ever considered PunkBuster as an anticheating, antiteamkilling device? I do believe it can hold it's own and is quite efficent. It would eliminate the massive TKing when an admin isn't around and can take care of cheaters, again when the admin isn't around.
Anybody else has any thoughts on this?
Rofflecopter
Mar 6 2007, 14:36
PB does nothing for TK'ing, it's only an anticheat device.
Oh? I thought it could be configured for TKing.
Rambo-16AAB
Mar 6 2007, 14:40
It was also restrict the massive modding community.
Anti teamkilling though :- http://www.armagbl.net
Hmm, there's no explanation on how it works on that page. At least I found none. Mind if you explain it to me?
as rambo said, it was brought up a few months ago on the forums and basically most people didnt want it as it would cause problems for the modding scene (which basically floated OFP).
Rambo-16AAB
Mar 6 2007, 17:00
How the Arma Blanlist works. ?
Its a compiled list of banned Team killer ID's that anyone can download and use on their own server.
The list is compiled by a few ( but growing ) number of trusted servers who place banned Teamkiller ID's into the database. The list doesnt contain bans for any other reason.
The Database contains no names or personal details, just the ID numbers.
As for punkbuster, yes , has been mentioned in the past, but that would cost the commuity dearly in the sudden drop in available PB safe mods.
Quote[/b] ]
PB does nothing for TK'ing, it's only an anticheat device
can be configured to even work as TK system if able read game variables (depends on game and it's only "bonus" feature, if able then use game internal or user made solution)
Quote[/b] ]
It was also restrict the massive modding community.
Rambo ... please stop "spreading" false informations ...
PB works with modding (see Q3, UE, BF based games) and can be configured to support multiple files of different sizes and hashes ...
for Arma modding community will be PB same problem like signed addons feature already built-in engine
(simple it's no problem at all)
most of ANTI PUNKBUSTER and ANTI STEAM/VAC and so on trashtalk roots from absolute ignorance and zero functionality/features knowledge of these who "WHINE" most against them ...
and i'm not saying they perfect ...
just that others are WAY worse (aka if someone give me option to choose between nothing, PunkBuster, VAC2, HackShield, GameGuard then i choose PB)
Quote[/b] ]
Hmm, there's no explanation on how it works on that page. At least I found none. Mind if you explain it to me?
of course there are informatiosn pages about PB ... i guess you lazy to find them
http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=info.php
detailed informations differ by each game then, so just look at AA
http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=faq-aa.php
server stuff
http://www.evenbalance.com/publications/aa-ad/index.htm
client stuff http://www.evenbalance.com/publications/aa-pl/index.htm
downloads
http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=dl-aa.php
most of PB features and settings are well documented ...
rest are either experimetnal leftovers or unused obsolete ones ...
d3dsh33p
Mar 6 2007, 17:10
I can tell you that PB is garbage
we constantly find new ways around it, and even low level coders can figure it out.
waste of time imho
I can tell you that PB is garbage
we constantly find new ways around it, and even low level coders can figure it out.
waste of time imho
d3d maybe it's garbage http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif but best on market ...
or can You show me better one ? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif (ignore VAC2 as limitation are obvious)
plus this garbage keeps most cheating n00bs away,
private elite coded cheats will exist for any type of game
P.S. as You may noticed eysterday PB finally released theirs service based client, which removed need for certain privileges (admin acc) etc.
Quote[/b] ]
Hmm, there's no explanation on how it works on that page. At least I found none. Mind if you explain it to me?
of course there are informatiosn pages about PB ... i guess you lazy to find them
I wasn't talking about PB, I was talking about the banlist that Rambo pointed out. I wonder what is that game ID, is it unique to a game copy or what? As it seems as a rather fast bypass.
@<hidden>: then why don't you do Even Balance a favour and send them a list of problems and they might fix it.
But yes, PB does support mods easly, just look at BF1942 or BF2. Forgotten Hope for BF1942 is the prime example, the mod is about 3 gigs in size.
TrevorOfCrete
Mar 6 2007, 17:19
How the Arma Blanlist works. ?
Its a compiled list of banned Team killer ID's that anyone can download and use on their own server.
The list is compiled by a few ( but growing ) number of trusted servers who place banned Teamkiller ID's into the database. The list doesnt contain bans for any other reason.
The Database contains no names or personal details, just the ID numbers.
As for punkbuster, yes , has been mentioned in the past, but that would cost the commuity dearly in the sudden drop in available PB safe mods.
hmm, sounds like a bad idea. What if somone plays on a server and accidently crashed a chopper with lots of te-mates in. The admin might ban him out of anger, then he would be added to the list. Thats not fair, even though it prevents real TK'ers (but there likely to shove off to the next new game in time anyway)
Quote[/b] ]
Hmm, there's no explanation on how it works on that page. At least I found none. Mind if you explain it to me?
of course there are informatiosn pages about PB ... i guess you lazy to find them
I wasn't talking about PB, I was talking about the banlist that Rambo pointed out. I wonder what is that game ID, is it unique to a game copy or what? As it seems as a rather fast bypass.
@<hidden>: then why don't you do Even Balance a favour and send them a list of problems and they might fix it.
But yes, PB does support mods easly, just look at BF1942 or BF2. Forgotten Hope for BF1942 is the prime example, the mod is about 3 gigs in size.
ah sorry my fault then ...
i agree that TK banlist is easily abusable and problematic in case of e.g. someone crashing full heli into full heli because of bug/control problem etc. ...
and btw. here info about new PB service solution http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=pbsvcfaq.php
in PB banning on server got tons of levels, by clan tag, nickname, PB ID, game ID, IP etc...
Rambo-16AAB
Mar 6 2007, 17:51
The TK Banlist does require an admin to have common sense when banning.
Its there for those who wan t it, if you dont, dont use it. Its your own choice.
In ArmA. Its never gonna happen. PB has tight controls which prevent files from being modded, it wouldnt be suitable for ArmA. PB even stops you using TS overlays etc and it will auto ban you. Also to implement it in the game would be a lot of bother.
Anti TK scripts exist and work brilliantly, u just need the mapmaker to add them.
Banning ingame needs work, we need to be able to ban ingame without having to ammend a banlist outside of the game then having to restart the server for it to take effect.
Otherwise im fine with what we've got
d3dsh33p
Mar 6 2007, 22:04
my e buddies would g0t really mad at me if i did such a thing
with that aside I loved this gameplay since ofp and I would hate to see this community get bogged down with more issues about shitty 3rd party software
Hint: a smart admin is the only solution
In ArmA. Its never gonna happen. PB has tight controls which prevent files from being modded, it wouldnt be suitable for ArmA. PB even stops you using TS overlays etc and it will auto ban you. Also to implement it in the game would be a lot of bother.
Anti TK scripts exist and work brilliantly, u just need the mapmaker to add them.
Banning ingame needs work, we need to be able to ban ingame without having to ammend a banlist outside of the game then having to restart the server for it to take effect.
Otherwise im fine with what we've got
strange as i use certain TS overlay and other types of overlay fine in PB games http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
and tight control over file erm ...
i'm sure you know you can define files lists in PB server including multiple version of single file
like weapons.pbo MD5hash1 MD5hash2 etc, don't worry it can be partial MD5 hash also to avoid CPU and I/O overload
implementing it into game is less bother than developing own low level AC system from ground (let say its like developing whole new middleware so 2-5 y at min)
Rambo-16AAB
Mar 7 2007, 07:46
I agree that a good admin is key, but you also need goo admin tools, which arma hasnt realy got ( no RCON of any kind for one ).
Untill BIS bring the Admining side of the game up to speed, server hosts will have to make up their own minds on how best to use whatever they can find, whether its editing maps to contain punnishment scripts, shared ban lists or unfortunately locking their server and only letting a select few play.
lets not forget we're talking about a game with a handful of servers and a few hundred players, the vast majority of which are fine people.
net result is i think the ban list will work perfectly well, chances are the idiots wont be able to hide in a game with such a small community and after a while (once the common garden variety muppet leaves) youll know who the idiots are and just ban on sight.
in my opinion punkbuster is over the top, and more hassle than it's worth.
Quote[/b] ]I agree that a good admin is key, but you also need goo admin tools, which arma hasnt realy got ( no RCON of any kind for one )
when You bring up RCON then take note that PB contains such feature too ...
Quote[/b] ]in my opinion punkbuster is over the top, and more hassle than it's worth.
and i still wonder what's up with that PB more hassle than good i mean in every game (except MMO like Warrock) it's OPTIONAL (aka You can disable it on both server and client)
Dwarden
Mar 12 2007, 08:38
BUZZARD @<hidden> Oct. 14 2006,03:19)]I voted for no because of my experience in BF1942 -
it stopped auto-updating which it should do no matter what, and I ended up having to update it manually...
I did it twice, then had enough of it -
so I DON'T want in in ArmA. Plus, unlike other games,
I just KNOW that ArmA won't even be forgiving to dispense 0.1% of CPU power to run it, so forgettaboutit, will ya?
EvenBalance now got tool named PBSETUP to update all PB games installed on computers, as usualy for Win, Linux and Mac
(in fact it can be used also as tool to update unlimited number of machines via network shares etc.)
read more... http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=pbsetup.php
---
Another (relative old i know lol) news is existence of PB remote UDP control via tool PBUCON, exists for Win, Linux and Mac
read more... http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=pbucon.php
---
And latest fresh news, EvenBalance moves to use system service for PB to get rid of these admin specific rights
(thus allows game run even on non admin accounts) and better OS related compatiblity, supported are W2k, wXP and Vista
read more ... http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=pbsvcfaq.php
so, is this evil PunkBuster still so evil for You? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif)
churnedfortaste
Mar 12 2007, 08:50
I think this game is asking to get raged to be honest...
Dwarden
Mar 12 2007, 08:54
I think this game is asking to get raged to be honest...
what u mean? it can be easily raped already ...
via drivers (either glitches, bugged features or modded ones)
via DX SDK tools with bit effort
via tons of DX tools available on internet
etc.
and i don't even get into messing with game itself or replaced DX http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
sad http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/sad_o.gif
[G-Shock]
Mar 12 2007, 08:58
Autoevidently, i've seen countless games destroyed by cheaters and cheating is an issue.
Some games have a self-developed AC system, some others, the vast majority (and more than 50%) use punkbuster and there's got to be a reason don't you think?
I don't see why voting no and actually, the clients can be checked for file integrity already so PB has nothing to do with hampering modding. I voted a big Yes. http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Voted no to be part of the majority and because I never encounter any. Either play on Pwed server or with a non-retarded admin and you'll be just fine.
Killerwatt
Mar 12 2007, 10:22
Voted no here as well. The best "punk buster" of all is a vigillant admin.
Dwarden
Mar 12 2007, 11:10
Voted no here as well. The best "punk buster" of all is a vigillant admin.
i'm gunna say that admin will be unable to discover you cheat if You not cheat obviously (insta headshots on 10km or tracking people if you see thru stuff http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif ...
man people are so naive ...
voted no
pb is ok for stopping the casual cheater, but it can be bypassed.
also, it is Expensive.
i'd much rather see BIS put just a fraction of that money in upgrading this forum with a decent search function - one that includes showing posts instead of just loonnngggg threads as results. :-)
Voted no.
EvenBalance also assume that everyone playing the games are tech-savvy. Games are becoming more and more difficult for non-techie players to get in to. Imagine you were enjoying your newfound game you just bought and were kicked from all servers because PB said "cvar_maxpackets = 30". That happened after COD2 went to 1.03 and some new config rules applied. Nah, it didn't do anything friendly like set them to appropriate values on your behalf. Players who did not understand what was going on would have to go to Evenbalance and find out what it's all about. For non-techies, this kind of thing is a nightmare. (There's a point here, perhaps, about non-techie's playing games, but that's for another discussion).
On another note, one of the better things to come from PB is the Auto-Master-Ban-List (Auto MBL) (Info at http://www.punksbusted.com). Essentially, hosted servers opt to stream the MBL to themselves. Your PB GUID get's banned on one, you can't connect to any of the others. PB GUID's are voted for banning in a forum, where you post the PB-shot that is suspicious, and if the general consensus is "yes", the PB GUID goes on the list.
For it to work, PB should be pretty much transparent. None if this screen-full of text you get in America's Army. If PB insists for some game that a particular config variable be within known constraints, then it must provide the user with the option to set this var on their behalf (It must ask permission, at least). This would make it easier.
But then, is it worth it? I've seen sites out there that say "PB WON'T CATCH YOU!" If this is true, what's the point?
McTavish
Mar 12 2007, 15:54
Absolutely, positively NO.
As a regular, honest player of Bvarious PB enabled shooters over the years I've lost count of the number of times I've been booted out of a game unceremoniously because PunkBuster decided I wasn't "compatable", forcing me to run their darn update program.
It's inconvenient, it doesn't work as a genuinely inobtrusive background process and worst of all it has prematurely, and with no warning, booted me out of proper clan matches http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/banghead.gif
Dwarden
Mar 13 2007, 00:32
Same song still again ?
How does cvar check differ from files integrity, custom files (faces/sounds) or in theory internal ArmA var checks ? http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Seems like most of people forgot that "PB is optionable not must!" ...
and i doubt most of You will be playing games like CoD w/o PB existing at all http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Shataan
Mar 13 2007, 01:19
I don`t need it. I play co op primarilly. Mp has degraded horribley in the last 5 years. The A.I. will always play incharacter.
[G-Shock]
Mar 13 2007, 12:21
Sadly, i noticed 90% of those who voted no, do not know anything about pb and it's just after all as it takes months of studying and serious proficiency before being able to openly criticize it.
Consider that without PB the vast majority of games out there wouldn't even exist. The fact that some of us only play CO-OPS doesn't mean PB is a bad choice...the fact we don't need it doesn't mean others don't either.
I would like to reassure all of you that the issue with lack of transparency in the anticheating orgs and their MBL is a non-issue. First of all, the loading of their master banlists is not mandatory (so each server admin may choose which one to load and IF to load one at all) and the server admins may pick the AC org they like best *if any*.
Secondly, MBL do not mean GLOBAL bans. Cheater would only be banned on those servers using that mbl...only EBI can apply hardware bans and it's a method generally reserved to those hackers who are beyond any AC script or check.
My network bans 50 cheaters a week and i know what i'm saying. I've been talking to ebi representatives everyday for years now and i have no doubt pb would be a good choice for this game.
Expect cheats to come out for this game like mushrooms. It happens for every game and it will happen for this too.
Isn't it better at this point to release BIS personnel and commit them to more important tasks while ensuring the cheaters have bad days by giving this task to PROs like the guys at ebi ? That's the only sane question imho...and my answer is YES http://forums.bistudio.com/oldsmileys/smile_o.gif
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.0 Copyright © 2013 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.