99 replies to this topic

[Summon3r]

Gas Guzzler, on 09 August 2015 - 11:25 AM, said:

Report it with video if you feel there is really something wrong.

I doubt there is anything wrong though.

this

[LORD ORION]

Malakie, on 09 August 2015 - 11:17 AM, said:

I have a question... How often are the devs checking for hack/cheats being used? Because either there is a big bug that pops up in faction games or there are once again people cheating.

In the last few weeks I have seen quite a few games where something is very off. Targeting that is perfect no matter how a mech moves or turns, shots that kill in one hit on just about every mech that person targets, games where mechs do not take hardly any damage while easily taking out opponents.

The most prevalent seems to be the targeting and high damage every hit... I watched one game where every single member of a team was destroyed without a single death by the other team... and I have seen that happen more than once. Usually in Faction combat. There is no way probably that one team can lose every single mech almost instantly when hit and the other team walk away with barely a scratch.

Now some of us are not the top end hit everything we shoot at perfect every time players. But we are also not slouches especially when we have a good team leader and we work as a unit... and yet it matters not in these games because it does not matter if we run and twist and whatever, the hits always nail the same spot and within one of two of them we are dead.

So like I said, either there is a HUGE bug that is popping up pretty much making some players invincible or again we have people cheating the system...

How often are the devs checking for this?

You're not going to get accurate crosshair positioning while viewing.

You have the server calculating what to show you based on the ping of the person you are watching and the person he is shooting at... and then that information is relayed to you with more latency from your ping.

It will always look off if you're seeing 250ms or higher latency.

Now add in all the reticle toggles that good players use. Toggle armlock, center torso, centre legs... There is no way viewing a person is going to show you they have an aimbot vs goodaim and solid practives. (you need to learn to use these toggles to converge your weapons, get crosshar on target fast, and to put your crosshairs in the right place to shoot in advance while perfomring aggressive manuvering.

However,
There are a couple of things to detect derps who don't know how to calibrate their hacks properly.
1) You get hit in the exact same place all the time from every angle no matter what you are doing. (hide aimbot fail)
2) The hackers walk around like derps in very bad positioning until you put your crosshair over them, and they react instanty to you. *there is a demonstration of the hack on youtube that shows the hacker gets a text warning when an enemy reticle is put on them*

Spotting the morons is really easy, and they don't last long....
Determining when somone using hacks proprly vs someone is just good is prbably impossible to tell from watching.

But yeah, everyone knows cheating is rampant in this game.
Everyone knows that you need to be a network engineer to calibrate your hitreg properly.

Alot of BS in this game... but, people love battletech... this game would be deserted if PGI didn't have the battletech IP.

[InspectorG]

With the player base and the nature of this game(in particularly Solo drops),

it is likely more respectable and worth your effort to cheat at Tick-Tack-Toe.

[Escef]

Malakie, on 10 August 2015 - 06:39 PM, said:

And keep in mind, I was using standard engine, MAX armor including ferrous fibrous upgrade...

I'm a little surprised no one commented on this.

What is it that you think ferro armor does? You've mentioned a couple times that you have ferro armor, but that doesn't actually mean anything. It doesn't make your mech resist damage. It doesn't allow you to exceed normal armor maximums. It's a little lighter per unit of armor than standard plate, that's it. A ton of normal armor is 32 points of protection, ferro armor is just shy of 36 per ton; maximum armor is based on points, not armor tonnage.

Your Atlas, for example, would be MUCH better off with endo steel instead of ferro armor. Ferro armor will at most save you about 2 tons, that's if you max out your armor protection. Endo steel halves the weight of your internal structure, which is normally 1/10th your mechs tonnage. On an Atlas endo steel works out as saving you 5 tons. 5 vs 2 is a big difference. That could be more heat sinks, bigger (or more) guns, more ammo, an Active Probe (cuts through ECM interference), and/or AMS.

At this point I also have to ask, how is your front/back armor allocated on your torsos? I've actually heard before of someone that performed a massive brainfart and reversed the numbers and was walking around wondering why he was getting killed so easily.

[Sarlic]

You should definitely front load the armor on the Atlas. It will expose your back even more - but with decent piloting (e.g. watch your back and make use of the available terrain) it is and could be a life saver.

Because the CT / ST is ridiculously fast breached by all those perfect convergence, laserspam/gauss and focus fire.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

support informed.

[Mcgral18]

Sarlic, on 11 August 2015 - 01:20 AM, said:

You should definitely front load the armor on the Atlas. It will expose your back even more - but with decent piloting (e.g. watch your back and make use of the available terrain) it is and could be a life saver.

Because the CT / ST is ridiculously fast breached by all those perfect convergence, laserspam/gauss and focus fire.

Yesterday I came across an atlas who had MORE THAN 42 rear armour on a rear side torso...


That's over double stock...so I was very confused. Either that or hitreg died...don't think it was Oceanic though (270 ping).

[nehebkau]

Again. I ask has Russ said anything further after his "we know of more and are watching them and will be banning them later" post?

Honestly, I would put the incidence of cheating in the general population at a very low level -- the cost of the cheat software is absurd for playing stompy-stompy robots. On the other-hand I could see a case for cheat use being much higher on the competitive side where there is pressure to be excellent and many competitive players spare no expense (in time, equipment or software) to do better. Were the latter the case, and given that Russ wants this to be an e-sport, I could see him not wanting to alienate his target market. (or maybe I'm just baiting conspiracy nuts -- with only 2 cups of coffee in me i am still a little fuzzy)


And let me relate a funny story on how, in an older game, for which i was a CSR, we detected people using a radar hack -- its funny.

First, as a CSR we were allowed to download and install (the company had pirated it lol) the radar hack ourselves. Funny thing about this radar hack was that it didn't detect stealth players. We would go out into the game-world and hide, stealthy, out of LOS near a heavy traffic area.

We would watch, with the radar hack, for teams running by and, as they pass by us would drop our stealth and watch the other players. If they kept running by, they were legit. Often, they would instantly turn and b-line straight for us and we would let them kill us, bring up the admin console and BAM! Account suspended please contact customer support!

Was, quite enjoyable and I was a little sad when the devs came up with in-game detection.

Edited by nehebkau, 11 August 2015 - 10:27 AM.

[Malakie]

Too many replies to comment on each one so will just do it as a full reply...

The biggest problem with cheating, IF that is what is happening again, is that it ruins the experience which in time will cause players to eventually quit playing altogether.
I have seen it before in games that I have been part of the full development beta teams. Some of you may remember a game called Space & Beyond. It started losing players right and left due to cheating until suddenly one day the game was completely shutdown and taken offline.

Other games have suffered membership issues for this as well. Games where the devs took steps to mitigate the problem are the ones that survive though.. Ultima Online being one of the oldest examples.

I am a Battletech fan AND part of some of its actual history (some of you probably have read a couple other threads about who I am) and I want to see this game succeed well into the future, expand and grow and become something akin to a living Battletech universe we can all enjoy.

But I also know of two people who have already quit, one due to these kind of issues and another due to the repetitive nature we are all stuck with in terms of maps, missions, etc..

In previous posts I also said that yes, there ARE a few ELITE players out there who are just damn good. But I also CLEARLY stated the situations I have encountered were not normal. Mechs were moving not just standing there. Hits were striking areas that should NOT be struck based on angles, being turned away etc.

Someone else also mentioned Ferrous Fibrous armor. Actually Ferrous Fibrous armor is NOT standard armor and is supposed to offer enhanced protection over standard armor AT a reduced weight. Now if they have coded to be standard but weigh less, then it is NOT conforming to actual Battletech FF armor. I was under the impression in game that FF armor DOES offer the enhanced protection AND weight reduction... thus the reason some of my mechs were upgraded with it.

They also mentioned I should change the internal structure instead. I don't agree when creating a 'tank' mech. You lose way to many 'slots' for mounting weapons and armor by doing so to utilize in a 'tank' mech. If your goal is to create a less armored but more weapon powerful mech, then yes, internal is a good choice. This is also a good choice for a missile boat since in most cases you are not going to be rushing into close range combat where outer armor is a must vs internal.

Since two of my mechs are designed to take a beating as well as dish a beating out in my faction mechs I use, I went with heavy on the armor and standard internals, heavy weapons and double heat sinks as well. In these case with IS mechs, I also always use standard engines and if I have the room left, CASE.

Anyhow, the entire point is that as I stated, I do not make this or say any of this off the cuff or lightly. I am not saying what I am saying after a single mission or even two or three missions.. I am talking about this after WEEKS and weeks of monitoring, watching, witnessing and talking to others.

Yesterday's match I talked about was the final 'straw' so to speak that put me over the top in terms of taking this public and contacting the dev team.

NOTHING has been determined yet. I could be wrong. I hope I am. BUT with everything I have talked about, there is more pointing to some kind of 'issue', whether a bug or outright cheating, than not.

[Escef]

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 11:55 AM, said:

I am a Battletech fan AND part of some of its actual history (some of you probably have read a couple other threads about who I am) and I want to see this game succeed well into the future, expand and grow and become something akin to a living Battletech universe we can all enjoy.

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 11:55 AM, said:

Someone else also mentioned Ferrous Fibrous armor. Actually Ferrous Fibrous armor is NOT standard armor and is supposed to offer enhanced protection over standard armor AT a reduced weight. Now if they have coded to be standard but weigh less, then it is NOT conforming to actual Battletech FF armor. I was under the impression in game that FF armor DOES offer the enhanced protection AND weight reduction... thus the reason some of my mechs were upgraded with it.

Claims to be a part of Battletech history, has no idea what ferro armor actually does.

There ARE armors in TT Battletech that offer better protection, but none at reduced weight.

• Stealth Armor: Penalizes opponent to-hit rolls at medium and long ranges.
  
• Reflective Armor: Reduces damage received from energy weapons.
  
• Reactive Armor: Reduces damage from missiles and artillery.
  
• Ferro-Lamellor Armor: Provides less protection per ton, but reduces all damage received.
  
• Hardened Armor: Half as many armor points per ton, but each point soaks 2 damage. (Can mount twice as much armor.)

Notice what isn't on that list? All members of the ferro-fibrous family (regular FF, Light FF, Heavy FF, and Clan FF).

[Malakie]

Escef, on 11 August 2015 - 12:15 PM, said:

Claims to be a part of Battletech history, has no idea what ferro armor actually does.

There ARE armors in TT Battletech that offer better protection, but none at reduced weight.

• Stealth Armor: Penalizes opponent to-hit rolls at medium and long ranges.
  
• Reflective Armor: Reduces damage received from energy weapons.
  
• Reactive Armor: Reduces damage from missiles and artillery.
  
• Ferro-Lamellor Armor: Provides less protection per ton, but reduces all damage received.
  
• Hardened Armor: Half as many armor points per ton, but each point soaks 2 damage. (Can mount twice as much armor.)

Notice what isn't on that list? All members of the ferro-fibrous family (regular FF, Light FF, Heavy FF, and Clan FF).

ORIGINALLY, IF in fact your list is correct which I will be looking up, ORIGINALLY Ferrous Fibrous armor was a BETTER armor at a lighter weight.

And get rid of the snide condescending attitude while you are at it.. all you have to do is check or read to find out who I am and my 'claim'... I included pictures, data and more so bite me if you have a problem with it. That is NOT the issue here.

Now, it is possible the Battletech world has made some changes from when I was involved... but I was not aware of any nor had I heard of any changes to armor types in the ORIGINAL gaming system when the Clans hit in 3050.

There was Standard armor and Ferro Fibrous armor... PERIOD.

BTW, I have no idea what TT Battletech means... I am talking about FASA, Battletech back in the day when we still had the game in books - the heyday of Battletech... the ORIGINAL Battletech, not some modernized changed game you must be talking about.

[Escef]

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

ORIGINALLY, IF in fact your list is correct which I will be looking up, ORIGINALLY Ferrous Fibrous armor was a BETTER armor at a lighter weight.

You're gonna have to cite a source for that. As far back as TRO2750 you don't see ANY game mechanics that support you.

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

And get rid of the snide condescending attitude while you are at it.. all you have to do is check or read to find out who I am and my 'claim'... I included pictures, data and more so bite me if you have a problem with it. That is NOT the issue here.

I can include pictures and data stating that I'm Elanor Roosevelt. That doesn't make the claim true. You've gotten the attitude you have received because you make claims to "being somebody" of some kind of importance, yet display a lack of knowledge of the material.

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

Now, it is possible the Battletech world has made some changes from when I was involved... but I was not aware of any nor had I heard of any changes to armor types in the ORIGINAL gaming system when the Clans hit in 3050.

Inner Sphere ferro armor has NOT changed since its introduction in TRO2750, save for any caused by alterations/clarifications to the rules in regards to rounding numbers.

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 12:37 PM, said:

BTW, I have no idea what TT Battletech means... I am talking about FASA, Battletech back in the day when we still had the game in books - the heyday of Battletech... the ORIGINAL Battletech, not some modernized changed game you must be talking about.

TT = table top. Wow, the ignorance is astounding here.

[Malakie]

Escef, on 11 August 2015 - 12:59 PM, said:

You're gonna have to cite a source for that. As far back as TRO2750 you don't see ANY game mechanics that support you.



I can include pictures and data stating that I'm Elanor Roosevelt. That doesn't make the claim true. You've gotten the attitude you have received because you make claims to "being somebody" of some kind of importance, yet display a lack of knowledge of the material.



Inner Sphere ferro armor has NOT changed since its introduction in TRO2750, save for any caused by alterations/clarifications to the rules in regards to rounding numbers.



TT = table top. Wow, the ignorance is astounding here.

First off, I made NO CLAIMS what so ever to be someone of importance. Just because you want to ASSUME or add lib or make something out of nothing for whatever angry reason you have, does not mean I will sit here and take it.. Maybe you can intimidate other people behind your keyboard.. You picked the wrong person this time because not only do I not back down, but I can back up my comments and have done so before. I also CLEARLY explain what I am saying for those that take the time to READ them.

Learn to read. I SAID I was was involved in the past in the Battletech universe team for a while, having a hand in some of the stuff that FASA did, especially in computer work and in the design of the Battletech Game Centers. I did this while on medical hold and physical rehab from injuries sustained while active duty United States Navy. Shortly after that, I was recruited by Commodore Business Machines and work for 2 years as one of the head technical engineers before finally going back to full duty and my military career. I am proud of my past and the things I had a hand in. And if you do not like it, too f'ing bad.

And if you BOTHERED to read those other discussions, you would have all the proof you need (or data to EASILY look it up for yourself for verification).

I don't know what bug you have up your rear end.. perhaps the fact I am calling out some possible cases of cheating and for some reason that bothers you?

I am not claiming to be an expert nor anything else even with my past involvement in the genre. However, WE designed and coded a full on Battletech game back then based on the "table top" books and rules. There was NO SUCH thing as you wrote... Instead of jumping all over you because of something you said I had never heard before, I stated I would have to see IF there have been changes SINCE then I was not aware of.. YOU on the other hand, have clearly taken it upon yourself to just launch into condescending insulting sentences and better than thou attitude.

I said, things change and I may not be aware of changes after that period. But ORIGINALLY, there were TWO armor types. And they were as I listed them.

Today, I have no idea what the genre holds by whomever is still making Battletech table top products. But back when FASA was Battletech, that I do know because I was part of it... and if you don't like it, bite me and move on to a different thread taking your crap with you.

[Escef]

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 01:44 PM, said:

However, WE designed and coded a full on Battletech game back then based on the "table top" books and rules. There was NO SUCH thing as you wrote... Instead of jumping all over you because of something you said I had never heard before, I stated I would have to see IF there have been changes SINCE then I was not aware of.. YOU on the other hand, have clearly taken it upon yourself to just launch into condescending insulting sentences and better than thou attitude.

Yes, yes, yes, and I'm a former Signals Intelligence Analyst.

Here's the long and short of it. You kept on about how you were getting killed despite using ferro armor. I pointed out that ferro armor does not do what you think it does. You went on to say something along the lines of "they must have changed it" and "they got it wrong". The problem is that they DID NOT change it, nor get it wrong. Point of fact, it has been unchanged since 1989, when TRO2750 was first published. So, either your memory is faulty, your team took liberties with the game mechanics when you made your game, and/or you are full of crap.

I'm inclined to favor the "full of crap" explanation. When someone starts throwing around talk that boils down to, "Do you know who I am!?" all that is accomplished is appearing as a child throwing a temper tantrum.

[Malakie]

Escef, on 11 August 2015 - 01:57 PM, said:

Yes, yes, yes, and I'm a former Signals Intelligence Analyst.

Here's the long and short of it. You kept on about how you were getting killed despite using ferro armor. I pointed out that ferro armor does not do what you think it does. You went on to say something along the lines of "they must have changed it" and "they got it wrong". The problem is that they DID NOT change it, nor get it wrong. Point of fact, it has been unchanged since 1989, when TRO2750 was first published. So, either your memory is faulty, your team took liberties with the game mechanics when you made your game, and/or you are full of crap.

I'm inclined to favor the "full of crap" explanation. When someone starts throwing around talk that boils down to, "Do you know who I am!?" all that is accomplished is appearing as a child throwing a temper tantrum.

I find it hilarious that you claim to be the expert yet had nothing to do with the original design or anything else back then.

But then I suppose you also say that CLANS did not have a DECISIVE advantage in the original universe either, right? An advantage that allowed them to basically walk right through IS mechs originally until the IS was able to incorporate changes to their own designs that helped but did not stop the massive advantage.

But you know it all apparently because you have played the game. Apparently all the actual DATA we got FROM FASA, apparently the very data that the two DESIGNERS of Battletech GAVE and worked with us on, is invalid.

So I bow to your superior know it all. I had no idea you knew more than either of the two founders of Battletech, the specs as they were back then originally and so on.

The full of crap issue here is the person you see in the mirror.

Oh and BTW, you OUTTED yourself as not know what you are talking about... and I quote:"Point of fact, it has been unchanged since 1989, when TRO2750 was first published"

If you were so brilliant you would know the CLANS NEVER APPEARED UNTIL 3050-3061 and FF armor did not appear until THEY arrived.....

So take your bull and peddle it to someone else because you have no clue what you are talking about as we now can all easily read and see from your own comments.

[Escef]

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 02:10 PM, said:

Oh and BTW, you OUTTED yourself as not know what you are talking about... and I quote:"Point of fact, it has been unchanged since 1989, when TRO2750 was first published"

If you were so brilliant you would know the CLANS NEVER APPEARED UNTIL 3050-3061 and FF armor did not appear until THEY arrived.....

So take your bull and peddle it to someone else because you have no clue what you are talking about as we now can all easily read and see from your own comments.

http://www.sarna.net...l_Readout:_2750

Read that nice and slow, chummer. Nice... and... slow.

[bad arcade kitty]

as far your cheat accusations are largely related to poor hitreg on their part and poor aiming on your part

as far as i know, there is no 'no damage' cheat in this game (like that site links to which were deleted from this thread offers only aimbot, wallhack and threat warning), so if they shrug damage it's not them whom to blame, it's either a server/ping/connection problem or rather you just partially miss and partially spread damage too much

i also strongly doubt your ability to recognize cheaters, i'm sorry but you obviously didn't bother to check the mwo mechanics since you claim ferro armor as giving additional protection, if you don't know the basic mechanics how can you recognize suspicious moments

[Malakie]

Escef, on 11 August 2015 - 02:12 PM, said:

http://www.sarna.net...l_Readout:_2750

Read that nice and slow, chummer. Nice... and... slow.

Obviously you did not.. or you would have noted they are talking about TOURNAMENT rules. NOT Original standard rules. In fact it even specifies it was originally was allocated under the "Rules 2" specs.

One thing I will say you are right on was that there were some differing types in the TABLE TOP versions later on which I was not aware of. Even so, that was NOT the case ORIGINALLY as I stated. It was added LATER after the Clan invasion releases not prior to it.

It has become apparent to me you are nit picking very specific points for whatever reason you have just to have an argument. This WAS a discussion but instead of it remaining that, you decided to interject with insults and condescending comments.

In the long run, it does not matter. Today for the sake of THIS GAME, there are TWO armor types PERIOD. Standard and FF. From what I understood regarding THIS game AS I SAID, current FF gave a better protection rating AND less weight which is or was the same intent under the original Battletech system.

I tired of this and you... let's get back to the actual discussion and if that is not possible for you, then go elsewhere..

[bad arcade kitty]

Malakie, on 11 August 2015 - 02:31 PM, said:

In the long run, it does not matter. Today for the sake of THIS GAME, there are TWO armor types PERIOD. Standard and FF. From what I understood regarding THIS game AS I SAID, current FF gave a better protection rating AND less weight which is or was the same intent under the original Battletech system.

no, you are wrong; ferro armor merely weights less and takes more space
so your first bet to save weight it should be endo steel and only then if you have enough space for all the weapon, ammo and heatsinks you can pick ferro

also consider to have most of your armor front loaded, snipers generally should have less back armor, brawlers a bit more

[Malakie]

bad arcade kitty, on 11 August 2015 - 02:30 PM, said:

as far your cheat accusations are largely related to poor hitreg on their part and poor aiming on your part

as far as i know, there is no 'no damage' cheat in this game (like that site links to which were deleted from this thread offers only aimbot, wallhack and threat warning), so if they shrug damage it's not them whom to blame, it's either a server/ping/connection problem or rather you just partially miss and partially spread damage too much

i also strongly doubt your ability to recognize cheaters, i'm sorry but you obviously didn't bother to check the mwo mechanics since you claim ferro armor as giving additional protection, if you don't know the basic mechanics how can you recognize suspicious moments

So you are also going to jump on the other guys bandwagon too huh?

Whatever... I will CLEARLY say it one last time. ORIGINALLY there were TWO armors, Standard and FF. PERIOD.

My understanding was that in THIS GAME, there are TWO armors. Standard and FF. PERIOD.

It was also my understanding that in THIS GAME, FF offered better protection and LESS weight than standard armor.

IF THAT part is wrong, then point me to something that shows that. Because I have yet to see anything that says different.

As for the cheating point.. I ALSO clearly said, I could be wrong and hope I am. And you clearly cannot read because I ALSO clearly said and explained EACH situation and how I came to the conclusion something was not right.

When I started the thread, I only new about the AIMBOT that I heard about.. I had never heard of the other one mentioned at all until yesterday... SO that means there could very well be OTHER CHEATS/HACKs that YOU have never heard of as well..

I am getting sick of REPEATING MYSELF and people not reading what is being written.. No freaking wonder things are going down hill here AND in game by losing long time players because of attitude and crap pulled by some players.

A discussion should be just that. Not a place to jump on someone, insult them, call them names etc... But apparently some of you have this chip on your shoulder that you just have to pull out when someone says something that irks you a bit because it is not exactly to your specification or understanding.. instead of DISCUSSING it and even offering correction for it, some of you think the right thing to do is just go spastic on the person.

Apparently my statement that I COULD BE WRONG and hope I am fell on deaf ears as well....

bad arcade kitty, on 11 August 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

no, you are wrong; ferro armor merely weights less and takes more space
so your first bet to save weight it should be endo steel and only then if you have enough space for all the weapon, ammo and heatsinks you can pick ferro

also consider to have most of your armor front loaded, snipers generally should have less back armor, brawlers a bit more

So point me to the links where it states this for THIS GAME.