587 replies to this topic

[S204STi]

GateheaD, on 11 May 2015 - 08:47 PM, said:

remember when PGI banned someone for talking spewing profranity-laced incentives at PGI employees on voice comms on a stream they were on?

FIFY

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

CMetz, on 11 May 2015 - 08:41 PM, said:

Yes, I watched most of the matches in question on the tournament stream.

Yes, there was more than reasonable suspicion to launch an investigation.

What many of you don't realize is that the player in question was someone that PGI wants to have around.

They have no reason to maliciously ban said player.

The only ppl who seem to dispute this are from his/her unit

oops they arent lol

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 11 May 2015 - 09:19 PM.

[Hobotorius Augustus Kerensky]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 11 May 2015 - 09:00 PM, said:

bout that...



And never explaining that or providing proof

The reporting system for ingame behavior was weaponized to the point that PGI was very tired of dealing with the reports stemming from us fighting people and mocking them - as a result we dramatically changed our behavior after discussions and are now very suspicious of non-transparent policies.

[Triordinant]

CMetz, on 11 May 2015 - 08:43 PM, said:

Also, I hate to break peoples' hearts, but as much as this Davion loyalist has disagreed with the ways of NKVA in the past, and as much as I disagree with much of what some of their members have proposed in this thread, the cheater was not a member of NKVA.

This is the reason why everyone thinks so:

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, on 11 May 2015 - 07:00 PM, said:

I'm not sure what your point is. My point is that if you were a member of a successful, controversial unit like NKVA, you would be doing the same when repeated abuses against your guildmates happened.

Edited by Triordinant, 11 May 2015 - 09:10 PM.

[Hobotorius Augustus Kerensky]

Coordinator Aigis Kurita, on 11 May 2015 - 09:02 PM, said:

Given CryEngine's long, distinguished history of being extremely vulnerable to hacks, CryTek's OWN GAMES included and, with MWO opened, the lack of any third party anticheat software running, the alternative is that PGI, with its (understandably) rather limited resources, the same company that bungles calculating something as simple as proper values while implementing UAC jam quirks, somehow managed to come up with their own anticheat where CryTek, a company employing approximately 700 people, could not, as far as I know. This seems rather, uh, unlikely to me.

Uh, middleware???

[Kiiyor]

S204STi, on 11 May 2015 - 08:59 PM, said:

Yup, and yet the trainwreck ensues.

Well, It has momentum. Hard to stand in front of that at the moment.

Perhaps when the dust has cleared. I predict another 15 pages before the last tumbling carriages grind to a halt, and people start the gruesome task of identifying bodyparts.

[Elizander]

No matter how much you argue with evidence it is SOP for most publishers of online games to not share the details of ban cases. Everything falls back to the EULA anyway (where you don't own your account etc, etc).

Are innocents never banned by companies? From 11 years of experience no, people make mistakes, but at the same time things have to be done. Same goes for the real world. No justice system is perfect. If that's their final decision then that's that. It'll be left up to the person affected to discuss the matter with PGI directly.

People who are banned will often lie to friends family and anyone else that they do not cheat. They will create pity threads and such to either clear their name or get their account unbanned. I've seen a grown man bring his own 5 year old daughter to make a case that she was playing his account when it got banned for botting in one game. Like, seriously, leave your kid out of it.

This is the ideal case for a banning system where a main account is involved. It gets way less efficient when disposable F2P accounts are used.

Edited by Elizander, 11 May 2015 - 09:15 PM.

[excalipur]

Coordinator Aigis Kurita, on 11 May 2015 - 09:02 PM, said:

Given CryEngine's long, distinguished history of being extremely vulnerable to hacks, CryTek's OWN GAMES included and, with MWO opened, the lack of any third party anticheat software running, the alternative is that PGI, with its (understandably) rather limited resources, the same company that bungles calculating something as simple as how multiplying a percent by a percent works while implementing UAC jam quirks, somehow managed to come up with their own anticheat where CryTek, a company employing approximately 700 people, could not, as far as I know. This seems rather, uh, unlikely to me.

occam's razor ftw

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

ah, now I get where the name Anders is from

[Hydrocarbon]

wanderer, on 11 May 2015 - 06:24 PM, said:

No, I certainly HOPE we get a public name and shame on cheaters.

It's already technically happening, however I'm sure there are legal reasons PGI can't just make their own list. I'm sure someone who's been burned in the past will take it upon themself to hunt down the banned accounts & post up their own list.


Regarding finding cheaters, IMO it really depends on how stupid the cheater is. In the case of "pilot X" calling completely unlikely (but ultimately 100% accurate) shots and rising from nowhere to top of the comp scene, it didn't take too much. If PGI has to sift through a pile of data for a needle, it's very unlikely.

In other words, the more you cheat the higher your chance for BANHAMMER. Or BANCANNON since we don't have melee attacks in MWO yet.

[Coordinator Toxic Kerensky]

Triordinant, on 11 May 2015 - 09:06 PM, said:

This is the reason why everyone thinks so:

Hobotorius Augustus Kerensky, on 11 May 2015 - 09:05 PM, said:

The reporting system for ingame behavior was weaponized to the point that PGI was very tired of dealing with the reports stemming from us fighting people and mocking them - as a result we dramatically changed our behavior after discussions and are now very suspicious of non-transparent policies.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Hobotorius Augustus Kerensky, on 11 May 2015 - 09:05 PM, said:

The reporting system for ingame behavior was weaponized

Got any proof of that?

reason I ask is because you all are asking for "proof"

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 11 May 2015 - 09:22 PM.

[R E T I]

Man i wanna say alot here but my boss would get mad lol.

[Dino Might]

Kiiyor, on 11 May 2015 - 09:08 PM, said:

Well, It has momentum. Hard to stand in front of that at the moment.

Perhaps when the dust has cleared. I predict another 15 pages before the last tumbling carriages grind to a halt, and people start the gruesome task of identifying bodyparts.

Best description of this so far. All I have to say is, thank goodness my life doesn't revolve around my online persona. This chain of jackassery has inspired me to go out, mow the lawn, ride my bicycle, repack my parachute rig, and pick up some groceries. Fresh air is nice.

[Whatzituyah]

Zedekiah316, on 11 May 2015 - 09:21 PM, said:

Man i wanna say alot here but my boss would get mad lol.

Then wait when you get off of work not now!

[Repasy Cooper]

excalipur, on 11 May 2015 - 09:12 PM, said:

occam's razor ftw

#middleware

[Hobotorius Augustus Kerensky]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 11 May 2015 - 09:20 PM, said:

Got any proof of that?

reason I ask is because you all are asking for "proof"

What kind of proof do you want, friend? I genuinely want to answer your question.

[IraqiWalker]

Repasy, on 11 May 2015 - 09:23 PM, said:

#middleware

It is an actual thing

http://en.wikipedia....wiki/Middleware

[Hobotorius Augustus Kerensky]

Hobotorius Augustus Kerensky, on 11 May 2015 - 09:24 PM, said:

What kind of proof do you want, friend? I genuinely want to answer your question.

I am serious of course, assuming you are asking in good faith and definitely aren't being intentionally dense about the crux of the situation.

Edited by Hobotorius Augustus Kerensky, 11 May 2015 - 09:27 PM.

[Sereglach]

Coordinator Aigis Kurita, on 11 May 2015 - 09:02 PM, said:

Given CryEngine's long, distinguished history of being extremely vulnerable to hacks, CryTek's OWN GAMES included and, with MWO opened, the lack of any third party anticheat software running, the alternative is that PGI, with its (understandably) rather limited resources, the same company that bungles calculating something as simple as how multiplying a percent by a percent works while implementing UAC jam quirks, somehow managed to come up with their own anticheat where CryTek, a company employing approximately 700 people, could not, as far as I know. This seems rather, uh, unlikely to me.

This . . . just . . . wow. For one, there's plenty of middleware to sniff out cheaters/hackers. For two, RSI (Star Citizen) is another game being built on the CryEngine and they've also stated that there's already a TON of tools to help them prevent cheating, and they plan on squashing it every time it comes up. Therefore, your statements about CryEngine are already debunked from official sources.

For two, most cheating doesn't happen in the game engine, it happens with exterior plugins and addons that alter data that's sent through the network traffic; or they directly alter game files. Both of these things are actually pretty easily detectable by the right tools. Network traffic is wrong/off, or the data in files isn't matching up with what the servers say it should be.

For three, have you ever sat down and coded something big? I'm not talking a couple hundred or even thousand lines of code. MWO is in something like the millions of lines of code at this point. It's really easy to mix up one small thing and cause unexpected effects. For example, the engine probably handles most, if not all, modifiers to the weapons as multipliers, but yet they stack additively. Therefore, it would have been really easy to have a situation that was meant to be a +(addition, in case you need to be told) be treated as a situation with a *(multiplication, in case you need to be told).

Lastly, even if something is vulnerable to hacking doesn't mean that there aren't things to address it. That's like saying that there's nothing stopping you from walking off on a White House tour and going into places you're not supposed to go. You actually can just wander away from the tour (like hacking, in this case). After all, it's not even roped off. However, it's really stupid to do so, because before you get to round that next corner there's going to be a lot of people with really big guns waiting to "remedy the situation" and get you back to where you need to be, willing or unwilling.

In this case, because people weren't willing to play the game honestly and do what is expected of them, the situation was "remedied" in a very direct and unwilling fashion for the cheaters.