134 replies to this topic

[Kaspirikay]

MustrumRidcully, on 10 December 2012 - 06:54 AM, said:

Actually, starting again from the beginning, in a trial mech, would suck big time. If you spend any real money on a mech, it sucks even more.

Pretty much this. Make trials play with trials only, then you've weeded out flyby hackers and only the truly determined ones would get through. But by the time, he should have been reported while playing the trial games.

[Bad Karma 308]

Thorn Hallis, on 10 December 2012 - 06:20 AM, said:

And then he creates another account, and then another, and so on. Doesn't hurt in a F2P game, while for BF3 he would have to buy another copy to continue.

I've been running dedicate servers for awhile now. BF1942/BF2/2142/BC2/BF3/COD/MW*.... Always streaming to PB but the hackers still get through. You can pump in a lot of money to run dedicated servers big enough to host multiple maps & games at the same time, it can be quite an investment. And nothing can kill a server as quickly as hackers. Once you have a streaming PB account you'll realize that there are not just 1000s of individual hackers, but you learn the the tools use, and most of them include Keyhash generators. You can ban them by GUID but they can come right back in. Same with IP bans, they just release and grab a new one. Inside PB you'll find hackers with 100s of banned GUIDs linked to them. But PB so rarely does global bans that you'd think they were getting paid not to. If you don't have admins constantly watching 24/7 you can quickly lose your investment. ProCon actually had to develop a database (which got very large) to pool ban's by admins community wide, to try and combat the threat. But between PB & ProCon they still get through.

Edited by Bad Karma 308, 11 December 2012 - 03:37 AM.

[Codejack]

u

Bad Karma 308, on 11 December 2012 - 03:35 AM, said:

I've been running dedicate servers for awhile now. BF1942/BF2/2142/BC2/BF3/COD/MW*.... Always streaming to PB but the hackers still get through. You can pump in a lot of money to run dedicated servers big enough to host multiple maps & games at the same time, it can be quite an investment. And nothing can kill a server as quickly as hackers. Once you have a streaming PB account you'll realize that there are not just 1000s of individual hackers, but you learn the the tools use, and most of them include Keyhash generators. You can ban them by GUID but they can come right back in. Same with IP bans, they just release and grab a new one. Inside PB you'll find hackers with 100s of banned GUIDs linked to them. But PB so rarely does global bans that you'd think they were getting paid not to. If you don't have admins constantly watching 24/7 you can quickly lose your investment. ProCon actually had to develop a database (which got very large) to pool ban's by admins community wide, to try and combat the threat. But between PB & ProCon they still get through.

then ban accounts and make a 30 minute tutorial that new accounts have to go through.

[Khori]

Ok, so...regardless of your location, 'netcode' is forcing a lag on everyone. Isn`t that the same as balanced aka "effects everyone"?
I left Battlefield 3 also due to client-side nonsense. Also during client-side, taking advantage of a high lag to win is not a hack, it`s an exploit which means it`s hard to detect and legitimately ban. I could on my router or PC itself increase lag on will by restricting packets (often used by non-gaming servers to help with bandwith issues, it`s ping vs stability). Right now no hack can do very much, since it is server-side with poor coding, everyone is effected and you learn to adjust until fixes. My ping on average is 35ms or less anyonwere else however on here I can easily tell my weapons are not that responsive, my brother actually discovered that before I did.

Right now everyone is on equal grounds, netcode affects everyone including bots.
client-side encourage not hacking, but intentional external exploit that anyone can do freely that is hard to detect.

I vote "NO" on client-side, just my observation.

[Enigmos]

Rizzwind, on 09 December 2012 - 09:45 PM, said:

The return for money on a free to play is better on a old system with ping. If this was a subscription game then a new system would have been the right choice. Free to play means high chance of lower incoming money.

Has to be a complete game ready for release first, rather than basically the core mechanics for a game in development.

[Pr8Dator]

Kaspirikay, on 09 December 2012 - 06:07 PM, said:

I haven't seen that many cheaters in BF3.

I am a BF3 player... now, the problem with client side is that you can see yourself ducking behind cover on your screen but still get hit because on the other guys' screen, you are still outside of cover. This makes quick reaction going behind cover pointless.

[nom de guerre]

Kaspirikay, on 09 December 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

When is it going to be implemented?

With this atleast us high pings can use lasers, SRM and Ballistic reliably.

ECM wouldn't hurt us too much.

BF3 uses it. Why not MWO?

never hopefully

[Kousagi]

No to clientside hit detection. The best way to stop hackers is to not even let them hack in the first place. If you give them a way to hack they will hack and there will not be much you can do about it. Banning them will not get you very far. Systems like punk buster as also not that great. The better hacking groups easily get around them and the anti-hack people are is a constant state of catch up.

Hackers will crush games, just ask APB about that one. They helped put that awesome game under very fast, now the new company that got it is crap.

[Kaspirikay]

Kousagi, on 11 December 2012 - 08:36 AM, said:

No to clientside hit detection. The best way to stop hackers is to not even let them hack in the first place. If you give them a way to hack they will hack and there will not be much you can do about it. Banning them will not get you very far. Systems like punk buster as also not that great. The better hacking groups easily get around them and the anti-hack people are is a constant state of catch up. Hackers will crush games, just ask APB about that one. They helped put that awesome game under very fast, now the new company that got it is crap.

Point is hackers will hack a game no matter what you do. Its how fast and effective the response is that counts.

[BellatorMonk]

Kaspirikay, on 09 December 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

When is it going to be implemented?

With this atleast us high pings can use lasers, SRM and Ballistic reliably.

ECM wouldn't hurt us too much.

BF3 uses it. Why not MWO?

Wow..really...Hacktastic BF3 uses it so why shouldn't MWO? gee.....I wonder why not.

[Alois Hammer]

Kaspirikay, on 09 December 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

When is it going to be implemented?

Hopefully never.

Quote

BF3 uses it. Why not MWO?

Self-answering question.

Kaspirikay, on 11 December 2012 - 08:37 AM, said:

Point is hackers will hack a game no matter what you do. Its how fast and effective the response is that counts.

And based on how quickly and effectively PGI responds to things, client side hit detection should be avoided like a contagious plague carrier.

Edited by Alois Hammer, 11 December 2012 - 12:31 PM.

[DoRkcHoPs]

I would love to see the improvements they make to the netcode before doing something as drastic as client side hit detection.

[The Cheese]

Pr8Dator, on 11 December 2012 - 08:14 AM, said:

I am a BF3 player... now, the problem with client side is that you can see yourself ducking behind cover on your screen but still get hit because on the other guys' screen, you are still outside of cover. This makes quick reaction going behind cover pointless.

And how is that different from seeing someone out in the open and wasting ammo on them, when they've actually moved behind cover? (which is what we have now) Either way, you're not seeing what is really there (or not there). This isn't a normal fps. You can take more than 3 hits to the foot before you die.

[Codejack]

Look, it's real simple:

1) Punkbuster or similar to detect and track suspected cheaters.
2) Ban confirmed cheater accounts, temporarily for first offenses, permanent after.
3) Require new accounts to go through a tutorial "campaign" that takes 30m-1h.
4) Enjoy client-side hit detection!

Of course, I thought that the trial mechs were punishment enough, but....

[bob1234567890]

Kaspirikay, on 09 December 2012 - 06:01 PM, said:

When is it going to be implemented?

With this atleast us high pings can use lasers, SRM and Ballistic reliably.

ECM wouldn't hurt us too much.

BF3 uses it. Why not MWO?

MWO doesn't use it because the devs cant code for it, not good enough apparently. you remember the Mech5 trailer they had a new gamemode called dropship, thats not in either