The ultimate thread about Arma 3 anti-cheat discussion

[nuxil 2]

Will Arma3 continue using Battleye as its Anti Cheat System. or do bis have other plans for a anti cheat system this time??

i for one hope that arma3 will continue using Battleye as its Anti cheat system,

Edited May 21, 2011 by nuxil

[teaboy 11]

I think that they will continue to use battleye as the anti cheat system. They have stuck with it since Armed Assault.

[Darkhorse 1-6 16]

If they even think about punkbuster I'll hold Maruk hostage, or try to...

[zooloo75 834]

All I know is that I would not want BE used as the AC. It is just too easy to bypass.

[dysta 10]

I Pwned the B@$7@&d. Guess it.

[CarlGustaffa 4]

Battleye with strong signatures on a per addon basis (rather than on a per addon maker basis). If I accept laser-gun (or any other silliness) on our server, I want to add server key for just that addon. Not automatically accept the bad addons the creator makes for himself and friends that uses the same signature to create keys.

[jhoson14 10]

For GOD sake, not PunkBuster.

This is the worst think some one can even cogitate to use in a game. It gives more problem to user's than get any real cheat.

This think aways gave me headaches when i used to play Americas Arma 2.8, needed a heavy voodo section and lot of deleting and updating till it get good mood and started to work.

[ArmAriffic 10]

I want it to stay the way it is now where you don't have to give out your email and log on every time you want to play, just go into the game and straight on a server (keep steam away from me)

[Tom1 10]

Game is fine now, if anyone hacks, report them or join a different game. PnkBuster especially is sooo horrible, I have a few old games that i can't even play because i get kicked after 30 seconds each time. I dont hack.

[nuxil 2]

Battleye with strong signatures on a per addon basis (rather than on a per addon maker basis). If I accept laser-gun (or any other silliness) on our server, I want to add server key for just that addon. Not automatically accept the bad addons the creator makes for himself and friends that uses the same signature to create keys.

+1

i toltaly agree with you on that.

battleye has worked fine the past years. some minor issues here and there, but overall it has proven to work.. at least for me.

people that think switching to another "ACS" will prevent hacks, have no clue on how cheats are done in arma.

a person who exploiting the scripting capabilities will not be stopped by a ACS no matter who made it. BE, PB,VAC etc etc.

good server server setup with active admins has always been the best.

and not allow every little silly addons made.

[SnR 1]

We need to have a better review system after the event, text docs with gibberish is in need of an upgrade. I want IP's and ID quickly identifying in detail who has what, and what is.

[SgtBigRig 10]

no idea wth Arma has for multilayer but if its the same old 4 playesr with bots crap it wont matter worth a damn if there's hackers or not.

[metalcraze 290]

There's nothing wrong with Battleye.

When a public server doesn't limit what mods you can use there's nothing an anti-cheat or BIS can or will do.

It's the choice of a server admin whether to risk having a cheater once in a while for the sake of letting gamers use whatever mods they like or not.

[PuFu 4600]

dude, you signed up on those forums just to troll?

[RSF TheCapulet 59]

On even very strict servers, such as HS's who just recently switched to V2 signatures and apparently only allows a single random german mod, it's been a month or more since I've connected and managed to get a game or two off without being accosted by a hacker.

I do like battleye, but the fact of the matter is that it 'still' isn't doing it's job, despite how convenient it may be. Punkbuster on the other hand has a history of being a pain in the ass sometimes (Though I've never once had a problem with it), but it DOES get shit done. If you need proof, just point your browser to pbbans.com, punksbusted.com, AON.com, etc. You'll see hundreds of thousands of global GUID bans, keeping the pricks out of our games. And that is precisely what I want in an AC program.

[gossamersolid 155]

I say stay away from BattlEye, I'm sorry, but it doesn't do anything. All the script kiddies just need to get into the lobby (where BattlEye cannot touch them).

Switch to a larger name like PB or VAC.

[BigMorgan 11]

There's nothing wrong with Battleye.

When a public server doesn't limit what mods you can use there's nothing an anti-cheat or BIS can or will do.

It's the choice of a server admin whether to risk having a cheater once in a while for the sake of letting gamers use whatever mods they like or not.

Sorry to dredge this up but I was curious what BIS might be planning for anti-cheat in Arma 3 and found this post...

...you can't be serious right? :confused:

[Phantom Six 25]

I prefer VAC, it seems to work pretty well on the Source Games I have played, but Punkbuster is a HELLZZ NO!! I remember playing America's Army and if I have to alt tab the game temporally and come back to it, I see my character just spraying every bullets and I'd freak out with a punkbuster message coming up to me saying I got kick and I never hack.

[DieAngel 0]

I wouldn't mind if ARMA3 did what any sensible modern games do today, stop letting clients run part of the simulation, only the server should be autoritative, the client should be limited by sending position update and shooting, not participating in the game logic.

Edited July 28, 2011 by DieAngel

[Nicholas 5]

I voted for VAC, as it has much larger consequences if caught.

If Steam VAC catches you cheating, it bans you in all games that use VAC. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[bigsam656 10]

I think rather than using a horrible anticheat that will only cause trouble for legitimate users the devs need to code the game in such a way that hacks have a less dramatic effect on the other players, for example in games like battlefield people can aimbot/wallhack but they can't have unlimited health, ammo and spawn JDAMs on every player in the server. Client side addons shouldn't have the ability to do a lot of the things they do now.

[gossamersolid 155]

for example in games like battlefield people can aimbot/wallhack but they can't have unlimited health, ammo

You sure about that?

[5LEvEN 11]

I honestly don't know which security system is the best, so I will not vote...

At the very least they should improve the server logs, so that you can see who is spawning the JDAM on players for example. I got banned from the xx-team-xx server because I was not a regular and it got hacked while I was playing on it. I didn't get unbanned until someone vouched for me, and said I was not the hacker basically. Took 2 weeks, if it wasn't for someone vouching for me, I probably would of been banned indefinately, and I am actaully surpised that somone vouched for me, as it was my 4th or so time on the server, so I didn't think anyone would remember who I was... Basically I would really like it if they improved the logs so the type of thing cannot happen.

[Mikobiko 10]

I voted for VAC, as it has much larger consequences if caught.

If Steam VAC catches you cheating, it bans you in all games that use VAC. Correct me if I'm wrong.

It bans you in that game engine. So if all of Arma used vac, you'd be banned from all of Arma.

Vac can sometimes wait 6 months before issuing a ban letting hackers run amuck for however long they like. Vac really is a terrible tool for relying upon to catch cheaters.

[Black Cat 10]

Use a mix of VAC and BE but NOT punkbuster. Any more games with that, and I'll go crazy!