The ultimate thread about Arma 3 anti-cheat discussion

[WalkerDown 1]

That is not exacly true, not looking far I was buing on steam second Arma 2 on my girlfriend account using my paypal. No issue with that. Also I dont see reason why should be an issue, example: parrent buying for kid. So basicly you can have different accounts and use the same payment method. Btw. who belives that steam cares about fake accounts as long as you pay? :)

You can pay with the same accont and have multiple accounts until your payment method will turn to be a way to identify your identity.

So far on ArmA2 the cheaters bought SEVERAL (we're not talking about you and your girlfriend account, but tenth of keys used per month) keys, most of them are stolen keys (illegally read by backdoors and trojan), so the kid were having really an easy life: change the key into the registry and play until being banned again; repeat the operation and so on...

With Steam and VAC, it would be very different: you may need to create a new account each time you get banned and use a pirated CD-KEY to run the game (unless you want to buy it at full price on steam).

It's a very different situation, and since A3 is a steamworks product, it would be very beneficial for us to have VAC, in this way the "keys black market" would have a very hard life.

Remember: the point is not to stop the cheater before he cheats (this is pretty impossible), the key is to make the cheater spending much more money and make his "return" less convenient, ban after ban, after he decides that paying 10.. 20.. 50.. 100.. or 200 dollars is enough to stop cheating. Yes, the "rich cheater" (or the smart one with private hacks) would survive, but 99.9% of cheaters are kids, they'll stop to cry at their mom for more money after a while.

[TSAndrey 1]

Could you elaborate how using VAC in A3 would bury Arma?

He actually made good point about BE in Arma2/DayZ. (and also AFAIK DayZ has already confirmed VAC as their anti cheat which is pretty significiant decision as we look at the current DayZ situation regarding hacking, basically on 1 out of 3 servers there are cheaters from my experience so i'm pretty sure they have made extensive research about it)

VAC wouldn't stop anything, really. The amount of scripters/cheaters would be so bad, the game would be completely unplayable. DayZ uses VAC because it's free and Rocket (not knowing how bad it is) decided to use it.

The amount of cheaters in A2/DayZ was not BE's fault (discussed 10000 times), and it would only be worse with VAC/PB. Also keep in mind that most custom anti-hacks (which keep DayZ servers alive) are made of BE's server filters.

---------- Post added at 17:23 ---------- Previous post was at 17:18 ----------

With Steam and VAC, it would be very different: you may need to create a new account each time you get banned and use a pirated CD-KEY to run the game (unless you want to buy it at full price on steam).

It's a very different situation, and since A3 is a steamworks product, it would be very beneficial for us to have VAC, in this way the "keys black market" would have a very hard life.

Why does VAC matter in the CD-key situation? If you use Steam and BE, the result would be the same. They would still need to buy a new CD key and make a new Steam account! The only difference is that VAC is useless...

[k3lt 3]

VAC wouldn't stop anything, really. The amount of scripters/cheaters would be so bad, the game would be completely unplayable. DayZ uses VAC because it's free and Rocket (not knowing how bad it is) decided to use it.

The amount of cheaters in A2/DayZ was not BE's fault (discussed 10000 times), and it would only be worse with VAC/PB. Also keep in mind that most custom anti-hacks (which keep DayZ servers alive) are made of BE's server filters.

---------- Post added at 17:23 ---------- Previous post was at 17:18 ----------

Why does VAC matter in the CD-key situation? If you use Steam and BE, the result would be the same. They would still need to buy a new CD key and make a new Steam account! The only difference is that VAC is useless...

The difference is pretty huge, for example hackers would not be able to steal cdkeys of anyone which is currently ongoing issue with A2.

It would also prevent of reselling used cdkeys, and so much less headache for the support dealing with it.

You gonna deny this aswell?

VAC wouldn't stop anything, really. The amount of scripters/cheaters would be so bad, the game would be completely unplayable.

I'm sorry but that's just empty speculations, i can say exactly the same about BE. (and i can actually prove it by highlighting current A2 situation, you have nothing)

Edited March 12, 2013 by k3lt

[TSAndrey 1]

The difference is pretty huge, for example hackers would not be able to steal cdkeys of anyone which is currently ongoing issue with A2.

It would also prevent of reselling used cdkeys, and so much less headache for the support dealing with it.

You gonna deny this aswell?

BE was not the cause of the CD key theft :j:

It was the bad CD key system, which will be good now since they use Steam. VAC doesn't make a difference

[$able 2]

BE was not the cause of the CD key theft :j:

In a way it was the cause of it. ;) Ever wondered why theft has never been such a huge issue in any other game that uses cd-keys? BE was so quick/effective at banning the cheaters they were literally forced to come up with this scamming scheme.

They had their fun long enough. In future games BE will make them cry horribly.

[WalkerDown 1]

VAC is embed into Steam, and Arma3 is a steamwork product. Key stealing wouldn't be possible, and there won't be any key black market. As i specified in a previous post: most of the cheaters "survives" because they counts on the possibility to buy another CD-KEY at very low price ($1-$2) to continue cheating; if you eliminate this possibility a cheater (especially the mass of kids) wouldn't spend 45 euro (the final price of A3) anytime they would be caught cheating, to not count the fact that the Steam account is involved into the ban as well.

We're not discussing the effectivness of the two anti-cheat (probably VAC sucks as BE) but about the consequences of being caught with one or with the other, in THIS scenario (not ArmA2 but ArmA3), the Valve product will much more effective and makes much more sense.

[$able 2]

VAC is embed into Steam, and Arma3 is a steamwork product. Key stealing wouldn't be possible, and there won't be any key black market. As i specified in a previous post: most of the cheaters "survives" because they counts on the possibility to buy another CD-KEY at very low price ($1-$2) to continue cheating; if you eliminate this possibility a cheater (especially the mass of kids) wouldn't spend 45 euro (the final price of A3) anytime they would be caught cheating, to not count the fact that the Steam account is involved into the ban as well.

We're not discussing the effectivness of the two anti-cheat (probably VAC sucks as BE) but about the consequences of being caught with one or with the other, in THIS scenario (not ArmA2 but ArmA3), the Valve product will much more effective and makes much more sense.

Read the previous posts by TSAndrey please. You are missing the point. Key-stealing has nothing to do with BE.

[TSAndrey 1]

VAC is embed into Steam, and Arma3 is a steamwork product. Key stealing wouldn't be possible, and there won't be any key black market. As i specified in a previous post: most of the cheaters "survives" because they counts on the possibility to buy another CD-KEY at very low price ($1-$2) to continue cheating; if you eliminate this possibility a cheater (especially the mass of kids) wouldn't spend 45 euro (the final price of A3) anytime they would be caught cheating, to not count the fact that the Steam account is involved into the ban as well.

We're not discussing the effectivness of the two anti-cheat (probably VAC sucks as BE) but about the consequences of being caught with one or with the other, in THIS scenario (not ArmA2 but ArmA3), the Valve product will much more effective and makes much more sense.

As I said, VAC makes no difference. I agree that key stealing was an issue in A2, but BE and VAC have nothing to do with that! If you put BE into A3, cheaters will still have to rebuy CD keys at full retail prices!

[Dwarden 1125]

cheaters don't care about need to make new account, considering STEAM users captcha and email verification , it can be even automated for account creation

plus cheaters don't care about VAC bans, I seen the same people who cheat on CSS / TF2 to cheat in COD games etc ...

they play with same account on these games, up until they get banned, then start new account

cheats can use PayPal or bought 'gift/money cards' or just gifted games so argument about linking 'cheat' accounts by that is another non-sense

thinking that 'VAC' and STEAM will magically remove cheats or lower the abuse is nearly same absurd as thinking you can stop cheaters ...

don't be naïve that the 'bad guys' are stupid ... even the script kiddies can read 'sticky with how-to steps' on one of the many popular cheat forums

...

Arma 3 Alpha has for now no security, as the development progress, it will be implemented and deployed

and it's about the combination of these solutions to make the game more secure w/o using drastic means of atrocities like 'always online'...

Edited March 12, 2013 by Dwarden

[WalkerDown 1]

It a game where the always on may have a sense.. that's ArmA. So if that solution would would do anything against cheating, i will be ok with it. Plus BE already shown that it's not effective against cheating in ArmA (because of how it is designed), so there's nothing to lose, it cannot be worse than the current situation, so i say let's try VAC and let's check how it ends?

[Dwarden 1125]

It a game where the always on may have a sense.. that's ArmA. So if that solution would would do anything against cheating, i will be ok with it. Plus BE already shown that it's not effective against cheating in ArmA (because of how it is designed), so there's nothing to lose, it cannot be worse than the current situation, so i say let's try VAC and let's check how it ends?

and in that point you quite wrong , BE is effective against cheating in Arma ... the numbers don't lie ...

[WalkerDown 1]

and in that point you quite wrong , BE is effective against cheating in Arma ... the numbers don't lie ...

After this sentence, i'm not sure how we could continue with a constructive discussion. Everything is fine, the problem doesn't exists, this (34 pages) thread is just a dream.

We can close it.

[joebopie 1]

that's not what he said, if you had been playing dayz since the beginning you would have seen different hacks come and go as they had figured out how to stop each one. don't be so sarcastic it helps nobody. the problem is the hackers are numerous and skilful any very very persistent. so switching would just be stupid as other anti cheat software provider would have to start from scratch. Keep BI Its better than the forums seem to sugest. and BTW anyone that doesn't realise BI isn't in ARMA 3 yet (please add it soon and read my post to vote)http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?149722-Battleeye-needed-now-nothing-else-matters

Also walker you do realise that was a BI DEV?

[WalkerDown 1]

that's not what he said, if you had been playing dayz since the beginning you would have seen different hacks come and go as they had figured out how to stop each one. don't be so sarcastic it helps nobody. the problem is the hackers are numerous and skilful any very very persistent. so switching would just be stupid as other anti cheat software provider would have to start from scratch. Keep BI Its better than the forums seem to sugest. and BTW anyone that doesn't realise BI isn't in ARMA 3 yet (please add it soon and read my post to vote)http://forums.bistudio.com/showthread.php?149722-Battleeye-needed-now-nothing-else-matters

We must have a different definition of what "effective" means... in my view "effective" is when something effectively works for that specific purpose (in our case: reduce the number of cheaters), and under that aspect, saying that BE is effective against the cheating is like saying that a bottle can contain the sea.. sure it can contain the sea: an insignificant part of it.

Btw we were not talking about how good a anti-cheat is to PREVENT the cheating: due to the arma engine, probably NO anti-cheat would help.. the game is heavily based on open scripting, and it's pretty impossible to determine a malicious script from a legit script if not AFTER it has been exectuted > BE devs have admitted the frustration of being unable to counter-fight the cheaters due to this "limitation" (read: openess). So, since we cannot realistically fight the cheating (not most of it), we must concentrate on how prevent that a cheater, AFTER he cheated, will continue to do so.. eventually buying another stolen cd-key for $1. In fact the main problem atm is not the single kid cheating, but the kid that doesn't care to be caught because he knows that he can return anytime, by only spending a couple of bucks. Here come into play the difference between BE and VAC <<now the news>> but after a long discussion yesterday night, we come to the conclusion that due to the fact that A3 now is a steam product, a cd-key swapping (or a cd-key stolen) isn't easy as before, simply because a cd-key tehcnically doesn't exists, so a BE global ban will operates pretty like a VAC ban: you need a new steam account (new email / payment method) to purchase the game again; the only difference between the two atm is the account flagged "VAC banned", so when "VAC banned" your steam account as flagged as a cheater, this would help to eliminate that part of "occasional cheaters" (the ones that cheats now and then, by using their main accounts..), since the "professional cheaters" knows this already, and they uses separate accounts for that specific games where they know ALREADY they're going to cheat.

Also walker you do realise that was a BI DEV?

David? I tought he's a cheater posting here to hijack the discussion...

[Dwarden 1125]

VAC itself would do ZERO work against in-script cheats, so these cheaters would roam free ... you obviously don't get it what, where, how ...

[WalkerDown 1]

VAC itself would do ZERO work against in-script cheats, so these cheaters would roam free ... you obviously don't get it what, where, how ...

Indeed, if you do not deploy your own solution for script logging/handling (assuming there's time). Btw an alternative solution would be to use BE for the scripting part (and the remote console), and VAC as antivirus (memory reading / manipulation.. and so on).

[TSAndrey 1]

Btw we were not talking about how good a anti-cheat is to PREVENT the cheating: due to the arma engine, probably NO anti-cheat would help.. the game is heavily based on open scripting, and it's pretty impossible to determine a malicious script from a legit script if not AFTER it has been exectuted >

David? I tought he's a cheater posting here to hijack the discussion...

BE has custom script detection

Why would you switch to VAC when BE is 10X more effective, has admin tools, custom script detection and etc? I fail to see your point and what you are fighting for.

[WalkerDown 1]

BE has custom script detection

Why would you switch to VAC when BE is 10X more effective, has admin tools, custom script detection and etc? I fail to see your point and what you are fighting for.

1) I said, eventually, "both";

2) I've shown the possible differences between the two, AFTER the ban (consequences to your steam account), after the last discussion they are little;

3) We tried BE already, we never tested VAC on arma, we don't know how it will perform, so your "10X more effective" is invalid.

4) I'm fighting to mitigate the unacceptable number of cheaters in Arma, we cannot live in the ghetto forever, with passworded servers and all this stuff, there's a huge number of casual players, and i'm not that egoist to say: who cares about em. The story of "the cheaters cause no harm, play on whitelisted server" is getting old.

5) People here believes this is a war BE vs VAC... lol. We need ubiased opinions, not "fanboysm".

Is BE enough to fight the cheaters? No, it's not, and if you negate this evidence, then there's nothing to talk about. A solution exists? We don't know, what's why we are discussing it, VAC (or any other anti-cheat) is one of the many possibilities. Closing your eyes pretending the problem doesn't exists won't help anyone, surely it won't help this game.

[TSAndrey 1]

3) We tried BE already, we never tested VAC on arma, we don't know how it will perform, so your "10X more effective" is invalid.

4) I'm fighting to mitigate the unacceptable number of cheaters in Arma, we cannot live in the ghetto forever, with passworded servers and all this stuff, there's a huge number of casual players, and i'm not that egoist to say: who cares about em. The story of "the cheaters cause no harm, play on whitelisted server" is getting old.

5) People here believes this is a war BE vs VAC... lol. We need ubiased opinions, not "fanboysm".

Is BE enough to fight the cheaters? No, it's not, and if you negate this evidence, then there's nothing to talk about. A solution exists? We don't know, what's why we are discussing it, VAC (or any other anti-cheat) is one of the many possibilities. Closing your eyes pretending the problem doesn't exists won't help anyone, surely it won't help this game.

I already told you, the number of cheaters is not BE's fault. The exploitable engine and full documented scripting language is. No anti-cheat will change this!

However, when comparing anti-cheats, BE is much much much more effective than VAC, and that's a fact, not opinion. Maybe it doesn't look like it is, but if you go and look how BE works under the surface you would see that it's better than most AC's.

[cm. 10]

I see the biggest issue with cheating in arma is the availability of stolen keys....

By removing those stolen keys (via steam) and using BE (or maybe VAC and BE if possible?) I think the amount of cheaters will drop drastically.

when you can get OA cd-keys for $2-3....... it's not a big deal when you get banned.

I remember banning a particular dayz player on our servers over 20 times... each with a different key. at $3 per key that's about $60, at $50 per key it's $1000.... a big difference. I could find $60 down the side of my couch, $1k not so much.

Edited March 14, 2013 by cm.

[$able 2]

I see the biggest issue with cheating in arma is the availability of stolen keys....

By removing those stolen keys (via steam) and using BE (or maybe VAC and BE if possible?) I think the amount of cheaters will drop drastically.

when you can get OA cd-keys for $2-3....... it's not a big deal when you get banned.

I remember banning a particular dayz player on our servers over 20 times... each with a different key. at $3 per key that's about $60, at $50 per key it's $1000.... a big difference. I could find $60 down the side of my couch, $1k not so much.

Exactly. In my opinion cd-key theft is the biggest issue right now, even bigger than the game engine's weaknesses (scripting).

As I said a few pages back:

In a way it was the cause of it. ;) Ever wondered why theft has never been such a huge issue in any other game that uses cd-keys? BE was so quick/effective at banning the cheaters they were literally forced to come up with this scamming scheme.

They had their fun long enough. In future games BE will make them cry horribly.

[Huzz 1]

Agree

[Ezcoo 47]

In a way it was the cause of it. Ever wondered why theft has never been such a huge issue in any other game that uses cd-keys? BE was so quick/effective at banning the cheaters they were literally forced to come up with this scamming scheme.

They had their fun long enough. In future games BE will make them cry horribly.

Love those words :)

How about combination of BE (and, not "or" VAC) and Steam MP service / server list to prevent illegal versions from being used, rendering BE actually useful?

[WalkerDown 1]

Yup that's what we proposed: BE to control the scripting side and to have a remote console, and VAC as a traditional anti-cheat and as an additional deterrent (because of the steam account consequences.. small or big they are). We will probably still have cheaters aboard, but it'll be sure better than before.

[TSAndrey 1]

Yup that's what we proposed: BE to control the scripting side and to have a remote console, and VAC as a traditional anti-cheat and as an additional deterrent (because of the steam account consequences.. small or big they are). We will probably still have cheaters aboard, but it'll be sure better than before.

How many times do people need to explain: VAC bans are the same as BE bans