The ultimate thread about Arma 3 anti-cheat discussion

[Ezcoo 47]

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

But two systems searching your system for cheats would be better than one, no? And wouldn't using VAC too have some other effect too, because it would probably have preventative effect due to the risk being flagged publicly as cheater and would make association between cheaters more difficult...? On the other hand, if VAC is expensive, I understand that going "BE only" would be the best option, it's best value for the money by far I think... :)

[TSAndrey 1]

But two systems searching your system for cheats would be better than one, no? And wouldn't using VAC too have some other effect too, because it would probably have preventative effect due to the risk being flagged publicly as cheater and would make association between cheaters more difficult...? On the other hand, if VAC is expensive, I understand that going "BE only" would be the best option, it's best value for the money by far I think... :)

VAC is free if your game is in Steamworks. But implementing VAC would be a waste of time because VAC is useless...

[k3lt 3]

VAC is free if your game is in Steamworks. But implementing VAC would be a waste of time because VAC is useless...

Seriously you just lost any credibility, you're free to leave this thread.

I'd guess you're affiliated with BattleEye since by looking at your post history you're basically praising & defending them 24/h, now try to play DayZ in public server with BE anticheat - have fun.. NOT.

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.

This made me laugh hysterically, first of all cdkey abuse/stealing wont be issue anymore because of Steam, and BE has nothing to do with it.

You're claiming that you will be so effective and make them cry.. interesting, so any reason why pretty much every public DayZ (Arma 2) server is swarmed with hackers and basically rendered it unplayable unless it's private server with password protection? ;)

Edited March 15, 2013 by k3lt

[WalkerDown 1]

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

No, it's not .. VAC bans have the additional deterrent of flag your Steam account as "VAC banned", you can repeat here 1000 times that *IN YOUR OPINION* this wouldn't make much difference, and i respect your opinion, but stop saying it's the same. You also have not a single prove of the effectiveness of VAC used on the Arma engine (script aparts, this game is being hacked like any other game via memwriting). I don't know if you're $able girlfriend, but here we're trying to find a solution, your blabbling is getting annoying, this is not constructive at all.

---------- Post added at 14:13 ---------- Previous post was at 13:58 ----------

But two systems searching your system for cheats would be better than one, no? And wouldn't using VAC too have some other effect too, because it would probably have preventative effect due to the risk being flagged publicly as cheater and would make association between cheaters more difficult...? On the other hand, if VAC is expensive, I understand that going "BE only" would be the best option, it's best value for the money by far I think... :)

VAC is free, probably BE chaps are scared of being put in the corner... this is why some ppl in this thread are fighting against VAC implementation. :)

Another excuse will be: "VAC cannot be easily implemented" .. apart that this could be completely false, we should ask Valve, not a random on a forum.

[TSAndrey 1]

so any reason why pretty much every public DayZ (Arma 2) server is swarmed with hackers and basically rendered it unplayable unless it's private server with password protection? ;)

Open engine, cd key stealing, bad server administration?

No, it's not .. VAC bans have the additional deterrent of flag your Steam account as "VAC banned", you can repeat here 1000 times that *IN YOUR OPINION* this wouldn't make much difference, and i respect your opinion, but stop saying it's the same. You also have not a single prove of the effectiveness of VAC used on the Arma engine (script aparts, this game is being hacked like any other game via memwriting).

You think public flagging will scare cheaters? LOL

VAC would fail miserably in Arma, because it has no script detection, no admin tools and doesn't detect anything.

Here's a fun assignment for you: Buy a DayZ cheat and see how long you will last without being globally banned. Now go buy a cheat for a VAC protected game and see how long you will last ;)

[nik21 1]

You're claiming that you will be so effective and make them cry.. interesting, so any reason why pretty much all public DayZ servers are swarmed with hackers and basically rendered it unplayable unless it's private server with password protection? ;)

Because Cheaters don't care about being banned (CD-Key Theft) and can run game-destroying hacks (insecure MP scripting - Engine).

BE has busted all public hacks to date (and has always done it fast), as well as busting private hacks on a regular basis. However, the cheaters you still see around on the servers don't care about being banned because they can simply buy stolen CD-Keys for like 1$ and continue. They had to come up with something like this because they didn't want to spend 15 bucks every time BE busted them.

Now e.g. in Arma 3, CD-Keys can no longer be stolen (as it's Steam-exclusive) and cheaters would have to re-buy the game full-price on a new steam account every time they get banned by BE. That's why it will be much more effective in future games.

No, it's not .. VAC bans have the additional deterrent of flag your Steam account as "VAC banned", you can repeat here 1000 times that *IN YOUR OPINION* this wouldn't make much difference, and i respect your opinion, but stop saying it's the same. You also have not a single prove of the effectiveness of VAC used on the Arma engine (script aparts, this game is being hacked like any other game via memwriting). I don't know if you're $able girlfriend, but here we're trying to find a solution, your blabbling is getting annoying, this is not constructive at all.

I don't think that cheaters would care if they have their steam account flagged in public. Dumb script kiddies may think they get their whole steam account busted and it might keep a few off, however any "more expierienced" cheater will make a new Steam account for every game they cheat in and leave their main account untouched.

VAC is not any more effective because of the engine being used, in fact it would be less effective than in Valve/ Source games. I don't think it would hurt to use both VAC and BE, but from my expierience in other games it's not worth much.

Edited March 15, 2013 by Nik21

[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.

This made me laugh hysterically, first of all cdkey abuse/stealing wont be issue anymore because of Steam, and BE has nothing to do with it.

You're claiming that you will be so effective and make them cry.. interesting, so any reason why pretty much every public DayZ (Arma 2) server is swarmed with hackers and basically rendered it unplayable unless it's private server with password protection? ;)

Bolded the answer for you :p

If A3 had proper piracy and cd-key theft/generation protection (fingers crossed !), AC would be useful then. BE bans CD keys – if you can get new one within minutes, it's not fault of the anticheat that the script kiddie will be soon back on the server again. It's just regrettably way too easy to get new CD key in A2. That's one of the most important reasons why you have servers swarmed with script kiddies in A2.

Btw, I'm not willing to leave the BE out of the game (the game would be doomed since that day), I was just wondering that could we use BE & VAC together.

But yeah, I'd like to see some argumentation from TSAndrey instead of just pure claims.

[TSAndrey 1]

Btw, I'm not willing to leave the BE out of the game (the game would be doomed since that day), I was just wondering that could we use BE & VAC together.

But yeah, I'd like to see some argumentation from TSAndrey instead of just pure claims.

VAC & BE wouldn't hurt, it's just unnecessary.

What kind of argumentation do you want from me? As Nik21 said, BE busts all public hacks in a few days and private cheats almost every week.

VAC on the other hand, takes weeks to detect a public cheat and months to detect a private one! VAC also doesn't include any admin tools.

[$able 2]

This made me laugh hysterically, first of all cdkey abuse/stealing wont be issue anymore because of Steam, and BE has nothing to do with it.

You're claiming that you will be so effective and make them cry.. interesting, so any reason why pretty much every public DayZ (Arma 2) server is swarmed with hackers and basically rendered it unplayable unless it's private server with password protection? ;)

I explained it before, cheaters laugh about global bans right now. They simply don't care because they have an unlimited amount of cheap stolen cd-keys, which won't be the case in the future.

Other than that, you seem to be another one of those blaming BE for the game engine's weaknesses/possibilities.

---------- Post added at 15:38 ---------- Previous post was at 15:29 ----------

No, it's not .. VAC bans have the additional deterrent of flag your Steam account as "VAC banned", you can repeat here 1000 times that *IN YOUR OPINION* this wouldn't make much difference, and i respect your opinion, but stop saying it's the same. You also have not a single prove of the effectiveness of VAC used on the Arma engine (script aparts, this game is being hacked like any other game via memwriting). I don't know if you're $able girlfriend, but here we're trying to find a solution, your blabbling is getting annoying, this is not constructive at all.

---------- Post added at 14:13 ---------- Previous post was at 13:58 ----------

VAC is free, probably BE chaps are scared of being put in the corner... this is why some ppl in this thread are fighting against VAC implementation. :)

Another excuse will be: "VAC cannot be easily implemented" .. apart that this could be completely false, we should ask Valve, not a random on a forum.

From what I know it's quite easy (even trivial) to add VAC support in a Steamworks game, so there is no reason not to add it (unless it's actually not free).

And no, I'm not afraid of "being put in the corner" because of it. VAC will not solve any of this game's problems (no admin features, no nothing) and it's known to be quite slow and ineffective at fighting even public hacks (private hacks are almost never detected).

---------- Post added at 15:46 ---------- Previous post was at 15:38 ----------

Seriously you just lost any credibility, you're free to leave this thread.

I'd guess you're affiliated with BattleEye since by looking at your post history you're basically praising & defending them 24/h, now try to play DayZ in public server with BE anticheat - have fun.. NOT.

He's not affiliated with BE, he simply likes to defend the truth. It's great to have some supporters when the vast majority of things posted on the internet is nothing but lies/misinformation.

If you don't believe that BE itself is effective, feel free to join some popular private hack forums and see all the pain/crying (despite the cd-key theft issue) for yourself.

Edited March 15, 2013 by $able

[WalkerDown 1]

Why making it so complicate? $able resumed it in the phrase: "there is no reason not to add it".

- Is VAC free? Yes it is for Steamworks games, and A3 is a steamwork game.

- How much time and effort it requires? We need a reply from dwarden: he CANNOT lie (for who believe he can invent another "excuse"), because he's a BIS worker, and Valve wouldn't be happy to listen something like: "adding VAC is very hard.. balbabal", from a developer that is actually using Steam as exclusive platform.

So, assuming it is easy enough, there's NOT A SINGLE reason to not add VAC together with BE. The cheaters wouldn't be "scared" of having their accounts flagged? Yes many wouldn't.. but many others (the kids with a single steam account, that only occasionally cheats).. will be annoyed of having their "main" account flagged... it is BETTER than nothing.

I'm not sure why we need 36 page of a thread, when the solution that would makes anyone happy and apparently provide the best protection is already here. However the thread title should be: "Add VAC to Arma3", and not "Drop BE (...for VAC)".

[$able 2]

Why making it so complicate? $able resumed it in the phrase: "there is no reason not to add it".

- Is VAC free? Yes it is for Steamworks games, and A3 is a steamwork game.

- How much time and effort it requires? We need a reply from dwarden: he CANNOT lie (for who believe he can invent another "excuse"), because he's a BIS worker, and Valve wouldn't be happy to listen something like: "adding VAC is very hard.. balbabal", from a developer that is actually using Steam as exclusive platform.

So, assuming it is easy enough, there's NOT A SINGLE reason to not add VAC together with BE. The cheaters wouldn't be "scared" of having their accounts flagged? Yes many wouldn't.. but many others (the kids with a single steam account, that only occasionally cheats).. will be annoyed of having their "main" account flagged... it is BETTER than nothing.

I'm not sure why we need 36 page of a thread, when the solution that would makes anyone happy and apparently provide the best protection is already here. However the thread title should be: "Add VAC to Arma3", and not "Drop BE (...for VAC)".

Well, to be honest, you always argued how bad BE was and that VAC would be the better solution. I remember your constant negativity towards BE on the DayZ forums too well. ;)

[kremator 1064]

Drop battleeye and watch script kiddies ruin our game...... Not on your nelly, sunshine!

If anything I want BE, VAC, PB and a bloody big stick to beat the shit outta cheaters!

[WalkerDown 1]

Well, to be honest, you always argued how bad BE was and that VAC would be the better solution. I remember your constant negativity towards BE on the DayZ forums too well. ;)

That's not true:

- If i would have to chose TODAY between the two, i would say: let's try VAC because we tried BE already. *BUT* BE atm is handling all the remote console and script logging/restriction (that is something specific of Arma) and removing BE requires the deployment of an in-house solution, and there's no time for it (confirmed by dwarden). So again: changing BE for VAC, is *not technical possible*, it's not a decision, it is a fact that goes beyond the anti-cheating capabilities. But using both seems a fair solution.

- My constant negativity about BE is more "my constant negativity about the cheating in Arma2", it isn't just me, anyone can see it every single day. When you are called to "protect" something and you fail, you can blame the engine being broken (and we both agree that BE can't do much about it), but you still fail. You can't say: "i'm doing very good" .. nope: you are doing your best, but unfortunately is far to be enough.

[OrLoK 20]

Hello there

I am fairly sure that BI are aware of the hacking/scripting issue (let's call it a hunch), now does anyone possibly think that they would choose an unreliable or defective anticheat system for their flagship game/sim?

As we all know this game (in various guises) has been around for a long time and has some fairly experienced hands in it's team. To me, it's inconceivable they would us BE "just 'cos they are mates" or because of any "conspiracy" to squeeze a few more £/$ from us.

They know their engine rather well and the inherent strengths and weaknesses. I'm sure they have done their research and will use the best and most appropriate system available to them. They want the game to do well. It's their job.

The game isn't perfect and AFAIK (in my small limited way) no "anticheat" is infallible. but I trust their judgement on this as I do with other issues surrounding the game. I may not agree all the time, but it's their game, if I dont like the direction/ethos of the way the game is going I'll move on to something else.

It's great to discuss perceived flaws as we actually get direct feedback from the folks "in the know". I think we should listen to them.

Rgds

LoK

[$able 2]

That's not true:

- If i would have to chose TODAY between the two, i would say: let's try VAC because we tried BE already. *BUT* BE atm is handling all the remote console and script logging/restriction (that is something specific of Arma) and removing BE requires the deployment of an in-house solution, and there's no time for it (confirmed by dwarden). So again: changing BE for VAC, is *not technical possible*, it's not a decision, it is a fact that goes beyond the anti-cheating capabilities. But using both seems a fair solution.

Again you can't admit that BE is good at detecting hacks. It's only about the extra features, of course. ;)

- My constant negativity about BE is more "my constant negativity about the cheating in Arma2", it isn't just me, anyone can see it every single day. When you are called to "protect" something and you fail, you can blame the engine being broken (and we both agree that BE can't do much about it), but you still fail. You can't say: "i'm doing very good" .. nope: you are doing your best, but unfortunately is far to be enough.

Yet you still seem to think that VAC could possibly do better (otherwise you wouldn't say "let's try VAC because we tried BE already"), which is just naive. If VAC was in charge of protecting A2/OA the situation would be much worse than it already is, rest assured. If you don't believe me ask some of the hackers themselves.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. Every time I see someone praise BE on the DayZ forums I think to myself: "You cannot seriously say that publicly seeing how much hacking there is in this game. It sounds like a bad joke." - yes, indeed. It almost feels like there is some unwritten law that prohibits saying anything positive about BE because of the current situation.

[tonygrunt 10]

One negative for VAC would be how long it would take to whitelist the eventual ArmA 3 beta builds, I don't expect BI devs would have access to the online portion of VAC and maybe we would get slower updates.

I know Valve titles get updated routinely but maybe 2-3 updates in a week for a 3rd party game will be too much.

It would also be funny if in a combination of VAC and BE you would get VAC banned due to an unforeseen update of BE.

[Qweets 1]

The last 5 wasteland servers I joined had a hacker attack on them within 2 minutes of being there.. stuff exploding everywhere, everyone being mass killed, teleported etc.. This is downright stupid. Why wouldn't they make the scripting system more restricted so this kind of crap can't happen? Arma 2 barely had any MP servers because of hacking and this game will suffer the same fate if they don't do something about it, I realize its alpha and battleye isnt implemented yet but you would think they would learn from past mistakes and try to tighten up the system a bit. It is really disappointing because arma 3 is a great game.

[armyinf 33]

Do you understand what an Alpha means, Do you see any kind of program to stop hackers ATM... no... Give it time man, this is like the hundredth post on Hacking, go to the feedback tracker and vote it up there not make another pointless thread on it.

[Qweets 1]

Do you understand what an Alpha means, Do you see any kind of program to stop hackers ATM... no... Give it time man, this is like the hundredth post on Hacking, go to the feedback tracker and vote it up there not make another pointless thread on it.

did you even read what i wrote? I specifically said i know its alpha and battleye isn't implemented I'm merely asking why they didn't tighten up the scripting system to try and combat this bullcrap.

There may be a lot of posts about hacking but today in general it has gotten a LOT worse, every server you join is getting hacked or gets hacked soon after.

[VeteranHeroes 1]

Do you understand what an Alpha means, Do you see any kind of program to stop hackers ATM... no... Give it time man, this is like the hundredth post on Hacking, go to the feedback tracker and vote it up there not make another pointless thread on it.

lol another one of those people who's comeback has something to do with the alpha. Enabling BattlEye has nothing to do with alpha. At any time can Bohemia enable it.

[Lucasmnunesk 2]

I think if they limit scripting it will do more harm than good, since very interesting things can be acomplished through scripting

[Qweets 1]

I think if they limit scripting it will do more harm than good, since very interesting things can be acomplished through scripting

Understandable but they could try to tighten the system up so people can't do the things they can do with a simple script, no one should be able to teleport everyone and kill everyone I don't see why they dont just take those scripting commands out or something.

[Fuse 1]

Sorry guys, I know you hate to hear it, but "alpha" is definitely the answer. Anti-Cheat isn't some magic button they press. There are legit uses for scripting during an alpha test.

[Lucasmnunesk 2]

Understandable but they could try to tighten the system up so people can't do the things they can do with a simple script, no one should be able to teleport everyone and kill everyone I don't see why they dont just take those scripting commands out or something.

I understand you, but IMO they should never take commands out, never limit the experience, since we are free to do almost as we want we could find a good use to teleport or kill commands, the problem isnt the tools it is the users. And yes, they should not be able to teleport other but since we are in alpha i guess we have a very fragile game in terms of cheating, let's hope they improve it soon but i don't think it is their focus now.

[5133p39 12]

Understandable but they could try to tighten the system up so people can't do the things they can do with a simple script, no one should be able to teleport everyone and kill everyone I don't see why they dont just take those scripting commands out or something.

Unfortunately it's not that easy. Your "tighten the system" would actually mean "remove 70% of scripting functions", and nobody wants that, because the modding and scripting is what makes ArmA the game we want.

Using your example, the "teleporting":

A "setPos" command can be used to instantly move a unit from one place to another. You can't remove this command, because it's needed, it is used in almost every mission.

The only way would be to somehow restrict usage of this command, but there is no way without sacrificing scripting flexibility - sometimes you might need to run this command on server, sometimes on the client, and in both cases you may need to use it on various units, including other players.

Also, there is no way to tell whether any possible "teleporting" would be a legal part of the mission scenario, or a result of cheating - you could put together some decision making for a certain mission, where you know when is teleporting possible/desired, who can be teleported and where, and then you could check these constraints and possibly decide whether it is result of cheating or not, but it wouldnt work in other missions in general.