Do You want PunkBuster in Armed Assault?

[Bun 0]

VALVe uses VAC2 (an internal solution).

It's far less effective than PunkBuster, and has been cracked/bypassed numerous times.

You can't really compare America's Army with this (or any other) game.

It has such a big cheat problem because people can make infinite accounts,

without loss of money (seeing how accounts are free).

In America's Army, all you have to do is create a new account, which will give you

a new GUID, thus bypassing your ban (excluding hardware bans, of course).

I (obviously) voted Yes.

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

Punkbuster has been breaked alot of times, but has been updated each time, opposit of some other anti cheat messures... Trueth is, when AA is done, BIS will have its focus on game 2, and will therefor not be able to (Even if they wanted to), support arma with anticheat programs, the way that an external program such as PB can.

So I voted YES.

Also, for the ones afraid it would kick in against addons etc. PB will only check files that you and the server use. Of course wont it allow you to play with a different version of an island or sounds than the server. But all addons/mods that are being played on a server, will be perfectly legal.

[caveman 0]

i personally think that AA needs a anti cheat software added to it rather have to go on a server that has a filechecker running and still someone spoils the game via cheating.

i play BF2 and PB seems to be doing its job in that game all u see in the game at moment is stat paddlers (exploiters of the game) that arent really cheating just exploiting a bug so PB wont kick them.

whatever happens and whether BIS adds PB or anything else to the game as a anti cheat, cheaters are not going to stop trying to think of ways around it

[HotShot 0]

I dont see the need for PB, what Flashpoint has at the moment seems to be doing it's job as i have never seen a cheat in Flashpoint. I only play coops mind you which i guess isn't the sort of game type people cheat in, so maybe it is more of a problem then i think. Personally though, i dont think there's any need in adding PB, as it's bound to be broken, and if you dont update it to the version a server is running then it may mean you will get kicked and have to go and download the new version, so i dont think it will be worth it. AA is bound to have cheats in it, but i think after a few months of it's release they will all go back to Counter Strike, with PB implemented in AA or not.

[benreeper 0]

I'm with Kegs, because he is Kegs.

Seriously, I vote no because OFP is a different game from those others.

Firstly because the game has AI in it and most others don't. People who play those other games HATE when their games have AI in them because beating AI gives you no props. They want to beat YOU and brag about it.

Secondly, Flashpoint games are huge and I don't want the performance hit. I'd rather play large games with friends rather than small games with cheaters.

--Ben

[Cpt Viper 0]

I voted No.

I've been playing OFP for 2 years and 2 months now, and never, ever saw a cheater.

Basicly, because i only play with my friends, and i know them, they don't cheat. As someone else said earlier, that's the countermeasure against cheating.

Like other people say aswell, updating PB etc, will only make ArmA more annoying when playing online, and getting kicked for something you didn't do...

So, a big, fat, NO

- Viper

[xnodunitx 0]

might be hearing a few

"omg he killed me in 1-3 shots! cheater!!" heh...

[berghoff 11]

I can't say I have played many games with PB but I used to play Americas Army and only had one problem with PB, so I guess its better for ArmA to have its own anti-cheat system.

[D34N 0]

I voted No to PB in ARAS and NGPCG.. as has been said it would just encourage more cheaters.. I started playing OFP when I was twelve.. If PB had not allowed me to play OFP online (because back then I didn't have admin account) then I probably would have stopped playing a long time ago... Imagine if OFP ran PB, but some servers didn't run it because they didn't like it...Now I've played on both PB and non-PB servers in different games, and players on non-pb servers are generally paranoid all the time.. thats not something I've ever want to see in ARAS or NGPCG..

I certainly hope BIS is doing something to help prevent cheating in their NGPCG.. but it will probably ultimately be up to the players to squash cheating.

[4 IN 1 0]

Punkbuster has been breaked alot of times, but has been updated each time, opposit of some other anti cheat messures... Trueth is, when AA is done, BIS will have its focus on game 2, and will therefor not be able to (Even if they wanted to), support arma with anticheat programs, the way that an external program such as PB can.

So I voted YES.

Also, for the ones afraid it would kick in against addons etc. PB will only check files that you and the server use. Of course wont it allow you to play with a different version of an island or sounds than the server. But all addons/mods that are being played on a server, will be perfectly legal.

Thats really the main problem that PB would cause in OFP,

you see, there are just too many ppl using mods and addons which acturaly changes the files in the game, a simple model replacement would not be allowed, not to talk about what happen on mods like ECP.

so in the end you have got a not-so-effective anticheat system, and it killes almost all the freedom the game have

[xnodunitx 0]

Yep,currently on OFP online you have people running around with Y2K3,FFUR,ECP,and original flashpoint,similar but not the same and I'm sure PB would have a field day with this.

[deanosbeano 0]

personally i would not like to see it added, simply because of the hassle i have had with it in the past.the servers i play ofp on are co op and to cheat in there is simply ,beyond all reason and we all know how to see who is doing it anyway, with teamspaeak and kegs spectator script ,i think we already got a good way to monitor it. of course in public servers with 24 rambos and no teamspeak it maybe different .

[.kju 3244]

well in my view there is a lot of invalid arguments floating around ..

still i think a BIS solution would be better for several reasons (some pointed out already) and i think BIS does understand now the importance of cheat protection !

[SHWiiNG 0]

WHAT .. who doesnt want punkbuster.... imean i always read threads on these forums.. about people complaining about cheaters... i i know how annoying it is when during a game you find out that someone has an unfair advantage.

[orson 0]

If PB checks files , how would it check an addon made by the community to see if it was the same version as the server had ?

If it relies upon file sizes , whats to stop me from opening up the .p3d and altering it for my own advantage , but keeping it the same size file and re packing it ?

If this is the case , then perhaps make a packing tool that issues a unique number or code to the addon when originaly packed , and if any alterations are made the number would be different .

[DBR_ONIX 0]

Thats really the main problem that PB would cause in OFP,

you see, there are just too many ppl using mods and addons which acturaly changes the files in the game, a simple model replacement would not be allowed, not to talk about what happen on mods like ECP.

so in the end you have got a not-so-effective anticheat system, and it killes almost all the freedom the game have

No, aslong as the server has the same mod, thus the same files, it will be fine, but that's not the point..

Look how many people hate PB, it has to be for a reason (It kicking/banning them incorectly), people still manage to cheat etc..

Quote[/b] ]

If it relies upon file sizes , whats to stop me from opening up the .p3d and altering it for my own advantage , but keeping it the same size file and re packing it ?

It'll not rely on file-sizes.. Only extreeeeeemmmly old cheat "prevention" does this, chances are it'll use a CRC check of the file. Which are hard to fake..

- Ben

[orson 0]

whats a CRC check ? is that a check at a binary level ? 0's and 1's etc ?

checks Google

[4 IN 1 0]

Thats really the main problem that PB would cause in OFP,

you see, there are just too many ppl using mods and addons which acturaly changes the files in the game, a simple model replacement would not be allowed, not to talk about what happen on mods like ECP.

so in the end you have got a not-so-effective anticheat system, and it killes almost all the freedom the game have  

No, aslong as the server has the same mod, thus the same files, it will be fine, but that's not the point..

Look how many people hate PB, it has to be for a reason (It kicking/banning them incorectly), people still manage to cheat etc..

dont forgot that you just cant tell every server/player to use or not using ECP and other Client side mod

[x Flashpoint x 0]

Why would anyone want to cheat anyway You only cheat yourself.

I can never tell who's cheating in games anyway, i am too bizzy runing around like a headless chicken

[Dwarden 1125]

Punkbuster has been breaked alot of times, but has been updated each time, opposit of some other anti cheat messures... Trueth is, when AA is done, BIS will have its focus on game 2, and will therefor not be able to (Even if they wanted to), support arma with anticheat programs, the way that an external program such as PB can.

So I voted YES.

Also, for the ones afraid it would kick in against addons etc. PB will only check files that you and the server use. Of course wont it allow you to play with a different version of an island or sounds than the server. But all addons/mods that are being played on a server, will be perfectly legal.

Thats really the main problem that PB would cause in OFP,

you see, there are just too many ppl using mods and addons which acturaly changes the files in the game, a simple model replacement would not be allowed, not to talk about what happen on mods like ECP.

so in the end you have got a not-so-effective anticheat system, and it killes almost all the freedom the game have  

wrong ... u can configure PB to accept any file change You as admin want to be used for game ... this include also allowing multiple versions of 1 file (e.g. low res, med res, hi res texture or model file etc)

another of typical PB related myths ...

[Dwarden 1125]

If PB checks files  , how would it check an addon made by the community to see if it was the same version as the server had ?

If it relies upon file sizes , whats to stop me from opening up the .p3d and altering it for my own advantage  , but keeping it the same size file and re packing it ?

If this is the case , then perhaps make a packing tool that issues a unique number or code to the addon when originaly packed , and if any alterations are made the number would be different .

PB using modified MD5 hashes ... not size ... please visit official website before starting another "rumour" ...

[xnodunitx 0]

What if its an OFP enthusiast with alot more addons than on the server,would PB kick or ban them simply because of that?

[Espectro (DayZ) 0]

No, but it would kick him, if he used an altered version of a specifik addon. That is different from what the server is using

[Big Ofp Fan 0]

no PunkBuster is not an "Must Have" for ARMA. PunkBuster is slow down the connection. But, i must say this, I've used PB only in a LAN an there was a great stuttering of conection if it is enabled. Over Internet I can't nothing say about it, I never play online with a 56k .

[Guest]

I've been playing Quake 3 for years. The last patch (Oct 2003) included Punkbuster. So what happened? Well a hell of a lot less cheaters for a start! I used to see two per week, and since then I've seen about four total. It stopped nearly all cheating.

There have been a few problems everynow and then, with people getting kicked from servers etc. Maybe once a month someone I know will get any error. But it's a very small price to pay compared to games being constantly ruined by bots/hacks (and there were a LOT of hacks for Quake).

Some servers I play on have PB switched on, others have it switched off. There is NO difference in ping. However having either the client or server end with PB switched on but poorly configured can add a lag spike everynow and then. For LAN I just switch it off...because if someone is hacking you can just go smack them

The biggest problem people have had is updating. PB have a little program called PBweb, which (for me and most people) has always worked very well).

The arguement that having PB will cause more people to try and hack it is totally false. Less people will try because it is harder. Never underestimate how lazy people are Why bother hacking PB, when you can just hack another game with less protection?