Do You want PunkBuster in Armed Assault?

[norsu 180]

I voted no. I've had too many bad experiences with PB in games like CS and RtCW where PB would simply kick me out of server for no reasons, aborting server connection although I had PB enabled and even banning me from server because I used custom models .

If BIS is going to add some anticheat support, I hope it's going to be optional for server admins. The biggest advantage of PC games is their customization, a feature that shouldn't be removed or limited.

P.S. I've never seen a cheater in OFP, perhaps I play with the right people .

[ANTH 0]

P.S. I've never seen a cheater in OFP, perhaps I play with the right people .

From apart of the pvp communtiy of ofp I would have to strongly disagree with that comment. I see one every night im on ofp last night there was one that made a script that made made smoke rise into the sky looking like northern lights lol not a bad cheat but made the game unplayable the night before someone was firing shilka rounds out of a g36a I could go on and on.

Put it this way if bis does not do somthing about the cheats in AA the pvp side of things are doomed from the start. Things are changed so easily in addons and scipts without the file checkers picking it up, making the game riddled with cheats all have to do is just look at a certain site to see what a laugh they think the filecheckers are in ofp and i agree with them. The certain site even has trailers of them cheating.

Basically AA NEEDS good anitcheat protection even if it is pb. aswell as the way the filcheckers check for files drastically changing.

[Antichrist 0]

Hell no! PB is a buggy piece of crap!

[Dwarden 1124]

how about going with valve, and their steam software.

that VAC anticheat is really good and it's self updateing.

wouldn't mind having ArmAss and OFP2(game2) sitting with HalfLife2 in my steam window.

i voted NO for PunkBuster. i call it game buster since all it does is mess up the games. i didn't like it in Raven-Shield and i don't want it in OFP.

well first ...

original VAC was complete disaster ... last year was not working at all there was over 250 working VAC 'enabled' cheats ...

now ... VAC2 i in place for "Source engine" games ...

but there are some major "BUTs"

- admins and clients got only option to "on / off" and that's all

- except Valve programmers no one else (most likely) got "damn" idea IF and HOW exactly it works

- there are already some "VAC2" enabled cheats but it's quite hard to say how VAC2 is effective because it's using quite LONG delay before ban happen ...

- no "remote" screenshot like features or addition AC stuff

- cost of "Steam / VAC2" license is not going to be cheaper than PB

- You are limited to use Steam/VAC2 which is forcing u to use "latest" build always and that's not going to work so well with game like FlashPoint (while with PB reconfigurability u can manage to run multiple Armed Assault builds as admins/clients need (sometimes people dislike last build because e.g. it's crashing them or so, while in Steam u can't do anything about u need wait till it's fixed next patch (in other words u screwed up)) ...

[Dwarden 1124]

When i reading posts above i always wonder ... does anyone here play more than 1-2 game? or is admin of more than 10 servers? i mean ...

for example ... people speak about "script" cheats in OFP® ... of course that are cheats too but ... this stuff can be simple "ELIMINATED" by correct game server programming (client CAN NOT do that because server simple refuse to accept such data/script to be executed from client)

it will be probably possible to "partially" cover this through PunkBuster like combination of file / variable check but ... that's not where PB should aim ...

when You look at anticheat like PB or Hradba (used now Vietcong 1 and 2 made by United Admins for Pterodon) You need to take in mind main reasons are to prevent D3D hooks, various unauthorized overlays (like radars or aim helpers), file injections, memory edits (sure game itself can cover this but there are so many techniques to mess with memory so it can be hard cover all by default), textures messing (wallhacks, brighthacks, neonhacks), external aimbots (using color of uniforms etc to aim and so on), speedhacks etc ...

when people speak about "PB" or whatever AC ruined the game ... what and how mean ruined ?

just some bit CPU/HDD stress because of file hashing or memory variable checks ? if you compare PB and Hradba ... u get very similar "resource increase" because of this ... u can't avoid it ... no matter what type of file hashing u use , u need to dedicate some CPU cycle and some HDD I/O and some memory to do it ... it's all about keep it in acceptable level ...

or just because people are unable to read FAQ/README how setup some accessrights?

even tried to think that there is reason why theirs process/service need such level of access ? w/o that AC itself will be useless locked in limited user mode w/o chance to access memory/files whatever ...

i mean let say you got something extremely expensive stored in bank and one day bank will decide to implement new security solution , as result they will scan ur fingerprint and eye retina.

First that will take time than before just using some ID card,

second it's bit unpleasant and

third You can always think omg they collecting some of private data about me what about they will try spy on me (u known big brother, selling the info to 3rd party and such paranoi stuff)

Now , i doubt You will take Your time to call or visit someone of bank board of directors of any chief in lead and WHINE about "hey man, this new security stuff is taking my precious time and i feel uncomfortable because of that and maybe You also storing some private identification data about me (omg spy*ware* whatever) ... i would like to see this ...

so maybe ... think about the bank example then about how the HELL made AC enough effective in todays world of multiple platforms, multiple operation systems with multiple level system of access rights on thousands various hw / sw configs ...

if You manage to made something better than PB / Hradba / VAC2 / Wache and so on ... then i wonder how come u not already billionaire

[Dwarden 1124]

... PunkBuster is now going to be implemented into F.E.A.R.

Quote[/b] ]... will be available for F.E.A.R. in an upcoming game update patch.

never is too late to implement some AC solution ...

[ACES_KEVIN 0]

I vote no to Punkbuster, and think that BIS could come up with a more unique way to prevent cheating.

Or at least make a efficient way to permenently ban cheaters.

Just my 2 cents tho!

[Dwarden 1124]

in meanwhile PB was added to RS4:Lockdown, Prey, FEAR, COD2 and some others are on horizont ...

so keep discussing and voting on this important topic ...

[-kelet0r 0]

was cheating a problem in operation flashpoint online in the past?

i voted for punkbuster - some protection is better than none and while cheating exists in for example BF2 - I've yet to see the extent of the frightening amount i saw in CS 1.6 in punkbuster protected games

[Spoock 3]

I played Americas Army over internet and every problem with join to game was in PB!!!

I hate PB

[Blake 0]

Punkbuster? Hell no. For 3D FPS kids games like CS and DoD fine but NEVER on Armed Assault.

[Dynamax 0]

i really dont care much for this disscussion about what AC to use and what not.. that fact is, OFP needed a good AC and ArmA better have one included..

the last time i saw someone cheating in OFP was when i was playing CTF Tanks...

the game is tanks only, there are no aircraft of any kind on the map.

this guy was in htere spawning helicopters and blowing everyone up, and the worst thing was that we couldnt see the player as he was invisable.

stuff like this piss me off and make it so i dont even want to play.

like i said above.. i dont gave a damn about what AC is used.. just use something that works!!!

[M4XSs 0]

I voted yes long time ago!

The PB is the most used anti-cheat system around the planet.

It will be nice if BIS agrees to integrate it into ARMA or even game 2 but leaving the game without such protection is not wise at all.

As I noticed many people complaining about PB maybe will harm their gaming experience, PB is easy to troubleshoot and you can find nice documentations and related FAQs if you faced problems with it.

To be honest it’s the only thing that makes cheating harder in games these days!

[Sniperwolf572 758]

IMO Only thing that needs to be implemented to the current system is the "Client Screenshot" option from PB, anyways, PB is bad mmkay?

[-kelet0r 0]

well punkbuster is better than no AC and there are very few commercial products available other than it

having BIS invest months in creating their own AC may be a misuse of resources particularly if they find that punkbuster would work well

[paragraphic l 2]

I'd say no to punkbuster or any other allready excisting AC software.

Offcourse there most be some kind of protection but i'd rather see a programm from BIS or this community.

I played other games that had many cheat issues, the community made their own AC tool and it worked perfect. They knew everything about the games issues and where able to fix them. Also it was updated the very second they noticed someone got through the security.

[armandobronca 0]

was cheating a problem in operation flashpoint online in the past?

i voted for punkbuster - some protection is better than none and while cheating exists in for example BF2 - I've yet to see the extent of the frightening amount i saw in CS 1.6 in punkbuster protected games

Lol

Loads of players stopped playing flashpoint because of cheaters. And that include some mod-makers

As bis stated before they are developing their own AC system, so obviously PB will not be in arma.

[-kelet0r 0]

was cheating a problem in operation flashpoint online in the past?

i voted for punkbuster - some protection is better than none and while cheating exists in for example BF2 - I've yet to see the extent of the frightening amount i saw in CS 1.6 in punkbuster protected games

Lol

Loads of players stopped playing flashpoint because of cheaters. And that include some mod-makers

As bis stated before they are developing their own AC system, so obviously PB will not be in arma.

really?

do you have a source for that?

[FCOPZ-illuminator 0]

really?

do you have a source for that?

Oh ja, one example.

Our Squad don't play OFP since 2004, because a lot of cheats and cheaters. At this moment we only play "Joint Operations" (PB include) and hope "Armed Assault" will have a good cheater protection.

Our squad isn't the only one.

[-kelet0r 0]

Quote[/b] ]As bis stated before they are developing their own AC system, so obviously PB will not be in arma.

sorry man i meant this

joint ops? i really should get it seeing as its dirt cheap now but well Battlefield 2 is too damn fun

[armandobronca 0]

Quote[/b] ]As bis stated before they are developing their own AC system, so obviously PB will not be in arma.

sorry man i meant this

joint ops? i really should get it seeing as its dirt cheap now but well Battlefield 2 is too damn fun

From ofp.info interview:

Quote[/b] ]

: Will you add more features and options for dedicated servers, especially concerning anti cheating/server crashing measures?

A (V.B): Yes.

To be honest, that really dont mean PB will not be in arma.

Btw if PB is going to be added to the game, PB developers will need time to get it ready. And arma is wip...

[hoot 0]

mh... a working anticheatsystem is already present for ofp and under further development and research by clans and the alsr. so i dont know any cheatpack (what includes the so called betas up to 1.26c) that works anymore when this tool is serverside running in the background and additionally maps are prepared to stop cheating with their own techniques!

to prevent any upcoming pleasant anticipation it must be said, that i guess that it wont go public until arma is out! besides, if arma comes out equipped with a similar system and closes the few holes known from ofp:1985 that make cheating cheap, there won't be a further need to proceed the developement of this community anticheatsystem, that is still for eyes only.

meanwhile it is working as a honeypot and it has already catched and locked out more than 30 cheaters in about 6 months at one single server, absolutely autonomous and automatically.

so lets wait what anticheatsystems arma will bring with and lets hope they'll be effective. but if those systems will fail or become somehow or other ineffective (and we do all hope that it won't go that way) we have something in readiness...

[Dwarden 1124]

mh... a working anticheatsystem is already present for ofp and under further development and research by clans and the alsr. so i dont know any cheatpack (what includes the so called betas up to 1.26c) that works anymore when this tool is serverside running in the background and additionally maps are prepared to stop cheating with their own techniques!

to prevent any upcoming pleasant anticipation it must be said, that i guess that it wont go public until arma is out! besides, if arma comes out equipped with a similar system and closes the few holes known from ofp:1985 that make cheating cheap, there won't be a further need to proceed the developement of this community anticheatsystem, that is still for eyes only.

meanwhile it is working as a honeypot and it has already catched and locked out more than 30 cheaters in about 6 months at one single server, absolutely autonomous and automatically.

so lets wait what anticheatsystems arma will bring with and lets hope they'll be effective. but if those systems will fail or become somehow or other ineffective (and we do all hope that it won't go that way) we have something in readiness...

problem is ... to have complete anti-cheat protection You need not only well done server (all what is possible should be calculated, controller and revalidated by server not client)

but also client and with client side part of AC ... (to prevent DX hooking, content messing, code injections and so on) ...

30 cheaters in 6 months ? lol ... You get that in day-week on any popular FPS ...

there is another problem with 3rd party "only" external solutions (clan written , some game fan etc) is "trust" especially if it contain some sort of autoupdate and stability ...

due to lack fo info it's very hard to get image if there will be real improvements or just some changes in how server handle scripting (like fc "DENIED" to prevent well know "spawning" cheats etc)

[hoot 0]

Quote[/b] ]problem is ... to have complete anti-cheat protection You need not only well done server (all what is possible should be calculated, controller and revalidated by server not client)

but also client and with client side part of AC ... (to prevent DX hooking, content messing, code injections and so on) ...

both types (serverprotection und clientverification) would be there if we (this is what some folks a trying to do and was meant by saying "development and research") merge all the code together, what is for sure possible and focused in a public release!

Quote[/b] ]30 cheaters in 6 months ? lol ... You get that in day-week on any popular FPS ...

dude, this system was mentioned and titled as a community project, so what community are we speaking about- lolË›!!!! i think it is a nice ammount of catched cheaters if you would have noticed the average of 500 players per day in ofp multiplayer matches nowadays!

Quote[/b] ]there is another problem with 3rd party "only" external solutions (clan written , some game fan etc) is "trust" especially if it contain some sort of autoupdate and stability ...

that is true but maybe you become the man that have the knowledge to monitor whats going on, when this system is running?! i guess lots of ppl will do it just to prevent hostile code on their systems. but maybe we open the sources to some trusted eyes that can say whether it is going to be a leak or not! "stability at autoupdate" - nice - you take majors seriously who are patching their games up to the moon, but you don't "trust" ppl like us...

Quote[/b] ]due to lack fo info it's very hard to get image if there will be real improvements or just some changes in how server handle scripting (like fc "DENIED" to prevent well know "spawning" cheats etc)

true and was pointed out before!!!

[Ronin Warrior 0]

Adding PunkBuster to ArMa would be completely pointless, as there are many people who already cheat in PunkBuster servers. All you need is a private cheat, i.e. one that nobody else has, and it will never catch you

And please, no posts arguing this point,I can easily point anyone to many sites that offer these cheats for download(but I won't-so don't even ask ), or supply you with the code, if you are a programmer. Some of the stuff currently availabe is:  anti PB screenshot, Hardware un-ban, Hardware spoofer.

Anyway BIS should make their own anti-cheat, if they intend to use one. PB is already cracked as well as VAC, we need something new and improved.