WalkerDown

I dunno who he is (neither i know who you are..). If he talks as BIS, he should tell me/us. Translated... what it means? They have planned to apply BE in? End of march? April? When exactly? That's what i would like to know. I'm not forcing anyone, neither i know how i could do it. I'm not "important", i don't "need" .. i'm asking, i am a customer.

How do you know? Proves? Is it a secret? I didn't asked this, i'm asking exactly: when you (BIS) planned to release BE?

Exactly.. and this is the problem we had.. how many? five years ago? And they didn't found a solution in these years... so why they didn't put all their heads (including familiaries, dogs, even the man who clean their offices) concetrate to SOLVE this issue and to update the game engine to the YEAR 2013, instead of giving us a "nice gfx" that you cannot even see with a couple of Titans? They should have solved this problem before anything else, it should have be the VERY TOP priority.

It's ONE of the factors, please read a post before replying. This isn't true, adding BE doesn't depends by the "code to change", the scripting filtering part and the remote console doesn't have (almost) nothing to do with the core code. However i didn't asked: WHY THE F* YOU ARE NOT ADDING IT RIGHT NOW? I've asked something else: WHEN IT IS PLANNED .... ? ---------- Post added at 15:37 ---------- Previous post was at 15:34 ---------- So this company doesn't have a plan? They doesn't even know when BE could be deployed? It must be the first game company of not having a GDD or a workflow, in my experience you have deadlines set and you know (several months before) what you're supposed to do in the next year or so, you can move deadlines but you do not develop a game without knowing what you'll do "tomorro".. unless you're an amateur (and i don't think BIS is a bunch of amateurs). So again (to BIS), the question: when you plan to deploy BE?

Beta... and Retail? Do you wanna launch a game without even testing the anti-cheat? No thanks, we need it asap. Why so impatient? 3 weeks ago we had 10k players online, tonite (while im writing this post) they are 1102 (barely the 10%), this is due to many factors: bad performance + lack of contents *AND* cheaters/hackers all around.

Btw what's the plan? How long we have to wait for an anti-cheat? I'm not blaming.. it's a question: i've tried to play again today after weeks to ceck the situation, and guess what? Mass server kill within the first 30 minutes. :)

It's how the script in ArmA works today, it's the client that "spawn" stuff, and the server accepts it: if you drop a weapon, that weapon gets "created" for me to pick up; now if i create a weapon using a cheat, the server doesn't know if it's legit (ie: because someone else have dropped it) or if a cheater created it (without leaving traces in the log). That's why (in my opinion) they should consider to review this approach, and redesign the script engine, since it's "old" and it doesn't take accounts of possible cheaters (it wasn't a problem in the previous arma title because of the hardcore/niche nature; today it is a a AAA title, and there's much more casual players and cheaters... we had an anticipation with DayZ).

Hmm.. nope, i'm referring to the possibility of running a script (or just function) without leaving traces in any BE filters logs.. this is how the cheats operates (or to be exact this is the "bypass" part of the cheat). If you leave no traces, the filters cannot operate for obvious reason (here comes in play the traditional anti-cheat... but assuming that the anti-cheat is capable of find and recognize the bypass code). So yes, i can "createweapon" without leaving any trace of the function call.

So i've figured that A3 heavily uses my SSD's for no apparent reason, i could understand the loading of this or that textures or model or whatever time to time, but not a 100% usage the whole time i play, this doesn't make much sense. We don't have much data on how the SSD life could be affected by this kind of "access", but it's surely not good. Does anyone have figured about this issue as well?

BE filters works when a filter kicks in.. if i call the script routine without leaving any trace of the call, i will obtain the result without BE notices it. This is how 99.9% of cheats works in Arma, and in other games as well, with the difference that in any other game a teleporting (in example) is always a cheat.. while in arma (due to the scripting) it could be a legit request, the problem is that (due to the engine limitation) it's very hard to figure who initiated that request and why. BE has the filters functionality .. *and* it operates like a traditional anti-cheat... and it has the same problems of any other anti-cheat: getting up to date, coz the cheaters/hackers evolves.

Nope, but sounds logical to me to change how the scripting works in arma, at the moment it gives complete freedom without even considering that someone could use this freedom to cheat.. because it was designed this way... years ago (hardcore target; less ppl interested to cheat coz they were more into the "simulation"). You can make the script more secure without limiting the scripting freedom, using the basic concept that it must be the server to check if what the client is pretending to do, is a legit request or not (the script filtering is not enough). But this requires an engine (re)design, something that is not going to happens.. nor for ArmA3.

I still, in fact im asking for official admin tools to be used under a controlled environment. The tools we have now (and the ones i'm using) are literally cheats, and i won't see them "legalized" (including mine), because they would be used by any kid out there: i trust myself, i wouldn't trust any other else using a such tool without control. ---------- Post added at 09:43 ---------- Previous post was at 09:32 ---------- BE works with the assumption that the cheater leaves a trace somewhere (in the logs), so a bypass is enough to do anything you want without being noticed; and it analyzes the running processes to look for something suspicious, but again: i slightly modded a custom cheat would be enough to not being caught. You really need much more integration to be effective with this engine, an integration that today doesn't exists: BE is an external entity, it sits at the top (actually bottom) of ArmA, pretending to know what's happening into the game.

Heuristically... when it cannot be determined i review what happened and i adjust the behavior: most of cheaters are really "script kids", they doesn't know how to code a cheat, they just use what they find on the net, and so they have a very recognizable path and behavior. There's those smart cheaters (ie: those ones using a ESP that are smart enough to not go straight for their victmins) that must be remotely observed (remote cam), they do something wrong first or late.. i don't actively admin anymore btw, it's too time expensive on A2, that's why i hope we will have something better for A3, i'm not planning to spend half of my free time to spy those kids. And no, you couldn't apply a solution like this for a public anti-cheat because a single false positive will give you much trouble.. while on my server a false positive is just a collateral damage: i can accept it. But on the other side you have more possibilities to analyze what's happening in the game instead of hacking into a bunch of data in the memory like i do. ---------- Post added at 00:46 ---------- Previous post was at 00:40 ---------- I think there's something "public", similar to what i'm using privately.. but the guy wanted some money for it, plus he admitted he was a key stealer in the past (yes, i'm serious.. lol), so ppl didn't gave him much trust. But the tool is there, you can find a thread in the "Server" area of the dayz forum. Returning to what i'm using: i'm technically cheating, i don't do anything else that other tools like the navigator does: i read game data from the memory.. with the only difference that instead of just representing it on a map, i elaborate this data to find out who's cheating: why that user is surfing from a vehicle to another in a straight line? Why that user was in a place and now is elsewhere? Why this user has a As50 30 seconds after spawning? Why there's a MedBox in the middle of nowhere? ...and stuff like this. What i should public then? A admin tool that can be easily used to cheat? It will be banned in a week (i'm not banned only coz im the only one using it...). We really need proper admins tools into the game.. and they must be official, not "hacks".

My "anticheat" is nothing more than a hack (i'm surprised that BE didn't banned me yet after more than a year of usage.. but it's just because i'm the "only" one using it..), there's no "magic" into it, nothing that couldn't be implemented natively to assist the server admins. Having or not having these tools isn't a matter of skill, it's a decision: we asked for more admin tools by years already, nor that is something new > what you cannot fight with anti-cheat can be fight by humans... BUT having the right tools or it will be just randomly guessing: who's the script kid now?

Leon, you can have the files unpacked (just unpack the pbo) and see that the SINGLE files are accessed continuosly over and over again. You can try this with any MP mission out there and check yourself.

We are on topic.. i'm on SLI as well, and my SLI is used "fine".. and with fine i mean: my gfx cards are capable of process the graphic, BUT if the frames are capped by something else (bad/unoptimized engine) and the fps are so low (for another reason that is not depandant of my gfx cards) there's NOTHING my two super-huber-gfx-cards have to process, because thre's only 25 frames per seconds to "calculate". This is why with a single card you have the same fps of two (or 3 of them) .. coz they aren't used, because the engine: s-u-c-k-s (atm).

It's technical impossible to bypass: i don't counter-fight the cheat (method) but i'm interested into the consequence (what the cheat does), and the consequence is the "advantage" gained by cheating, so it cannot be eliminated or hidden for obvious reason. It's like someone watching you constantly while playing, there's nothing you can do to "hide" yourself, the only option you have is to not cheat or to cheat and being banned. This doesn't mean that everything works fine of course: recently there's more (tons) trolls than traditional cheaters, most of them are not interesteted to have an advantage by cheating, but they are only interested to disrupt the gameplay, so they doesn't even try to "hide" themself.. they just mass-kill, get a ban, find another key and repeat.. they have plenty of server to chose from. This is why caught a cheater (something that i can do easy most of the times) isn't enough, but stop them to cheat is important as well, or at least give em a good reason to not cheat again after they have been caught the first time (read: pricey game; no stolen keys; account flagged as cheater; and so on...), this is not possible anymore for ArmA2, we hope in ArmA3.. so let's hope.

Go for Hetzer (better prices and support).. and avoid OVH like a plague, they put so many servers online that cannot cope with the customer support, it's a nightmare.

Admin tools more than anticheats... on my server i use my own "anti-cheat" that predicts the user behavior in example and it can determine when ppl teleports, when ppl spawn stuff and shit like this without using BE or scripting.. but by hacking into the game memory (like a cheat does)... :)

Isn't that hard to figure it out: Arma3 uses my CPU and GPU by 40% of its total "power".. and it runs at 25 fps on average. So it's not my PC short on "power", it's the engine that sucks. I'm not sure why we're still discussing it.. it's so obvious! :)

I don't have any pagefile on my system, and the HD is used by Arma3 continuously. I didn't only monitored the HD usage, i've even monitored the file accessed, and this is why i said that the game is accessing to the same file multiple times for no reason, while a simple file caching would avoid it completely. Again: i have no windows pagefile on my system.

The HD is used likely 100% during the gameplay.. and the same files are accessed zillion of times for no reason, i did not see any file caching to be honest, neither in a basic form. An HD could surely cope with it, but there's no point of wasting the resources, especially when there's a much faster resource available (your RAM).

You can be worried about your mechanical disk as well (in this case you wouldn't worry just about the write cycles...), so the problem remains: ArmA3 "streams" the files, even when it's not (technically) necessary. It is a waste of resources and it affects the game performances. It would be nice to have (even a basic) file caching, since it doesn't look to be that hard to implement (for a game developer). I'm honestly surprised that it doesn't have a such primitive technology already, that's why i tought it was a "bug" rather than a missing feature.

Every week we discover that an issue of 4 years ago, is again here today.. so the question is: what they did in this years? It's the 2013.. the game is not taking advantage of multiple cores (neither it can use fully two of them), it doesn't take advantage of having 24GB or 32GB or RAM aboard (it's pretty standard nowaday, considering the RAM cost) ... it's not that you must be that skilled to deploy a basic file caching: why the hell my HD is reading the same file zillions of time when it can sits in the memory after the first reading? File caching is something that any average coder knows of... wth.

It should loads textures and stuff into the ram, if you have plenty of ram available. See above. It's not efficient, hard drives (what if you don't have an SSD?) are much slow than ram.. for obvious reason. So SSD life apart, this is another area (after the CPU usage) where Arma is not efficient at all: the game is accessing the HDD continuosly (the HDD is accessed 100% of the time) when i still have like 18GB of RAM free? It doesn't make sense. ---------- Post added at 19:52 ---------- Previous post was at 19:46 ---------- Indexing and swap-file is disabled, plus another couple of optimization to make sure that my SSD's aren't unnecessarily used, this is why i'm complaining that a game is using it 100% of the time for no obvious reasons. I'm using two OCZ Vertex4 512GB (nor that it would makes any difference btw...)