mxmissile wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 16:47:
so glad I dont play these shit EA / Dice rehash games... just sit back and lol

I've skipped a lot of DICE games in recent years but Battlefield 1 is an excellent game...

jdreyer wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 20:07:
I wonder if you could control cheating by having a game start a runtime virtual machine and having the game start up within it. Then it would be isolated from any apps trying to manipulate client side data.

There are alot of things you can try, but at the end of the day, if the client for the game runs on a remote machine(the user's) and you as the Server only have limited control, people will find a way to manipulate the game and cheat.

The only real way to control cheaters is with live Admins on servers, which DICE/EA seem to have really veered away from, for whatever reason. It just makes it that much easier for cheaters to cheat.

I wonder if you could control cheating by having a game start a runtime virtual machine and having the game start up within it. Then it would be isolated from any apps trying to manipulate client side data.

Oh noes, they are banning people.. if only BF1 wouldn't be included in Origin Access where you can easily scam your way in for free at the cost of a fake credit card. Or you know, pay 4€ to get a game every other fucking idiot paid 50€ for.. fuck EA.

Ever since BF1 was put on Origin Access it was dead. Cheaters everywhere, and yes, that is coming from a top player, ESP and box hacks are rampant.

This entire news post is utter bullshit, a ban costs a cheater exactly 4$ or even nothing, if he recycles accounts every 10 hours

https://www.origin.com/deu/en-us/store/battlefield/battlefield-1/revolution-edition

Make new account click trial, point to already installed BF1 = 10 hours cheating for free. Repeat infinitely.

And this is why "detection rates are going down" their stupid ass system needs 3 days (or 20 hours) of playdata before it even triggers.

so glad I dont play these shit EA / Dice rehash games... just sit back and lol

jdreyer wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 12:16:
getting accidentally banned is a situation that can be rectified via customer service. It's not like being sent to jail for a crime you didn't commit. Online multiplayer games *must* get a handle on this, or they won't survive.

Customer service haha. More like "buy another copy cheater", that's pretty much how most companies handle it. Companies always give some horseshit line about how their software can't do that and then later on when it turns out it did, they just say it was a small percentage of users.

I hate playing with cheaters but on an open platform there is no getting a handle on this. It will always be a problem until companies start using proper isolation techniques involving jails or dockers which will likely need platform support from Microsoft. Some companies certainly make it easier than others though, people shouldn't be able to teleport around or kill you from distances that aren't possible, don't trust the client that much.

Cutter wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 13:07:
Why do FPS' waste so much time and money on all this nonsense when the solution is simple?

Because they can’t control DLC/loot boxes, where they make a KILLING, if they offer player run servers. You know that.

Why do FPS' waste so much time and money on all this nonsense when the solution is simple?

Retired wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 12:52:
Little late eh?

Exactly, I quit 5 weeks in due to the rampant ESP/Radar hacks.

Cheating has evolved as more and more long term cheaters play fps. A good cheater does not get caught as they are not blatant about it and play the hack to just appear skilled. Just having a box around all the enemies no matter where they are on map is a great advantage, you do not even need aimbot. Bad cheaters are the kiddies who are too stupid to not get caught.

There are professionally developed websites where you subscribe to the hack. They update it constantly to stay ahead of Fairfight.

There was a 150 and 360 plus page threads on the BF1 forums on cheating. EA games are the worst for this.

Retired wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 12:52:
Little late eh?

Heh.

Little late eh?

While there are a ton of cheaters in BF1, probably more than any Battlefield game I've played (or they are just more blatant), there are also a ton of cheating accusations being thrown around, it feels like. I get called a cheater like once a day at least, if I play a few good rounds, and some of those accusers claim they have reported me.


I've never been banned or had any communication with EA/DICE or Fairfight, and I don't even know if my data gets reviewed at all, but I'd hate for false positive bans to occur. It does make me wonder though, how much data gets collected for them to be able to avoid erroneously banning people. I don't just mean player position/aiming percentage, etc. but stuff like programs resident in memory on the PC, more invasive things along those lines.

*EDIT* Oops, grammar.

necrosis wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 10:45:

RedEye9 wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 10:26:

A common misconception regarding FairFight is that higher skilled players are more likely to get sanctioned due to their improved match stats. This is not correct; it is not possible to be banned simply for being skilled.

But the cheaters will scream that is what's happening. I would rather see 1 false positive for every 100 cheaters caught than let 10 cheating bitches slip through the net.

Glad you dont run our judicial system.

Unfortunately the people that run the judicial system often think that way.

Still, I agree with Redeye here: getting accidentally banned is a situation that can be rectified via customer service. It's not like being sent to jail for a crime you didn't commit. Online multiplayer games *must* get a handle on this, or they won't survive.

necrosis wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 10:45:

RedEye9 wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 10:26:

A common misconception regarding FairFight is that higher skilled players are more likely to get sanctioned due to their improved match stats. This is not correct; it is not possible to be banned simply for being skilled.

But the cheaters will scream that is what's happening. I would rather see 1 false positive for every 100 cheaters caught than let 10 cheating bitches slip through the net.

Glad you dont run our judicial system.

I would imagine that DICE has a way of verifying actual cheating is going on as opposed to someone being called a cheater because they are so skilled that they are dominating in a round. From what I've seen in Overwatch the cheaters are very obviously cheating in ways that have nothing to do with skill.

NOW that it's nearing EOL for the game they talk about curbing the cheaters...???

well, one is going to jail, one is waiting for review....

RedEye9 wrote on Feb 6, 2018, 10:26:

A common misconception regarding FairFight is that higher skilled players are more likely to get sanctioned due to their improved match stats. This is not correct; it is not possible to be banned simply for being skilled.

But the cheaters will scream that is what's happening. I would rather see 1 false positive for every 100 cheaters caught than let 10 cheating bitches slip through the net.

Glad you dont run our judicial system.

A common misconception regarding FairFight is that higher skilled players are more likely to get sanctioned due to their improved match stats. This is not correct; it is not possible to be banned simply for being skilled.

But the cheaters will scream that is what's happening. I would rather see 1 false positive for every 100 cheaters caught than let 10 cheating bitches slip through the net.