is it a bit overkill while aCI unbans players after 5 days?

Same idea previously on aIW. We encountered cheaters, we'd ban them according to our ruleset which was based on permanent banning while the CI banned cheaters temporary. Still, if we encounter cheaters (mostly) we are sure that they are cheating. The CI could give false positives.

>manual bans

didn't I already--

>manual bans

didn't I already--

Yes... :c

>manual bans

didn't I already--

If CI was (almost) infallible and constantly updated, I would second the not-allowing-manual-bans policy amongst the staff members. But this isn't the case, and there is an obvious amount of hackers freely cheating.

 

Now, I would rather get back to the XUID system, this time linking a player's forum ID with that XUID. And getting back to the old system (as per bansystem.alteriw.net - with the hacker report/banning tool), while having CI active (I don't even know if that is possible, but you get my idea).

... with the hacker report/banning tool)

I don't think that it would be a good idea. There lots of good players that don't cheat and are banned from servers everyday. If we also add a cheater report tool, most of the reports would be false.

>manual bans

didn't I already--

If CI was (almost) infallible and constantly updated, I would second the not-allowing-manual-bans policy amongst the staff members. But this isn't the case, and there is an obvious amount of hackers freely cheating.

 

Now, I would rather get back to the XUID system, this time linking a player's forum ID with that XUID. And getting back to the old system (as per bansystem.alteriw.net - with the hacker report/banning tool), while having CI active (I don't even know if that is possible, but you get my idea).

For that we will need the ACT. Thus, more staff members. Thus, probably some chaos might occur.

Anyway, me and a few of my mates had our own IWnet running for a short while. As anticheat measure we linked the forum accounts with the game accounts. The forum account had to be put into a special usergroup, ptherwise the user could not play. It worked out well, actually. How about this idea?

The old system was still the best. XUID bans.

The old system was still the best. XUID bans.

you do know that 'XUID' is just a fancy name for the steamid, which is currently the forum user ID?

The old system was still the best. XUID bans.

you do know that 'XUID' is just a fancy name for the steamid, which is currently the forum user ID?

Here comes a question: a XUID was unique and produced by the computer. It was (supposedly) impossible to change, unless you formatted your OS (until that guy made the spoofer). But, does the forum ID have that "unique" characteristic?

 

A XUID wasn't supposed to be able to be spoofed (and most of the noob cheaters didn't know about it), but as far as I know with creating a new forum account you are able to play without restrictions, right? Or am I wrong there?

 

... with the hacker report/banning tool)

I don't think that it would be a good idea. There lots of good players that don't cheat and are banned from servers everyday. If we also add a cheater report tool, most of the reports would be false.

I was talking about the staff-only version of it. Regulars wouldn't be able to report. Staff members were able to ban right from inside it.

The old system was still the best. XUID bans.

you do know that 'XUID' is just a fancy name for the steamid, which is currently the forum user ID?

Here comes a question: a XUID was unique and produced by the computer. It was (supposedly) impossible to change, unless you formatted your OS (until that guy made the spoofer). But, does the forum ID have that "unique" characteristic?

 

A XUID wasn't supposed to be able to be spoofed (and most of the noob cheaters didn't know about it), but as far as I know with creating a new forum account you are able to play without restrictions, right? Or am I wrong there?

 

That's just the meaning you people gave to the term. The GUID/XUID/SteamID in the legitimate version actually is an account ID as well, for the record.

That's just the meaning you people gave to the term. The GUID/XUID/SteamID in the legitimate version actually is an account ID as well, for the record.

Except to get a new valid account ID on Steam you need to buy the game again.

Here you just need to make a new account, making it incoherently flawed...

That's just the meaning you people gave to the term. The GUID/XUID/SteamID in the legitimate version actually is an account ID as well, for the record.

Except to get a new valid account ID on Steam you need to buy the game again.

Here you just need to make a new account, its incoherently flawed...

and a locally-provided no-server-side-checking-at-all system-unique identifier can't be faked?

That's just the meaning you people gave to the term. The GUID/XUID/SteamID in the legitimate version actually is an account ID as well, for the record.

Except to get a new valid account ID on Steam you need to buy the game again.

Here you just need to make a new account, its incoherently flawed...

and a locally-provided no-server-side-checking-at-all system-unique identifier can't be faked?

hey, not my fault you made a bad system

That's just the meaning you people gave to the term. The GUID/XUID/SteamID in the legitimate version actually is an account ID as well, for the record.

Except to get a new valid account ID on Steam you need to buy the game again.

Here you just need to make a new account, its incoherently flawed...

and a locally-provided no-server-side-checking-at-all system-unique identifier can't be faked?

hey, not my fault you made a bad system

oh, so a 'good system' can't have such a token faked?

Well... in theory, bans are impossible in a free system like ours. In any case, users need an ID. Here, they can get it for free. Accounts get created, xuids get spoofed and IPs changed, proxies used, etc.

The only effective way of handling cheaters is by having a better definition of the cheats, so that aCI can detect them faster and immediately kick the player. Since new cheats get created all the time, having that better definition of cheats seems rather utopic.

So... we just have to live with it...

Did someone even read this?

Anyway, me and a few of my mates had our own IWnet running for a short while [Maybe 1 month or so, we intended it as our own little private solution until a proper version of IW4 was released here at 4D1]. As anticheat measure we linked the forum accounts with the game accounts. The forum account had to be put into a special usergroup [by a staff member, based on a invitation], otherwise the user could not play. [in case of cheating, user was removed from that group] It worked out well, actually. [We didnt have something like aCI, so this was our only solution as our coders werent able to write a proper anticheat. However, this system+aCI shouldnt be that bad...] How about this idea?

Did someone even read this?

Anyway, me and a few of my mates had our own IWnet running for a short while [Maybe 1 month or so, we intended it as our own little private solution until a proper version of IW4 was released here at 4D1]. As anticheat measure we linked the forum accounts with the game accounts. The forum account had to be put into a special usergroup [by a staff member, based on a invitation], otherwise the user could not play. [in case of cheating, user was removed from that group] It worked out well, actually. [We didnt have something like aCI, so this was our only solution as our coders werent able to write a proper anticheat. However, this system+aCI shouldnt be that bad...] How about this idea?

 

Indeed, but then we will be spammed with >50 PMs every day to put the dude in the group and eventually the staff will get tired of it and just add everyone that requests one making the idea overall ineffective and the idea just adding to our work.

Did someone even read this?

Anyway, me and a few of my mates had our own IWnet running for a short while [Maybe 1 month or so, we intended it as our own little private solution until a proper version of IW4 was released here at 4D1]. As anticheat measure we linked the forum accounts with the game accounts. The forum account had to be put into a special usergroup [by a staff member, based on a invitation], otherwise the user could not play. [in case of cheating, user was removed from that group] It worked out well, actually. [We didnt have something like aCI, so this was our only solution as our coders werent able to write a proper anticheat. However, this system+aCI shouldnt be that bad...] How about this idea?

 

Indeed, but then we will be spammed with >50 PMs every day to put the dude in the group and eventually the staff will get tired of it and just add everyone that requests one making the idea overall ineffective and the idea just adding to our work.

Well, if we are already talking about the old bansystem and a anticheat team, we could also have a small team reviewing these invitations (i.e. checking if the invited user once cheated, etc).

Hm, I am just not sure if it would work out in a large scale.

Did someone even read this?

Anyway, me and a few of my mates had our own IWnet running for a short while [Maybe 1 month or so, we intended it as our own little private solution until a proper version of IW4 was released here at 4D1]. As anticheat measure we linked the forum accounts with the game accounts. The forum account had to be put into a special usergroup [by a staff member, based on a invitation], otherwise the user could not play. [in case of cheating, user was removed from that group] It worked out well, actually. [We didnt have something like aCI, so this was our only solution as our coders werent able to write a proper anticheat. However, this system+aCI shouldnt be that bad...] How about this idea?

 

Indeed, but then we will be spammed with >50 PMs every day to put the dude in the group and eventually the staff will get tired of it and just add everyone that requests one making the idea overall ineffective and the idea just adding to our work.

Well, if we are already talking about the old bansystem and a anticheat team, we could also have a small team reviewing these invitations (i.e. checking if the invited user once cheated, etc).

Hm, I am just not sure if it would work out in a large scale.

It wouldn't work. We've got too many users and we're getting more everyday...

We can, however make it so that all accounts can only play after a week of registration, that should bring the amount of hackers and ban evaders to fairly low levels (try not to even include the word "post" to prevent spam). This will stop new players from joining, but one week seems like a fail deal for a free and a better game.

We can, however make it so that all accounts can only play after a week of registration, that should bring the amount of hackers and ban evaders to fairly low levels (try not to even include the word "post" to prevent spam). This will stop new players from joining, but one week seems like a fail deal for a free and a better game.

not really, they'll just go to arev/teknogods and not bother returning.

 

in addition, cheaters just make 20 accounts at a time.

in addition, cheaters just make 20 accounts at a time.

True. That's why we should have a rule against two accounts for the same user.

It's also true that people share connections, have brothers, and whatsoever. But having that rule would be a nice excuse to get rid of an account spammer, as soon as detected. Plus, it would disencourage the "low-level" (aka really noob) cheater from creating backup accounts.

in addition, cheaters just make 20 accounts at a time.

True. That's why we should have a rule against two accounts for the same user.

which still would need someone to check all account registrations

 

It's also true that people share connections, have brothers, and whatsoever. But having that rule would be a nice excuse to get rid of an account spammer, as soon as detected. Plus, it would disencourage the "low-level" (aka really noob) cheater from creating backup accounts.

how about ISPs which place entire regions behind NAT due to being unable to get more IPv4 addresses?

I'm talking about guys like the one that I got last week. Vitality banned him, but he had a couple of accounts, and I had to wait for an excuse to ban each of the accounts, because there isn't a rule against multiple accounts.

So, I had to wait for the guy to create another stupid topic on the portuguese section, telling how we couldn't ban him because he had other accounts, to keep banning his accounts.

Plus, note that this measure is mostly to scare the noob cheaters, to disencourage them from creating backup accounts.

random matter: now that I banned this guy's latest account, I got another email:

 

such a dumbass.....allways ban me, what you won with that..?

 

edit:

for a while *-*? .....congratulations, you have lost a mapper......for 4 months i haved all respect for all, but since yesterday, i lost all respect for you....you say that activision sucks, but you are actiang just like they act with aiw

 

lol