Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Treatment of convicted cheaters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238331 is a reply to message #238256] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 02:53   |
fl00d3d
Messages: 1107
Registered: August 2003
Location: Iowa, USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Viva la Resistance! |
|
|
| Crimson wrote on Tue, 09 January 2007 19:09 |
Uh, also, I don't answer to EA. I had merely asked EA to help us accomplish our goals by giving us the source for the game and letting us release patches through the Westwood Auto-updater because being able to patch ALL clients would give us a lot more power in fighting cheaters since players would be forced to patch or get version mismatch when they tried to join a server.
But Spoony pre-emptively went to EA and said "Hey guys, Crimson is going to ask to take over hosting the Renegade listing service and wants to take it away from XWIS. These are all the reasons why you should deny her request." Never mind that I never intended to ask such a thing and I have NO idea how such an idea got into his head. So, when I had my extremely time-limited conference over the phone with him, I had to waste several minutes of that time talking about the "Spoony situation" that he should have never known about in the first place.
So now when I decide to remove him from the forums that I built and I pay for, he goes and cries to EA about it? Ridiculous. I don't answer to EA and I will not set a precedent that he can cry to EA when I don't do what he wants me to do and get results from it. I have done a lot more for EA than they have done for me, of that you can be damn sure.
|
I just read this.
I still think that Spoony should be un-banned as he has not violated any rules. I also think that the whole concept of "mine mine mine" of these forums and such should die immediately because you took on a responsibility to the community, not yourself. These forums are for the community - and personal bias should not be playing into this. We all know you hate Spoony, but that is absolutely no grounds to ban him.
Hypotheticlly speaking what if someone had some good points, truths, or opinions they wanted to share that did not go along with how you wanted things to go (or which weren't in sync with your opinions): would you ban them too? I'm not trying to be argumentative or target you Crimson, but I do think that this is starting to get a bit out of control.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238339 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 04:02 |
 |
Goztow
Messages: 9728
Registered: March 2005
Location: Belgium
Karma: 13
|
General (5 Stars)
Goztoe |
|
|
My humble opinion on all this after having read through it all on both forums and after MSN conversation with Spoony. Remember, I consider myself an outsider in this whole "vendetta":
1. If the cw.cc community and renforums community could work together to counter cheaters then they should. The contents of Spoony's proposal does seem to me worthwhile as it is a solution which can work in short term without a lot of effort, but based on cooperation from the community. I technically believe that xwis bans will make cheaters think twice, especially because some people are working at ways to make sure people without a valid xwis serial will not be able to join the server. I also believe there are better ways but they will ask more time and cooperation with xwis/EA.
2. To be able to cooperate, you need a basis of respect and objectivity from both sides, otherwise you will fail miserably. At this moment, I tend to believe both sides have problems with this point.
Spoony is very bad in packing his proposals, as is a big part of the cw.cc community (many seem to find it a good idea to throw in a lot of insults when things aren't exactly going the way it should go). There's a lot of prejudices already instored and as long as both sides won't go to the core of the problem and focus objectively on what can be done with respect towards eachother, all this hasn't got the slightest chance of succeeding. So yes: Spoony's proposal makes sence but what a terrible public relations person you make if you use a perfectly sensible proposal to throw in a couple of other issues to make the other partie look bad. If you REALLY want a peace treaty, then don't you think it would be good to pack your proposal as one? Where's the "let's forget about the past, I want to work with you and not against you"? In your mind, you may think of things as completely objective and maybe they are (I won't judge) but that's no reason to write them down as if in a proposal ment as peace treaty.
Then again, Crimson: you are correct that this wasn't exactly packed as what you could call a peace treaty but you take the opportunity to throw this back at Spoony and, at the meanwhile, throw away the complete proposal.
Both your reactions make me ask the question "do you both want what's best for the renegade community or do you want what you propose as being best for the Renegade community"?
Wouldn't it be fair to strip the proposal of political stuff and discuss the proposal itself before discussing who can administrate the whole thing? But before doing this: dress a seperate, clear "peace treaty" in which both parties agree to forget about past problems and agree to respect and defend eachother statements in public forums. PLEASE keep your vendetta away from public forums, for the love of God: it doesn't benefit the renegade community AT ALL, it only makes us look like clowns towards xwis and EA.
IMO it would be best for everyone to have a third person, trusted by both parties, with a good knowledge of cheaters, administrate this anti-cheating proposal. Whoever this could be is an open question but ain't important at all if you two can't work at above problems first.
3. If you guys REALLY cannot get over all of this and if you REALLY believe there is no way to make bridges, then the only solution is to do what Crimson has said so far: stay FAR away from eachother but then you need an agreement to do this and to stop the stupid fighting/disrespecting. But if you agree to do this anyway, then you may as well work together on some projects, right?
My two cents, hopefully this can make something work.
You can find me in The KOSs2 (TK2) discord while I'm playing. Feel free to come and say hi! TK2 discord
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238342 is a reply to message #238339] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 04:46 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
| Goztow wrote on Wed, 10 January 2007 04:02 |
1. If the cw.cc community and renforums community could work together to counter cheaters then they should. The contents of Spoony's proposal does seem to me worthwhile as it is a solution which can work in short term without a lot of effort, but based on cooperation from the community. I technically believe that xwis bans will make cheaters think twice, especially because some people are working at ways to make sure people without a valid xwis serial will not be able to join the server. I also believe there are better ways but they will ask more time and cooperation with xwis/EA.
|
It may SEEM worthwhile on the surface, but if you look at the most prevalent bypass out there and the people making the cheats, this idea simply will provide a false sense of security not unlike the current iteration of RenGuard. And why should we have two easily-bypassed anti-cheat solutions when one is more than enough? There are also some other factors I simply can't talk about in public. I think the BI guys can agree with me on that.
| Quote: |
2. To be able to cooperate, you need a basis of respect and objectivity from both sides, otherwise you will fail miserably. At this moment, I tend to believe both sides have problems with this point.
|
Well, I do respect certain aspects of his work... maybe that's a start.
| Quote: |
Spoony is very bad in packing his proposals, as is a big part of the cw.cc community (many seem to find it a good idea to throw in a lot of insults when things aren't exactly going the way it should go).
|
Nice to see someone agreeing with me on this. Spoony essentially told me that it didn't matter that he insulted me so long as he felt what he was saying was true.
| Quote: |
There's a lot of prejudices already instored and as long as both sides won't go to the core of the problem and focus objectively on what can be done with respect towards eachother, all this hasn't got the slightest chance of succeeding. So yes: Spoony's proposal makes sence but what a terrible public relations person you make if you use a perfectly sensible proposal to throw in a couple of other issues to make the other partie look bad. If you REALLY want a peace treaty, then don't you think it would be good to pack your proposal as one? Where's the "let's forget about the past, I want to work with you and not against you"? In your mind, you may think of things as completely objective and maybe they are (I won't judge) but that's no reason to write them down as if in a proposal ment as peace treaty.
|
I can't disagree with that. I can dig up the few times over the past few years that I've sent peace offerings that didn't include insults and show you what happened...
| Quote: |
Then again, Crimson: you are correct that this wasn't exactly packed as what you could call a peace treaty but you take the opportunity to throw this back at Spoony and, at the meanwhile, throw away the complete proposal.
|
Incorrect, I threw away the proposal for the reasons I stated above as to the potential for effectiveness. If I thought the idea was good but wanted to act biased against Spoony, I would have ACCEPTED the idea and put someone else at the helm of it. There is ample evidence of me taking the advice of others and acting on it when it's good and usable advice.
| Quote: |
Both your reactions make me ask the question "do you both want what's best for the renegade community or do you want what you propose as being best for the Renegade community"?
|
I don't see the difference. Of course I want what's best for the community... I don't intend to waste my time or money.
| Quote: |
Wouldn't it be fair to strip the proposal of political stuff and discuss the proposal itself before discussing who can administrate the whole thing?
|
We already did that... once I removed Spoony from posting here we were able to discuss the proposal itself in civil terms without insults.
| Quote: |
But before doing this: dress a seperate, clear "peace treaty" in which both parties agree to forget about past problems and agree to respect and defend eachother statements in public forums. PLEASE keep your vendetta away from public forums, for the love of God: it doesn't benefit the renegade community AT ALL, it only makes us look like clowns towards xwis and EA.
|
I can't disagree with that. I never wanted these discussions here in the first place. They are completely counterproductive. The fact that Spoony has tried to go over my head and complain about me to EA twice now serves as the very pinnacle of embarrassment for this community. There was no reason they ever needed to know about one of the many levels of ReneDrama(tm).
| Quote: |
IMO it would be best for everyone to have a third person, trusted by both parties, with a good knowledge of cheaters, administrate this anti-cheating proposal. Whoever this could be is an open question but ain't important at all if you two can't work at above problems first.
|
Unfortunately, there are pitiful few who can qualify, and even those could easily be fooled by someone with a little intelligence and planning. However, the proposal itself would not have sufficient impact to stop cheating. And last, but not least, I am unhappy that the proposed solution encourages server owners to stop allowing direct connect players. I have many players on my server who use GameSpy (who I previous referred to as "my GameSpy players" which made Spoony think I was claiming ALL GAMESPY PLAYERS as my own or something) and I don't want to force them to use XWIS. There is a strong WOL vs. GameSpy competitiveness in this community and encouraging servers to move to XWIS-only would be insulting to those who prefer GameSpy.
| Quote: |
3. If you guys REALLY cannot get over all of this and if you REALLY believe there is no way to make bridges, then the only solution is to do what Crimson has said so far: stay FAR away from eachother but then you need an agreement to do this and to stop the stupid fighting/disrespecting. But if you agree to do this anyway, then you may as well work together on some projects, right?
|
*shrug* I'd prefer keeping our discussions on a need-to-talk basis, without insults, if he is in fact capable.
Just to add on here... I started the Server Owners' forum back when RenGuard just started to be developed as a solution to communicate between server owners when cheaters were found, and those cheaters were generally banned from most of the big servers in the community within 24 hours or less. This isn't exactly a "new" idea. It's just a change of the existing idea where, instead of server owners deciding who to ban/not ban from their servers, they are expected to trust one person to decide for them.
I have already presented a better solution in another thread... all of which was ALREADY IN PROGRESS before this "proposal" (which, let's be fair here, is the exact same proposal someone else came up with and posted here, with the added "let me run it" tacked on) came to me.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238346 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 05:16 |
|
Goztow
Messages: 9728
Registered: March 2005
Location: Belgium
Karma: 13
|
General (5 Stars)
Goztoe |
|
|
Just about the proposal itself.
I think there's a misunderstanding in the purpose of this proposal. The proposal, IMO, ain't a way of banning all cheats or a way to replace renguard (quite impossible to do). It's a way to stop people who cheat just to ruin other people's fun/game. I'm talking about the f1n ren cheaters, who just get in there until they're banned. About pretty obvious cheaters who just want to cheat, wait until they get banned from a serevr, then go on another one and maybe just don't do it on 2 servers which they play on regulary. How aret hey punished? Not. A xwis ban would punish them.
As to the gamespy-WOL issue: this is the serevr owner's choice. I don't think people who run wolspy now won't stop running it once this gets released. And even if they do, this should be their choice IMO. Just like renguard it is an option that serevr owners could choose, but if i'm not mistaking they already do: some cheaters have already been xwis banned and can still play on gamespy.
You can find me in The KOSs2 (TK2) discord while I'm playing. Feel free to come and say hi! TK2 discord
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238351 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 05:36 |
MexPirate
Messages: 883
Registered: March 2006
Location: UK
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Also if this was put in to effect, hopefully the cheaters IP would be posted following an XWIS ban and a list would be compiled of PROVEN cheaters, allowing individual servers to IP ban them - IP banning as I understand it is the most efficient way of stopping people using the latest cheats. A central database of that information in an organised format would surely be useful.
It's a mexican pirate .... F*ck a dog by Blink 182
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238352 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 05:40 |
|
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
Yes, and something like that is already in the planning stages... but the server owners are VERY concerned that they want control over who can and can't play in their servers. Even I have struggled to find a solution that bridges the gap.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238355 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 05:54 |
 |
Blazer
Messages: 3322
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Administrator/General |
|
|
Just a few random thoughts:
1. Banning cheaters from XWIS is useless. Honestly most people that I have personally caught cheating were not connected from XWIS, and using names like "LOL I Hax".
2. There is definitely a *current* problem with people using RG bypasses. BHS is working hard on getting RG 1.04 out which will stop all of the current bypasses and also close up other vulnerabiliies (and lots of other things like new features and compatibility with win2k and 64bit systems).
3. Server-side cheat detection is definitely a plus. While server side cheat detection cannot do everything RenGuard can, I think its definitely the way to go. This is one of the reasons that BHS is coordinating with EA on getting access to the FDS source code so that we can release an FDS that has enhanced anti-cheat capabilities and other bug fixes. Some folks like Whitedragon and BI are already testing server-side cheat detection via scripts.dll mods.
4. BHS is working on a fix for the FDS that will allow true cdkey banning. This combined with an IP ban should make it easier for server owners to ban people and keep them gone.
5. I believe Spoonys proposal (of banning cheaters from XWIS) is, how do you say...he means well and its a good idea, but as I noted in #1, it just will not be effective, since they can just direct connect, or come from gamespy, etc. I havn't actually talked to Olaf about the XWIS banning protocols, but I was under the impression that XWIS bans were more for people who were abusing XWIS itself (page flooding, loading bots, etc). I dont know where all this talk of "spoony should be made an XWIS admin so that he can ban people because Crimson isn't doing her job" came from. Like I said Crimson and/or strike-team could place an xwis ban on every known cheater, and it would make little to no difference in stoping the current cheating in renegade, because most of the cheaters already connect via Gamespy or direct connnect (or, if they don't know, they would once they were banned).
6. The Renegade community of players is "too small" to ban everyone who has ever done anything wrong. You would be surprised how many people load a cheat just to see how it works, or just to test it, or to try and counter another cheater. I think the best anti-cheat mechanism is to simply BLOCK them from cheating - make their cheats not work. This is pretty much the goal of RenGuard. If they have cheats or modified files, they simply cannot play on RG-protected servers. The only people we actually ban from RenGuard are people who attack RenGuard itself, (usually people caught testing or creating a bypass). I've noticed that BI's server-side anti-cheat works in a similar manner...instead of detecting that someone is cheating and kicking the player, it detects that they are doing more damage than they should and just *ignores* the extra damage, thus nullifying their cheat. This is a much better way to stop cheating - make the cheats simply not work, no ban lists to manage, no "my brother/friend/neighbor/dog did it" excuses, etc. Of course it is still up to server owners if they want to ban someone, which is why BHS is working on the cdkey ban fix.
Thats it...sorry for the randomness, like I said, just thinking out loud.
[Updated on: Wed, 10 January 2007 06:24] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238358 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 06:45 |
|
Goztow
Messages: 9728
Registered: March 2005
Location: Belgium
Karma: 13
|
General (5 Stars)
Goztoe |
|
|
Just some extra info:
5. | "Xwis site" |
All players should now have the message that cheating is not allowed on XWIS. To help stamp out cheating on the server bans have now been increased as follows :
1st time caught cheating : warning and 16 Days server ban
If a player is caught again they will get a final warning and a 32 day ban from the server
If they are caught a 3rd time they will be permanently banned from XWIS.
No second chances will be given for players permanently banned so we recommend that anyone that has cheated in the past get rid of any trainers on their PC and play fair.
Fair play makes the server fun for everyone, so make sure you do your part and do not cheat.
Good luck and have fun everyone.
|
It would just actually be doing what they say they do.
6. BI's anti-cheat system also bans players after it detected. So yes: it blocks, but also bans.
You can find me in The KOSs2 (TK2) discord while I'm playing. Feel free to come and say hi! TK2 discord
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238409 is a reply to message #238355] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 12:58 |
 |
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Blazer wrote on Wed, 10 January 2007 13:54 |
Just a few random thoughts:
1. Banning cheaters from XWIS is useless. Honestly most people that I have personally caught cheating were not connected from XWIS, and using names like "LOL I Hax".
|
If I would know that XWIS is rather cheat free I am sure we would setup the server to only allow XWIS players. Server owners may choose what they want. Want the GSA players too? Ok, but then you might get more cheaters. thats your own choise then.
| Quote: |
2. There is definitely a *current* problem with people using RG bypasses. BHS is working hard on getting RG 1.04 out which will stop all of the current bypasses and also close up other vulnerabiliies (and lots of other things like new features and compatibility with win2k and 64bit systems).
3. Server-side cheat detection is definitely a plus. While server side cheat detection cannot do everything RenGuard can, I think its definitely the way to go. This is one of the reasons that BHS is coordinating with EA on getting access to the FDS source code so that we can release an FDS that has enhanced anti-cheat capabilities and other bug fixes. Some folks like Whitedragon and BI are already testing server-side cheat detection via scripts.dll mods.
|
You don't need the source code for that specifically, but it would be rahter usefull for fixing other stuff.
Our serverside antichiet, BIATCH, is currently running on BlackIntel1 BlackIntel2 and TheKOSs2/BlackIntel3 and just on BI1 and BI2 it has detected about 125 cheaters since we started testing.
| Quote: |
4. BHS is working on a fix for the FDS that will allow true cdkey banning. This combined with an IP ban should make it easier for server owners to ban people and keep them gone.
|
I'm sure that should be done by now as from what I've seen it isnt that hard (for StealthEye that is) and I expect that SK knows a thing or 2 about renegade so...
| Quote: |
5. I believe Spoonys proposal (of banning cheaters from XWIS) is, how do you say...he means well and its a good idea, but as I noted in #1, it just will not be effective, since they can just direct connect, or come from gamespy, etc. I havn't actually talked to Olaf about the XWIS banning protocols, but I was under the impression that XWIS bans were more for people who were abusing XWIS itself (page flooding, loading bots, etc). I dont know where all this talk of "spoony should be made an XWIS admin so that he can ban people because Crimson isn't doing her job" came from. Like I said Crimson and/or strike-team could place an xwis ban on every known cheater, and it would make little to no difference in stoping the current cheating in renegade, because most of the cheaters already connect via Gamespy or direct connnect (or, if they don't know, they would once they were banned).
|
You can block direct connect if you want to...
| Quote: |
6. The Renegade community of players is "too small" to ban everyone who has ever done anything wrong. You would be surprised how many people load a cheat just to see how it works, or just to test it, or to try and counter another cheater. I think the best anti-cheat mechanism is to simply BLOCK them from cheating - make their cheats not work. This is pretty much the goal of RenGuard. If they have cheats or modified files, they simply cannot play on RG-protected servers. The only people we actually ban from RenGuard are people who attack RenGuard itself, (usually people caught testing or creating a bypass). I've noticed that BI's server-side anti-cheat works in a similar manner...instead of detecting that someone is cheating and kicking the player, it detects that they are doing more damage than they should and just *ignores* the extra damage, thus nullifying their cheat. This is a much better way to stop cheating - make the cheats simply not work, no ban lists to manage, no "my brother/friend/neighbor/dog did it" excuses, etc. Of course it is still up to server owners if they want to ban someone, which is why BHS is working on the cdkey ban fix.
Thats it...sorry for the randomness, like I said, just thinking out loud.
|
There are plenty of places to just test a cheat without bothering other ppl so that shouldn't be an excuse. You can always use lan mode or just try it with some friends.
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238414 is a reply to message #238358] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 13:11 |
|
Blazer
Messages: 3322
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars)
Administrator/General |
|
|
| Goztow wrote on Wed, 10 January 2007 08:45 |
Just some extra info:
5. | "Xwis site" |
All players should now have the message that cheating is not allowed on XWIS. To help stamp out cheating on the server bans have now been increased as follows :
1st time caught cheating : warning and 16 Days server ban
If a player is caught again they will get a final warning and a 32 day ban from the server
If they are caught a 3rd time they will be permanently banned from XWIS.
No second chances will be given for players permanently banned so we recommend that anyone that has cheated in the past get rid of any trainers on their PC and play fair.
Fair play makes the server fun for everyone, so make sure you do your part and do not cheat.
Good luck and have fun everyone.
|
It would just actually be doing what they say they do.
|
Strike-Team has a strict banning policy for *other* games that are hosted on XWIS, and it is effective, because when you ban someone from XWIS, they simply cannot rejoin Red Alert, etc servers anymore. This is not the case with Renegade...if you ban someone from XWIS, they can easily direct connect or come from Gamespy, so the ban is ineffective, as pretty much anyone who has the ability to find a cheat and install it, also knows that you can connect to a renegade server multiple ways.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238415 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 13:11 |
 |
reborn
Messages: 3231
Registered: September 2004
Location: uk - london
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| fl00d3d wrote on Sat, 06 January 2007 02:41 |
As many of the folks at clanwars.cc have found out recently:
--Two convicted cheaters are being allowed to return to the league
--Someone who cheated on a public server under Crimson's name is not being banned on clanwars.cc and is instead getting a forum ban for one month
|
WOW, I can't believe clanwars.cc allows cheaters to play in there tournaments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238426 is a reply to message #238414] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 13:40 |
|
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Blazer wrote on Wed, 10 January 2007 21:11 |
| Goztow wrote on Wed, 10 January 2007 08:45 |
Just some extra info:
5. | "Xwis site" |
All players should now have the message that cheating is not allowed on XWIS. To help stamp out cheating on the server bans have now been increased as follows :
1st time caught cheating : warning and 16 Days server ban
If a player is caught again they will get a final warning and a 32 day ban from the server
If they are caught a 3rd time they will be permanently banned from XWIS.
No second chances will be given for players permanently banned so we recommend that anyone that has cheated in the past get rid of any trainers on their PC and play fair.
Fair play makes the server fun for everyone, so make sure you do your part and do not cheat.
Good luck and have fun everyone.
|
It would just actually be doing what they say they do.
|
Strike-Team has a strict banning policy for *other* games that are hosted on XWIS, and it is effective, because when you ban someone from XWIS, they simply cannot rejoin Red Alert, etc servers anymore. This is not the case with Renegade...if you ban someone from XWIS, they can easily direct connect or come from Gamespy, so the ban is ineffective, as pretty much anyone who has the ability to find a cheat and install it, also knows that you can connect to a renegade server multiple ways.
|
I dont like it when ppl wont read my posts...
You CAN block DC and GSA if you wanted, so that isnt an excuse for not doing it.
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238427 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 13:42 |
 |
warranto
Messages: 2584
Registered: February 2003
Location: Alberta, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
I'll show some of them to you then:
| Quote: |
instead of banning everyone for telling the truth of something you don't want the community to know about
|
Lying.
| Quote: |
Now, I know what you're gonna say here about the clan ladder you have in the pipeline, but there are empty promises and excuses, and then there are results.
|
Accusing anyone related to the project of lying.
| Quote: |
Another thing is a viable, unbiased and easily accessible anti-cheat policy. Again, before you mention Renguard 1.04, re-read my earlier statement about the difference between empty promises and results.
|
Accusing the Renguard team of lying and of being incompetent.
| Quote: |
suspect I know what you're thinking upon reading that last sentence: that you'll do it. There are several reasons why that is not a good solution. (Paragraph shortened for space)
|
Accusing Crimson of being incompetent.
| Quote: |
Once again... there are promises, and there are results. And if some of your projects take over a year before you can show some tangible results to the community, then it's plain you have enough on your plate as it is.
|
Accusing BHS of lying and of being incompetent.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238430 is a reply to message #237504] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 13:48 |
|
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
How do you think it would look to a GSA player if we said "welp, the best way to block cheaters is to block them from XWIS, so all server owners who want to have cheaters unable to join should move strictly to XWIS."
The solution presented also does not solve the problem where server owners want a say in who is banned from their servers. Heck, I know of at least 1 server (xphaze) that is RUN by a proven cheater. As someone who has a lot of regular players through my WOLspy-provided listing on GameSpy, I would not want to drop my GSA support.
As I've mentioned more than once before, OTHER SOLUTIONS ARE IN THE WORKS. Other solutions which are MUCH more effective and do not require server owners to ditch GameSpy. It's not that this idea is bad -- it's that there are other ideas which are BETTER.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Treatment of convicted cheaters [message #238434 is a reply to message #238430] |
Wed, 10 January 2007 14:04 |
|
EvilWhiteDragon
Messages: 3751
Registered: October 2005
Location: The Netherlands
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| Crimson wrote on Wed, 10 January 2007 21:48 |
How do you think it would look to a GSA player if we said "welp, the best way to block cheaters is to block them from XWIS, so all server owners who want to have cheaters unable to join should move strictly to XWIS."
The solution presented also does not solve the problem where server owners want a say in who is banned from their servers. Heck, I know of at least 1 server (xphaze) that is RUN by a proven cheater. As someone who has a lot of regular players through my WOLspy-provided listing on GameSpy, I would not want to drop my GSA support.
As I've mentioned more than once before, OTHER SOLUTIONS ARE IN THE WORKS. Other solutions which are MUCH more effective and do not require server owners to ditch GameSpy. It's not that this idea is bad -- it's that there are other ideas which are BETTER.
|
I said IF you want to block GSA and DC then you could do it, if you do like GSA and DC players then you could not block it.
But that is NOT a reason to leave servers that do NOT want GSA or DC'ing players without a POSSIBLE protection against cheaters. I know you wont liek this because your server (and the one that remain on GSA) will be likely to get more cheaters to them. BUT it would help the pure XWIS servers.
Hell, if you dont want to go to the problems of banning or not I would like to moderate the banning, and setup a jury for that.
And we currently have 2 anticheater projects running one that is slightly revealed by now and the other is far from completion, but would also help against cheaters.
BlackIntel admin/founder/PR dude (not a coder)
Please visit http://www.blackintel.org/
| V, V for Vendetta |
People should not be afraid of their governments.
Governments should be afraid of their people.
|
|
|
|
|
| Pages (5): [ 4 ] |
  |
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Jun 05 06:28:24 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01275 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
