Home » General Discussions » General Discussion » BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227409 is a reply to message #227302] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 06:27   |
boozaboy
Messages: 9
Registered: July 2006
Location: US
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| light wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 13:40 |
forcerg is the most widely abused command in Renegade. I'm not saying you abused it or that your ban was fair but it would make life easier if it was just removed from servers.
|
I agree to a point. I've seen it be abused many times. But, in my opinion, it can be used for good. Like The Force, lol  ,with descretion, but maybe most who play AND use renguard, are only teenagers? IDK what the general age of renegade gamers is. If I understand though, a person who IS connnected through the renguard network, is not able to use any type of cheats. Correct? I've never tried using any cheat command or codes so I don't know how they work. I just get so fed up with those idiots who ruin a game by using some type of cheat, so I finally downloaded renguard. The game seems to load much faster now that I have and I like the new features; for example, the red cross over a players head when they need repairs, and EVA stating when a building is repaired and or the harv is under attack.
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227414 is a reply to message #227393] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 07:16 |
 |
trooprm02
Messages: 3266
Registered: August 2005
Location: Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| light wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 05:32 |
| Goztow wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 22:09 |
The easiest way to avoid being !forcerg'ed is still using RG...
|
Where do I start with a comment like that?
The whole point of forcerg was to give "power to the people" to allow non-mods/admins to get rid of users not running anti-cheat software. Fine in theory, but terrible in practice, when you take into account the following factors:
1. Legitimate players know that RenGuard is useless and that running RG doesn't prove them any more innocent than anything else. (You can argue that point, I stand by it)
2. Win XP 64bit and Win 2000 users can't run RenGuard
3. People who believe in RenGuard also seem to believe lag doesn't exist and that anyone who gets a headshot is most likely cheating.
Taking these into account, you have a situation where a perfectly legit player can be forced by 3 RG-running n00bs and a cheat can play happily without interferance because they are running an RG bypass.
|
ROFL. Wow, where do you get your info from?
1)According to you, im not saying you cheat but it has been proven before that people who say renguard=noobs, cheat 
2)ROFL, how come I can and I have win2k?
3)thats some people in n00by big public servers.
My: Videos/Website/Forums
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227424 is a reply to message #227414] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 07:48 |
 |
mrpirate
Messages: 1262
Registered: March 2003
Location: Ontario
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| trooprm02 wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 10:16 |
| light wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 05:32 |
| Goztow wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 22:09 |
The easiest way to avoid being !forcerg'ed is still using RG...
|
Where do I start with a comment like that?
The whole point of forcerg was to give "power to the people" to allow non-mods/admins to get rid of users not running anti-cheat software. Fine in theory, but terrible in practice, when you take into account the following factors:
1. Legitimate players know that RenGuard is useless and that running RG doesn't prove them any more innocent than anything else. (You can argue that point, I stand by it)
2. Win XP 64bit and Win 2000 users can't run RenGuard
3. People who believe in RenGuard also seem to believe lag doesn't exist and that anyone who gets a headshot is most likely cheating.
Taking these into account, you have a situation where a perfectly legit player can be forced by 3 RG-running n00bs and a cheat can play happily without interferance because they are running an RG bypass.
|
ROFL. Wow, where do you get your info from?
1)According to you, im not saying you cheat but it has been proven before that people who say renguard=noobs, cheat
2)ROFL, how come I can and I have win2k?
3)thats some people in n00by big public servers.
|
Whether or not light is right about Windows 2000 and 64-bit XP, I would tend to agree with him that RenGuard is almost useless in its current state.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227463 is a reply to message #227414] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 13:16 |
=HT=T-Bird
Messages: 712
Registered: June 2005
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| trooprm02 wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 09:16 |
| light wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 05:32 |
| Goztow wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 22:09 |
The easiest way to avoid being !forcerg'ed is still using RG...
|
Where do I start with a comment like that?
The whole point of forcerg was to give "power to the people" to allow non-mods/admins to get rid of users not running anti-cheat software. Fine in theory, but terrible in practice, when you take into account the following factors:
1. Legitimate players know that RenGuard is useless and that running RG doesn't prove them any more innocent than anything else. (You can argue that point, I stand by it)
2. Win XP 64bit and Win 2000 users can't run RenGuard
3. People who believe in RenGuard also seem to believe lag doesn't exist and that anyone who gets a headshot is most likely cheating.
Taking these into account, you have a situation where a perfectly legit player can be forced by 3 RG-running n00bs and a cheat can play happily without interferance because they are running an RG bypass.
|
ROFL. Wow, where do you get your info from?
1)According to you, im not saying you cheat but it has been proven before that people who say renguard=noobs, cheat
2)ROFL, how come I can and I have win2k?
3)thats some people in n00by big public servers.
|
I want to see your sources for #1. P.S. RenGuard is not quite trivial to bypass, but it's pretty close...
HTT-Bird (IRC)
HTTBird (WOL)
Proud HazTeam Lieutenant.
BlackIntel Coder & Moderator.
If you have trouble running BIATCH on your FDS, have some questions about a BIATCH message or log entry, or think that BIATCH spit out a false positive, PLEASE contact the BlackIntel coding team and avoid wasting the time of others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227467 is a reply to message #227414] |
Fri, 20 October 2006 14:24 |
 |
light
Messages: 988
Registered: January 2005
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| trooprm02 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 03:16 |
ROFL. Wow, where do you get your info from?
1)According to you, im not saying you cheat but it has been proven before that people who say renguard=noobs, cheat
2)ROFL, how come I can and I have win2k?
3)thats some people in n00by big public servers.
|
1. It's also been proven that people who run RG can cheat, look for topics in these forums that contain the words [Edit by warranto: believing or not, people are stupid when it comes to looking for certain things. Let's not give them something to search for]. So your point is moot, any of us can cheat.
2. You're one of the lucky ones, I admit RG will run on some 2000 machines (thanks for reminding me), but 2000 and XP 64 aren't supported and if it runs on either you're lucky.
3. I play in plenty of servers and it's happened in may of them.
| Quote: |
I want to see your sources for #1. P.S. RenGuard is not quite trivial to bypass, but it's pretty close...
|
Crimson herself has posted to say there is a working RG bypass in circulation, and people have been seen using bypasses in verious servers.
Heck yesterday some guy posted a cheat that allows you to use modified models and run RG on XpHaZe forums. It was promptly removed and he's banned from their servers, but still, if he can get it I don't doubt that someone else can.
[Updated on: Fri, 20 October 2006 14:31] by Moderator Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227533 is a reply to message #227260] |
Sat, 21 October 2006 09:18 |
|
trooprm02
Messages: 3266
Registered: August 2005
Location: Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
1)yes of course there is, BUT there has always been 1 (ever since RG was first created) they even had info about it on the old renguard website, so a RG bypass is nothing new, and just calling it useless now doesnt make sense.
2)Do yyou understand why it doesn't work on win2k? C++ overbuffer run, which means it sends too many packets than expected (256 i think, correct me if im wrong), and i used to have that all the time,EASY FIX:
i was a member of a VB development forum and heres basically it:
There are three main actions to resolve the problem. First is to utilize the /GS compile
option. This option creates a cookie between the stack overrun and the return address.
This allows the system to helps prevent buffer overruns, by changing the stack layout.
The second action is to use the <strsafe.h> library. This library has buffer overrun safe
functions that will help with the detection of buffer overflows. Finally, the last action
is to perform extensive code reviews of string functionality and indexes utilized within
your application.
also try installing 3rd party runtime files
3)ofcourse there will always be n00bs who say that, but the fact that its not true means why bother discussioning this? 
My: Videos/Website/Forums
[Updated on: Sat, 21 October 2006 09:20] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227569 is a reply to message #227533] |
Sat, 21 October 2006 13:47 |
=HT=T-Bird
Messages: 712
Registered: June 2005
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| trooprm02 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 11:18 |
2)Do yyou understand why it doesn't work on win2k? C++ overbuffer run, which means it sends too many packets than expected (256 i think, correct me if im wrong), and i used to have that all the time,EASY FIX:
i was a member of a VB development forum and heres basically it:
There are three main actions to resolve the problem. First is to utilize the /GS compile
option. This option creates a cookie between the stack overrun and the return address.
This allows the system to helps prevent buffer overruns, by changing the stack layout.
The second action is to use the <strsafe.h> library. This library has buffer overrun safe
functions that will help with the detection of buffer overflows. Finally, the last action
is to perform extensive code reviews of string functionality and indexes utilized within
your application.
also try installing 3rd party runtime files
|
Not really. If that was true, why would the error only show up on W2K and not on XP? P.S. many people aren't smart enough to download a replacement for the VCRT and I haven't heard anything about it being dependent on the presence or absense of a patch/SP...so unless the VCRT version in XP didn't ever get backported to W2K, IDK what's up
HTT-Bird (IRC)
HTTBird (WOL)
Proud HazTeam Lieutenant.
BlackIntel Coder & Moderator.
If you have trouble running BIATCH on your FDS, have some questions about a BIATCH message or log entry, or think that BIATCH spit out a false positive, PLEASE contact the BlackIntel coding team and avoid wasting the time of others.
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227572 is a reply to message #227260] |
Sat, 21 October 2006 14:31 |
Tiesto
Messages: 600
Registered: June 2006
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
This whole topics is just encouraging players to be more paranoid. And encourages morons to think everyone who owns them cheats.(trooprm02 for example.)
Lets face it, theres going to be no secure(reliable) RG for a while..
This is where good moderating is needed..(which is somewhat lacking in renegade)
Exodus Senior Moderator
For a commwar against Exodus, pm me.
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227573 is a reply to message #227533] |
Sat, 21 October 2006 14:32 |
|
mrpirate
Messages: 1262
Registered: March 2003
Location: Ontario
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| trooprm02 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 12:18 |
1)yes of course there is, BUT there has always been 1 (ever since RG was first created) they even had info about it on the old renguard website, so a RG bypass is nothing new, and just calling it useless now doesnt make sense.
2)Do yyou understand why it doesn't work on win2k? C++ overbuffer run, which means it sends too many packets than expected (256 i think, correct me if im wrong), and i used to have that all the time,EASY FIX:
i was a member of a VB development forum and heres basically it:
There are three main actions to resolve the problem. First is to utilize the /GS compile
option. This option creates a cookie between the stack overrun and the return address.
This allows the system to helps prevent buffer overruns, by changing the stack layout.
The second action is to use the <strsafe.h> library. This library has buffer overrun safe
functions that will help with the detection of buffer overflows. Finally, the last action
is to perform extensive code reviews of string functionality and indexes utilized within
your application.
also try installing 3rd party runtime files
3)ofcourse there will always be n00bs who say that, but the fact that its not true means why bother discussioning this?
|
So you'd advise someone on Win2k who can't RenGuard to work to use the strsafe.h library. I can tell you know what you're talking about.
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227575 is a reply to message #227260] |
Sat, 21 October 2006 15:23 |
 |
Crimson
Messages: 7428
Registered: February 2003
Location: Phoenix, AZ
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars)
ADMINISTRATOR |
|
|
We can't just magically fix the problem with the buffer overrun that way. The problem with Win2k and Win64 are BOTH a result of the protection software that our app is wrapped in. RenGuard 1.04 will be using a completely different protection app which we will be heavily testing with those operating systems, but is supposed to work fine with them.
I'm the bawss.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227597 is a reply to message #227260] |
Sat, 21 October 2006 17:06 |
 |
Sniper_De7
Messages: 866
Registered: April 2004
Location: Wisconsin
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Why did they add that stupid message that says "<name> is NOT using Renguard. <name> COULD be cheating. I mean, it makes it sound like if someone is using RG, they can't be cheating. It just doesn't seem like anything necessary to be said. I don't know what exactly that message is from and if it's default but I don't know why you would put that there.
Oderint, dum metuant.
It is not the critic who counts; not the man who points out how the strong man stumbles, or where the doer of deeds could have done them better. The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena, whose face is marred by dust and sweat and blood; who strives valiantly; who errs, who comes short again and again, because there is no effort without error and shortcoming; but who does actually strive to do the deeds; who knows great enthusiasms, the great devotions; who spends himself in a worthy cause; who at the best knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those cold and timid souls who neither know victory nor defeat. - Theodore "Teddy" Roosevelt
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227598 is a reply to message #227533] |
Sat, 21 October 2006 17:12 |
|
light
Messages: 988
Registered: January 2005
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
[quote title=trooprm02 wrote on Sun, 22 October 2006 05:18]1)yes of course there is, BUT there has always been 1 (ever since RG was first created) they even had info about it on the old renguard website, so a RG bypass is nothing new, and just calling it useless now doesnt make sense.[quote]
Ok, here's my perspective. If I run RG and play too well and get accused, people will !rg me. If it says i'm running RG they will accuse me of bypassing, if it says i'm not running RG they will accuse me of cheating. Either way i get falsly accused, that's where I'm coming from.
| trooprm02 wrote on Sun, 22 October 2006 05:18 |
2)Do yyou understand why it doesn't work on win2k? C++ overbuffer run, which means it sends too many packets than expected (256 i think, correct me if im wrong)
|
Yes, I know about C++ buffer over-runs, I've had my fair share of seg faults from over-running the end of an array. I don't know about solutions using VB because I work in Java and C++, but even if it is a simple fix it doesn't make my point any less valid.
| Quote: |
Why did they add that stupid message that says "<name> is NOT using Renguard. <name> COULD be cheating. I mean, it makes it sound like if someone is using RG, they can't be cheating. It just doesn't seem like anything necessary to be said. I don't know what exactly that message is from and if it's default but I don't know why you would put that there.
|
It's a holdover from when people thought RG really did block all cheats, in which case it makes sense.
danpaul: is forcerg enabled by default?
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227600 is a reply to message #227597] |
Sat, 21 October 2006 17:19 |
fl00d3d
Messages: 1107
Registered: August 2003
Location: Iowa, USA
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star)
Viva la Resistance! |
|
|
| Sniper_De7 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 20:06 |
Why did they add that stupid message that says "<name> is NOT using Renguard. <name> COULD be cheating. I mean, it makes it sound like if someone is using RG, they can't be cheating. It just doesn't seem like anything necessary to be said. I don't know what exactly that message is from and if it's default but I don't know why you would put that there.
|
Yes, you should be able to supress those messages. I understand the intended purpose, but its kinda forceful and misleading.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: BULLSHIT!!! banned for !forcerg [message #227800 is a reply to message #227600] |
Sun, 22 October 2006 23:52 |
 |
Goztow
Messages: 9727
Registered: March 2005
Location: Belgium
Karma: 13
|
General (5 Stars)
Goztoe |
|
|
| fl00d3d wrote on Sun, 22 October 2006 02:19 |
| Sniper_De7 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 20:06 |
Why did they add that stupid message that says "<name> is NOT using Renguard. <name> COULD be cheating. I mean, it makes it sound like if someone is using RG, they can't be cheating. It just doesn't seem like anything necessary to be said. I don't know what exactly that message is from and if it's default but I don't know why you would put that there.
|
Yes, you should be able to supress those messages. I understand the intended purpose, but its kinda forceful and misleading.
|
If some server owners weren't so damn lazy, they would configure it. In brenbot 1.41 it was already configurable in brenbot.cfg and in brenbot 1.43 beta, this hasn't changed.
You can find me in The KOSs2 (TK2) discord while I'm playing. Feel free to come and say hi! TK2 discord
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Thu May 16 10:28:37 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01158 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
)
