No anticheat in new patch-Im out

[Kunstula]

@CedarOfLebanon

@Mikhailovitch

1. An average of three hacks per 64-player server may be a bit on the high side for the fps genre, but it’s not totally off the rails either; according to most of the professional AC programmers, cheating in fps gaming in general tends to hover in the 1-5% range, so the odds are that in most every other fps game that you’ve played over the years you have also had a couple of hacks on the servers with you.
2. It’s just that, and in no small part due to the traditional admin fisheye, most of those hackers have tried to be a bit more subtle with their cheating, aka in the closet, than they tend to be right now in BF1 – a result that is likely to wholly be a result of the lack of an AC + the horrible RSP rollout that pretty much killed off most of the active admins in this game.
3. In short, and iow, if nobody is looking why bother to hide the crime. Hence, more peeps are starting to notice the bodies piling up in the street, as none of their murderers trouble themselves with the traditional shovel and shallow grave.
4. Yeah, all of this is just pure guesswork, and based upon three major points: i. Most professional AC programmers have usually put the fps genre hacking numbers at 1-5% so, and lacking any evidence to the contrary, I personally tend to just run with the pro opinion on the genre as a whole. Followed by. ii. the hacking forums have downloaded a simply huge number of PC hacks for a game that does not really have all that many players, which strongly implies that an exceptionally large fraction of the player base is all hacked up. So, putting the number of cheats at the high end of the traditional 1-5% number seems plausible. iii. Common sense. If a game has no active AC and essentially no admins then, yeah, you would expect more hackers so, again, at the high end of the usual numbers ~ 5%.
5. It could be less, it could be a heck of a lot more – when you get right down to brass tacks, it is possible that we’ve got, say, 30% of the players currently running walls and bots, and without an AC and admins, there is nothing that we can do about it. That said, over many years of fps gaming I’ve seen just far too many spurious hackusastions flying around, so I tend to be cough more than a bit skeptical when it comes to buying into the whole “this game is totally flooded with hackers” perspective.
6. If the devs can tie in a scaling server-side detection system that, just perhaps, could be expanded to include random checking of players at all ping levels, and could do so without blowing up the processing requirements, then this might constitute the basis for one heck of an AC program. No clue as to how easily the pro hacks could get around such a randomized server-side checking system, but it stands to reason that it might be a bit harder than usual, and possibly a lot harder.

Who the hell would read all of that

Perhaps people who are interested in the subject and possess an attention span longer than a few seconds?

[Danebrain]

@CedarOfLebanon

@Mikhailovitch

1. An average of three hacks per 64-player server may be a bit on the high side for the fps genre, but it’s not totally off the rails either; according to most of the professional AC programmers, cheating in fps gaming in general tends to hover in the 1-5% range, so the odds are that in most every other fps game that you’ve played over the years you have also had a couple of hacks on the servers with you.
2. It’s just that, and in no small part due to the traditional admin fisheye, most of those hackers have tried to be a bit more subtle with their cheating, aka in the closet, than they tend to be right now in BF1 – a result that is likely to wholly be a result of the lack of an AC + the horrible RSP rollout that pretty much killed off most of the active admins in this game.
3. In short, and iow, if nobody is looking why bother to hide the crime. Hence, more peeps are starting to notice the bodies piling up in the street, as none of their murderers trouble themselves with the traditional shovel and shallow grave.
4. Yeah, all of this is just pure guesswork, and based upon three major points: i. Most professional AC programmers have usually put the fps genre hacking numbers at 1-5% so, and lacking any evidence to the contrary, I personally tend to just run with the pro opinion on the genre as a whole. Followed by. ii. the hacking forums have downloaded a simply huge number of PC hacks for a game that does not really have all that many players, which strongly implies that an exceptionally large fraction of the player base is all hacked up. So, putting the number of cheats at the high end of the traditional 1-5% number seems plausible. iii. Common sense. If a game has no active AC and essentially no admins then, yeah, you would expect more hackers so, again, at the high end of the usual numbers ~ 5%.
5. It could be less, it could be a heck of a lot more – when you get right down to brass tacks, it is possible that we’ve got, say, 30% of the players currently running walls and bots, and without an AC and admins, there is nothing that we can do about it. That said, over many years of fps gaming I’ve seen just far too many spurious hackusastions flying around, so I tend to be cough more than a bit skeptical when it comes to buying into the whole “this game is totally flooded with hackers” perspective.
6. If the devs can tie in a scaling server-side detection system that, just perhaps, could be expanded to include random checking of players at all ping levels, and could do so without blowing up the processing requirements, then this might constitute the basis for one heck of an AC program. No clue as to how easily the pro hacks could get around such a randomized server-side checking system, but it stands to reason that it might be a bit harder than usual, and possibly a lot harder.

@Mikhailovitch

1. An average of three hacks per 64-player server may be a bit on the high side for the fps genre, but it’s not totally off the rails either; according to most of the professional AC programmers, cheating in fps gaming in general tends to hover in the 1-5% range, so the odds are that in most every other fps game that you’ve played over the years you have also had a couple of hacks on the servers with you.
2. It’s just that, and in no small part due to the traditional admin fisheye, most of those hackers have tried to be a bit more subtle with their cheating, aka in the closet, than they tend to be right now in BF1 – a result that is likely to wholly be a result of the lack of an AC + the horrible RSP rollout that pretty much killed off most of the active admins in this game.
3. In short, and iow, if nobody is looking why bother to hide the crime. Hence, more peeps are starting to notice the bodies piling up in the street, as none of their murderers trouble themselves with the traditional shovel and shallow grave.
4. Yeah, all of this is just pure guesswork, and based upon three major points: i. Most professional AC programmers have usually put the fps genre hacking numbers at 1-5% so, and lacking any evidence to the contrary, I personally tend to just run with the pro opinion on the genre as a whole. Followed by. ii. the hacking forums have downloaded a simply huge number of PC hacks for a game that does not really have all that many players, which strongly implies that an exceptionally large fraction of the player base is all hacked up. So, putting the number of cheats at the high end of the traditional 1-5% number seems plausible. iii. Common sense. If a game has no active AC and essentially no admins then, yeah, you would expect more hackers so, again, at the high end of the usual numbers ~ 5%.
5. It could be less, it could be a heck of a lot more – when you get right down to brass tacks, it is possible that we’ve got, say, 30% of the players currently running walls and bots, and without an AC and admins, there is nothing that we can do about it. That said, over many years of fps gaming I’ve seen just far too many spurious hackusastions flying around, so I tend to be cough more than a bit skeptical when it comes to buying into the whole “this game is totally flooded with hackers” perspective.
6. If the devs can tie in a scaling server-side detection system that, just perhaps, could be expanded to include random checking of players at all ping levels, and could do so without blowing up the processing requirements, then this might constitute the basis for one heck of an AC program. No clue as to how easily the pro hacks could get around such a randomized server-side checking system, but it stands to reason that it might be a bit harder than usual, and possibly a lot harder.

Who the hell would read all of that

Danebrain did

[Mikhailovitch]

@CedarOfLebanon

@Mikhailovitch

1. An average of three hacks per 64-player server may be a bit on the high side for the fps genre, but it’s not totally off the rails either; according to most of the professional AC programmers, cheating in fps gaming in general tends to hover in the 1-5% range, so the odds are that in most every other fps game that you’ve played over the years you have also had a couple of hacks on the servers with you.
2. It’s just that, and in no small part due to the traditional admin fisheye, most of those hackers have tried to be a bit more subtle with their cheating, aka in the closet, than they tend to be right now in BF1 – a result that is likely to wholly be a result of the lack of an AC + the horrible RSP rollout that pretty much killed off most of the active admins in this game.
3. In short, and iow, if nobody is looking why bother to hide the crime. Hence, more peeps are starting to notice the bodies piling up in the street, as none of their murderers trouble themselves with the traditional shovel and shallow grave.
4. Yeah, all of this is just pure guesswork, and based upon three major points: i. Most professional AC programmers have usually put the fps genre hacking numbers at 1-5% so, and lacking any evidence to the contrary, I personally tend to just run with the pro opinion on the genre as a whole. Followed by. ii. the hacking forums have downloaded a simply huge number of PC hacks for a game that does not really have all that many players, which strongly implies that an exceptionally large fraction of the player base is all hacked up. So, putting the number of cheats at the high end of the traditional 1-5% number seems plausible. iii. Common sense. If a game has no active AC and essentially no admins then, yeah, you would expect more hackers so, again, at the high end of the usual numbers ~ 5%.
5. It could be less, it could be a heck of a lot more – when you get right down to brass tacks, it is possible that we’ve got, say, 30% of the players currently running walls and bots, and without an AC and admins, there is nothing that we can do about it. That said, over many years of fps gaming I’ve seen just far too many spurious hackusastions flying around, so I tend to be cough more than a bit skeptical when it comes to buying into the whole “this game is totally flooded with hackers” perspective.
6. If the devs can tie in a scaling server-side detection system that, just perhaps, could be expanded to include random checking of players at all ping levels, and could do so without blowing up the processing requirements, then this might constitute the basis for one heck of an AC program. No clue as to how easily the pro hacks could get around such a randomized server-side checking system, but it stands to reason that it might be a bit harder than usual, and possibly a lot harder.

@Mikhailovitch

1. An average of three hacks per 64-player server may be a bit on the high side for the fps genre, but it’s not totally off the rails either; according to most of the professional AC programmers, cheating in fps gaming in general tends to hover in the 1-5% range, so the odds are that in most every other fps game that you’ve played over the years you have also had a couple of hacks on the servers with you.
2. It’s just that, and in no small part due to the traditional admin fisheye, most of those hackers have tried to be a bit more subtle with their cheating, aka in the closet, than they tend to be right now in BF1 – a result that is likely to wholly be a result of the lack of an AC + the horrible RSP rollout that pretty much killed off most of the active admins in this game.
3. In short, and iow, if nobody is looking why bother to hide the crime. Hence, more peeps are starting to notice the bodies piling up in the street, as none of their murderers trouble themselves with the traditional shovel and shallow grave.
4. Yeah, all of this is just pure guesswork, and based upon three major points: i. Most professional AC programmers have usually put the fps genre hacking numbers at 1-5% so, and lacking any evidence to the contrary, I personally tend to just run with the pro opinion on the genre as a whole. Followed by. ii. the hacking forums have downloaded a simply huge number of PC hacks for a game that does not really have all that many players, which strongly implies that an exceptionally large fraction of the player base is all hacked up. So, putting the number of cheats at the high end of the traditional 1-5% number seems plausible. iii. Common sense. If a game has no active AC and essentially no admins then, yeah, you would expect more hackers so, again, at the high end of the usual numbers ~ 5%.
5. It could be less, it could be a heck of a lot more – when you get right down to brass tacks, it is possible that we’ve got, say, 30% of the players currently running walls and bots, and without an AC and admins, there is nothing that we can do about it. That said, over many years of fps gaming I’ve seen just far too many spurious hackusastions flying around, so I tend to be cough more than a bit skeptical when it comes to buying into the whole “this game is totally flooded with hackers” perspective.
6. If the devs can tie in a scaling server-side detection system that, just perhaps, could be expanded to include random checking of players at all ping levels, and could do so without blowing up the processing requirements, then this might constitute the basis for one heck of an AC program. No clue as to how easily the pro hacks could get around such a randomized server-side checking system, but it stands to reason that it might be a bit harder than usual, and possibly a lot harder.

Who the hell would read all of that

Very possibly people that were in the same position that I was in when I wrote it: stuck in queue, chattering away on TS with my friends, and dolefully waiting for enough players to rage-quit the server so I can finally get in the game. Having a big list of friends to play with is great and all that, but the downside of joining in on your regular pack of squaddies is that you can wind up stranded 8th in queue.