As the number of cheaters spiral, the Crossfire community must decide whether to enforce controversial new policies that will potentially curb the cheating crisis.
Cheaters are human. Most of us have either played with a cheater or cheated ourselves, if you haven't then you're lying, exceptionally lucky or Gary 'KiLl3rBoY' Brincat just hasn't gotten round to you yet. I as some of you will know was caught cheating, I was banned for two years on ESL and was only recently unbanned. Cheating is the cancer of online gaming and if it's anything like its real life equivalent then one in three of us will suffer, apparently.
Cancer can't be cured and neither can cheating, there's however a discussion that needs to take place to decide how to prevent cheating and how to punish cheaters. I hope to raise some of the issues which shows how hard it's to create a fair and balanced anti-cheat policy.
Prevention
Anti-cheating software is an active deterrent, regardless how bad the likes of Punkbuster, X-RAY and ETACE are at catching cheaters, they form a necessary part in the chain. Without them there's no incentive to stay clean, you also remove one of the technical means of providing evidence to actually punish a player as well. Anthony 'TheRogue' Seedhouse (Head of ESL's EMS) summarised the role of anti-cheats with an analogy - “you're a lot less likely to do something illegal with a cop nearby”.
Punkbuster isn't infallible though, netCoders proved that three months ago. Technology has often prevented the banning process from being applied because it was seen as the only 'concrete' evidence accepted. When bans or cases have been solved through the use of demo's, people usually cry foul play or moan about subjectivity.
Subjectivity is what (some) people fear when it comes to governing a cheating policy, no one wants to ban someone by mistake purely because of the potential backlash by the community, this is partly why Clanbase is so slow to punish cheaters, but more often than not any ban they did hand out was justified.
The competitive organisations like Clanbase were dependent on third party organisations like Punkbuster, Yawn and PBBans in order to provide evidence to apply a ban. They can't and shouldn't place unwavering support on infallible technology which can be either bypassed or abused. The ability to ban someone from demos is necessary in order to stop people who blatantly use hacks in matches from escaping on a technicality.
Healthy skepticism when it comes to new talent especially when it comes to high skilled players and competitions is imperative. Teams and players should be wary of not only new players, but established players who suddenly improve without just cause.
Punishment
The relatively new idea that's being discussed in Stuart 'TosspoT' Saw's column 'Poland Please!' is aiding and abetting. If you hide or play with a cheater you're just as guilty and liable to be punished. It's a necessary step in order to stamp out unnecessary cheating and the behaviour associated - assisting or encouraging people to cheat by providing an environment free.
The reason why this is classed as punishment and not prevention, i.e. “you play with a cheater and you will be banned” is because it's not always possible to check the background of a prospective team mate, especially if they're unknown or at the lower end of the skill spectrum.
Finding evidence is the biggest issue and punishing people for hiding and playing with cheaters should only be given when it's very clear that the player in question was aware of they team mates cheating, the evidence used could be broadened as a consequence and make the process easier. For example if someone plays with a player whose serving a ban and they're a competitive player, they should also be punished. Not being able to play officials just isn't a large enough deterrent to crack down on cheating when the vast majority of Enemy Territority's competition is online.
'TosspoT's' decision to ban Mike 'Sheep' Gibbs was the right one in this sense. To make sure that no one is banned unduly, there should be a warning rule. If cheatbusters can provide evidence that a competitive player has played (in an official match or scrim) with someone currently banned then they should be warned/made aware of it, if it happens again then they're liable to be punished for supporting cheaters.
The 'compromise'
For the zero tolerance advocates amongst you who'd rather see a cheater be burnt alive than accepted back into the community, this is what you've been dreading – the compromise. The compromise comes because not only are cheaters human, but so are cheatbusters. People make mistakes and there's only so much that can be done to prevent people cheating. No matter who you're reality has to hit home at some point, there will always be cheaters both on public and private servers but you've to decide what's more important for the wellbeing of Enemy Territory'.
'KiLl3rBoY' admitted that he could easily spend up to seven hours a day 'cheatbusting', checking demos, discussing new methods of detection and actively plowing through evidence in order to get the bans processed. There are I feel a few compromises that have to be made in order to make sure his and the other cheatbusters time is used as efficiently as possibly.
Public cheaters who don't play in competition should be left alone. If they've an account on Crossfire that could potentially be banned, but there should be a definite split between public and competition players and how they're treated. The best way to deal with public only players is through (Punkbuster) hardware bans.
The competitive mentality is completely different to the average public player, public servers are in a sense ungovernable because there are too many rogue elements which could potentially lead to someone being banned unnecessarily. The is also the major issue of wasting resources on players who've no interest in competition anyway.
Public cheaters who play competitively shouldn't be banned from competitions on the basis of a public cheat. This is the biggest gray area in the banning process and one where the majority of popular cases emerge. If the player has cheated on a public server then they should be put under close scrutiny, all their matches and demos should be watched for a (fixed) lengthy probation period in order to see whether they're cheating in competition as well.
The reasoning behind this is often enough serving an actual ban isn't the punishment, the loss of reputation for competitive players can be unrecoverable. If a player has cheated on public server, then they're more likely to cheat in a competitive game but it's not a certainty.
While the compromises may appear to be make punishment more lenient, it should however stabilise the community and create an legitimate path for cheaters to integrate back into the competitive community. If there's no way for a cheater to come back then there's no reason to ban a player in the first place, nor to stop cheating either.
The new ideas make banning legitimate players whose curiosity or stupidity got the better of them less frequent but punishes the players who actively support and play with cheaters more common. The idea of isolating players provides a good counter when a ban may fall over a summer period for example and naturally there's less official matches played, the solution means that someone whose banned will find it hard to play any (practice) matches with or against legitimate players.
This is where you've to debate the severity of the punishment. If a banned player plays with someone whose also currently serving a ban (or cheats while serving a ban) then their ban is extended, and since they cannot play with legitimate players without causing future damage you realistically isolate them to playing public for the duration of their ban.
If a player has served their ban then he's free to rejoin the community as a clean player. There could potentially be different sentence levels (ban periods) if he was caught cheating again, though that would depend entirely on the will of the community. If someone is banned twice for cheating, the likelihood I fear is that they're already lost.
If a cheating policy were to be officially written up, then all past cases before the policy was recognised should be ignored, apart from those currently serving bans. The reasoning behind this is to ease the workload initially and also to stop precendents being set which would actively conflict against the new rules. The policy would also be reviewed at regular periods (once every three months?) to make sure it's up to date and if amendments need to be made.
While ET ACE might provide cleaner public and private servers, it would only be temporary. Effective rules to govern the players while they're serving bans means you're eliminating the bad habits which have made bans useless in the past and made players more tolerant of supporting cheaters.
Cheaters are human. Most of us have either played with a cheater or cheated ourselves, if you haven't then you're lying, exceptionally lucky or Gary 'KiLl3rBoY' Brincat just hasn't gotten round to you yet. I as some of you will know was caught cheating, I was banned for two years on ESL and was only recently unbanned. Cheating is the cancer of online gaming and if it's anything like its real life equivalent then one in three of us will suffer, apparently.
Cancer can't be cured and neither can cheating, there's however a discussion that needs to take place to decide how to prevent cheating and how to punish cheaters. I hope to raise some of the issues which shows how hard it's to create a fair and balanced anti-cheat policy.
Prevention
Anti-cheating software is an active deterrent, regardless how bad the likes of Punkbuster, X-RAY and ETACE are at catching cheaters, they form a necessary part in the chain. Without them there's no incentive to stay clean, you also remove one of the technical means of providing evidence to actually punish a player as well. Anthony 'TheRogue' Seedhouse (Head of ESL's EMS) summarised the role of anti-cheats with an analogy - “you're a lot less likely to do something illegal with a cop nearby”.
Punkbuster isn't infallible though, netCoders proved that three months ago. Technology has often prevented the banning process from being applied because it was seen as the only 'concrete' evidence accepted. When bans or cases have been solved through the use of demo's, people usually cry foul play or moan about subjectivity.
Subjectivity is what (some) people fear when it comes to governing a cheating policy, no one wants to ban someone by mistake purely because of the potential backlash by the community, this is partly why Clanbase is so slow to punish cheaters, but more often than not any ban they did hand out was justified.
The competitive organisations like Clanbase were dependent on third party organisations like Punkbuster, Yawn and PBBans in order to provide evidence to apply a ban. They can't and shouldn't place unwavering support on infallible technology which can be either bypassed or abused. The ability to ban someone from demos is necessary in order to stop people who blatantly use hacks in matches from escaping on a technicality.
Healthy skepticism when it comes to new talent especially when it comes to high skilled players and competitions is imperative. Teams and players should be wary of not only new players, but established players who suddenly improve without just cause.
Punishment
The relatively new idea that's being discussed in Stuart 'TosspoT' Saw's column 'Poland Please!' is aiding and abetting. If you hide or play with a cheater you're just as guilty and liable to be punished. It's a necessary step in order to stamp out unnecessary cheating and the behaviour associated - assisting or encouraging people to cheat by providing an environment free.
The reason why this is classed as punishment and not prevention, i.e. “you play with a cheater and you will be banned” is because it's not always possible to check the background of a prospective team mate, especially if they're unknown or at the lower end of the skill spectrum.
Finding evidence is the biggest issue and punishing people for hiding and playing with cheaters should only be given when it's very clear that the player in question was aware of they team mates cheating, the evidence used could be broadened as a consequence and make the process easier. For example if someone plays with a player whose serving a ban and they're a competitive player, they should also be punished. Not being able to play officials just isn't a large enough deterrent to crack down on cheating when the vast majority of Enemy Territority's competition is online.
'TosspoT's' decision to ban Mike 'Sheep' Gibbs was the right one in this sense. To make sure that no one is banned unduly, there should be a warning rule. If cheatbusters can provide evidence that a competitive player has played (in an official match or scrim) with someone currently banned then they should be warned/made aware of it, if it happens again then they're liable to be punished for supporting cheaters.
The 'compromise'
For the zero tolerance advocates amongst you who'd rather see a cheater be burnt alive than accepted back into the community, this is what you've been dreading – the compromise. The compromise comes because not only are cheaters human, but so are cheatbusters. People make mistakes and there's only so much that can be done to prevent people cheating. No matter who you're reality has to hit home at some point, there will always be cheaters both on public and private servers but you've to decide what's more important for the wellbeing of Enemy Territory'.
'KiLl3rBoY' admitted that he could easily spend up to seven hours a day 'cheatbusting', checking demos, discussing new methods of detection and actively plowing through evidence in order to get the bans processed. There are I feel a few compromises that have to be made in order to make sure his and the other cheatbusters time is used as efficiently as possibly.
Public cheaters who don't play in competition should be left alone. If they've an account on Crossfire that could potentially be banned, but there should be a definite split between public and competition players and how they're treated. The best way to deal with public only players is through (Punkbuster) hardware bans.
The competitive mentality is completely different to the average public player, public servers are in a sense ungovernable because there are too many rogue elements which could potentially lead to someone being banned unnecessarily. The is also the major issue of wasting resources on players who've no interest in competition anyway.
Public cheaters who play competitively shouldn't be banned from competitions on the basis of a public cheat. This is the biggest gray area in the banning process and one where the majority of popular cases emerge. If the player has cheated on a public server then they should be put under close scrutiny, all their matches and demos should be watched for a (fixed) lengthy probation period in order to see whether they're cheating in competition as well.
The reasoning behind this is often enough serving an actual ban isn't the punishment, the loss of reputation for competitive players can be unrecoverable. If a player has cheated on public server, then they're more likely to cheat in a competitive game but it's not a certainty.
While the compromises may appear to be make punishment more lenient, it should however stabilise the community and create an legitimate path for cheaters to integrate back into the competitive community. If there's no way for a cheater to come back then there's no reason to ban a player in the first place, nor to stop cheating either.
The new ideas make banning legitimate players whose curiosity or stupidity got the better of them less frequent but punishes the players who actively support and play with cheaters more common. The idea of isolating players provides a good counter when a ban may fall over a summer period for example and naturally there's less official matches played, the solution means that someone whose banned will find it hard to play any (practice) matches with or against legitimate players.
This is where you've to debate the severity of the punishment. If a banned player plays with someone whose also currently serving a ban (or cheats while serving a ban) then their ban is extended, and since they cannot play with legitimate players without causing future damage you realistically isolate them to playing public for the duration of their ban.
If a player has served their ban then he's free to rejoin the community as a clean player. There could potentially be different sentence levels (ban periods) if he was caught cheating again, though that would depend entirely on the will of the community. If someone is banned twice for cheating, the likelihood I fear is that they're already lost.
If a cheating policy were to be officially written up, then all past cases before the policy was recognised should be ignored, apart from those currently serving bans. The reasoning behind this is to ease the workload initially and also to stop precendents being set which would actively conflict against the new rules. The policy would also be reviewed at regular periods (once every three months?) to make sure it's up to date and if amendments need to be made.
While ET ACE might provide cleaner public and private servers, it would only be temporary. Effective rules to govern the players while they're serving bans means you're eliminating the bad habits which have made bans useless in the past and made players more tolerant of supporting cheaters.
I disagree.
As I said in pedro's column the war can never be won, the example I used then was M1lk and teKoa, two of the games top players and very very nice guys. However they've also played with almost every cheater to speak the dutch language and they're not gonna change. Skill doesnt dictate who people chose to be friends with, all we (crossfire or cb) can try to deter them from competing alongside them in a bid to hope to change their mind and outcast them or make them change their ways.
You can stop some people, I've had quite a lot of pm's since the Sheep & Wrobel cases supporting the decision and giving their own examples and that will deter some, stop some, make people think twice. But at the end of the day you'll never catch them all, just like pokemon :(
They've no incentive to change, if they were going to receive a ban because they played with some of their 'friends', then I'm sure they'd soon start changing their attitude. It only applies to currently banned players of course, so there's obviously some stereotyping going on with the likes of mize, jackie and fost etc.
I certainly do not agree with you about public cheaters and players. new players come from publics, they are the fuel of the community. if their fun is ruined by bunch of retarded cheaters, then they will never evolve into competition players, thus killing the community.
(cauz there is no need to win on a pub and it is for fun or train purposes, but we have to make clear that there is nothing funny about cheating and if you do so you will be punished!)
and even if you wouldnt. cheating is forbidden and therefore has to be punished. (dont you act as if competetive gaming is the only real gaming. I guess our NQ-Servers will be filled to the last man month after the last irc-war passed)
absolutely and completely WRONG.
obviously public cheating should be punished, agree with you there, but that sentance is just so so wrong.
i'd say most people that use a public hack won't dare to use it in a war, especially when they play with certain m8s all the time, not with random people.
I just want to say I see it as a big insult saying I'm the perfect example of why cheaters will never be defeated. You will probably disagree, so here's what I suggest. Give me a perm ban on xfire, ET, LANS, etc. Then, do the same to everyone who's ever knowingly played with cheaters. If that will save ET I'm willing to make that sacrifice. You can send me a status on the scene in 6 months to prove how wrong I was and how this brilliant idea saved the game. If I was right, you pay me back all the prizemoney I would have won during my absence.
However even in your irrational state when you make such statements as, "I didn't care when those guys you mentioned got busted for public cheating and you can probably guess why." I think you do understand my point. Shame you had to hide it in so many lines of 'I'm feeling hard done by' text.
I'm sorry but I dont care that you feel insulted, the fact that you are the example is indeed a compliment to your skill and standing within the community, something happily agree with, but you cannot disagree that you play with and call friends an abnormally high number busted cheaters for someone in your skill level thus you must accept why you are the example someone like myself would use. You simply decide that there is a line between public and scrims for cheats, which is where we differ and why you feel aggrieved.
I'll summarise, this could well be a roster - M1lk, fost, lunatic, mize, junky, tekoa - 2 of the games most popular and skilled players with 4 busted cheaters. It was partially your roster for CPC1 and it was partially your roster for CDC4. You have unwavering support for your friends regardless of their actions and the examples it sends out.
Understand where someone might highlight that as an example of something negative?
If you would like for me to take you seriously....
if you cannot understand the point then I am wasting my time.
Re: Fost - You've changed your story from CPC1, I guess what he and you told us about him going on a once in a life time trip to China with his Dad was a lie - You certainly held that one until CPC2 when you wanted him back in the lineup again, Who knows, you've got 2 stories though.
The point was, he was in the communities opinion cheating then, a point that got proven correct later on, then he came back to play with you.
- CPC1 - Suspected Cheater - You play with him
- CPC2/3 - Busted Cheater - You play with him
- CDC4 - Served his ban - You play with him
The point could be extended to luna and mize all be it on different timescales.
The point being, that he is not an limited example of how you will support someone because they are your friend regardless of whether they are cheating. As the fost example proves. If you wont shun cheaters who will?
You can continue denying it, but I dont understand why you would unless you want to lie. The point being you do nothing to shun such cheaters regardless of your standing in the community because they are your friends. That being the point I made a long time ago, that being the point that you still fail to comprehend.
It was never made as an insult to you, it was an example of how hard it is to remove cheaters. That clearly isnt insulting to you because you play with so many.
Simply saying that because someone tries out cheats on public instead of in competition they are alright is why there are less and less ET players all the time. The more people like you completely SHIT on the Public side of ET, the less likely it is that there will be public players who get interested in competitive play and work to get good at it. If you cared at all about ET, instead of your own selfish 'Fuck those n00bs on pub servers' superiority complex (you got small dick syndrome or what?) you'd man up and treat pubbers as fellow gamers with the same respect you give to mystic or night. Pubbers are the future of ET, as there are a lot more of them than competitive players like yourself, and every time you piss on them by allowing public HACKING to take place, you drive more away before they even discover competitive ET.
And lets get one thing here: They are not cheating. They are HACKING someone else's work. They are taking what Splash Damage created and HACKING the code to suit their own personal gain. Sadly, thats not criminal, as I would love nothing more than to see every sorry ass piece of shit hacker get sued and tossed in jail.
You earn respect.
Giving them the respect mystic or night get is ridiculous.
Uhm, at CPC2 M1lk and teKoa played with Xpaz, Tiigeri, Raveneye, mystic. I'm a very patient and sweet dude, but now you crossed the line. You better apologize to that l33t lineup or I will have no other choice than to feed you two bottles of applejuice through your nose at the next CDC, mister!!! :@ ;-)
Perhaps you shouldn't be shoving this type of behaviour just into M1lk's shoes. Does a mix of last week where you got alexL to play with us ring a bell?
If anyone is an icon in the ET-Scene it's you so why didn't you shun alexL aside?
Besides that we ignore a different matter and that is knowing HOW someone ended up playing with a cheat and with what intentions. It's very black and white to simply say "he got busted with cheats and thus is a cheater and anyone playing with him should simply stop playing with him otherwise they are a cheaterlover". Hnkn cheated on a public once, should I stop playing with him? Maverick cheated on a public once, should I stop playing with him? GulpenRevenge cheated on a public once, should I have stopped playing with him? The black and white answer dictates I should, but the colored RL answer says they would never cheat in competition and had a fun night on vent while running into some dumb pubhack. Should they be punished for it if they got busted, yeah sure. Should I stop being their friends? HELL no..
The point I raised is that you use milk as an example of a topdog in the ET-scene that remains playing with busted cheaters instead of shunning them, and meanwhile you played a mix with me and got alexL to play with us. You are pretty much THE icon in the ET-scene so why didn't you shun him? Why don't you use yourself as an example?
Are you gonna respond to my points now or are you going to divert it another time by telling me to read your comments again.
I've known you for a long time now and it seems to me that if the heat gets too much for you you run the hell out of the kitchen in full ignorance mode.
Why do you not respond to the facts about you getting alexL into a mix? A fact that has nothing to do with your discussion with milk whatsoever.
Just read, look for key points about timelines and maybe in 10 years you'll see the point.
What my view on cheaters is has nothing to do with this entire point whatsoever.
Why are you lowering yourself in such a way that you have to start insulting people because you can't have it your way? You insulted milk a couple times, you insult me a couple times, and for what. Just that you couldn't say right away that you play with busted cheaters as well when it suits you?
I'm even starting to wonder what's worse. Milk playing with guys like lunatic, fost etc or you (AND me) playing with a guy like alexL. At least luna and fost have been friends of milk for a looooong time and they used a public hack.. Can't say the same about alexL.
but lets' just leave this since it's getting to a point where it gets or already is ugly, so to use milk's wise-words ;
After so many times of saying that, the insults will come its in my nature
So no, I don't need to win browny points with anyone, but thx for the assumption.
And thus we've come full circle. No more replies from me if you cared about my point you'd message me.
bible: "those who have done no sins can throw the first stone, others hold back"
so basically if u think pub cheaters are bad, then actually play a mix with alexl, that must be the biggest contradiction of all time
id love to comment whore but im working alot this week so ill comment whore at wierd times if u reply!
We(cortana) are sharing ventrilo with NL having the privilege to see all those nasty hackers and who they play with. And I'm telling you, m1lk can be seen quite often with them and I've got exactly the same opinion about it as Tosspot does.
And dont compare m1lks' long-term-friend-relationship with NL cheaters and Tosspots' two day mix with AlexL. It just makes u and the rest who r saying this look very stupid.
And I do agree public cheaters should be treated the same way as those cheating in competition. It's quite simple, dont use hacks, nowhere, never...
Anyway, how's weather there tox?! :D
just wanted to show a bit of contradiction :p
weather is hot as always, 33 in the shade is the average, and im working outside as a waiter in the sun, brilliant, croatia? :p
You have to prove that the person knows it, because there are lots of innocent people who get caught out but if you can prove knowledge such as sheep has done or wrobel did, surely you deserve such strict punishment if even if you've never cheated and have been to lan.
It is a risk to be very strict on cheaters but what is there to lose? Look how bad last seasons EC was.
Secondly.
I completely disagree, like Toss.
*Edit*
Now that I think of it, I played with ecklav. First time he was caught on a public, I/we kicked him immediately. I never experienced any moments while playing with him, which could be interpreted as hacking.
And as stated I have never played with any cheaters, except for that one situation (which is unlikely). So it is also a matter of picking the team you play with. As with this new concept of "punishment" which you describe.
Are you trying to say that I am playing with someone who has cheated, or that I have at some point?
In the case that I have, if I would have known, I would not have played with the person. So I would not call that ignorance, but more "not knowning".
(what's interesting here is that you say probably not, which leaves room for interpretation)
If i look back to times of 2004/2005 where there werent that much cheaters and we as non-cheaters could never think what will happens in et in 2006-2008 with all that cheaters, im sure most of players who tested a hack wouldnt test it, but this is exactly the problem, many players tested it just for fun, jsut to know how it works, without knowing which effect it can have for et in the near future.
Another side ar the cheaters from nowdays who know exactly which cheating problems ET has and if those try cheating its in my eyes different as like i said was before.
I mean there's quite a sizable list of competitive players who've been caught or admitted cheating on public servers yet they've played on multiple LAN's. I know many people will see what I proposed as a cop out, you're punishing less people in the short run, but I see it as an act of faith in a sense. If someone known is caught, then the ban is almost irrelevant, their reputation is the thing at stake.
Because they can, because the current situation doesn't discourage them.
To play in any given competition isn't a right, you play at the discretion of the competition organisors. If a fundamental condition of that privilege were "cheat anywhere, anytime, for any reason and you don't get to play in our competition" the would be public cheater then has 2 choices: cheat and risk getting caught and not be able to play in those competitions, or not chance it in the first place. Either way you promote a climate in which no kind of cheating is tolerated. Currently in ET public cheating is tolerated, not because we condone it out-right, but because we don't condemn it out-right, which is essentially the same thing.
Couple comments:
Coming from the Public (non-competitive sector), the are a number of servers that are very well ran. I will easily say that playing on a number of public servers is a lot more than than playing on SNL most days, as SNL is full of kids who spam swear words and blame everyone who kills them for hacking, while the public servers I visit are a lot more relaxed and people are not at each other's throats for every little reason.
Also, in my opinion, if you're caught hacking, regardless of what mod its on, you should receive a full ban. So many of you complain about ET dying all the time, ever think that you may be part of the problem? Instead of simply ignoring the public aspect of ET, treat it the same as you do competition. The future of ET is in public players becoming competition players, not the same group of guys who have always been the elite continuing. Hacking is hacking, and just because they are a key part of Team EuroCountryA and it was done on a Public server should not change the fact that they WERE hacking, and were CAUGHT doing so. Continuing to polarize the ET community into Public and Competition will only serve to kill ET faster, as neither by itself is strong enough to last for another 5 years, but working together they can.
Public cheaters who play competitively shouldn't be banned from competitions on the basis of a public cheat
Yes they should. Anyone who cheats, anywhere, anytime, under any circumstances, should receive the punishment. The punishment should be the same regardless of circumstances.
If it's otherwise you get the current can or worms, if some sorts of cheating are different from some other sorts of cheating you invite "debate" about what "kind" of cheating the latest cheater got busted for. Arguments will rage about how "serious" the cheat was. Would cheating on a random 32-slot XP-save noob-pub server be the same as cheating on BiO with every other player on the server a Clan player? How is cheating against public players less onorous than cheating against Clan players, are public players a bit less human perhaps?
Similarly the punishment must be exactly the same for any kind of cheat. Whether it be a 1 year ban or whatever, if it's not exactly the same for all offenses you invite "debate" on the seriousness of the offense (again) and comparisons with other banned players. "so-and-so" got x months so "whoever" must get more .... yeah but "what's-his-name" only got x - 3 months so "whoever" must get less.
One crime, one punishment, simple, no room for debate, flame, argument.
And once the ban is over, no bringing up past offenses every time the prior offender opens their mouth. If you're going to think less of someone, or apply different rules as regards eligibility for competitions, NC captaincy or whatever, ban them for life in the first place and have done with it.
And one final thought.....
NOT installing a cheat on your PC requires ZERO effort. A cheat has NEVER touched my hard-drive in 7 years playing online, and it took NO effort whatsoever to make that happen. If someone has or has had a cheat on their PC ask yourself why?
"And once the ban is over, no bringing up past offenses every time the prior offender opens their mouth"
amen
maybe i'm wrong because i don't know you.
But! point of your thinking is good
not-fully agreed!
still you don't uderstand my point?
in your world only med or higher must be able to write a comment or what?
I won't say it again and again.
I think perhaps what you're saying is being low-skill I never get accused of cheating, and therefore I can say "burn all those dirty hackers" safe in the knowledge I'll never be accused of being one. Whereas if I was high skill I might be more reluctant to have a zero tolerance policy enforced in case I was banned for cheating despite being innocent?
If that's what you meant, then I can see your point. But how we determine who cheats and who doesn't is one issue, what we do about them is another, and I don't think the punishment for cheating should be based on the proof available, otherwise we just get arguments about the nature of the proof on top of everything else.
Once again...
So i really don't care about that i just don't agree with this
BECAUSE evryone who is very good (high and more) are accused by cheats...
Did you get my way of thinking?
Thanks
You don't agree that it takes NO effort to NOT do something? How can that be? If I install a cheat on my PC it would've taken an amount of time, not much time, but some. To not install a cheat on my PC takes precisely zero minutes zero seconds, because not doing something takes no time at all.
And what's that got to do with high-skill players being accused? Of course skilled players get accused, I'm not that low that I've never been accused myself as it happens. ;)
What are we to do: not even try to ban cheaters because we can't tell the difference between cheat and skill?
It takes no effort to not hack, but it does take effort TO hack. So, hackers make a decision that they WANT to cheat, and do it knowing full well that they ARE cheating, and as such they should be punished a lot harder for DECIDING to cheat.
Someone either hacks or they don't. And if they hack they decided to hack, they didn't come to hack by any other means. There's only one crime involved here, and so only one punishment needed.
anyways 90% of the busted people are saying that they only wanted to try it on a public 8D
Some might see the following as a far-fetched example, but just bare with me. Cconsider army bootcamps for a second. It has many similarities with how a group of people COULD deal with the problem of these free-riders, social loafers, rascals or as we normally say...cheaters.
Especially in the early stages of boot camps or any type of correction programs for youth, there are always those that have problems abiding by the rules and in effect fuck it up for the rest.
There is only so little that a drill instructor or youth-worker can do to make someone change his behavior. You might think screaming in someone face (verbal abuse) and physically tiring someone will help, but there is a small breed of people that in effect even worsen their behavior. Punishing them personally can only go so far and those that persevere would always continue to try and cut some corners, until they face a punishment that does hit a nerve...peer pressure.
There are much similarities with the cheaters. They get caught, the punishment barely affects them. In fact, people especially their teammates or e-buddies are likely to hold a hand above their heads to protect them.
In the army they have only one solution left and that is punishing the entire squad or battalion. If you look at any type of such programs, they make an entire group responsible for the behavior of its members....best thing is...
It has worked for ages in cracking down faulty behavior. The ill behavior of one single member of a group that is cutting corners will have its consequences on that group. It works two ways: a. Those that are likely to break a rule are less likely to commit such a thing just because of the consequences he will face amongst his peers. In the end, everyone wants to be accepted into the group. b. For all the members abiding by all the rules, they are more eager to correct false behavior in order not to get punished...
And there you have the key component in building the individual responsibility among players you need to reduce cheating. Social control is the best control mechanism to reduce any type faulty behavior, also cheating.
Stipulating this onto the cheaters-issue, for those that still don't get it.
It is not the issue whether it is right or wrong to punish the innocent. If you make an entire team responsible for the behavior of a member, they will hate his guts if they found out he has cheated as he fucks up their reputation and kills any chance of E-success. And that will condemn those that cheat.
So I disagree. Punish teams, perhaps with a reduced sentence but let's install the only control mechanism that has worked in such situations...
Call me old-fashioned but don't you guys give trials anymore? Play a few games with a prospective new member to see how good they are, get a feel for what kind of person they are on comms? And in matches don't you spec team-mates when you're in limbo to get a feel for what's going on before you respawn. How can you play with someone and "not know"?
(disclaimer: I played with Hype / Kamz for many months and didn't even know it was him, but not once did I ever suspect his alter-ego (Reapz) of cheating, and I'm damn sure I'd have noticed if he was)
Sometimes you just can't tell that somebody is cheating just from speccing them in limbo.
I do agree in principle, it's just impractical due to the current state of humanised aimbots and wallhack toggles.
I still think that, once a cheater is discovered officials should notify said cheaters team's and inform them. If said cheater is not immediately removed from the team, then punish the entire team for not taking action. However, if the team immediately removes said cheater from their line-up, a harsh penalty will serve no purpose.
Punishing teams who, once notified, take action to help bust a cheater will only cause teams to try and hide a cheater, so they don't get punished. Give incentive for teams to help bust a cheater on their team, not to cover it up.
Being banned means nothing if you're still playing 5-10 scrims a night with your legitimate friends. I don't think peer pressure can effectively work when you can quite easily leave a team and join up with another, a clean slate in a sense. But if the cheatbusters inform your new clanmates that you're banned and warn them if they're going to play with you they themselves will face punishment, I don't see you being able to stick with them too quickly.
In a sense instead of the peer pressure coming just from your team mates, it's coming from the entire community.
agree on most of it :D
I was banned for two years for circumstantial evidence, I wrote an essay just like cyx and it was rejected, I can't ask the ESL why they rejected it because it's their policy not to respond. You would've thought such a procedure would benefit from transparency, right? But never mind, an admin deleted my ban when I agreed to help the ESL with coverage.
As for Killerboy, he's like the majority of writers in the scene. An ego helps, it gives you an incentive to always be right and to stay ahead, even if it's purely self indulgent. He like most 'celebrities' has a public persona to work with or against (so have you, check here for proof).
that way the game is balanced again and real cheater have no advantace anymore :)
the
fuck
More than that, that policy is probably why he cheated in the first place. With a policy like that someone who's inclined to cheat has everything to gain and nothing to lose. You can only make things easier for yourself and your team online, thus increasing your chances of getting some prizes. In the worst case you only end up writing some shitty essay filled with apologies and get back to the starting point.
but wtf is this minipic at main page?!
what about "from cheaters...for cheaters?"
If cyx didnt get any punishment for his ban then ESL were wrong, whether he got punished and then went on to win EMS is not the point anyone is making here.
ET can't be saved
I once got a hacker calling me a hacker in a random 3v3, and a few minutes after that he gets kicked for multihack :D:D:D
Holding the whole team responsible and encouraging social control certainly sounds nice in theorie. But this is not a youth prison or a zero-to-hero movie about a juvenile basketball team. It's an _online_ gaming community where these kind of attitudes and ethics don't count at all.
they should have fuckin thought about it before they startet cheating!
If you don't wanna lose the reputation you have towards your cheaterfriends by hiding their names, you lose your reputation towards the entire community.
Make a quick calculation and decide what's best for you.
I just hope for you you make the right decision...
The guys that are trying to say things like "cheating is okey on public servers" - gtfo, it isn't okey anywhere. Cheating is something only a brick would do.
More methods to catch cheaters the better, as long as doesn't turn a witch-hunt. So far I haven't seen too many falsely accused. With pbss there is little to argue. With demos, there is little to argue - if it's 100% clear and obvious.
:)
nvm reading
Just like FDJ said, the only thing Crossfire writes about nowadays is this damn cheater thing. All it does is actually giving Crossfire more hits but as well giving cheat distributors more exposure together with the encouragement towards others to start hacking as well.
Saying ET can be saved is impossible, because the game has changed drasticly in comparison to the good old pub times, at least the times where we all started. The cheaters play an 'important' role in our community, and they can't be removed.
I don't posess much knowledge about the projects that are being developed in order to prevent the cheat & abuse issues in game, but in my eyes we should all wait for RTCW 2 (if it is ever going to be developed and released) and see what that will be like.
For now we can all go to a private server and have the times of our lives, not noticing the cheaters (or atleast noticing and leaving the server when you have done so), or we could just cry and write columns about it.
And btw, before we accuse a person of cheating(because he might be suspicious), get your facts straight, because if oyu don't, you ruin the community bit by bit as well.
i bet 90% of ppl writing comments here dont so STFU.
Why is no one talking about the HUGE amount of cheaters in COD4?
That would end in a disaster...
wtf sheep is banned!!!!!1
OH NOES WTF!!
its that simple.
I just have 2 words, which say: 'get perspective'. Tosspot and Kendle are all about kick all cheaters, no matter what. Tosspot is the living example of a defender of a situation he can't control. If you _ever_ played with a cheater, you loose all your credibility. Playing with AxelL prooves that.
Is some sports( cycling, Tour de France) you get suspended if you use drugs before the competition. Debate however is wheter that influences your abilities when the competition starts.
I had to laugh about the
As a solution i'd say that anyone that wants to try out cheats, has to go to a non-punkbuster server(YES, they are around) and have fun seeing what it does.
Anyone daring to try a cheat on a server with punkbuster anti-cheat wheter detected or not should get banned en shamed for life! or something in that context :)
Instead of bashing Punkbuster all the time for their crap program, the term should stand for fair online gaming. It's not the program that should be responsible, it is the competition and the people within that have to enforce fair gaming.
Quote:
"No person is without mistakes and should therefor be allowed to make up for it."
- By
This is a column of punishment on hackers and teammates and anticheating stuff, posted by a caught hacker?
G Fucking G
why to we need another one !!!
the world is full with cheaters you cant do shit about it,
either you cheat or you dont, you do your choice and deal with the results
the biggest threat to the gaming community is not w*****s cheating in comps it is the spotty little herbets that infect our pub servers with their haxs.....and worse still then get together with their bumchums at netcoders etal to organise mass haks of server admin........
you make me wana puke with your pontificating and the fact that you are attempting to make a case for people being allowed to cheat on pubs makes me wonder just how clean you now are......as for burning alive yeah you shud have been but only after a razor blade had been taken to your balls (if you have any)...........
cheating on pub is more serious than in comps for the simple reason it is the pubs were our community gets its new blood from, how many newbs have been lost to the gaming community cos of you gimps.....it is difficult enough for new players to compete with established fragwhore adren fed meds without them havin to fight a hax also.......
you say serving a ban isnt punishment or the punishment that bothers these sad little a**holes, then tell me why the ones banned from our server are continually trying to rejoin and then pleading and weeping in forum with i am sure the same excuse u tried to use wen caught:
"oooo it wasn't me, i lent my friend my copy", or "no it was my little brother,,,ive never cheated in my life"
tell you what dude, plz come across to our server so i can issue you with a perm pbban and stop you at least infecting our community ....if not then plz plz stop spouting your assanine justification(s) for your inability to frag without hax.....
There will always be cheats in every game you play and anti cheats like PB etc are the ones who deserve respect IMO and not the pricks who think they are great when in reality its the hax thats great and not the players using them, lets face it ANYONE can use a hax and pwn ffs, thats the point.
NC and haxors alike spout shite about how great they are and how they pwn noobs etc but again in reality its them who are the noobs who get pwned, hence the need for a hax.
I won't say i havn't used cheats for games in my life cos i have however those games have been single player jobbies against the AI of the game rather than my fellow human and i certainly wouldn't cheat in online games and then make out i'm great.
Those who cheat in ET and other online games should be perm banned (forever and not till they decide to reform (laugh a min)) IMO simply because they ruin the game for those who don't cheat, all this reformed cheat shite is exactly that...shite. While i agree with some of what the original poster says with regards to comp play etc i'm in total disagreement when it comes to pub servers because as stated by jizz these servers are the mainstream for new blood to the game and again its ruined by pricks who think they are great when its the hax doing the work. How big and bad these cheats are eh, living a fantasy within the fantasy thinkin they are pwning when again in reality its the hax pwning which TBF can pwn just as easily for a 2 year old as it could a 20 year old etc.
I've played ET since its start back in 2003 and have seen many so called leet players get busted and although many knock PB and other anti cheats, without them the game would have faded to nothin way back when.
I only play a few pub servers nowadays and i do so because i know admin on those servers are good at their jobs and the chances of me going up against a haxor are slim to nil because of that. Don't get me wrong the cheats do try but they never last long.
Shame really that haxors and "reformed" haxors are now so high up in the comp rankings and community and in some ways it goes to show that cheats do and can prosper. However they will NEVER have the respect or skill i and many others who play and don't cheat have, simple as.
Reformed or not a cheat is a cheat and as i've just read on a forum you can choose to cheat but you don't get the choice when it comes to cancer. So don't insult cancer by compairing cheats to it. And before you say its the cure part thats being compaired.....well just remember that cheats can be cured with a good hidin. ;-)