Anti-Cheat Solution

[jackcrow 129]

So considering the hacking issue is such a problem, I think the DayZ team needs to reevaluate their "server rules".

If Rocket truly cannot do anything about the problem then we need to be allowed to start locking our servers, period. At this point we are basically told we have to allow this type of game play and these players on the servers WE pay for or else we the server admins/owners will be reprimanded with a server blacklist. I have to say that is fucking bullshit unless the DayZ team has something up their sleeve in the near future because waiting until Dec is unacceptable. I mean hackers invaded the Machinima live stream yesterday while they interviewed Rocket! WTF!?!?

I understand that this would really suck for those of you who do not have your own server, but YOU'RE not paying for anything. We are.

Ive submitted this to the DayZ team, Id like to see if the community wants to get behind this idea. Especially those of us that really are paying money to enjoy this game.

I personally would allow players to submit applications to join the server, we would be generous in most cases. But we need to know who is playing with us that we do not know personally and not allow some random ass-hat script kiddie to come in and destroy weeks of clan effort in minutes.

I'm open to variations of this idea or even other suggestions, but dammit give us some fucking control over our servers!

P.S. sorry about some of my language, I'm just tired of this problem and Rocket hinting that he has no plans on a anti-cheat pre-stand alone release really set me off. So if he cant thats fine, but stop forcing us to allow our servers to be held hostage by script kiddies.

Edit: Fixed the grammatical issue for the grammar police =)

Edited August 3, 2012 by jackcrow

[SilenceSoLoud 34]

I can stand behind this. When you pay for a service, you deserve to get what you pay for. Its not a matter of "well then dont pay for it" because then, we have to go find a server anyway, which still has hackers, then we are back at square one.

Anyway, I would prefer there be an actual solution but this seems reasonable, even as a temporary rule change.

[jordy@sigux.com 44]

No, that would suck. And besides, how is that going to stop hacking? Once they submit their application to get into the server they can hack just as easily, just not immediately.

Server owners will just have to live with the guidelines and rules when they're connected to the hive, that's it really.

Edited August 3, 2012 by Brightbull

[SmashT 10907]

Plenty of locked servers already despite the rules. It doesn't stop it by any means but most hackers are simply not going to bother registering when there are hundreds of unlocked servers that are an easier target, Rocket talked briefly about relaxing the rules in the machinima livestream.

Edited August 3, 2012 by smasht_AU

[nik21 287]

.... and then the non-locked servers will be unplayable. No thanks.

[Dingus (DayZ) 429]

There is no solution until there are standardized official servers.

[Polkaman 60]

Yeah, white-listed servers. That'd actually solve a lot of the problems.

And there's no arguement that you can just lock a server as the admin and have you or your squad go looting when hackers spawn AS50's and M107's by the hundreds and distribute them

[jackcrow 129]

Those of you who think this idea is horrible need to understand more and more server admin/owners are becoming less and less interested in renewing server costs. If you think we will continue to provide servers for you to play on while they are destroyed by script kiddies you really have another thing coming. Think about that for a second before you say its such a bad idea.

[jordy@sigux.com 44]

Those of you who think this idea is horrible need to understand more and more server admin/owners are becoming less and less interested in renewing server costs. If you think we will continue to provide servers for you to play on while they are destroyed by script kiddies you really have another thing coming. Think about that for a second before you say its such a bad idea.

There's plenty of DayZ servers dude. There's about 3000 DayZ servers. It won't matter if you stop your server. If admins for HIVE servers will be allowed to lock the server, they could just lock it and then the clan or whatever could just loot most of the map, go to different server, and kill people for the laughs. No thanks. Or when you get around 50 players on, you just kick everyone and lock it, then loot their tents. That's probably the reasons why it isnt allowed to lock the server when it's connected to the hive.

[SmashT 10907]

Don't worry, Rocket is already considering it as a temporary band-aid solution until the game goes standalone. I don't really see any valid reasons why people would be against it with the amount of hacking/duping going on.

Edited August 3, 2012 by smasht_AU

[martin_sonderegger@bluewin.ch 141]

I don't see a problem with that. Admins should be allowed to lock their servers and if they do, the server has no access to the HIVE. If the server's unlocked, HIVE is available again.

[jackcrow 129]

There's plenty of DayZ servers dude. There's about 3000 DayZ servers. It won't matter if you stop your server. If admins for HIVE servers will be allowed to lock the server, they could just lock it and then the clan or whatever could just loot most of the map, go to different server, and kill people for the laughs. No thanks. Or when you get around 50 players on, you just kick everyone and lock it, then loot their tents. That's probably the reasons why it isnt allowed to lock the server when it's connected to the hive.

You are correct, but if all servers could be locked its going to be fairly hard to server hop as you suggest so that point is moot. Players can still come here and submit tickets for servers and admins who abuse their privileges, your second point is moot. If you don't pay to rent or own a server you really dont have a leg to stand on in this conversation. Im sorry but your playing for free, Im not.

Edited August 3, 2012 by jackcrow

[jackcrow 129]

Don't worry, Rocket is already considering it as a temporary band-aid solution until the game goes standalone. I don't really see any valid reasons why people would be against it with the amount of hacking/duping going on.

I hope to see this happen, just temporarily. Once the standalone is out and Rocket has control then this would never be needed.

[jordy@sigux.com 44]

You are correct, but if all servers could be locked its going to be fairly hard to server hop as you suggest so that point is moot. Players can still come here and submit tickets for servers and admins who abuse their privileges, your second point is moot. If you don't pay to rent or own a server you really dont have a leg to stand on in this conversation. Im sorry but your playing for free, Im not.

Please don't talk to me like I'm some poor guy who knows nothing about servers. In fact I probably know more than you. I have multiple dedicated Linux and virtual private servers in various locations. I have hosted multiple game servers before too. I don't host a DayZ server because.. well, why would I? There's plenty of servers for me to play on. If you just get a good server with GOOD admins who have a good system for reporting cheaters on their server, nothing should be going on. The server of the clan I'm in hasn't had any cheaters as far as I'm aware. Usually has around 40 players on it too.

And just because I don't have my own DayZ server doesn't mean I won't reply to your thread, think again.

[jackcrow 129]

Please don't talk to me like I'm some poor guy who knows nothing about servers. In fact I probably know more than you. I have multiple dedicated Linux and virtual private servers in various locations. I have hosted multiple game servers before too. I don't host a DayZ server because.. well, why would I? There's plenty of servers for me to play on. If you just get a good server with GOOD admins who have a good system for reporting cheaters on their server, nothing should be going on. The server of the clan I'm in hasn't had any cheaters as far as I'm aware. Usually has around 40 players on it too.

And just because I don't have my own DayZ server doesn't mean I won't reply to your thread, think again.

First of all, whats your point? I could care less what you claim to do or know. Second of all if you have access to a clan server why do you care? Are you server hoping? Are you running scripts yourself? Please keep replying, its just bumping the thread so the rest of the community can see it. Thanks!

[Ankhenaten 111]

Fully support the idea.

The only issue I would see is that with 700K + players you might end up with 20K applications. If you do it automatically you might not be wiser.

[SP45M 240]

The only real fun in DAYZ is from random pvp, lock the server and you lose that. When your all geared what will you do? Organised pvp with your conscripts? You don't need DAYZ for that. I hate hackers and they are killing the mod without a doubt but I cant see how locking the servers will help, In fact it would probably help to kill it.

[jordy@sigux.com 44]

First of all, whats your point? I could care less what you claim to do or know. Second of all if you have access to a clan server why do you care? Are you server hoping? Are you running scripts yourself? Please keep replying, its just bumping the thread so the rest of the community can see it. Thanks!

I don't play on my clan server. And nor do I server hop. Neither do I run any scripts. My point is that I think it's a bad idea, if all the serves will get locked. It will result in servers having low population, hackers going after unlocked servers first, etc. How can you know if you whitelist a hacker or not? There is no way to tell if the person is a hacker before you give him the password, whitelist him or whatever. He can just start hacking as soon as he gets into the locked server, can't he? Then you have the same problem. No admin online = Hacker stays. Might as well keep an admin on most of the time and unlock it, would do the same.

[jackcrow 129]

Fully support the idea.

The only issue I would see is that with 700K + players you might end up with 20K applications. If you do it automatically you might not be wiser.

Clans will have some work if they want people on their server, I know we will. But I guarantee clans would rather sift through applications and build a healthy fun server than the current situation. Plus we are only talking about long enough for either BI to do something about Arma2 or the DayZ standalone release which probably wont support the current hive anyways so we are all starting over when that comes out.

[jackcrow 129]

I don't play on my clan server. And nor do I server hop. Neither do I run any scripts. My point is that I think it's a bad idea, if all the serves will get locked. It will result in servers having low population, hackers going after unlocked servers first, etc. How can you know if you whitelist a hacker or not? There is no way to tell if the person is a hacker before you give him the password, whitelist him or whatever. He can just start hacking as soon as he gets into the locked server, can't he? Then you have the same problem. No admin online = Hacker stays. Might as well keep an admin on most of the time and unlock it, would do the same.

Locking servers is at the Admins discretion. I know that we would start accepting requests to join our server and start logging information for all people we dont personally know so that we have a log of who is playing so when shit starts going haywire with scripts we know where to start looking. Again, your points are moot if you stop thinking about yourself for a second and think about how those of us who are actually willing to put money into playing this game feel.

You have absolutely no point that cannot be overcome, why don't you start thinking about other solutions if you dont like mine. Its easy to discredit someone else without having anything to show for it as an alternative.

Edited August 3, 2012 by jackcrow

[jackcrow 129]

BTW, you also realize this is how a lot of Aram2 servers handle cheaters right?

[SP45M 240]

BTW, you also realize this is how a lot of Aram2 servers handle cheaters right?

Thats why they are empty.........

[jordy@sigux.com 44]

BTW, you also realize this is how a lot of Aram2 servers handle cheaters right?

As far as I'm aware Arma 2 doesn't have any Hive or anything like that either.

Like I said, I can both agree and disagree with you, as I don't like certain things about it and I also do like certain things about it, but I think it is currently disabled to prevent "stats padding" or just getting more gear. They should do the same thing in Battlefield 3, now you can lock your server there and start padding your stats. Makes it easy to get all unlocks etc.

[jackcrow 129]

As far as I'm aware Arma 2 doesn't have any Hive or anything like that either.

Like I said, I can both agree and disagree with you, as I don't like certain things about it and I also do like certain things about it, but I think it is currently disabled to prevent "stats padding" or just getting more gear. They should do the same thing in Battlefield 3, now you can lock your server there and start padding your stats. Makes it easy to get all unlocks etc.

I understand your concern on stat padding, but with the way things are running right now I think a lot of servers would follow suit making it extremely difficult to stat pad in the way you think people would do. Besides as many have said considering the amount of scripting and duping going on, everyone is stat padding in unlocked servers as is so what difference is it really going to make?

[urspider2018@gmail.com 109]

No thanks.

It's not gonna stop anything (hackers can still get on anyways, it's not like they're going to put "Oh and I'm a hacker" into their application, and without an admin on the hacker can just keep hacking) and more likely than not it'll decrease the playerbase significantly. Plus, who's do to say that if Rocket does allow servers to lock, that the server owners aren't just going to build their own little survivor havens where nobody kills each other?

One of the main points of DayZ that I really enjoy is that you don't get to choose your community. You go onto a random server and you have no idea how many of them are bandits, or survivors, or would just completely ignore you. If servers are allowed to lock and you have to apply to the server owners to gain access, the owners can just say "Bandits need not apply," and completely ruin the PvP aspect of the game.

And don't say something like "Well, we won't do that." Because that doesn't stop the other 50 million other servers from doing it.