I hate to admit it but there are cheaters in this game currently

Comments

  • g0merpile
    482 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 26
    Had a match today, old friend and a awsome tanker, lav driver (pocherello) from bf4. Anyways there were no cheaters in the game. Totally different game with no Especes d'idot
    Welcome to bf5 poncho
  • STOPchris
    437 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Loony said:
    Yeah, spot on Micas. We are consumers who have paid for a product with the worse customer service I know off. Even with just general issues, its like pulling teeth. They enforce rules harshly in forums but do nothing with the actual product itself? "Action is greater than words" no?

    Yeah, we need to stop buying their games. BF games were the only games left that I have bought from EA, used to buy all of them on Steam. Now, I won't buy these games either. These games are at an all time low. 
  • StarscreamUK
    7079 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    edited April 26
    Loony said:
    Yeah, spot on Micas. We are consumers who have paid for a product with the worse customer service I know off. Even with just general issues, its like pulling teeth. They enforce rules harshly in forums but do nothing with the actual product itself? "Action is greater than words" no?

    "They" don't.  Nothing is harshly enforced.  Rules are simple to follow.  You have only yourself to blame if you fall foul of them.  We are the moderation team, we are volunteers, we have NOTHING to do with product development.
  • parkingbrake
    3094 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    You could have recorded that, sent it to EA, and it would have been ignored just as thousands of other videos have been ignored.  I reported a guy who had a kill streak of 266 (at least a month ago), he's still playing.  That FF either isn't flagging such players or (based on a Twitter comment of someone from EA) being flagged and being banned can be widely separate events.  Can anyone think of any good reason why a cheater flagged by FF could be allowed to continue playing for weeks or months before being banned?  The "ban wave" theory doesn't seem very convincing anymore.
    Was there more to it than that?  As in did you see the player do the 266 kill streak, were there other suspicious stats involved, or was it just because of that stat alone?  There is a reason for my curiosity.    We don't know what is flagged and what isn't, and when something is flagged is it manually analysed/investigated before a ban is issued ... sometimes? in all cases?  Perhaps they lack confidence in fairfight's findings not because its detection is unreliable, but because the statistics engine from the actual game can be misleading/manipulated..... when i say misleading I mean broken to some extent.  
    We know BFV tracker has incorrect stats, and I've seen incorrect stats on the in-game player profile page too.  It would be a very ineffective way of dealing with the problem if thats the case, but it could be an explanation.


    Naturally I didn't choose to look him up at random, the way he was playing seemed to me and a lot of others (including some of his team who were calling him out) to be outside the normal operation of the game.  I'm prepared to give even very high-scoring players the benefit of the doubt if what they're doing makes sense, e.g. they're in a clan squad so they're almost certainly being revived a lot which keeps their number of deaths down.  But when someone clearly knows where all opponents are all the time, and gets instant hipfire headshots on everyone who peeks around a corner, something isn't right.  Everyone gets lucky some of the time, has a good run.  But someone who is never unlucky, who never guesses wrong, who always aims at the side of the building where their opponent is about to appear--nope, that's someone getting some outside help.


    Players can spot that stuff, why can't EA?  Or is it that they just don't much care?
  • JPhysics
    804 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    You could have recorded that, sent it to EA, and it would have been ignored just as thousands of other videos have been ignored.  I reported a guy who had a kill streak of 266 (at least a month ago), he's still playing.  That FF either isn't flagging such players or (based on a Twitter comment of someone from EA) being flagged and being banned can be widely separate events.  Can anyone think of any good reason why a cheater flagged by FF could be allowed to continue playing for weeks or months before being banned?  The "ban wave" theory doesn't seem very convincing anymore.
    Was there more to it than that?  As in did you see the player do the 266 kill streak, were there other suspicious stats involved, or was it just because of that stat alone?  There is a reason for my curiosity.    We don't know what is flagged and what isn't, and when something is flagged is it manually analysed/investigated before a ban is issued ... sometimes? in all cases?  Perhaps they lack confidence in fairfight's findings not because its detection is unreliable, but because the statistics engine from the actual game can be misleading/manipulated..... when i say misleading I mean broken to some extent.  
    We know BFV tracker has incorrect stats, and I've seen incorrect stats on the in-game player profile page too.  It would be a very ineffective way of dealing with the problem if thats the case, but it could be an explanation.


    Naturally I didn't choose to look him up at random, the way he was playing seemed to me and a lot of others (including some of his team who were calling him out) to be outside the normal operation of the game.  I'm prepared to give even very high-scoring players the benefit of the doubt if what they're doing makes sense, e.g. they're in a clan squad so they're almost certainly being revived a lot which keeps their number of deaths down.  But when someone clearly knows where all opponents are all the time, and gets instant hipfire headshots on everyone who peeks around a corner, something isn't right.  Everyone gets lucky some of the time, has a good run.  But someone who is never unlucky, who never guesses wrong, who always aims at the side of the building where their opponent is about to appear--nope, that's someone getting some outside help.


    Players can spot that stuff, why can't EA?  Or is it that they just don't much care?
    I agree with you, but you only mentioned the kill streak so that whys I asked, as I know that particular statistic is bugged, although how it comes about I'm unsure, but I wouldn't be surprised if combined arms mode had something to do with it before it was patched.
    ^I came across one of those candidates just now, player has been seen blatant aim botting since bf4.  No action was ever taken despite video evidence and supporting statistics, and still at it in BFV.   These obvious cases are a real concern in my eyes because lack of action against cannot be rationally explained. 
  • Netranger9
    169 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I quit BF3 because of cheaters,I quit BF4 because of cheaters,I quit BF1 because of cheaters,and now I just played my last game of BF5.I have about 350 hours in BF5,so I guess I got my $109AUD value out of it,I wont be ordering anymore games from EA/DICE.Here is a rundown of how my last game went - spawned in and walked to grab ammo from A,some **** put a bouncing betty there-dead.Spawned in again,lasted about 35 secs before some sniper headshot me - dead.Spawned in again and got taken out by some assault player so far away I couldnt even see him - dead.Thats it,Im done.I have given EA/DICE all the chances Im going to give them,and all they have done is crap all over me.Id like to say its been fun-but it really hasnt.
  • parkingbrake
    3094 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Micas99 said:
    Any chance someone can copy and past all 222 pages of this onto Reddit so we can get a dev response?



    Our teams will continue to work and improve our anti-cheat initiatives, and with proper reporting, we can identify and remove them.

    Name & Shame threads will, as always, continue to be a violation of the forum rules, so report them properly (as noted above).

    And, of course, we will continue to field any relevant feedback and constructive criticism, bugs, and suggestions to continue to improve fair gameplay in Battlefield 1.

    Thanks.
    -Braddock512-

    (no need to recreate this thread)
    Ah yes.. the BF1 Braddock mic-drop. 

    One thing, among many, that Red is good at is history. I think it's important to always remember we paid for these games. It's not as if Braddock, or anybody at Dice, is doing us some sort of favor. We have an expectation that cheating will be mercilessly pursued, and it just isn't. Time and again, Dice representatives are making claims that never come to fruition, and when they don't like the response from their customers, they simply stop the discussion. So far, this thread remains open but it's no different than the BF1 thread that Braddock closed. Clearly we're not presenting anything new here, but we do this to keep it at the top of the official forum. We want it addressed. These promises of future improvements are hollow at best, blatant lies at worst. 

    How awful is the anti-cheat when Dice is asking we report players? How awful is the anti-cheat when statistically obvious players play hundreds of rounds, with thousands of kills, and you can easily find them on the tracker, still playing every day?

    What is it going to take for Dice to make an official statement (none of this reddit nonsense) regarding cheating in frostbite games, with milestones and expectations? 
    I'm fine with them asking us to report suspicious players, I just wish they would follow PUBG's lead and send ban confirmation messages when they follow through on those reports and nail some critter's hide to the wall.  As bad as cheating is in PUBG, I'll at least give them credit for being very public about their fight against it.  They don't hide how many bans they're doing, they let players who report confirmed cheaters know a ban resulted, they even discuss in broad terms when they've come up with a new anti-cheat technique, e.g. their anti-macro tool.

    EA's radio silence might be meant to keep from providing useful info to hack creators, maybe.  But human nature being as it is, legit players interpret it as inaction and even indifference.  On the other hand when they do say something about this issue it's just pathetic PR fluff, so maybe the silence doesn't really matter, either way they're not actually doing much.
  • Elprez11
    30 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I quit BF3 because of cheaters,I quit BF4 because of cheaters,I quit BF1 because of cheaters,and now I just played my last game of BF5.I have about 350 hours in BF5,so I guess I got my $109AUD value out of it,I wont be ordering anymore games from EA/DICE.Here is a rundown of how my last game went - spawned in and walked to grab ammo from A,some **** put a bouncing betty there-dead.Spawned in again,lasted about 35 secs before some sniper headshot me - dead.Spawned in again and got taken out by some assault player so far away I couldnt even see him - dead.Thats it,Im done.I have given EA/DICE all the chances Im going to give them,and all they have done is crap all over me.Id like to say its been fun-but it really hasnt.
    Happens to me too.....that is why I camp all the time. Find me a good tree to get under and wait. :)
  • 2HoleDoll
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Loony said:
    Yeah, spot on Micas. We are consumers who have paid for a product with the worse customer service I know off. Even with just general issues, its like pulling teeth. They enforce rules harshly in forums but do nothing with the actual product itself? "Action is greater than words" no?

    "They" don't.  Nothing is harshly enforced.  Rules are simple to follow.  You have only yourself to blame if you fall foul of them.  We are the moderation team, we are volunteers, we have NOTHING to do with product development.
    I don´t think this is what he meant though. EA/DICE employ volunteers to overlook their forums and enforce the rules, yet they don´t for their gameservers. How many people do you think would volunteer in a heartbeat to maintain a cheatfree and civil environment on the servers? 1? 2? 100? 1000? And adminwork is no different from modwork. You get your rules, you get an infraction catalog for when you have to take action when someone breaks the rules and that is it. Obviously there is burden of proof, but for that you can record gameplay which for the most part combined with statistics does the trick. It´s simple, it´s neat and it works.
  • parkingbrake
    3094 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    You could have recorded that, sent it to EA, and it would have been ignored just as thousands of other videos have been ignored.  I reported a guy who had a kill streak of 266 (at least a month ago), he's still playing.  That FF either isn't flagging such players or (based on a Twitter comment of someone from EA) being flagged and being banned can be widely separate events.  Can anyone think of any good reason why a cheater flagged by FF could be allowed to continue playing for weeks or months before being banned?  The "ban wave" theory doesn't seem very convincing anymore.
    Was there more to it than that?  As in did you see the player do the 266 kill streak, were there other suspicious stats involved, or was it just because of that stat alone?  There is a reason for my curiosity.    We don't know what is flagged and what isn't, and when something is flagged is it manually analysed/investigated before a ban is issued ... sometimes? in all cases?  Perhaps they lack confidence in fairfight's findings not because its detection is unreliable, but because the statistics engine from the actual game can be misleading/manipulated..... when i say misleading I mean broken to some extent.  
    We know BFV tracker has incorrect stats, and I've seen incorrect stats on the in-game player profile page too.  It would be a very ineffective way of dealing with the problem if thats the case, but it could be an explanation.


    Naturally I didn't choose to look him up at random, the way he was playing seemed to me and a lot of others (including some of his team who were calling him out) to be outside the normal operation of the game.  I'm prepared to give even very high-scoring players the benefit of the doubt if what they're doing makes sense, e.g. they're in a clan squad so they're almost certainly being revived a lot which keeps their number of deaths down.  But when someone clearly knows where all opponents are all the time, and gets instant hipfire headshots on everyone who peeks around a corner, something isn't right.  Everyone gets lucky some of the time, has a good run.  But someone who is never unlucky, who never guesses wrong, who always aims at the side of the building where their opponent is about to appear--nope, that's someone getting some outside help.


    Players can spot that stuff, why can't EA?  Or is it that they just don't much care?
    I agree with you, but you only mentioned the kill streak so that whys I asked, as I know that particular statistic is bugged, although how it comes about I'm unsure, but I wouldn't be surprised if combined arms mode had something to do with it before it was patched.
    ^I came across one of those candidates just now, player has been seen blatant aim botting since bf4.  No action was ever taken despite video evidence and supporting statistics, and still at it in BFV.   These obvious cases are a real concern in my eyes because lack of action against cannot be rationally explained. 
    It is astonishing what EA is prepared to ignore.  I remember spotting a guy in the top ten on the BF4 leaderboard with really weird stats, he had almost no kills yet was supposedly one of the ten best players in the game.  So I looked up his game history, and he spent almost all his time on "no kill, flag run only" servers where he could get hundreds of thousands of points per round without firing a shot.  First, how could there be servers with "no kill, flag run only" right in the name (a blatant TOS violation), and second, how could anyone with only a handful of kills reach the top ten without that glaring issue being noticed by anyone at DICE or EA?  Either nobody from DICE/EA ever looked at the leaderboards, or they were aware of the obvious cheating going on but cared so little about their game's reputation that they did nothing about it.  Just for laughs I reported the guy, and to my surprise his stats were wiped quite quickly.  There was a popular topic back then, why does EA care more about boosting or stat padding than they care about hack use?  But there it was, report a hack user and nothing happens, but report a booster and his stats are wiped in days--what odd priorities.
  • Red_Label_Scotch
    1232 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 30
    Here's a recent round.

    [link removed for name and shame]

    Here are his cumulative stats.

    https://imgur.com/9aiqYCN


    Post edited by ragnarok013 on
  • parkingbrake
    3094 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 30
    Here's a recent round.

    [link removed for name and shame]

    Here are his cumulative stats.

    https://imgur.com/9aiqYCN


    Pffft, that guy is an amateur, 59-1 KDR, that's noob stuff.  I saw a player on the leaderboard who had 1,600 kills and three deaths, his KDR worked out to 533-1.  No, he hasn't had the best KDR in this game, there are guys on the leaderboards right now who are "better" than him.  One of the top players in BFV at this moment has officially only died once.  Even if he's quitting games or whatever, that is an astonishing stat.

    Post edited by ragnarok013 on
  • Red_Label_Scotch
    1232 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Here's a recent round.

    https://imgur.com/7RcA4Xc

    Here are his cumulative stats.

    https://imgur.com/9aiqYCN


    Pffft, that guy is an amateur, 59-1 KDR, that's noob stuff.  I saw a player on the leaderboard who had 1,600 kills and three deaths, his KDR worked out to 533-1.  No, he hasn't had the best KDR in this game, there are guys on the leaderboards right now who are "better" than him.  One of the top players in BFV at this moment has officially only died once.  Even if he's quitting games or whatever, that is an astonishing stat.
    You know, I find two things hilarious:

    The "white knights" (that aren't really white knights, like someone who used to post here but does not) who will say things, like, "I suppose you think Stodeh/Ravic/Relaa cheat too?"

    Yet if they extricated their craniums from their rectums, they would see that the above guys are, in quite a few instances, down in the "thousands" from first place on the leaderboards...Which begs the question, how are all those players out there so much better than even these metaphorical gods?
  • Red_Label_Scotch
    1232 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The other thing that I find hilarious is that, as you said, they (DICE) can't simply just look at the leaderboard and say, "hmm."
  • pajsner
    56 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    This thread has become over 220 pages and how many are we in total, complaining about cheaters really since page 1?
    Maybe not enough,that is why EA / Dice doesn't care.
    The only thing EA needs to do is "advertise" that they made a ban wave similar to that in BF1 when they banned 7000 cheaters and shut down the thread. Many lifted their eyebrows and praised the EA / Dice then for the effort, but how do we not know that they do not ban 7000 every day when no one knows how many they are banning?
    BF is the cheaters game, so it is, and the shareholders are not going to protest either, as long the cheaters buying their investment over and over again.
  • LOLGotYerTags
    12081 postsMember, Moderator, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Moderator
    2HoleDoll said:
    I don´t think this is what he meant though. EA/DICE employ volunteers to overlook their forums and enforce the rules, yet they don´t for their gameservers. How many people do you think would volunteer in a heartbeat to maintain a cheatfree and civil environment on the servers? 1? 2? 100? 1000? And adminwork is no different from modwork. You get your rules, you get an infraction catalog for when you have to take action when someone breaks the rules and that is it. Obviously there is burden of proof, but for that you can record gameplay which for the most part combined with statistics does the trick. It´s simple, it´s neat and it works.
    The thing with having volunteers being able to initiate full manual game bans,  Is that there is a HUGE risk of the volunteers to perhaps have a grudge against any one particular user,  And manually ban the user just because he can.

    The legal implication is huge in that a perfectly legitimate user could be manually banned and then it could throw the ban system into disrepute,  Moreso than the automatic fairfight suspensions.


    IF EA were to do something like this,  It would have to be with well known trusted users  ( E.G forum volunteer moderation team being one example ) And/Or hire EA staff that goes into servers after a user has been flagged ( such as via live notifications when a report is made ) 

    There's a lot more than meets the eye when it comes to things like this,  Everything has to be done 100% by the book,  No matter how infuriating it can be due to inaction being taken until some time later,  Sometimes QUITE some time.
  • Madnesis
    12 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Firestorm = Cheaters Fest. Even though I'm reporting cheaters with video, no one is looking at it (0 view stats).
    I'm done Firestorm, thanks EA for awful experience lately and useless anti-cheat system.
  • 2HoleDoll
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    2HoleDoll said:
    I don´t think this is what he meant though. EA/DICE employ volunteers to overlook their forums and enforce the rules, yet they don´t for their gameservers. How many people do you think would volunteer in a heartbeat to maintain a cheatfree and civil environment on the servers? 1? 2? 100? 1000? And adminwork is no different from modwork. You get your rules, you get an infraction catalog for when you have to take action when someone breaks the rules and that is it. Obviously there is burden of proof, but for that you can record gameplay which for the most part combined with statistics does the trick. It´s simple, it´s neat and it works.
    The thing with having volunteers being able to initiate full manual game bans,  Is that there is a HUGE risk of the volunteers to perhaps have a grudge against any one particular user,  And manually ban the user just because he can.

    The legal implication is huge in that a perfectly legitimate user could be manually banned and then it could throw the ban system into disrepute,  Moreso than the automatic fairfight suspensions.


    IF EA were to do something like this,  It would have to be with well known trusted users  ( E.G forum volunteer moderation team being one example ) And/Or hire EA staff that goes into servers after a user has been flagged ( such as via live notifications when a report is made ) 

    There's a lot more than meets the eye when it comes to things like this,  Everything has to be done 100% by the book,  No matter how infuriating it can be due to inaction being taken until some time later,  Sometimes QUITE some time.
    When I mentioned burden of proof on the admin, I forgot to mention that this was meant as a way to proof cheating in case a user appeals the ban. If there is no wrongdoing or no footage, the ban gets lifted. And it´s not like ACTools haven´t issued false bans too. No one system is perfect obviously.

    And yes potential candidates need vetting, but that´s no different to becoming a mod on this very forum, no? And whether these admins were entirely volunteers, EA Staff or a mix of both, it sure beats an entire lack of moderation on the servers.

    Everything imo ofc.
  • murphy
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    After yet another game, messed up by players who are just getting blatant in their cheating (though they at least go to the trouble of hiding their stats) I think the only solution to the problem is to provide an incentive to EA to do something about it, and the only way I can think of motivating EA is if BF went to a monthly subscription model. That way, they wouldn't care about sales, but about retaining a community, and doing something about the cheating that has gotten way out of hand. I just want a clean game, win or lose, it's still fun if it's fair. I would happily pay a monthly fee to be able to enjoy the game again. Long time fan of the series, but this is just getting out of hand at the moment.
  • TyroneLoyd
    1191 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    2HoleDoll wrote: »
    LOLGotYerTags said:

    2HoleDoll said:
    I don´t think this is what he meant though. EA/DICE employ volunteers to overlook their forums and enforce the rules, yet they don´t for their gameservers. How many people do you think would volunteer in a heartbeat to maintain a cheatfree and civil environment on the servers? 1? 2? 100? 1000? And adminwork is no different from modwork. You get your rules, you get an infraction catalog for when you have to take action when someone breaks the rules and that is it. Obviously there is burden of proof, but for that you can record gameplay which for the most part combined with statistics does the trick. It´s simple, it´s neat and it works.


    The thing with having volunteers being able to initiate full manual game bans,  Is that there is a HUGE risk of the volunteers to perhaps have a grudge against any one particular user,  And manually ban the user just because he can.

    The legal implication is huge in that a perfectly legitimate user could be manually banned and then it could throw the ban system into disrepute,  Moreso than the automatic fairfight suspensions.


    IF EA were to do something like this,  It would have to be with well known trusted users  ( E.G forum volunteer moderation team being one example ) And/Or hire EA staff that goes into servers after a user has been flagged ( such as via live notifications when a report is made ) 

    There's a lot more than meets the eye when it comes to things like this,  Everything has to be done 100% by the book,  No matter how infuriating it can be due to inaction being taken until some time later,  Sometimes QUITE some time.

    When I mentioned burden of proof on the admin, I forgot to mention that this was meant as a way to proof cheating in case a user appeals the ban. If there is no wrongdoing or no footage, the ban gets lifted. And it´s not like ACTools haven´t issued false bans too. No one system is perfect obviously.

    And yes potential candidates need vetting, but that´s no different to becoming a mod on this very forum, no? And whether these admins were entirely volunteers, EA Staff or a mix of both, it sure beats an entire lack of moderation on the servers.
    Everything imo ofc.

    No it really doesnt. I've been down this road on a different game. Giving outside entitites those tools is a slippery slope waiting to happen.
This discussion has been closed.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!