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

Comments

  • Loony
    35 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    im assuming there is a time limit to leave a comment? sigh.
  • OskooI_007
    650 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Madnesis wrote: »
    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.

    <!-- Used for easily cloning the properly namespaced rect -->

    It's my understanding that EA/DICE doesn't consider video evidence good enough to ban cheaters. So most likely you're just wasting your time recording cheaters.
    Braddock512
    Community Manager
    36 points
    ·
    3 hours ago
    I'm sorry you feel that way, but as I repeatedly stated, the action of the anti-cheat team isn't based on videos from Spectator mode. They use their own tools. Your point that Spectator can be unreliable is exactly WHY they don't rely on it to determine if someone is cheating.

    So unless EA/DICE's weak anti-cheat system manages to detect the cheat using software detection methods, the cheater probably won't be banned. I don't even think EA/DICE is banning cheaters based on stats anymore, because an aimbotter in BF1 has been raging for months with tons of people reporting him and he hasn't been banned. He racks up 60+ headshots every round with the LMG.
  • Red_Label_Scotch
    1232 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Was on my team tonight.

    He said, "stupid enemoes," when we accused him of hacking.

    Then, he left.

    https://imgur.com/vR662rw
  • SirBobdk
    3925 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Was on my team tonight.

    He said, "stupid enemoes," when we accused him of hacking.

    Then, he left.

    https://imgur.com/vR662rw
    Had one yesterday with a **** name going 68-12 as sniper on devastation. He was really good  :D
    And another who overall stats was 110 spm, 0.1 kpm who went 21-0 within the first 5 min on hamada also as sniper. He must have practiced a lot.
  • SirBobdk
    3925 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

    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.
    Agree, but I did like BF4DB even though it had its problems. I would like to see EA have a equivalent transparent system.

  • g0merpile
    507 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    SirBobdk said:

    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.
    Agree, but I did like BF4DB even though it had its problems. I would like to see EA have a equivalent transparent system.


    Those days are long gone, gaming monopoly has taken over. They want it all.
  • Madnesis
    12 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 27
    Madnesis wrote: »
    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.

    It's my understanding that EA/DICE doesn't consider video evidence good enough to ban cheaters. So most likely you're just wasting your time recording cheaters.
    Any idea what they need? I mean, good quality video is among the best proof I see for reporting cheaters, plus looking at the stats afterwards if still doubtful.

    I'm so irritated about EA/Dice not giving a damn about the whole situation, it's so disrespectful, this is like they simply not longer support their customers, that simple.
    I will ensure all my friends know about that and will most likely I will stop supporting them even though I bought every single BF except 2142.
    Since they just care about money money and money, at least they will no longer get mine (which is peanuts I know, but still)
  • Loony
    35 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, 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. 
    Apologies if I generalized too much... Dont get me wrong, I personally think the forum mods do a great job... hence my point, the volunteers are doing a better job than the Dev team, there is action with one and not the other.

    What Im trying to say, The Moderators read posts and react accordingly (if it be a warning or a ban). The rules are there... like you said, break them and there is an action. People will think twice on what they post (well... most will), because there is a DETERRENT.
    In game, where is the deterrent? hacks beat the auto system... nothing else to be worried about. How many posts are there of reports made and they are still playing? Ive reported a guy for his name (I wont repeat here but trust me, it was FAR from appropriate)... hes still playing. its  not like a "ok well we need to investigate if hes sus or not" its black and white. If its ok, fine.. let him keep playing, if not... action is required.

    We have all had experiences with bad admins in games, they are like footy umpires, sometimes they make bad calls, Shame on anyone who believes there is a perfect human who NEVER makes mistakes. The focus should not be on defense of accidentally banning a player, it should be enforcing the rules. Do you believe hack activity would rise or fall with a random HUMAN admin watching? He doesn't even have to enforce anything! Like having a security guard at a shop or a fake camera on your house.

    Like LOL' said "Everything has to be done 100% by the book" and you are right, here is the book = https://tos.ea.com/legalapp/WEBTERMS/US/en/PC/

    "When you access or use an EA Service, you agree that you will not: Use any software or program that damages, interferes with or disrupts an EA Service or another's computer or property, such as denial of service attacks, spamming, hacking, or uploading computer viruses, worms, Trojan horses, cancelbots, spyware, corrupted files and time bombs"

    Vet some staff  to be game admins.... whoever they believe will do the job the best they can, Create the deterrent and maybe even enforce their own rules?

    Bah, the time has come where Im just venting as I know nothing will change. I stopped playing a while ago where I stay hopeful for something to happen... but I know the answer, its "fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me" for even buying the game.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    2HoleDoll said:
    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.
    There would be a line around the block of players willing to do that.  But then there would have to be EA supervisors keeping an eye on them, and an appeals process if someone claimed he was kicked or banned unfairly, and sooner or later there would be cases of volunteers playing favorites or even rigging games, it could become a real mess.  And EA doing something like this would depend on EA caring about the problem in the first place, which it doesn't seem they do.

    It was simple with rented servers, it was up to the admins to police their servers.  If they were jerks (and there were a few) then we voted with our feet and played somewhere else so the "badmin" server sat empty.  When we found a good server with good admins there was a queue of players waiting to join, it was like a line outside a restaurant with good food and service.  And not only did EA not have to pay for those thousands of servers, they even made a little money from them.  EA chose to get rid of that system, and now all you can do if a blatant cheater shows up or there are twice as many players on one team, is leave.  I think this will be the single biggest blow the BF series takes, the loss of rented servers and the dedicated clans which ran them, it will erode the community like nothing else EA could have done.  But I think they're okay with that, it's part of their business model now--short-lived games, skin sales, replace the title every two years, rinse and repeat.  Wait until they get Battlefield Mobile up and running, it will only get worse.
  • CaptHotah
    1061 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.

    Or in BF5 case, never. Or at least not yet (6 months)
  • 5hadyBrady
    404 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 27
    I'm fairly certain the cheating has snowballed. Let me explain. There's always stages of grief. First you're worried or concerned, then you're annoyed, and finally you're just resentful and angry. When you spend $1,500 on a gaming pc, and 80 dollars on a game you sort of expect to have a decent time. Then you get into your favorite FPS games, and it's just a giant circus. When exploits like the LOD bias are being promoted by the largest BF youtube channels (seen by millions of people), you can't have faith anymore. PC gaming is going down the tubes. It's just way too easy for 12 year olds with lenovo thinkpads to use exploits that give them insane visibility advantages. What am I getting at? I think there's probably a bunch of people who are cheating, or using exploits in BFV, who wouldn't otherwise be cheating. I think there's a lot of people using cheats and exploits who are angry and resentful. They're so annoyed by the fact that the cheating and exploits are so prominent, that they eventually just join them. I'm 100% positive there are people who play this game who are trying to burn it to the ground. I know this because I've listened to them rant about it in game. They eventually get frustrated and come back and take it out on everybody else, and it just turns into a vicious cycle. The crazy part is, I actually sympathize with some of them and I hate unsportsmanlike/nasty behavior more than anything. However, nothing is being done to resolve this problem. At some point it does actually have to be "burnt to the ground". Otherwise, this is what we get. Developers have shown little to no interest in resolving or at least mitigating this stuff until it gets so bad they have no alternative. I typically don't cheer for burning anything to the ground, but if I were going to , this is what I'd be cheering for.
  • TapperSweden
    202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 27
    Madnesis wrote: »
    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.

    <!-- Used for easily cloning the properly namespaced rect -->

    Same experience here, BF V is still playable but firestorm is a no go if you don't have aimbot and radarhack yourself because if you last to the endring you will moust likely be up against a scumbag with aimbot.
    Post edited by TapperSweden on
  • 2HoleDoll
    25 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

    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.
    What game was that may I ask?
    There would be a line around the block of players willing to do that.  But then there would have to be EA supervisors keeping an eye on them, and an appeals process if someone claimed he was kicked or banned unfairly, and sooner or later there would be cases of volunteers playing favorites or even rigging games, it could become a real mess.  And EA doing something like this would depend on EA caring about the problem in the first place, which it doesn't seem they do.

    It was simple with rented servers, it was up to the admins to police their servers.  If they were jerks (and there were a few) then we voted with our feet and played somewhere else so the "badmin" server sat empty.  When we found a good server with good admins there was a queue of players waiting to join, it was like a line outside a restaurant with good food and service.  And not only did EA not have to pay for those thousands of servers, they even made a little money from them.  EA chose to get rid of that system, and now all you can do if a blatant cheater shows up or there are twice as many players on one team, is leave.  I think this will be the single biggest blow the BF series takes, the loss of rented servers and the dedicated clans which ran them, it will erode the community like nothing else EA could have done.  But I think they're okay with that, it's part of their business model now--short-lived games, skin sales, replace the title every two years, rinse and repeat.  Wait until they get Battlefield Mobile up and running, it will only get worse.
    Supervisors is an obvious given. As is an appeals process, which is why I mentioned burden of proof on the admin, to minimize the potential of powerabuse.

    But honestly, I would be most satisfied with RSP on the level of BF3/BF4/BFH. Give us that.
  • TyroneLoyd
    1284 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    edited April 28
    2HoleDoll wrote: »
    TyroneLoyd_TV said:






    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.
    What game was that may I ask?



    parkingbrake said:
    There would be a line around the block of players willing to do that.  But then there would have to be EA supervisors keeping an eye on them, and an appeals process if someone claimed he was kicked or banned unfairly, and sooner or later there would be cases of volunteers playing favorites or even rigging games, it could become a real mess.  And EA doing something like this would depend on EA caring about the problem in the first place, which it doesn't seem they do.

    It was simple with rented servers, it was up to the admins to police their servers.  If they were jerks (and there were a few) then we voted with our feet and played somewhere else so the "badmin" server sat empty.  When we found a good server with good admins there was a queue of players waiting to join, it was like a line outside a restaurant with good food and service.  And not only did EA not have to pay for those thousands of servers, they even made a little money from them.  EA chose to get rid of that system, and now all you can do if a blatant cheater shows up or there are twice as many players on one team, is leave.  I think this will be the single biggest blow the BF series takes, the loss of rented servers and the dedicated clans which ran them, it will erode the community like nothing else EA could have done.  But I think they're okay with that, it's part of their business model now--short-lived games, skin sales, replace the title every two years, rinse and repeat.  Wait until they get Battlefield Mobile up and running, it will only get worse.


    Supervisors is an obvious given. As is an appeals process, which is why I mentioned burden of proof on the admin, to minimize the potential of powerabuse.
    But honestly, I would be most satisfied with RSP on the level of BF3/BF4/BFH. Give us that.

    Alliance of valiant arms.

    There were moderators that access to the report server to make determination on whether someone was cheating or not. Turned out a good one or two of them were cheaters to begin with. (I also had access to this server) . Quickly Too many people got access to the server which started a [removed] storm about the competence of the company and questioned certain bans.
    Post edited by LOLGotYerTags on
  • TNA_SneakyMonkey
    545 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Was on my team tonight.

    He said, "stupid enemoes," when we accused him of hacking.

    Then, he left.

    https://imgur.com/vR662rw

    At least he didn't spell "stupid enemas" instead. Just one small ray of sunshine...
  • AntiFox08
    73 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    I just had a good game on Fjell, then moved on to Twisted Steel. Had a few kills there, and suddenly my plane started getting lit up with no signs of tracers, no airburst, and I died with no killcam. I was well within the playing area, was on the German team, so Onion rounds are out as a suspect, and I was high up. Nothing AI or penalty related could've killed me, but I died, and it happened a few times. I gave up on flying near the end since it was too much, and I spawned on a teammate. Same thing happened while I was on the ground and I got blown sky high as if a tank hit me, but no kill cam. I was revived, then a Stag Hound killed me a minute later and I saw his name and red silhouette. I couldn't record it because my PC started lagging in that server when I started recording. I knew someone was cheating, but didn't have a name, and nobody had an outrageous k/d on the other team.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, 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.
    We once had well thought out stats analysis services like Cheat-O-Meter, iStats, BF4DB (the original one) and they provided a wealth of information on suspicious players so admins didn't have to go by their gut, they could see that someone was doing something outside the realm of believability.  If bans in this hypothetical volunteer admin system were based on red-flagged stats then that would greatly diminish the chances of admins paying off grudges or whatever.  But EA didn't like those outside services or server operators using them, so they blocked access to the data needed, then they made it so control plugins wouldn't work, then they just did away with rented servers, so much for local admin control.  And there is the irony, those outside services and the server operators who used them did a much better job of dealing with cheaters than EA ever dreamed of.  Now that they're gone we're left with whatever feeble anti-cheat effort EA is using, and that doesn't seem to be doing the trick.

    This proposal is a pipe dream of course, EA doesn't share our concerns about cheating and they aren't about to do anything this radical in response to a problem in the PC platform which they no longer care about much.  Between the end of rented servers, and this fiasco called Live Service, and the weak anti-cheat, and the wobbly network performance, I think EA is convincing me that BF6 probably won't be a game I'll be interested in.
  • AOD_Zodca
    1 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    So is it even worth it to report cheaters? If EA just doesn't give a crap then they should remove the promoted cheating directions and accounce they don't give a crap.

    Just came off a Firestorm match and watched a person named perrythefairy nail long range shots with a green SMG and walk right up to every opponent. It's really sad EA doesn't care enough to do anything about this.
  • CaptHotah
    1061 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    AOD_Zodca wrote: »
    So is it even worth it to report cheaters? If EA just doesn't give a crap then they should remove the promoted cheating directions and accounce they don't give a crap.

    Just came off a Firestorm match and watched a person named perrythefairy nail long range shots with a green SMG and walk right up to every opponent. It's really sad EA doesn't care enough to do anything about this.

    No. Dont waste your time reporting anyone else. Ppl that i recorded 6 months ago and reported them with video proof are still playing today. Its a fact.
  • BlackWing1977
    5 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    In Asia servers, there so many cheaters from China that they are organizing into squad within their own cheater circle... and ruining the gameplay for everyone esle... 
This discussion has been closed.