DISCUSSION: Our Anti-Cheat Approach to Battlefield V

Comments

  • warslag
    1366 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Cheating is frustrating and ruins players enjoyment completely. But if you can contribute in a positive way, all those little positive contributions will add up.

    1. Don't cheat
    2. Report cheats
    3. Support the anti-cheat effort

    Going nuts at EA just doesn't solve anything. We've been doing that for years and it solves nothing.
  • Red_Label_Scotch
    1232 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    2. Reporting has a perceived net effect of: NONE when you report a rage hacker and he is playing three weeks later.

    3. It is hard to support someone that you know is not trying. I am not going to give my alcoholic brother $20 bucks for, "food," for the fourth time.
    And whether we "support" or don't "Support" the effort, that should make no effect on the anti-cheat itself. We are not cheerleaders. We don't inspire or disappoint the anti-cheat.

    To me, your post lacks introspection and critical thinking.
  • Red_Label_Scotch
    1232 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    warslag wrote: »
    Catching cheats must just be a very difficult thing to do.

    All that I need to do is go to the battlefieldtracker.com leaderboard, I find one every time.

    r/woooosh

  • DigitalHype
    734 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    since they have clearly decided to not go after the cheat providers

    This is only a very minor guess as I'm not fully aware of legalities regarding this when it comes to intercontinental issues ( such as this ) , But Perhaps they are unable to do that as they can only logically sue a company that is infringing on the rights of the developers that are actively trading in the US ( since EA's main HQ is in the US ).


    So say for example a cheat provider is selling the cheats from Russia, And the domain of the website is located in.. Let's say, Norway for arguments sake.

    EA would be unable to file a lawsuit and issue a takedown notice because they have no jurisdiction over in those countries.


    However nice you may think it would be if EA were of course to chase those responsible for making the cheats and for selling them, You have to realise that it is not black and white and there is a lot of red tape regarding these kinds of issues.

    I don't agree with your guess. Lawsuits happen all the time across internation boundaries, including in ones where the companies HQ is in the US. Ask yourself this question. If a company in another country started selling a knock-off Battlefield V clone for $10, and it was doing moderately well. How long would it be before EA had all hands on deck in its legal department? I don't care if this was happening in a freaking dome on the planet Mars. EA would be taking any and all legal action it could.
    -
    They have options, including going after hosting providers, transit providers, etc. Just because one party is in another country doesn't mean they have no recourse. Especially for a corporate giant like EA.


  • Klendathu1987
    138 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    edited March 23
    i love the idea of VACNET.
    and for me, every developer who doesnt invest resounces in something similar, is not even trying to stop cheating.
    and why would they? as long as we keep buying **** cheaterinfested games they dont have to care about it.
    hit'em where it hurts and STOP BUYING.
  • Myrenous
    2 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    As a new player to the game I can say I'm massively disappointed with EAs attempt to curb hacking, its the problem as old as the FPS genre of game there will always be someone trying to ruin the game for other people. however with that being said I recently played another game World War 3 and the Anti hacking software implemented in that game is on point. As a company I really hope you check it out because the hacking in BFV is absolutely out of hand atm, I cant tell you how many matches a night I go into and they always seem to know exactly were I am and they never miss. I literally just came out of a match were they didn't even bother trying to hide it they absolutely dominated us with hacks in conquest 544 to 0. I might not be nearly as good as I used to be but I know im not that bad.

    furthermore I think a 0 tolerance policy should be enacted, Hacking is hacking and it ruins games thus is a player is activily engaging in an activity that will knowing kill a game they should be removed like the cancer they are and not allowed to return, you cheat .. you pay the price.
  • Shadow_MissFire
    112 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    The hackers are in almost every game now, blatant hacking, its so annoying, whatever you are doing just isnt good enough.
  • warslag
    1366 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    2. Reporting has a perceived net effect of: NONE when you report a rage hacker and he is playing three weeks later.

    3. It is hard to support someone that you know is not trying. I am not going to give my alcoholic brother $20 bucks for, "food," for the fourth time.
    And whether we "support" or don't "Support" the effort, that should make no effect on the anti-cheat itself. We are not cheerleaders. We don't inspire or disappoint the anti-cheat.

    To me, your post lacks introspection and critical thinking.
    warslag wrote: »
    Catching cheats must just be a very difficult thing to do.

    All that I need to do is go to the battlefieldtracker.com leaderboard, I find one every time.

    r/woooosh

    You must not let someone else's negative behaviour make you negative, too. They want you to be upset, angry and irrational.

    Instead, use the energy in a positive way to do something good, such as reporting players. Support the anti-cheat effort by reporting players who cheat.
  • MauriceBavaud
    6 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Enough, enough, enough

    Just left a game where one player sporeted a 98-2, the other a 68-3 KD, any other FPS has tools to handle this, not BFV

    Our approach to cheating, my backparts!

    It is clear, this game has been given up
  • DrunkwoIf
    288 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    edited March 23
    Enough, enough, enough

    Just left a game where one player sporeted a 98-2, the other a 68-3 KD, any other FPS has tools to handle this, not BFV

    Our approach to cheating, my backparts!

    It is clear, this game has been given up

    sad part is we use to be able to own servers and prevent this from happening. There would be known servers with active fair admins that would see people who are 90-2 and watch them, record them, then if evidence ban and report them. but now that is just another feature taken away from the battlefield series.

    They also use to have battle recorder, so every match you played was recorded and you could go and watch it and watch every single player the entire match if you wanted and see if they are cheating. another feature taken away.

    These are just a couple things that have made it easier for cheaters to do what ever they want, now we have to depend on EA/Dice even more to ban them, and you can all see how that goes.
  • parkingbrake
    3202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    GenCuster wrote: »
    Dice should apply a Bayesian inference method to the reporting function. This would help reduce and eventually nearly eliminate (by filtering it out) the noise in the signal-to-noise ratio of false reports vs. valid.
    -
    They could do this by hiring and training people who would investigate the reports (data analysis, client telemetry data, spectating suspects, etc.). Then start assigning a validity score to the reporters based on the accuracy of the report. As suspects are deemed to be cheating by investigation, those whom reported them would get a higher weighted preference for review.
    -
    Over time, the individuals shown to be more accurate would get a higher weighted preference and review priority. Eventually, you find enough high-accuracy reports to maintain the system and you need less people doing the reviews.

    I've suggested for years that players who submit a certain number of unjustified cheat reports should temporarily lose the ability to send more as that will remove the need for the anti-cheat staff to review their reports completely. A recent poster here who boasted about sending in thousands of cheat reports would probably qualify as part of the signal/noise ratio problem.

    Another factor that should probably send someone to the top of the to-be-investigated list is multiple reports. IIRC from a recent PUBG Corp. announcement on anti-cheat, 83% of players who get multiple cheat reports end up being banned.

    PUBG is also doing something I think is very helpful for the morale of legit players, sending ban confirmation messages to players who report cheaters. I had a couple of dozen of those before I stopped playing PUBG, it's nice to know that sending in a report isn't a waste of time.

    But it all costs money, and I doubt EA will spend more than the bare minimum for any PC game because that platform no longer matters much to them. I'd love to be proven wrong, but so far I see little reason to believe EA cares about this issue.

    I do not understand you,
    on the one hand you say to temporarily suspend those who send cheater reports because they send many, but if there are cheaters you have to continually send them reports,
    on the other hand you say that 83% are banned because reports are sent ......
    we send reports to check suspicious players ...... if he is doing 80/0 it is not suspect ... it is cheater.
    while if he is doing 20/0 in rush and he never dies with 4 that shoot him together as it happens in these days ..... he is potentially suspect, certainly not, but suspect, he needs a deeper control.
    the reports are used for that small part of players who appear to be a little suspiciously too good.
    while in automatic those who have K / D17 should be banned, without any warning, as happens now.

    I said players who send in a certain number of unjustified cheat reports should temporarily lose the ability to send more. Sadly there are players who call "hack" almost every time they die, I've played with a couple of people like that. If such people are flooding the anti-cheat dept. with hackusations because their paranoia causes them to see cheaters who are not really there then they have become part of the problem.
  • STOPchris
    467 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I will never buy another game from EA/DICE.
  • Hercules728
    202 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    GenCuster wrote: »
    Dice should apply a Bayesian inference method to the reporting function. This would help reduce and eventually nearly eliminate (by filtering it out) the noise in the signal-to-noise ratio of false reports vs. valid.
    -
    They could do this by hiring and training people who would investigate the reports (data analysis, client telemetry data, spectating suspects, etc.). Then start assigning a validity score to the reporters based on the accuracy of the report. As suspects are deemed to be cheating by investigation, those whom reported them would get a higher weighted preference for review.
    -
    Over time, the individuals shown to be more accurate would get a higher weighted preference and review priority. Eventually, you find enough high-accuracy reports to maintain the system and you need less people doing the reviews.

    I've suggested for years that players who submit a certain number of unjustified cheat reports should temporarily lose the ability to send more as that will remove the need for the anti-cheat staff to review their reports completely. A recent poster here who boasted about sending in thousands of cheat reports would probably qualify as part of the signal/noise ratio problem.

    Another factor that should probably send someone to the top of the to-be-investigated list is multiple reports. IIRC from a recent PUBG Corp. announcement on anti-cheat, 83% of players who get multiple cheat reports end up being banned.

    PUBG is also doing something I think is very helpful for the morale of legit players, sending ban confirmation messages to players who report cheaters. I had a couple of dozen of those before I stopped playing PUBG, it's nice to know that sending in a report isn't a waste of time.

    But it all costs money, and I doubt EA will spend more than the bare minimum for any PC game because that platform no longer matters much to them. I'd love to be proven wrong, but so far I see little reason to believe EA cares about this issue.

    I do not understand you,
    on the one hand you say to temporarily suspend those who send cheater reports because they send many, but if there are cheaters you have to continually send them reports,
    on the other hand you say that 83% are banned because reports are sent ......
    we send reports to check suspicious players ...... if he is doing 80/0 it is not suspect ... it is cheater.
    while if he is doing 20/0 in rush and he never dies with 4 that shoot him together as it happens in these days ..... he is potentially suspect, certainly not, but suspect, he needs a deeper control.
    the reports are used for that small part of players who appear to be a little suspiciously too good.
    while in automatic those who have K / D17 should be banned, without any warning, as happens now.

    I said players who send in a certain number of unjustified cheat reports should temporarily lose the ability to send more. Sadly there are players who call "hack" almost every time they die, I've played with a couple of people like that. If such people are flooding the anti-cheat dept. with hackusations because their paranoia causes them to see cheaters who are not really there then they have become part of the problem.

    It's not paranoia , a lot of these high score pros are using recoil and fire increase macros . A macro is a cheat , it's a third party program . These youtubers are using them as well . Watch the videos , zero recoil . I heard one of them and he is famous saying he wasn't sure if using a macro was cheating . This is the state of this game and online gaming . I don't play as much and when I see these stupid scores 60 - 4 , 54 - 6 ....... I leave .
  • BadBudgieSmuggla
    252 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Netranger9 wrote: »
    They have already got your money,they(EA/DICE dont HAVE to do anything).Here is what goes down - sure they could pay several million dollars for a good anticheat but thats several million dollars straight out of the shareholders pockets,and that goes down like a lead balloon.Its all about money people and in this incredibly sad world we live in its only going to get worse.These days its the shareholders that make the rules and until that changes(it never will),our games are going to just like this(unpolished pieces of alien ****).If you have already been paid for a job,it makes it that much harder to do a great job.

    On the flipside. If they continue to do the bare minimum on anti cheat they will lose hundreds of thousands of gamers(loyal customers who've bought Battlefield and other EA titles) for the long term. This is bad for their brand image being known as the worst company around on cheating. Myself like many others won't touch an EA game anymore. They don't get my money to play mostly cheats whether lod bias, esp, aimbot or any of the more subtle hacks. I don't think i'm the only one who feels this way. The poor showing on anti cheat has been a slap in the face on Battlefield V. And they want to do BR now? How much do you think people will spend on coins or in game purchases if the cheating problem is the same as BFV? It takes only one or 2 rage hackers to ruin the game in BR. So how do you quantify those losses against investing in a decent anti cheat system? When anti cheat is a neccesary investment in modern gaming. It's like a designer clothes shop in a dodgy neighbourhood not having security or anti theft systems in place. Like in BFV they would be taken to the cleaners. Withh all the issues surrounding this game, bugs and the like the last thing they need is waves of long term customers jumping ship forever. They need to get a grip of cheating and fast
  • Klendathu1987
    138 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member

    GenCuster wrote: »
    Dice should apply a Bayesian inference method to the reporting function. This would help reduce and eventually nearly eliminate (by filtering it out) the noise in the signal-to-noise ratio of false reports vs. valid.
    -
    They could do this by hiring and training people who would investigate the reports (data analysis, client telemetry data, spectating suspects, etc.). Then start assigning a validity score to the reporters based on the accuracy of the report. As suspects are deemed to be cheating by investigation, those whom reported them would get a higher weighted preference for review.
    -
    Over time, the individuals shown to be more accurate would get a higher weighted preference and review priority. Eventually, you find enough high-accuracy reports to maintain the system and you need less people doing the reviews.

    I've suggested for years that players who submit a certain number of unjustified cheat reports should temporarily lose the ability to send more as that will remove the need for the anti-cheat staff to review their reports completely. A recent poster here who boasted about sending in thousands of cheat reports would probably qualify as part of the signal/noise ratio problem.

    Another factor that should probably send someone to the top of the to-be-investigated list is multiple reports. IIRC from a recent PUBG Corp. announcement on anti-cheat, 83% of players who get multiple cheat reports end up being banned.

    PUBG is also doing something I think is very helpful for the morale of legit players, sending ban confirmation messages to players who report cheaters. I had a couple of dozen of those before I stopped playing PUBG, it's nice to know that sending in a report isn't a waste of time.

    But it all costs money, and I doubt EA will spend more than the bare minimum for any PC game because that platform no longer matters much to them. I'd love to be proven wrong, but so far I see little reason to believe EA cares about this issue.

    I do not understand you,
    on the one hand you say to temporarily suspend those who send cheater reports because they send many, but if there are cheaters you have to continually send them reports,
    on the other hand you say that 83% are banned because reports are sent ......
    we send reports to check suspicious players ...... if he is doing 80/0 it is not suspect ... it is cheater.
    while if he is doing 20/0 in rush and he never dies with 4 that shoot him together as it happens in these days ..... he is potentially suspect, certainly not, but suspect, he needs a deeper control.
    the reports are used for that small part of players who appear to be a little suspiciously too good.
    while in automatic those who have K / D17 should be banned, without any warning, as happens now.

    I said players who send in a certain number of unjustified cheat reports should temporarily lose the ability to send more. Sadly there are players who call "hack" almost every time they die, I've played with a couple of people like that. If such people are flooding the anti-cheat dept. with hackusations because their paranoia causes them to see cheaters who are not really there then they have become part of the problem.

    What do you think is the reason some player (such as me) report a lot of other players?
    cause they can cheat however they want! in CS:GO we SAW how players get banned by Overwatchers. We SAW players get banned live on stage. We SAW how VACNET keeps sending player demos to Overwatchers.
    In BFV? Nothing! No plyers getting banned mid game, no messages "someone you reported got banned", no feedback, no announcements.
    there is a lot of incentive in BFV for people to start cheating.
    And dont forget that there is more than just players blatently aimboting.
    thats only the tip of the iceberg. players disabling hitboxes, instantly repairing their tanks. 20 different types of wallhacks (from esp to maphacks), hard to see low-fov-aimbots.
    everything thats comes down to a 1 or a 0 can be hacked in a game.
    and since there is pretty much nothing preventing players from messing with the game,-
    YES i am gonna report EVERYTHING that seems fishy to me.
  • GenCuster
    55 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    GenCuster wrote: »
    Dice should apply a Bayesian inference method to the reporting function. This would help reduce and eventually nearly eliminate (by filtering it out) the noise in the signal-to-noise ratio of false reports vs. valid.
    -
    They could do this by hiring and training people who would investigate the reports (data analysis, client telemetry data, spectating suspects, etc.). Then start assigning a validity score to the reporters based on the accuracy of the report. As suspects are deemed to be cheating by investigation, those whom reported them would get a higher weighted preference for review.
    -
    Over time, the individuals shown to be more accurate would get a higher weighted preference and review priority. Eventually, you find enough high-accuracy reports to maintain the system and you need less people doing the reviews.

    I've suggested for years that players who submit a certain number of unjustified cheat reports should temporarily lose the ability to send more as that will remove the need for the anti-cheat staff to review their reports completely. A recent poster here who boasted about sending in thousands of cheat reports would probably qualify as part of the signal/noise ratio problem.

    Another factor that should probably send someone to the top of the to-be-investigated list is multiple reports. IIRC from a recent PUBG Corp. announcement on anti-cheat, 83% of players who get multiple cheat reports end up being banned.

    PUBG is also doing something I think is very helpful for the morale of legit players, sending ban confirmation messages to players who report cheaters. I had a couple of dozen of those before I stopped playing PUBG, it's nice to know that sending in a report isn't a waste of time.

    But it all costs money, and I doubt EA will spend more than the bare minimum for any PC game because that platform no longer matters much to them. I'd love to be proven wrong, but so far I see little reason to believe EA cares about this issue.

    I do not understand you,
    on the one hand you say to temporarily suspend those who send cheater reports because they send many, but if there are cheaters you have to continually send them reports,
    on the other hand you say that 83% are banned because reports are sent ......
    we send reports to check suspicious players ...... if he is doing 80/0 it is not suspect ... it is cheater.
    while if he is doing 20/0 in rush and he never dies with 4 that shoot him together as it happens in these days ..... he is potentially suspect, certainly not, but suspect, he needs a deeper control.
    the reports are used for that small part of players who appear to be a little suspiciously too good.
    while in automatic those who have K / D17 should be banned, without any warning, as happens now.

    I said players who send in a certain number of unjustified cheat reports should temporarily lose the ability to send more. Sadly there are players who call "hack" almost every time they die, I've played with a couple of people like that. If such people are flooding the anti-cheat dept. with hackusations because their paranoia causes them to see cheaters who are not really there then they have become part of the problem.

    What do you think is the reason some player (such as me) report a lot of other players?
    cause they can cheat however they want! in CS:GO we SAW how players get banned by Overwatchers. We SAW players get banned live on stage. We SAW how VACNET keeps sending player demos to Overwatchers.
    In BFV? Nothing! No plyers getting banned mid game, no messages "someone you reported got banned", no feedback, no announcements.
    there is a lot of incentive in BFV for people to start cheating.
    And dont forget that there is more than just players blatently aimboting.
    thats only the tip of the iceberg. players disabling hitboxes, instantly repairing their tanks. 20 different types of wallhacks (from esp to maphacks), hard to see low-fov-aimbots.
    everything thats comes down to a 1 or a 0 can be hacked in a game.
    and since there is pretty much nothing preventing players from messing with the game,-
    YES i am gonna report EVERYTHING that seems fishy to me.

    I see that the ideas are quite clear.
    If people make many reports, creating this "hackusation", it is because they are convinced that what they feel or see is wrong .....
    I repeat that the biggest problem is not those who use aimbot at 10, bulletfree at 10, wallhack at 10, and are obviously obscene in the scores,
    but that MASS of sneaky, inept and slimy, which use aimbot at 2-3, bulletfree at 4 ......
    Those who have realized that they must use cheat in moderation because they would be discovered.
    Those that are currently the most dangerous and harmful for this game.
    And believe me ..... there are many more than you think.
    So ..... YES I will continue to report.
    when the anticheat will work .... I no longer see the need to do so.
  • GenCuster
    55 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I entered the first Firestorm game last night,
    I parachuted ... I enter some houses, collect weapons and ammunition, and hide in a bunker ... shortly after the game begins.
    An opponent arrives, hides behind sand bags about 10 meters from me, and while he is behind me I start shooting him in the head with MP40,
    I hit it at least 4 times "hit confirmed by the different color of the head, not white as in the body".
    It turns and 1 shot to me in the head kills me ...... with the same MP40.
    I close the game and eliminate firestorm
    until better times.
  • DrunkwoIf
    288 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Member
    287martin wrote: »
    Played loads of fps games the only thing that works to prevent cheating ruining the experience is fully functioning rental servers. On rental servers with admins cheaters are quickly called out, kicked from the server and put on ban list Servers with admins abusing that position are usually avoided easily with the simple function of having the ability to add/remove from favourites list. There's a reason older battlefield titles are still played, the rental servers

    I been saying this ever since they removed them. I will never buy a BF game again without rented servers. If you have to rely on EA/Dice to deal with the cheaters it will never happen. but people who actually give a crap will police their servers and then those servers get known to people as a fair place to play.
  • 287martin
    143 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    Why can't there be rental servers like there was in BFBC2, BF3 & 4 ? It can't be financial because they are paid for by gamers. If it's due to complaints of admins abusing that position that's a poor decision. Most of those complaints come from cheaters because all they are left to play on are empty official servers. Most genuine players end up having a couple of favourite rented servers they keep going back to where known cheaters are banned.
This discussion has been closed.