Jump to content
Forum rules

Sophiie

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content Count

    452

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Sophiie

  2. Posted · Edited by Sophiie

    3 hours ago, cowhorseman said:

    so how well did this go. i have time but i rather waste it doing anything that isn't watching some garden gnome talk about a dead game.

    Matchmaking being tested publicly regularly on OTW (discord channel announces these playtests), EAC ban / unban update (they are working on an updated appeal system with Epic), new car in-dev w/ screenshots, new unsilenced perma nano on regular sale (NOT legendary) for Black Friday along with KTTW pack discounted by an extra 25% on top of premium discount,

     

    vsZ4F37.png?ex=656f8ac3&is=655d15c3&hm=dimage.png?ex=656f8ab8&is=655d15b8&hm=7a7

    butcher.png?ex=656f8981&is=655d1481&hm=b

  3. Posted

    16 minutes ago, Hexerin said:

    You could literally just commission your own weapons over there, from appearance to stats etc. I'm still surprised that the RUS players got to keep their weapons when Innova shut down and they were merged into EU, considering a lot of those weapons they bought had higher stats than the actual weapons.

    Those weapons do not have the same stats on Citadel.

  5. Posted

    14 minutes ago, Y2Venom said:

    How exactly will the "world server" help the matchmaking ? Considering all the good players will still group together and will not team with the new players ?? You cant say that it will have more of a pool to pull from. Simply because when we had 2000 people on a server to pull from, we had the same issue.

    There are only 100 people in a district. That means you only have a potential 100, if they're all not in a mission.

  6. Posted · Edited by Sophiie

    8 minutes ago, MonkaS said:

    stop lying we all know /report doesn't work. unless they start broadcasting bans again or show me /report working I don't believe they are actually banning anyone.

    Epic Games requires you to integrate the "EOS Report Interface" as part of the integration process to activate Sanctions automatically.

     

    Here is the article in question that shows the documentation, straight from Epic's own Online Services documentation, which is public for anyone to see:

    https://dev.epicgames.com/docs/game-services/anti-cheat/using-anti-cheat#working-with-cheat-detections

     

    After a player is sanctioned, they may be automatically kicked by EAC the next time they enter the game.

     

    The /report command is hooked up to Epic on the server-side which is why the messaging was included in the main post, I would wager.

    • Like 1
    • Thanks 1

  16. Posted

    6 minutes ago, Sakebee said:

    We take our ToS seriously and we do discipline users found violating our policies. We believe in giving players a chance to learn from their mistakes. We don't permanently ban accounts for minor infractions, though we do punish them in smaller ways, and these punishments get more severe over time. Our support team investigates each claim and responds accordingly depending on the severity of the infraction and the number of violations on record. If the goal is to improve the APB community, spreading the narrative that we don't enforce our policies is not only incorrect, it is harmful if it prevents people from putting in tickets or using the report function. We rely on those user reports for our investigations.

     

     

    Also there's tons of actions per day that break the TOS, in public or private. If no one is offended and no one reports it, and it is not outright theft of you, another player, or LO's property, and it is also not an egregious act like cheating in an online game... while it may not be against the TOS, there is no financial reason for LO to go after those people automatically or manually.

     

    If you have a problem with toxicity ingame? Submit a ticket. Don't just post saying LO isn't 'doing their job' if you aren't showing initiative to tell them how.

    • Like 2

  17. Posted · Edited by Sophiie

    Hell yes! Good luck and see you guys there.

      

    13 minutes ago, zMax said:

     

    the question that does not want to remain silent, will I need to change my processor to play the beta?

     


    For this beta it's TBD I assume. AVX-512 is needed to run the game, and it's not an easy fix to really implement non-AVX-512 override functions in appropriate places that would benefit from it without significant code work. So if they've completed it for this beta, then yes, you can use your current server-grade processor or old potato that supports AVX-512.  Note that *not* using AVX is a significant performance drop in almost every case and is done on compile time. There is a solution but not one that is a quick implementation and not one you can do yourself short of replacing the hardware.

    • Like 2

  19. Posted · Edited by Sophiie

    2 hours ago, Sakebee said:

    We only ban if, at the end of our investigation, we are satisfied that a TOS violation has occurred. 

    Should also mention that TOS violations extend beyond hacking violations - racism, sexism, homophobia etc also are TOS violations, though often punished in less severe ways.

    And a lot of folks lump in 'ban' with 'suspension', especially today. Historically, ban used to not be synonymous with suspension.

    Additionally, a players' history with offenses is typically included in consideration with the investigation.

     

    The statement is technically correct, but may be misinterpreted by players.

     

    I suppose the part that is open to interpretation here: If you're repeatedly reporting for 'cheating' and that is found not to be true, but you are also are toxic, you are punished according to the current and prior offenses... AND repeat offenders may be subject to harsher punishment. Is that correct?

     

    Are players investigated for cheating via automated /reports also open to being investigated for other offenses they may have committed that haven't been reported, such as verbal harassment? If so, what I described would probably be a slippery slope and the exact reason why Tiggs' ban policies failed ultimately - players would get banned by 'FairFight' because it had been used to determine information about the player based on a cheat report, but ultimately players were banned for other reasons such as extreme verbal harassment that wasn't reported. Which also opened up the player to humiliation as well as discomfort knowing they would not get their account back without significant work, neither of which are acceptable treatment for consumers.

     

    My opinion on that would be:

    If someone 100% not detected as cheating/hacking, is being interpreted as being toxic by the CSR pulling the players' other logs... and additionally, the separate violation would not be affecting the person who reported them for cheating... They are ALSO not causing financial loss AND has not been reported for anything other than hacking. The action should then result in the player being able to get away with the TOS violation provided the TOS violation is not affecting another consumer AND is not an automated hack detection. Would LO agree with that opinion?

  20. Posted · Edited by Sophiie

    they are trying their best, have you not been following their posts?

     

    imma take a page from the early 00's and say this: READ THE STICKIES.

     

    also i'll reiterate what i said on the unofficial discord:

     

    Quote

    you gotta remember that not only are they a small team, but they also have no obligation to tell you when they take action. they also can't tell you when they take action against whom, only that they will investigate and if they find any wrongdoing they will take appropriate action

    GMs are glorified hall monitors, as far as I know. they're basically the SPCM, but with a slight bit more of power. (actually, SPCM used to have their power before a specific set of individuals abused the program)

    which actually lead to the SPCM being dismantled except for 1 other person, who fucked off after some time

    only paid employees can terminate accounts temporarily or forever afaik

    they also have access to a large swath of internal tools used to make their decision

    just because you don't see it [bans] happening doesn't mean they aren't happening.

    also, i noticed a lot less people online in the last month as soon as battleye was introduced, and around the same time it was turned to automatic perma bans, there was also a lot less people ingame

    beyond that, there's like 2-3 reddit posts about 'i was banned unfairly because i called someone gay, and [other words i can't put in discord without getting monkatos'd] until they reported me'

    paid cheats all have their detection status as 'questionable'

    there's reports on <snipped> and other sites about triggerbotters 'getting away with macros for years' and suddenly got hammered

     

  21. Posted

    Remember: cheats are made by people that have an interest in hacking the game for either profit, or for their own amusement. Both require the end users of the cheat to actually have an outlet for using the cheats. If anything, the uptick in cheaters means the game is getting popular again and changes to the game are working as there are more people wanting cheats and complaining about them again. If you noticed, EAC was implemented at a time where there was a lot of hope, but no action. Now the game's had a lot of changes for the better and players are returning... hence the interest again in cheats, as some players will resort to them.

     

    I'd like to also mention something I've been saying for a long damn time: Just because someone isn't banned immediately when they have a hack running doesn't mean they will not get banned later. In fact, if you just have a big message that pops up immediately saying 'ur banned idiot' every time someone starts the game and logs in with a cheat, you can just adjust the cheat until it doesn't happen anymore.

     

    There's also the notion that some players get away with hacking because no one reports them using the ingame report system, which does flag them up for manual review, or a delayed ban in the case there's no false positives. If they aren't causing a financial loss by making someone else complain about them, they aren't worth banning until they do get reported. This not only reduces the chance of false positives, but also ensures that the right people are getting banned and that BattlEye is working correctly.

    • Like 1

  22. Posted

    26 minutes ago, Nickolai said:

    People here demanding it to be released early will only complain when its broken and constantly crashes.

     

     

    If they go in with expectations that it will be broken, and are explained when they download it that it will be broken and crash a lot, they can't really say they had different expectations.

    • Like 1

  23. Posted · Edited by Sophiie

    Launch it! It sounds like it's in a state that people would expect for an open beta test, but I wouldn't go jumping the gun on marketing or anything too crazy yet. Let dedicated players who have spent a 6 year delay waiting for this actually get in there. Their feedback can help shape it so that when there is an actual marketing push, the game is well thought out, and has minimal bugs and issues.

     

    I'd personally be interested in taking a look into how the game performs on my system. I can understand the hesitation from the development team on pushing it out too early to make a bad impression, especially since this has been many years in the making, and the performance gains might not be final. However, the audience of people that will be testing are enthusiastic about the game... enough to where, if those performance / crash / gameplay bugs are all resolved during the testing, they will sing high praises about the current development team. That in itself could push a lot of hype on its own.

  24. Posted

    1 hour ago, MattScott said:

     

    During playtests, we kept encountering a common crash related to a vague DirectX error where the DX device was "lost". After spending a lot of time researching this, we narrowed the error down to a combination of problems with Fullscreen Exclusive mode. In our last playtest, we had all the players run in some form of windowed mode. That test only had 1-2 crashes down from 25 for the previous test.

     

    I don't want to hold back the Open Beta any more than I need to, so for now based on the information at hand, we are going to remove Fullscreen Exclusive.

    If the team finds a way to make DX11 Fullscreen Exclusive work without crashing during the Beta, then we'll put that back in.

    Matt, check your Discord PMs when you have a chance. I've provided some extra info that may help the team.

  25. Posted

    13 minutes ago, MattScott said:

    Hi there,

     

    We had to turn on this feature recently when our registration / login pages were getting hit by bots. This isn’t a DDoS attack, but it’s

    similar in that attackers direct lot of traffic to fill out specific page to make them unavailable.

     

    Thanks,

    Matt

    Matt, this feature is being applied to specific ARMAS pages too via the ingame browser. Just making sure you're aware.

×
×
  • Create New...