Anti-cheat update

[Spy 152]

8 hours ago, MattScott said:

We're going to be making a change to the anti-cheat soon, and I want to walk the community through it instead of brushing it under the rug.

Matt, this is music to my ears! I'm looking forward to see those closets drop skill massively on day 1 the new anti-cheat is implemented. That reminds me, I need to go to the shop and buy me some popcorn

[UltraMES187 19]

I hope this time it wont give blue screens again at game start like it did before you changed to Eac. Not sure if this was a win7 issue tho..hope it was so Im safe on win10

[Talla 84]

@MattScott
If, by chance, you're going for a in-house solution,
do you think it will require hiring dedicated developers?

That kind of project gets me massively interested.

[Resine 144]

I was happy in current state of cheaters. I played for weeks lately and spotted maybe one or two?

But I do think there is trigger bot issue. 

I would just love to see dynamic color changing crosshair removed. 

Players would adjust and trigger issue would be no more. 

[ReaperTheButcher 177]

Thats a bummer, EAC was the most efficient at blocking client side cheats, now i suspect we will see the famous teleporting cheat once again combined with obvious aimbot Film/zBlock/Goat style.

With all due respect to the idea, no game is clear from mouse software macros and this game is no different and it will stay that way.

Edited June 1, 2020 by ReaperTheButcher

[Cutey 29]

Edited June 4, 2020 by Cutey

[Grabbe 4]

5 minutes ago, Resine said:

I was happy in current state of cheaters. I played for weeks lately and spotted maybe one or two?

But I do think there is trigger bot issue. 

I would just love to see dynamic color changing crosshair removed. 

Players would adjust and trigger issue would be no more. 

Cheaters don't just check for the red crosshair. There are a lot of attack vectors which APB gives. eg. red names when targeting, memory changes, crosshairs, skin-colors,...

[GhosT 1301]

8 hours ago, Snubnose said:

move right there

keep switching through anticheats like underwear... cheat coders are fuming

 

Wouldn't that be somewhat smart actually, to randomly switch anti cheats without announcing them, causing people to get banned?

 

Though cheat devs would probably then make their cheats immune to them all soooo that won't work for long.

[SmilyFace 300]

51 minutes ago, ReaperTheButcher said:

Thats a bummer, EAC was the most efficient at blocking client side cheats, now i suspect we will see the famous teleporting cheat once again combined with obvious aimbot Film/zBlock/Goat style.

With all due respect to the idea, no game is clear from mouse software macros and this game is no different and it will stay that way.

^ ... when peoples don't know what they are talking about is funny. ^

 

PS oh btw teleporting thing was also happening with EAC.

[Lign 361]

1 minute ago, AlishaAzure said:

^ ... when peoples don't know what they are talking about is funny. ^

 

PS oh btw teleporting thing was also happening with EAC.

Because it's not a cheat but an exploit of the game client. I'm not sure if LO fixed it, might try to test it today

[Shui 225]

Now all the srcubs think they will be an average player soon
But guess what .. you are just bad at the game and will still get smashed by everyone lol

Gitgud scrubs

[cheater 296]

1 step forward 5 steps backwards.
Battleye is one of the shittiest anti cheats there are in the market, good luck with killing the game even more.

[CookiePuss 5379]

It sounds like it's less about which is the better in the overall industry and more about which one functions better with APB.

[cheater 296]

3 minutes ago, CookiePuss said:

It sounds like it's less about which is the better in the overall industry and more about which one functions better with APB.

compare how many cheaters there are now to how many there were while battleye was running.

your statement is wrong.

[CookiePuss 5379]

4 minutes ago, cheater said:

compare how many cheaters there are now to how many there were while battleye was running.

your statement is wrong.

Bro I play Jericho. Cheaters arent a problem there.

 

Also, unless I read it wrong Matt said they couldn't get EAC to work properly and Battleye has had some changes making it the more appealing choice.

 

Cool story tho.

[SynRapture 7]

10 hours ago, MattScott said:

We're going to be making a change to the anti-cheat soon, and I want to walk the community through it instead of brushing it under the rug.

I love the level of transparency and how you're truly considering us the Project's Stakeholders and giving us regular status reports, even when the subjects are less-than-popular and/or controversial.

I'm not sure how much of a good move it will be to revert back to BattleEye, but I understand that not being able to solve current issues with EAC, even when engaging their support and spending time, resources and money, means something has to be done. Let's just hope things work out better this time with BE. 

By the way @MattScott, will there be any sort of data release about how many people get banned and how many macro / potential triggerbot users were roaming the game at some point after this is implemented?

 

 

5 hours ago, swft said:

LO ditched EAC because they couldn't afford the server-side anticheat costs since the playerbase is too small for it to be worthwhile.

That's not what the post says at all...

The client side integration was fairly smooth, but the server side integration hit immediate snags. We spent months trying different configurations with the networks to get them talking properly, and when that didn't work, both sides dedicated programming support to fix the issues. When it still didn't work, we started exploring other ways to possibly fix it, but Kamu said based on our concurrency we wouldn't like get good results anyway. More recently I was finally contacted by their head of development with the news that they could no longer justify the resources to finish the server side integration. So then we attempted to work out a reduction in pricing. But we couldn't come to a compromise, so we have mutually decided to end the agreement. 

This basically means Epic contacted LO saying they were dropping their support for the integration.

 

4 hours ago, 404 said:

i guess it depends on how strict they are on macros/software - someone earlier mentioned rebinding keys, and if that’s something that won’t be allowed i can’t say i’ll be playing much apb

This is a good point, but... what key binds are you using that the game doesn't natively allow? 

 

6 hours ago, Aeronaut said:

even as you mention that some players won't read the forums, the biggest takeaway that should somehow get more visiblity is:

But I am taking this step to let all of you to know in advance, that you need to disable your macros and hot key / mouse scripting systems.

 

might want to have an in-game pop up like the EULA/TOS message that happens everytime to patch the game that officially warns every player that logins in to disable macros/scripts/etc. should also have a more indepth message that states "yes, even logitech's G hub software is not recommended at this time" or whatever the parameters are.

This.

Adding a pop-up (for a time) and including something in the EULA/TOS is a great approach to this new change and should ensure most people knows about it and why they're getting kicked out of the game if they keep trying to use macros.

[Latsha 71]

all cool but i somehow doubt this will stop salty "mediocre players" from whispering "stop macro noob" and other hackusations anyways,
i'm clean anyways so this doesn't touch me in any way (at least from what I know now)

[thelinux 51]

11 hours ago, MattScott said:

However, we do have a problem right now with scripted triggerbots and aimbots. (...) players don't often realize they are enabled by default when they enter the game. 

We all agree that scripted triggerbots and aimbots should be bannable / need to be spotted, but I doubt anyone uses these by accident..? No legitimate mouse software should come with such a thing.

If you're referring to hardware macros or other functions of the sort, I'm fairly certain there will be lots of false positives after implementing detection for that (in fact, I am unsure whether that is even possible).

 

Therefore, in my view you should try to separate triggerbot / aimbot scripts from hardware macros, the latter should not be bannable.  

[MACKxBOLAN 431]

11 hours ago, MattScott said:

Easy Anti-Cheat.

Thanks for the update Matt. I have little faith in EAC. I am playing War Thunder, They have the full 64 bit EAC. 

 It does catch some cheaters, but the word is that it takes months.

  I don't know what its called when they lag you offline, this still happens in apb, but they do it all the time in WT.  I'm running a Nitro 5 Laptop. It does fine most of the time, even in close quarter with many guns firing tracers, ship fires, smoke ect. I do fine.

 Now I realize the two games are vastly different when it comes to anti cheats, but the lag events are similar in that the hacker attacks the Que Server/Log in. causing a total freeze up. Eventually you are kicked by EAC for lack of connection in WT, in apb it just freezes until the game crashes. And you dont have to be in a mission for them to do it. 

 Thanks again for the update and the efforts. 

[DORIUS 9]

APB Administration acknowledged the existence of the triggerbot. 
Hallelujah! 

[Grabbe 4]

The current problem with scripts / macros will be solved by Battleye and i hope some top tier script users will be banned by it. The game is unplayable especially if you're playing and you face gold players using scripts / macros.. rapid firing pistols which isn't possible without macros.. There are a lot of users using aimbots / triggerbots currently.. you notice that pretty quickly when you get hit by every shot that a player takes.

[CookiePuss 5379]

12 minutes ago, DORIUS said:

APB Administration acknowledged the existence of the triggerbot. 
Hallelujah! 

Did you think they didn't exist?

[swft 356]

3 hours ago, SynRapture said:

That's not what the post says at all...

 

Maybe I worded it poorly, I meant EAC didn't want to develop the server-side anticheat for a game with such low playerbase because the development cost of it would outweigh the result.

[TheMessiah 430]

My prediction what will happen:BE is back.Gonna fail to deliver like the last time.Will cause a lot of false positives,client crashes etc.LO will give up on it once again and will switch to FACEIT or something else.In result 3.5 release will be delayed even further because all this will cause wasted time and efforts..hope im wrong

[Grabbe 4]

28 minutes ago, swft said:

 

Maybe I worded it poorly, I meant EAC didn't want to develop the server-side anticheat for a game with such low playerbase because the development cost of it would outweigh the result.

They targeting their business-model which requires massive player-bases since they want to get profit out of it. A lot of server-side solutions like an AI which is learning how player movement / aiming is isn't possible and takes a lot of time to learn the AI (less players, longer learning period). Most people understand server-side anti cheat as it could read any data or whatever it takes to ban players, which isnt the point of server-side anti cheats. Server side anti cheats can be based on stats (which leads to false / positive as we know when fairfight hittet people), can be based on movement / aiming (mostly a AI like Steam's Vacnet) and by detecting un-natural values from packets received by the client. (like if view angles range from 0° to 180° and someone sends 454° to the server).

 

Client side anti cheats are there to mostly prevent cheats from getting loaded (thats why it's called, "who loads first wins") or from manipulating client side changes. (also integrity checks)