New Anti-Cheats?

Earthewen · March 2017

I have heard a rumor that ZOS entered into an anti-cheat agreement with Steam, and that Steam has insisted that ZOS put anti-cheats in place due to the massive complaints from their Steam clients. Again, this is just a rumor and I was wondering if anyone had any information either confirming or contradicting this. I'm not sure, but apparently there is some kind of lawsuit going on between Steam and ZOS? Anybody know anything?

Potenza · March 2017

why would you even care. unless of course your running CE and need to know that you might get caught.

Earthewen · March 2017

Actually, I'm excited to hear it if it's true. I understand so many people are running it, and I was hoping for an end to it.

NightbladeMechanics · March 2017

j.murro2ub17_ESO wrote: »

why would you even care. unless of course your running CE and need to know that you might get caught.

Integrity of the game.

Turelus · March 2017

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

j.murro2ub17_ESO wrote: »

why would you even care. unless of course your running CE and need to know that you might get caught.

Integrity of the game.

Because that's something ZOS has proven to care about.

BuggeX · March 2017

as vac even could detect ce, vac cant even ban cheaters on valves own games

NightbladeMechanics · March 2017

Turelus wrote: »

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

j.murro2ub17_ESO wrote: »

why would you even care. unless of course your running CE and need to know that you might get caught.

Integrity of the game.

Because that's something ZOS has proven to care about.

He asked why the op would care. ZOS allegedly needs to be leveraged into caring by Steam (if such an agreement exists).

Katahdin · March 2017

Vacban may not be perfect but it has banned people in the past. I personally know of several accounts that were banned. Any banned account says it right on their profile.

apostate9 · March 2017

j.murro2ub17_ESO wrote: »

why would you even care. unless of course your running CE and need to know that you might get caught.

Well.

That escalated quickly.

vamp_emily · March 2017

The rumor I heard was they disabled CP to install a new anti-cheat engine and test it for a week.

I wonder if that is true

Katahdin · March 2017

vamp_emily wrote: »

The rumor I heard was they disabled CP to install a new anti-cheat engine and test it for a week.

I wonder if that is true

If that's true, that is awesome.
Let the bans begin

NightbladeMechanics · March 2017

vamp_emily wrote: »

The rumor I heard was they disabled CP to install a new anti-cheat engine and test it for a week.

I wonder if that is true

I'd laugh if the entirety of those two guilds flipping the outpost on EU got banned.

It isn't realistic, but I can dream.

No_True_Scotsman · March 2017

Think of all the LoS checks and passives calculations they could place client side if they actually had robust anti-cheat software. Slimmer packets = better server performance if everything else stays the same. That way coordinating proxy + ult dumps wouldn't also incidentally DDoS the server!

BuggeX · March 2017

No_True_Scotsman wrote: »

Think of all the LoS checks and passives calculations they could place client side if they actually had robust anti-cheat software. Slimmer packets = better server performance if everything else stays the same. That way coordinating proxy + ult dumps wouldn't also incidentally DDoS the server!

i doubt that would prevent lag, i think that will cause more lag as all Clients Needs to update themself with possition markers for los, etc

No_True_Scotsman · March 2017

BuggeX wrote: »

No_True_Scotsman wrote: »

Think of all the LoS checks and passives calculations they could place client side if they actually had robust anti-cheat software. Slimmer packets = better server performance if everything else stays the same. That way coordinating proxy + ult dumps wouldn't also incidentally DDoS the server!

i doubt that would prevent lag, i think that will cause more lag as all Clients Needs to update themself with possition markers for los, etc

There was lag before the infamous "lightning patch", but it was nothing compared to what it is now. The probable culprit was actually a huge migration of LoS checks from client to server, and progressively more LoS checks were added to different skills. There's decent circumstantial evidence that more clientside computation is better for latency, even if it's not a cure for it.

rfennell_ESO · March 2017

If it's true, expect a whole lot of I was banned for no reason threads

Rohamad_Ali · March 2017

I don't believe Steam has any influence over ZoS or how they police thier game . GTA is on steam and if they had influence over customer complaints , that game would of been removed years ago .

NBrookus · March 2017

NightbladeMechanics wrote: »

vamp_emily wrote: »

The rumor I heard was they disabled CP to install a new anti-cheat engine and test it for a week.

I wonder if that is true

I'd laugh if the entirety of those two guilds flipping the outpost on EU got banned.

It isn't realistic, but I can dream.

I'm not in favor of banning people for essentially using a mechanic ZOS was warned would cause this to happen. I am in favor of reversing all the goodies they got. But if ZOS follows form, they will do nothing. At most they might do 3 day bans while allowing said players to keep everything. I daresay most of those players smirking over their unearned decoy scrolls would do it again even if they knew they'd get a 3 day ban.

It's why so many players feel free to hop on the latest exploit, because there are never any significant repercussions.