Hypothetical: You discover 5% of your players cheating

[Koyasha]

An important question...does the hypothetical assume that you can continue to detect the cheaters indefinitely?  After all, in a real situation, as soon as the program can be detected, it's altered to be undetectable again.  So if you assume that at this time, you can detect the cheaters, but in a week or so you won't be able to, the decision has a hell of a lot less options, and this is a more realistic view on it.

Of course, real ShowEQ couldn't possibly be detected, since all it is is a sniffer, but if we were to use MacroQuest as the example instead; it alters memory in the EQ client - it's a little more feasible that it could be legally detected.

However, if we go by the reality of the situation, many of the ideas posted here simply wouldn't work.  If the company announces that they can now detect cheating, the people working on the program would determine how pretty soon.  The longest that SEQ/MacroQuest has been broken, that I can remember at least, during the time I kept track, was around 2 months.  Maybe 3, I can't recall in exact detail.  So you're left with only the options of either gathering the data for a while, and banning them all, without giving any sort of warning at all....banning a significant portion of them in an effort to scare away the others...or trying an amnesty type thing...which would work for a number of the more 'casual' cheaters that are too afraid to lose their accounts, but most of them would simply stop using the cheat program until it's been fixed again to be undetectable.

I should note that I know little or nothing about any of the cheating programs for games other than EQ.  I know about MacroQuest and ShowEQ, and I've heard of a couple other programs for EQ, and I know a *little* about how they work, though I'm not very technical.  I do know what I learn by following their message boards (during the time I played EQ...I'm pretty much retired now, though I don't know how permanent it is, since I've 'retired' before).  And in general, they get fixed within a few weeks or months.

Personally, I believe that in the end, it is necessary for the company to admit a certain level of defeat.  The most important parts are exactly *what* cheats they have no choice but to tolerate, and what cheats are simply unacceptable no matter what.  Obviously, duping, cheats that give characters abilities they shouldn't posess, and the like are things that *must* be eradicated.  Things like SEQ that give more information, or MacroQuest that gives more control over the client...well, with things that don't directly affect the server, there's little that can be done.

My answer to the original question would be this..  Give no indication that I can detect the program at all, and start tracking some of these accounts; the most high-profile ones.  Say, everyone with access to Time, and high-end GoD zones, in EQ.  Of these, watch them for a couple weeks, and ban the most blatant cheaters, along with a random sampling of general-population cheaters.  This won't do a *lot* in the long-run, but it will give the perception that you're 'tough on cheaters' and it'll discourage cheating by anyone who isn't willing to take the full risk of being caught.  Beyond that, continue observing until they change the program to make it impossible to detect, banning anyone who's particularly bad at the cheating.  Sure, it's not the most honest thing to do...but as long as I can keep the cheating to a small percentage of my total population, and continue to give the perception that I'm doing everything I can to eliminate all cheating, it's the most practical business decision.

Selling of plat or items, on the other hand, if someone presented me with a foolproof method of stopping 100% of it, I would ban every last one of them, because at least in my opinion, trafficking of plat and items (but not characters, that much) is far, far more harmful to an MMOG than even if 95% of the population were the ShowEQ users (and if that many people used SEQ, I'd just stick a link to it on my page and call it 'ok' to use, so the final 5% wouldn't be at a disadvantage for being honest).

[Dark_MadMax]

This discussion is completley stupid and moot - for the reasons above poster stated. Passive sniffers can't be detected. period. If  you have sniffer on the same computer - yes there are ways ,but they actually can be considered illegal.

 First you have a fact that you can't "reliably detect cheaters" and any speculations about  this are retarded.  The last bastion of cheating is passive network packet sniffers on a separate box  - so far there werent even any real need to resort to it , as  its already very hard to detect anything like that on the same computer as a client.

 the only way is to use subjective and prone to exploiting human CCR to "trap" suspected cheaters. -But its not reliable by any stretch.

 best way to prevent cheating is to make sure it is impossible by DESIGN.  -e.g. design game with assumptions everything client receives is common knowledge ,  assume  server-clients packets could be fabricated in any way .Assume that  "secret protocol "and actual server -client mechanics and architecture are common knowledge. -when   security relies on design and not on ingorance it works much better.

[Malderi]

You know what I'd do?

Flag every character on every known cheater account. Then, alter mob AI so that when one of those characters zones into an area with monsters, all the monsters see him and charge, willy-nilly, at that one character.

It's like giving ShowEQ to all the monsters!

(Oh, and don't even THINK about announcing this change. Let the cheaters figure it out.)

[AOFanboi]

Flag every character on every known cheater account. Then, alter mob AI so that when one of those characters zones into an area with monsters, all the monsters see him and charge, willy-nilly, at that one character.

What, give them a free, always-on aggro-drawing power? Team tanks would KILL for that. Also, it would piss off other people in the zone trying to gain exp, as their kills run away from them.

Try, try again.

[HaemishM]

I was always a fan of lightning bolts from the sky, followed by a large .wav or .mp3 file in a suitably booming voice that says:

Kent, this is Jesus. You've been very bad. You must stop cheating now. AND STOP TOUCHING YOURSELF!

Then execute a "C:\format \s", ban their account and call it a day.

[Daeven]

Real Genius Quotes for the win!

Thread debate goes to Haemish.  The rest of you loosers can go home now.

[Trippy]

Though not in the same category as ShowEQ-type cheats, SOE just recently discovered a credit dupe exploit in SWG and has suspended/banned accounts based on their log data. In this particular case they seem to have taken aggressive action including suspending apparently innocent accounts since they suspended accounts receiving duped credits, not just accounts handing them out.

[Koyasha]

best way to prevent cheating is to make sure it is impossible by DESIGN.  -e.g. design game with assumptions everything client receives is common knowledge ,  assume  server-clients packets could be fabricated in any way .Assume that  "secret protocol "and actual server -client mechanics and architecture are common knowledge. -when   security relies on design and not on ingorance it works much better.

The problem with this is that when implemented, it hinders the game.  Why does EQ run (relatively) lag-free, even at bardspeed, while other games have issues with just running around?  Because your client posesses all the information about all monsters in the zone..  In SWG, for example, you can be on top of a monster before it even draws on your screen, because there are A: no zones, and B: the information isn't transmitted to your client ahead of time.  Yes, it is the only way to completely prevent cheating of this kind, but it also causes a pretty significant problem with the game.  Other reasons are because EQ trusts the client.  If you tell the server 'I am at location x, y, z.' the server believes you.  This is why you'll never, ever be 'rubberbanded' in EQ.  Wherever your client says you are, you ARE.  If you played UO in the early days, you'll know how much of a benefit this is, when you could run across Britain before you got rubberbanded back to 3 steps from your original location.

So me, I don't think it's worth going to that extent to stop cheaters.  If it comes down to having SEQ/MacroQuest/whatever, or having the server check and doublecheck everything the client tells it, and not tell the client anything until the last second...I'm gonna say screw it, and let the cheat programs exist.  It's an advantage - but as long as it doesn't allow duping, godmoding, or whatever, I'm gonna just say it's an acceptable one.

This becomes a bigger issue in a PvP game, obviously...  But at the same time, fast reactions and actually being where you think you are are also important in a PvP game.  In a game like this, I'd make the cheating worth as little as possible.  Give the players all the information anyway.  Hide whatever is absolutely necessary to keep the game fun and strategic, and don't send that to the players at all...but keep the hidden, non-sent data as small as possible.  Give all the players 'radar', for example.  The ability to NOT appear on radar would be special, given to stealth classes.  That minimizes the amount of information that isn't sent.

[HaemishM]

Actually, I'm of the opinion that stealth is one of those things like crowd control, stuns, roots, mezzes, etc. that breaks PVP. In a PVP world, the ability to turn invisible is the same as turning invincible. I'd rather that any stealth is more of a transparency as opposed to flat out invisibilty. If you have radar, instead of not having the person appear on radar, have the stealther's radar dot jump/warp around. You'd know there's SOMEONE out there, you just don't know where.

[hirebrand]

Once I release the patch, I start banning ShowEQ users and their credit cards and addresses.

Actually, you just have to ban that one account, or delete that one character. They will either give up, or buy a new account and not cheat this time.

This is what DAOC does for some cheats.

[Koyasha]

Once I release the patch, I start banning ShowEQ users and their credit cards and addresses.

Actually, you just have to ban that one account, or delete that one character. They will either give up, or buy a new account and not cheat this time.

This is what DAOC does for some cheats.

Hmm.  No.

I suppose I should elaborate.  I've had people I know get banned for various reasons including using ShowEQ.  They've always come back, with very few exceptions.  Most people I know who have been banned have come back, those who I know have quit EQ entirely have never quit because they were banned.  I personally have done things that could get me banned, and during the time that I was still playing EQ fully, I can say with certainty that being banned wouldn't have stopped me from coming back, getting a bit of twinkage from my friends, and PL'ing myself back to my previous level, especially considering I have 3 EQ accounts.  And I wouldn't even have gotten tagged for anything serious, just minor things, no dupes, exp exploits, use of game-altering programs, etc.  Just things like training, mercilessly destroying peoples' raids because I've been pissed off by them, etc.

Obviously, now I wouldn't bother, I haven't played EQ significantly in many months...but when it was *the* game I played, hardcore, there's very little that would have kept me from returning one way or another.  Not that banning my credit card(s) would be effective either, it would have been simple enough to buy game cards at EB or something.

Remember, people who use ShowEQ and other such programs will probably have significant resources in-game, besides having the obvious advantage that the program gives them in order to regain their lost status in the event of being banned or something.  It is therefore far less work than it is for average guy to rebuild their character, and usually not something they're unwilling to go through.

[Psychochild]

We banned them all.  Cheaters make the game unfun, especially in a PvP game.

Admittedly, M59's 5% is smaller than EQ's 5%, but they were all banned none-the-less.  Some of us still do the right thing and aren't entirely motivated by fat sacks of cash.

Have fun,

[Signe]

We banned them all.  Cheaters make the game unfun, especially in a PvP game.

Admittedly, M59's 5% is smaller than EQ's 5%, but they were all banned none-the-less.  Some of us still do the right thing and aren't entirely motivated by fat sacks of cash.

Have fun,

Well done, Brian!  You are a star!

[Sparky]

If the general player base gets wind of a laissez faire attitude to cheaters, expect more than 5% of them to quit.

[Strazos]

If the general player base gets wind of a laissez faire attitude to cheaters, expect more than 5% of them to quit.

The general player base has seen this since....forever. Bans have always been slow to come and narrow in scope, and ultimately, pointless in slowing illegal activity.

[Samwise]

[Strazos]

"Like, Oh my God, He did it!"

[Sparky]

Bugger, it was on page 1.  Didn't look at the dates.