Forum

Quoted from alfa

[…]

Not that we don’t have ESEA-LAN in NA or anything.

Just use the same thing (we had UKeSA at some point) and there you go, you have lan finals. This is practical because the top 4 teams have sponsors, therefore they can afford it.

Good point actually yeah. Just saying it’d be difficult to set something like that up as opposed to the current system, and the prize fund would be less, no doubt.

Quoted from N/A

[…]

It is true, pm me a link to a tf2 cheat that bypasses ESEA AC. I don’t care about it being possible, the fact is it’s not available to basically anyone in tf2 at the moment.

if you think it is true then you don’t understand the basic premise of an operating system — it provides a layer between software and hardware. if you modify the method of that layer, you can make it say anything you want.

not only that, but it should not be too difficult to bypass the ac with existing or even currently detected cheats using this method. there is no anti-cheat (including ESEA) which can get around this.

if you want me to code one, you’re going to need to offer me some money up front, joske ;)

quad et al, feel free to pm me with a cash offer to develop a proof of concept if you ever want to move to america. ;)

Quoted from alfa

I don’t think there is yet a way to bypass the ESEA AC client and also it’s very useful because it also has a pug system implemented in it (so it’s not only an anti-cheat).

oh really? so tell me, how does it detect relevant kernel-mode discrepancies? it doesn’t. no anti-cheat can. if you want to make it so that it can, you have to build the anti-cheat into the operating system (bad and flawed) or have it running all of the time that the computer is ever on (bad and flawed).

OR

Make a news post in which you state that you just coded some ultra high-tech shit that scans demos and detects every cheat there is, then ban like 500 inactive accounts and then noone will cheat anymore srsbsns.

Quoted from konr

[…]Do you honestly think that if someone worked out how to bypass something like that they’d tell everyone how to do it publicly? Of course they wouldn’t. They’d keep it private in hidden sections of forums, in IRC channels and in private chat with friends and such. For that reason, we have no idea how it’s done or if it’s been done. But the chances are, it has been done.

i just told you how to bypass it. gg

Quoted from octochris

[…]

i just told you how to bypass it. gg

:O

Anti cheat software is notoriously bad at catching people who use anything other than the most well known public hacks. Anyone using private hacks with a limited userbase is extremely unlikely to be caught by any anti-cheat client, and if they do get caught, it’s almost always a long time (months or years) after the hacks first become available for use. Unfortunately this is just the way it is.

There are several downsides to implementing the use of an anti-cheat client in leagues which in my opinion outweigh the benefits substantially. Most of these downsides relate to issues of compatibility and performance which ALWAYS occur for a large sample of users in addition to the considerable investment of time, effort and resources required to actively moderate and update the client and check the data collated.

Whats the point in implementing an anti-cheat client when ultimately they still have to be moderated and maintained by people? The time and resources invested can be better spent doing work the likes of which the ETF2L anti-cheat team conduct on a daily basis.

I believe there is no substitute for the capacity of active players to identify cheaters themselves. Anti-cheat clients don’t even aid in the process in the overwhelming majority of cases. They either outright prove that someone is cheating or they don’t, there is no middle ground.

Often the process is a rigorous one and it is of course susceptible to human error, but this is just something we have to deal with. It’s not all doom and gloom though as there are many methods which if applied responsibly can dramatically reduce the likelyhood of human error resulting in a false positive. Of course it’s impossible to eliminate human error entirely from the equation.

Now, as someone who is neither involved with the AC team nor versed in the specific workings of cheats through personal experience (since I’ve never used them and never will) I can tell you that in the last year I have a 100% success rate with regards to reporting players to the AC staff who later get banned for cheating, and of the list of players banned within this period I’ve reported a high percentage of them to the AC admins. It’s not like I just throw out cheat accusations willy-nilly either, or to put it another way, to my knowledge I’ve never reported a player who hasn’t been identified as a cheater and banned at a later date.

Maybe I’m just extremely lucky, or maybe it is genuinely the case that having played versus a multitude of different players in different games spanning well over 10000 hours of gameplay over the years, I’ve come to grasp a solid (but not fullproof) understanding of the in-game characteristics of players who are legitimate compared to those who likely are not.

Please don’t take this the wrong way, I wouldn’t for one second claim to be entirely devoid of human error in any respect and certainly I wouldn’t take my own suspicions and opinions of players as genuine proof of foul play, or in other words, I would never wish a player banned based solely on my own deductions. I merely wish to highlight one of the main reasons for my belief that human judgement is the best way to identify cheaters.