Notice A statement on cheating in Elite Dangerous.

[znôrt]

There is nothing magical about client-server vs peer-to-peer, with proper design and appropriate resources roughly the same space of solutions is accessible using either architectural model. And as it happens, we know that the game as it stands now uses elements of both.

nothing magical. there is simply one thing that cs has naturally built in, that is a single trustable source of information. such doesn't exist in p2p, so you need to implement a mechanism to produce it by consensus. in real time. between non-trusted peers. that's so far from trivial that i doubt it is even viable today in this specific case.

would love to be proven wrong.

 

[Troopi]

clever concept, but a very complex solution that gives you at best a 'trustable source' that is actually running 'server work' on a client node running on consumer grade hardware and connection. that's going to be even worse performance.

but i see theorical problems as well. how would 50 peers even agree who is 'loosing'? besides that being subjective, assuming you could have a discrete 'looser rating', how could they trust the others to report the correct number? the winning side just has to report higher 'looser rating' to claim/keep authority.

As i said, it was only a concept, an idea. It was based in the old, primal multiplayer systems in phone lines and LAN, where one player, usually the one that started a game was used as the "server". I don't remember which games was, as I only have the vague idea of reading about it in an article, that one 2nd generation fps multiplayer game used a system that changed this server-status to the player in the group with the worst ping, to even the lag advantages.
Of course, there's always a way for a hacker to bypass any security system, given time enough to do it, but you can hinder it greatly, by robbing a hacker of the game's feedback.

 

[bookmite]

Is Dr Kia’s Ed profiler allowed or not ?

 

[El Guido]

An open world game such as ED gets broke when people cheat. The problem is that when a cheater pays for the original game and then cheats he can say "This is the way I choose to play the game. I paid for it just like you non-cheaters."
It sounds like such a pathetic whinge when us normal players say, "You are spoiling the game for the rest of us."
What makes me angry is that cheaters depend upon normal players not to cheat better than they do.
It takes all the fun out of open play. I have spent very little time in open play. So many times I have done so I have been attacked without provocation and lost 2 ships already from 1 hit 1 kill weapons. These are definitely not weapons available in game.

 

[sewerratuk]

An open world game such as ED gets broke when people cheat. The problem is that when a cheater pays for the original game and then cheats he can say "This is the way I choose to play the game. I paid for it just like you non-cheaters."
It sounds like such a pathetic whinge when us normal players say, "You are spoiling the game for the rest of us."
What makes me angry is that cheaters depend upon normal players not to cheat better than they do.
It takes all the fun out of open play. I have spent very little time in open play. So many times I have done so I have been attacked without provocation and lost 2 ships already from 1 hit 1 kill weapons. These are definitely not weapons available in game.

Depending on your defences rapid kill weapons are definitely available in the game. It’s these kind of posts that are creating all the current hysteria of ‘everyone that destroys my ship is cheating’

 

[Arry]

An open world game such as ED gets broke when people cheat. The problem is that when a cheater pays for the original game and then cheats he can say "This is the way I choose to play the game. I paid for it just like you non-cheaters."
It sounds like such a pathetic whinge when us normal players say, "You are spoiling the game for the rest of us."
What makes me angry is that cheaters depend upon normal players not to cheat better than they do.
It takes all the fun out of open play. I have spent very little time in open play. So many times I have done so I have been attacked without provocation and lost 2 ships already from 1 hit 1 kill weapons. These are definitely not weapons available in game.

The engineers, can help make some really fast kill weapons. In the right hands and against the right targets; it can be all over in seconds.

I rarely have the time, or mind-set to think; let alone, analyse, what is going on, during PvP. Most times, I am on my toes; doing the brave Sir Robin. I look at it as; all players that are attacking me, if they get close enough; their weapons 'will' kill me quicky. So I always go for, distance 1st.

 

[Arry]

Depending on your defences rapid kill weapons are definitely available in the game. It’s these kind of posts that are creating all the current hysteria of ‘everyone that destroys my ship is cheating’

This is the issue of: Reporting, over, just how few are guilty.

That said: If suspects are not reported, F.D. can't be 'blamed' for not being aware. If only 1 in 1,000, that are reported, is genuinely guilty; at the end of the day, that one cheat can be and should be, removed and I would say that for F.D. It should be easier to check an event, than to try and 'scan the whole game', for said events. So if you think something is just not right, then report it; give the system a chance to work.

I know that 'grassing' or being the 'fink' is just not done; but this is a game. A game that 7 year old's, can and do play. Do you think it is right, to try and cheat against them? I don't.

I should say, that if I reported a player and as I have said above in this thread; I don't believe that I have met a software cheating player: But if I did report a player, for such a thing. I would like some feed-back from F.D. Even if it 'is' to say. You need to get gud, because you got beaten, fair and square, by a girl.

 

[IAM GROOT]

Thing is, when myself and a wingmate are dealing out full damage with heavily engineered weapons and shields on the opponent are not going down that’s hacks at work.

 

[[VR] M4st0d0n]

Is Dr Kia’s Ed profiler allowed or not ?

I'm afraid it's cheating as well. You get the unfair advantage of having a crosshair that is not orange, while fighting around an orange star while an orange filter is applied on ships painted with orange. It's too much of an advantage.

 

[Troopi]

We must not forget the old "ping handicap".
I went once with a modified small ship (adder with engineered engines) to check open at Shinrarta. There was a pilot there that rammed me with a mamba. He took my shields out and got my hull to 40%. I got close to the station and turned to him and waited. My intention was to dodge him and force him to ram against the station. When I saw him boost, I boosted down to avoid, but my ship exploded without any contact. I assume he did ram me, but the difference in our pings was enough for both pc's to resolve my position wrong. In my pc, I was way out of his ram line, but in his, I was probably standing still.
Multiplayer sucess is many times a tiny difference in ping lag. That's why my favorite weapon in quake 2 was the grenade launcher, where ping didn't matter much.

 

[znôrt]

It’s these kind of posts that are creating all the current hysteria of ‘everyone that destroys my ship is cheating’

it's the lack of working cheat prevention that creates all those posts. people just can't fathom how hackers can keep using long known trainers straight in frontier's face.

so are you accusing frontier of promoting mass hysteria?

 

[sewerratuk]

it's the lack of working cheat prevention that creates all those posts. people just can't fathom how hackers can keep using long known trainers straight in frontier's face.

so are you accusing frontier of promoting mass hysteria?

Not mass, just hysteria by some people

 

[Ralph Vargr]

I must, once again, apologize for playing in solo, and not participating in BGS/PP.

 

[h347h]

Wonderfull we warned frontier for years, even other software developers warned about how weak the security is .
Players that where cheating with all types of measures and in game bugs , only got action taken against them when its made public by others on streams like twitch, YouTube or Forums like redit .

And now the full blown cheats and software used is made public frontier is concerned by UELA.

I think frontier is regretting cancelling the standalone version.

I don't. I'm sure they have mad far more from the "service model" of being online and selling cosmetics than they had a dream of if it was an offline game.

That said open has been a no go for me since engineering. What really bugs me are the people using cheats to game the background Sim and Powerplay.

 

[withnail]

Frontier seem to be happy for everyone to be ignorant about it. Hence the bland response provided here.

What is certain though - any form of competitive gameplay between groups in this game is pointless.

I personally think this is one of the reasons there is such a focus on exploration, which is a real turn-off for non-nerds.

 

[Older Gamer]

What do we know and what can we assume?

What we know:

1. The Hack can be found in under five minutes by anyone using google (I did it in three minutes, so yah me).
2. The Hack has been available for some time. Talk on the forums, feature requests, mentions of old versions (etc) seem to indicate it's been around since at least Horizons.
3. The Hack has a download counter, as of today, that stands at a little over 1,500 (just for this current version).

What we can assume:

1. If only half of those who downloaded the hack are actively using it, then around 700, possibly more, are playing the game in a God-Mode format.
2. The hack is easy to locate, download and use, it should be assumed FD have done this, but it still works, so we can assume FD have no way of combating the hack
3. The Hack is in widespread use, probably being combined with AFK hacks, but also being used to grief commanders.
4. The hack has been in use for at least a year, possibly longer.
5. The number of players using the hack will increase as everyone tries to level the playing field.
6. The FD will have to either find a way to detect the hack, or they will have to close ED down.

 

[Myrm]

That’s alot of assumptions. Assumption 6 is a load of nonsense!

However, you watch what happens: As people discuss these assumptions, so they will mutate into fact.

 

[Older Gamer]

What do you think FD will do then?

 

[Troopi]

1. The FD will have to either find a way to detect the hack, or they will have to close ED down.

They won't need to close ED down. They can leave open play as a sandbox for hackers to do their shenanigans, and limit player influence in the PP and BGS, by making servers "control" PP and BGS results, much like a game master would do in a role play table top game. True multiplayers would play in private groups, and solo would take the rest. As long as private groups are proactive in banning players that break their rules, cheaters would be limited to open or their own cheating private groups.

 

[Older Gamer]

Further fragmentation of a diminishing user base.