Well google only translats my job title as IT-specialist. 3 years apprenticeship with part job school (done in germany) actually worked in IT for 8 years thereafter but not primarly in programming so nowadays im a bit rusty, maybe?
PunkBuster works kind of like anti virus software - making shure inputs are not tampered with before they go to the actual server, checking the integrity of game files etc.
Shurely it’s some effort to implement but doable and the effect on performane should be marginal at most.
1 Like
I did though. And more than enough bits and pieces to identify my main if you really want to 
You are the pretend elietist, doesn’t even know how to not die to Highsec rats but telling people how they should play sitting duck in the dark while uselessly smashing their d-scan buton.
Smack talking ‘nullbears’ about risk avrsion but too scared to meet me for a 1v1.
The ad-hominem is because of your hypocrisy invalidating your “arguments”.
Nothing ‘hard’ about gambling if there is a cloaky in system or not - it’s just dumb gameplay.
Now a reasonable chane to pay for that Rattlesnake before it gets ganked might have helped the situation a littel bit but thats a hard to find balance. Tripple, quadruple the bountys and 5 times faster mining maybe? But is it really healthy if people simply don’t mind loosing the ship? I don’t think so.
Also i and a lot of my corp mates tend to rat only as much as is needed to sustain PVP so it would probably result in far less ganking targets in space at any given time.
Not saying im all against higher payouts - just not as band-aid to fix unballanced BO nonsense by making losses completely meaningless.
A slight increase just to reduce tedium of grinding might just nodge PLEX price out of the problem zone but thats also not nulsec specific, or should not be if they do it.
At least this would be something that doesn’t make a bunch of players leave the game 
The effect on performance with PB is minimal to non-existent. Obviously when one first implements PB, there might be some initial issues, however the PB coders have always been very good in releasing timely updates and fixing whatever needs to be fixed in their software
And before you ask, I am not a programmer, however I have many years of experience dealing with Punkbuster as part of anti-cheat communities, so I would be very happy if CCP implements Punkbuster
Oh you so funny, accusing others of doing exactly the same thing you and your whole alliance do but saying others are bad for it.
Please, when Imperium turn off all 3rd party tools and you ALL fly with local closed permanently - Then and only then can you cast dispersions on how others play.
As for solo kills LOL, you don’t have a clue but I will tell you, 90% of my solo kills weren’t against defenceless players.
Ichinumi_Tsukaya Oh gee look at me I killed a tristan in a cynabal, I soooo good at solo pvp. I then went on to kill 4 more frigates with my faction cruiser.
Of course during BO you specialised in hunting ratting cruisers in a Loki - WOW you are so good, not suspected bots mind you - Actual players. Hunting botters = Effort, why do it when you can farm easy kills of pve’rs.
You are a risk averse scrub, F1 monkey who has delusions of grandeur
Not a matter of you “not mincing words”, it’s about you spouting off believing you have a clue. You are in the most risk averse alliance in the game, you play in a way that poses the least risk to you AND you insist on telling others they are doing it wrong.
You want to do something about the self entitled “doing it with minimal risk” PVE’rs - Talk to the leaders of your alliance, I’m sure they would love that.
The only way this game can survive and see the meta change is if CCP grow a pair and hit the largest most risk averse groups in the game and break them up - As that is not going to happen - Nothing changes.
Being a risk averse coward in an online game really isn’t how many want to play but as CCP made it the “easiest” way to play thousands like you will continue to do it.
Close but not quite accurate - Just prior to BO, Nulsec had rewards reduced.
Nulsec doesn’t and never did need the removal of local, it is simply a symptom of years of poor game design. CCP actively encouraged players to create the very things that make local chat as useful (or bad) as it is via their complicity in helping players create them.
CCP need to look at what led to the current state of the game and address those things - This half assed, done on the cheap, “Era of Chaos” is pointless.
CCP should have learned by now - it doesn’t matter how hard you make things it will still get done.
All the Era of Chaos is doing is thinning out the few small/er independent alliances and pushing them toward joining one of the larger blocs.
EG; Industrial cyno, not a problem for the large groups but pushes up logistics costs (in time and effort not only isk) for small/er groups, which leads to them looking for a way to contain cost/effort. Don’t have to look far to see, aligning with a larger entity is the best option.,.
If nulsec is to stand a chance of digging its way out of this rut, that has only gotten deeper over the last 5 years - They need to find ways to fix underlying issues that doesn’t turn small/er groups into (CCP Rise’s words) Collateral Damage.
2 Likes
Definitely agree with you.
In my opinion, fozzie sov was in the right direction as far as smaller groups and they simply needed to look at ways to improve it instead of destroying everything in 1 update
Hmm. First thing I see when I Google ‘Punkbuster’ ;-
**PunkBuster** isn't as common as it **used** to be. ... However, **PunkBuster** hasn't been integrated into a new online game since 2015. If you're playing an online multiplayer game released in the last few years, it doesn't require **PunkBuster**
I wonder why that might be - perhaps people are finally waking up to the folly of allowing propietary software access to everything that happens on their machine ? Did the computing world learn nothing from the Sony Rootkit debacle ?
If you have steam, you have a Proprietary anti-cheat installed on your computer called VAC. Ontop of that anti-cheat software only screens inputs and files that belong or interact with the game, if it does more than that… Then it not anti-cheat software anymore.
VAC only works with games that have integrated it and even in such games only at parts which have it enabled.
For example if a Counter-Strike server has VAC disabled then you can cheat or even hack all you want on that server and VAC will not trigger a ban, though for obvious reason most server admins have VAC enabled (and still can have in-game cheats enabled regardless). Another example is that most single-player games have no VAC integration even if their multiplayer aspect have it.
So only because you run Steam it does not mean it will prevent you or other Steam users from using cheats, hacks and exploits, only if the developers integrated it or other anti-cheat software.
One of several reasons I don’t have Steam…
Snowden?
Got a bugging decive in the pocket and a stationary one for the living room but scared of what amounts to anti virus software?
Humans are wierd…
So, you know, since you’ve said he should come to us…
Minimal risk with reasonable effort is fine. Minimal risk with no effort, yeah, we’d support doing something about that.
Note that ‘reasonable effort’ is a sliding scale, and a fairly complex balancing act. It’s not ‘reasonable’, for example, to require as much effort to keep a Myrmidon safe as you’d need to keep a Nyx safe. After all, the Nyx, being worth more, is more of an investment, and it’s reasonable to expect people to put more effort into keeping the larger investment safe.
That the Nyx is inherently more survivable against an identical threat is irrelevant, because the guys who’ll hit the Nyx aren’t necessarily the same guys who’d hit the Myrmidon. You don’t drop 200 bombers on a T1 Battlecruiser. That level of effort to kill it isn’t, you know… reasonable.
1 Like
I don’t think my ancient flip-phone (which is switched off in a drawer except when I actually need to use it) would bug too well, and what’s this ‘stationary one for the living room’ ? As for virus-checkers, I run Linux, a locked-down Firefox and Thunderbird, which makes me fairly virus-resistant anyway, on top of which I’m careful what I do online.
Humans are gullible…
P.S. And WTF has Snowden got to do with it ?
I think that depends on quite a few things. Firstly if you are a new/er player in a small/er group and can only afford a Myrmidon. In this case losing that myrmidon can be as or more devastating than a wealthy player losing a Nyx.
Safety and risk in NulSec is to a very large degree based on which group you belong to.
So, I’m sorry but a semi AFK Super out ratting should be more at risk than the newbie ratting in his myrm. Sadly this is not how the meta works, small gang/solo “hunters” go for the easy targets that pose little to no risk, then tell you their targets are bad because they don’t have the same support as the ratting Super.
These same small gangs and solo hunters will do everything possible to evade an actual fight, while they prey on those who pose no risk to them.
Dread drops on fleets of Rorquals or ratting Supers/Titans used to be a thing, CCP has made this much harder to do now - therefore making those in the largest groups who use 20 and 30 Rorquals “each” far safer than they ever have been.
Ratting should pose the same risk for everyone regardless of whether you are in a Super or a Vexor, it should not be safer for the Super because his ship is more expensive - The cost of a PVE ship is usually dependant on how rich the player is.
Sure, but now let’s look at what ‘reasonable effort’ means in those situations. the new/er player in a smaller group doesn’t have as many people putting in the effort—however minimal it may be when distributed among a large number of people—to provide that herd defense. When taken together, the large group’s putting out more effort, and they’re risking more.
Well, first, lemme just point out:
So, yeah, I agree with you about how the meta works, because the hunters are human beings who want to get their fun with minimum effort, too. And we’ve been fairly critical of the cyno changes, too—we’ve adapted, of course… every ratting super has to have a Force Recon alt—but that doesn’t help smaller groups at all, and yeah, by comparison, the Rorqs are safer than ever: someone might take the time and effort to drop dreads on a Nyx or a Hel (if they can keep the Recon alive long enough to drop the dreads), but there’s absolutely no point dropping them on Rorqs. By the time they come out of PANIC, the defense fleet’s probably got their cyno coming in and is about to drop a whole truckload of bricks on your head.
I’m more inclined to say that ratting should pose the same proportionate risk for all groups, regardless of what you’re using. No matter how rich you are, survival is a group activity. If you’re going it alone, you’re taking all that extra risk on your own shoulders.
Now… is it? Who the hell knows? That’s an actuarial task CCP isn’t even close to capable of undertaking, much less any of us with our incomplete access to the data.
Usually it’s the opposite: people claim to love being wormholers because of “no blobs”.
Still. What problem you want to “fix” here? And why this “fix” always requires nerfing other players game play?
1 Like
Well sounds like you’re perfectly capable of reading and understanding the dokumentation instead of basing your opinion on a few comments from google.
Got any tangiable criticism against PunkBuster? Better alternatives?
Yes WH people claim whatever reason why they like WH but I was listing the reasons why many null people whom don’t like wh don’t like them as it’s not that there is no local. I wanted the blackout to stay as did almost all of my corpmates but none of us want to live in a WH.
One person’s nerf is another’s buff. As is clear, the game has less people then before. What is also clear? Over that time CCP has constantly nerfed PVP in favor of pandering to the care bears. Said bears will quit anyway because at their core they are playing a game they don’t like and CCP is selling the soul of EvE chasing them. So the ‘nerf’ to your mindless grinding is actually a buff to people that think the free Intel shouldn’t have been there in the first place. I only proposed as a compromise a way to give these people something they want (the free Intel) but also adding some gameplay (guerilla warfare to make things interesting). That is better than the current tend of CCP just removing interesting gameplay from the game.
1 Like
oof
Clearly you are the one who actually doesn’t like playing a game where every item of interest must be created by players gaining resources from the environment, refining and finally supplying markets.
Simply denying that PVEers actually do play EVE must be the single most stupid thing that was said in this entire thread.
Probably also explains why you allways fly like a coward - stuff must be expensive if everything goes via credit card and then you need to get it all the way from Jita, paying some filthy Carebear each step along the way… eew…
The discussion was about having a dedicated BO style.
The reason why people like or dislike WH space is irrelevant.
My point was that if a selective or dedicated BO was to be applied, it will be very hard not to make Null feel like WH space, as every single aspect of information outgoing from Null will have to be shut.
That to me this is the only real BO, equal opportunity for all involved.
I was trying to illustrate that if hunters get absolutely no information of where they are going, who lives there, what is being produced, etc… then they will need to scan every single system every single time, as there would be no way of telling much about the place, except for perhaps a name or number. Then, they will need to assess the situation VISUALLY or via Dscan, IF they find anything… Afterwards, perhaps consider bringing a punisher to kill a barge. That’s what I mean with “equal”.
That would be a type of BO I would endorse. The idea of having it giving any remotely minor advantage to any part gets a sound NO.
That kind of space, the one with true BO is WH space. And if such scenario is so alluring or desirable, then it would be plagued atm.
Anything else is just void arguments based on fallacies like “free intel” or “too easy” BS. What they want is a cake and it will never happen again.
1 Like