Clubradio wrote:
"Cheat-o-Meter" and "Fair Fight" are just cheat assumption tools. They give no evidence at a all, just an assumption. At last, such tools very likely ban highskilled players "false positive" because the majority of Server Admins dont know howto configure such tools.
I don't understand why you have such a bad opinion about these tools.
Fair-Fight cannot be influenced by the server-admin so he cannot misconfigure it. On the other hand this is the bad thing about it: to a certain extend you give away the control over bans/kicks. But this is just the same as with punkbuster. Also this "problem" could be easily eliminated by a "write to log only" option, that informs someone of suspicious behaviour and lets an admin decide. Additionally the report could be automatically sent to EA/Dice that theirselves could take measures - independent on how the local admin decides. BTW allegedly all Fair-Fight bans are rechecked by EA/Dice.
All in all I think analyzing stats is a great method to find cheaters. It all just depends on the formulas behind the analysis. If they're good then they only catch cheaters, if they're bad then innocent players will get banned. Easy as that. Since there are plenty of stats in BLog I think it cannot be too hard to find reliable formulas to detect cheaters. Finding the correct parameters and formulas even could be achieved by analyzing BF3 stats and cheater-reports/pb-bans/battlereports. Add some securities and that's it.
Statistics and math. Not sure how one can deny that it has to work if done properly.
10% luck, 20% skill, 15% concentrated power of will, 5% pleasure, 50% pain and a 100% reason to remember the name ;D
"So what if its a female gamer? You cant call it teabaggin... I now introduce the term "lipdip" for the fairer sexed gamers."
