Command and Conquer: Renegade Official Forums - RDF feed
C&C: Renegade --> Dying since 2003™, resurrected in 2024!
WTF. I've been an advid Renegade gamer for almost one year now. I'm not saying that I'm the best out there, but I know how to team play, what the basic strategies are, and how conduct works in the game/generally. So today, I'm playin my first game of the day on my usual server, Ren-ladder.com Public 2, and I get fucken banned for using the !forcerg command. Yes, I obviously utilize renguard. I mean, I was courteous enough to use !rg to see what was up and then saw that this other gamer wasn't using renguard. He had like 40:4 kills and shot me dead with one shot using a basic infantryman. I KNOW that can't happen. Also see like 5 other names of kills by him just after I respawned and before forcerg. So, now I'm 'banned from this channel'. Some one please tell me how and why that is ethical and what I can do to play on that server again.
boozaboy wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 17:19 That's the only server that has any decent players. Did you play on servers like BlackIntel1 before, that you can say that
Yer right. Yes, that is my opinion; hind sight says, no I can't necessarily say that. I don't wish to offend any1. I'm only saying that some of the times I've been playing on different servers other than ren-ladder, I've been frustrated with the lack of team play,etc. and/or when I connect there are no other players currently on those servers.
So why are you complaining here and not at their website?
I didn't remember that they had one. So, I will then. I figured that some1 who frequently plays on that server might reply here. Generally, it's the ethics of the situation I wanted to address. How is that right to ban me? I try to do what's right; I downloaded renguard, I don't use any cheat codes, etc. So what then?
Find a server that doesn't have poor administration. I dont know the reasoning behind the ban, but taking it for what you said, that's pretty ridiculous.
Any recommendations?
N00bstories has some decent players and some good admins. I'd solicit my community but we just opened the doors so it hasn't been quite full yet. But that is about to change real fast... http://www.renunderground.com
fl00d3d, I used the hotlink for your site and tried to register. After inputing the necessary info, it stated that it could not get mail server response codes, under it was DEBUG MODE (no link). My prob or an error on the site? BTW, very professional. I read all that I could in the various sections on your site.
tried n00bstories. i don't mind it. i play on that server once in awhile. Same story though, seems like mostly non-team players and lots of 'n00bs'; hence the name right? lol. IDK, I just don't like to get a Sak or Havoc and try sniping for 30-45 minutes. Rushes are more fun. Plus, you rush once or twice, to take out the base defenses or pp, then everyone can enjoy sniping I guess.
For the 19 millionth time, the "n00bstories" server is called that because it's ran by "n00bstories.com" which is a website that was designed to make fun of n00bs. It has no reference to the preferred player skill on the server. We do, in fact, have a LOT of regulars and TeamSpeak regulation which means you can get on our TeamSpeak server and be automatically placed on a private channel with your teammates for the ultimate in teamplay.
boozaboy wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 19:34 fl00d3d, I used the hotlink for your site and tried to register. After inputing the necessary info, it stated that it could not get mail server response codes, under it was DEBUG MODE (no link). My prob or an error on the site? BTW, very professional. I read all that I could in the various sections on your site. try logging in with the name you created; i got the same thing when i registered
the17doctor wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 15:06 boozaboy wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 19:34 fl00d3d, I used the hotlink for your site and tried to register. After inputing the necessary info, it stated that it could not get mail server response codes, under it was DEBUG MODE (no link). My prob or an error on the site? BTW, very professional. I read all that I could in the various sections on your site. try logging in with the name you created; i got the same thing when i registered
forcerg is the most widely abused command in Renegade. I'm not saying you abused it or that your ban was fair but it would make life easier if it was just removed from servers.
the only server i know of at the mo, where if people arent running cp2 it ruins the fun, is ren-archive ctf - as there is a powerup on there which grants stealth. bad thing is, only cp2 users can see the stealth, and if you pick one up, non-cp2 users still see you :S anyway, the forcerg command should be used if someone thinks someone else is cheating. if you forcerg someone instead of making a fuss, then the mods/admins wont get angry at you for constantly accusing someone, and telling the mods/admins to kick 'im.
light wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 14:40 forcerg is the most widely abused command in Renegade. I'm not saying you abused it or that your ban was fair but it would make life easier if it was just removed from servers. Agreed. The way the !forcerg feature was implemented in BRenBot made it really hard to deal with abusers short of kicking/banning them... As far as your case goes, I have no idea how the moderators did not get suspicious of someone killing people in 1 shot with a basic infantry, as cheats of that sort show up rather readily in the IRC output of a regulator. I would post it on their forums, you'd have a much better chance of getting unbanned that way
=HT=T-Bird wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 21:23 light wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 14:40 forcerg is the most widely abused command in Renegade. I'm not saying you abused it or that your ban was fair but it would make life easier if it was just removed from servers. Agreed. The way the !forcerg feature was implemented in BRenBot made it really hard to deal with abusers short of kicking/banning them... As far as your case goes, I have no idea how the moderators did not get suspicious of someone killing people in 1 shot with a basic infantry, as cheats of that sort show up rather readily in the IRC output of a regulator. I would post it on their forums, you'd have a much better chance of getting unbanned that way isnt there a command for mods/admins that lowers a users !forcerg stats to 0 if they think someone has abused that command?
ForceRG requires three people to use it, so abusers can't forceRg people on their own anyway...
danpaul88 wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 22:12 ForceRG requires three people to use it, so abusers can't forceRg people on their own anyway... what people tend to do is, if they see someone forcerg someone else, others will start to do it for no apparent reason
The error code that you're getting is a BS error code. The website is hosted on a network that is pretty sure and the mail server resides on a completely separate area of the network. So it is sometimes common for the php scripts of the forums to not be able to communicate with the mail server (thus the error) --- and the only reason that it tries to do that is in case your preferences are to be notified by email. The error is bogus. Your posts will still be made, you just don't get the fancy confirmation. I'm trying to resolve that bug though. It just showed up recently. N00bstories is a pretty cool server with some decent players on it. I just can't play on it cuz my computer sucks and it lags me so I prefer smaller servers. Jelly mini-AOW is a good one, too - but I think that is only listed on WOL. I don't want to act like there are no other good servers or there are no other good admins by strictly speaking of my own servers ... but I'm really trying to build a nice, organized, cheat-free place for people to play in the community. Now if I could only consolidate some of the servers so there aren't so damn many ...
the17doctor wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 16:16 danpaul88 wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 22:12 ForceRG requires three people to use it, so abusers can't forceRg people on their own anyway... what people tend to do is, if they see someone forcerg someone else, others will start to do it for no apparent reason That is exactly correct, the17doctor. Many people assume that whenever someone is !forcerg'ed, it is always because they cheat. ForceRG is also flawed in that a) there is no mechanism that I know of by which a moderator can halt a !forcerg in progress and b) there is no way to "shun" someone from !forcerg'ing other players without resorting to a !ban.
Why not play in Infinint's server ( sig ) while your at it, last time I checked you were ranked first anyway. And yes n00bstories is actually a fair server, but the high player count makes most expect a high amount of teamwork, which in my opinion ( not to be rude or anything ) just doesnt seem to be happening all that often.
=HT=T-Bird wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 12:24 the17doctor wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 16:16 danpaul88 wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 22:12 ForceRG requires three people to use it, so abusers can't forceRg people on their own anyway... what people tend to do is, if they see someone forcerg someone else, others will start to do it for no apparent reason That is exactly correct, the17doctor. Many people assume that whenever someone is !forcerg'ed, it is always because they cheat. ForceRG is also flawed in that a) there is no mechanism that I know of by which a moderator can halt a !forcerg in progress and b) there is no way to "shun" someone from !forcerg'ing other players without resorting to a !ban. It is rare to see a single forcerg. I might also add that you can accumulate 3 forces over a period of 3 months and it will still force you to run RG when you receive the 3rd. Moderators can use !unforce (this happened on me today) and afaik there is no way to shun, as =HT=T-Bird said. Besides, in todays climate, with the state RG is in forcing someone to use it offers minimal protection at best, and at worst it's completely useless. !forcerg assumed RenGuard can block cheats, which as of this post is a flawed assumption.
Question: would it be possible to make it so that when you forcerg! someone, no one else would know about it, except that person (and the admins of course)? Just like when you send a private message to someone, but only that person can see your message. I am sure this is possible.
Terminator 101 wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 07:04 Question: would it be possible to make it so that when you forcerg! someone, no one else would know about it, except that person (and the admins of course)? Just like when you send a private message to someone, but only that person can see your message. I am sure this is possible. im not sure exacly what happend, but wasn't it the admins that banned him? also, yes, it is possible.
The easiest way to avoid being !forcerg'ed is still using RG...
light wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 01:33 Moderators can use !unforce (this happened on me today) and afaik there is no way to shun, as =HT=T-Bird said. Except the !shun command of course...
Goztow wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 22:09 The easiest way to avoid being !forcerg'ed is still using RG... Where do I start with a comment like that? The whole point of forcerg was to give "power to the people" to allow non-mods/admins to get rid of users not running anti-cheat software. Fine in theory, but terrible in practice, when you take into account the following factors: 1. Legitimate players know that RenGuard is useless and that running RG doesn't prove them any more innocent than anything else. (You can argue that point, I stand by it) 2. Win XP 64bit and Win 2000 users can't run RenGuard 3. People who believe in RenGuard also seem to believe lag doesn't exist and that anyone who gets a headshot is most likely cheating. Taking these into account, you have a situation where a perfectly legit player can be forced by 3 RG-running n00bs and a cheat can play happily without interferance because they are running an RG bypass.
That is a problem indeed. I see it happening rather often on our servers too, and the biggest problem now it that yuo're likely toge forcerg'ed again by others if someone forcerg'ed you. What I mostly do then is telling RG is rather useless now and !unforcerg the person, after that I untrust the Forcerg'ed person. The untrust feature on our server works for all kinds of damage hacks so it covers most of the worst cheats. The downside is that the untrusted person might experience a bit more lag then trusted ppl. We might block brenbot from listening to the !forcerg command and change it so that after 3 (hidden) votes the person will be untrusted. That way we do have some protection that can be triggered by normal players.
light wrote on Thu, 19 October 2006 13:40 forcerg is the most widely abused command in Renegade. I'm not saying you abused it or that your ban was fair but it would make life easier if it was just removed from servers. I agree to a point. I've seen it be abused many times. But, in my opinion, it can be used for good. Like The Force, lol ,with descretion, but maybe most who play AND use renguard, are only teenagers? IDK what the general age of renegade gamers is. If I understand though, a person who IS connnected through the renguard network, is not able to use any type of cheats. Correct? I've never tried using any cheat command or codes so I don't know how they work. I just get so fed up with those idiots who ruin a game by using some type of cheat, so I finally downloaded renguard. The game seems to load much faster now that I have and I like the new features; for example, the red cross over a players head when they need repairs, and EVA stating when a building is repaired and or the harv is under attack.
light wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 05:32 Goztow wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 22:09 The easiest way to avoid being !forcerg'ed is still using RG... Where do I start with a comment like that? The whole point of forcerg was to give "power to the people" to allow non-mods/admins to get rid of users not running anti-cheat software. Fine in theory, but terrible in practice, when you take into account the following factors: 1. Legitimate players know that RenGuard is useless and that running RG doesn't prove them any more innocent than anything else. (You can argue that point, I stand by it) 2. Win XP 64bit and Win 2000 users can't run RenGuard 3. People who believe in RenGuard also seem to believe lag doesn't exist and that anyone who gets a headshot is most likely cheating. Taking these into account, you have a situation where a perfectly legit player can be forced by 3 RG-running n00bs and a cheat can play happily without interferance because they are running an RG bypass. ROFL. Wow, where do you get your info from? 1)According to you, im not saying you cheat but it has been proven before that people who say renguard=noobs, cheat 2)ROFL, how come I can and I have win2k? 3)thats some people in n00by big public servers.
i would like to know all the infomation regarding "proving" anyone who doesn't use regaurd is cheating. i didn't used to use rengaurd as i didn't know about it, and i didn't cheat. so...this guy wasn't use rengaurd, it says in his post, "Yes, I obviously utilize renguard" meaning he was using it and "I get fucken banned for using the !forcerg command." suggests he was kicked for using a server command. WTF? the shit mods/admins need sacking.
trooprm02 wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 10:16 light wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 05:32 Goztow wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 22:09 The easiest way to avoid being !forcerg'ed is still using RG... Where do I start with a comment like that? The whole point of forcerg was to give "power to the people" to allow non-mods/admins to get rid of users not running anti-cheat software. Fine in theory, but terrible in practice, when you take into account the following factors: 1. Legitimate players know that RenGuard is useless and that running RG doesn't prove them any more innocent than anything else. (You can argue that point, I stand by it) 2. Win XP 64bit and Win 2000 users can't run RenGuard 3. People who believe in RenGuard also seem to believe lag doesn't exist and that anyone who gets a headshot is most likely cheating. Taking these into account, you have a situation where a perfectly legit player can be forced by 3 RG-running n00bs and a cheat can play happily without interferance because they are running an RG bypass. ROFL. Wow, where do you get your info from? 1)According to you, im not saying you cheat but it has been proven before that people who say renguard=noobs, cheat 2)ROFL, how come I can and I have win2k? 3)thats some people in n00by big public servers. Whether or not light is right about Windows 2000 and 64-bit XP, I would tend to agree with him that RenGuard is almost useless in its current state.
The only real use for it now is to prevent you from being !forcerg'ed, lol [edit] And ofcourse to prevent stupid auto admin pages saying you should run renguard
When I tried to install Renegade + RG on my other Win2000 maching, RG didn't work. Plus, when Vista x64 is released, there are going to be a whole lot of people not able to use RG.
trooprm02 wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 09:16 light wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 05:32 Goztow wrote on Fri, 20 October 2006 22:09 The easiest way to avoid being !forcerg'ed is still using RG... Where do I start with a comment like that? The whole point of forcerg was to give "power to the people" to allow non-mods/admins to get rid of users not running anti-cheat software. Fine in theory, but terrible in practice, when you take into account the following factors: 1. Legitimate players know that RenGuard is useless and that running RG doesn't prove them any more innocent than anything else. (You can argue that point, I stand by it) 2. Win XP 64bit and Win 2000 users can't run RenGuard 3. People who believe in RenGuard also seem to believe lag doesn't exist and that anyone who gets a headshot is most likely cheating. Taking these into account, you have a situation where a perfectly legit player can be forced by 3 RG-running n00bs and a cheat can play happily without interferance because they are running an RG bypass. ROFL. Wow, where do you get your info from? 1)According to you, im not saying you cheat but it has been proven before that people who say renguard=noobs, cheat 2)ROFL, how come I can and I have win2k? 3)thats some people in n00by big public servers. I want to see your sources for #1. P.S. RenGuard is not quite trivial to bypass, but it's pretty close...
It's not easy to bypass, but all you need is one...
trooprm02 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 03:16 ROFL. Wow, where do you get your info from? 1)According to you, im not saying you cheat but it has been proven before that people who say renguard=noobs, cheat 2)ROFL, how come I can and I have win2k? 3)thats some people in n00by big public servers. 1. It's also been proven that people who run RG can cheat, look for topics in these forums that contain the words [Edit by warranto: believing or not, people are stupid when it comes to looking for certain things. Let's not give them something to search for]. So your point is moot, any of us can cheat. 2. You're one of the lucky ones, I admit RG will run on some 2000 machines (thanks for reminding me), but 2000 and XP 64 aren't supported and if it runs on either you're lucky. 3. I play in plenty of servers and it's happened in may of them. Quote: I want to see your sources for #1. P.S. RenGuard is not quite trivial to bypass, but it's pretty close... Crimson herself has posted to say there is a working RG bypass in circulation, and people have been seen using bypasses in verious servers. Heck yesterday some guy posted a cheat that allows you to use modified models and run RG on XpHaZe forums. It was promptly removed and he's banned from their servers, but still, if he can get it I don't doubt that someone else can.
1)yes of course there is, BUT there has always been 1 (ever since RG was first created) they even had info about it on the old renguard website, so a RG bypass is nothing new, and just calling it useless now doesnt make sense. 2)Do yyou understand why it doesn't work on win2k? C++ overbuffer run, which means it sends too many packets than expected (256 i think, correct me if im wrong), and i used to have that all the time,EASY FIX: i was a member of a VB development forum and heres basically it: There are three main actions to resolve the problem. First is to utilize the /GS compile option. This option creates a cookie between the stack overrun and the return address. This allows the system to helps prevent buffer overruns, by changing the stack layout. The second action is to use the <strsafe.h> library. This library has buffer overrun safe functions that will help with the detection of buffer overflows. Finally, the last action is to perform extensive code reviews of string functionality and indexes utilized within your application. also try installing 3rd party runtime files 3)ofcourse there will always be n00bs who say that, but the fact that its not true means why bother discussioning this?
trooprm02 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 11:18 2)Do yyou understand why it doesn't work on win2k? C++ overbuffer run, which means it sends too many packets than expected (256 i think, correct me if im wrong), and i used to have that all the time,EASY FIX: i was a member of a VB development forum and heres basically it: There are three main actions to resolve the problem. First is to utilize the /GS compile option. This option creates a cookie between the stack overrun and the return address. This allows the system to helps prevent buffer overruns, by changing the stack layout. The second action is to use the <strsafe.h> library. This library has buffer overrun safe functions that will help with the detection of buffer overflows. Finally, the last action is to perform extensive code reviews of string functionality and indexes utilized within your application. also try installing 3rd party runtime files Not really. If that was true, why would the error only show up on W2K and not on XP? P.S. many people aren't smart enough to download a replacement for the VCRT and I haven't heard anything about it being dependent on the presence or absense of a patch/SP...so unless the VCRT version in XP didn't ever get backported to W2K, IDK what's up
This whole topics is just encouraging players to be more paranoid. And encourages morons to think everyone who owns them cheats.(trooprm02 for example.) Lets face it, theres going to be no secure(reliable) RG for a while.. This is where good moderating is needed..(which is somewhat lacking in renegade)
trooprm02 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 12:18 1)yes of course there is, BUT there has always been 1 (ever since RG was first created) they even had info about it on the old renguard website, so a RG bypass is nothing new, and just calling it useless now doesnt make sense. 2)Do yyou understand why it doesn't work on win2k? C++ overbuffer run, which means it sends too many packets than expected (256 i think, correct me if im wrong), and i used to have that all the time,EASY FIX: i was a member of a VB development forum and heres basically it: There are three main actions to resolve the problem. First is to utilize the /GS compile option. This option creates a cookie between the stack overrun and the return address. This allows the system to helps prevent buffer overruns, by changing the stack layout. The second action is to use the <strsafe.h> library. This library has buffer overrun safe functions that will help with the detection of buffer overflows. Finally, the last action is to perform extensive code reviews of string functionality and indexes utilized within your application. also try installing 3rd party runtime files 3)ofcourse there will always be n00bs who say that, but the fact that its not true means why bother discussioning this? So you'd advise someone on Win2k who can't RenGuard to work to use the strsafe.h library. I can tell you know what you're talking about.
We can't just magically fix the problem with the buffer overrun that way. The problem with Win2k and Win64 are BOTH a result of the protection software that our app is wrapped in. RenGuard 1.04 will be using a completely different protection app which we will be heavily testing with those operating systems, but is supposed to work fine with them.
Sure, forceRG sometime's results in legitimate players being shut out of a server for one reason or another, but don't forget server owners have CHOSEN to allow the forceRG command. It can easily be disabled in commands.xml... (since I know that most servers running BRenBot are using the 1.43 beta, even if they didn't get permission to do so... )
Why did they add that stupid message that says "<name> is NOT using Renguard. <name> COULD be cheating. I mean, it makes it sound like if someone is using RG, they can't be cheating. It just doesn't seem like anything necessary to be said. I don't know what exactly that message is from and if it's default but I don't know why you would put that there.
[quote title=trooprm02 wrote on Sun, 22 October 2006 05:18]1)yes of course there is, BUT there has always been 1 (ever since RG was first created) they even had info about it on the old renguard website, so a RG bypass is nothing new, and just calling it useless now doesnt make sense.[quote] Ok, here's my perspective. If I run RG and play too well and get accused, people will !rg me. If it says i'm running RG they will accuse me of bypassing, if it says i'm not running RG they will accuse me of cheating. Either way i get falsly accused, that's where I'm coming from. trooprm02 wrote on Sun, 22 October 2006 05:18 2)Do yyou understand why it doesn't work on win2k? C++ overbuffer run, which means it sends too many packets than expected (256 i think, correct me if im wrong) Yes, I know about C++ buffer over-runs, I've had my fair share of seg faults from over-running the end of an array. I don't know about solutions using VB because I work in Java and C++, but even if it is a simple fix it doesn't make my point any less valid. Quote: Why did they add that stupid message that says "<name> is NOT using Renguard. <name> COULD be cheating. I mean, it makes it sound like if someone is using RG, they can't be cheating. It just doesn't seem like anything necessary to be said. I don't know what exactly that message is from and if it's default but I don't know why you would put that there. It's a holdover from when people thought RG really did block all cheats, in which case it makes sense. danpaul: is forcerg enabled by default?
Sniper_De7 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 20:06 Why did they add that stupid message that says "<name> is NOT using Renguard. <name> COULD be cheating. I mean, it makes it sound like if someone is using RG, they can't be cheating. It just doesn't seem like anything necessary to be said. I don't know what exactly that message is from and if it's default but I don't know why you would put that there. Yes, you should be able to supress those messages. I understand the intended purpose, but its kinda forceful and misleading.
fl00d3d wrote on Sun, 22 October 2006 02:19 Sniper_De7 wrote on Sat, 21 October 2006 20:06 Why did they add that stupid message that says "<name> is NOT using Renguard. <name> COULD be cheating. I mean, it makes it sound like if someone is using RG, they can't be cheating. It just doesn't seem like anything necessary to be said. I don't know what exactly that message is from and if it's default but I don't know why you would put that there. Yes, you should be able to supress those messages. I understand the intended purpose, but its kinda forceful and misleading. If some server owners weren't so damn lazy, they would configure it. In brenbot 1.41 it was already configurable in brenbot.cfg and in brenbot 1.43 beta, this hasn't changed.
I just saw this or I would have replied sooner. I'm the Head Mod on RA. We do our best to keep the servers cheat free and promote team work. We will kick peeps for being idiots that hamper team play. We prefer a ban to be a bit stronger than for a reason of !forcerg. If you are still ban post here http://forum.ren-archive.com in the ban section and I would be glad to help you. I have no problem removing a ban like this. Mods are not perfect but neither are players so shit happens.