menu
Downloads Servers Forums Support
Home› General Discussion

Future Updates

bbrandon
in General Discussion
How will future updates be handled?

How will clients know that there is an update?

If DT is reinstated will DT be included in the Multiplayer Patch?

I'm worried that by enabling DT at this point will divide the players unless all servers are set to require DT. In other words, is there anything included in the current patch that will notify or require clients to update?

Comments

  • SynorythSynoryth
    If anything, Thyth would develop his own protection system, I'm guessing.


    ~Syn~
  • TurkehTurkeh
    There is an auto-updater included in the t2csri.vl2 package.

    DT will NOT likely be included in the patch. The decision to download/use DT is left to the server hosts and players.
    At current, I do believe the patch breaks most known cheats.
  • bbrandon
    Turkeh
    At current, I do believe the patch breaks most known cheats.

    So then it isn't necessary to have DT running at all?
  • LLouCypher
    hm2 works fine. Tribes Next doesn't break it, just DefenseTurret.

    I already posted (on TWL) a link to a dtdll.dll I modified with the new hash for the Tribes Next patched Tribes2.exe so that DefenseTurret doesn't throw an error on startup. I played on Tribes Next servers earlier today with DT active, but since I was probably the only player running it and the servers don't have the serverside .vl2 installed I couldn't check the consensus HUD or test with another player.

    I can easily update the hash in dtdll.dll for any new version of Tribes Next that make it necessary.
  • bbrandon
    What I am trying to get at is if DT will be a standard requirement like it used to be? If it is then we need some way to get that out to all the new players who do not know what DT even is.

    So before I go on requiring DT to be enabled on servers I host, is it necessary to have DT or not? Since the last comment from Turkeh says 'I do believe the patch breaks most known cheats'.

    I'm assuming that 60% of the players wont even know what DT is and 80% probably wont even have it installed. So if DT is necessary to maintain the integrity of the game I think it should be included or mandatory otherwise the playerbase will be divided.
  • LLouCypher
    Even before VUG pulled the plug on the official master/authentication servers we had server operators running with or without DT required. Of course TWL required it for competition but players on their ladders should know what and where to download to be compliant with their rules.

    There will always be "noob friendly" pub servers with stock maps and no DT requirements, even if I updated it. We could also have "pro" pub servers with map packs and DT required for those who wanted to play there instead.
  • bbrandon
    Well it would be nice if we could have some sort of unified system, all DT or all Non-DT. From what I gather, hm2 and other cheat scripts will work in TribesNext with DT disabled? So wouldn't we all want to use DT?
  • EEolk
    brandon
    Well it would be nice if we could have some sort of unified system, all DT or all Non-DT. From what I gather, hm2 and other cheat scripts will work in TribesNext with DT disabled? So wouldn't we all want to use DT?
    That is planned from what I've heard, however, it's waaaay on the bottom of the list.
  • DDeathspawn!
    Would be nice if it worked kind of like punkbuster. Where it installed with the update.
  • KrashKrash
    The in-game updater isn't currently connected up to anything, but once it is, all patch updates will be handled internally. However, at the moment the only indication people will have of a patch update will be to check back on the or click the "TN News" button on the Warrior pane.

    DT will never be a requirement - if we are to implement an (optional, by server) anti-cheat measure in the future, it will be self-contained, and written by us. Keep in mind that while DT may be an effective deterrent to script kiddies, it's not exactly hard to bypass with a bit of know-how.
    However, if supporting it is indeed as simple as modifying their DLL a bit, I can put in an option to patch it to a working version in the next update.
  • bbrandon
    Well we definitely need sometype of anti-cheat. There's some shady business going on.
  • AbstractAbstract
    Krash
    The in-game updater isn't currently connected up to anything, but once it is, all patch updates will be handled internally. However, at the moment the only indication people will have of a patch update will be to check back on the or click the "TN News" button on the Warrior pane.

    DT will never be a requirement - if we are to implement an (optional, by server) anti-cheat measure in the future, it will be self-contained, and written by us. Keep in mind that while DT may be an effective deterrent to script kiddies, it's not exactly hard to bypass with a bit of know-how.
    However, if supporting it is indeed as simple as modifying their DLL a bit, I can put in an option to patch it to a working version in the next update.

    You could implement some kind of crc check upon login, that way relevant files would be flagged as modified by the server and would not allow the user to login. Of course this would only be a useful method of keeping out users that modified the files in queue for check.
  • BBlakhart
    Dt was hakd before next came along, why use it now? If someone's obviously cheating, ban the guid. Might be good to get a demo first.
  • RRev. Zen
    brandon
    Well we definitely need sometype of anti-cheat. There's some shady business going on.

    To Brandon's point, instead of having the default be that there is no anticheat measures in place and they can be implemented voluntarily from server to server, maybe it would be prudent to automatically implement the anticheat measures by default. That way if an admin wants to run a server without the anticheat measures, then all he has to do is diable them.
Sign In or Register to comment.