Java False ban counter for Sentinel?

[PhantomFeather]

I'd like to think that the majority of those numbers are hackers, but I just can't stop wondering how many were false bans? I think it would be cool if a false ban counter for sentinel were added, not that I have any hard feelings against it for being falsely banned before (:

 

[Quis]

I don’t think this is a good idea. The number kinda persent the anticheat and this way it will look bad.

 

[_PedroPF_]

I believe if they did that, in the case that indeed there are quite a few false bans, it wouldn't be great for CubeCraft's image and overall, even if the number is low, it never looks good to present to the world how many times the anticheat has failed...

 

[PhantomFeather]

You need to think of it as more of them being able to take responsibility for their errors

 

[99th_DutchNubnub]

I think it's a very good idea #experience:)

 

[PieCreeper]

The ban counter is showed to discourage players from hacking on the server. If a false ban counter was added, people would take the anti-cheat system less seriously. Also, if a player is falsely banned, they can always just appeal on the forums.

 

[Pineapple]

This idea isn’t very good in my opinion like people have said before, all it does is make look bad. It’s saying how many times they failed, a cheater will see this, take the anti-cheat less seriously, and continue to cheat without caring. Plus considering the anti-cheat has been getting worked on/improving so that’d be kind of unfair to the devs to show past fails before its finished.

 

[PhantomFeather]

I disagree with your idea that it'll cause sentinel to be taken less seriously. I have seen that it does get rid of hackers, but it seems oversensitive and bans normal players. Just because some of the bans it makes are false, doesn't mean the actual hackers get away, they are the ones who get denied when they appeal.

 

[Technosword]

I disagree with your idea that it'll cause sentinel to be taken less seriously. I have seen that it does get rid of hackers, but it seems oversensitive and bans normal players. Just because some of the bans it makes are false, doesn't mean the actual hackers get away, they are the ones who get denied when they appeal.

Yes but some people don’t recognize that no anti cheat is perfect. No other anti cheat displays the amount of false bans, so it makes Sentinel look bad because it false bans. Also, when new checks for sentinel are added, I assume false bans go up a little, making Sentinel look bad. For the image of the server, I don’t think this should be added.

 

[PhantomFeather]

Then perhaps it could be used as an incentive for it to be worked on more.

 

[Technosword]

Then perhaps it could be used as an incentive for it to be worked on more.

They already have 3 devs working on it constantly. The amount of hackers has decreased and they usually get banned by Sentinel eventually. I’m sure @funkemunky can assure you that he is working hard and Sentinel is working.

 

[Younisco]

I feel like if this were to be introduced, it will only be used as ammunition for players once they get banned. It will serve no real purpose other than a source of negativity.

Then perhaps it could be used as an incentive for it to be worked on more.

Our anticheat developers are identifying false positives and rectifying it as soon as they're seen - that is their greatest incentive I'd believe.

 

[Siftenly]

I don't think this is a good idea to add. Why would we want to make our own product look bad? Players will think Sentinel is even worse than they already thought it was. We're currently trying to improve our anti-cheat, adding a negative statistic doesn't really help in the process of improving it, it will only create more negativity.

This number will also never be accurate because we can't know which bans are false and which are not. It also happens that a correct ban gets undone and a false ban doesn't get removed. I don't think that adding a statistic that isn't even accurate is a good idea.

 

[PhantomFeather]

Quick question, are the current numbers even exact? 2k bans within 24h, almost every 24h, seems like a rather large amount of bans even for cubecraft and I still remain curious as to how many of them are false. Could it not also be used to show improvement? Possibly a decrease in daily false bans, something to show people that sentinel is actually improving.

 

[funkemunky]

Quick question, are the current numbers even exact? 2k bans within 24h, almost every 24h, seems like a rather large amount of bans even for cubecraft and I still remain curious as to how many of them are false. Could it not also be used to show improvement? Possibly a decrease in daily false bans, something to show people that sentinel is actually improving.

The false ban rate for Sentinel is quite low. It depends on the detection though. Also, those ban numbers are accurate. We get a surprising of cheaters on CubeCraft every day. Not to mention Sentinel is also now detecting non-blatant cheaters, so you'll see some regular players getting banned too. This isn't as common though.

EDIT: I should add we accept on average 40 appeals due to false positives daily. The majority false positive appeals we get actually come from only two checks though.

 

[PhantomFeather]

Oh dope a dev replied :D
A question for you then I guess, when it just says that someone is banned for just cheating, what exactly did sentinel pick up on them? Was it the way they were moving or something, and why are some kept quiet like mine was?

 

[funkemunky]

Oh dope a dev replied :D
A question for you then I guess, when it just says that someone is banned for just cheating, what exactly did sentinel pick up on them? Was it the way they were moving or something, and why are some kept quiet like mine was?

What do you mean your ban was kept quiet? If you were banned within the last 24 hours, that was because a check was configured to ban when it should not have been.

 

[PhantomFeather]

There was no mention of my banning in chat

 

[Keanu]

View attachment 171029
There was no mention of my banning in chat

Some detections don't announce the ban yet, not sure why exactly. If I recall correctly this was already brought up and should be dealt with shortly. :]

 

[LordSidi0us]

There's not a single proper reason for me to shame Sentinel for nothing, or at least the ones that take care of it.
Sure it's not perfect, as everything basically, but since three developers are working on it the difference is clearly noticeable.
False bans will always be a thing, but as I mentioned above, nothing can be 100% perfect.
It's constantly being improved and you can really see the positive difference if you play often on both 1.8 and 1.9 combat.
Hopefully you understood my concerns.