MaydaX

Server admins can now add Battlefield 3 servers for streaming. Our Automated Streaming Setup tool now supports BF3: http://www.pbbans.com/automated-streaming-setup.html ProCon 1.1.0.0 Beta supports BF3 for those looking for an admin tool now. http://www.phogue.net/forumvb/showthread.php?2399-Procon-1.1.0.0-Beta-Release You can also use ProCon to setup streaming using this guide: http://www.pbbans.com/info-center-hubguide.html#frostbitegui A sample pbsv.cfg file for those interested can be found at: http://www.pbbans.com/mci-view-bf3-pbsv-41.html BF3 is also included in the Enforce MBi Bans (EA GUID) feature. http://www.pbbans.com/forums/enforce-mbi-bans-ea-guid-t147262.html

Updated OP with 285.62 WHQL

http://www.phogue.net/forumvb/showthread.php?2399-Procon-1.1.0.0-Beta-Release

http://oneofswords.com/2011/10/call-of-duty-elite-october-2011-update/

http://forums.electronicarts.co.uk/battlefield-3-pc/1443233-second-look-bf3-pc-game-servers.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mV-gnh1En6E

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1xjCdN_rWCE

If your referring to unranked having the option to enable all unlocks for everyone then BF3 is also doing that.

Console server browser http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pW9z4OUyDAE

From what I understand ranked PC will be P2P like MW2 with 18 players. Only unranked is on dedicated servers.

402 updated his post

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7GVSx7yMaA

Sounds like another case of MW2. CEG does nothing to stop real cheaters. And they can keep it with 18 players max. Seems the two biggest games this year have failed for making TDM with at least 32 players like many older games have. I don't care if it ruins the "balance" because it was still fun for me in CoD4. It should be the choice of the player not the dev.

The chances of that happening are dropping with GGC posting their message on sites outside of GGC (ex BFP4F). It's one thing to post such a message on our own sites but posting on official game forums doesn't show me they want to work it out but instead it makes PBBans look bad. That's why we never posted it on any forums outside of our own. And for the record I did ban the GGC hostname from IRC but it was not because of what they did. It was a really bad day for me in real life and I just wanted all the crap to end. I never kicked anyone currently in the channel. I knew it was wrong the next day and I promptly removed the IRC ban. I'm not afraid to admit that I was wrong for doing that. We are only human after all.

http://www.evenbalance.com/index.php?page=announce.php

Actually many developers don't even consider anything outside PB itself. They contract PB and trust it's all they need. Devs are not going to VAC because of what happens in the 3rd party AC community. It's more because PB is becoming increasingly problematic (from the customer support side) and outdated over the years. It's fine if you have experience with PB but new users tend to have more issues and contact customer support. I don't see it being a victory. If we thought this would hurt the AC community we would not have done it. The partnership was mainly both sites exchanging banlists. When GV removed their banlist for download and we removed them from the EBL, I didn't read many complaints about it from anyone here. No matter what people think of GV they are banning cheaters like the rest of us. But when we make a simular move we are suddenly the bad guy. If we didn't want to fight hackers we wouldn't be here honestly. As I said before, if admins stream to PBBans, GGC and others simultaneously and it's the same protection. In fact it's better as you get live ban updates instead of a once per day update.

It's a bug from what I read on the ea forums

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRqfFfuVuNE

I don't see why some people are upset when PsB and Game-Violations are essentially doing the same thing by requiring admins stream to use their complete banlists. Multi-streaming has existed for years now and I honestly don't hear much about it causing lag. RCON tools for BC2 that spam pb_sv_plist would cause more lag than multi-streaming. The amount of data sent is very small. We started that trend years ago with the EBL and PsB. But honestly it's didn't work out the way we hoped in the end. But we respect each parties decision in each case.

We removed all the GGC bans from the EBL after we could not import them anymore to prevent unbanned players from being kicked. But if anyone streaming to PBBans thought the GGC banlist helped on their server then they should stream to them as well. That's also the reason we asked GGC to remove our bans as we had a few unbanned players ask by they were still being kicked. As time went on that would increase. The EBL isn't required anymore it's just a luxery. Game-Violations removed their banlists for download and require people to stream in order to use them. PunkBusted requires admins stream their servers to access the live banlist for years now too. So I see little impact of not sharing banlists between our two sites. Admins can stream to both and it makes a more effective system.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nQR49JGySTM http://blogs.battlefield.ea.com/battlefield_bad_company/archive/2011/10/17/battlefield-3-open-beta-wrapup-or-how-many-tanks-can-you-build-from-the-bullets-you-fired.aspx

I 100% agree and we could have posted about a lot of other issues from the past few years but we didn't think it was fair to paint anyone in the anti-cheat community in a negative way. Long gone are the days where a server admin had to choose what site they wanted to stream to because the repository method only supported streaming to one site at a time. So in the end it doesn't help the anti-cheat community as a whole when server admins are discouraged from streaming to PBBans and others because another system enforces bans from external sources.

Last I read it was officially 24. However the leaked beta servers went much higher.

I'm sure some know about the PBBans decision to block the GGC website from accessing our banlists. We have done so for more than one reason but the biggest reason is they are encouraging admins they do not need to stream to PBBans which even led to some server admins dropping PBBans entirely. Their reason for that suggestion is because they import and enforce our bans anyway. We blocked their servers from accessing our webserver and formally informed them to cease downloading our banlist to which they ignored and downloaded them using other means. We asked them for a second time to do so but again they refuse to acknowledge our request. We even displayed a similar message as this post to any traffic originating from their website but they added a redirect service anonym.to to bypass this message. So we are now posting this information to the public. Shortly after we blocked them they removed the feed we used to import their bans and displayed "- Please contact the webmaster -" instead. That is why they are no longer included in our EBL. We remove any site that we cannot get an up to date banlist for because unbanned guids wouldn't be updated on our end which means innocent players would be kicked and we do not want that to occur. We respected their decision and have not tried to import them using other methods. PBBans imports and enforces bans as well but we do not suggest anyone drop streaming to another site. The EBL was not created to replace anyone. In fact it was created out of my laziness. I was tired of checking the same GUID on many different anti-cheat websites so I made the EBL to check those sites automatically and if a match was found then provide a link to the website the guid is banned on. It was never my intention to replace any 3rd party anti-cheat website with the EBL in order to gain streaming exclusivity. In fact we often promote server admins to multi-stream to others to make a better anti-cheat community. There have been other incidents that we ignored over the many months because we didn't want to start an AC war. Only people who win in those are the cheaters. Since streaming servers is what makes PBBans so effective, we will not allow anyone to import our ban lists and have them encourage users to cease streaming or not sign up with PBBans because the server admin can use an enforce bans option. Without streaming servers, fewer cheaters get caught and that is against our goal. I'm sure server admins know what it's like to have a player come in your server and spam their server info or clan website in a hope to attract players away from your server. It's disrespectful to say the least. We didn't want to resort to this but in the end we have to protect ourselves and our goals. Server admins can stream to PBBans, AON, GGC and others simultaneously therefore we feel this decision is best for us but doesn't affect the anti-cheat community.

Map reviews which is too much to quote so