On 8/20/05, Karsten Lund (COD) steambans.com <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > When your VAC banned you cannot even enter a server, steambans doesn't have > that option and therefore the same player can be banned multiple times which > will create the illusion its more effective compared to VAC, which it is not > since VAC banned people will never even enter the server for you to see him > being banned.
I am not sure I agree here. If VAC didn't even tell you when VAC banned people tried to connect, why would you get reports in the server's logs saying VAC has removed a player. The point people were making is there ARE entries for VAC in their logs. But they nowhere near approach the amount they get about Steambans related bans (in the logfiles for the same servers). It's more likely the *REAL* reason for this difference is that that once someone is VAC banned and they know they are VAC banned, they know there is no point trying to connect to secure servers anymore. Hence they do not even bother trying to connect to secure servers. Instead searching for insecure servers. Since it's easy to know if a server is secure or not. It's even possible to search for all insecure servers within the browser. However from within the steam browser it is not so easy to spot if SBSRV is running. Hence the higher detection rate (because they need to connect using trial and error)... This is in fact evident when you see the same cheat trying to connect to multiple SB connected servers.. They are simply looking for a server that will let them in. With VAC they'd just look for insecure servers, not create a log of their attempt and get straight in. _______________________________________________ To unsubscribe, edit your list preferences, or view the list archives, please visit: http://list.valvesoftware.com/mailman/listinfo/hlds_linux
