It’s not possible that’s what I’m trying to say but the dude thinks otherwise.
There’s so many mistakes in your reply…
To begin with:
The same problem would exist with client anti noclip, even if something like that happens, a single rollback won’t do any harm.
Could you provide me any example where you would change part collision on client in an obby game? Even if it’s a problem for you, create a tag that will ignore certain parts, non-existent problem suddenly fixed.
Almost every competitive front page game is using server anti-cheats, take combat warriors as an example. You will never see a single person noclipping in it, guess why? Thier anti-cheat isn’t client, which basically makes it unbypassable.
EDIT: thier magnitude check is also server-sided, speed hacks are also impossible.
I begin to highly doubt your ability to create proper client anti-cheats at this point.
I think they mean that you can find other ways to detect if a player is in a part, which is definitely possible.
Yeah but what if their animation is causing them to go in the part, that’s what im trying to say. Sometimes client sided anticheats aren’t a bad idea.
HumanoidRootPart isn’t animatable…
This problem would also exist on client anti-cheat by the way.
There’s multiple factors that i wouldn’t really risk, what if the player got crushed into the part or flinged so fast that it entered an object.
Both problems would still exist on client anti-cheats, please think about it before replying. You also don’t risk anything by simply performing a rollback.
For further replies, please DM me instead, this post is already flooded.
Why don’t you do your research before commenting. You can send a list by server of what objects are Can Collide and what objects aren’t. The client can then see if any object in workspace CanCollide is set differently to what it states in the table.
I don’t know how I’d implement it entirely as I’d have to test various things and make adjustments, but I think you could make a well rounded anti “noclip” cheat on the server. But as I said, a player shouldn’t be punished severely if they are flagged as “noclipping” so it’s kind of a non issue.
I’m not trying to say that client anti cheats are bad ideas, I think they could pretty good for taking out the script kiddies but a more advanced scripter could alter their client to remove the checks necessary for the anti cheat to work. Server anti cheats are more secure if implemented properly as they cannot be bypassed easily.
Client and server anti cheats can co-exist.
A waste of traffic and also easily bypassable. By the way, scripts change your character collision instead of parts for noclip. Please act more professional and learn to accept criticism, I’ve made a working server anticheat before that included anti-noclip and it worked perfectly, I can even send the source code to it if you want to test it yourself.
How can my idea be easily Bypasable, the information is literally sent by the server. Otherwise your code does seem to be a lot better than mine.
I apologise. I should have really improved mine.
Theres 3 simple ways I can say right now that exploiters can use to bypass that:
- Hooking
FireServer,InvokeServer - Hooking
__indexof the game and spoof CanCollide for certain scripts - Locating the function in garbage collector and hooking it
Those ways are pretty much universal and would work for decent-professional anti-cheats. Use old Synapse X documentation as a reference when creating client anti-cheats.
1 Like
Thank you for that. I will indeed take this into account when creating an antinoclip script and I do apologise for the confusing argument caused by me not clearly stating what the issue was.
1 Like
just make every thing on the server if you have like an if statement put it on the server