Look, I don't have strong opinions on rules enforcement on emulated EQ servers .. I truly don't. I just see an unsolved problem.
I also agree: anti-cheats
are invasive, and (all else being equal) invasive solutions
are worse. I've even previously agreed that MQ-based cheating can be solved without the need for invasive anti-cheats.
But, I just don't see how a petition/GM-only system can solve ShowEQ. If the server sends info to the client (like which nameds are up), there's nothing to stop another program on that client (eg. ShowEQ) from seeing it ... and if someone abuses that info, there's no way to detect it (without anti-cheats).
So, I'm not at all saying "Quarm must use an anti-cheat". If Secrets could (say) limit the server so that it only sends data on NPCs nearby, it would solve ShowEQ without the need for anti-cheats.
But without
some plan to address ShowEQ, it feels like you anyone saying "Quarm won't have cheaters" is just doing this:
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]