Cheating everywhere, GMs???

[hotkarlmarxbros]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I think Arcler was the first proven cheat, no? For his AFK trakanon batphones using pixel detection, right? I assume that's why Riot is so good at figuring out that everybody else is cheating and knowing exactly how they do it.

Well, first behind catherine, anyway. Autofire away!

I wonder what Arcler and catherine have in common, hmm... It's definitely not that their both in Vanquish together, is it?

Who's the real fucking cheaters here.

I don't care about arcler, I don't care about stunningly, I don't really care about anybody who is cheating. The problem isn't the cheaters, it is the fact that the engages are exploitable. You ban a cheater here and there and another will just pop up to replace them so long as the engages stay the same. The box owners want to have a competitive server but refuse to provide any oversight or competitive implementations. Every guild who has "dominated" the server in the time since I've played here has done so on the coattails of cheaters, riding their momentum as far as it will take them. Aftermath, Riot, Vanquish. I'm sure the guilds that were around prior to me playing here rose through the ranks similarly. The majority of raiders here have never even raided competitively and barely understand the engages, only showed up to one side's zergfest or the other hitting their autoattack button or ch macro.

[Nibblewitz]

Could it be that both winners and losers hate losing?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by hotkarlmarxbros [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't care about arcler, I don't care about stunningly, I don't really care about anybody who is cheating. The problem isn't the cheaters, it is the fact that the engages are exploitable. You ban a cheater here and there and another will just pop up to replace them so long as the engages stay the same. The box owners want to have a competitive server but refuse to provide any oversight or competitive implementations. Every guild who has "dominated" the server in the time since I've played here has done so on the coattails of cheaters, riding their momentum as far as it will take them. Aftermath, Riot, Vanquish. I'm sure the guilds that were around prior to me playing here rose through the ranks similarly. The majority of raiders here have never even raided competitively and barely understand the engages, only showed up to one side's zergfest or the other hitting their autoattack button or ch macro.

To even hope to begin to provide evidence of cheating, please explain how OP can come to any conclusions without the ping of the players involved. I will re-post my example until someone can counter it. If they cannot, OP just wasted 2 months by not understanding the basics of computer science unfortunately.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I said "Happen to receive", because it is an example[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] I wanted to keep the example as simple as possible. But sure, let us add that variable in if you want. It doesn't help your case or OP's. Your logic is incorrect here.

================================================== =======================================

I will try to make a very simple math example to show why online games are not a great way to judge reaction times.

In case you don't know, ping measures the round trip time it takes for a player to send data to the server, and receive it back. So if a player has a ping of 20ms, that means it took something like 10ms to send the data out, and 10ms to get the data back. It doesn't have to be a 50/50 split like that, but I will use it for simplicity.

Here are the conditions for the hypothetical example:

1. Racing Player A has 20ms ping.

2. Racing Player B has 200ms ping.

3. Observing Player has 30ms ping.

4. Rolling Player has 40ms ping.

5. The Server is the P99 server.

6. Lets assume OP is correct, and normal humans have a 250ms reaction time.




Rolling Player would send the "REQUEST RANDOM" command to the server at the 0ms mark.

The Server would receive the "REQUEST RANDOM" command from the Rolling Player at the 20ms mark (+20ms to receive the message from the Rolling Player)

Racing Player A would receive the "RANDOM NUMBER 900" message at the 30ms mark (+10ms to receive the message from The Server)

Racing Player A would send the "STARTED MOVING" command to the server at the 280ms mark (+250ms reaction time).

The Server would receive the "STARTED MOVING" command from the Racing Player A at the 290ms mark (+10ms to receive the message from the Racing Player A).

Observing Player would receive the "STARTED MOVING" command from the Racing Player A at the 305ms mark (+15ms to receive the message from The Server).




Rolling Player would send the "REQUEST RANDOM" command to the server at the 0ms mark.

The Server would receive the "REQUEST RANDOM" command from the Rolling Player at the 20ms mark (+20ms to receive the message from the Rolling Player)

Racing Player B would receive the "RANDOM NUMBER 900" message at the 120ms mark (+100ms to receive the message from The Server)

Racing Player B would send the "STARTED MOVING" command to the server at the 370ms mark (+250ms reaction time).

The Server would receive the "STARTED MOVING" command from the Racing Player B at the 470ms mark (+100ms to receive the message from the Racing Player B).

Observing Player would receive the "STARTED MOVING" command from the Racing Player B at the 495ms mark (+15ms to receive the message from The Server).




So in this example, you would have a difference of 190ms just from ping.

[titanshub]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Please read the example more carefully, because it is all you need to understand why OP's evidence is invalid. He doesn't have the ping for everybody in the video, so he has no idea how the data was received.

Via Hotkarlmarxbro above:


"The fastest racers of the pack (which vary from week to week, with the exception of stunningly and the race bloodeye scripted and submitted his petition) we can say naturally select for above average reaction time and a closer position to the server. So someone on the East coast with a 30 ping and 170ms reaction time will clock in at 200ms to the server. An observer with 50 ping will see the roll at 25ms and then the legit racer (or at least one that baked in a delay to the scripts) leaves the line at 225ms for a total of 200ms from roll to run."

In other words all these are within the distribution that we would expect from racers.

However since you were strictly looking at the reaction times of the accused I feel it's important to point out that we know with a great deal of certainty what their response time is. It's inhuman. Additional sources of delay from the accused make the real response times even less believable because we know when the server transmitted the +900 random and we know the observer and stunninglys ping and can calculate the window for which he got the packet and when her responded in relation to the observers recording.

[PlsNoBan]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

To even hope to begin to provide evidence of cheating, please explain how OP can come to any conclusions without the ping of the players involved. I will re-post my example until someone can counter it. If they cannot, OP just wasted 2 months by not understanding the basics of computer science unfortunately.

Surely someone with your proficiency in computer science would understand how simple it is to exploit this system via extremely simple scripts and how unlikely it would be to ever be detected doing so "beyond a reasonable doubt" right?

Just so we're on the same page

[Profyx]

Originally Posted by Croco [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I've watched over 2 dozen videos of you racing in kael and tov and you're off the line first in every single one of them. Without fail. Even at 1-5am pacific time. Instant reaction. The only races I've seen you lose are where you screw up somewhere further in the race after the start. The point in time after the script helps you get the inhuman jump.

I dont even think Ive raced 2 dozen times in the history of p99

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by titanshub [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Via Hotkarlmarxbro above:


"The fastest racers of the pack (which vary from week to week, with the exception of stunningly and the race bloodeye scripted and submitted his petition) we can say naturally select for above average reaction time and a closer position to the server. So someone on the East coast with a 30 ping and 170ms reaction time will clock in at 200ms to the server. An observer with 50 ping will see the roll at 25ms and then the legit racer (or at least one that baked in a delay to the scripts) leaves the line at 225ms for a total of 200ms from roll to run."

In other words all these are within the distribution that we would expect from racers.

However since you were strictly looking at the reaction times of the accused I feel it's important to point out that we know with a great deal of certainty what their response time is. It's inhuman. Additional sources of delay from the accused make the real response times even less believable because we know when the server transmitted the +900 random and we know the observer and stunninglys ping and can calculate the window for which he got the packet and when her responded in relation to the observers recording.

Please... read my example more carefully. OP does not have the ping for everybody in those videos. You do not know how the data was sent or received. In my example, there was a 190ms difference between the two players, not even including differences in human reaction, which could happen. I am not sure how OP's data points to "inhuman" when you take this into account, unless you have the ping for everybody?

[Samoht]

Originally Posted by titanshub [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

In other words all these are within the distribution that we would expect from racers.

The assumed distribution. But nobody involved with the creation of this video bothered to try to figure out how Stunningly is so much better. They just wanted to prove he was cheating, and are willing to provide evidence that shows he's cheating whether the evidence is honest and factual or not.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by PlsNoBan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Surely someone with your proficiency in computer science would understand how simple it is to exploit this system via extremely simple scripts and how unlikely it would be to ever be detected doing so "beyond a reasonable doubt" right?

Just so we're on the same page

Yes, you could cheat in a manner that goes undetected. But if it is undetected, how can we punish someone for it?[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You could increase your start time by lets say 40ms with a script. But in my example, there is already a 190ms difference if the two people have equal reaction times. So instead of a difference of 190ms, you would see a difference of 230ms. Sadly that is within the margins of ping. That is why you can't even begin to check if cheating occurred unless you had proper logs of everybody's ping, and the time it took to send and receive the data.

[titanshub]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The assumed distribution. But nobody involved with the creation of this video bothered to try to figure out how Stunningly is so much better. They just wanted to prove he was cheating, and are willing to provide evidence that shows he's cheating whether the evidence is honest and factual or not.

The distribution is from humanreaction.com and their database of 81million tests. Looks pretty valid to me.