All Activity

It can be ruled out for all cases because it's not the host that's relaying messages. I would like to test some features for mods or even future patches in practical conditions, i.e. a 4v4 game. If mod signing prevents me from testing and editing the patch on the fly then that would be annoying.

It doesn't work in singleplayer replays?

Of course wrong accusations are bad. I heard some that were too wild too. On the other hand this described cheats are cheats and methods we know of. I would not rule out that e.g. players reveal the map. The oddity detector itself is also just a workaround. If we had something better, like mod signing, I'd drop it since it monitors the players. I made a trainer mod based on autociv for a26 once. It was nice for spectating and reviewing build orders but could be abused easy. That's why I dropped it. This can also lead quickly to information overload. Best method for players atm. is just to play with trusted players which is also annoying. The only cheat we can rule out is reading the enemy chat if the host is trusted (as I understand it atm.).

I don't understand, what is in violation of the license? At no point did the license mention restrictions on the names of variables and quality of code By introducing waffles and misleading variable names, I'm not denying the user access to anything. I'm just presenting a more messy version of the the product. With enough patience, the user can still understand which variable is which. The source code is freely available as always.

This is nice example of positive contribution to 0ad. Higly appreaciate your work.

Yeah, but it's only your choice to use them or not. Not so in a MP game with cheaters. My reasoning was that, with more SP content, players will have more choice and not be affected by the cheating MP scene as much.

yes but also make it available for renaming! like in rise of nations! ofc, if youre scared of misuse just bar anyone from inserting racial slurs and such

I dont really think cheating in mp is the reason we need more sp content, but we would definitely profit from more sp content. That being said, there are some great minds already at work to make it happen afaik, so be patient

This would be a violation of autociv's license. And for good reasons, as explained here: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html

0-0

Unfortunately singleplayer is free cheat. Cheat codes are enabled by default, when you are under attack by the AI, all you need to do is gift from the gods + open developer overlay and win Possibly people are just curious / giddy with this new discovery earlier today. But by later this evening, in the TGs hosted by Chocapoca and Akentas, nobody even bothered to build a market and the thing was forgotten My plan would be to introduce some counter-intuitive names for variables and waffle a lot of irrelevant nonsense in the source code of Autociv to make it harder to pinpoint the important lines.

I spectated a few games today and the market exploit was in 50% of them used. The state is quite bad imo. Maybe everyone is eager to try their new trick. I don't see how atm. besides mod signing.

V01: Added detection for market exploit.

This is why we need more single player content.

After a large increase in cheat accusations between players and Geriatrix's monologue of claims, I think it's necessary for me to debunk the possibility of cheating in A27. I will reference the source code in every one of my statements so that you can peer review what I write and make further studies. 1. Seeing enemy chat and spec chat. This is not possible anymore because all chat messages are sent to only the intended recipients by an engine function. The Engine.SendNetworkChat() function is defined at Line 237 of https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/src/branch/main/source/network/scripting/JSInterface_Network.cpp If you attempt to edit this file, the most you can do is send all of your messages to everyone, but those who use the official release will still be sending messages to the right targets, then you just make a fool of yourself. In A26 and earlier versions, the messages are sent to all players, then the GUI (defined in public mod) selectively displays these messages on the screen. Therefore someone can make a mod which removes the selection process to reveal all chat messages. 2. Revealing the map If you attempt to reveal the map by injecting commands into the console or using some kind of mod, you will get a message saying "Changing the perspective with cheats disabled is prohibited" . See lines 92-95 of https://gitea.wildfiregames.com/0ad/0ad/src/branch/main/source/ps/scripting/JSInterface_Game.cpp Therefore the reveal map cheat is gone from a mod level. Theoretically, one could edit the engine code to allow this function to be called, then recompile into a different version without causing OOS. However, this is beyond the level of most players. Furthermore, even if you call this function successfully, you will be put into a different player identity and you will not be able to control your own units and buildings. The advantage of the temporary vision is diminished by the need for extra apm and being afk for a bit. Oddity detector will likely pick you up and you might also have an OOS. 3. Seeing enemy stats This may be possible by changing some code in public/gui/ to display information about your enemy in the summary screen but I am not sure about this. One could theoretically edit the Javascript code of a mod with stat panels e.g. autociv, BoonGUI, ModernGUI to reveal enemy stats. However, actually doing it is non-trivial (not a 1-liner change) and most players don't even know where to start. @Atrik could we solidify our mod code to make hacks less easy? 4. Excessive automation It has been demonstrated by ProGUI and Quickstart that automation of commands is possible. Therefore it is theoretically possible to make a mod which does all of the micro tasks for you, or completely take over your eco. The core technology is the function Engine.SendNetworkCommand() which issues a command. This function is normally called after interpreting an user input, but one can also spam call it in GUI code. This is where @ffm2's oddity detector comes in handy: if somebody sends too many commands in a short time, they are automating things. You can also inject commands in via RL interface. However, what's the point ? You play 0ad because you enjoy playing the game and the action. If you automate everything that much, you might as well just stay spec behind some pro player who is actually playing and imagine that you are him. 5. Market exploit - yes this is still going on and we might ban this building / ask spectators to monitor abuse. 6. Biased spectators - some players have a pro friend who is watching and giving advice to them in global chat or voice chat on another platform. Some might make a smurf account which joins as spec to see the game. But this is much of a social issue not a technical issue.

Just a thought: there is a mod "volatile market". Would that fix this?

Hippeus yeah? Singular. Also, would be Specific Name. I merely suggested Generic Names.

PLEASE delete this topic and send in private to staff not in ffa without spec , noboby know, but in market we see something wrong. NOW how abuse market, without cheat purpose?

At least ppl can see it occur in tgs(trading history), if it is public knowledge and just ban those who cheat, seems easy enough. Im assuming this works with any res right? not just metal im guessing. Im gessing something to do with price changes being imbalanced? Or I remember something about ppl saying shift buying giving the initial price for whole batch, altho from my understanding thats not the case. Does this profit only occur with extreme conditions (selling thousands then rebuy), or can it occur in a less extreme manner even in general market use?

Whichever the case may be, the fact that people are abusing it recently is a shame. Sell metal for wood until the price of metal is quite low, buy the metal back with many times over return on investment. Players amassing 5000, 10 000 metal in a matter of seconds. Then just so happening to be a mercenary heavy civ while claiming not to know English or that exploiting bugs is cheating. Hopefully there is a fix, otherwise hard to want to spend any free time playing when it can ruin a game. The only silver lining is that it reveals which players are most willing to use exploits in order to win and try avoid playing with them in the future.

As per the post, I would say that Hippeis would be a more appropriate title for the bodyguard version, but otherwise I agree.

@Agne1940 Hello, Thank you for this information.

Hi there, It's definitely frustrating when the AI still feels too tough even on "Very Easy." A few things you might want to check: Campaign or Skirmish? – Some games have different AI settings for campaign missions compared to skirmish/custom matches. Even if you've set the default to "Very Easy," the campaign might override it. AI Behavior Matters – You mentioned setting it to Random — this can sometimes result in unexpectedly aggressive or tricky behavior. Try setting it to something more predictable like Defensive or Passive if the game allows that. Modifiers or Boosts – Check if the AI is getting resource or production bonuses regardless of the difficulty level. Some games apply boosts that aren't tied strictly to the "Very Easy" setting. Game Speed or Mechanics – In some titles, the pace of the game or complex mechanics can make things harder even if the AI is weaker. Try slowing down the game speed or experimenting with different factions/units. If all else fails, sometimes community forums or mods can help adjust the difficulty further if the base settings aren’t enough. Hope this helps, and good luck!

What about doubling the territory effective ranges of the buildings? Could encourage the AI player to build further out.

I didn't change the AI's logic for this. But it responded well. Although it doesn't do it like a human, building absurdly far away, to gain advantages, it still builds outside its area.