"auto-sniping" thoughts and tests

[real_tabasco_sauce]

4 hours ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

The solution is to remove the disable checks feature from the base game. This would ensure that all players in a match have the same mods installed and enabled. 

Yeah, that might have to be a reality. It was nice to have such flexibility back before this whole nightmare.

[Atrik]

3 hours ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Yeah, that might have to be a reality. It was nice to have such flexibility back before this whole nightmare.

This would make mod usage unnecessarily more painful. You'll punish the users that declare their mods and do nothing against those who hide them.

More specifically this proposal is to prevent legitimate compatible mods, and by no mean can mitigate cheats or any mod a user would want to hide, and you know it.

Edited September 25, 2023 by Atrik

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

24 minutes ago, Atrik said:

This would make mod usage unnecessarily more painful. You'll punish the users that declare their mods and do nothing against those who hide them.

You know this how?

 

25 minutes ago, Atrik said:

More specifically this proposal is to prevent legitimate compatible mods, and by no mean can mitigate cheats or any mod a user would want to hide, and you know it.

You know this how? My guess is you'd take steps to make these mods bypass this check then? Curious.

[Atrik]

10 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

You know this how? My guess is you'd take steps to make these mods bypass this check then? Curious.

Serious question? How can you bypass the mod check : you don't have the mod. You don't need to create a mod to make modifications. You can use other mods too to host your mods. Maybe then you planning to add new security features? I don't know maybe I'm missing something but right now if you want to cheat you have plenty of options.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

1 hour ago, Atrik said:

Serious question? How can you bypass the mod check : you don't have the mod. You don't need to create a mod to make modifications. You can use other mods too to host your mods. Maybe then you planning to add new security features? I don't know maybe I'm missing something but right now if you want to cheat you have plenty of options.

Your cheats are the only ones i've seen being used in 5 years of 0ad. Save for a player seeing spec chat which was also recent and less problematic.

You seem to be trying to deflect. To act as if there are many cheats and that they are rampant, and that yours are just a drop in the ocean of cheating.

You are trying to distribute and normalize the use of a set of cheats, allowing anyone to start cheating right from your repository. If cheat publishers are not publishing cheats, that eliminates the vast majority of cheating, and any cheater in the future will likely be a single bad actor.

In FPS games, the games with cheating problems are the games for which cheat developers have made cheats.

[Atrik]

8 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

Your cheats are the only ones i've seen being used in 5 years of 0ad. Save for a player seeing spec chat which was also recent and less problematic.

You seem to be trying to deflect. To act as if there are many cheats and that they are rampant, and that yours are just a drop in the ocean of cheating.

You are trying to distribute and normalize the use of a set of cheats, allowing anyone to start cheating right from your repository. If cheat publishers are not publishing cheats, that eliminates the vast majority of cheating, and any cheater in the future will likely be a single bad actor.

In FPS games, the games with cheating problems are the games for which cheat developers have made cheats.

That's a lot of time the word cheating. I'm a cheater who cheats by cheating creating cheats. Now that's 100% sure everybody understand that I'm a cheater and the only form of cheating is me, therefore I AM cheat. You don't have to think, just think about how cheat is cheat.

[JC (naval supremacist)]

Stockfish when discovering that the next release will block any cheating modd and he will go back to 1700

 

 

 

 

[Dizaka]

Big problem with automation.  

Either: 

(1) Automate things IG to simplify it (e.g., sniping feature rather than a plugin, basic eco management, initial start "moves", etc)

(2) Detect and ban cheats

[Stockfish]

On 02/12/2023 at 11:13 PM, JC (naval supremacist) said:

Stockfish when discovering that the next release will block any cheating modd and he will go back to 1700

 

 

 

 

[0 calories]

gaming mouse 4 times faster click... such cheating.. just 100 euro

[rossenburg]

Here's an idea to ensure fairness and block cheat mods: why don't we consider permitting only verified mods through mod.io? These mods undergo manual checks before being signed. If a mod isn't listed on mod.io, its not compatible even tho it can still be used in single player games. This approach ensures fairness as any mod used should be available to everyone.  if your mod isn't signed, it won't be usable in multiplayer games.

[hyperion]

3 hours ago, rossenburg said:

Here's an idea to ensure fairness and block cheat mods: why don't we consider permitting only verified mods through mod.io? These mods undergo manual checks before being signed. If a mod isn't listed on mod.io, its not compatible even tho it can still be used in single player games. This approach ensures fairness as any mod used should be available to everyone.  if your mod isn't signed, it won't be usable in multiplayer games.

So instead of a dev just checking if there is no malicious code you want to put him into the crossfire of the vocal and abusive community for signing the wrong mod? Given that it's outright impossible to implement so that it can't be sidestepped I suggest to give up the notion of this being a good idea.

[rossenburg]

1 hour ago, hyperion said:

So instead of a dev just checking if there is no malicious code you want to put him into the crossfire of the vocal and abusive community for signing the wrong mod?

mods are manually checked before its signed. also mods on mod.io can always be taken down whenever needed. Even if there's a slip-up and a cheat mod accidentally gets approved and reported, we should have the ability to remove it. Once it's removed and the player logs in again, the system should check the active mods against the ones signed in mod.io. If there's an active mod on the player's side that isn't signed in mod.io, it should automatically become incompatible, just like how mod versions are handled with every alpha. dunno if its too much to ask, but this idea could really push us two steps ahead in fighting cheats. Also, we've got to consider the scenario where a player directly modify the main game - another sneaky way to bypass

[sternstaub]

On 12/12/2023 at 7:06 PM, rossenburg said:

mods are manually checked before its signed. also mods on mod.io can always be taken down whenever needed. Even if there's a slip-up and a cheat mod accidentally gets approved and reported, we should have the ability to remove it. Once it's removed and the player logs in again, the system should check the active mods against the ones signed in mod.io. If there's an active mod on the player's side that isn't signed in mod.io, it should automatically become incompatible, just like how mod versions are handled with every alpha. dunno if its too much to ask, but this idea could really push us two steps ahead in fighting cheats. Also, we've got to consider the scenario where a player directly modify the main game - another sneaky way to bypass

I said it once, and i say it again: give game hosts the option to decide such things. Game host could be given options to restrict mod usage only to signed mods.

[Atrik]

I opened this topic to try to try to address the sniping meta that a lot of players legitimately think is problematic. A handful of people sized the opportunity to spread bs so unfortunately it makes it harder to have an intelligent discussion. There are (still) no mods that I know of, that change how sniping is done.

In game chat and here I've read players giving 'solutions' like throttling cps, re-balance units etc. It has to be compared to simply giving the players the ability to control the unit behavior. Features that change unit attack behaviors already exist as 'Stances', so making/changing Violent 'Stance' to "Focus Weakest Units in attack Range", isn't far stretched at all. I can't see how this won't make the game more interesting as battle outcomes should be defined by other things then cps, it will greatly help the current faster clicker win meta.

Ex:

Toggle Normal Stance =>Make units attack closest unit.

Toggle Violent Stance =>Make units attack the most vulnerable units in their attack range.
(Meaning won't chase weak units, just attack them if they are found in their attack range)

 

Edited December 20, 2023 by Atrik

[real_tabasco_sauce]

6 hours ago, Atrik said:

bs

I have raised concerns with your existing mod and also with your stance idea, do not dismiss this as bs.

There are 2 issues with what you suggest in my opinion

1. It is a 'smart' behavior from units. The default UnitAI without human input shouldn't be capable of doing things of high value that traditionally take human actions. In other words, they should be somewhat 'dumb'. The example here being that a group of cavalry trying to raid would find their weakest unit killed sooner which would typically be a skill (find and kill weakest enemy unit first to improve odds to win the fight).

2. It will not address or help the 'sniping meta'. If all one's units are tasked to shoot the weakest unit, what happens when an army is full hp? Shoot the closest unit? in that case, the closest unit is therefore weaker. Basically, in this system targeting is dependent on the unit previously targeted, which won't do much for sniping which generally entails focusing the enemy ranged units above all else. The sniping and meat shield situations go hand in hand. It is a "meat" "shield" because it literally is: melee units are all super tanky and do very little damage, ranged units are very fragile and do tons of damage. While your proposition might partially help, the real solution would be a rebalance.

[Atrik]

28 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

1. It is a 'smart' behavior from units. The default UnitAI without human input shouldn't be capable of doing things of high value [...]. While your proposition might partially help, the real solution would be a rebalance.

Your re-balancing is great, only for sniping, I can't picture how it's a definitive solution to make sniping just less important. Long-range unit potential should be used easier. If they are used without sniping, long-range/archers will always be useless in big battles because of their lower dps. All players should be able to use their archers attack back-lines units. Currently a very small minority of players can execute this basic tactic because of how sniping is done.

I don't see how spamming clicks should be considered as high value, nor how allowing players to change unit targeting would make unit look smart.
The stance suggestion I made, you'll have to pay attention on your unit placement. It won't even make much difference if you engage without micro.
Simply, when engaging, instead of rushing to spam clicks to assign all units to weak targets, you'll now have to move ranged units in a spot where they can attack weak units.
Battles will look more realistic if more importance is put on unit placement rather then cps race.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

29 minutes ago, Atrik said:

Long-range unit potential should be used easier. If they are used without sniping, long-range/archers will always be useless in big battles because of their lower dps.

The way it addresses sniping has a lot to do with what you said here.

That archers have low dps doesn’t really matter all that much. Sniping is also very strong with skirmishers.

the important part is that currently ranged units are a higher value target than melee units, making the ability to target more distant ranged units overly important.

if an archer is equally valued shooting a melee unit as shooting a ranged unit, then new players that don’t know how to snipe won’t be punished overly by a technique they haven’t learned.

in that case sniping would be a highly conditional approach with mixed results. It would only be useful for highly knowledgeable players that know when it will improve the battle outcomes.

for example, if a player tries to snipe under the rebalance, the opportunity cost is that the enemy melee units will more quickly win their fight, forcing the retreat or loss of the players ranged units.

[hyperion]

On 12/12/2023 at 8:06 PM, rossenburg said:

Even if there's a slip-up and a cheat mod accidentally gets approved and reported

Does this mean the authority to decide doesn't lie with the dev signing? So how should it work then, some user claiming the mods I use are fine but the one you use is not gets to make the call?

I struggle to see why WFG should even try to get involved in this mess (a social problem with not technical solution at all). Why not simply add a vanilla badge to user in lobby that don't use any mods and make the only form of cheating recognized by WFG modifications to show said badge when not appropriate. If hosts of games or even tournaments want random mods rules then it's their business.

 

[Stan`]

On 22/12/2023 at 4:02 PM, hyperion said:

I struggle to see why WFG should even try to get involved in this mess (a social problem with not technical solution at all). Why not simply add a vanilla badge to user in lobby that don't use any mods and make the only form of cheating recognized by WFG modifications to show said badge when not appropriate. If hosts of games or even tournaments want random mods rules then it's their business.

Even that badge wouldn't be enough. Some people just edit the public mod these days...

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

1 hour ago, Stan` said:

Even that badge wouldn't be enough. Some people just edit the public mod these days...

Welp! Time to encrypt the zip file! Jk

[hyperion]

1 hour ago, Stan` said:

Even that badge wouldn't be enough. Some people just edit the public mod these days...

Against accidental edits (1) of public you could do something, against deliberate edits with the goal of showing a vanilla badge without playing vanilla nothing can be done. I repeat any and all technical solutions suggested to "prevent cheating" are utter garbage conceived by people which don't know any better. Such a thing simply doesn't exist and wont ever exist for 0ad. If you fully control the hardware the user runs 0ad on you'd have some means.

The badge is a compromise, a concession to people who want to hunt others for playing some definition of unfair.

Protecting devs and other staffers is far more important than anything else. There must be no room for discussion what is cheating and what not. So if you use any mods you have no ground to accuse others of cheating. This auto-sniping was even suggested by wraitii in some form for the base game before, so excuses like my mod should be in the base game, is standard for an RTS or similar, therefore is okay but yours is not are sort of ridiculous. So either you play vanilla or you don't. Pretending to play vanilla when you are not is cheating, anything else is not. Enforcing is impossible but occasionally catching someone is possible (2).

Sure you can go for other definitions of cheating but that means an extra burden (to mental health) and we have a recent example of a dev saying it's enough to prove my point

There was also a thread maybe a year ago where some user was asked to share their pov on a conflict which they then did. Sure that position wasn't great but what shocked me were an awful lot of justice knights that jumped out using language far beyond what is acceptable and feeling smug about what great they did for the community for lynching an individual.

An other example is Norse, sure sometimes unconventional how he does moderation but I have seen nothing so far that would be make doubt his integrity, still there seems to be an awful high level of acceptance for attacks against him.

Basically I feel anything but a simple rule as I propose for what constitutes cheating is simply creating a breeding ground for further misconduct, unfortunately.

 

(1) It's reasonable for someone to assume to mod the game is to extract public and work away on it whiteout realizing that this sidesteps some vanilla badge you don't know exists.

(2) For example someone uploading a video to youtube while forgetting to disable their mod.

[hyperion]

1 hour ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

Welp! Time to encrypt the zip file! Jk

Doesn't help at all, the engine needs to read that zip file, so the "cheater" can as well.

[wowgetoffyourcellphone]

On 12/12/2023 at 7:17 AM, 0 calories said:

gaming mouse 4 times faster click... such cheating.. just 100 euro

We could limit click inputs.

[real_tabasco_sauce]

52 minutes ago, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

We could limit click inputs.

Its really not an issue, I think @0 calories is sarcastic here.