Status of "Cheat" Mods

[strat0spheric]

@Atrik I want to add to my posts that i really don't want to discredit your work and effort for the ProGUI in general. As far as i have read about it you introduce some interesting and useful features that might also be considerable for an implementation in the vanilla version, e.g. showing idle barracks or buildings (I mean vanilla already shows idle units). A lot of respect for that. All the improvements of a GUI that are not really automating tasks, are not of my concern. I also don't want to throw the autotrainer and startup-script in the same basket with the cheats, that reveal the map or reveal enemy stats and chat. This is also another level, imo. But still automation makes a difference and does change the required attention and concentration and multitasking. This is what many players judge as unfair. If automating the unit production would be part of vanilla, and hence used by all players there would be even conditions as well. I could also live with that - because it would also reestablish fair competition.

I expect of a multiplayer game, that skill decides. You can compare your performance with others, learn from replays, improve your eco-management and hopefully improve your gameplay and lvl. So that rating at the end means a thing. What could i learn from replays of a player using automation or how could i compare my skill level with yours if i wanna stick with the vanilla? Surely, atm this is my problem and i can avoid it if i don't play with people who use the autotrainer (still this is not visible to me before a game)... but basically i would prefer if there would exist a common understanding and gaming culture. I know i am only talking about a feeling here, which might be considered naive. But, just given the fact that there is a rating system (even if it is definetly not perfect), leads me to the assumption that the developers intended to provide it to make a fair comparison of skill levels possible.

If we had dedicated servers, the providers could define their own rules of gameplay for their server and ban certain tools. But we don't have that, nor do we obviously have means of simple detection for cheats in general. So imo it would be favourable that for now it is visible for everyone what WFG considers as unfair and/or cheating, which includes answering the question if they tolerate autotrainers and startupscripts or not. I just miss the orientation here and it is obvious that others have the same issue, because the point 8. of the TOS is obviously  too vague to give a clear guidance. It could be added, that "when not explicitly mutually agreed on..."

But i guess, after this endless discussion, which turns out to change nothing that i have to call my games tg(vanilla), as @TheCJ recommended and trust that people switch the autotrainer and the startup script off when we play together.

 

 

 

[Grapjas]

3 hours ago, strat0spheric said:

If automating the unit production would be part of vanilla, and hence used by all players there would be even conditions as well. I could also live with that - because it would also reestablish fair competition.

I'd be heavily against implementing more automation into vanilla. It's part of the rts to juggle all balls, economy, warfare and management. Satisfaction comes from mastering those aspects of the game and beat your opponent fairly, meaning either all have the same mod(s) or no one has a mod.

If you feel you need automation to win certain games then you are simply playing against players out of your league. Or if you feel like you are forgetting to keep producing units then you have an area to focus and improve on.

No disrespect meant to any player whatsoever.

I do think you have to be a little dense if you think automating half the game for you does not give you an advantage and isn't cheating though.

Edited Wednesday at 16:56 by Grapjas
typo

[strat0spheric]

8 minutes ago, Grapjas said:

I do think you have to be a little dense if you think automating half the game for you does not give you an advantage and isn't cheating though.

i guess you don't mean me in this context Because i am definetly against the automation - but what i meant to say is that fairness in terms of equal conditions for everyone is the most important aspect for me. I prefer definetly to juggle all balls.

[Atrik]

What attracted me in the first place to games of this genre is strategy, macro, teamwork...

@Grapjas if you get satisfaction out of making repetitive tasks that's ok. The mechanical skill of clicky stuff for me just gets in the way of game enjoyment, I prefer having time to think when playing rather then just only learning to queue up brain tasks.

I don't know exactly what proportion of players would actually prefer game with less clicky UI, but it's surely not 0%.
Also once again with remarks on skill and leagues and whatnot, I'm considered the same when balancing a game with me disallowed to use "automation", I let you conclude what you want of that, eventually stooping to make stupid remarks on this being related to """"""""skill"""""""".

[MetaPhyZic]

29 minutes ago, Atrik said:

What attracted me in the first place to games of this genre is strategy, macro, teamwork...

The cope of rushed plebs is insane here.

[Grapjas]

1 hour ago, Atrik said:

if you get satisfaction out of making repetitive tasks that's ok.

I mean alot of games have tasks/routine that come with the genre, but that's not what i said anyway. You still need to adapt to the game and what's happening around you and be faster than the enemy.

1 hour ago, Atrik said:

I prefer having time to think when playing rather then just only learning to queue up brain tasks.

And thats excactly the unfair advantage it gives opposed to someone who doesn't use it, dont you see that? You're being really obtuse about it tbh.

1 hour ago, Atrik said:

I don't know exactly what proportion of players would actually prefer game with less clicky UI, but it's surely not 0%.

I'm sure there are people that would love to play it. It honestly sounds like total war games are better suited for your RTS itch if all you want to do is slay but w/e.

[Atrik]

57 minutes ago, Grapjas said:

I mean alot of games have tasks/routine that come with the genre, but that's not what i said anyway. You still need to adapt to the game and what's happening around you and be faster than the enemy.

One can only agree. Is there a screnario or build that you think the autotrainer feature doesn't allow you to adapt your production too? In my experience you have much better control, and feeling of control of your production and army composition with the suggested autotrainer overlay.

1 hour ago, Grapjas said:

And thats excactly the unfair advantage it gives opposed to someone who doesn't use it, dont you see that? You're being really obtuse about it tbh.

You probably make very informed judgement, and you seems to have stake in mp. What's your lobby account name if I might ask? Anyway you might also be one that will start replying with quick claims and insults, I might be guilty of doing it too but better I stop replying to this thread.

[BreakfastBurrito_007]

It doesn't take any multiplayer or even 0ad experience to understand that automating a signification portion of the game provides an unfair advantage. I wouldn't go hounding grapjas to "verify" if his level is high enough to critique your mod, anyone of any level can do so just like anyone can see through your self-serving argumentation and your dishonest downplaying of the advantages you get from progui.

[MetaPhyZic]

[Grapjas]

4 hours ago, Atrik said:

Anyway you might also be one that will start replying with quick claims and insults, I might be guilty of doing it too but better I stop replying to this thread.

Yeah it's gotta be exhausting being obtuse on purpose i guess. It's wasted energy. But now some volunteers have to find a solution to make games fair, which would've happened sooner or later anyway so its not a bad thing persé.

Onto that subject, i think a "no mods" toggle for the host would be nice thats on by default. But im not sure 0ad supports loading/unloading mods on the fly yet, seeing how you need to restart the game if you download a mod. On the other hand coding while playing does live update. Haven't looked into that much yet, and if it's on the cpp side of things im not even going to lol.

Maybe a mod can be made that detects unsigned mods or shows what files people have altered.

Edited Wednesday at 23:15 by Grapjas

[Seleucids]

41 minutes ago, Grapjas said:

Onto that subject, i think a "no mods" toggle for the host would be nice thats on by default. But im not sure 0ad supports loading/unloading mods on the fly yet, seeing how you need to restart the game if you download a mod. On the other hand coding while playing does live update.

Unfortunately hot loading doesn't happen normally. The game only scans the mod folder once on boot, then never scans again. Even if you put in a new mod, it will not be detected by the mod selector until you restart the game. 

However, this is not an impossible problem:

1. We can always load a dummy mod which has all the dummy file placeholders, so that the engine is forced to consider all of the files there in live. Then, if we need to modify a file, we copy in and replace the dummy on the fly. To deactivate, we overwrite with dummy values. 

2. We can add engine commands to check the mod folder more often for presence of new mods and hotload files. 

45 minutes ago, Grapjas said:

Maybe a mod can be made that detects unsigned mods or shows what files people have altered.

I'm afraid this might have to go to engine level. You can't really see into other people's mod files without hacking their computer filesystem. 0AD lobby 100% trusts your own mod reporter script during game registration, which only reports the title and versions of your active mods. The exact contents of your mod folders will never be transmitted to anyone.

On top of this, people can edit this script to fool the lobby and other clients. 

 

[Seleucids]

"Controversial" mods such as ProGUI and chat hacks often leave behind unwanted signatures that expose them. Having a machine learning detector program running besides 0ad might be a solution.

For example, we can implement ffm's script as a separate live application that sends a system message whenever abnormal activity is detected. Unsolicited behaviours such as private chat between specs and players will also leave a warning in everyone's log. Reveal map and other cheat commands will result in "invalid command" being printed in logs. If too much of these occur in one game then you know somebody is messing around. 

[Atrik]

I was wondering how geniuses would solve the issue at hand. Tell us more please @Grapjas. The machine learning suggestion from @Seleucids sounds very promising, thoughts?

We could also think of a partnership with this very reputable solution : https://www.easy.ac/

Edited yesterday at 01:31 by Atrik

[Seleucids]

Sadly anti-cheat solutions don't seem to work on Linux. 

Anti-cheat programs be like:  Linux user = Hacker  + cheater -> ban

Linux users would have many more games available to them if it wasn't for anti-cheat engines; they are the true roadblocks; the compatibility issue is already handled very well by WINE and PROTON. 

[Grapjas]

10 hours ago, Seleucids said:

I'm afraid this might have to go to engine level.

I'm pretty sure someone can recompile the game and still play with people in the lobby if all you did was disable a check. Maybe someone more knowledgeable can confirm.

10 hours ago, Seleucids said:

You can't really see into other people's mod files without hacking their computer filesystem.

A checksum can be networked, what isn't there can be made. Still leaves the problem above though. But you'd cut out a decent portion of cheaters, untill someone publishes an alternative 0ad build they can install with a simple .exe.

10 hours ago, Seleucids said:

which only reports the title and versions of your active mods

It only shows signed mods afaik. Or better said, mods downloaded through the ingame downloader, which is the same thing.