89 replies to this topic

[Derek Icelord]

Aimbots and other such cheats are something for PGI to address, but not tell us how (the less information would-be cheaters have, the better). As for client-side skins and hit box marking, I wouldn't worry about it. On all 13 currently announced 'Mechs, we all know where the head/cockpit is and on all but a couple it sticks out from the rest of the 'Mech. Even if a 'Mech's head is marked in florescent orange, it won't give a player that much of an advantage. If they do add night, blizzard, and other low-visibility environments, it won't show up anyway.

[Glythe]

One massive difference from this game and WoT is that here you can choose to store your ammunition just about wherever you want: Left Leg - Right Arm- Center Torso- etc. If you have an all energy weapons mech (such as the swayback) then there is no ammunition for them to shoot at all.

An aimbot program is going to be really tough for a game like this considering the large variety of mechs. But if this game lets you save replays then you'll easily be able to spot anyone using such a hack. Does every shot hit the same exact spot even when you're moving and he's moving? I don't care how good you are that level of precision is only possible at long ranges by a computer. I doubt there will be any one shot kill locations on any mech if for no other reason it will discourage people from even thinking about an aim bot in the first place.

[Nik Van Rhijn]

The physical Head contains but does not make up the entire head hitbox, if they follow normal practice, as some mechs have very large "heads". With double armour it will need 2 hits at least to kill a mech and wont be that easy, especially with both mechs moving.

[Bloodweaver]

Shoklar, on 02 July 2012 - 06:17 AM, said:

In WoT, they dealt with aimbots by having a randomizer circle where the shot would land anywhere in that circle at a predefined range...so the longer the distance of the shot, the more chance that it would miss. It would generally stay toward the middle of the circle, but it was a bunch of statistics stuff that I'm not going to pretend to understand.

This is the one main thing I see as the Devs of MW:O having made a mistake on. Weapons still fire pretty much where they're pointed, although torso weapons cannot be aimed in the same way arm-mounted weapons can. And topics keep popping up discussing how they aim to simulate -or rather, make an equivalent substitution for- the various weapons' inherent inaccuracies as portrayed in the table-top game, where it was determined via die rolls. They seem to have taken every possible path except the most obvious one, such as including doubling armor values. The most obvious solution would be to simply make weapons fire within a circle around the aiming reticle, which changes its size based on movement, heat, ECM, critical damage, and whatever else. It's pretty much a direct transition of the TT model, since both are based on chance, and it's already widely implemented in various other games, so it's not as if it would be treading new territory...

Edited by Bloodweaver, 02 July 2012 - 09:19 AM.

[Riffleman]

BigMo5, on 02 July 2012 - 06:43 AM, said:

Lets look at a few..

To score a Head Hit on an Atlas, you have to hit the Left EYE of the head to actually score a hit. yeah try hitting an EYE at 400 meters in something that bouncing...Good luck...

From what I have been hearing on other sites, you may be veeeeerrrryyyy disapointed about just how easy it is to hit an atlas head.

[Calle30]

You are wrong about WOT aimbots though. Also, that hitbox skins becomes useless after a couple of games , cause everyone knows where to shoot after playing for a while. And lets be honest, it will be the same in MWO.

[grimzod]

Shoklar, on 02 July 2012 - 06:17 AM, said:

Hi all,

I'm fairly new here still, and there is one thing I've been dreading. That is extremely low head armor (if the actual game holds true to Battletech) and the use of aimbots and/or hitbox skins.

Hitbox skins were a major issue in World of Tanks, and I'd hope there wasn't a repeat of that here. In WoT, it was being constantly set on fire or ammo racked (which you could combat in a limited fashion), but if you take a head hit from an AC/20 or Gauss...you're pretty much done.

In WoT, they dealt with aimbots by having a randomizer circle where the shot would land anywhere in that circle at a predefined range...so the longer the distance of the shot, the more chance that it would miss. It would generally stay toward the middle of the circle, but it was a bunch of statistics stuff that I'm not going to pretend to understand.

I ran a search, but didn't see any specific discussion of these topics. These are pretty important, so I hope they're being discussed in the Beta forum if not here. Could a dev (or someone who knows of a dev post I missed) address this in a general fashion to aleviate some potential community fears? Thanks.

Hit box skins are not a major issue in WOT. Anyone can use them or not. You can also get schematics of tansk and just aim for the vulnerable spots. The skins make this a bit easier but arent needed to do the damage. You are either misinformed or naieve.

[Faenwulf]

MWOs policy and security against cheaters is pretty easy.
First step will be tracking you down using your IP. Second step is Paul coming to visit you and "extract" some beta keys through the usual measures. Thirs step is you paying for Pauls travel expenses.

[Endless Ike]

I guess my primary concern is that since it's free to play, even a permanent ban for cheating isn't much of a weapon to deter people who are deadset on cheating.

It needs to be an instant kick and permanent IP ban, and even that's far from foolproof. If I really want to just ruin people's day I would just make a new account everytime I'm banned and isntall all the bots and hacks I can get my hands on. If I'm banned OH WELL, just make a new account!

[DraigUK]

Anyone of any merit in WoT didn't need hitbox skins.

We actually tried to use them in clan at one point to help train new players, but it was pretty much a waste of time. They were often inaccurate, giving false weak spots to where you really should be shooting a given tank, and they could never really teach someone how to shoot. We abandoned using them within a few days of realising how useless they really are.

Nothing beat our own knowledge of where to shoot what tank. We got that knowledge from playing and making practice games and basically shooting the crap out of each other to find out what was what. In summary people who were any good at all, never used them. They were more of a hinderence to a good player and a distraction than anything else.

In MWO it is even less use because what are you going to aim for on a mech? The head? The legs? The arms? The rear? They are all 100% obvious as to what does what. So...what's the point? None.

As far as aimbots etc go,much as in WoT it will be practically impossible due to it all being held server end. I played 12 months of Beta, and something like 7000 battles in WoT realease (I'd guess in excess of 15,000 battles total) before I quit and in all that time I seen ONE case that I thought "that looks a bit odd" and I was probably drunk at the time. Everything else was down to people being stupid, new or paranoid(or maybe all 3) about non-existent cheating.

Edited by DraigUK, 02 July 2012 - 09:44 AM.

[Schtirlitz]

Hope MWO will utilize the similar mechanics against cheaters.
The one in WOT is very reliable.

[Paullus Valcerus]

I play APB and have experienced a thing or two while playing against well known hackers that admit they hack. Even in a game where everything is controlled server side you can have third party programs that run your hacks. PUnk buster does an okay job at detecting these programs but it struggles a lot!

The fact is that people will always find ways to cheat whether that is by paying for hax or using macros, the list goes on. The best we can hope for is that MWO devs make it a priority to supress hackler chets in such a way that the total population % of hackler chets is very small compared to the total number of players.

[Kali Sukhoi]

A report button does wonders as well.

Cheaters are the scum of the earth.

[CL_Kodiak]

Cheating is such a weird thing. On one hand you have people cheating, on the other hand you people feeling inadequate and someone else MUST be cheating.. because there is no WAY they could have beaten you. Newsflash: You can't all be the best pilot out there driving a mech, someone is better than you. Some people will be WAY better than you.

Back in MW4 we had a group of guys that were screaming hacks - but I knew them and their skills. Back when we played Mw4 cheating wasn't that bad - sure there was some obvious exploiting going on, but for the most part it was fine. Now... later MW4 was riddled with crap but I wasn't there for it.

[Saren21]

Shoklar, on 02 July 2012 - 06:17 AM, said:

Hi all,

I'm fairly new here still, and there is one thing I've been dreading. That is extremely low head armor (if the actual game holds true to Battletech) and the use of aimbots and/or hitbox skins.

Hitbox skins were a major issue in World of Tanks, and I'd hope there wasn't a repeat of that here. In WoT, it was being constantly set on fire or ammo racked (which you could combat in a limited fashion), but if you take a head hit from an AC/20 or Gauss...you're pretty much done.

In WoT, they dealt with aimbots by having a randomizer circle where the shot would land anywhere in that circle at a predefined range...so the longer the distance of the shot, the more chance that it would miss. It would generally stay toward the middle of the circle, but it was a bunch of statistics stuff that I'm not going to pretend to understand.

I ran a search, but didn't see any specific discussion of these topics. These are pretty important, so I hope they're being discussed in the Beta forum if not here. Could a dev (or someone who knows of a dev post I missed) address this in a general fashion to aleviate some potential community fears? Thanks.

The Aim bot has been covered alot in this thread. so i will not make any coments on that one but lets talk about hit boxes...

First they are not going to be very effective as other people have stated its very obvious to see what to aim for.

Second we are allowed to move armor around in on our mechs take some away add some here or there it would make hit box maps totaly
useless becuase players can change things around.

Third advanced scouts will be able to relay info about enemy mechs to friendlys (ie; Armor type/weak points. wep load out, mech type and tons) that sounds like a hell of a lot more useful thne a hitbox map IMO.

So in closeing Hit box maps will be totaly useless.

[csebal]

BigMo5, on 02 July 2012 - 06:43 AM, said:

The WoT luck based aiming system SUCKs. Ok now that you understand where I am coming from...

WUT? I mean WOT? erm.. WHAT?

I'm sure you also know, that in the real world, ballistic weaponry is inaccurate over long distances. It was especially true for WW2 era tank weapons, some of which were smoothbore cannons. I believe that WoT managed to do a fairly good approximation of proper aiming / inaccuracy with their aiming time and shot deviation system.

If anything, I would like to see MWO follow a similar approach when it comes to ballistics, especially long range ballistics, like gauss or lighter AC cannons. Not the aiming time of course, but the shots deviating from target over distance.

Endless Ike, on 02 July 2012 - 09:37 AM, said:

It needs to be an instant kick and permanent IP ban, and even that's far from foolproof.

It sure is not, especially considering how many ISPs use dynamic IP ranges for DSL connections, so you only get an IP when you establish the connection and what IP you get is completely based on the pool of addresses available at that time. Perma banning IP addresses as such is not a good idea, at least not until we manage to get rid of IPv4 for good.

In the IPv6 world, where each user could have his very own dedicated IP address RANGE, things look different, but the whole IPv6 thing is still in the process of getting set up.

[Kaelin]

there is another factor to consider;
historically from the Mechwarrior franchises the physical 'head' on the model actually counts as center-torso armour locale, and the 'head' hitbox/armour locale was the cockpit specifically, this seemed to provide an accurate representation of the likelihood of head-shotting mechs.

I'm inclined to believe this will operate on a similar principal.

as for skins/aimbots I believe some will try, but ultimately it's not likely to be worth the hassle.

[Sirous]

It all depends on how hit detection is enabled is it server side or client side. Plus everyone thinking that because the servers are controlled by the developers does not mean they will be hack free. On the contrary, there are more than enough unscrupulous people to build in codes for various cheats. I play more than my fair share of FPS games and Modern Warfare series is riddled with aimbots and hacks, and most of those servers were "controlled" by the devs.

And as much as I hate some of the issues with Punkbuster, I will admit that they are very good and fairly timely when acting on a new hack or aimbot. Punkbuster is way better than say VAC, by more than leaps and bounds. Punkbuster will not allow the person to play, VAC waits oh say a few weeks before stopping the player.
It's more to do with dedicated servers controlled by decent admins that is the best way to go. You never know what you are going to get with matchmaking type services, Where as if there is a server that you know the admins are decent you can be fairly certain that no cheaters will last long there.

[Voyager I]

Sirous, on 02 July 2012 - 10:51 AM, said:

It all depends on how hit detection is enabled is it server side or client side

Hit detection is always done server side, but the client still has the information on where their enemies are (because, you know, they need to actually be on the screen). That's all an aimbot needs.

Quote

Plus everyone thinking that because the servers are controlled by the developers does not mean they will be hack free. On the contrary, there are more than enough unscrupulous people to build in codes for various cheats. I play more than my fair share of FPS games and Modern Warfare series is riddled with aimbots and hacks, and most of those servers were "controlled" by the devs.

This is correct. Their will be hacks for this game.

Quote

And as much as I hate some of the issues with Punkbuster, I will admit that they are very good and fairly timely when acting on a new hack or aimbot. Punkbuster is way better than say VAC, by more than leaps and bounds. Punkbuster will not allow the person to play, VAC waits oh say a few weeks before stopping the player.

VAC has a very good reason for doing so, and also causes far fewer problems for the users than Punkbuster does...namely, with not coming up with false positives all the time.

Quote

It's more to do with dedicated servers controlled by decent admins that is the best way to go. You never know what you are going to get with matchmaking type services, Where as if there is a server that you know the admins are decent you can be fairly certain that no cheaters will last long there.

This is also correct. There will always be cheaters. You can ban most of the hackers, but not all of the hackers, and not instantly, and more will inevitably appear. Well-administrated servers can take care of the ones that get through, but on a random matchmaker? There is no protection.


Cheating is actually liable to be a significant problem. We have an FPS with headshots, powerful hitscan or near-hitscan weaponry, and an essentially nil cost of creating a new account. It will be possible, and it will be very, very hard to stop.

[Bodha]

Intruder, on 02 July 2012 - 06:29 AM, said:

World of Tanks is server based too so cheating was incredibly rare (I only heard of 2 reasonably convincining cases in my near 10,000 games). People did get banned for botting (not Aimbots).

However skinning etc is of course client-side and lots of players, especially in the competative Clan Wars side, used hitbox skins to highlight weakspots and the like.
I don't think this is as relevant in MWO as we all know the head and rear torsos are weak and the game seems to have an element of damage / shot distribution.
I hope so anyway!!!

Those skins in WoT arent terribly useful. Anyone with half a brain can figure out to shoot the side of the rear half of the hull if you want to have a chance of causing engine fires.

Add in the fact that the skins are on the surface of the tank and the actual target is inside the 3d model and things aren't quite perfect. On top of that I've heard people complain about shooting those colored spots on the skins and failing to get the desired results. After a bit of inquiry I determined they didnt consider that the angle of the shot would result in a high level of bounces.

In conclusion... skins are not a big issue. Aimbots though would be a very big issue. Personally. I hope they work very hard to prevent aimbots and other 3rd party software hacks which aid players unfairly.