88 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

mwhighlander, on 18 December 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

4 Head shots in a row? Childs play

I raise you, 5 in a row with an AC20 cat.


Witnesses are the Arctic Knight Alliance

Yes but did you pull all those off on moving powered up mechs in a span of 15-20 seconds?

[Arch Liche]

Now killing 5 people isn't saying you headshot them... I had a very good match recently where I killed 7 enemy mechs. None, to my knowledge, were headshots. My whole team was killed, and all the enemy mechs were very badly damaged. Running in my AWS 9M I was able to finish off every mech on the enemy team. So I could pull up a screenshot with all the kills on it too. But can't claim any came from headshots, a dual ac20 would seem more than likely that you finished off other peoples targets through torso damage. I don't care who you are, a moving mech is hard to score a headshot on, let alone 5 in succession.

And until they put in hit locations or give a headshot bonus, you can claim whatever you want.

Edited by Arch Liche, 19 December 2012 - 07:23 AM.

[Brixx]

mwhighlander, on 18 December 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

4 Head shots in a row? Childs play

I raise you, 5 in a row with an AC20 cat.

Witnesses are the Arctic Knight Alliance

I am so happy that you are on my friends list. Keep it calm when you run into me, okay?

[Fooooo]

Most ive done is 3 HS in a row.

As in, 3 shots from my ac/20, 3 kills.

ALL CATAPAULTS.

Granted these guys were running right at me as they turned the corner & must of already had cockpit damage as it was 1 right after the otherand 1 ac/20 shot won't HS you....... One went down, next popped around the corner and he went down, then the next........just like lemmings

That said, aimbots are really the least of anyones worries atm. The only effective weapon for aimbots to use is lasers in the arms. Using the torso slots for lasers, or just ballistics or PPC's in general, would give it a degree of inaccuracy (each torso has a set movement speed that you cannot surpass and projectiles are not hit-scan like lasers) that a human can easily compensate for, but a bot not so much, especially against a moving mech.

Not to say they would not work, just a decent human player will beat an aimbot in MWO 9 times out of 10 imo.

Edited by Fooooo, 19 December 2012 - 07:47 AM.

[Arch Liche]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 December 2012 - 07:14 AM, said:

Yes but did you pull all those off on moving powered up mechs in a span of 15-20 seconds?

Looking at his damage indicator, he is probably one of those people who skirt the battle picking off the damaged mechs. Because if he was in actual combat, his mech would be a lot more damaged.

So, more likely than not, he picked off people who were engaged with someone else. If he was under fire, I don't think he would be able to make these claims.

Edited by Arch Liche, 19 December 2012 - 07:40 AM.

[Mr 144]

Arch Liche, on 19 December 2012 - 07:39 AM, said:

Looking at his damage indicator, he is probably one of those people who skirt the battle picking off the damaged mechs. Because if he was in actual combat, his mech would be a lot more damaged.

So, more likely than not, he picked off people who were engaged with someone else. If he was under fire, I don't think he would be able to make these claims.

You say that as if it's a bad thing. In some of my high Alpha builds, I LOVE someone skirting the edge of battle dropping the ones that take more than 1 alpha...saves me time...I don't slow down...next target..rinse...repeat.

Mr 144

[Insidious Johnson]

This was bound to happen the DAY that ballistic weapons get a speed buff. I'd wager the OP is just terribad vs snipers, as were the rest of his team. The 1st guy to die literally translates to cover up and expose less than can be targeted. People wanted Gauss nerfs and PPC buffs. Naturally, they will be engaging angrily and from extreme ranges. I look forward to there being 0 aimbots found on this. I know players this good. Brawling isn't what they do best. Hint Hint.

[MrPenguin]

Enemista, on 19 December 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

Did all of you 4 stand still, or does that aimbot count with leading targets as well?

You'd be hard pressed to find a working aimbot that can perfectly lead the shots for every single weapon round velocity in the game.

People here seem to think aimbots work using magic...

Edited by MrPenguin, 19 December 2012 - 09:13 AM.

[Timberpoes]

MrPenguin, on 19 December 2012 - 07:46 AM, said:

You'd be hard pressed to find a working aimbot that can perfectly lead the shots for every single weapon round velocity in the game.

People here seem to think aimbots work using magic...

They work using mathematics, which is a far more scary beast than magic will ever be.

[MrPenguin]

Timberpoes, on 19 December 2012 - 07:55 AM, said:

They work using mathematics, which is a far more scary beast than magic will ever be.

Just... forget it.

[Corbon Zackery]

Were not suppose to talk about it you get a pvt message stating that you should not promote cheats on the forums board.


The first rule is your not suppose to talk about cheats.

Thanks

[PropagandaWar]

I think I've been subject to a headshot about 3 time in the last 6 months of playing this game. Never by a Thundercat which is crutch mech to begin with. You need to move man move. With that being said find and permaban all cheaters!!!!

[Timberpoes]

MrPenguin, on 19 December 2012 - 08:00 AM, said:

Just... forget it.

For reference sake:
We know weapon projectile velocities.
The velocity of your 'mech and the position of your 'mech is held within the game's working memory region right there on your sticks of RAM in your machine.
The velocity of your opponent's 'mech, it's orientation, it's distance - All also held within the game's working memory region regardless of how serversided the game is or is not. It has to send data to your client to allow it to render 'mech models and thus you hold a copy of all positional 'mech information.
We also know latency numbers too - Both for yourself and your targets.
Hitting specific parts of a 'mech is also not hard either. Do you even know how rigging, animation and skeletons work? Each part of a 'mech's vertices can be modified by a skeleton mesh underlying the primary model mesh. These are seperate entities that typically act as muscle and bone to allow fluid and in some cases procedural/interpolation of animations. Which means once again the "skeletal structure" of all 'mechs is stored on your RAM in your computer. The data's right there and as it's so closely tied to Direct3D rendering finding out how to access it is not difficult either.

So we know both how long it will take an enemy 'mech to get a specified position, how long it will take a projectile to reach a specified position (and thus what 3d vector to aim along), the latency numbers between you and them to ascertain where they "really" are in conjunction with the server. We also know where specifically positioned skeletons in the 'mech and thus we can choose our focus point for attack. We also know our latency so we can ascertain how much further to lead a target due to firing authorisation from the server.

But what about convergence for shooting ballistic weapons far into the distance? To be honest, I don't have a reliable answer for this. But if you get close enough to the enemy it stops being a factor (and it's never a factor with lasers).

So with all laser weapons, using mathematics we can nail perfect shots 100% of the time since they are pinpoint hitscan weapons.

With all projectile weapons once the target's movement slows down or once a close enough distance has been achieved we can also nail perfect shots I'd say about 80% of the time.

This is not magic. It is not luck. It is not entirely impossible. A reasonable knowledge of physics, maths (mechanics) and maths (calculus).

Scaremongering is bad. But hiding your head under the rocks saying "IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO MAKE WEAPONS HIT 100% OF THE TIME, IT'S POWERED BY MAGIC!" is also bad.

Just because you're too ******** to understand that all the basic foundations you need for an aimbot (projectile velocities, projectile falloff, all known targets in the game world and their affinity (friend or foe), your world position, enemy's world position, your displacement, enemy's displacement, your latency, enemy's latency) are sat as tiny differences in voltage in your RAM - And then all the vertex and index buffers for models, bump maps, collision/hit box meshes, skeletal mesh data etc. are sat in your GPU's RAM (and are obtainable by detouring or hooking D3D and D3DX functions, methods or classes and writing your own) and the D3DX library has a ton of simple, fast, optimised helper functions (and most commercial game engine code will also contain countless predicates and functors for ascertaining whether something is within a viewing frustrum, is within line of sight [depth-buffers] etc.) - It's all right there.

I'm a game programmer. Writing code for an aimbot is fundamentally the same as writing code for an AI with 100% accuracy. You just manipulate data held in your computer's RAM and index and vertex buffer data in your GPU's RAM (in the form of interfaces to Direct3D meshes) to hit where you want, when you want.

Aimbots are real. They exist. They're a real problem to games. I'm a Legendary Founder, I sunk $120 into this game because I wanted it to succeed.

I may be wrong in what I say. I'm not going to say I'm 100% factually correct in my assessments. But the more I learn about games, I more I learn about programming, about DirectX/Direct3D and OpenGL, the more I learn about computer science, software engineering, object-orientied programming - The more informed my conclusions become.

Magic? Pfft. Maths is scarier than magic. On the 21st it's far more likely that Mathematics is the root cause of Rapture 2012 than the Mayan Prophecy or Magic.

And finding a working aimbot is as simple as finding a mathematician and a programmer who has an understanding of the Windows API, the DirectX API and the many structures of storing data within computer games.

And you'd be surprised at how often the mathematician is also the programmer.

Edited by Timberpoes, 19 December 2012 - 08:35 AM.

[Major Cockburn]

Wildcat, on 18 December 2012 - 04:59 PM, said:

just witnessed a Player one shot 4 Mechs in a Row, after he had one shot my Mech which had taken hardly any damage previously...

he had taken another kill within seconds of killing me, then took another 2 kills in very short succession...

I refuse to believe that they were all head shots aimed by a Human Player, no one is that good...

I 1 shot mechs all the time get used to it

and no you don't even need head shots to 1 hit mechs with the right load out.

[Oderint dum Metuant]

QQ i died hacks QQ.

It's perfectly doable with no scripting no hacks, some players out there are just that bad at standing still for all eternity in the open.

[Arclight]

Hesketh Vernon Hesketh Prichard, on 19 December 2012 - 06:16 AM, said:

Yes, but them issues can be resolved, Its better than a free for all as it is now!

I been stopped by PB myself by accident. It sucks. Back in BF2 days that was. YOu are right, it is like a root kit haha

Better than nthing.......

Perhaps... Aren't there better implementations though? I'm not much of a competitive player to be honest, so I'm not really familiar with other solutions.

I'm pretty carefull what gets on this system; anything that behaves like a rootkit is just... no.

[Hesketh Vernon Hesketh Prichard]

Timberpoes, on 19 December 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

For reference sake:
We know weapon projectile velocities.
The velocity of your 'mech and the position of your 'mech is held within the game's working memory region right there on your sticks of RAM in your machine.
The velocity of your opponent's 'mech, it's orientation, it's distance - All also held within the game's working memory region regardless of how serversided the game is or is not. It has to send data to your client to allow it to render 'mech models and thus you hold a copy of all positional 'mech information.
We also know latency numbers too - Both for yourself and your targets.
Hitting specific parts of a 'mech is also not hard either. Do you even know how rigging, animation and skeletons work? Each part of a 'mech's vertices can be modified by a skeleton mesh underlying the primary model mesh. These are seperate entities that typically act as muscle and bone to allow fluid and in some cases procedural/interpolation of animations. Which means once again the "skeletal structure" of all 'mechs is stored on your RAM in your computer. The data's right there and as it's so closely tied to Direct3D rendering finding out how to access it is not difficult either.

So we know both how long it will take an enemy 'mech to get a specified position, how long it will take a projectile to reach a specified position (and thus what 3d vector to aim along), the latency numbers between you and them to ascertain where they "really" are in conjunction with the server. We also know where specifically positioned skeletons in the 'mech and thus we can choose our focus point for attack. We also know our latency so we can ascertain how much further to lead a target due to firing authorisation from the server.

But what about convergence for shooting ballistic weapons far into the distance? To be honest, I don't have a reliable answer for this. But if you get close enough to the enemy it stops being a factor (and it's never a factor with lasers).

So with all laser weapons, using mathematics we can nail perfect shots 100% of the time since they are pinpoint hitscan weapons.

With all projectile weapons once the target's movement slows down or once a close enough distance has been achieved we can also nail perfect shots I'd say about 80% of the time.

This is not magic. It is not luck. It is not entirely impossible. A reasonable knowledge of physics, maths (mechanics) and maths (calculus).

Scaremongering is bad. But hiding your head under the rocks saying "IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO MAKE WEAPONS HIT 100% OF THE TIME, IT'S POWERED BY MAGIC!" is also bad.

Just because you're too ******** to understand that all the basic foundations you need for an aimbot (projectile velocities, projectile falloff, all known targets in the game world and their affinity (friend or foe), your world position, enemy's world position, your displacement, enemy's displacement, your latency, enemy's latency) are sat as tiny differences in voltage in your RAM - And then all the vertex and index buffers for models, bump maps, collision/hit box meshes, skeletal mesh data etc. are sat in your GPU's RAM (and are obtainable by detouring or hooking D3D and D3DX functions, methods or classes and writing your own) and the D3DX library has a ton of simple, fast, optimised helper functions (and most commercial game engine code will also contain countless predicates and functors for ascertaining whether something is within a viewing frustrum, is within line of sight [depth-buffers] etc.) - It's all right there.

I'm a game programmer. Writing code for an aimbot is fundamentally the same as writing code for an AI with 100% accuracy. You just manipulate data held in your computer's RAM and index and vertex buffer data in your GPU's RAM (in the form of interfaces to Direct3D meshes) to hit where you want, when you want.

Aimbots are real. They exist. They're a real problem to games. I'm a Legendary Founder, I sunk $120 into this game because I wanted it to succeed.

I may be wrong in what I say. I'm not going to say I'm 100% factually correct in my assessments. But the more I learn about games, I more I learn about programming, about DirectX/Direct3D and OpenGL, the more I learn about computer science, software engineering, object-orientied programming - The more informed my conclusions become.

Magic? Pfft. Maths is scarier than magic. On the 21st it's far more likely that Mathematics is the root cause of Rapture 2012 than the Mayan Prophecy or Magic.

And finding a working aimbot is as simple as finding a mathematician and a programmer who has an understanding of the Windows API, the DirectX API and the many structures of storing data within computer games.

And you'd be surprised at how often the mathematician is also the programmer.

Id moostly agree and i HAVE SEEN AIM BOTS FIRST HAND, his name was Dre..... Dr .....! So yes, I SEEN IT FOR CERTAIN!

As for 21/12/2012 (12/21/2012 for americans) IS THE END OF A EON, which means AGE! THats it! Pises to aquarius if you care. An age is 28,000 years so we are a very gifted generation in some senses. Seen a millenium and an Eon(age) pass by.

People need to learn there stuff before portraying the end of the world!

I mean, GET REAL!

[MrPenguin]

Timberpoes, on 19 December 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

~snip~

I love the fact you wrote all that, yet missed the point of the post you quoted. Or the point of my original post.

Also, I know how to code. I know exactly what you need to make a "working" bot. That's not the problem here.

I just refuse to go into details because that would be against the ToS. Was hopping someone who also knows about this would understand what I mean with out explicitly spelling it out. And I just flat out refuse to do that for you.

If you do how ever, actually understand this. PM me and will continue the conversation there.

Edited by MrPenguin, 19 December 2012 - 09:11 AM.

[Hesketh Vernon Hesketh Prichard]

MrPenguin, on 19 December 2012 - 09:07 AM, said:

I love the fact you wrote all that, yet missed the point of the post you quoted. Or the point of my original post.

Also, I know how to code. I know exactly what you need to make a "working" bot. That's not the problem here.

I just refuse to go into details because that would be against the ToS. Was hopping someone who also knows what would understand what I mean with out explicitly spelling it out. And I just flat out refuse to do that for you.

good man

[Jacmac]

mwhighlander, on 18 December 2012 - 05:17 PM, said:

4 Head shots in a row? Childs play

I raise you, 5 in a row with an AC20 cat.


Witnesses are the Arctic Knight Alliance

I have to admit, that would make me think aimbot.