Liam Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 Well, now this bug has been found I think that it should be brought to Hubert so that SC2 doesn't have the same flaw. At least make it a bit harder for the cheaters so not every 14 yr old kid has got the "Force" on his side<the Dark side of course> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 now this bug has been found I think that it should be brought to Hubert so that SC2 doesn't have the same flaw. At least make it a bit harder for the cheaters First of all, it's not a game bug. The issue is that any saved game file can be opened and looked at. Since these files can be copied and opened multiple times, there's no way to determine how many times someone has played his turn for best results. And for TCP/IP, the ability to save a game in progress and open the turn in another window allows players of questionable character to do whatever they do. SC2 will at least have a timer feature. Perhaps Hubert can also add a simple broadcast message whenever the game is saved, so that way all players know if they're up against an opponent who's looking for an unfair advantage. Unless it's announced that someone will save the game for ending a session or some other mutually agreed upon reason. Beyond that, I've suggested that Battlefront consider offering a server for its games where players can log in and play TCP/IP or PBEM games WITHOUT ever having access to the saved game file. There would have to be a game option to do this, which automatically connects to the server and does NOT allow the players to save the game to their PC. This may be overkill for the many decent gamers out there who don't need to cheat for their entertainment, but for some heated league competitions it may offer squeaky clean accountability to keep everybody honest. Can't you kids just play nice without cheating?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zappsweden Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 pzgndr, I think the cheater could grab the highly updated autosave.sav so the cheat works without eben saving. That means, "save detection" would not help. However, a distinction between PBEM saves and TCP/IP saves would intead work better. mysave.pbm mysave.ip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted May 18, 2004 Author Share Posted May 18, 2004 Why not add the features requested in the SC2 thread: pre-game viewing, timers, & replays? Also, show the dice rolls after the game in a summary log or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zappsweden Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 pzgndr, I also have an old topic where I discussed a client-server technique to avoid cheating (not only reload cheat but cheating with values too). It was similar to having 2 chess board and just sending the moves (instead of the results) on the communication link and let both computers perform them i.e dual performing system. Instead of sending "My rook is now on D4 and your Queen is missing from the board" you send "Move my Rook to D4" and let the opponent check and perform the move too (if it was a legal Rook Move) and possibly remove the Queen (if the queen was on D4). http://www.battlefront.com/cgi-bin/bbs/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=18;t=003033#000000 [ May 18, 2004, 08:46 AM: Message edited by: zappsweden ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pzgndr Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 I think the cheater could grab the highly updated autosave.sav Right. This is a nagging problem. Can't exactly disable the autosave in case something happens to the TCP/IP connection, but maybe it could be locked somehow or kept active in virtual memory only while the game is in progress. Maybe there's a solution, maybe not. Rest assured, the issue is on the radar screen. I discussed a client-server technique to avoid cheating The thing is the GAME has to interface with the server and that means Hubert has to provide certain code features. I agree it's doable, but probably would require a dedicated host and support. This is something Battlefront could consider doing, and then provide support for the interface coding for its various games. I doubt if Hubert is going to tackle this issue all on his own just for SC2. It's not exactly the game designer's headache to worry about how players may misuse his game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Les the Sarge 9-1 Posted May 18, 2004 Share Posted May 18, 2004 Cheating for all the ballyhoo, is only a human to human online gaming issue remember. Before everyone rushes to the conclusion it will "kill" the game, all it really does, is kill off league and or ladder gaming between people you "don't know". It does squat to harming the game during solo play vs AI, or to gaming in hotseat mode (which I like eh) as well as you vs you mode in hotseat mode. And while it will be a major bone to pick over for the crowd that enjoys human to human online gaming, I have also noticed how people absolutely rant out of control the second you mention possibly omitting the AI in a computer wargame. People EXPECT to be able to play the game solo, because quite frankly, online play being the salvation of wargaming is a myth. It is just as hard to get reliable online games as it is to get someone to your place to play in person. SOOOOOO, keep inmind, that while security IS a very big issue HC needs to address, it does NOT kill the game. It just makes everyone paranoid in online games when they sudden think they are no longer any good as an opponent (due to amazing bad luck). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted May 19, 2004 Author Share Posted May 19, 2004 Les --- Yeah, we know. You're the most honest, a great guy, blah-blah-blah... What we want is our features of replays, timers, pre-game viewing, & spectator mode. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aesopo123 Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Rambo, Let them delude themselves calling themselves hollow champions of nothingness. This is the problem that we have nowadays, instant gratification - no values, no work ethic, etc...etc... Look who we elected president, a drunkard, frat boy, who can't add simple fractions much less carry an intelligent conversation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Comrade Trapp Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Les --- Yeah, we know. You're the most honest, a great guy, blah-blah-blah...lol Sorry Les, had to laugh at that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted May 20, 2004 Author Share Posted May 20, 2004 aesopo123 said Look who we elected president, a drunkard, frat boy, who can't add simple fractions much less carry an intelligent conversation. ASSmyPoo123 --- Suddenly I don't like you. I love George Bush. I was a frat boy too who likes to drink beer. It's better than a Christ-Rejector who burned the US Flag in England during 'Nam. George got saved in the mid-80's, led to the Lord by the Rev. Billy Graham, we are all sinners. Rambo supports our troops Rambo supports George W. Bush Rambo supports C-Trapp over ASSmyPoo If you have noticed, I'm tired of those who have no faith or patience for the mission in Iraq. We pulled Saddam out of a rathole, waxed his sons, & liberated a country. It will take a little time to install democracy. It might fail, but it's worth a try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kossuth Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 I dont like bush, but i usully do not like american presidents cuz its often a question of a lot of money, not their competence. BUT as i am not living in USA i can hardly be the right person to have an opinion. About Iraq. I strongly SUPPORT the invasion and the presence there. BUT i think it should have been done -91, directly after desert storm. They should have moved in when they saw that the uprisings failed. Now the people and the anti-Saddam fractions turned to Saddam instead of against him thanks to a decade of embargos. Thats my only critism. What is a frat boy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted May 20, 2004 Author Share Posted May 20, 2004 kossuth --- "frat" is short for "fraternity". A fraternity is a group or organization typically found in college. There are lots of types of fraternities...social (like the movie Animal House - which is excessive liquor/partying), academic, sports, etc. The Middle East is a real mess. Back to the topic: I'm sure there's lots of people out there that knew about this FOW-SNIFFER method. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Iron Ranger Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Hey Rambo and Gang, Yea, I knew it was theridicall possiable, after all in PBEM you can can redown load and redown load till you get what you want. So why not do the same in a IP game with the auto save. However I assumed the same as Zapp, since I couldn't have two games up at one time (hot seat) that in reality it was not workable unless you had a much better computer then my 1999 POS. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zappsweden Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Iron Ranger. When Rambo and I tested it, it worked loading 2 SC. I think (not sure) that switching between the 2 instances of SC it often terminates one of them but the cheater could just do the cheat and then shut down the extra SC. In critical moments of the game, a FOW cheat could determine enemy air positions and win the game (by snatching air superiority in front of the enemies noses). Also, some guy could have 2 computers. SUMMARY: I do not know the exact conditions on when running 2 SC (on same computer) crash each others but what I DO know is Rambo and I suceeded in running a TCP/IP game while I started a PBEM load and could then switch back telling Rambo where his navy was. [ May 20, 2004, 05:16 PM: Message edited by: zappsweden ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted May 20, 2004 Share Posted May 20, 2004 Zapp: this is a major design flaw. I have one idea for a fix Do not let a player Save the game without both players voting for a save. In some games I play before you can quit, all players have to vote and then there is a timer to save. Well, modify SC2 to the point where if I want to save I cannot do it without your okay as my opponent.Offer the Autosave feature for those who trust it, but disable it for those who do not. Small amount of programming here Big Factor Problem could be fixed unless player asks for a lot of 'breaks'... but that would eliminate a lot of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zappsweden Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Liam. Another fix would simply be that the "load PBEM" cannot open a TCP/IP save. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted May 21, 2004 Share Posted May 21, 2004 Zapp, yes eliminating this altogether. Great idea. Little alteration to programming, hope that Hubert listens.. It'll crash SC2 before it hits the competitive Market if not. Players are anal about their moves in this game... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted May 21, 2004 Author Share Posted May 21, 2004 Hubert, Moon, or Battlefront representatives, do you have any comments on this issue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
With Clusters Posted May 22, 2004 Share Posted May 22, 2004 I'm all for "replays, timers, pre-game viewing, & spectator mode", not that I care so much about cheating (only played against one person I met on-line who wasn't a friend I'd known in real life, and he seemed a perfectly stand up guy), but I think it would be enjoyable just for the heck of it. I think the idea of hosted servers is a good idea too for cutting down on the cheating (although not being a computer science major, I have no idea how they work - would a hosted server cut down on this 'save' cheat thingy you're all talking about?). I just assume that will cost money, meaning some sort of monthy fee or what not. For those interested in serious competative play, it might be worth it (although I suppose some uber-nerd could still figure a way to hack even that?). At least with 'replay', you could spot trends and figure when someone was really working you over. Of course they could be crafty, like Allied intelligence in WWII, who let a few U-boats and resupply missions to N.A. get through, even though they new about 'em, just so the enemy wouldn't catch on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon_j_rambo Posted May 23, 2004 Author Share Posted May 23, 2004 What's interesting, nobody else but me is claiming to know about this bug. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 Originally posted by kossuth: I dont like bush, but i usully do not like american presidents cuz its often a question of a lot of money, not their competence. BUT as i am not living in USA i can hardly be the right person to have an opinion. Arseholer newbie? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
imported_Rannug Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 Are you an asshole if you don´t like Bush? Kuni, trodde du var en sosse...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kossuth Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 Tackar för förolämpningen. (thanks for the insult) [ May 23, 2004, 02:55 AM: Message edited by: kossuth ] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kuniworth Posted May 23, 2004 Share Posted May 23, 2004 Opps you are against Bush? That makes you an angel newbie. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts