3 ms·
Very much depends on how you employ the frequency limits. If you say "You can only do 300 actions per minute", the bot could make all 300 actions in the first s
by hobofan 9y ago
Very much depends on how you employ the frequency limits. If you say "You can only do 300 actions per minute", the bot could make all 300 actions in the first second if it sees that as optimal, breaking the latency limits. If you however say "You can only do 1 action after waiting 200ms since the last action", the bot will have to choose one optimal action every 200ms, effectively limiting the input latency.
- gpm 9y agoNo. Because the bot can choose the next action at the end of the 200ms, with all the information available then, not at the start. Bandwidth limits are typically of the "You can only do 1 action (send 1 packet) 200ms since you sent the last packet", not "You can only send 300 packets per minute".
- hobofan 9y agoHow about "You have to choose an action at the end of 200ms, with the information at the start"? At the end of the day we can be nitpicky and speculate all day long, but we won't know for sure what they achieved/didn't achieve unless they publish something more concrete than a blog post that is intentionally written in accessible language, which has the side effect eroding some of the more specific measures that were taken to ensure a level playing field.
- gpm 9y agoIf they did than then they are simulating latency, but I see nothing to suggest they did that.