4 ms·

Anisotropic mouse movement? Or perhaps the 0ms-80ms distribution of mouse movement matches the >80ms mouse movement distribution within some bounds. I'm thinki

Anisotropic mouse movement? Or perhaps the 0ms-80ms distribution of mouse movement matches the >80ms mouse movement distribution within some bounds. I'm thinking KL divergence between the two. The Kolmogorov-Smirnov Test for two-dimensional data? There's a lot of interesting possible approaches that can be tuned for arbitrary sensitivity and specificity.

lukan 11mo ago
Like another commentor mentioned, I think that only works for a specific cheat(engine) - as long as they don't adjust (and randomize more for example). If it could be solved with some statistics, I think it would have been done already. I ain't a statistician though, but if you feel confident, I think there is quite some money in it, if you find a real world solution.
- kelseyfrog 11mo ago
  To be sure. There's at most 6 frames of data per event to work with at 60fps. It's an interesting problem and well suited to statistics.
- Xss3 11mo ago
  Even randomisation would cause their aim to be statistically different to a normal players aim over time.
dchftcs 11mo ago
Throwing in ML jargon and going straight to modelling before understanding the problem reduces your credibility as a data scientist in front of engineers and stakeholders. As always, one of the most difficult parts is getting good features and data. In this case one difficulty is measuring and defining the reaction time to begin with. In Counter Strike you rely on footsteps to guess if someone is around the corner and start shooting when they come close. For far away targets, lots of people camp at specifc spots and often shoot without directly sighting someone if they anticipate someone crossing - the hit rate may be low but it's a low cost thing to do. Then you have people not hiding too well and showing a toe. Or someone pinpointing the position of an enemy based on information from another player. So the question is, what is the starting point for you to measure the reaction? Now let's say you successfully measured the reaction time and applied a threshold of 80ms. Bot runners will adapt and sandbag their reaction time, or introduce motions to make it harder to measure mouse movements, and the value of your model now is less than the electricity needed to run it. So with your proposal to solve the reaction time problem with KL divergence. Congratulations, you just solved a trivial statistics problem to create very little business value.
- Xss3 11mo ago
  More like congrats, you just made every cheater far less effective by forcing them to play nearer to human limits. You arent eliminating cheaters, that's impossible, you are limiting their impact.
  - Akronymus 11mo ago
    If cheaters play indistingushable from normal people, the seems like mission accomplished.
    - Xss3 11mo ago
      Yep
    - dchftcs 11mo ago
      Cheaters don't have to play like normal people to avoid detection. They just have to make it expensive to police them. For example, the game developer may be afraid of a even a 10% false positive ban rate, and as a result won't ban anyone except perhaps a small number of clean-cut cases.
      - Xss3 11mo ago
        Most cheaters are playing well outside of human limits and doing huge amounts of damage to the legitimate player experience. A 10% safety margin beyond human play sounds reasonable. A world where cheaters can only play 10% better than humans is a far better world than the one we are in at the moment.
        lukan 11mo ago
        "A world where cheaters can only play 10% better than humans is a far better world than the one we are in at the moment." My world is pretty fine, as I don't play games on servers, without active admin/mods that kick and ban people who obviously cheat. ML solutions can maybe help here, but I believe they can reliable detect cheats, without banning also lucky or skilled players, once I see it.

lukan 11mo ago

Like another commentor mentioned, I think that only works for a specific cheat(engine) - as long as they don't adjust (and randomize more for example). If it could be solved with some statistics, I think it would have been done already. I ain't a statistician though, but if you feel confident, I think there is quite some money in it, if you find a real world solution.

kelseyfrog 11mo ago
To be sure. There's at most 6 frames of data per event to work with at 60fps. It's an interesting problem and well suited to statistics.
Xss3 11mo ago
Even randomisation would cause their aim to be statistically different to a normal players aim over time.

dchftcs 11mo ago

Throwing in ML jargon and going straight to modelling before understanding the problem reduces your credibility as a data scientist in front of engineers and stakeholders. As always, one of the most difficult parts is getting good features and data. In this case one difficulty is measuring and defining the reaction time to begin with. In Counter Strike you rely on footsteps to guess if someone is around the corner and start shooting when they come close. For far away targets, lots of people camp at specifc spots and often shoot without directly sighting someone if they anticipate someone crossing - the hit rate may be low but it's a low cost thing to do. Then you have people not hiding too well and showing a toe. Or someone pinpointing the position of an enemy based on information from another player. So the question is, what is the starting point for you to measure the reaction? Now let's say you successfully measured the reaction time and applied a threshold of 80ms. Bot runners will adapt and sandbag their reaction time, or introduce motions to make it harder to measure mouse movements, and the value of your model now is less than the electricity needed to run it. So with your proposal to solve the reaction time problem with KL divergence. Congratulations, you just solved a trivial statistics problem to create very little business value.

Xss3 11mo ago
More like congrats, you just made every cheater far less effective by forcing them to play nearer to human limits. You arent eliminating cheaters, that's impossible, you are limiting their impact.
- Akronymus 11mo ago
  If cheaters play indistingushable from normal people, the seems like mission accomplished.
  - Xss3 11mo ago
    Yep
  - dchftcs 11mo ago
    Cheaters don't have to play like normal people to avoid detection. They just have to make it expensive to police them. For example, the game developer may be afraid of a even a 10% false positive ban rate, and as a result won't ban anyone except perhaps a small number of clean-cut cases.
    - Xss3 11mo ago
      Most cheaters are playing well outside of human limits and doing huge amounts of damage to the legitimate player experience. A 10% safety margin beyond human play sounds reasonable. A world where cheaters can only play 10% better than humans is a far better world than the one we are in at the moment.
      - lukan 11mo ago
        "A world where cheaters can only play 10% better than humans is a far better world than the one we are in at the moment." My world is pretty fine, as I don't play games on servers, without active admin/mods that kick and ban people who obviously cheat. ML solutions can maybe help here, but I believe they can reliable detect cheats, without banning also lucky or skilled players, once I see it.