CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
1–10 of 73 posts
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#2I wonder how often wall hacks are actually used in high-level competitive play by cheaters vs ESP. ESP seems like the better route to avoid manual review flagging suspicious activity. Audible cues (which this currently does not mitigate, and I'm not sure it can) are things that can genuinely separate players by skill and you'd think someone running such a cheat just has very good hearing.
>CS2FOW uses static baked map geometry. Dynamic occluders such as doors, breakables, props, smokes, particles, and projectiles are intentionally out of scope for now.
Market window on Mirage just became more powerful on these servers :)
Very cool project nonetheless.
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#3This has been done before in both 1.6 as well as Source. I helped with some of these implementations back in the late-2000s when I was playing professionally and I even tried to kickstart an anti-cheat hardware solution about a decade ago[1].. spent way too much time working on some of these problems. The main issue with occlusion was slightly increased latency, visual jitter because of interpolation (especially around corners), and a few other more technical problems[2]. It's good enough for public servers, but not tenable in serious competition.
Cheating has always been a problem in FPSs, and it likely won't go away. That's why premier competitions have always been on LAN.
[1] https://www.pcgamer.com/introducing-gameref-the-anti-cheat-h...
[2] Hard to fully obfuscate audio sources, hard to obfuscate hitboxes since you still need them for collision checking (e.g. if a grenade bounces off an enemy player behind a wall—the server does not do all physics for all clients), and this is on top of the engine itself sometimes requiring actual entities, so you're stuck with these dummy entities in memory, and so on.
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#4 > Does it cause pop-in when peeking?
The goal is early reveal, not exact last-millisecond reveal.
CS2FOW predicts using movement and ping, reveals enemies slightly before exact visibility, and keeps revealed enemies visible briefly. This intentionally leaks a small near-corner window to avoid late pop-in.
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#5> Does it cause pop-in when peeking? The goal is early reveal, not exact last-millisecond reveal. CS2FOW predicts using movement and ping, reveals enemies slightly before exact visibility, and keeps revealed enemies visible briefly. This intentionally leaks a small near-corner window to avoid late pop-in. This fails to address the main point of the "pop-in" issue relevant to fog of war systems, which is that it is th…
Interesting, could it be mitigated by the server doing its own prediction and defogging the peeker early? Or is lag prediction in CS2 not entirely client-sided.
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#6This is good. However, it still sends info about the players ~200ms ahead which still makes you lose.
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#7> Does it cause pop-in when peeking? The goal is early reveal, not exact last-millisecond reveal. CS2FOW predicts using movement and ping, reveals enemies slightly before exact visibility, and keeps revealed enemies visible briefly. This intentionally leaks a small near-corner window to avoid late pop-in. This fails to address the main point of the "pop-in" issue relevant to fog of war systems, which is that it is th…
Why wouldn't you just send the positions to both clients in the same tick? Seems trivial to solve.
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#8[dead]
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#9This has been done before in both 1.6 as well as Source. I helped with some of these implementations back in the late-2000s when I was playing professionally and I even tried to kickstart an anti-cheat hardware solution about a decade ago[1].. spent way too much time working on some of these problems. The main issue with occlusion was slightly increased latency, visual jitter because of interpolation (especially arou…
Why on earth don't the producers of the game implement this? It sounds trivial to do?
Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers
#10> Does it cause pop-in when peeking? The goal is early reveal, not exact last-millisecond reveal. CS2FOW predicts using movement and ping, reveals enemies slightly before exact visibility, and keeps revealed enemies visible briefly. This intentionally leaks a small near-corner window to avoid late pop-in. This fails to address the main point of the "pop-in" issue relevant to fog of war systems, which is that it is th…
Why wouldn't you just send the positions to both clients in the same tick? Seems trivial to solve.
"Same tick" is a misnomer for a few reasons. First of all, games use UDP, which is basically a "fire and forget" protocol (which means packets get dropped routinely). Second of all, realtime games use some interpolation/prediction to make up for latency (and aforementioned dropped packets).
So it's sort of a "relativistic" temporal system, not a linear "oh now you're at t=1, now you're at t=2" kind of timeline. And there's all kinds of complicated ways you create concensus between multiple clients, between server and clients, etc. (A lot of this remains an active research area.)