Live data from Hacker News

CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

github.com

21–30 of 73 posts

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#22
post #3

This 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…

Valve also implemented this on CS:GO back in 2015 [0], and enabled by default in competitive servers, so I would consider it absolutely tenable (FACEIT, the platform used by competitive variants, had their own hand-rolled SMAC implementation, before using the 1st party solution, albei,t that solution was buggy). Why Valve didn't port this over to CS2, I will never know.

[0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/comments/35zwwy/opt...

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#23
Moving away from the technical solution space - I'm curious, have their been any games (or communities) with a high entry fee/deposit (e.g. $500 USD) to join kept in escrow and lost in the event you're discovered to be cheating?

There are plenty more questions like paying for mods/review, securing the money, paying for servers, etc.. but my basic question is if cost of entry exceeds cost of reward from cheating has ever been attempted in a game.

Apparently buying a new copy of a $10-20 game isn't enough to keep people away from cheats. Less so when there is prize money on the line or skins (e.g. CS2) worth $100k.

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#24
post #3

This 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…

Valve also implemented this on CS:GO back in 2015 [0], and enabled by default in competitive servers, so I would consider it absolutely tenable (FACEIT, the platform used by competitive variants, had their own hand-rolled SMAC implementation, before using the 1st party solution, albei,t that solution was buggy). Why Valve didn't port this over to CS2, I will never know. [0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/c…

PVS-based culling is very different from the kind of fog of war system in discussion here. The cases that these FoW systems purports to deal with would all be "pass" cases for PVS culling.

PVS culling solves the informational/strategic advantage aspect provided by wallhacks, but not the pre-aiming reaction-time advantage in a peeker vs holder scenario.

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#25
post #19
post #2

I 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 ma…

I didn't know what ESP was; from some googling, it appears to notify you when someone is aiming at you?

Yeah my bad for not defining it. "Extra-Sensory Perception", basically as you said I believe is the most common feature -- but in general I think encompasses cheats that generally boost your "senses". So it could use audio to visually draw on your screen/radar where the sound came from.

The screenshot in this repo is kind of similar to wallhacks, but you could imagine this could easily be extended to show dropped items and the 3D audio location: https://github.com/ryanjpwatts/esp-analysis

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#26
post #9
post #3

This 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?

CSGO already added this over a decade ago.

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#27
post #21

Why hasn't valve poured a billion or two on fixing this concept and implementing it?

>Release Notes for 5/26/2015

>– Added trace-based visibility checks to prevent networking invisible enemy players.

https://blog.counter-strike.net/2015/05/11988

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#28
post #3

This 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…

Valve also implemented this on CS:GO back in 2015 [0], and enabled by default in competitive servers, so I would consider it absolutely tenable (FACEIT, the platform used by competitive variants, had their own hand-rolled SMAC implementation, before using the 1st party solution, albei,t that solution was buggy). Why Valve didn't port this over to CS2, I will never know. [0]: https://www.reddit.com/r/GlobalOffensive/c…

> so I would consider it absolutely tenable

Always confuses me why people speak so authoritatively on topics they aren't versed in. PVS culling is not even remotely comparable to occlusion culling, mainly because wallhacks are not relevant accross the map; in fact they are only useful when opponents are always well into your PVS range.

FYI: there are also some clever ways to get around PVS culling (mostly by inferring opponent position based on other indicators, like gunfire).

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#29

Moving away from the technical solution space - I'm curious, have their been any games (or communities) with a high entry fee/deposit (e.g. $500 USD) to join kept in escrow and lost in the event you're discovered to be cheating? There are plenty more questions like paying for mods/review, securing the money, paying for servers, etc.. but my basic question is if cost of entry exceeds cost of reward from cheating has e…

>e.g. $500 USD

I've seen private cheats for games with less-than-terrible anticheats charge that monthly, if not weekly. You're underestimating how much people are willing to pay to play with cheats, and overestimating how much regular people are willing to pay to play against players without them.

Re: CS2 Fog Of War: Server-sided anti-wallhack occlusion culling for CS2 servers

#30
post #3

This 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…

I was on the other side of this in League of Legends. They used to have packets leak information to the client about player position. The classic examples are for stuff like particle emission or spell usage. Well at some point they decided that they had enough and did a pretty major rework of their netcode to only send player positions when you were supposed to have vision on them (plus a tiny extra radius). That absolutely wrecked the determinism of the game, as small jitters would cause skill shots to hit you before they even drew in your game, players would become invisible as the packets arrived out of order. Particle emitters would bug out.

This stuff i way harder than people imagine. I think League eventually got it somewhat figured out, but it took a couple of years from what i recall.

Post reply on HN