Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

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

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 73 posts

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

#31

Post by cosmic_cheese »

dvt wrote: 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 wonder why similar methods haven't been employed in MMO servers to help curb botting/cheating there. The impact of jitter and loss of smoothness in a tab-target game like WoW would be minimal (even in PvP), because it's always had a noticable level of artifacts like rubberbanding.

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

#32

Post by reactordev »

dvt wrote: 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…

Except when the professionals are doing the cheating. LAN won’t save you. Word.exe

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

#33

Post by foota »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #31
dvt wrote: 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 wonder why similar methods haven't been employed in MMO servers to help curb botting/cheating there. The impact of jitter and loss of smoothness in a tab-target game like WoW would be minimal (even in PvP), because it's always had a noticable level of artifacts like rubberbanding.

How would it help? MMOs generally don't need to know where things are right now since it's mostly static, no?

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

#35

Post by dvt »

cosmic_cheese wrote: post #31
dvt wrote: 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 wonder why similar methods haven't been employed in MMO servers to help curb botting/cheating there. The impact of jitter and loss of smoothness in a tab-target game like WoW would be minimal (even in PvP), because it's always had a noticable level of artifacts like rubberbanding.

Well, if you cheat in WoW, Blizzard might just sue you[1], so that tends to be quite effective :)

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MDY_Industries,_LLC_v._Blizzar....

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

#36

Post by cherryteastain »

foota wrote: post #33
cosmic_cheese wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wonder why similar methods haven't been employed in MMO servers to help curb botting/cheating there. The impact of jitter and loss of smoothness in a tab-target game like WoW would be minimal (even in PvP), because it's always had a noticable level of artifacts like rubberbanding.

How would it help? MMOs generally don't need to know where things are right now since it's mostly static, no?

WoW has a lot of mechanics involving line of sight (eg a spell you begin casting when the target was in LOS will fail when the casting time finishes if the target moves out of LOS) and positioning (AOE spells, spell ranges, NPCs/objects you can interact with only within a certain range, among many others)

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

#37

Post by frollogaston »

Xeoncross wrote: post #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 e…

Csgo became free at some point, and I remember the amount of smurfing increasing a lot then. Have rarely noticed cheaters, but smurfs are just as bad if not worse. They do at least require new accounts to waste some time playing deathmatch to be eligible for competitive.

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

#38

Post by ThatPlayer »

bakies wrote: post #7
xeonmc wrote: post #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. 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.

That would have to include your own position on your own client. Adding a delay of the RTT of the worst latency in the server to your inputs

Some games still do this. RTS games notably, but hide it with mouse and sound effects. If anyone remembers the Starcraft 1 option of "extra high latency", it would work by increasing the delay.

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

#39

Post by frollogaston »

lachiflippi wrote: post #29
Xeoncross wrote: post #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 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.

Yeah you'll deter legit players with the escrow way before you'll deter cheaters. It's a good thought but probably not going to work.

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

#40

Post by [deleted] »

dvt wrote: post #28
shaokind wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 inferrin…

[deleted]
Post reply on HN