Live data from Hacker News

Riot Games Approach to Anti-Cheat

engineering.riotgames.com

411–412 of 412 posts

Re: Riot Games Approach to Anti-Cheat

#411

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The options presented are 1) segregate them into a separate pool, as suggested. They can then still give you money, the arms race is short circuited, and they don't impact the enjoyment of other players. 2) You ban them.

And then they possibly create an account and tread more carefully next time so they don’t lose their skins. This is behavior you can even see in streamers that get banned. Frankly I think a zero tolerance approach to cheating makes sense and sends a more serious message. It still looks bad if cheaters exist even to other cheaters, for example a shadowbanned streamer, and makes it harder to take your game seriously.

So you ban them and they get back up to the same, if not worse behavior. Maybe they behave a little better or try to avoid getting caught.

Trying to keep someone banned is much much harder problem than finding them to ban in the first place.

Re: Riot Games Approach to Anti-Cheat

#412
post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like a completely different system than League of Legends has. So hellbanning should work fine as suggested (it was suggested for League of Legends). Other games that use (IMHO) broken protocols by trusting the client can't reliably use hellbanning, and I don't think they can reliably do anything.

But the realtime gameplay is where the cheaters are giving other clients items in order to mark innocent players as cheaters. So everyone's getting hellbanned, at which point no one is hellbanned...

I'm saying that a game where the server isn't in the middle is broken, and cannot implement hellbanning.

League of Legends has a server in the middle, thus isn't broken, players can't give each other fake items, and hellbanning will work.

Post reply on HN