cheaters

Also for the record, I'm not suggesting I could walk into CG's offices and code it for them. But if you do some Googling on gaming replay systems, the groundwork and expertise is out there. It's a common feature. And the load on the game and servers would appear to be minimal based on my rudimentary understanding.

But if it costs more than it generates, CG will not care.

I did record an outcome (don't ask me how), and it took only 12ko ...

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401728" wrote:
Also for the record, I'm not suggesting I could walk into CG's offices and code it for them. But if you do some Googling on gaming replay systems, the groundwork and expertise is out there. It's a common feature. And the load on the game and servers would appear to be minimal based on my rudimentary understanding.

But if it costs more than it generates, CG will not care.

I believe a replay system is a standard, but not sure if it was a thing back when CG created SWGOH which is one of the earliest hero collector games in the mobile industry

So the battle replay feature would be something they would need to develop later on, they definitely get enough logs to recreate a battle, but whether they have a replay system developed and is used is another question

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401732" wrote:

"Ultra;c-2401727" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401725" wrote:
Back to swgoh, you don't store everything you described. You don't need to know the mods. You just need the rng seed, base stats, ability levels, and a move/target log. The game engine can recreate the outcomes upon request.

CG actually gets battle logs (its how we get GAC results) but they get more information than what the GAC history shows, they get a step by step information of the battle, and it also includes the RNG seed

We know this because one of the dataminers in swgoh events server shared a battle log example that is sent after a battle concludes, and i read some of it

There was enough data that its possible CG has a sandbox environment where you can drop the JSON file and the battle simulation can be displayed

Such technology is possible to create from battle log, but the question whether CG has a battle recreation is unknown to me

This just makes me more sad that cheaters appear to prosper. It sounds like CG has the tools and data needed and just don't want to do anything with them :(

Not necessarily, it will all depends on their "RNG" algorithm(s), if it is clean and they own it, it should be unit tested and should be able to "prove" to the authority that their drop rate on their "loot box" are valid (if there is any law on loot box) but I am guessing (pure speculation) that, they did not own the algorithm, EA own it.

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401735" wrote:
Got to GW. For any given node, if you take the same actions, you get the exact same results. At least that was the case ages ago when we had to do those fights manually.

Ahahah, miss these old days, when I started this game, I was always restarting a battle in GW to find the "right" path :smiley:

What I mean, is, if CG don't own the algorithm or it is messy, they can't check against forged datas, so their only ways is to rely on player report.

"wharp;c-2401737" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401735" wrote:
Got to GW. For any given node, if you take the same actions, you get the exact same results. At least that was the case ages ago when we had to do those fights manually.

Ahahah, miss these old days, when I started this game, I was always restarting a battle in GW to find the "right" path :smiley:

What I mean, is, if CG don't own the algorithm or it is messy, they can't check against forged datas, so their only ways is to rely on player report.

Have you ever heard of parallel processing?

As far as I understand things, cheaters juice their stats on offense, they don’t alter the RNG.

"nfidel2k;c-2401740" wrote:

"wharp;c-2401737" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401735" wrote:
Got to GW. For any given node, if you take the same actions, you get the exact same results. At least that was the case ages ago when we had to do those fights manually.

Ahahah, miss these old days, when I started this game, I was always restarting a battle in GW to find the "right" path :smiley:

What I mean, is, if CG don't own the algorithm or it is messy, they can't check against forged datas, so their only ways is to rely on player report.

Have you ever heard of parallel processing?

As far as I understand things, cheaters juice their stats on offense, they don’t alter the RNG.

Never heard of it (going to google now).

I am not saying they are altering RNG, but altering datas sent (sending modified datas to the server, including stats, damage done, ....). You don't event need the app to send forged datas....

They have to manually check the datas, if they can't reproduce the outcome (or do the reverse function).

"nfidel2k;c-2401740" wrote:

"wharp;c-2401737" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401735" wrote:
Got to GW. For any given node, if you take the same actions, you get the exact same results. At least that was the case ages ago when we had to do those fights manually.

Ahahah, miss these old days, when I started this game, I was always restarting a battle in GW to find the "right" path :smiley:

What I mean, is, if CG don't own the algorithm or it is messy, they can't check against forged datas, so their only ways is to rely on player report.

Have you ever heard of parallel processing?

As far as I understand things, cheaters juice their stats on offense, they don’t alter the RNG.

They could use parallele processing maybe that why on CG/EA carrer page, intern post were opened (long time ago) on the cheating subject.

"wharp;c-2401742" wrote:

"nfidel2k;c-2401740" wrote:

"wharp;c-2401737" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401735" wrote:
Got to GW. For any given node, if you take the same actions, you get the exact same results. At least that was the case ages ago when we had to do those fights manually.

Ahahah, miss these old days, when I started this game, I was always restarting a battle in GW to find the "right" path :smiley:

What I mean, is, if CG don't own the algorithm or it is messy, they can't check against forged datas, so their only ways is to rely on player report.

Have you ever heard of parallel processing?

As far as I understand things, cheaters juice their stats on offense, they don’t alter the RNG.

Never heard of it (going to google now).

I am not saying they are altering RNG, but altering datas sent (sending modified datas to the server, including stats, damage done, ....). You don't event need the app to send forged datas....

They have to manually check the datas, if they can't reproduce the outcome (or do the reverse function).

So the reverse function would merely generate a possible seed from a pseudo-random number. I don’t understand how this checks the data - especially since more than one seed can potentially produce the same value. An easier way to verify a pseudo-RNG sequence would be to independently generate the same sequence and compare them. You can do this merely by calling the same methods within a contained scope.

The RNG should be internal to the server, without any dependence on any client data. Most likely they are using a server timestamp for the seed, generated with the server request for the battle. This is the easiest setup and prevents someone from altering the outcome. I haven’t heard of anyone altering the battle algorithm results; what I have heard is they alter the unit stats those algorithms use to calculate the results.

"nfidel2k;c-2401745" wrote:

"wharp;c-2401742" wrote:

"nfidel2k;c-2401740" wrote:

"wharp;c-2401737" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2401735" wrote:
Got to GW. For any given node, if you take the same actions, you get the exact same results. At least that was the case ages ago when we had to do those fights manually.

Ahahah, miss these old days, when I started this game, I was always restarting a battle in GW to find the "right" path :smiley:

What I mean, is, if CG don't own the algorithm or it is messy, they can't check against forged datas, so their only ways is to rely on player report.

Have you ever heard of parallel processing?

As far as I understand things, cheaters juice their stats on offense, they don’t alter the RNG.

Never heard of it (going to google now).

I am not saying they are altering RNG, but altering datas sent (sending modified datas to the server, including stats, damage done, ....). You don't event need the app to send forged datas....

They have to manually check the datas, if they can't reproduce the outcome (or do the reverse function).

So the reverse function would merely generate a possible seed from a pseudo-random number. I don’t understand how this checks the data - especially since more than one seed can potentially produce the same value. An easier way to verify a pseudo-RNG sequence would be to independently generate the same sequence and compare them. You can do this merely by calling the same methods within a contained scope.

The RNG should be internal to the server, without any dependence on any client data. Most likely they are using a server timestamp for the seed, generated with the server request for the battle. This is the easiest setup and prevents someone from altering the outcome. I haven’t heard of anyone altering the battle algorithm results; what I have heard is they alter the unit stats those algorithms use to calculate the results.

You are right, it will be easier to compare the RNG sequence and this can be triggered automatically and ban cheater also automatically since the expected outcome should match the actual outcome.

Timestamps is the most common data used to generate the seed but not the only, you can use anything and when I see the drop rate / luck of one of my guild mate, I am wondering if there is something more to add, like ally code / player id, ... (or any account related data) .... but I might be paranoid :smile: .

So if they altering characters stats it should be a lot easier to check since character progression stat table is fixed, and the only way to boost stats, without cheating is datacon/mods that they should own so if the stats doesn't adds up => ban ! >:)