How do you stop LUA that cheats?

[zwzsg]

Seriously, that's just stupid. Cheating should be anything that effects units and issues orders automatically in game, be it a cheat that manages metal makers for you, micro or macromanages units, issues abstract order queues at the touch of a button. You should be allowed to customize what keystrokes it takes to issue an event, but you shouldn't be allowed to remove large portions of the necessary keystrokes from the game by adding common orders to hotkey queues.

Ok. So selecting more than 12 units is a cheat, since in real online competitive RTS you cannot give order to more than 12 units. Area reclaim is a cheat, since it would normally takes one click per wreck. Move in formation is a cheat too, normally you have to select and give a move order to each unit individually to achieve that. Srlsy, you shoud aft stop right after "effect units".

There is something to be drawn from this - we need to draw a line between a feature and a cheating element.

A cheat changes the properties of the units, or the parameters of the simulation, while letting you play with people who don't have it. For exemple, it makes units cheaper, grants tons of energy or metal, makes your units immune to shots, etc... Cheats are bad and ruins the fun.

A interface enhancer gives you better or easier control of your units. For instance, a group AI that you assign to the commander at the start of the game and it plays the whole game for you*. Interface enhancers are good and should be encouraged.

* solar, vp, mexx, mexx, solar, solar, 200 flashes, move to enemy base, is just menial repetitive clicking that doesn't require any thinking.

Anything automatable should be automated**. This is 2007, we are in the future, it's high time robotics takes over humanity. I'm really longing for a RTS ruled by cyborg players, half 1337 humans, half artificial intelligence, each complementing the other to create The ultimate RTS Player, dispatching commands with the rapidity of a 3Ghz CPU, while analyzing the situation with the fuzzy logic of a hundred billions neurons.

** more precisely, anything that can be automated without going against the will of the player. This is why stuff like auto-retreat are hard to automate, and should be disablable or overridable by player, since an AI can never really decide if the player would rather turn back to retrieve half his units, or push forward and lose all while blowing up that fusion farm. But stuff like two clicks to create aerial bridge, zone commands, turning MM off when E is low, fire at will on any enemy on range when nothing else to do, gives units to allies before dying, these are things an AI can decide by itself without goofing up

use .nohelp make it a requirement for the ladder or something PROBLEM SOLVED

But then people who are used to the better interface are penalised in the ladder! Instead, a fair way would be to have the battleroom list all group AI LUA widgets of each player, and propose to download them.

The idea was that every player should have equal resources to win, not take us back to the stone age.

To make everybody equal, there is two ways: pull everybody down (.nohelp), or pull everybody up (easier sharing of interface upgrades).


Also, you're all under the impression that interface upgrades makes the n00bs able to beat the pr0. It is quite the contrary. Pr0 will always be the most up to date as to which interface upgrade are really useful and how to use them to the max, while n00bs will probably just have the default install, and even once told about interface upgrades, it'll take them much time and learning to understand and use them efficiently. So don't worry about n00bs beating pr0 thanks to better UI, in fact it's quite the contrary, it will just widden the gap between the hard core online player using everything possible to win and the casual ignoring whole aspect of the game.

[Ishach]

i control my rockos one at a time

[Ishach]

i dont read posts, i make them

[Boirunner]

Seriously, that's just stupid. Cheating should be anything that effects units and issues orders automatically in game, be it a cheat that manages metal makers for you, micro or macromanages units, issues abstract order queues at the touch of a button. You should be allowed to customize what keystrokes it takes to issue an event, but you shouldn't be allowed to remove large portions of the necessary keystrokes from the game by adding common orders to hotkey queues.

I disagree with this sentiment entirely. Things like area orders, repeat orders, patrolling (and thus complex things like airbridges or patrolling healers), Mex upgrader AI, Metal Maker AI make the game a lot more fun for me.

Of course there are limits, like a commander auto dgun script that can dgun air, or the auto give script (solutions: modify damage type of dgun to air, make sharing units take time).

But in general, anything that lets me do less tedious clicking and more strategic thinking is win in my book.

Anyway, a skilled player will very probably be able to do most of these automated tasks better than the scripts anyway.

[RogerN]

I'm really longing for a RTS ruled by cyborg players, half 1337 humans, half artificial intelligence, each complementing the other to create The ultimate RTS Player, dispatching commands with the rapidity of a 3Ghz CPU, while analyzing the situation with the fuzzy logic of a hundred billions neurons.

100% pure win!

[Sleksa]

The idea was that every player should have equal resources to win, not take us back to the stone age.

To make everybody equal, there is two ways: pull everybody down (.nohelp), or pull everybody up (easier sharing of interface upgrades).

1) standardize the already built-in helpers like mmaker AI.
and make sure that no other helpers are available other than those approved


2) create some kind of system that lets people to create and download any help they need(read: HACK)



Personally, i'd go back to the OTA-Age with all the crude engine exploits and economy management thingys like mmaker control, hawkdancing, nanoshield-hacking etc. But i guess im alone with this thought

2) is fine for now, but if we want to have a proper ladder system or (like we'll ever have enough competitive players lol) we need a system that makes sure neither one has unfair advantages (read: HACKS)

[SwiftSpear]

Seriously, that's just stupid. Cheating should be anything that effects units and issues orders automatically in game, be it a cheat that manages metal makers for you, micro or macromanages units, issues abstract order queues at the touch of a button. You should be allowed to customize what keystrokes it takes to issue an event, but you shouldn't be allowed to remove large portions of the necessary keystrokes from the game by adding common orders to hotkey queues.

I disagree with this sentiment entirely. Things like area orders, repeat orders, patrolling (and thus complex things like airbridges or patrolling healers), Mex upgrader AI, Metal Maker AI make the game a lot more fun for me.

Of course there are limits, like a commander auto dgun script that can dgun air, or the auto give script (solutions: modify damage type of dgun to air, make sharing units take time).

But in general, anything that lets me do less tedious clicking and more strategic thinking is win in my book.

Anyway, a skilled player will very probably be able to do most of these automated tasks better than the scripts anyway.

If it makes the game more fun then it should be added into the game by modders and seen as a designer intended feature. I don't care if it makes the game more fun for you honestly, that argument can be made to anything. "I maphack because it makes the game more fun!". In a normal average game, and especially in a game in a competitive environment, it shouldn't be possible to have scripts or code segments running that allows you to easily do things that are alot of work for other players.

In terms of customization. I think it's fair to allow customization that isn't malicious, I can customize my GUI so I have hotkeys bound to my buttons rather then needing a mouse click, or if I want I can rebind the dgun key from 'd' to 'p' for whatever reason. With the exception of straight rebinding of an order key, GUI modifications at the user level shouldn't be allowed to issue orders to units or do anything contextually specific within the game (IE, if I have < 100 metal and I hit the e key it queues a metal maker, but if I have < 100 energy it queues a wind). If those kind of functions are desired they should be built in by mod builders, so it isn't restricted to the arbitrary elite group of GUI scripters who can do all kinds of crazy things to get these obtuse gameplay advantages.

ZWZSG: You're taking my post out of context... granted I didn't properly clarify the context with in. I meant to imply that anything that isn't built into the game by default, AND effects units and issues orders automatically. As opposed to any user side modification to the game at all being considered a cheat. If I like a green GUI, and I like to press a to queue peewees rather then clicking a button, that should be my prerogative. If a gameplay relevant feature is in the game already, it's a feature, not a cheat. If I have to make some script or code addition to the game in order to make use of the gameplay relevant feature, then it is a cheat/exploit, not a feature.

[Pxtl]

Somewhere there is a line that will be crossed. The difference between a customized UI and an aimbot is not as big as people would like it to be.

but first and foremost, the best way to avoid exploits is to make the rules of the game itself avoid those exploits, or do them automatically.

If "Game Ends" autogive is popular, then it should be default or giving should be disabled. So, two possible solutions:

1) change "Game Ends" behaviour - when comm dies, the units are disowned, allowing another player to .take them instead of blowing up. Only blow up when _last_ comm in alliance dies.

2) disable sharing units in game-ends.

[KDR_11k]

DGun air is an often cited example. It's technically possible to just pause the game and give the DGun order manually, it only annoys the other players. That you can't give attack orders on planes easily is a shortcoming of the interface (I blame those stupid halved collision spheres), not game balancing. If you don't want the com to dgun air use OnlyTargetCategory, don't assume that just because it's hard to click on planes people won't dgun them.

Hell, if people want to combomb in com ends they could just donate ALL their units, including the com to an ally and let him handle the bombing, that way noone can mess up the timing.

I disagree that clientside Lua is cheating, perhaps uncovers design flaws in the gameplay (that do get fixed, e.g. lineage mode) but since everyone can download them and use them they aren't unfair. Sure, knowledge of how to do that gives an advantage but so does knowledge of how the mod works, how to micro, etc.

Me, I'm using a lot of Lua, loads of widgets. The result? My GUI is still not as powerful as the GUI and helpers in Earth 2160.

[Sleksa]

If "Game Ends" autogive is popular, then it should be default

CASE DISCLOSED :--DDD

[manored]

Personally I think that doesnt matters how much things managed for you you get the other can get it too and so there is still strategy on the game, and with some administration help you can make your bases and arms bigger since you dont need to worry with ever single unit, thus making everthing more interesting. It would be good if it could be controlled tough so people can play in the way they wish.

[Boirunner]

If it makes the game more fun then it should be added into the game by modders and seen as a designer intended feature. I don't care if it makes the game more fun for you honestly, that argument can be made to anything. "I maphack because it makes the game more fun!".

Well, I see what you mean. But games _are_ played for fun, so it's a valid argument.

In a normal average game, and especially in a game in a competitive environment, it shouldn't be possible to have scripts or code segments running that allows you to easily do things that are alot of work for other players.

So you think area orders, the repeat command and GroupAIs should be removed from Spring? Come to think of it, queueing lines or boxes would also fall into this category.

If those kind of functions are desired they should be built in by mod builders, so it isn't restricted to the arbitrary elite group of GUI scripters who can do all kinds of crazy things to get these obtuse gameplay advantages.

Well I do hope that the scripts will be avaiable to all players, just as GroupAIs are now.

Of course, if all these features could be taken away from the engine and inserted into mods, that would be cool.

I do see the problem that, taken to the extreme, the game would become one of who can configure his scripts best opposing as to who can play best. In theory it would, after all, be possible to write much better Pathfinding an AI routines for units, automate your early-game raiders to avoid llts and kill econ and so on. The problem is, this is all possible as it is, but afaik no one is really doing it.

[Sleksa]

In a normal average game, and especially in a game in a competitive environment, it shouldn't be possible to have scripts or code segments running that allows you to easily do things that are alot of work for other players.

So you think area orders, the repeat command and GroupAIs should be removed from Spring? Come to think of it, queueing lines or boxes would also fall into this category.
Of course, if all these features could be taken away from the engine and inserted into mods, that would be cool.

it shouldn't be possible to have scripts or code segments running that allows you to easily do things that are alot of work for other players.


it shouldn't be possible to have scripts or code segments running that allows __you__ to easily do things that are alot of work for ___other___ players.

it shouldn't be possible to have scripts or code segments running that allows you to easily do things that are alot of work for other players.




HE MEANS THAT THE PLAYERS NEED TO BE ON THE SAME BASE, NOT ON STONEAGE

what in the world is so hard to understand in it.

1) player A plays player B

Player A is running a MAP-HACK , this means that player A is having a unfair advantage against player B by knowing where his units are without using economy to scout

2) player A plays player B

Player B is running a AUTOMATED EXPANSION- script. this means that player B is having a unfair advantage against player A by not having to spend actions/time on economy, and is free to use the time on microing other stuff.

3) player A and player B are both running a metal maker AI

BOTH players are on the same par, and thus no unfair gameplay is happening.

[Boirunner]

HE MEANS THAT THE PLAYERS NEED TO BE ON THE SAME BASE, NOT ON STONEAGE

Cheating should be anything that effects units and issues orders automatically in game, be it a cheat that manages metal makers for you, micro or macromanages units, issues abstract order queues at the touch of a button. You should be allowed to customize what keystrokes it takes to issue an event, but you shouldn't be allowed to remove large portions of the necessary keystrokes from the game by adding common orders to hotkey queues.

As far as I understood, he wants to severely limit what widgets and Group AIs you can use. Anyway, it's obvious that both players should have the same tools available. Them just having equal tools does not legitimize the tools, though, as if everybody maphacked it would be fair, but make the game less fun.

[Dragon45]

i think we're all agreeing with each other rather loudly here
Is anyone bothering to read any1 else's post


srsly, aside fro mthe 'real cheats' (aimbots, maphacks), there is nothing that a CPU can giveUBERLEETADVANTAGES to over any semi-decent player. Playing the game for you, doing perfect retreats - those are impossible to sync with the players desires. we dont have strong/complete/weaklygodlike AI yet! (yes those are technical terms)

[smoth]

srsly, aside from the 'real cheats' (aimbots, maphacks), there is nothing that a CPU can give UBERLEETADVANTAGES to over any semi-decent player.

FUCKING TRUTH!

[Neddie]

I can see where you're coming from, and it is true.

[Deathblane]

Just to address the original point, I may not have an amazing APM but in most team com-ends games (of AA/BA) where my comm's about to die I've got the reflexes to go crt+a, h and give all my crap to someone else
(I'd guess it takes all of 2-3 seconds).
So for me personally, barring inattention and sniping I find it fairly easy to circumvent the rule and the widget fairly redundent.
Of course in the interest of the game I don't, well not since being kicked by Bigsteve a long time ago for doing just that.

[KDR_11k]

2) player A plays player B

Player B is running a AUTOMATED EXPANSION- script. this means that player B is having a unfair advantage against player A by not having to spend actions/time on economy, and is free to use the time on microing other stuff.

Either Player B will suffer from a sub-par economic growth because the script will not adapt properly to the situation (possibly even running his units into enemies) or the mod should reconsider its expansion gameplay if it's so dumb even a script can do it.

[SwiftSpear]

I don't want to severely limit what is possible with groupAIs and Lua scripts, I want to give game ops the option of blocking common AI and Lua items that are not in the game by default, and allow for commands that are traditionally complex to be done extremely effortlessly and easily by players. IE, sharing all your units but your comm with an ally at the click of a button.

As I understand it trepan is describing a game host side variable that allows a host to block scripts from directly issuing orders to units. That seems pretty sensible to me.