Teeworlds - bridge

this is crap

00:13

soon they will start ddosing the masters too, and making lots of bots again

is this line a potential bug if one expects the underlying array/memory to contain garbage, especially a bit set to 1 at the position of the extend bit when the i evaluates to 0, due to the |= the value of the extend bit is not forced to 0?

01:11

https://github.com/teeworlds/teeworlds/blob/b7e76314023664658b9f119bb80c9bf3d7c26361/src/engine/shared/compression.cpp#L23

the 0 part should also be negated with ~(0 << 7)

01:43

inverted*

hm, kind of not a problem it seems. as it breaks in the 0 case.

@jxsl13

06:20

@jxsl13 zillywoods has zoom for weeks already

months

@jxsl13 ... could have at least co authored me in the commit

07:41

if you dont merge xd

:/ didn't think about that.

guide to write zoom client

10:33

copy zilly woods

10:33

fin

I doubt that zilly has this as an ingame feature :0, that would be zilly.

ddnet people usually consider that as not-a-cheat because it's PvE, and they restrict it to race gamemodes

https://gist.github.com/Learath2/e0ebd13d3a7aad08ca96a9e658ae28d3 found it, this parses the output of heinrich5991's tool and outputs identifiers that are named incorrectly

check_identifiers.py

GitHub Gist: instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@jxsl13 of course it is an ingame feature

i love how it has a "Secret" icon next to it

I mean ingame as not in spectators.

Ddnet should somehow not share zoom code, its SO easy to remove the gametyp restriction

Useless

@Skayland Its SO easy to just recode it

I dont even know c++, but i can easily remove the restriction, although i cannot recode it myself

@Skayland you can change one line in the vanilla client to get a zoom client

make that an official ingame feature :D

15:51

hehe

@heinrich5991 never really checked vanilla client source, only server part, so idk

"4:03 PM] Skayland [identifyy host|msg me]: Ddnet should somehow not share zoom code, its SO easy to remove the gametyp restriction"

15:55

"[4:55 PM] Skayland [identifyy host|msg me]: @heinrich5991 never really checked vanilla client source, only server part, so idk"

Ye, what

zoom code is in vanilla, yet you complain about ddnet

Remove it from vanilla then

15:56

What is it? Editor zoom?

leople call it dyn cam.

no

people

that's not what I'm talking about

Dyn cam is not zoom

remove zoom -> have to remove dyn cam

this is a different discussion and not the one we just had

15:58

no, regular ingame "zoom", @Skayland

What i mean is its too easy to get a zoom client or a bot client, things should be different

it's way too easy to get a cheat client for cs:go

and arguments like: it jas always been here, that's wuy it can't be removed are no arguments :'(

valve makes millions with the game

15:59

yet they're unable to prevent client-side hacks

cuz serverside is flawed.

no.

in our case

you will always be able to gain an advantage by zooming out, as long as we don't want to introduce ping artifacts for players playing with the normal client

16:00

i.e. players randomly appearing, even without dyncam @jxsl13

yeah, the advantage of the range that is being used to allow for a proper entity alpearance, but the whole dyn cam range to all sides is kind of over the top.

16:01

appearance

so you'd be here today to complain about zoom clients as well, I guess, if we didn't have dyncam. but they would have a smaller impact (I guess(?)), so fair

There is no way to combat cheat well. The cs example shows that well. Now imagine a FOSS game with no budget

cs:go shows that even a large budget does not help

16:03

check noby's server for a good approximation of anticheat

Dunno, maybe I would if I had solutions to offer.

To be fair, the cheat vector would be much smaller without dyncam indeed

doesn't change what's here and now.

I see plenty of people enjoying the game without constantly worrying about bots

16:05

I feel the worries also destroy some of the fun people have, as the bots do as well

I don't play that much race mods, so I can only speak for mods that are more impacted by those exploits than others.

@heinrich5991 got the same feeling. And it gives publicity

I was mostly talking about FNG in that statement

hm, dunno about fng, but having high mouse sense + zoom kind of gives you the advantage. but yeah, currently there might not be that much stress until one of these clients becomes publicly available.

16:11

it looks to me, that something is done after the exploits have been distributed, like in 0.6, not the other way around. it seems that the 0.8 iteration is earlier to come than 0.7 was. just waiting and seeing the house burn, that's what imma do :)

Nothing is going to be done after exploits are distributed and this kind of condescending attutude helps no one

why was the masterserver fixed then:D?

because it was possible to fix it

16:16

there are some things that are unfixable, as we discussed earlier. you can try to make them harder

is the fake ping part fixable?

thinking about it from a network perspective, no