← Back to context

Comment by strbean

2 days ago

> Any player responding to ingame events (enemy appeared) with sub 80ms reaction times consistently should be an automatic ban.

It's really much more nuanced than that. Counter-Strike 2 has already implemented this type of feature, and it immediately got some clear false positives. There are many situations where high level players play in a predictive, rather than reactive, manner. Pre-firing is a common strategy that will always look indistinguishable from an inhuman reaction time. So is tap-firing at an angle that you anticipate a an opponent may peek you from.

You mustve missed the part where i spoke of consistency?

Ive played at the pro level. Nobody prefires with perfect robotic consistency.

I dont care if it takes 50 matches of data for the statistical model to call it inhuman.

Valve has enough data that they could easily make the threshold for a ban something like '10x more consistent at pre-firing than any pro has ever been' with a high confidence borne over many engagements in many matches.

  • > Nobody prefires with perfect robotic consistency.

    Then all you need to do to fool this anticheat is to add some randomness to the cheat.

    • Then youve immediately made the cheater worse than the best players to blend in with them. Mission accomplished, cheater nerfed significantly. You wont even know theyre doing it.

      1 reply →

There's well analyzed video of a pro player streaming who got temporarily banned for something like this. It might not even have been pre-fire, but post-fire at a different enemy retreating at the same position

https://youtu.be/SFyVRdRcilQ

  • Valve need to tweak the model so that it requires a higher confidence level before a ban, and to reduce false positives in their data capture methods. This is a mistake but doesnt kill the idea.