Cheating in PBEMs; A scenario designer's response.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Patient English
So (pardon my ignorance) how do you VERIFY a cheater, unless they confess, or are very stupid?

People like Darius, Case, Duke of Marlborough actually download past files and check for things like combat results that could not have happened, units that move to far from turn to turn, and production in cities that have civil disorder or should have civil disorder. It is a tedious process and my hat is off to those three guys and others who have taken the time to prove that cheating existed. Im sure there are other ways to check those are a few and the experts would now better than I would.

[Exile]

John, I'll give you an example of how I was able to determine cheating was going on in Imp1870 in one PBEM game.

I made the city of Fez a very tough nut to crack. It's virtually impossible to take without the use of rifled artillery or very, very many cannon units. In the dozens of games I've played myself, it usually takes no less than 8-10 rifled artillery units, most of which perish in the process. With cannons only, it would be FAR more difficult. In the game I saw, a player was able to take Fez on either turn 2 or 3. No rifled artillery was available. This shouldn't have been possible. Why? Because the scenario's extra-high production costs for units would prevent ANY player from constructing enough cannons, and then get them to the location, to successfully assault and seize the city. When I saw this happen, I knew what was going on, but couldn't determine myself exactly what to do about it. It wasn't a test run set up by myself, so I felt compelled to keep quiet and allow the other players to eventually discover it themselves. Try to put yourself in my place here. What would you do?

There are other signs to watch, however. Units moving between turns when they're not supposed to is a strong indicator that someone inside the game is cheating.

The other guys have more technical methods of detecting cheating.

The cheaters either DO confess (usually after being caught ), or they disappear--a tacit confession, AFAIAC.

Verification, as it has been conducted, is OBJECTIVE and can easily be proven.

[Darius871]

I would rather see the odd innocent punished here

This shouldn't even be discussed because it can't happen. As Exile and conmcb25 made clear, cheating is objective and can be confirmed beyond a doubt. If any idiot posts an unsubstantiated accusation on the list, the accusation will (hopefully) be deleted and the poster's reputation will be ruined. This is why everybody's worries about 'witch hunts' are completely unfounded.

Actually, we've already HAD this discussion (several times), it's been divisive, and I don't want to repeat it just 'cause Exile missed out on it the first few times.

Agreed. I value his input on this, but the thread should not turn into another debates. Let creators voice their concerns and that's it, instead of us being redundant.

When I saw this happen, I knew what was going on, but couldn't determine myself exactly what to do about it. It wasn't a test run set up by myself, so I felt compelled to keep quiet and allow the other players to eventually discover it themselves. Try to put yourself in my place here. What would you do?

Sorry, but frankly I don't agree with your decision. The turns in Imperialism 1870 and the diplomacy on the thread are very time consuming, and I wouldn't have let people play through a half dozen rounds until they eventually figure it out themselves. I wouldn't have posted 'OMFG Eivind's an f'ing cheater', but I would have just privately contacted one of the players or Duke of Marlbrough and let them handle it, perhaps under the guise of a random check. Eivind's cheating was flagrant and could have been proven and announced in a matter of hours.

[Darius871]

Re: Thanks.

Originally posted by Exile

I'd still like to hear from Paul, Stephan, Bernd, Carl, and the Magyar crusader on this.

That reminds me, why isn't this thread at SL?

[Kull]

Cheating is always unacceptable, but I completely concur with those who say it must be proven & documented before any public accusations are bruited about. On that basis, I don't have a problem with the list.

[Exile]

Thanks, Paul.

Now I don't want anyone to feel left out , so perhaps I should also mention that I'd like to hear from Henrik, JayBee, Kindal, FMK, DarthVeda, John Petroski, Markus Eklund, Michael Daumen, William Keenen, Harlan Thompson, Mr. Temba, Mattias Koster, Hendrik the Great, and yes, even Kobayashi.

If I've forgotten anyone else, the omission was entirely inadvertent.

(I don't think we'll hear from some of these folks, though, which is too bad)

[Darius871]

Why don't you PM them? I don't think it'll be too much of a nuisance to voice their opinions on this.

[Patient English]

John, I'll give you an example of how I was able to determine cheating was going on in Imp1870 in one PBEM game.

Exile, OK, I bow to your cheater-hunting expertise on this. I'm glad there are guys like you out there who will spend the time and effort to find the rotten apples.

My hang-the-(possibly)-innocent statement that has attracted so much distain was only because I didn't understand how marginal cheaters (those who slightly edit the rules.txt or replay turns indefinitely until they get the "right" result) can be caught unless they are careless or greedy. The sort of analysis you hint at could very well prove wrongdoing, I can see.

In that case, I agree wrongdoing should be conclusively proven first - because apparently it CAN be.

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by Patient English In that case, I agree wrongdoing should be conclusively proven first - because apparently it CAN be.

Yep if someone has the patients (no pun intended) for it is possible. Im checking into one right now and quickly discovering that I dont. And my skill aren't good enough to really tell. But Im glad guys like Darius, Case, Exile, DoM and others are out there!

[Darius871]

I didn't understand how marginal cheaters (those who slightly edit the rules.txt or replay turns indefinitely until they get the "right" result) can be caught unless they are careless or greedy.

[Fortunately] it turns out that almost all cheaters are very poor cheaters, and always make painfully obvious changes. For example, willemvanoranje set his spitfires' attack value from 10 to 50 and wiped out an entire army group with them.

There have been people out there who some of us believed were 'slightly' editing the rules file or reloading (although somehow it seems the community thinks the latter is acceptable anyway), but since it wasn't provable it was kept private as it should have been.

[Choke]

I think scenario designers ought to help find cheaters when and if they're called upon and the creator of a scenario should be the one to determine whether cheating has taken place as long as they're not in the game. While I haven't created any scenario for Civ2 that have been played by anyone but me I have made some for myself and have made scens in other games like Panzer General 2 so I have some understanding of how disapointing it would be to have the perception of your scenario scewed by a cheater.

[St Leo's Edit: Flowers are purty.]

[conmcb25]

[SIZE=1] St. Leo's Edit II: Lollipops are Yummy.

Cant we just be professional about this discussion, please?

[techumseh]

Why is the moderator editing other people's posts?

[conmcb25]

Originally posted by techumseh
Why is the moderator editing other people's posts?

Because the post was less than professional, and I for one am glad he edited both posts including mine.

And please read some of my previous posts. If we dont keep this thread professional it is going to get closed. Simple as that.

And just what the heck ever happened to common courtesy in this day and age?

Go ahead and agree or disagree with someones opinion but dont insult them personnaly. It is just plain out of line.
Thanks!