PDA

View Full Version : So any advice for telling if someone is using black hidden or not?



Wuped
10th December 2008, 13:31
I have had a couple people I have never seen before who are amazingly good iris but horrible hidden, but I honestly have no proof if they are cheating or not, any advice on how to tell if they are/what to do in this situation?

biohazard-uk
10th December 2008, 13:50
There isn't really a easy way of telling, unless its really obvious they are D:

but...

*Spectate them, and see if they track hidden well or know where hidden is hiding.
*Play as hidden and test them see if they can track you easy.
*Ask them what they see hidden as, sometimes people don't know hidden isn't meant to be black and could tell you straight away.
*Check their stats, if their new with alot of kills then it makes it them more suspicious.

If they are making it look as if they aren't cheating then eventually they always make the mistake of getting a obvious kill.

-SM-SUCKER
10th December 2008, 15:13
grab a demo, either spectating them or stay near them, so you can see what they can see while reviewing the demo. You dont have to face the same way. You can fly around using the demoui while playing the demo.

Darkhand
10th December 2008, 15:43
On my server, I set my rendermode and alpha to 0 and bounce around in front of everyone as hidden every once in a while... If anyone shoots me... :eek:

It's a good check for hooking cheats, doesn't help with black hidden though.

EDIT: I wonder though... If someone's card is that old (or their drivers are that screwed up), will an unsupported material get drawn even if alpha is 0? If so I suppose it could work.

Wuped
10th December 2008, 15:44
On my server, I set my rendermode and alpha to 0 and bounce around in front of everyone as hidden every once in a while... If anyone shoots me... :eek:

It's a good check for hooking cheats, doesn't help with black hidden though.
How do you do this exactly?

Darkhand
10th December 2008, 16:49
Since I'm too lazy to actually make a script for it, I use Eventscripts and just manually fire off the events in console:


rcon es_fire myuseridhere !self addoutput "rendermode 1"
rcon es_fire myuseridhere !self alpha 0

[TSAT]Flow
10th December 2008, 18:00
Would't 617 still affect the LAM then? xD

Paegus
10th December 2008, 18:16
probably yes since as far as i'm aware the server just says it's hitting a model.

though you could try...


rcon es_fire myuseridhere !self addoutput "renderfx 6"

...to become completely invisible. ideally even for a BHSer.
0 (or 8?) returns you to normal.

Ideally they'll have the same issue with the hidden's overlay shader so enabling that should produce a black screen when they're playing as the hidden. which is why you always ask for a colour before telling them how to fix it... Wuped.

That said i've seen people with one but not the other so... /shrug

Though i've never been able to replicate BHS to test things like drawing no-refraction refractive sprites here and there or ideally just attaching an inside-out crate model to the IRIS's head and painting it hidden.

Darkhand
10th December 2008, 19:00
Though i've never been able to replicate BHS to test things like drawing no-refraction refractive sprites here and there or ideally just attaching an inside-out crate model to the IRIS's head and painting it hidden.

I like that last one. :) You're right, we need to capture a BHS system in the wild and study it. :D

Wuped
10th December 2008, 23:38
Uh I know a method to get a purple/black checkerboard hidden....

Paegus
10th December 2008, 23:57
oh right... thanks for reminding me


can someone please make me an inside-out box big enough to cover the IRIS's head from here:
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/4121/headcamyu7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

and by inside out i mean there's a texture applied to the inside surface as opposed to the outside.

Wuped
11th December 2008, 00:00
Wait, what?

Paegus
11th December 2008, 04:17
oh right... thanks for reminding me


can someone please make me an inside-out box big enough to cover the IRIS's head from here:
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/4121/headcamyu7.jpg

and by inside out i mean there's a texture applied to the inside surface as opposed to the outside.

hmm so there's a slight problem in that even a 0 refractive surface causes some distortion. It doesn't prevent you from seeing the hidden though. Like natural anti-aliasing or something.

though i need to get a much smaller model in place to cover only the player's view-point. otherwise there's a partially visible blob of something floating around...

Wuped
11th December 2008, 04:31
I'm still confused, ):

Zabiela
11th December 2008, 04:57
I'm still confused, ):

Put box around iris head with 0 refraction shader on the inside surface.

Ideally, people with BHS see a black screen, normal people see through it.
Apparently Paeg is saying 0 refraction actually does refract a bit, which might annoy honest players being cheat-tested.

Paeg are you thinking of this as an always on preventative measure, or a diagnostic activated by an admin?
Also, isnt forcing cl_hvision the same thing?

Paegus
11th December 2008, 08:11
ideally both. up the the admin if they want to have it running full-time or only only targeted players.

The disruption isn't too bad but i meed to make the attachment smaller so people don't think the hidden's hanging around.

-SM-SUCKER
11th December 2008, 08:58
Give the IRIS protective glasses made in china, this would explain the refracting ;)

Paegus
13th December 2008, 10:31
so I've run into a slight road block.

to ensure the anti-bhs model isn't altered, I'd need to have it in sv_pure's list. but the default cl_downloadfilter none still causes problems as initially connecting players wont have the ability to download the floater's model but sv_pure will kick them for not having it on hand. which means they can't get it unless they reconnect since i think sv_pure doesn't work instantly so hopefully there'll be time to exec cl_downloadfilter all on their client before they get kicked.

and I'd much rather have a model attached to their headcam than have to constantly spawn sprites etc.

though I've always wondered which is actually more work for the server, an attached model, which I assume is just a loose model being teleported by the game engine every server frame to the new location of its parent's attachment, or having a free-floating model being teleported manually by me (or rather a plugin) every frame.

the only plus side for the attachment method is that everything renders correctly. the hidden-spectator plugins teleports the attachment manually and that has its limitations. the downside of course is that attachments don't move correctly with the attached-to-client's view but their player model instead. the angles & rotation aren't updated so you get a straight ahead view that wobbles about woozily as the player model's shoulder wobbles.

and something of interest: the player model is too tall. we see from the base of their necks. worse when crouched
:D

Darkhand
13th December 2008, 16:05
You could set sv_pure_kick_clients to 0 to stop the server from doing the kicking, and handle it in the plugin after the player has connected and had a chance to download everything. Maybe a specific exception for that model that only warns you instead of kicks so the first connect doesn't set off a false positive.

Paegus
13th December 2008, 16:12
if you know of a way to pick up pure infractions that don't include kicks that would be great... but i haven't found one. the failures aren't logged in the traditional manner (shakes fist at valve!) so the only way i can see them at the moment is by intercepting the reason that the player disconnects... as in the pure-log plugin in that other thread.

Darkhand
13th December 2008, 17:23
the failures aren't logged in the traditional manner (shakes fist at valve!)

Darn it :mad:


handle it in the plugin

the pure-log plugin in that other thread.

Woops, I mixed up my threads. :D

EDIT: Ah ha, I finally looked at the script, it's looking for the kick itself, not some kind of failure event (just like you said... failures aren't logged normally).