|
On May 11 2011 06:15 porytom wrote:
While this thread is rather interesting, I can't help but notice the glaring typo in the OP. I am of course referring to "turns our campaign portraits". This should, of course, be "turns out". I am quite eager to read your blog but to be frank, I'm not sure that I could stomach any more of these linguistic lethargies. If Teliko were to be kind enough to take the time to amend his original post, I would be more than happy to try this edit for myself.
http://www.endlessvideo.com/watch?v=pnq96W9jtuw&start=3m18s&end=3m21s
On May 11 2011 07:09 SlipperySnake wrote:+ Show Spoiler +What I don't think anyone has even mentioned yet is whether Blizzard should be banning people for altering their game. Everyone has been saying that they would switch the models and then ladder would be easy but there is ways that Blizzard can check the game files. I feel like they could just restrict people from laddering if the files are out of place or altered while still letting them play custom games.
I mean I know Blizzard wants to make the ladder fair but there has to be a balance between fairness and maintaining customization. Some may argue that the world editor is enough room for changing aspects of the game but I think there is at least an argument to be made for custom HUDs or menu systems. People keep parroting the same ridiculous arguments over and over again about how customization will lead to cheating which is nothing but speculation.
I have always experienced customization as a good thing because there were always utilities developed to protect against cheaters while allowing players to create their own original content. I would like too see Blizzard working towards the goal of making things more open for users rather than being a monolith who is so concerned about creative control that they can't just be psyched that people bought and are playing their game.
I am not naive to think that they don't have a stake in the continued success of SC2 so that is why they want control but I don't think the input of fans would be a detriment. It is just disappointing from my end to see that Blizzard might end up with the classic Activision philosophy of milking each series as much as possible. Maybe though Blizzard has already been doing that though with WoW so I am just hoping for a change in the industry's policy.
Everyone can't be Valve and I guess I am hooked on the product.
It's not as easy as one might think for Blizz to be able to detect model/texture modifications. It's kind of like asking a computer to answer a captcha. While a person can easily (sometimes) make out the captcha, computers will have great difficulty. Model edits don't change any file names, only the files inside them. While a Blizz employee could obviously see the difference, they can't go around individually inspecting each file of everyones' game client. Especially considering all edits will be client-side, the server won't know anything about it.
The one thing they could do is judge it by the filesize. Say a default Observer model file is 200kb, I replace it with a mothership and now the file is suddenly 1mb. While the game will be able to detect this, even then it can't go around banning people just because of different filesizes with the assumption that they're exploiting the game.
|
Why not just have a sort of sv_pure but for sc2?
|
On May 11 2011 07:29 Teliko wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2011 06:15 porytom wrote:
While this thread is rather interesting, I can't help but notice the glaring typo in the OP. I am of course referring to "turns our campaign portraits". This should, of course, be "turns out". I am quite eager to read your blog but to be frank, I'm not sure that I could stomach any more of these linguistic lethargies. If Teliko were to be kind enough to take the time to amend his original post, I would be more than happy to try this edit for myself. http://www.endlessvideo.com/watch?v=pnq96W9jtuw&start=3m18s&end=3m21sShow nested quote +On May 11 2011 07:09 SlipperySnake wrote:+ Show Spoiler +What I don't think anyone has even mentioned yet is whether Blizzard should be banning people for altering their game. Everyone has been saying that they would switch the models and then ladder would be easy but there is ways that Blizzard can check the game files. I feel like they could just restrict people from laddering if the files are out of place or altered while still letting them play custom games.
I mean I know Blizzard wants to make the ladder fair but there has to be a balance between fairness and maintaining customization. Some may argue that the world editor is enough room for changing aspects of the game but I think there is at least an argument to be made for custom HUDs or menu systems. People keep parroting the same ridiculous arguments over and over again about how customization will lead to cheating which is nothing but speculation.
I have always experienced customization as a good thing because there were always utilities developed to protect against cheaters while allowing players to create their own original content. I would like too see Blizzard working towards the goal of making things more open for users rather than being a monolith who is so concerned about creative control that they can't just be psyched that people bought and are playing their game.
I am not naive to think that they don't have a stake in the continued success of SC2 so that is why they want control but I don't think the input of fans would be a detriment. It is just disappointing from my end to see that Blizzard might end up with the classic Activision philosophy of milking each series as much as possible. Maybe though Blizzard has already been doing that though with WoW so I am just hoping for a change in the industry's policy.
Everyone can't be Valve and I guess I am hooked on the product. It's not as easy as one might think for Blizz to be able to detect model/texture modifications. It's kind of like asking a computer to answer a captcha. While a person can easily (sometimes) make out the captcha, computers will have great difficulty. Model edits don't change any file names, only the files inside them. While a Blizz employee could obviously see the difference, they can't go around individually inspecting each file of everyones' game client. Especially considering all edits will be client-side, the server won't know anything about it. The one thing they could do is judge it by the filesize. Say a default Observer model file is 200kb, I replace it with a mothership and now the file is suddenly 1mb. While the game will be able to detect this, even then it can't go around banning people just because of different filesizes with the assumption that they're exploiting the game.
Detecting file sizes or you know, keep binary hashes of all the files and just do a quick check would be a pretty simple way to detecting and then auto log for mass ban time..
|
On May 11 2011 07:33 Antisocialmunky wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2011 07:29 Teliko wrote:On May 11 2011 06:15 porytom wrote:
While this thread is rather interesting, I can't help but notice the glaring typo in the OP. I am of course referring to "turns our campaign portraits". This should, of course, be "turns out". I am quite eager to read your blog but to be frank, I'm not sure that I could stomach any more of these linguistic lethargies. If Teliko were to be kind enough to take the time to amend his original post, I would be more than happy to try this edit for myself. http://www.endlessvideo.com/watch?v=pnq96W9jtuw&start=3m18s&end=3m21sOn May 11 2011 07:09 SlipperySnake wrote:+ Show Spoiler +What I don't think anyone has even mentioned yet is whether Blizzard should be banning people for altering their game. Everyone has been saying that they would switch the models and then ladder would be easy but there is ways that Blizzard can check the game files. I feel like they could just restrict people from laddering if the files are out of place or altered while still letting them play custom games.
I mean I know Blizzard wants to make the ladder fair but there has to be a balance between fairness and maintaining customization. Some may argue that the world editor is enough room for changing aspects of the game but I think there is at least an argument to be made for custom HUDs or menu systems. People keep parroting the same ridiculous arguments over and over again about how customization will lead to cheating which is nothing but speculation.
I have always experienced customization as a good thing because there were always utilities developed to protect against cheaters while allowing players to create their own original content. I would like too see Blizzard working towards the goal of making things more open for users rather than being a monolith who is so concerned about creative control that they can't just be psyched that people bought and are playing their game.
I am not naive to think that they don't have a stake in the continued success of SC2 so that is why they want control but I don't think the input of fans would be a detriment. It is just disappointing from my end to see that Blizzard might end up with the classic Activision philosophy of milking each series as much as possible. Maybe though Blizzard has already been doing that though with WoW so I am just hoping for a change in the industry's policy.
Everyone can't be Valve and I guess I am hooked on the product. It's not as easy as one might think for Blizz to be able to detect model/texture modifications. It's kind of like asking a computer to answer a captcha. While a person can easily (sometimes) make out the captcha, computers will have great difficulty. Model edits don't change any file names, only the files inside them. While a Blizz employee could obviously see the difference, they can't go around individually inspecting each file of everyones' game client. Especially considering all edits will be client-side, the server won't know anything about it. The one thing they could do is judge it by the filesize. Say a default Observer model file is 200kb, I replace it with a mothership and now the file is suddenly 1mb. While the game will be able to detect this, even then it can't go around banning people just because of different filesizes with the assumption that they're exploiting the game. Detecting file sizes or you know, keep binary hashes of all the files and just do a quick check would be a pretty simple way to detecting and then auto log for mass ban time..
Depending on the rate people are logging into bnet, this might create a lot of overhead even though the actual calculation can be made to be relatively low cost.
|
On May 07 2011 06:38 holynorth wrote:
So now people are going to going to edit the colors of key units. Ghosts will be a neon green, high templars a bright pink, so they stand out and are easily hit with feedback/emp.
I never really understood this argument. The ghost is already white and stands out. Their color isn't the problem. Its the fact that they are small and units clump up in sc2. So you have a ball of small units with one small unit inside that needs to be clicked on. Not only that, but almost everyone plays with the life bars on so now bars are covering everything up. Not just that, but then there are medivacs that cover everything up too.
But even with all that, its really not that hard. You will ALWAYS rely on the energy bars to identify the ghost before you look at the model. If you feel the need to make the ghost bright pink, thats fine, but it wont help you or give you any type of advantage because a purple energy bar amongst green bars and a white ghost are already enough. Templars have the bars too so the same argument there.
So far the only advantages i'm thinking of are the mothership to observer type swap, and probably putting in a custom model with spikes pointing in all directions. Lets say for the nexus. Then when the game starts you follow the spike to your enemies starting location. Stuff like that.
EDIT: I hope people stop focusing so much about it being exploitable and start contributing with cool Non-Cheat modifications to make the game better.
|
On May 11 2011 07:41 pzea469 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 07 2011 06:38 holynorth wrote:
So now people are going to going to edit the colors of key units. Ghosts will be a neon green, high templars a bright pink, so they stand out and are easily hit with feedback/emp. So far the only advantages i'm thinking of are the mothership to observer type swap, and probably putting in a custom model with spikes pointing in all directions. Lets say for the nexus. Then when the game starts you follow the spike to your enemies starting location. Stuff like that.
I don't think the spike works since you still need vision of the nexus to be able to view the model.
Still abusable by changing the DT/ghost model into an ultralisk, but it won't really help much except against noticing cloaked stuff.
|
On May 11 2011 07:45 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2011 07:41 pzea469 wrote:On May 07 2011 06:38 holynorth wrote:
So now people are going to going to edit the colors of key units. Ghosts will be a neon green, high templars a bright pink, so they stand out and are easily hit with feedback/emp. So far the only advantages i'm thinking of are the mothership to observer type swap, and probably putting in a custom model with spikes pointing in all directions. Lets say for the nexus. Then when the game starts you follow the spike to your enemies starting location. Stuff like that. I don't think the spike works since you still need vision of the nexus to be able to view the model. Still abusable by changing the DT/ghost model into an ultralisk, but it won't really help much except against noticing cloaked stuff.
Oh, you're probably right about that. Good, then that's ruled out.
Yeah, fortunately the number of advantages possible doesn't seem as big. Can't wait to see more stuff come out from the community now.
|
On May 11 2011 07:22 pzea469 wrote:Thanks for the info man. I never did this research on my own, though I have played with swapping out some models. For example Ive been using this little dude I made from time to time ![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/xggJZ.jpg) I just miss the bw probe lol. I hope blizzard lets us keep doing this, but somehow limits us to not allowing us to do something like the mothership observer swap. Its a shame that people would use this to cheat instead of being creative and bringing something cool to the table.
D: these look awesome!
On May 11 2011 07:45 101toss wrote:Show nested quote +On May 11 2011 07:41 pzea469 wrote:On May 07 2011 06:38 holynorth wrote:
So now people are going to going to edit the colors of key units. Ghosts will be a neon green, high templars a bright pink, so they stand out and are easily hit with feedback/emp. So far the only advantages i'm thinking of are the mothership to observer type swap, and probably putting in a custom model with spikes pointing in all directions. Lets say for the nexus. Then when the game starts you follow the spike to your enemies starting location. Stuff like that. I don't think the spike works since you still need vision of the nexus to be able to view the model. Still abusable by changing the DT/ghost model into an ultralisk, but it won't really help much except against noticing cloaked stuff.
This is right. You need to have vision of the buildings hex placements to reveal it from the fog of war. Pretty much the cloak and larger target selecting are the only potential exploits, which while still annoying, isn't much compared to maphackers or PiLLaGe who's #1 US and #6 Grandmasters in the world purely from using a drophack.
|
Sorry for the bump on this old thread, but I've been trying to do this on the lastest patch.
Is anyone from the NA region able to get this model swap to work? I've heard that the folder prioritizing method doesn't work on the NA clients and only on the EU clients...
|
On July 25 2011 23:05 Velladin wrote:
Sorry for the bump on this old thread, but I've been trying to do this on the lastest patch.
Is anyone from the NA region able to get this model swap to work? I've heard that the folder prioritizing method doesn't work on the NA clients and only on the EU clients...
You need to use it in your proper locality (in this case the US file I'm assuming), it works for me
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
