Urgent. Host Cheating: Problem and Solution.

[Jasper]

There are ways to significantly avert cheating, such that cheating would require a hacked copy of dominions with security turned off. They are a quite a bit more cumbersome however, as they require action from several people to host.

For a hosted game, it would be enough for hosting to require that several people connect and provide their password over a secure chanel (eg SSH). One would also need to ensure all players have the same .map, to avoid unscruplous editing.

For PBEM this would be more difficult. A host request could send out encyrpted and time stamped requests to several players, and only host after receiving their response.

IMHO this is a significant problem, not so much due to rampant cheating, but to remove the commonplace suspicion of cheating -- especially should the host have even a slightly lucky start. Admitedly it's probably easier to just play with people you trust, or trade hosting so players aren't in games they host.

[Jam3]

Well i just started hosting but from my experience you gotta have master password in case you need to turn someone to AI. If they could allow the server client to change AI status (plus it would be nice to be able to switch back from AI if someone returns)

[Jam3]

Well i just started hosting but from my experience you gotta have master password in case you need to turn someone to AI. If they could allow the server client to change AI status (plus it would be nice to be able to switch back from AI if someone returns)

[Jasper]

Originally posted by johan osterman:

quote:

---

Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
No, this is a legitimate concern Really! If two people want to play competitively, and one of them is a known cheater... well, that's currently impossible without a 3rd-party host!

Not that it is any of my concern with whom you want to play, but why would you play with a known cheater. I would avoid them like the plague.

---

I think Sabre Cherry is being sarcastic -- note the .

It is a real problem however. In all of the games I've played, I didn't know my opponents beforehand. In such cases accusations of cheating arise easily -- simply because cheating is easy, and regardless of whether the accusation is true.

For me the solution is easy -- I just don't host. But _somebody_ has to host, and who really wants to open themselves up to such a potential headache?

[PvK]

Anyone want to develop dominions.pbw.cc?

See seiv.pbw.cc to see what I mean.

PvK

[Gandalf Parker]

Originally posted by PvK:
Anyone want to develop dominions.pbw.cc?

See seiv.pbw.cc to see what I mean.

PvK

Lots of conversation on that. Do a search (upper right of this screen) on threads with the word server in the subject. Both I (for a linux web) and Shrapnel (for windows) have offered to host one.

[Coffeedragon]

Originally posted by PhilD:
Only if both are known cheater. And it should only be a concern to known cheaters. If you absolutely must play with a cheater, and aren't one, you can host.

Yes, but this doesn´t cover the really serious case -what if no one is a cheater, but if all my friends are paranoid, and so am I, who should now host?

[Norfleet]

Originally posted by Saber Cherry:
Oh, wait, I figured it out. OK:

"Force Host Disabled"

and

"Master Password Disabled"

will allow perfectly cheatproof network play.

Gotcha there: All you have to do: Start a copy of the game: Turn it into a PBEM game as the copy, then force the hosting with the command line or the timer.

The fact of the matter is that you can either get a third party to host for you, and if you're REALLY paranoid, then you have to worry about that third party being in collusion with one or more cheaters, or you can stop playing with shady people.

As a general rule of thumb we use in games that my group plays, including, but not limited to, Dominions II, the person selected to be the host is the player considered to be the best anyway, because if the host gets killed off fast, the quality of your hosting may quickly decline.

The point is that if you're dealing with cheaters, you're just going to have to accept that there's no real solution to this: The harder you make it to cheat, the more lucrative cheating will be.

[Gandalf Parker]

If we can get a web-server working that might help. The image I have is a signup page which creates the entire game along with ways to drop off and pick up turn files.

Of course the server host still has access. But if the server is starting a new game every day then it would have to be a pretty addicted Dominions player. WHAT AM I SAYING? We are all addicted Dominions players.

[Saber Cherry]

Originally posted by Norfleet:
Gotcha there: All you have to do: Start a copy of the game: Turn it into a PBEM game as the copy, then force the hosting with the command line or the timer.

No, you can't force host with the copy, either, since the game was created with "Force Host Disabled".

JO:
Not that it is any of my concern with whom you want to play, but why would you play with a known cheater. I would avoid them like the plague.

So I can beat him=)

PhilD:
Only if both are known cheater. And it should only be a concern to known cheaters. If you absolutely must play with a cheater, and aren't one, you can host.

Well... as Jasper said, "accusations of cheating arise easily -- simply because cheating is easy, and regardless of whether the accusation is true.

For me the solution is easy -- I just don't host. But _somebody_ has to host, and who really wants to open themselves up to such a potential headache? "

and a bit of Coffeedragon's "Yes, but this doesn´t cover the really serious case -what if no one is a cheater, but if all my friends are paranoid, and so am I, who should now host?"

Cheaters, after all, are paranoid - you can't say "Let me host, as I am more trustworthy than you."

Maybe it's more of a logic puzzle than anything, like the question of how to get the cannibals and the missionary across the river with only one 3-person boat. And you could say, "Don't go to the Amazon rainforest in the first place", and while that's a good answer, it is not very helpful to missionaries.

Having a way for a host to be beyond suspicion is, IMO, necessary.

-Cherry