Jump to content


Is there any cheat or skill that would make you see undetected tank?

unfai cheat

  • Please log in to reply
90 replies to this topic

CmdRatScabies #21 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:17 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38527 battles
  • 5,074
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015
OP went to the spotting bush that spotters always go to and wonders why he was blind shot?  wtf

ValkyrionX #22 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:20 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 51194 battles
  • 2,307
  • [NOPAS] NOPAS
  • Member since:
    02-07-2015


pecopad #23 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:21 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28856 battles
  • 2,027
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

View PostDava_117, on 06 June 2019 - 09:46 AM, said:

 

Do you stream?

If not, there is no way the enemy ST-I can know your location if you are unspotted. His client get only the information needed and unspotted tank location is not necessary. 

 

How do you know this is the way the game handles spotting, do you have any inside info or you are just assuming this?

 

I remember that old sold hacks claimed that they would allow not only to see all tanks but would tell when they were aiming at you. My assumption is that the info is sent to all clients, there is no good reason not to do it.

 

I think that after a long period of lower hacking activity, where you would see mostly aimbots and tundra we are now seeing an increase in the sophistication of hacks, that is just the impression I get.


Edited by pecopad, 06 June 2019 - 10:24 AM.


CmdRatScabies #24 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:33 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38527 battles
  • 5,074
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 10:21 AM, said:

My assumption is that the info is sent to all clients, there is no good reason not to do it.

 

There is one rather obvious reason.  So that game breaking hacks such as the one you're describing cannot exist.

Dava_117 #25 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:41 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 22263 battles
  • 4,667
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 10:21 AM, said:

 

How do you know this is the way the game handles spotting, do you have any inside info or you are just assuming this?

 

I remember that old sold hacks claimed that they would allow not only to see all tanks but would tell when they were aiming at you. My assumption is that the info is sent to all clients, there is no good reason not to do it.

 

I think that after a long period of lower hacking activity, where you would see mostly aimbots and tundra we are now seeing an increase in the sophistication of hacks, that is just the impression I get.

 

There is a quite good reason instead, and it is the computational cost and the available datarate. If you have to send all the information to all the client, you will not only require an higher datarate, effectively reducing the amount of online player you can support at once (bad thing for a gaming company) but it would also require more computational power to send all those data around.

This all convert into more server needed to support the gaming comunity, hence more cost for the same results.

 

Plus it would allow cheating. So 2 good reasons to send to client only the important information.



woolfie #26 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:43 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 49653 battles
  • 418
  • Member since:
    02-06-2011

''Is there any cheat or skill that would make you see undetected tank?''

 

No there is no such cheat but there is a skill some players use called blindfiring - and it is called BLINDfire for a very good reason because it means you are shooting blindly into an area where you strongly assume an enemy might be lurking. It doesn't always work* but makes you grin quite a lot when it does.

 

* Hitting an unspotted enemy is the primary aim of blindfiring, but even a near miss can make an unspotted enemy relocate which is still a favourable outcome for the blindshooter and his team.



UrQuan #27 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:46 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21329 battles
  • 7,128
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 10:21 AM, said:

 

 

 

I remember that old sold hacks claimed that they would allow not only to see all tanks but would tell when they were aiming at you. My assumption is that the info is sent to all clients, there is no good reason not to do it.

 

 

I remember the thread about that cheat. It only worked if both sides had a certain mod running collecting data & they had to be in the same battle. On top of it, it generated large amounts of lag & was very easy to spot as well from an anti-cheat measure.

So in the unlikely case this was involved, know that someone on your team was cheating as well & both will get the banhammer at the next round of bannings.

The client only works on on information you have & your allies in radiorange (this last bit is important in certain situations) & verifies it with the server, who knows all. If something conflicts, the server overrides the client.

 

PS; another cheat mod that one might think of doesn't work either: Lighting up tracers, they can only lit up tracers from spotted tanks (and unspotted artillery tracers from artillery view mode). This is because the server doesn't share the information of unspotted tracers with the client, so there's nothing to lit up.


Edited by UrQuan, 06 June 2019 - 10:49 AM.


pecopad #28 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:50 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28856 battles
  • 2,027
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

View PostUrQuan, on 06 June 2019 - 10:46 AM, said:

 

I remember the thread about that cheat. It only worked if both sides had a certain mod running collecting data & they had to be in the same battle. On top of it, it generated large amounts of lag & was very easy to spot as well from an anti-cheat measure.

So in the unlikely case this was involved, know that someone on your team was cheating as well & both will get the banhammer at the next round of bannings.

The client only works on on information you have & your allies in radiorange (this last bit is important in certain situations) & verifies it with the server, who knows all. If something conflicts, the server overrides the client.

 

Where have you ever seen any detail info on the client server info, you are just assuming stuff.

 

Why would WoT be any different to another game apart from server calculations? 

 

And by the way, the broken object hack, proves you wrong... in WoT trees fall even when you are not looking at them.



gpalsson #29 Posted 06 June 2019 - 10:56 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24508 battles
  • 8,965
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 09:50 AM, said:

 

Where have you ever seen any detail info on the client server info, you are just assuming stuff.

 

From the hundreds of people making mods for this game. That's a pretty good source. The data just isn't available. It's common knowledge by now and has been for a long time.

If you want to prove otherwise, I suggest you do that. Prove that all the data is available. No one else can, but maybe you can. But it certainly will require more effort than bringing tinfoil to every discussion.

 

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 09:50 AM, said:

 

And by the way, the broken object hack, proves you wrong... in WoT trees fall even when you are not looking at them.

 

That's actually one of the things that DOES get sent to the clients, destructed objects. Otherwise the client would not be able to render it. That's how it got abused and used for this kind of thing. Do you really think that if locations of enemies was sent to every client, the broken object cheat would even be a thing? Ofc not. They would simply get the position of the enemies instead. As always, think about it logically before you bring the tinfoil.


Edited by gpalsson, 06 June 2019 - 10:59 AM.


Dava_117 #30 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:00 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 22263 battles
  • 4,667
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 10:50 AM, said:

 

Where have you ever seen any detail info on the client server info, you are just assuming stuff.

 

Why would WoT be any different to another game apart from server calculations? 

 

And by the way, the broken object hack, proves you wrong... in WoT trees fall even when you are not looking at them.

 

Broken object data are shared with all player because it reduce calculation ad data excange. It can be used to see if a tank passed over a certain object, but the usefulness is quite questionable, as a LT can break multiple object to attract a possible cheating team in a trap.

Edited by Dava_117, 06 June 2019 - 11:00 AM.


UrQuan #31 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:02 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21329 battles
  • 7,128
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 10:50 AM, said:

 

Where have you ever seen any detail info on the client server info, you are just assuming stuff.

 

Why would WoT be any different to another game apart from server calculations? 

 

And by the way, the broken object hack, proves you wrong... in WoT trees fall even when you are not looking at them.

 

It is a server-run game, not a client run game. That comes with alot of limits on what you can & can't do (WoT is set up like an MMO, server runs things, client serves the server).

The trees falling & objects being destroyed is the server telling the client the environment changes so that everyone in the battle has the same experience. This is especially important with objects that can act as cover. It is important for everyone to know, even beyond range, that that house has been knocked down, so that everyone can look through it.

But that is all the server shares about that fallen tree or torn down house: server just goes 'look this is now changed, adapt' and up to you to figure out who made that change. A tank? a shell?

 

Edit: as pointed out above, you can use the breaking of the environment as trap as well. I sometimes do it in my HT's, running over as many trees & houses as I can, to pretend a larger group then just me is coming through. After all, everyone can see the trees fall & the houses being torn down. Up to them to guess how many tanks are involved.


Edited by UrQuan, 06 June 2019 - 11:26 AM.


gpalsson #32 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:08 AM

    General

  • Player
  • 24508 battles
  • 8,965
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2013

View PostDava_117, on 06 June 2019 - 10:00 AM, said:

 

Broken object data are shared with all player because it reduce calculation ad data excange. It can be used to see if a tank passed over a certain object, but the usefulness is quite questionable, as a LT can break multiple object to attract a possible cheating team in a trap.

 

It isn't to reduce data exchange. It's because the client would otherwise not be able to render that a tree fell down or a wall broke. It is necessary to make the game work as expected.

pecopad #33 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:16 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 28856 battles
  • 2,027
  • [UGN] UGN
  • Member since:
    09-04-2015

View Postgpalsson, on 06 June 2019 - 10:56 AM, said:

From the hundreds of people making mods for this game. That's a pretty good source. The data just isn't available. It's common knowledge by now and has been for a long time.

If you want to prove otherwise, I suggest you do that. Prove that all the data is available. No one else can, but maybe you can. But it certainly will require more effort than bringing tinfoil to every discussion.

 

 

That's actually one of the things that DOES get sent to the clients, destructed objects. Otherwise the client would not be able to render it. That's how it got abused and used for this kind of thing. Do you really think that if locations of enemies was sent to every client, the broken object cheat would even be a thing? Ofc not. They would simply get the position of the enemies instead. As always, think about it logically before you bring the tinfoil.

 

Mods explain nothing,you are modding objects not calculations...

 

And its not common knowledge, because I have looked for this info and couldn't find any... it was never disclosed.

 

So its just an assumption, and IMHO a very bad one, since it would require the servers to have GPU's to run the game engine, which is something very expensive and actually something no other game does.

 

Server side calculations can mean a huge number of things, what it is exactly what WoT uses, very few people know. My logic is that WG would make this game the more efficient it can, so the handling of objects and physics is done client side by our GPU's and CPU's, not server side.

 

To get a better insight, actually the spec of the WG servers would be enough... or a picture...


Edited by pecopad, 06 June 2019 - 11:18 AM.


malachi6 #34 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:18 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 50920 battles
  • 4,181
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
Confirmed that ability is cheating.  Good to know.

UrQuan #35 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:25 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 21329 battles
  • 7,128
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    08-19-2011

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 11:16 AM, said:

 

So its just an assumption, and IMHO a very bad one, since it would require the servers to have GPU's to run the game engine

 

Server side calculations can mean a huge number of things, what it is exactly what WoT uses, very few people know. My logic is that WG would make this game the more efficient it can, so the handling of objects and physics is done client side by our GPU's and CPU's, not server side.

 

Server doesn't need GPU's to run. The visual aspect is not needed for the server. The visual aspect is only needed for the user, so yes the tree falling & wall/house breaking is shown clientside, after the server told the client 'this tree falls down that way' & 'that part of the house breaks this way' The client does not know why the tree falls that way, or the house breaks like that, it only generates it because the server tells it. 

The server knows, because client X drove his tank over the tree in Y direction & shared that info with the server, the server calculates what happens & approves & sends out the data to all clients regarding the falling tree, so all clients can generate the falling tree, but only shares the tank driving location to its allies in radiorange (as long as he isn't spotted that is), so those clients can generate the tank driving over the tree. There is no need for a  server GPU in this case. (GPU would only be needed in case of cloud/stream gaming, when the server does everything, including client calculations)


Edited by UrQuan, 06 June 2019 - 11:26 AM.


Dorander #36 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:29 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 21025 battles
  • 5,735
  • Member since:
    05-07-2012

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 10:16 AM, said:

 

Mods explain nothing,you are modding objects not calculations...

 

And its not common knowledge, because I have looked for this info and couldn't find any... it was never disclosed.

 

So its just an assumption, and IMHO a very bad one, since it would require the servers to have GPU's to run the game engine, which is something very expensive and actually something no other game does.

 

Server side calculations can mean a huge number of things, what it is exactly what WoT uses, very few people know. My logic is that WG would make this game the more efficient it can, so the handling of objects and physics is done client side by our GPU's and CPU's, not server side.

 

To get a better insight, actually the spec of the WG servers would be enough... or a picture...

 

The server only needs to do the calculations. The server obviously has all the data about where players are. The spotting system has been explained by Wargaming a few times, especially when they made changes to it, about how often the server checks for possible spots based on proximity of tanks to each other. This is explicitly stated to be done server-side, so no, the idea that our clients do not have data about where everyone is, which is what's required for invisibility cheats or magical sight cheats, is not an assumption. It's been explained.

 

Server knows where you are, server knows the model of the tank you're driving, server knows where somebody fires at, from and when. Server doesn't need to render anything or run a game engine, it simply has to do a mathematical calculation for an object with a certain vector to impact another object with a certain vector and send the results to the client for rendering.

 

Don't you think it's telling that despite people claiming that these cheats not only exist but are common, that nobody's ever shown any evidence of them in action? Nobody who went "lol look at this, anyone can do it"? Common cheats don't behave like big secrets, else they wouldn't be common cheats. With the exception of that very specific mod where two players on opposing sides communicated through a third-party server, which functioned as a proof of concept, and in doing so showed all the problems of that concept, the described cheats that supposedly violate the server-side handling of spotting and firing have never been shown to exist.



Cobra6 #37 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:35 AM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16506 battles
  • 17,277
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostGremlin182, on 06 June 2019 - 09:06 AM, said:

When I know I have been spotted I immediately start looking for where the spotter might be and thanks to changes on some maps it has become easier.

There is actually a mod that's legal and it marks on the minimap ideal sites for Arty TD and I think Light tanks to go to.

Its great you know just where to shoot to kill them and where not to go when you are them.

 

 

 

Personally I find this mod a bit dubious as it marks things specifically on the map.

 

When a player *KNOWS* where light tanks might be as he has played there as well himself is something radically different from just being clearly told by a mod. The first case takes experience, the second is just an advantage over players not having  the mod.

 

Cobra 6



arthurwellsley #38 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:40 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 54060 battles
  • 4,018
  • [-B-C-] -B-C-
  • Member since:
    05-11-2011

View PostFreeBird_, on 06 June 2019 - 08:55 AM, said:

watch replay, and see it from enemy perspective (second link that i provided) he moves his turret (ST-1) in coresponding manner as my tank moves.

"You do know that when shell doesn't hit anything, it will produce a plume of dirt? Particularily big guns (over 75mm) have very visible effect when hitting ground on medium and upward settings. No plume, you have hit something in bush. That's "

yes but if your enemy is on top of the hill behind bush then there will be no visual effect regardless

 

1. FreeBird_  goes to usual scouting bush.

2. FreeBird_ shoots at an enemy IS3 from said bush.

3. Enemy STI sees his allied IS3 get hit for a smallish amount of damage by an unspotted enemy.

4. STI assumes from the amount of damage taken by the IS3 that it was shot by a light tank.

5. STI assumes that shooting the obvious bush might gain him an advantage.

6. STI takes the blind shots.

7. FreeBird_ sits in the same spot after shooting up the IS3 and gets punished.

8. All pretty standard stuff.

9. STI follows a chain of logic and succeeds.

10. FreeBird_ sits like a patsy to get shot up and then blames it on cheating.


Edited by arthurwellsley, 06 June 2019 - 11:41 AM.


CmdRatScabies #39 Posted 06 June 2019 - 11:44 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 38527 battles
  • 5,074
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    10-12-2015

View Postarthurwellsley, on 06 June 2019 - 11:40 AM, said:

 

1. FreeBird_  goes to usual scouting bush.

2. FreeBird_ shoots at an enemy IS3 from said bush.

3. Enemy STI sees his allied IS3 get hit for a smallish amount of damage by an unspotted enemy.

4. STI assumes from the amount of damage taken by the IS3 that it was shot by a light tank.

5. STI assumes that shooting the obvious bush might gain him an advantage.

6. STI takes the blind shots.

7. FreeBird_ sits in the same spot after shooting up the IS3 and gets punished.

8. All pretty standard stuff.

9. STI follows a chain of logic and succeeds.

10. FreeBird_ sits like a patsy to get shot up and then blames it on cheating.

 

No no no.  A totally game breaking hack that's very common but not publicised anywhere is a far more likely explanation.

4nt #40 Posted 06 June 2019 - 12:05 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28732 battles
  • 1,372
  • Member since:
    04-09-2013

View Postpecopad, on 06 June 2019 - 11:16 AM, said:

 

Mods explain nothing,you are modding objects not calculations...

 

And its not common knowledge, because I have looked for this info and couldn't find any... it was never disclosed.

 

So its just an assumption, and IMHO a very bad one, since it would require the servers to have GPU's to run the game engine, which is something very expensive and actually something no other game does.

 

Server side calculations can mean a huge number of things, what it is exactly what WoT uses, very few people know. My logic is that WG would make this game the more efficient it can, so the handling of objects and physics is done client side by our GPU's and CPU's, not server side.

 

To get a better insight, actually the spec of the WG servers would be enough... or a picture...

Jezus, just because you don't understand how things work it really doesn't invalidate reality. If data you are insinuating to exist would be there, there would be cheats that allow wallhacks and 0-rng shots. And there are none.

 

Regarding server needing GPU... It appears you have very very limited understanding how data is used in computers. This pretty much explains on what basis you make these theories, that of ignorance. Do extrapolate: what in the hell would server -that uses pure data (y'know, 0s and 1s)- would do with dedicated GPUs? 







Also tagged with unfai, cheat

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users