Matrix Games Forums

I brought this issue up in the thread AAR: Return Road to Kharkov - RocketMan vs. Mad Russian hoping I would get some discussion of the issue. Unfortunately, no one had anything to say there, so I wanted to bring up the issue here.

The recommended way the PBEM files are exchanged makes it fairly easy for an unscrupulous player to cheat. The recommended sequence of file exchanges is for each player to play two phases and exchange two files at a time. However, it is fairly easy to play the first file, watch what happens when the second file is played and then go back and replay the first file again using the knowledge gained from having already "played" the second file.

For those familiar with the Combat Mission games, this sequence is similar to playing in "trusted mode" in that it minimizes the number of email exchanges it takes to complete a PBEM game, but allows for a player to cheat if he was inclined to. As long as people understand what is possible and they both trust each other enough to agree to play using the recommended method there is absolutely no problem with this system.

However, if you want to make sure your opponent cannot cheat, I am pretty sure you need to exchange only one file at a time instead of the recommended two files. I have worked this sequence out on paper and done a little testing by playing a PBEM game with myself, but I am not 100% sure it will work in practice.

Here is the sequence I came up with. Each player does a setup for the side they are playing, but only one player (chosen ahead of time, whom I will call player 1) sends his file to his opponent (whom I will call player 2). Player 2 then plays a phase and sends a file to player 1, followed by player 1 playing a phase and then sending a file to player 2. Alternating this sequence should, in theory, result in a game where nobody can cheat by gaining future knowledge of the next phase.

If somebody else could test this sequence and see if they agree with my conclusions it would be greatly appreciated.

Hmm, sounds reasonable.

Regards,

Greg

oh crap
it's true indeed
in tourneys or ladder games the only solution is to exchange files between phases, which doubles the length of the game essentially

Yes, it's possible. The random seed is stored for PBEM games, so replaying the same turn won't get you different results. However, playing it, then going back and changing your actions and playing it again could result in differences. Any PBEM system requires some trust in your opponent and we decided to lean in favor of a default system that played quickly.

And yes, keeping to one phase per exchange will make it much harder for this type of cheating to be useful but it will slow things down.

Regards,

- Erik

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

Yes, it's possible. The random seed is stored for PBEM games, so replaying the same turn won't get you different results. However, playing it, then going back and changing your actions and playing it again could result in differences. Any PBEM system requires some trust in your opponent and we decided to lean in favor of a default system that played quickly.

And yes, keeping to one phase per exchange will make it much harder for this type of cheating to be useful but it will slow things down.

Regards,

- Erik

Thanks for the response Erik. Like I said, as long as people understand how the system works, it is no big deal.

Most people don't know how to do it, but it is childishly easy to cheat in Combat Mission even with their PBEM system. I doubt if there has ever been a PBEM game invented where it was impossible to cheat if somebody was really determined to do it.

ORIGINAL: RocketMan


... but it is childishly easy to cheat in Combat Mission even with their PBEM system. ...

Except that its not.

ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell

ORIGINAL: RocketMan


... but it is childishly easy to cheat in Combat Mission even with their PBEM system. ...

Except that its not.

LOL Whatever you say Rebel Yell.

Just to prove my point, I spent the 10 minutes it took (which includes taking the screenshot and writing this post) to "cheat" in Combat Mission. Notice that the Rifle 41 squad has 10 MG34 LMGs and 2 Panzerfaust-100s. I also set the rattled bit. I could have done more, but I think this makes my point.

How do you do that?  I have never seen that before?
 
Also, once a unit is ID'ed, wouldn't that show to your opponent?

Remind me not to play Rocketman with CM! [;)]

ORIGINAL: thewood1

How do you do that? I have never seen that before?

Also, once a unit is ID'ed, wouldn't that show to your opponent?

I would rather not say how I did it. No reason to make it easier for people to cheat, but knowing it is possible makes it easier to spot cheaters.

As to your second question, I have never tried cheating in an actual game, but I am pretty sure your opponent would see the change once the unit was ID'ed. However there are ways around even that.

ORIGINAL: British tommy

Remind me not to play Rocketman with CM! [;)]

LOL As I said earlier, I doubt there is any game you can play PBEM that a determined person can't figure out how to cheat at. I have never cheated in any two player game I have ever played, although I have been known to reload a previous save game when I am playing the AI once in a while.

ORIGINAL: RocketMan

ORIGINAL: British tommy

Remind me not to play Rocketman with CM! [;)]

LOL As I said earlier, I doubt there is any game you can play PBEM that a determined person can't figure out how to cheat at. I have never cheated in any two player game I have ever played, although I have been known to reload a previous save game when I am playing the AI once in a while.

The AI has no moral compass, so there is such thing as cheating the AI.

True thewood1. I view playing an AI as solving a puzzle. My enjoyment comes from finding the right solution to the puzzle.

However when I play another person, the enjoyment comes from matching wits with them. And while winning is more fun than losing, a loss against a human is more enjoyable than a win against the AI.

What you're claiming to do here has nothing to do with your original post.  In PCK it is inherently easy to cheat in PBEM.  You said it is childishly easy to cheat in CM PBEM, but it is not.  You can't go back and change things if you don't like the results.  In PCK, you can.

ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell
What you're claiming to do here has nothing to do with your original post.  In PCK it is inherently easy to cheat in PBEM.  You said it is childishly easy to cheat in CM PBEM, but it is not.  You can't go back and change things if you don't like the results.  In PCK, you can.

If you do two phases per exchange in PCK, yes. If you slow things down and do one, it's not nearly as easy.

Honestly, I don't think "replay" cheating is going to trump good play in the majority of cases though and in my experience most cheaters are discovered in time and that's the end of their community reputation.

Regards,

- Erik

Personally, I think its a bad feature in the name of speeding up gaming, but this is not a knock on PCK, just pointing out the difference in cheating in PBEM and hacking your way into a .exe.

ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell

What you're claiming to do here has nothing to do with your original post. In PCK it is inherently easy to cheat in PBEM. You said it is childishly easy to cheat in CM PBEM, but it is not. You can't go back and change things if you don't like the results. In PCK, you can.

Yes, my example of cheating in CM is different than what I pointed out you can do in PZCK, although there are ways to cheat in CM as well that change the results you don't like during replay (I don't know how to do that, but research 101Paratrooper at either The Blitz or World at War for an example of this type of cheating).

But the larger point is that cheating can occur in every game that I know of. The reason I pointed out this potential cheating issue in the first place is so that people can decide for themselves how they want to play the game and recognize this type of cheating if it occures.

I completely agree with Erik in that "I don't think "replay" cheating is going to trump good play in the majority of cases though and in my experience most cheaters are discovered in time and that's the end of their community reputation." But if you don't realize that it is possible, you might not recognize it if it occurs.

However, the downside is that some people might be accused of cheating when they did not in fact cheat. Until a game company makes a game that is impossible to cheat in, that will always be a problem. Until that time comes, caveat emptor.

ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell

Personally, I think its a bad feature in the name of speeding up gaming, but this is not a knock on PCK, just pointing out the difference in cheating in PBEM and hacking your way into a .exe.

LOL I did not touch the .exe file Rebel Yell. I could do the same type of cheating (as well as other things I did not show could be done) in any CM game, including any PBEM game.

If you want to Rebel Yell, we can play a PBEM game of CM where I will be allowed to cheat. I guarantee you that you will never be able to prove that I had cheated.

ORIGINAL: Erik Rutins

ORIGINAL: Rebel Yell
What you're claiming to do here has nothing to do with your original post.  In PCK it is inherently easy to cheat in PBEM.  You said it is childishly easy to cheat in CM PBEM, but it is not.  You can't go back and change things if you don't like the results.  In PCK, you can.

If you do two phases per exchange in PCK, yes. If you slow things down and do one, it's not nearly as easy.

Honestly, I don't think "replay" cheating is going to trump good play in the majority of cases though and in my experience most cheaters are discovered in time and that's the end of their community reputation.

Regards,

- Erik

I like this approach to PBEM - make it so its a matter of choice and you can play fast, or if you want to be more cautious then pay the price of having a slower, but more secure, email game.

Maybe if I played more pbem, I'd feel different, but I prefer to not worry about cheaters - I'm a lousy player anyway, so not many would need to cheat against me.

Rick