Matrix Games Forums

Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

The possibilty of manipulation

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> The possibilty of manipulation Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 8:32:23 PM   
trw2264

 

Posts: 121
Joined: 12/18/2002
Status: offline
I have been a big EiA fan since 1986, when I first purchased the game and in the past I have spent untold evening playing EiA. I have been reading the forums and the constructive criticism of the game. I am not a programmer, just an accountant, so I know next to nothing about designing a computer game. There are bugs and the Matrix team is addressing those bugs. As with anything we all think that we can make something a little better etc.

Currently, I own the Matrix EiA game and I am in several games that are at different stages. I did not buy EiA to play against the AI, I bought the game to play against other human opponents. As with any game there is the chance of hacking, exploiting, etc. But I am involved in a PBEM game were one player accused another player of cheating and posted this argument on the AAR report section. A gentlemen that helped to design Matrix’s EiA posted on the AAR that it is possible for an individual to use a copy and paste function to replay a turn before you send that turn to others. I found this to be very troubling because it can be easily done I guess.

This is a game that many of us will spend our valuable time playing and plotting, but now to find out that the game results can be manipulated in such an easy manner has greatly decreased my desire to play. People will post on here that you need to have more trust and that people sometimes find ways to exploit in any game. From an accounting perspective, internal controls are put into place to decrease risk and to, eventually catch foul play.

Again, not being a game designer, I do not understand why a set of randomly generated numbers cannot be generated and thus fixed for that phase so that the same results would still happen no matter how many times the copy and paste function is used and in what order the action takes place. Assign pre-generated die rolls to each country or each counter, etc. (this is not a debate about whether or not a set of fixed random numbers, etc. would work) Perhaps this is not feasible, but I find it hard to believe that something can’t be done to stop this potential exploit.

EiA is a game that I am passionate about and I am strongly debating on whether or not to continue playing myself, because this is a time investment for me, an enjoyment of the game, but to know that an individual has the ability to so easily manipulate the results, I am questioning my desire to continue playing.

I really hope that this issue can be solved in a manner that will not detract from the game and in no way should this be taken as a way to decrease sales or hurt EiA activity. I would love nothing more than to be able to find opponents and play this game for years to come! It might not even be Matrix’s duty to put internal controls into place to stop manipulation. Instead it might be my burden to find seven players that I trust, so that I can play this game at a level in which I do not need to worry if there is manipulation happening or not wihout me using a stats program to see if somebody's result are falling outside the bell curve.

Thomas Whitfield
Post #: 1
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 9:11:22 PM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline
Chit selection and variable battle order.

That is, yes -- it would be technically possible for EiANW to incorporate a custom pseudorandom number generator (if they decided not to rely on a stock one) and to preserve the state in the save file.   A generator + state results in a replicable stream of numbers, provided that there are no arithmetic inconsistencies (like cross-platform issues when approximating floating-point computations).

However, that would still leave
(a) the ability to reload a file and choose different chits, and
(b) the ability to use the same numbers in different battles, whenever one has multiple battles per turn, by going through them in a different order
(c) the ability to introduce different die-roll requirements by doing/not doing things like guard commitment and reinforcement attempts


(a) might be most important.  If an attacker can reload a file and choose different chits, then even with a frozen die roll stream he can repeat until he reaches an optimal case (for that set of rolls) -- minimizing losses, at worst.  If one were willing to increase the number of e-mail exchanges, then one could minimize this problem by requiring a file transfer between decision / resolution.  For instance, attacker would not immediately resolve the battle after choosing a chit, but would send to defender.  If the defender then chose a chit (instead of having it selected prior to attack, or AI doing it for him), he'd have to send it to the attacker before seeing the attacker's selection.  The same holds for guard commitment and reinforcement attempts.

Even taking chit selection out of the hands of players AND having a single frozen PRNG stream still leaves it to be exploitable, if he can run and re-run battles in a different order.


(b) That might suggest basing the PRNG state on the particular battle -- perhaps computing a PRNG seed based on a global seed specific to the game, somehow blended with such things as location, date, troop counts, et al -- so that one cannot exploit the sequence of rolls by resolving battles in a different order.  Provided that the PRNG is not particularly bad, and the factors going into the battles are well-selected so as to be difficult to replicate.  ex.  picking bits out of a cryptographic hash / digital signature of a string including various factors for a seed.

...

Considered an approach in which chit files et al are sent to a third party for execution who then computes results but does not see them, but that still leaves room for exploits; he can send the results to just one side and re-execute if they weren't what was desired.  So the PRNG state would still need to be preserved, and if the "third party" conspired with the second player to select chits, that selection could be changed.


(in reply to trw2264)
Post #: 2
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 9:16:39 PM   
Murat


Posts: 803
Joined: 9/17/2003
From: South Carolina
Status: offline
Huh?  Too techy 4 me.

(in reply to Grognot)
Post #: 3
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 9:23:56 PM   
Soapy Frog

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 7/16/2005
Status: offline
Using encryption, chit choices for a given land combat phase could be held, encrypted, by the host until all chit choices are received and then executed. This would require a seperate phase each land combat segment for chit selection.

Simply put; the current system is utterly broken from a "security" standpoint. There should be NO WAY that I can reload the game until I pick the right chit or get the right sequence of die rolls.

It could be done with a PBEM format but you do need to have a trusted host which cannot be tampered with. I don't think much thought was given to this in the current design.

(in reply to Murat)
Post #: 4
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 9:36:29 PM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline
Hm, 'k.

PRNG = pseudorandom number generator.  Combines a state -- a number or set of numbers, chosen however -- and a method for using that state to generate supposedly random numbers, plus the next state.  If the method is designed well, the numbers are difficult to predict (without knowing the algorithm and state).

So if you keep a single PRNG and save the state, then you can request a series of supposedly random numbers and get the same ones in the same order.

However, if you just use a single stream amongst all battles, then the player can reload the battles in a different order.  If, for instance, he knows he'll get a certain sequence of rolls, and he knows that as a consequence he'll roll badly in the first battle he resolves and well in the second, he could choose a minor battle for the first and resolve the more important battle second.  Or he might resolve a siege attempt at a different time.

Likewise, if the system let you decide whether or not to forage, then start resolving battles before you committed to your decisions by sending files to the next player -- then you could check your die rolls.  High die rolls might cause you to prefer depot supply and use the rolls in battle.

Hence, to cut down such exploits -- you'd want to rig the PRNG in such a way that a player can't get different results just by reloading a file over and over again (so repeatability is good) but also so he can't get different results just by making a slightly different decision that alters how the same numbers are used and repeating until he's happy.  So either the sequence of random numbers should be specific to each situation, so that no matter what he does he can't change that; or you prevent him from doing 'try this and see what happens' repeatedly by making him commit the first time (by sending the files to a hostile player with no reason to let him 'do over', before he can see the results of his choices).

The same holds for such things as foraging rolls; if you're going to forage in many places, and you know you're going to roll badly sometimes, you might have an incentive to forage in a different order if doing so lets you distribute losses in a more preferable manner (or have fewer losses, due to varying forage levels and modifiers).

(in reply to Murat)
Post #: 5
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 9:41:19 PM   
Jimmer

 

Posts: 1968
Joined: 12/5/2007
Status: offline
I would agree. However, before I spend any time on the corrections available for the problem, I would like someone to verify that it actually exists.

_____________________________

At LAST! The greatest campaign board game of all time is finally available for the PC. Can my old heart stand the strain?

(in reply to Grognot)
Post #: 6
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:05:33 PM   
gwheelock

 

Posts: 563
Joined: 12/27/2007
From: Coon Rapids, Minnesota
Status: offline
I recently posted a suggested solution to this in a thread on the tech-support subforum:

http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=1676424&mpage=1&#1677317

Please tell me what you think about that? (see no reason to duplicate)


(in reply to Jimmer)
Post #: 7
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:24:40 PM   
Monadman


Posts: 2085
Joined: 12/6/2005
From: New Hampshire
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: trw2264

I have been a big EiA fan since 1986, when I first purchased the game and in the past I have spent untold evening playing EiA. I have been reading the forums and the constructive criticism of the game. I am not a programmer, just an accountant, so I know next to nothing about designing a computer game. There are bugs and the Matrix team is addressing those bugs. As with anything we all think that we can make something a little better etc.

Currently, I own the Matrix EiA game and I am in several games that are at different stages. I did not buy EiA to play against the AI, I bought the game to play against other human opponents. As with any game there is the chance of hacking, exploiting, etc. But I am involved in a PBEM game were one player accused another player of cheating and posted this argument on the AAR report section. A gentlemen that helped to design Matrix’s EiA posted on the AAR that it is possible for an individual to use a copy and paste function to replay a turn before you send that turn to others. I found this to be very troubling because it can be easily done I guess.

This is a game that many of us will spend our valuable time playing and plotting, but now to find out that the game results can be manipulated in such an easy manner has greatly decreased my desire to play. People will post on here that you need to have more trust and that people sometimes find ways to exploit in any game. From an accounting perspective, internal controls are put into place to decrease risk and to, eventually catch foul play.

Again, not being a game designer, I do not understand why a set of randomly generated numbers cannot be generated and thus fixed for that phase so that the same results would still happen no matter how many times the copy and paste function is used and in what order the action takes place. Assign pre-generated die rolls to each country or each counter, etc. (this is not a debate about whether or not a set of fixed random numbers, etc. would work) Perhaps this is not feasible, but I find it hard to believe that something can’t be done to stop this potential exploit.

EiA is a game that I am passionate about and I am strongly debating on whether or not to continue playing myself, because this is a time investment for me, an enjoyment of the game, but to know that an individual has the ability to so easily manipulate the results, I am questioning my desire to continue playing.

I really hope that this issue can be solved in a manner that will not detract from the game and in no way should this be taken as a way to decrease sales or hurt EiA activity. I would love nothing more than to be able to find opponents and play this game for years to come! It might not even be Matrix’s duty to put internal controls into place to stop manipulation. Instead it might be my burden to find seven players that I trust, so that I can play this game at a level in which I do not need to worry if there is manipulation happening or not wihout me using a stats program to see if somebody's result are falling outside the bell curve.

Thomas Whitfield




Thomas,

I hear you, but there really is no way to prevent the unscrupulous enterprising character from cheating in PBEM games (Grognot pretty well covers it). The power of the copy paste function eradicates all in-house efforts (pre-chosen random number events, read writes to third party files, etc.) Obstacles can only curtail the action not prevent it.

Anyway, same offer that I already made in another post . . .

For PBEM games without Quick Combat option enabled, if the playgroup wants a neutral (non-playing) arbitrator to settle all or some of their battles for them then the arbitrator will need to have the following files and player instructions in order to perform the action.

1. The attacker’s saved game files (with password) immediately after picking his chit
2. The battle file (from the attacker)
3. The defender’s saved game files (with password) and chit pick instruction
4. Instructions for casualty preferences (including pursuit) from both players
5. Reinforcement and guard commitment instructions from both players (if applicable).

I’d be happy to arbitrate battles if needed. Just PM me.

Richard


< Message edited by Monadman -- 1/14/2008 10:25:20 PM >


_____________________________


(in reply to trw2264)
Post #: 8
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:34:23 PM   
sw30

 

Posts: 410
Joined: 9/20/2000
From: San Francisco, CA
Status: offline
Or, you have the host resolve it, and that cuts it down to only the host being able to cheat, and really, if you have a host who cheats, go find someone else...

_____________________________


(in reply to Monadman)
Post #: 9
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:40:41 PM   
yammahoper

 

Posts: 231
Joined: 4/23/2004
Status: offline
Wow.  And I thought cheating in EiA was slipping extra garrison counters onto the map or trying to "drop roll" a specific number on the die.

Times do change.

yamma

_____________________________

...nothing is more chaotic than a battle won...

(in reply to sw30)
Post #: 10
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:49:01 PM   
trw2264

 

Posts: 121
Joined: 12/18/2002
Status: offline
Thanks Richard and I know that it is impossible to balance internal controls with playability. I am actually typing up something now that I would like to try and I will be posting it to Opponents Wanted section. I am going to try and get a principles-based game or two going. I have received a lot of PM's and private emails about this post in the past couple of hours, so I get the impression that there is a desire for fairness or at least some comfort level of fairness for a game that people are passionate about and realize the time commitment that is involved.

After I completed the post, I went back through the forums and saw that others have had concerns as well, but to be honest I never even thought about manipulation or ways to manipulate this game until it was questioned in a current game that I am in. I can see in your replies that you have been upfront in your posts on this matter and that is appriciated, especially your offer of arbitration.

(in reply to Monadman)
Post #: 11
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:54:06 PM   
lavisj

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline
You could have the die roll emailed to all participants of the PBEM. If all players enter their email address at the start of the game, then everytime the dice is rolled, an email is sent to all players indicating the reason for the die roll, and the result of the die roll. This way, it does not matter if you reload or copy/paste.

just my 2 cents.

(in reply to trw2264)
Post #: 12
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:56:54 PM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline
If the game were mass-market (*), there might also be people trying to decode the save files to see whether they can bypass the fog of war, or even to edit them.  *shrug*  I don't know whether the files contain readily-accessible information that players shouldn't have, or whether they're protected against alteration with checksums and so forth.  It's an old, old problem in MP game design.

Yup, trusted third-party arbitrators are helpful.


(*) Or even not.  I do recall that there was somebody who figured out how to edit his resources in "Dominions II" PBEM games (before eventual discovery and fix), and that's a fairly obscure game.

(in reply to yammahoper)
Post #: 13
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:58:36 PM   
gwheelock

 

Posts: 563
Joined: 12/27/2007
From: Coon Rapids, Minnesota
Status: offline
The problem with this is that my email program is under MY control. If I am trying to
cheat; I simply shut OFF my internet connection & all outbound email sits in the "out basket". If I reload the files; I also delete the outgoing email. Sorry.

(in reply to lavisj)
Post #: 14
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 10:59:58 PM   
fatfloyd

 

Posts: 17
Joined: 12/11/2007
Status: offline
Perhaps the phasing player can send an email to the Host or a non-playing neutral party with his chit selection before he sends the file to the defender. This email can then always be checked if need be. This assumes the attacker has to pick his chit first. I have not go that far in a PBEM so I could be way off.

(in reply to yammahoper)
Post #: 15
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/14/2008 11:23:42 PM   
Soapy Frog

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 7/16/2005
Status: offline
The host should resolve everything, after chit choices are recieved independently form participants. Communications should be encrypted. The host should have no control over the "order of operations" i.e. the order in which combats are resled. This means the host could do reloads to try and get better die rolls, but if this is combined with PRNG of sufficient sophistication then even that would be impossible.

In short it could be made WAY HARDER to cheat.

Did I ever mention that a TCP/IP CLient/Server solution would be far superior to PBEM? :D

(in reply to fatfloyd)
Post #: 16
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 1:22:29 AM   
lavisj

 

Posts: 89
Joined: 10/17/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

The problem with this is that my email program is under MY control. If I am trying to
cheat; I simply shut OFF my internet connection & all outbound email sits in the "out basket". If I reload the files; I also delete the outgoing email. Sorry.


True, but in this case the game is its own email software. The player would have no control over the email, and so should be prohibited to delete them. I do not believe that the email has to go through your normal email browser. The program can save the copy itself and send it once it detects an internet connection.
If the player were to reload the other players would be getting many different die roll for the same event and would become suspicious. I am not a programer but this does not seem to be too difficult to implement.

(in reply to gwheelock)
Post #: 17
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 2:52:53 AM   
gwheelock

 

Posts: 563
Joined: 12/27/2007
From: Coon Rapids, Minnesota
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: lavisj


quote:

ORIGINAL: gwheelock

The problem with this is that my email program is under MY control. If I am trying to
cheat; I simply shut OFF my internet connection & all outbound email sits in the "out basket". If I reload the files; I also delete the outgoing email. Sorry.


True, but in this case the game is its own email software. The player would have no control over the email, and so should be prohibited to delete them. I do not believe that the email has to go through your normal email browser. The program can save the copy itself and send it once it detects an internet connection.
If the player were to reload the other players would be getting many different die roll for the same event and would become suspicious. I am not a programer but this does not seem to be too difficult to implement.



Actually; the game does NOT have its own email & DOES go thru your normal email browser.
(You can see this because there is no provision to setup the SMTP/POP3 email connection in the game itself)
It would be possible to ADD an email section (they are fairly "out-of-the-box" plugins); but then if I still
wanted to cheat; I would simply set up my own Exchange Server; route the program's connection to THAT
(so that the email appears "UP" to to program); but not let the Exchange forward it & kill the extra stuff there
(Microsoft Exchange & other freeware equivalents are also "out-of-the-box" apps )

(And I AM a programmer)

(in reply to lavisj)
Post #: 18
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 4:32:05 AM   
Grapeshot Bob


Posts: 642
Joined: 12/16/2007
From: Canada
Status: offline
Hey, I was just thinking ...

Would it really be so bad to have everyone "optimize" their turns?

Maybe you could have "optimize" PBEM games where everyone agrees to play "optimized".



GSB

(in reply to gwheelock)
Post #: 19
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 12:12:52 PM   
bresh

 

Posts: 936
Joined: 8/8/2005
Status: offline
Hi, new to this. Im bit confused.

Question, combat phase if quick combat disbabled ,
is combat not resolved by the host ? Sending the combetants resoults after each round back and forth ?
Or is it just the defender and the curent-phase player exchanging files ? Things should run thorugh the host to avoid messy stuff.

This is cryptic.
Now i dont remember if zip still can have password, but if, then one option players could include is, when at combat phase.
The phasing players involved in combats, send a zipped(with password 2 letters 6 digits, offcourse i can still be cracked, not sure about unzip pgms to...) text file with chit selection, to the host.  Or to the defender, before combat is resolved.  Then come combat they "actually" exchange the combat files. And the password is released. So that they can compare the text file chit selection to the textfile send. Atleast this way, phasing player cant chose chit acording to the defenders chit.

Regards
Bresh

Regards
Bresh

(in reply to Grapeshot Bob)
Post #: 20
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 3:15:11 PM   
Ashtar

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 12/6/2007
Status: offline
I am sorry to insist, but THERE ARE ways to avoid much of the cheating with pre-generated random numbers and to beat much of the "reloading and doing things in a different order" stuff. Here it is my proposal:

1a. Combat phase - Non trivial combat. Simple way of doing it:
a) The attacker choses his chits and sends to the defender.
b) The defender choses his cheats and the program generates the needed die rolls. None of them are shown (so no reload is possible), and
the file is sent back to the attacker.
c) Results of the first turn are shown to the attacker, he decides about guard commitment and sends back to the defender.
d) The defender receives, check for first turn results and decides about guard commitment. Needed die rolls are secretly generated
and stuff his sent back to attacker...
Go on until the end of the combat. No way of cheating here, large battles are often the crucial and more important ones in a game
and are now secured. Moreover, no more file exchanges then now are required.

1b. Combat phase - Trivial combat and assaults. Random numbers (different from the ones used in foraging duing the land phase) are
pre-generated during the previous player land turn (or naval phase if this is the first turn of land phase).
True, wicked players can alter the order of assaults and trivial battles to look for the most convenient die distribution, but still
these are generally non-decisive gains. Moreover, if you do not trust your opponent, do not give pre-assigned order to single corps.
Otherwise, the order in which assaults and trivial combat are taken can be fixed (by ascending area number, for instance) to avoid
cheating. It is a small price to pay (order of larger combats need not to be fixed) to avoid cheating.

2. Naval phase. This is the most delicate one. Intercept rolls and naval battle rolls here. The player playing the previous
turn pre-generates two different sets of random number, one for interception and one for combat. This way there is often
not so much room for reloading and rearranging order. Still, if you still do not trust the French from trying every turn
to beat GB blockade and invade, only to sistematically cancel his move when his ships are sunk, introduce a Naval combat phase.
It will not take too much time, just a single extra file exchange is needed per battle (and naval battle are much rarer then land one).
Procedure: attacker send out his naval battle file, defender generates the needed die number without seeing them, the file is
sent back to attacker and combat is resolved. Easy, fast and bullet proof.

3. Land phase. Only rolls here are foraging ones. Lets have your foraging rolls be pre-generated
by the player playing the previous turn. Of course, if you do not like the outcome of foraging
you can change their order or decide to pay for supply. This is (almost) unavoidable, but
advantages from this kind of cheating are at best mild.

4. Diplomacy and Economic phase: rolls here are not of extreme importance (influencing minors,
spanish gold, piracy...), but they can be pre-generated for the entire phase when the last
player playing the previous phase ends his turn. This will avoid reloading issues.

It is long to explain in detail, but as you can see, there are really no programming issues here. I guess it is pretty easy to implement.


< Message edited by Ashtar -- 1/15/2008 3:16:53 PM >

(in reply to bresh)
Post #: 21
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 4:11:46 PM   
Soapy Frog

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 7/16/2005
Status: offline
I would tend to agree with Ashtar, his solution is a simple and elegant one and will eliminate 95% of cheating.

(in reply to Ashtar)
Post #: 22
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 4:15:05 PM   
AresMars

 

Posts: 234
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
Good proposal Ashtar!  Well done!


(in reply to Soapy Frog)
Post #: 23
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 11:12:04 PM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline
Its a good proposal, im however surprised how few have picked up cunctators suggestion to provide for the use of a dice server. It should be relativly easy to implement and would definatly provide a very reliable control feature that is very hard to bypass.

The use of a dice server seems to me like the obvious choice to easily and fast resolve these issues.

(in reply to AresMars)
Post #: 24
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/15/2008 11:36:30 PM   
Soapy Frog

 

Posts: 282
Joined: 7/16/2005
Status: offline
I'd prefer something built into the game that does not require extra emailing.

(in reply to zaquex)
Post #: 25
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/16/2008 12:39:05 AM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline
As the response from the dice server is automatic it should not create any noticable delay in game progress.

(in reply to Soapy Frog)
Post #: 26
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/16/2008 12:45:00 AM   
Grognot

 

Posts: 409
Joined: 12/7/2007
Status: offline
Yes, if you're willing to do completely interactive combat -- the frequent e-mail exchanges -- that will largely work in a full (seven-human) game.  The main difficulty with land combats is if you're doing PBEM quick combat or the like in order to minimize the back/forth e-mails, in which case a trusted third party becomes useful... well, have to look into the "non-trivial combat against AI" case for non-full games.

I'd also note that a system which generates 'secret' die rolls and saves them in files available to the person who is not supposed to know them, should take some care to ensure that the rolls cannot be readily extracted or tampered with.

(in reply to Soapy Frog)
Post #: 27
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/16/2008 12:53:18 AM   
zaquex


Posts: 368
Joined: 11/30/2007
From: Vastervik, Sweden
Status: offline
I would argue also that the use of an external game server probably is easier/faster to implement than Ashtars solution wich means (if im right) that its possible to solve the issue faster, this might be the strongest argument for this solution. I also think that the use of a dice server potentially is harder to tamper with than any ingame solution running on your machine. Its also the only solution ive seen that completly deals with issues concerning trivial combat intercepts etc that dont require an exchange of emails. 

(in reply to Grognot)
Post #: 28
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/16/2008 1:43:19 AM   
Ashtar

 

Posts: 160
Joined: 12/6/2007
Status: offline
quote:


zaquex:
I would argue also that the use of an external game server probably is easier/faster to implement than Ashtars solution wich means (if im right) that its possible to solve the issue faster, this might be the strongest argument for this solution. I also think that the use of a dice server potentially is harder to tamper with than any ingame solution running on your machine. Its also the only solution ive seen that completly deals with issues concerning trivial combat intercepts etc that dont require an exchange of emails.


It could be that you are right, especially noting that an external dice server should fix completely the problem while my solution still leaves spaces for minor cheats. But:

a) Actually I find my proposal neat and easier to implement then setting up an external dice server which should receive dice requests and send to all player correct logs for each die roll. EIANW it is not tied to any mail client (it tries to use outlook, but you can easily bypass it and send out files with your preferred method). Actually I sometimes do my move offline to connect later on to send it out to my fellow players. This would not be possible if you need a die server.

b) Keping pregenerated rolls secret is not a big issue. Either encrypt them (if someone goes so far to decript them - he should better invest his time attempting credit card frauds then cheating at EIANW) or simply write them in binary format in the middle of the turn files. They should contain hundreds of numbers anyhow, so finding them it is not a practical task.

c) What I do not really like is the idea of receiving hundreds of e-mails with all the die rolls performed by my opponents. This would make my mail box a mess and checking for cheating quite unpractical. Suppose the French tries to avoid British interceptions, he fails and then he decides to reload the turn and keep his fleets in port. As a British, should I check that he is not cheating looking between all the e-mails for intercept rolls not corresponding to actual naval movement? Or, worse, should I check that all my opponents are not reloading land turn switching from failed forage to supply?

Anyhow I would be happy to read that Marshall and his people are taking this issue seriously, whatever solution they chose...

(in reply to zaquex)
Post #: 29
RE: The possibilty of manipulation - 1/16/2008 1:44:50 AM   
AresMars

 

Posts: 234
Joined: 12/13/2007
Status: offline
I think programming realities and costs will determine which possible solution gets looked at.

Does Matrix want to host a game server/dice server?  Will they?

Both arguements have weight - however, economics still rule the day.....


(in reply to zaquex)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> Empires in Arms the Napoleonic Wars of 1805 - 1815 >> The possibilty of manipulation Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.781