It's actually fucking insane that 5white isn't banned yet after that twitter thread went up with the faceit admins tagged. It's one of the most blatant uses of soft aimbot/aim assist i've ever seen. I genuinely don't understand the incompetence with the faceit admins when it comes to some of these cheaters.
this is the first time I've seen these types of maths used since school nearly 8 years ago. I would've never thought that I was learning all that shit to figure out if people cheat or not lmao.
We do have to consider that a "spike" in mouse movement may just be due to a mouse sensor hiccup, like gliding the mouse over a speck of dust on your mousepad, for example. To prove conclusively, we must always have multiple pieces of evidence, to rule out hiccups like this. Nice video
Anytime my sensor messes up, it isn't magically doing it to perfectly accelerate to a players head, then keep a constant rate follow the movement speed perfectly. Usually that ends up looking like you enabled spin bot for like 0.2 seconds as your mouse freaks out.
His didn’t skip though it just immediately sped up. Also go watch the clips from the twitter compilation because it’s disgustingly blatant and this isn’t the only clip.
@@1bird_d I'm not doubting you. You are a trusted CS player whose opinion hold a lot of weight--I trust you. I'm only providing some context, that we should not accuse anybody from only a single piece of evidence, because weird hiccups are a rare possibility. I see this video more as a demonstration of a technology and methodology that can be used to catch cheaters, with a few examples given. Thanks! Cheers from USA
this is one clip of like 10 in the video, it's a ridiculous video but this one clip illustrated the others better since they happen to a smaller degree across multiple games for this player
>player are often considered guilty until proven innocent Sadly this is the reality of the world without anticheat, just assume that everyone is cheating
Do you think this is how vacnet might work by using AI and needing to collecting lots of data it can make charts like this (obv not actual charts but it does this math or something like it) and when it detects and anomaly it then connects a vacnet bot to then do further investigation?
if that's their solution then cheats are just going to become more humanized and use random math within a range that numerically would describe an elite player. think a trigger bot that is randomly picking a number between 150-175ms, aimbots that are being pulled towards the enemy at a random realistic speed and using different algorithms to pull the crosshair in different types of lines that you would normally do, not being 100% accurate and needing microadjustments, not having 100% recoil control. basically a talented programmer could make cheats indistinguishable from donk/niko. if that's what the market requires, that's what the market will get. there is zero hope for any type of AI anti-cheat eradicating cheaters, at best it will get rid of rage hackers and blatant wallers, but i'd rather know someone is cheating against me than play the cucks who closet cheat.
@@utu369cheats like this would just simulate good player and it would all come to the gamesense, util etc. Someone that is 3000 elo on faceit with this cheat will still be 3000 elo. Someone in faceit lvl 3 with this cheat will get caught, either for "false-positive" smurfing or just for cheating
@@1bird_d i also love you bird. im a bit of a yapper: a lot of people can speed up their cheater analysis by 1/4ing and analyzing crosshair. using cs2''s highlight feature/clicking on every kill that occurs. as for game sense and understanding when radar might be happening. that just requires that anyone have 1000+hrs and have watched these videos before. or neokcs. i am no such gamer lmfao i will shotgun report any player i see. imma let vac figure shit out. i dont have time for that. IF i had access to the Overwatch system. id take it way more seriously and slow.
They should make it so if a game you played had a cheater in it all the elo is reset to what it was before playing the match, the winners lose the elo they got, and the losers get back the elo they unfairly lost, would be nice to boot up cs2 to a message saying "4 of your recent matches had a cheater, you have been given +1189 points". They also need to readd overwatch immediately, it was the only saving grace for csgo, even if only 1% of the playerbase has access to it, it would make so much difference.
agreed, we need some overwatch for sure. I'm no pro player, but I can play against level 10s, top 100, etc., and frag them occasionally, and I watch some of their gameplay, I just know mechanically what is possible in this game and what isn't. Sometimes it is incredibly subtle and it requires some math like what was shown in this well done video. I'll even try to replicate stuff I see in demos just to make sure it was legit or not (just like bird did here, which is a good idea, everyone should do that when unsure), going so far as to test things like damage output to see if a frag was possible. I probably can't detect all cheats, but I'll watch demos for hours just to make sure if it's subtle, checking the radar every half a second to see if anyone had information, stuff like that. I've been changing the way I send reports when I play comp matches and I find conclusive evidence of a cheater on my team or the enemy team. After watching the demo, I will report the profile and select "cs2" as game, provide the date, local time, and map played, and I was putting their username down and then the timestamp in the demo of the evidence, but now I think I'll have to convert their profile id to steam-id with one of those websites, maybe presenting the data in that way would be more effective?
This is exactly the sort of analysis that Valve needs to be putting into VAC. VAC is "signature based" detection: Valve pulls apart a cheat, finds something to it like a fingerprint, and when it detects it, it acts. That's why it's sucked for so long. It is only capable of detecting a cheat via a signature of the software. What VAC needs more than Kernel level access (which still requires seeing signatures, it's just at a lower OSI level and more useful for detecting driver based cheats etc), is heuristic detection: Basically "Does this look like cheating?". Valve has traditionally avoided this as Valve wants VAC to be 100%. Maybe VAC doesn't catch everyone, but if you're VAC banned you were definitely cheating. Or got the wrong driver, because that has also happened. What Valve needs is heuristic detection, that goes "this input is impossible, or extremely unlikely from a player playing legit". Things like spinbots and bhop scripts are incredibly easy to detect like this (and the fact that VAC often lets them through is embarassing). Or "It is extremely unlikely that this player traced an enemy through a solid surface with no information that they're there" or "It's almost impossible that they made these precise little flicks all on exactly the same timeframe after getting close to an enemy." It's not as certain a system, there are some situations where people will get lucky, but that's why the algorithm needs to keep track and eventually go "nah, you can't be having this many moments where you perform inhuman movements this often in this many games". Fantastic work with the data breakdown.
VAC is only doing ban waves or (for software reference) instant bans for blatant cheating. VAC isnt designed to ban on first contact. Thats also why so many people got banned on driver updated and hardware errors. If VAC just banned on sight then a cheat developer could make near invisible cheats in weeks isntead of years where the game already changed to the point where everything already changed again
I think one can make a aimlock software that mimics those real life mouse movement physics, maybe using real time simulation stuff?? So maybe in the future, cheating cannot be distinguished by analyzing the mouse velocities
If you were going to smooth the aimbot so much that it was undetectable, the question you would need to ask yourself is is it actually helping the player more than lets say 2% of an improvement, and if so are you willing to deal with the fact that it still produces inhuman reactions when analyzed at a slow pace? And surely 1 week of playing deathmatch is enough to give your aim a 2% improvement anyways
Milo realized his opponent in Donut too late and then wanted to check the sidewalk. When he realized it, he stopped moving towards the sideway again. I think that the crosshair just landed on the opponent by chance.
U mentioned velocity spike.. Just to put cheating aside... any thoughts about us who use a Custom mouse acceleration curve? Thinking about like Raw Accel and Custom Curve Pro. Would be cool to see you dive into what differentiate normal sensitivity that is a constant, mouse acceleration and cheats when it comes to flicking and tracking.
You would see it smoothly approach this, remember that those data points are 1/120th of a second lol so he accelerated his mouse that quickly, and i bet if u did the inertial moment calculations of his specific mouse using the 2nd derivative of the curve at that line segment i bet the force to accelerate and decelerate would be enormous past anything u could do without cheats.
Really cool video! Subscribed! I'd LOVE to see more videos like this, and for you to analyze more cheaters (pro, or otherwise) using this technique. You're onto something really interesting and I wonder if anti-cheats could benefit from this type of analysis being publicly discussed like this! Keep up the great work!
I literally don’t understand people he was gonna flick to check temple and then the enemy peeked at the same time when he checked it so he had to flick back it was just lucky timing.
Nice video! I am still planning to do some sort of paper with TTD and the average reaction time. As of now the average TTD for high level players is around 500 ms. Really good/pro players can get up to 450 ms average. There are also games where players are faster and slower but the average is important!
so i guess the real money making question is... can valve implement this sort of info into their VAC. where sudden jolts of aim velocity can be marked and then if this jolt becomes consistently "inconsistent" VAC can end the match. follow up question is Valve already doing this with VAC and if so then why is it so hard for it to detect cheats. especially with data like this.... there are bound to be alot of false positives which valve obviously doesnt want to deal with so i wonder if we can attach some extra bit of info that would help this kind of vac system... like the sudden acceleration in aim velocity combined with something like how accurate the shot was or maybe if the shot was through a wall. i get that valve is deathly afraid of getting false positives but with data like this and excessive to even obsessive fine tuning; they could theoretically atleast kill ALOT of the soft aim/aim assist cheaters out there... naturally i dont think there is really any good way to deal with wh besides some extremely advanced intelligence that could understand that looking through a wall to check where enemies are is a red flag... but frankly if valve could atleast kill aim assist/spinning (ive heard they were able to partially kill spinning atleast) then the cheating scene i feel like will be easier to manage for legit players since you can outaim a wallhacker but not an aimbotter.
vacnet is doing stuff similar to this, i do premier hvh and you get banned or cooldowned if you have bad ragebot settings, but high smoothing legit bot, especially with a bezier curve will probably never be detected by vacnet because it is almost identical to human aim
If VAC was personified, they would be furiously scribbling down notes right now.... some of these cheats need to be analyzed frame by frame in demo, and using the method you showed on that graph at around 7 minutes....I did that the other day to check to see if someone just had a wallhack or if they also were using an aimbot. edit: showpos is definitely bugged, I was also testing it, and it's not consistent in terms of how fast it updates values
Yes but it would mean that it would be consistent and smooth. If you use mouse accel, it doesn’t explain why he immediately decelerates down to match the enemy’s head perfectly and tracks it. Mouse accel curves can be enabled but i want u to watch the twitter thread because it’s extremely blatant
3:03 You cannot compare pure reaction time and the ttd metric. See the description from leetify: Time to Damage Time to damage measures the average time it took you from seeing the enemy player to first dealing damage to them. Trigger discipline plays are excluded. How it is calculated Time to damage is NOT reaction time. It's a combination of your accuracy, crosshair placement, your weapons fire rate and your reaction time, so don't expect it to be near 200 ms. Your comparison is not quite correct.
There's already smoothed out aimlocks, AI trained, silent, proximity, bla bla, they put so much effort trying to make cheating look real so it's hard to say nowadays.
I literally sat there and hand typed them lmao the radar isn’t a constant backdrop and i didnt want to code something, i could have parsed it but the demo auto interpolates so it would have lead to more scuffed data
i mean people just randomly staring through walls isnt thats sus, im like silver 4 on mirage (ive not played that many games i think im better than silver) and i just stop moving and stare at a wall every now and again, but i just kinda suck, like sometimes when i swing an angle i dont track thw corner i just stare at the wall and swing, ive been accused of cheating a couple times😭
the reason i stopped grinding to faceit lvl10 was cheaters many closet cheaters, using soft aim cheats, walls everywhere i was grinding kovaks/faceit and was getting great results in kovaks kovaks has cheaters too most top scores are cheating made when i realised faceit was plagued with Smurfs, account buyers and closet cheaters in mid lvl elo i just stopped playing for elo solo q makes it even harder for new accounts in faceit its hell. smurfs, cheaters and account boosters make it hell FPS are ruin by the amount of cheaters most cs2 people just deny😅 playing for fun is a lot better
Also that is not proof of 5white cheating, anyone who has committed time to aim training (tracing to be more precise) has learned that exact mouse movement to consistently match the enemy players horizontal max velocity over a distance
Oh poor Milo. Actually, is it even possible to tell if someone is cheating just from seeing their viewpoint without a fancy mouse movement graph? Just the video?
Slow down the demo and analyze their aim, check for any suspicious crosshair movement patterns like unnatural micro adjustments or unnatural motions (like always going into a perfectly straight line, pattern repeating too much etc). Be aware that demo isn't the most accurate because it's 32 ticks for Mm games (unsure about Faceit or HLTV demos)
Ur gonna see what everyone else would with smooth aim, no crazy jumps. Like i said, this kind of “soft aim” and low fov aimbot are obvious to the eye but this just puts data behind it
by bringing up the time to damage stats, you're ignoring the possibility that he was using esp (walls,sound,radar) and knew the guy was there and about to peek. average time to damage stats aren't really comparable to an awper already scoped in on an angle, as that specific scenario time to damage will be much lower and closer to pure reaction times than the time to damage of someone running around with a rifle out where they would first need to spot the target then adjust aim, since that's most scenarios that's why the average ttd is much higher than pure reaction time. not all cheats are perfect and work properly, some are poorly written, malfunction and have bugs. I'm not saying anything definitive one way or the other, just pointing out the flaws in your debunking logic.
@@friqd7439you really can't figure it out? it would be a malfunctioning aim bot that caused him to flick to temple and on a guy through the wall after seeing someone. he did a pretty mediocre job of debunking it in the video, he framed it as proof he wasn't cheating because he reacted too fast. it's just a weak angle to debunk the clip. making the claim that he was looking away and then looking back is a decent explanation, but the reaction time would have only been proof if it was sub 130ms or something. he even mispoke at one point and said he started to flick before he saw the player when it was clear he flicked afterwards.
I debunked 2 options for milo to be cheating. 1) ESP with crosshair changing color quickly or making a noise. If milo had those things, their reaction time would be sub 20ms, as they pass over the CT in mid and stop their flick after 20ms and go back in around 100 total ms after that info could have been presented. 2) high fov/low fov aimbot - this isn’t even a low fov flick, as typically low fov aim is configured to be less than 1-10 degrees of vision, since flicking 20+ degrees perfectly to one side is super blatant and obviously not realistic to hide in a closet cheat. High fov aim is considered a rage cheat, which no one would be stupid enough to use in a legit match. It’s much more likely that radar is being used by people on hltv to cheat, but why would someone with radar only enabled have a “bug” like this happen? Literally when the code isn’t configured to run it won’t run… Cheats rarely ever “malfunction” like you think. Typically they are either coded poorly to make bad assumptions when assisting (not understanding wallbangs or not using proper desync rage modes) or coded too aggressively to not be hidden to the viewer, which is what happened with 5white. Milo’s crosshair movements are indicative of someone legitimately moving their mouse and stopping quickly, as you can see the graphs don’t show any foul play. Any of the points that don’t perfectly match the trend can be explained by the recording being bad (first point on the uptrend that’s slightly off) and the double scope making showpos lie to the recording. Hope this makes sense to you
@@1bird_d 1.) you did not debunk the possibility of esp. pause your video a 1:26. if milo was using sound esp it would be making a noise at that point well before he ever scoped in and it would be making a noise in his right ear so he would know that the enemy is on the right side of his cross hair. any other type of esp such as radar would have given him the info long before this as well. and I didn't watch the match but he could have known from sound esp that the enemy was donut much longer than this by simply looking in that direction. with sound or radar you're not gonna know exactly when someone is about to peek so that could explain the flick away and a panick click onto his aim key which could have caused the weird behavior that occured after he flicked left (flicking back right and then left to the enemy through the wall.) that is the most sus part of the clip, where after he flicked to temple, he flicks right and then back left onto an enemy through the wall, that is not normally. 2.) a high fov aimbot can be humanized to not be blatant with proper smooth/target switching time settings. you can even code a cheat to miss the first bullet, lock on after the third, or stop the lock after "x" bullet, overshoot/undershoot the aim. a high fov alone isn't rage hacking. typical rage hacking features are autoshoot (you don't even press m1, it does it for you) autowall, bhopping, 360 fov, etc. and I agree nobody would ever rage in a legit match. 3.) direct memory access radar cheats are absolutely being abused by onliners. the code for these cheats has been open source on github for a while. all you need is a dma card from aliexpress and someone to spoof the firmware for you. and if you're gonna go that far to get an edge over the competition, and tons of people are doing it which decreases your advantage, why wouldnt you aimbot as well? the sad truth is that tier 1 pros most likely cheat as well since they are allowed to bring their own hardware to the event and plenty of people on YT have demonstrated how easy it is to put cheats into the hardware. until tournament organizers provide peripherals there will always be cheating in tier 1, it's absolutely naive to think nobody would do it when so much money and prestige is on the line and humans have proven time and time again that they are morally ambiguous. 4.) I've used plenty of poorly coded cheats that have malfunctioned. sometimes people fuck up the math, other times there's bugs with unintended consequences, they are just code after all. 5.) yeah it could be poor mouse control which was what made him shake on the guy in the wall. I said in the first post that I don't believe this to be definitive evidence of cheating, only a sus clip. but I also don't think anything you've provided is definitive evidence of him not cheating and tbh I think the best circumstantial evidence that he wasn't cheating is that he only had a 1.04 rating on that map lol, that type of performance would only be explainable if everyone was cheating.
hey bird shitty MM faceit 5 player here love your videos but recently you mentioned train needs work and they need to fix ivy. could you explain the issues? i have played some of it and i dont love it but im curious what is wrong with it.
I don't know what bird's issue with it is but there's two main ones I know. First, peeking Hell from Ivy is kinda awful right now. I know the point of the box is to break up the angle so that an ivy player peeking hell isn't able to get rushed from Ivy, but it makes the movement and getting to speed to peek awkward and it's easy to hit the box and the box forces you to peek from close to the train giving a huge peekers advantage to T players in A main. Fighting main players from Ivy is a huge disadvantage. The other major issue is there's one smoke, one literally included in the guide, which can shut off the other Ivy door to site, completely cutting off the Ivy player from A-if they want to help their A teammates they have to peek hell which they have at a disadvantage. Previously the open tunnels allowed deep players in Ivy to cover back of site and contest across site, now they have one position that is smoked on every execute and one position they'll lose.
We do have to consider that a "spike" in mouse movement may just be due to a mouse sensor hiccup, like gliding the mouse over a speck of dust on your mousepad, for example. To prove conclusively, we must always have multiple pieces of evidence, to rule out hiccups like this. Nice video
aaaaaand its on the ceiling now...
pin of ecstasy
that placement + velocity graph is so useful for explaining aim. Cheers!
hi wraethhhh
@flexpetz55 sup
@@wraethcs2 i wanted to ask, who is Spinx??
@@flexpetz55 just search on Google, and you'll see who spinx is
It's actually fucking insane that 5white isn't banned yet after that twitter thread went up with the faceit admins tagged. It's one of the most blatant uses of soft aimbot/aim assist i've ever seen. I genuinely don't understand the incompetence with the faceit admins when it comes to some of these cheaters.
npc
There's the argument that you can never be 100% certain unless its an Anti-Cheat banning you
Sometimes the faceit admins get a little weird about trusting their AC too much.
and they banned my only account (level 6) for "smurfing" even tho i havent played for months
this is the first time I've seen these types of maths used since school nearly 8 years ago. I would've never thought that I was learning all that shit to figure out if people cheat or not lmao.
We do have to consider that a "spike" in mouse movement may just be due to a mouse sensor hiccup, like gliding the mouse over a speck of dust on your mousepad, for example. To prove conclusively, we must always have multiple pieces of evidence, to rule out hiccups like this. Nice video
Anytime my sensor messes up, it isn't magically doing it to perfectly accelerate to a players head, then keep a constant rate follow the movement speed perfectly. Usually that ends up looking like you enabled spin bot for like 0.2 seconds as your mouse freaks out.
@@troublishone It's entirely dependant on your sensor and type of mouse. In my case it skips like in the video so
His didn’t skip though it just immediately sped up. Also go watch the clips from the twitter compilation because it’s disgustingly blatant and this isn’t the only clip.
@@1bird_d I'm not doubting you. You are a trusted CS player whose opinion hold a lot of weight--I trust you. I'm only providing some context, that we should not accuse anybody from only a single piece of evidence, because weird hiccups are a rare possibility. I see this video more as a demonstration of a technology and methodology that can be used to catch cheaters, with a few examples given. Thanks! Cheers from USA
this is one clip of like 10 in the video, it's a ridiculous video but this one clip illustrated the others better since they happen to a smaller degree across multiple games for this player
>player are often considered guilty until proven innocent
Sadly this is the reality of the world without anticheat, just assume that everyone is cheating
victim mentality - you're just bad
ayo why are you called bird when your pfp is a wolf and you're the goat???
smooth
He's a furry. It's okay though because he's based.
Seriously, though, he must remove the furry shit.
@@TheFibie007 I disliked your comment btw
@@m9mykolkaaa Who are you? Someone to care about?
Do you think this is how vacnet might work by using AI and needing to collecting lots of data it can make charts like this (obv not actual charts but it does this math or something like it) and when it detects and anomaly it then connects a vacnet bot to then do further investigation?
it might be
wake me up when vac actually works...ohh wait, i am already dead.
AI does not work like this but devs could and should have implemented detections like this when csgo came out.
if that's their solution then cheats are just going to become more humanized and use random math within a range that numerically would describe an elite player. think a trigger bot that is randomly picking a number between 150-175ms, aimbots that are being pulled towards the enemy at a random realistic speed and using different algorithms to pull the crosshair in different types of lines that you would normally do, not being 100% accurate and needing microadjustments, not having 100% recoil control. basically a talented programmer could make cheats indistinguishable from donk/niko. if that's what the market requires, that's what the market will get. there is zero hope for any type of AI anti-cheat eradicating cheaters, at best it will get rid of rage hackers and blatant wallers, but i'd rather know someone is cheating against me than play the cucks who closet cheat.
@@utu369cheats like this would just simulate good player and it would all come to the gamesense, util etc. Someone that is 3000 elo on faceit with this cheat will still be 3000 elo. Someone in faceit lvl 3 with this cheat will get caught, either for "false-positive" smurfing or just for cheating
one of the nerdiest cs videos ive ever seen, nice
crisp clean lock boys
I fuckin love you b1rd lmao
thanks gang
@@1bird_d i also love you bird. im a bit of a yapper:
a lot of people can speed up their cheater analysis by 1/4ing and analyzing crosshair. using cs2''s highlight feature/clicking on every kill that occurs.
as for game sense and understanding when radar might be happening. that just requires that anyone have 1000+hrs and have watched these videos before. or neokcs.
i am no such gamer lmfao i will shotgun report any player i see. imma let vac figure shit out. i dont have time for that. IF i had access to the Overwatch system. id take it way more seriously and slow.
They should make it so if a game you played had a cheater in it all the elo is reset to what it was before playing the match, the winners lose the elo they got, and the losers get back the elo they unfairly lost, would be nice to boot up cs2 to a message saying "4 of your recent matches had a cheater, you have been given +1189 points".
They also need to readd overwatch immediately, it was the only saving grace for csgo, even if only 1% of the playerbase has access to it, it would make so much difference.
agreed, we need some overwatch for sure. I'm no pro player, but I can play against level 10s, top 100, etc., and frag them occasionally, and I watch some of their gameplay, I just know mechanically what is possible in this game and what isn't. Sometimes it is incredibly subtle and it requires some math like what was shown in this well done video. I'll even try to replicate stuff I see in demos just to make sure it was legit or not (just like bird did here, which is a good idea, everyone should do that when unsure), going so far as to test things like damage output to see if a frag was possible. I probably can't detect all cheats, but I'll watch demos for hours just to make sure if it's subtle, checking the radar every half a second to see if anyone had information, stuff like that.
I've been changing the way I send reports when I play comp matches and I find conclusive evidence of a cheater on my team or the enemy team. After watching the demo, I will report the profile and select "cs2" as game, provide the date, local time, and map played, and I was putting their username down and then the timestamp in the demo of the evidence, but now I think I'll have to convert their profile id to steam-id with one of those websites, maybe presenting the data in that way would be more effective?
man you're inspiring me to apply what I'm learning in ML class to the world. Great charts and analysis
these yap sessions are criminally underrated
First youtuber I've watched in like a month who uses his brain. Respect.
This is exactly the sort of analysis that Valve needs to be putting into VAC.
VAC is "signature based" detection: Valve pulls apart a cheat, finds something to it like a fingerprint, and when it detects it, it acts. That's why it's sucked for so long. It is only capable of detecting a cheat via a signature of the software.
What VAC needs more than Kernel level access (which still requires seeing signatures, it's just at a lower OSI level and more useful for detecting driver based cheats etc), is heuristic detection: Basically "Does this look like cheating?". Valve has traditionally avoided this as Valve wants VAC to be 100%. Maybe VAC doesn't catch everyone, but if you're VAC banned you were definitely cheating. Or got the wrong driver, because that has also happened.
What Valve needs is heuristic detection, that goes "this input is impossible, or extremely unlikely from a player playing legit". Things like spinbots and bhop scripts are incredibly easy to detect like this (and the fact that VAC often lets them through is embarassing). Or "It is extremely unlikely that this player traced an enemy through a solid surface with no information that they're there" or "It's almost impossible that they made these precise little flicks all on exactly the same timeframe after getting close to an enemy." It's not as certain a system, there are some situations where people will get lucky, but that's why the algorithm needs to keep track and eventually go "nah, you can't be having this many moments where you perform inhuman movements this often in this many games".
Fantastic work with the data breakdown.
If it gets kernal access nothing will change
this guy thinks hes smarter than valve devs lol
VAC is only doing ban waves or (for software reference) instant bans for blatant cheating. VAC isnt designed to ban on first contact. Thats also why so many people got banned on driver updated and hardware errors. If VAC just banned on sight then a cheat developer could make near invisible cheats in weeks isntead of years where the game already changed to the point where everything already changed again
Pretty sure that they already do this, there were strings added to the game a few months ago along the lines of “suspect shot count” etc
I’m sure if everyone who plays CS went back and watched their demos they would all find sussy shit.
Also that dude at the end is 100% cheating. No one moves their mouse like that. You can literally tell when it turns on, the movement gets so smooth.
I need your map tutorial for train
I think one can make a aimlock software that mimics those real life mouse movement physics, maybe using real time simulation stuff?? So maybe in the future, cheating cannot be distinguished by analyzing the mouse velocities
If you were going to smooth the aimbot so much that it was undetectable, the question you would need to ask yourself is is it actually helping the player more than lets say 2% of an improvement, and if so are you willing to deal with the fact that it still produces inhuman reactions when analyzed at a slow pace? And surely 1 week of playing deathmatch is enough to give your aim a 2% improvement anyways
peel my orange twin
no diddy
Milo realized his opponent in Donut too late and then wanted to check the sidewalk. When he realized it, he stopped moving towards the sideway again. I think that the crosshair just landed on the opponent by chance.
valve: here is your new case update buddy, keep playin.
U mentioned velocity spike..
Just to put cheating aside... any thoughts about us who use a Custom mouse acceleration curve?
Thinking about like Raw Accel and Custom Curve Pro.
Would be cool to see you dive into what differentiate normal sensitivity that is a constant, mouse acceleration and cheats when it comes to flicking and tracking.
You would see it smoothly approach this, remember that those data points are 1/120th of a second lol so he accelerated his mouse that quickly, and i bet if u did the inertial moment calculations of his specific mouse using the 2nd derivative of the curve at that line segment i bet the force to accelerate and decelerate would be enormous past anything u could do without cheats.
Really cool video! Subscribed! I'd LOVE to see more videos like this, and for you to analyze more cheaters (pro, or otherwise) using this technique. You're onto something really interesting and I wonder if anti-cheats could benefit from this type of analysis being publicly discussed like this!
Keep up the great work!
not banned yet, he's 3500 elo and still going 🤩
Now make that placement velocity graph into a tool that can be run against demos and you got em all
It's not that useful
@ isn’t it?
It’s not useful really for actually catching people since this guy is super blatant, but I think it’s better for proving innocence
To add to the Forsaken clip, you can’t shoot through that box with an M4 😂
I literally don’t understand people he was gonna flick to check temple and then the enemy peeked at the same time when he checked it so he had to flick back it was just lucky timing.
Most people suck at the game.
Nice video! I am still planning to do some sort of paper with TTD and the average reaction time.
As of now the average TTD for high level players is around 500 ms.
Really good/pro players can get up to 450 ms average. There are also games where players are faster and slower but the average is important!
Is this video meant for an internship at valve? Because I would hire immediately.
Valve and every other studio need to watch this so they can train their AI anti-cheat systems with this methodology. This will be next level!
Was that Matlab used to graph?
excel 🤑
Step 1: play cs
Congrats, youve found cheaters
so i guess the real money making question is... can valve implement this sort of info into their VAC. where sudden jolts of aim velocity can be marked and then if this jolt becomes consistently "inconsistent" VAC can end the match. follow up question is Valve already doing this with VAC and if so then why is it so hard for it to detect cheats. especially with data like this.... there are bound to be alot of false positives which valve obviously doesnt want to deal with so i wonder if we can attach some extra bit of info that would help this kind of vac system... like the sudden acceleration in aim velocity combined with something like how accurate the shot was or maybe if the shot was through a wall. i get that valve is deathly afraid of getting false positives but with data like this and excessive to even obsessive fine tuning; they could theoretically atleast kill ALOT of the soft aim/aim assist cheaters out there... naturally i dont think there is really any good way to deal with wh besides some extremely advanced intelligence that could understand that looking through a wall to check where enemies are is a red flag... but frankly if valve could atleast kill aim assist/spinning (ive heard they were able to partially kill spinning atleast) then the cheating scene i feel like will be easier to manage for legit players since you can outaim a wallhacker but not an aimbotter.
vacnet is doing stuff similar to this, i do premier hvh and you get banned or cooldowned if you have bad ragebot settings, but high smoothing legit bot, especially with a bezier curve will probably never be detected by vacnet because it is almost identical to human aim
bro wrote a book
@@pwere_this guy cant read
Dinoswarleaf would be proud.
Babe wake up , bird posted. *Realizes she left long ago*
If VAC was personified, they would be furiously scribbling down notes right now.... some of these cheats need to be analyzed frame by frame in demo, and using the method you showed on that graph at around 7 minutes....I did that the other day to check to see if someone just had a wallhack or if they also were using an aimbot.
edit: showpos is definitely bugged, I was also testing it, and it's not consistent in terms of how fast it updates values
whens the esea video
Would mouse accel cause these random spikes as well?
Yes but it would mean that it would be consistent and smooth. If you use mouse accel, it doesn’t explain why he immediately decelerates down to match the enemy’s head perfectly and tracks it. Mouse accel curves can be enabled but i want u to watch the twitter thread because it’s extremely blatant
@1bird_d awesome, thanks for the explanation
Do you think analysis like this could be integrated into an anti cheat that does it rapidly during a game
i am willing to bet that VACnet does this but def not faceit, faceit is just spyware looking for processes
of course, the server has all the information shown in the video and more, as well as perfect precision, how could it be unable to do so?
@@1bird_d based
3:03 You cannot compare pure reaction time and the ttd metric. See the description from leetify:
Time to Damage
Time to damage measures the average time it took you from seeing the enemy player to first dealing damage to them. Trigger discipline plays are excluded.
How it is calculated
Time to damage is NOT reaction time. It's a combination of your accuracy, crosshair placement, your weapons fire rate and your reaction time, so don't expect it to be near 200 ms.
Your comparison is not quite correct.
The video explains why ttd and reaction time aren’t linked
my name is on a bird video my life is fulfilled
Hoping that when they drop that season 2 update they release the anti cheat too
Do this with old flusha demos
There's already smoothed out aimlocks, AI trained, silent, proximity, bla bla, they put so much effort trying to make cheating look real so it's hard to say nowadays.
What are you using to record that data? Is it just a print out statement in console when you watch the demo back?
I literally sat there and hand typed them lmao the radar isn’t a constant backdrop and i didnt want to code something, i could have parsed it but the demo auto interpolates so it would have lead to more scuffed data
@@1bird_dI can show you a much better way to do it using Source Filmmaker actually out of all things if you’re interested.
really good video everything was explained well and in an interesting way
elite cheater knowledge😭🙏
i mean people just randomly staring through walls isnt thats sus, im like silver 4 on mirage (ive not played that many games i think im better than silver) and i just stop moving and stare at a wall every now and again, but i just kinda suck, like sometimes when i swing an angle i dont track thw corner i just stare at the wall and swing, ive been accused of cheating a couple times😭
how/where are you getting the data from?
The demo and cl_showpos 1
im so confused bro 😭
the reason i stopped grinding to faceit lvl10 was cheaters
many closet cheaters, using soft aim cheats, walls everywhere
i was grinding kovaks/faceit and was getting great results in kovaks
kovaks has cheaters too most top scores are cheating made
when i realised faceit was plagued with Smurfs, account buyers and closet cheaters in mid lvl elo i just stopped playing for elo
solo q makes it even harder
for new accounts in faceit its hell. smurfs, cheaters and account boosters make it hell
FPS are ruin by the amount of cheaters
most cs2 people just deny😅
playing for fun is a lot better
I think leetify adds 200ms base to their time to damage statistic.
Also that is not proof of 5white cheating, anyone who has committed time to aim training (tracing to be more precise) has learned that exact mouse movement to consistently match the enemy players horizontal max velocity over a distance
shoutout to Bird the goat
I have not watched the video yet but all I can say, the enemy player was too far for the cheat to work. There was nothing in the RAM
this guy deserves more subs
Oh poor Milo. Actually, is it even possible to tell if someone is cheating just from seeing their viewpoint without a fancy mouse movement graph? Just the video?
Slow down the demo and analyze their aim, check for any suspicious crosshair movement patterns like unnatural micro adjustments or unnatural motions (like always going into a perfectly straight line, pattern repeating too much etc).
Be aware that demo isn't the most accurate because it's 32 ticks for Mm games (unsure about Faceit or HLTV demos)
just because people are better than you in cs2 doesnt mean they are cheating.
How would this compare to versus a tier 1 pro player? Still pretty clean?
Ur gonna see what everyone else would with smooth aim, no crazy jumps. Like i said, this kind of “soft aim” and low fov aimbot are obvious to the eye but this just puts data behind it
by bringing up the time to damage stats, you're ignoring the possibility that he was using esp (walls,sound,radar) and knew the guy was there and about to peek. average time to damage stats aren't really comparable to an awper already scoped in on an angle, as that specific scenario time to damage will be much lower and closer to pure reaction times than the time to damage of someone running around with a rifle out where they would first need to spot the target then adjust aim, since that's most scenarios that's why the average ttd is much higher than pure reaction time. not all cheats are perfect and work properly, some are poorly written, malfunction and have bugs. I'm not saying anything definitive one way or the other, just pointing out the flaws in your debunking logic.
Why tf would he turn to watch temple, if he had that information? And why are you explaining shit he literally explained in the video?
@@friqd7439you really can't figure it out? it would be a malfunctioning aim bot that caused him to flick to temple and on a guy through the wall after seeing someone.
he did a pretty mediocre job of debunking it in the video, he framed it as proof he wasn't cheating because he reacted too fast. it's just a weak angle to debunk the clip. making the claim that he was looking away and then looking back is a decent explanation, but the reaction time would have only been proof if it was sub 130ms or something. he even mispoke at one point and said he started to flick before he saw the player when it was clear he flicked afterwards.
I debunked 2 options for milo to be cheating.
1) ESP with crosshair changing color quickly or making a noise. If milo had those things, their reaction time would be sub 20ms, as they pass over the CT in mid and stop their flick after 20ms and go back in around 100 total ms after that info could have been presented.
2) high fov/low fov aimbot - this isn’t even a low fov flick, as typically low fov aim is configured to be less than 1-10 degrees of vision, since flicking 20+ degrees perfectly to one side is super blatant and obviously not realistic to hide in a closet cheat. High fov aim is considered a rage cheat, which no one would be stupid enough to use in a legit match.
It’s much more likely that radar is being used by people on hltv to cheat, but why would someone with radar only enabled have a “bug” like this happen? Literally when the code isn’t configured to run it won’t run…
Cheats rarely ever “malfunction” like you think. Typically they are either coded poorly to make bad assumptions when assisting (not understanding wallbangs or not using proper desync rage modes) or coded too aggressively to not be hidden to the viewer, which is what happened with 5white. Milo’s crosshair movements are indicative of someone legitimately moving their mouse and stopping quickly, as you can see the graphs don’t show any foul play. Any of the points that don’t perfectly match the trend can be explained by the recording being bad (first point on the uptrend that’s slightly off) and the double scope making showpos lie to the recording. Hope this makes sense to you
@@1bird_d 1.) you did not debunk the possibility of esp. pause your video a 1:26. if milo was using sound esp it would be making a noise at that point well before he ever scoped in and it would be making a noise in his right ear so he would know that the enemy is on the right side of his cross hair. any other type of esp such as radar would have given him the info long before this as well. and I didn't watch the match but he could have known from sound esp that the enemy was donut much longer than this by simply looking in that direction. with sound or radar you're not gonna know exactly when someone is about to peek so that could explain the flick away and a panick click onto his aim key which could have caused the weird behavior that occured after he flicked left (flicking back right and then left to the enemy through the wall.) that is the most sus part of the clip, where after he flicked to temple, he flicks right and then back left onto an enemy through the wall, that is not normally.
2.) a high fov aimbot can be humanized to not be blatant with proper smooth/target switching time settings. you can even code a cheat to miss the first bullet, lock on after the third, or stop the lock after "x" bullet, overshoot/undershoot the aim. a high fov alone isn't rage hacking. typical rage hacking features are autoshoot (you don't even press m1, it does it for you) autowall, bhopping, 360 fov, etc. and I agree nobody would ever rage in a legit match.
3.) direct memory access radar cheats are absolutely being abused by onliners. the code for these cheats has been open source on github for a while. all you need is a dma card from aliexpress and someone to spoof the firmware for you. and if you're gonna go that far to get an edge over the competition, and tons of people are doing it which decreases your advantage, why wouldnt you aimbot as well? the sad truth is that tier 1 pros most likely cheat as well since they are allowed to bring their own hardware to the event and plenty of people on YT have demonstrated how easy it is to put cheats into the hardware. until tournament organizers provide peripherals there will always be cheating in tier 1, it's absolutely naive to think nobody would do it when so much money and prestige is on the line and humans have proven time and time again that they are morally ambiguous.
4.) I've used plenty of poorly coded cheats that have malfunctioned. sometimes people fuck up the math, other times there's bugs with unintended consequences, they are just code after all.
5.) yeah it could be poor mouse control which was what made him shake on the guy in the wall. I said in the first post that I don't believe this to be definitive evidence of cheating, only a sus clip. but I also don't think anything you've provided is definitive evidence of him not cheating and tbh I think the best circumstantial evidence that he wasn't cheating is that he only had a 1.04 rating on that map lol, that type of performance would only be explainable if everyone was cheating.
my brain hurts
Bro is megamind
i didnt do nuthin
Omg the glorious king posted again.
ive been waiting.....
Doesn`t convince me. Bro is cheating pretty clearly.
You would love r/vacsucks
but why milo did just look trough the wall ? there is no fucking reason considering there was a guy peeking donut
He didn't
Did you watch the video?
@@friqd7439 you dont look temple like that
no idea what your talking about. nice vid
Excellent analysis.
average nn farming cheaters
K scientist.
at this point is impossible to ban a cheater even their anti cheat doesn't know 💀
no outro or anything? just cold turkey stop XD
Mrbeast method
hey bird shitty MM faceit 5 player here love your videos but recently you mentioned train needs work and they need to fix ivy. could you explain the issues? i have played some of it and i dont love it but im curious what is wrong with it.
I don't know what bird's issue with it is but there's two main ones I know.
First, peeking Hell from Ivy is kinda awful right now. I know the point of the box is to break up the angle so that an ivy player peeking hell isn't able to get rushed from Ivy, but it makes the movement and getting to speed to peek awkward and it's easy to hit the box and the box forces you to peek from close to the train giving a huge peekers advantage to T players in A main. Fighting main players from Ivy is a huge disadvantage.
The other major issue is there's one smoke, one literally included in the guide, which can shut off the other Ivy door to site, completely cutting off the Ivy player from A-if they want to help their A teammates they have to peek hell which they have at a disadvantage. Previously the open tunnels allowed deep players in Ivy to cover back of site and contest across site, now they have one position that is smoked on every execute and one position they'll lose.
You're such a gross nerd
And I absolutely love this. This video and explaination is awesome.
Analyze Donk. Just for shits and gigz.
Let's hope vacnet3 will work like that
Thats what im here for
Great video
Nice to see you pookie
what is real anymore
brother its not a "third world cheat" its just a badly configured cheat, nice vid tho (bro cant even hack right lol)
You've obviously never played cs at a higher level...
Valve hire this mf right now
good video please flash us
you think at all possible that milo WAS cheating tho? like is there a chance still?
he is cheating dont know what you talk about xd i cheat since 2015 btw
So a random flick through a wall now means you're cheating? Stop cheating and you might learn how the game functions.
ur the goat
why furry tho
Why not guh
We do have to consider that a "spike" in mouse movement may just be due to a mouse sensor hiccup, like gliding the mouse over a speck of dust on your mousepad, for example. To prove conclusively, we must always have multiple pieces of evidence, to rule out hiccups like this. Nice video