Cheater Boards (How to Stop Them)

[SlartyBartFast]

Well, it's been raised that at least one cheater board has surfaced. I figure that the fact it's a WAS board is only coincidence. As I've said in other threads, it's so easy to reprogram or modify a microcontroller controlled board it's rediculous. All you need is a little patience to set yourself up with the required knowledge and equipemnt and the motivation to learn.

How can paintball tournaments stop and detect cheater boards? Considering factory teams are as likely to cheat as the next guys, requiring factory only boards isn't going to help. The factory just needs to produce some special boards for the tournament.

Testing is virtually imposible as well. After all, any number of secret codes could be employed to enable and disable the cheat modes.

The way I see it there's only one way to do it. Electronic markers need to be built with removable chips that can be replaced by tournament supervisors and identified with anti-tamper devices.

Additionally, source code would need to be released to a governing body that would analyse it to ensure it was legal and didn't hide any dubious functionality.

To ensure approved software is used, the guns would have to use a limited number of microprocessors. Blank chips could then be kept and flashed for the make and model of gun before being inserted and made tamper-proof.

[AGD]

Formula one with their millions of dollars couldn't stop cheater software for race cars, I doubt we will be able to do better.

AGD

[RRfireblade]

You can't stop it,it's simply not cost effective to even try.

The only thing that can be done to limit ROF is by mandating mechanical only hoppers.And that's not gonna happen until manufacturers start LOSING money on the sale of paint. ;)

Jay.

[shartley]

I have an idea… ROF limitations are fine… but what would be better is if they made all tournaments MANUAL only (not just hoppers... heck keep electric hopers). :D

But I don’t think that would fly….. ;)

[Tyril]

I have to agree with AGD on this one.


No matter what you do, once the standards are released, people will find ways around them.

All this talk of more and more stringent guidelines will only make it increasingly expensive for the weekend tourny'er to play. All those chips, guides, modes you speak of? Who's going to foot the bill? I, for one, doubt NPPL'll fork over the required cash. And with today's ridiculous rate of fire, the issue of 'trigger bounce' differs from ref to ref, from gun to gun. One ref might find my emag bouncy, while they might allow my friend's timmy. And what about being able to adjust debounce settings on the fly? That's another can of worms open right there. We truely are on the verge of a great deal of change.

For as the way the future will go?

I, for one, hope that the idea of a mech-only tourament grows. While I doubt this will ever make major headlines, as pump-only tourneys are a rarity today, I just prefer the feel of a mech trigger.

For electros, I wish that the semi-only rule would be repealed. I'm all for a 13 bps full auto cap. Such would be very easy to test and program, and would pretty much avoid all of today's controversey. I think that a 13 bps cap would actually be safer than today's ridiculously fast bouncy-walking triggers.


Will it go that way? I doubt it. Manufactuers sell by promoting the newest and best, and such a static cap will probably discourage sales. Then the only improvements would be in ball-loading and consistency.

Imagine one going on to the field with a single-trigger Angel LED with ZIP chip (and some sort of eye). 1999 technology being competitive again. Where's the desire to improve?

Oh well, just my thoughts on the subject.

-mike

[lopxtc]

As bad as it may sound, ultimately the decision to stop/limit electros or to even make mechanical only tourneys may not come till someone is severly injured or killed. We all know that the goggles we use are limited to the number of times repeat impacts can occur within a given span of time, and honestly I have been on the receiving end of bursts that have hit my lenses 3-4 times. How long do you think it will be till someone takes enough hits to finally go beyond the stress limit on lenses ...

Ultimately like many things it will not be something good that changes the sport, it will be something bad. I for one do believe that in the current state of escilation that there will be a on-field death or serious injury within a couple years ...

Aaron

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by lopxtc
We all know that the goggles we use are limited to the number of times repeat impacts can occur within a given span of time, and honestly I have been on the receiving end of bursts that have hit my lenses 3-4 times. How long do you think it will be till someone takes enough hits to finally go beyond the stress limit on lenses ...


Aaron

I don't know if anyone else has tried this but for fun we set up an old mask(low end VForce I think it was)just see if we could break it.After 2 hoppers I gave up on wasting paint as it still didn't break.Maybe a fluke and I definately wouldn't recommend that abuse for any "real" situation,but I was surprised.

Anyway,
Cheaters will be cheaters,it's as simple as that.If something is to be gained,even a shallow victory,there are those that will try.Not much you could do besides starting your own league and mandating your own rules and guidelines.......sucks I know.

Something interesting that seems to work in some other sports is a claiming rule.Some motorsports have a claiming rule meaning you can run whatever you want but there is a max value your allowed to have invested in your equiptment.At any time the sanctioning body can write you a check for said value and claim your equiptment,usually only ever excersized in cases of presumed cheating.It keeps a more even playing field and limits the "rare" and "excessively custom" equiptment to a minimum.For instance,what would you take to a Tourny if the "claiming" rule was $300 max?

Just a crazy thought.(also wouldn't ever happen ;) )

Jay.

[cledford]

Cheater boards let you do what? When you shoot a none cheater board (say something like the old Shocker 4x4) you are already pulling at a ROF exceeds the cyclic rate of an M16. What is the next logical step? To instead of having to actually pull 13-14bps, you have a full-auto marker that with one trigger pull continuously pumps out paint that fast. Some people want to call it bounce, but it is basically full-auto with a nice name and that is what these cheater boards allow.

I say allow full-auto and the problem goes away. Let's face it the ASTM regulation against full-auto is stupid - if you are pull 13-14bps and there are an number of balls in-route to a target (some opposing players head) and his mask comes off, is the fact that you are actually fanning that mouse-click trigger going to save his sight? I say allow full-auto, cap it at 10-15 rounds (to avoid runaway guns) and the problem is solved. For what it's worth, many in the industry are concern about pissing the ASTM off. I'd bet there are plenty of other sports out there on the "edge" that didn't cave and in haven't died. I know insurance issues govern a lot, but let's remember, paintball is big and getting bigger, these insurance companies aren't going to kill a cash cow just because they don't like full-auto.

On the other hand the manufacturers have a lot to worry about with regard to johny at home or in the yard, but hasn't that danger (some dumb kid shooting out some other kids eye) always existed? I realize that what they're trying to prevent is the "life altering" event of loosing ALL sight by have both eyes shot out - but I submit that you can't worry about everything. This is going to sound totally unrelated, but consider peanuts. My favorite restaurant (Lone Star Steakhouse) used to serve buckets of peanuts as appetizers and you could just dump the shells right on the floor. I've heard 2 different stories on why they stopped, one was that someone slipped on the shells and the other was that someone with peanut allergies got sick. Whatever the case, Lone star stopped serving peanuts (I'm certain) due to insurance pressure. Logan's now serves the peanuts and they seem to have no problem getting insurance or customers.

-Calvin

[Barfly]

kill someone with a paintball gun, very hard. Even if you get shot in the eye at point blank range, it doesn't mean you will lose your eye. In fact about 5 years ago, I guy my friends reffered to as Crack baby, decided his gun wasn't working, so he looked down the barrel and pulled the trigger. Pow right in the eye and his eye was fine after much cussing and screaming.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by AGD
Formula one with their millions of dollars couldn't stop cheater software for race cars, I doubt we will be able to do better.

AGD

Rubbish. F1 cars cost millions and are incredibly complex and far use more powerful computers. Also, the complexity of the programming means that it is VERY important your algorithms don't fall into the hands of you opponents. Paintball markers are simplistic by comparison.

How many PIC/EEPROMs are being used in the market today to control the various boards? There's a very limited pin-out configuration.

Also, a generic piece of software could control every current marker and probably many conceivable markers. Perhaps that's the solution if manufacturers really think their software is so proprietary. Isn't that the reason Morlock boards etc work in numerous markers?

But seeing as you've already proposed Shartley's solution, I guess that will be the only way to kill electro-cheaters.

Full-auto with a ROF cap as suggested by some won't help. How do you monitor the ROF? Perhaps someone could develop a barrel mounted Radar-Chron that could be monitored realtime.

[shartley]

I strongly disagree with simply allowing FA. While cheater boards enhance a players abilities to shoot fast, they still require SOME finger skills. I can see it now, everybody simply hosing the field with NO trigger skills needed.

A 10 year old picking up any marker would have the same ROF as a skilled player. Tournaments would be more of a joke than some think they are now.

Nope, I don’t think simply allowing FA is the answer to cheater boards. And no FA rules also have to do with OFF the field safety, not just ON the field safety.

[cledford]

Originally posted by shartley
I strongly disagree with simply allowing FA. While cheater boards enhance a players abilities to shoot fast, they still require SOME finger skills. I can see it now, everybody simply hosing the field with NO trigger skills needed.


Wrong. It would require the developement of a new skill, that being the rationing of paint. The team walks on with X amount, can share as they like, but when it gone, it's gone. I bed you'd see a lot control, espcially of the amount of paint carried was limited. And it is a whole lot easier to mashall.

-Calvin

[cledford]

Originally posted by lopxtc
We all know that the goggles we use are limited to the number of times repeat impacts can occur within a given span of time, and honestly I have been on the receiving end of bursts that have hit my lenses 3-4 times. How long do you think it will be till someone takes enough hits to finally go beyond the stress limit on lenses ...
Aaron

So why not make new goggles? Back in the day, when hopper couldn't keep up with emerging ROF, no one said "well, let's limit the ROF due to a technical difficulty." Instead someone sat down and figured out a solution, improve equipment. I realize that there is a safety issue here - but still, why shouldn't goggle systems continue to improve? Everything else has. Goggles in comparison really haven't gotten better since the upgrade from the UVEX.

One simple solution exists for the "goggles falling off in the middle of a game" issue. Add a second strap - problem solved.

-Calvin

[shartley]

Originally posted by cledford
Wrong. It would require the developement of a new skill, that being the rationing of paint. The team walks on with X amount, can share as they like, but when it gone, it's gone. I bed you'd see a lot control, espcially of the amount of paint carried was limited. And it is a whole lot easier to mashall.

-Calvin
I disagree.... Requiring the development of “new” skills does not negate the lack of trigger pulling skills that allowing FA would create.

I am not saying the game would not take on some new dimensions. I agree with that.

I also agree with the limiting of paint. But that can be implemented NOW as well, I don’t however see it happening across the board. But I could be wrong. And rationing of paint IMHO would be the same as if implemented now across the board. We already see some very fast dumping of paint, and that is NOT with FA. I think it is two different issues.

I was commenting on how shooting fast is shooting fast, but when you make it easy for ANYONE to shoot fast (and at a sustained rate of fire), you suddenly lose the need for one of the “skills” that is currently needed at the upper levels. You can argue about that making new skills needed, but that is another issue.

And that still does not address the off field safety issues that FA brings into the mix. Personally, I could care less about FA on the field, I am dressed and ready for getting hit.

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by shartley
I strongly disagree with simply allowing FA. While cheater boards enhance a players abilities to shoot fast, they still require SOME finger skills. I can see it now, everybody simply hosing the field with NO trigger skills needed.



I totally agree,NO WAY FA. Try walking 15bps,while running on the break or snap shooting.FA would allow that WAY to easily and you still couldn't stop "cheaters" that go over the "Cap" based on programming.

I think the whole issue is still not "an issue".From high ROF to really high ROF is not a critical difference in most cases.Just not that big a deal.

Jay.
Long live gravity only hoppers!!;)

[shartley]

Originally posted by RRfireblade


I totally agree,NO WAY FA. Try walking 15bps,while running on the break or snap shooting.FA would allow that WAY to easily and you still couldn't stop "cheaters" that go over the "Cap" based on programming.

I think the whole issue is still not "an issue".From high ROF to really high ROF is not a critical difference in most cases.Just not that big a deal.

Jay.
Long live gravity only hoppers!!;) I agree. But I will keep my Revvy on my RTP thanks. ;)

But I am going pump this year to add a different dimension to my game. :D

[Jack & Coke]

- Full Auto

- Minimum 4 lb. trigger pull (easily checked using a weight and some string)

- Limited Paint (4 pods max)

:D

[Muzikman]

Someone hit on something that might work, but not with todays standards. Years ago I use to race R/C Cars at the national level. In the "Stock" class you purchased a motor at check in that you had to run. The motor cap and bell housing were both marked to prevent tampering. For paintball this would be replaceable chips. If you made all electro guns operate with the same code and the same board, you could hand out one chip to each person playing. With the cost of chips, this wouldn't raise the entry fee too much and it would be a pretty good way to prevent the "cheater boards". The only thing you would have to do is have the marker manufacturers agree on a board.

[Torbo]

january ed. of facefull had a very similar article.....

anyway. FA is dangerous off the field more than on the field. And i agree, bouncy board or not, its still gonna take much more skill to run and shoot, or walk as fast as you can just holding down the trig. As for goggles, how about those new JT helmet masks? Id never wear one myself, but theres the option.

[nippinout]

Originally posted by Muzikman
If you made all electro guns operate with the same code and the same board, you could hand out one chip to each person playing. With the cost of chips, this wouldn't raise the entry fee too much and it would be a pretty good way to prevent the "cheater boards". The only thing you would have to do is have the marker manufacturers agree on a board.

Different guns need different code.

Solenoid pulse times vary greatly even within one specific gun model. Then you have the issue of one or two solenoid guns. Intellifeed and warp pulses also.


Making semi only boards from the manufacturer required for tournament play was tried. It failed.

[Muzikman]

Since the base operation of most electonic guns can fall in a few different standards. You would use a few different supplied chips. Really, to standardize on a few boards would not be all that hard.

[SlartyBartFast]

Well, at least the discussion came back round to my initial idea.;)


Originally posted by nippinout
Different guns need different code.
Solenoid pulse times vary greatly even within one specific gun model. Then you have the issue of one or two solenoid guns. Intellifeed and warp pulses also.

Not true. Do you really think that WAS boards have huge
development in programming?

If you were to have tournament issued chips, they could be programmed with standard programme and the few required varables for gun type and allowable user modifications set by a marshal.

For a standard chip, all the manufacturers would need to do is agree on the pinout configuration for inputs and outputs.

But, you could have any number of approved software. It would just be an issue of having manufactueres agree to having the source examined. Multiple chip types could easily be acomodated as well by using a univarsal programmer.

[FreshmanBob]

The problems not wether or not you can standerize boards, but who makes all the money off those boards? If its one persons design (say WAS), then he'll get more money than whoevers manufacturing it, whereas other board companies won't see any of that money.

Picking 1 standerized board is a monopoly and unfair to the competition.

[fallout11]

I'm with Cledford on this one, the easiest solution to the problem is forget about regulating the technology or enforcing the unenforcable.

Just limit each player to 600 rounds walk-on ammo. Period.
You can share with your teammates, but when you're out, your out.
Time to learn a little fire discipline.

And I'm sorry, but there is NO discernable difference between someone shooting 15bps bursts and full-auto.

[JEDI]

Originally posted by AGD
Formula one with their millions of dollars couldn't stop cheater software for race cars, I doubt we will be able to do better.

AGD

I agree. With such an importance and high demand placed on a high ROF, it just cant be stopped. You can try to limit it, and check it, but the resources and time needed is just not there for any given tourney.

[Muzikman]

Originally posted by FreshmanBob
The problems not wether or not you can standerize boards, but who makes all the money off those boards? If its one persons design (say WAS), then he'll get more money than whoevers manufacturing it, whereas other board companies won't see any of that money.

Picking 1 standerized board is a monopoly and unfair to the competition.

That's not true. For something to be standard, does not mean it can not be make by different companies. It just means that it has to follow a standard set of rules when it comes to the chip. Hell, for the non tournament days, you can make the board do what ever you want. When you get to the event, you pop out your chip and insert the chip that was given to you by the event.

A food example of stadards are PCs. There are MANY video card mfg's out there, but they all use a standard that will allow them to work in all "current" PCs.

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
Well, at least the discussion came back round to my initial idea.;)



Not true. Do you really think that WAS boards have huge
development in programming?

If you were to have tournament issued chips, they could be programmed with standard programme and the few required varables for gun type and allowable user modifications set by a marshal.

For a standard chip, all the manufacturers would need to do is agree on the pinout configuration for inputs and outputs.

But, you could have any number of approved software. It would just be an issue of having manufactueres agree to having the source examined. Multiple chip types could easily be acomodated as well by using a univarsal programmer.

Sorry,but it's NEVER going to happen that way.It's way to time consuming and to costly over all.Look at the chaos right before a big Tourny,everyone getting chrono'd last minute tweaks and confusion.Could you imaging unscrewing grip panels,swapping chips,software failures and debugging.And then what,either having to track down all the chips as they come off the field and getting them to the next group ,undamaged and intact.
And if you don't install them just prior to going on the field,your back in the same boat of counterfit chips and altered software,cause you know someone will get out with one of the chips in their pocket and then your done.
Not to mention,no more testing your gun before the game with any real reliability,cause you'll never now what the "official" software is going to do till it's to late.

Just no way,never going to happen like that.

Jay.

[JEDI]

Originally posted by RRfireblade


Sorry,but it's NEVER going to happen that way.It's way to time consuming and to costly over all.Look at the chaos right before a big Tourny,everyone getting chrono'd last minute tweaks and confusion.Could you imaging unscrewing grip panels,swapping chips,software failures and debugging.And then what,either having to track down all the chips as they come off the field and getting them to the next group ,undamaged and intact.
And if you don't install them just prior to going on the field,your back in the same boat of counterfit chips and altered software,cause you know someone will get out with one of the chips in their pocket and then your done.
Not to mention,no more testing your gun before the game with any real reliability,cause you'll never now what the "official" software is going to do till it's to late.

Just no way,never going to happen like that.

Jay.

Yeah, you're exactly right. Theres no way to keep such a tight seal on the matter, without totally disrupting the way things run now. Theres no way I would trust putting some "foreign" chip into my gun, and expect that it will work every time.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by Jack & Coke
- Full Auto
- Minimum 4 lb. trigger pull (easily checked using a weight and some string)
- Limited Paint (4 pods max)
:D

Not so sure I’d limit paint THAT much, but otherwise I’m in complete agreement.

As long as electros are allowed, FA is acceptable by default. It’s impossible to stop guns that have ‘turbo’ modes using trigger bounce to shoot at higher ROF than the users trigger finger.

The real danger isn’t FA, it’s hot guns. And seeing as a number of markers have their fps affected by the electronics/solenoid operation, I can guarantee that there is or will be people taking advantage of that.

Heck, I’m not even certain many of the chrono judges are aware of half the mechanical cheats to get around chrony speed limits.

I’ll admit, that I’ve never participated in tourny play. Considering the egos and attitudes that seem to abound, I have no interest in doing so. I’ll also admit that I NEVER go hard on the trigger. I’d rather be eliminated trying to do something skillful than battle an opponents wallet.

But if I am to start tourny play, the minimum requirements in my mind are limited paint and no electros.

Time to start a PGP league I guess. :D

Or revive the Splatmaster! ::cool::

[Muzikman]

Originally posted by fallout11
I'm with Cledford on this one, the easiest solution to the problem is forget about regulating the technology or enforcing the unenforcable.

Just limit each player to 600 rounds walk-on ammo. Period.
You can share with your teammates, but when you're out, your out.
Time to learn a little fire discipline.

And I'm sorry, but there is NO discernable difference between someone shooting 15bps bursts and full-auto.

Seeing as most of your events make their money off paint, there is no way this will happen.

[Muzikman]

Originally posted by RRfireblade


Sorry,but it's NEVER going to happen that way.It's way to time consuming and to costly over all.Look at the chaos right before a big Tourny,everyone getting chrono'd last minute tweaks and confusion.Could you imaging unscrewing grip panels,swapping chips,software failures and debugging.And then what,either having to track down all the chips as they come off the field and getting them to the next group ,undamaged and intact.
And if you don't install them just prior to going on the field,your back in the same boat of counterfit chips and altered software,cause you know someone will get out with one of the chips in their pocket and then your done.
Not to mention,no more testing your gun before the game with any real reliability,cause you'll never now what the "official" software is going to do till it's to late.

Just no way,never going to happen like that.

Jay.


Umm...the chips are yours to keep after the event. Do what you want with them. A PIC costs what, $5? The only thing I can see is the need for maybe windowed grips or something to make sure the person is using the designated chip.

Again, there is no difference between this and what happens/happened at large R/C events.

[fallout11]

Originally posted by Muzikman


Seeing as most of your events make their money off paint, there is no way this will happen.

Maybe not economically advantageous, but it is do-able, even currently.
I've seen it done on a small scale in the past.

Something will eventually have to give, or the tourney circuit will continue it's sad ride on to self-destruction.
It's well on it's way already.....

[Muzikman]

All I am saying is that limiting paint is not the answer. Paint mfgs and event promoters would NEVER do it. Yes in small scale it would work, but when you tell a team that you are only allowed x number of balls on the field per team, you would be taking money right out of your pocket. Unless you made the limit so high, that it would have no affect on the problem you are trying to solve.

If you are going this drastic, you might as well just get rid of electros and go all manual.

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by Muzikman



Umm...the chips are yours to keep after the event. Do what you want with them. A PIC costs what, $5? The only thing I can see is the need for maybe windowed grips or something to make sure the person is using the designated chip.

Again, there is no difference between this and what happens/happened at large R/C events.

How does that correct cheaters?

You don't think that once those chips are out someone won't just rewrite it or copy it's appearance,and then show up with that chip at the field?

Jay.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by RRfireblade
Sorry, but it's NEVER going to happen that way.It's way to time consuming and to costly over all.
Costly, not really. Programmers can be scratch built, with prior notice of what guns were going to be on the field, and the settings required/desired, the chips could be ready long before the tourney.

Look at the chaos right before a big Tourny, everyone getting chrono'd last minute tweaks and confusion.Could you imaging unscrewing grip panels, swapping chips, software failures and debugging.And then what, either having to track down all the chips as they come off the field and getting them to the next group, undamaged and intact.
Well, changing chips would take seconds. Players show up with the grip panels off and their chip removed. Inserting a chip in the socket couple of seconds max.
There would be a separate chip for each gun. You could even forget about even picking them up afterwards. It only costs $12 for the most expensive PICmicro and the ones used in eletros probably don’t cost half that.
Handled properly failure rates would be extremely low. As said before, in stock R/C racing you had to use a supplied motor. Far more can go wrong with a motor than a chip.
To avoid chaos at the field, just require an earlier check-in time for the first game for the idiots that leave it till the last second. Intelligent players will have it done as soon as they arrive at the tournament (perhaps part of the captains meeting or initial registration).

And if you don't install them just prior to going on the field, your back in the same boat of counterfit chips and altered software, cause you know someone will get out with one of the chips in their pocket and then your done.
All you have to do is put an anti-tamper sticker over the chip at installation time. If the sticker is torn, or the serial numbers don’t match at the end of the tournament, team is eliminated.

Not to mention, no more testing your gun before the game with any real reliability, cause you'll never now what the "official" software is going to do till it's to late.
Well, if the official software is based on the consumer software but not programmable, you can test it all you want before the game.
If the official chips use a generic software, just buy a chip with the generic software for a few bucks to test the adjustable settings.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by RRfireblade
How does that correct cheaters?

You don't think that once those chips are out someone won't just rewrite it or copy it's appearance,and then show up with that chip at the field?

You'd get a new chip every tournament. Each time a good chip was installed, a tamperproof seal would also be installed.

[Pacifist_Farmer]

and of course a Mech user steps up to solve the cheater board problem

Before each turney a ref walks to each gun and passes a very large elctromagnet over it, if youre marker still works afterwards...

play on!!

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast


You'd get a new chip every tournament. Each time a good chip was installed, a tamperproof seal would also be installed.

OK,OK I give up.;) .....But it's still not going to happen.

Whatever the arguement,I'll bet $1000 against anyone that it will never happen in our paintball lifetimes.

Not until we are so advanced technologically as a society that the capability to have ALL guns completely downloaded w/ thier software on the fly,through wireless transmission while your running on to the field using some Star Trek like programming device. :)

Jay.

[thei3ug]

i've got one... each board must be flashed and physicall "sealed" by a manufacturer before the event begins.

booyah.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by thei3ug
i've got one... each board must be flashed and physicall "sealed" by a manufacturer before the event begins.
booyah.
But the manufacturers are also the sponsors of teams. At the introduction of electros SP made the Turbo mode work for their factory team during tournamants even when the tournament lock was on.

[rdb123]

Originally posted by AGD
Formula one with their millions of dollars couldn't stop cheater software for race cars, I doubt we will be able to do better.

AGD

OT, but how would you cheat with a race car???

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by rdb123
OT, but how would you cheat with a race car???

Well, for example, in formula 1 you are nolonger allowed to have traction control. So they banned the use of wheel speed sensors.

However, it was rumoured that Shumi had engine control software that was implementing traction control based on engine rpm and acceleration.

When the allegations came to light, the Ferrari technician disappeared for a while and (surprise, surprise) Shumi started producing smoke with his rear tires. The technician came back when the storm passed, and (surprise, surprise) Shumi didn't seem to smoke the tires quite as much.

[Miscue]

There is no practical method to stop electronic cheating short of removing the circuit board. The ideas that have been proposed, are impractical and/or technically ineffective because they can be circumvented.

My best suggestion is a ROF cap at 13bps or so, I think this would solve a lot of things. But, this will never happen.

[SlartyBartFast]

Given an effective test of one pull one shot, I think an ROF cap is pointless.

Need a computer operated solenoid/ram to fire the markers over the chrono.
Without paint you could fire a string of varying speeds and compare to the sound signature for number of shots fired.
With paint, you could fire a rapid burst to verify speeds in game situations.

[lord1234]

cheater boards should be stopped. yes the "white board" with an undisclosed players name on it...

[Miscue]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
Given an effective test of one pull one shot, I think an ROF cap is pointless.

Need a computer operated solenoid/ram to fire the markers over the chrono.
Without paint you could fire a string of varying speeds and compare to the sound signature for number of shots fired.
With paint, you could fire a rapid burst to veryfy speeds in game situations.

That's the whole point. There is no fool-proof test to test for one-pull/one-shot. A board could be made to turn cheating on and off, in a manner that only the person using it knows how. A ROF cap keeps it reasonable... if they cheat to hit 13... who cares. It's easy to obtain legit and not a ridiculous ROF to today's standards.

[RRfireblade]

I think they should switch to handloading only.;)

Jay.

[QUINCYMASSGUY]

Other sports like baseball don't allow aluminium bats, which are superior to wood, certain enhanced golf clubs aren't allowedin the PGA, and other sports have similar guidelines. Basically cheating got so out of hand they had to set a mark to even the playing field. I think mech only tournies is right where it should be as it emphasizes skill and is a plus towards the game and easier to test markers. So now AGD, AKA, WGP, etc need to use their power, finances, etc, to create it because if they aren't up to doing that, good like persuading NPS, SP, DYE, and the other electronic fathogs from switching their formats.

[yeahthatsme]

this would MAYBE be applicable in the NXL considering the small amount of teams and the fact that they all have heavy sponsorships.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by RRfireblade
I think they should switch to handloading only.;)

Jay.

That's right, and you have to use a rod to shove ammo down your 4' barrel!

I didn't mention this earlier, forgot to:

Let's say you have a standarized chip. Ok, trigger input line is high... shoot. Low, trigger was let go... you can shoot again once the line goes high. Simple?

Ok, now what prevents you from sending this standardized chip false inputs? Are you going to inspect my switch? Are you going to trace my board to see what line goes to what pin?

[cledford]

Originally posted by Muzikman


Seeing as most of your events make their money off paint, there is no way this will happen.

Good point :(

[JEDI]

I wont go as far as saying its impossible to illiminate this type of cheating. Just highly unlikely. But, lets be reasonable:

A) Limiting paint will NEVER work, so drop that idea. Its an aspect of play that a lot of people like best about the sport (shooting tons of paint)

B) Limiting type of marker. Again will not work, because its highly favorable for a lot of people to shoot electros. As long as they're not illegal, people will form tournies where electros are used.

Just because shooting a butt load of paint out of an electronic gun is not favorable to you, doesn't make banning it a reasonable solution.

Changing an aspect of the game that people have come to love, will not solve the problem of cheating. Look elsewhere.

[JEDI]

Besides... even if limited paint was the answer, whats going to stop a guy, WHO ONLY HAS 50 ROUNDS OR SO from running past you and drilling 30 balls into you and your teammate. So what, he has no more paint, but he still did his job.

[FriedRicE2]

Just some idea from a newb and wannabe airsmith currently persuing a Electrial Engineering/Computer Science Degree :D

Chip with an external port and inspection software idea:

I really think we can have a standardised chip with some sort of port on the grip of your gun. This way a tech Judge can plug it into a computer real quick and inspect the chip's software for any tampering or code violations.

This ofcourse would take a lot of work to do; first, for the standardized chip and then for software that will inspect it quickly. Plus, the inspection software needs to be updated quite often to counteract any new ways of fooling the software and be able to dectect any imitaion or clone chips that somebody might make. You could also design the code in the chip and the chip itself so that it would be hard to code somthing that the inspection software could miss. This also means we need a dedicated organization of honest people to constantly monitor and test the chip for anyweaknesses and update the software accordingly.(upkeep) It would take alot of work and research. but believe it can be done.

Shure this upkeep step of this idea seems dauting, but it can be a small thing if a lot of thought is put into addeind preventative mesauseres in the design of the chip. Basically make it harder for people to tamper with it or create a copy of it. This way the upkeep organization only has to test the chip and add things to the inspection software every once in a while because the basic design is good.

I think this would be a quick and easy solution so you don't have to seal the chip or trade chips at the competition. Also, this way people can keep settings that they have put into their guns.

But ofcourse this means the big companys have to meet in a symposium and agree on a standardized chip and the software.
I don't see why we can't do it if enough people will start caring and by this it seems that caring people are growing.

It would take a good amount of work, but i think its the one quick way to keep these electric markers honest. I think there are enough honest people out there that can make this happen also.

(correct me if im wrong on any of this and i will be happy to edit it)

If you think this is too complex you should see what things are pulled off in other industries.

[FallNAngel]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast

But the manufacturers are also the sponsors of teams. At the introduction of electros SP made the Turbo mode work for their factory team during tournamants even when the tournament lock was on.

There's one thing I can think of that may work. I don't think it'd be ungodly difficult, but perhaps I'm wrong.

Generally, the code to run the markers can be held on 1 PIC chip. I can't see the frame needing more than that honestly, but I'm sure it can be dealt with if it has to. Anyway, 1 PIC chip for the program, and 1 for settings such as dwell, or in the case of EBlade/Race the bolt open/close, eye settings, etc.

The program chip is flashable and is only flashable by a physical handheld connection (eg palm pilot/computer) When the teams get on the field, all similiar markers are flashed the same. User settings aren't affected as they're kept on a separate chip.

Although this doesn't eliminate cheating, it will even the field. eg. Pretend Smart Parts want to give Dynasty cheater boards because they know their Shockers suck and they want to give them insane bounce after 10bps. Smart Parts would be required to give the head ref a Shocker compatible program image before the event starts. All players on all fields will have their markers flashed with this image each time they walk on the field. No PIC's to worry about getting stolen, no worrying about having to worry about players copying the look of the PIC, either the program works or it doesn't.

The only two problems that I can see with this are:
A) Refs being bribed to not flash particular teams or players or flash particular teams with different PIC images.
B) The markers being re-engineered to allow *A* chip to be programmed, just not the right one. This would more than likely require a decent amount of modification to the board and would probably be noticeable to someone looking at it.

[GT]

I cant read all this crap so I am just going to post.



I would love to see a limit on paint per game tourney but lets be honest tourney producers are seriously greedy and selling less paint=less money in some folks pockets. Its just so sad that paintball has become so cut throat in its infancy. :(

[Butterfingers]

Hmm Have tourney officals install a "e-mode eliminator" aka. (kiddie pool). Have players line up for the "software" cleansing ritual (dunking). This will prevent all cheater boards from ever being used. :)

In all sereousness there should be a ROF limit on guns wheres the skill when all you are doing is putting 20+ balls in the air to hit sombody. It gets real expensive real fast.

[speedyejl]

Ok here we go, the crazy but practical and easily implimentable idea.

Simply attach a device similar to hand chrony to each players barrel for the duration of the game. It would contain a chronograph and a bps meter. In addition a wireless transmiter. A laptop feild side would recieve information of everyone playing and if a device showed ramping fps/bps the player could be quickly checked by a ref. Each device would have a unique number as so not to cause confusion between devices. It would also be nesscary for the person monoriting the computer to make sure jumps in bps/fps are not because of the chrono picking up a stream of balls from a different player.

A cheaper method would be this device without a transmiter that beeps loudly when it senses the fps/bps jumping

For both of these devices it would be nesscary for the devices to be able to tell an axpromiatley close time between shots, because its hard to tell if a gun is ramping bps but if its obvious after ramping that the balls are the exact same space apart its obvious we have a cheater.

This may seem expensive but relistacly it would only be around $100 for unit. At a bulk rate the hand chronos would cost 50 add on a transmiter and you got it.

A league like NPPL would only need 100 of them
(70 actually 5 feilds 14 men per feild, but 30 incase someone drives into the ground with it)

The cost of this could easily by subsided by increasing the price for each event by as little as 20 per team.


The only flaw in this plan is favoritism and judges disregarding the data readouts. Maybe if the data was on a screen spectators could observe this would be completely eliminated. In addition ejecting all teams found to have a cheater board from tournaments.

[RRfireblade]

Hee Hee,


I just have to chuckle at some of these "solutions".


;)

[Miscue]

Originally posted by RRfireblade
Hee Hee,


I just have to chuckle at some of these "solutions".


;)

Agreed. They are not solutions at all. Too complicated, impractical, doesn't solve the problem because it can be circumvented.

[nuclear zombie]

It seems that electro's have become the latest scapegoat. I've seen many a people playing a scenario or rec ball with their A5-RT turned up to full auto. I've seen people with older RT-Automags with the on/off modified and input set to nearly 1000 psi so they would get enough bounce that it would be full auto.
The point ? It's not the rules it's the inability of the people who make the rules to enforce them. All pro-leagues in paintball are competing for one thing, money. If you change the rules of one league enough, especially rules limiting sponsorship e.g. paint, or gun value limits, you can decrease the amount of money flow from these events. If the teams don't like these rules then they can go to another pro-league, enough high level teams leave and your league loses it credit for being a pro-level competition.

The Fact: rules will never be able to be enforced until there is only one recognized pro-level league. Tournament paintball suffers from the same problem, who can be that years champion? When 3 teams are claiming the same title. The only way paintball can advance is to become unified, or start supporting the majority ( scenario/ rec-ballers ) a lot more.

[raehl]

First, needing to have a cheater board in the first place is, in and of itself, a victory. We don't want any idiot to be able to walk into wal-mart, put down $150, and walk out with a marker that shoots full-auto. So, if we've gotten to the point where the only place you find markers that do that is people cheating in top-level tournaments, the rules have already done much of their job.

This does, unfortunately, penalize the honest player in these leagues. The appropriate testing strategy is to have each board manufacturer certify that their boards are legal and submit a copy of the machine code on the board to the league, or a governing body. Not sure if a marker is legal? Open it up, download the software, and if it doesn't match a submitted, approved version, you penalize the crap out of the player with the marker. Equipment to do this is not prohibitively expensive, and you don't need "tamper-resistent" anything - you just pull the gun off the field and test it. You would probably couple this with a system where any opponent can pony up X amount of cash or points to have their opponent's marker tested (used in other sports) to keep testing reasonable. If you make the penalties severe enough, the vast majority of people won't do it.

And as much as you may not like the ASTM standards, they *ARE* important. One of these days, someone is going to get shot up by a marker that has "pushed" the standard and the manufacturer of that board will be sued, and they will lose, and they will lose a lot of money. The rules not only protect the players, they also protect the leagues. (Incidentally, I hope AGD is doing something about that 3.2 sofware that allows full auto fire on some markers, as that's a liability issue.)

Remember, insurance is generally based on the equipment used meeting ASTM standards.


- Chris

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by Miscue
Ok, now what prevents you from sending this standardized chip false inputs? Are you going to inspect my switch? Are you going to trace my board to see what line goes to what pin?

Actually, yes. After the event the winning markers are impounded and inspected to see that the boards are approved boards and that neither the chips nor the boards have been tampered with.

A tampered chip or illegal board on the winning team equals elimination from the tournament and the next team winning the prize.

As far a saying electros are the latest scapegoat and you can cheat with mechanical markers, well I say hogwash. The only reason you can cheat with mechanical marker is because of ineffective chronograph procedures and inept or ineffective refs/judges.

[truss]

its this simple, if you dont like how the game is being played then dont play it.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by truss
its this simple, if you dont like how the game is being played then dont play it.

So if people wipe, and cuss, and start getting into physical fights we should just walk away if we don't like it?:rolleyes:

Get real. Lowlife scumball cheaters should be driven out of any sport/game you play. Or at least you should give it your best effort to do so before quitting.

If "how the game is being played" includes accepting jerks who are too chicken to have a fair competition and those jerks outnumber the decent players then I won't play.

Some people would like to see the game develop and remain (or perhaps become) respectable. You truss, obviously do not.

[BarryTolar]

Ok let's just "assume" that ALL your manufs agreed to a standard PIC and also agreed to a standard Pin Addressing and a standard code to drive their boards.

Anyone know what a JTAG is ? I swear I saw a header on a Eblade last night.

Assuming that all the above assumptions are true the only way to keep people from cheating is make sure they don't tamper with the memory on the board. Hehe good luck with that one. Yeah you can make PICs read only. Yeah you can CRC the code in the PIC. Doesn't matter there are still ways around this (very easily too I might add).

Sure it's unfair but then again they caught THIS board didn't they ? Some procedure that's in place must have worked.

Barry

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by BarryTolar
Sure it's unfair but then again they caught THIS board didn't they ? Some procedure that's in place must have worked.

But there is nothing in place, the 'found' board was discovered outside of a tournament, and noone has suffered any concequences. People continue to hide the name of the person that was on the board. And in the highly unlikely event that anyone in the paintball industry investigated or tried to impose sanctions, the person to whom the board belonged could simply claim that the board was reprogrammed after the tournament and never used in a competition.

So in other words, NOTHING worked and NOTHING is in place. :mad:

Until something is in place, I couldn't care less about big tournament standings. In fact, I'm much more inclined to buy products from companies that DON'T sponsor big name teams because I know less money is being sent to (aledgedly) cheating scumbags.

[FriedRicE2]

The quickest and most simple idea is just to make new mech tournies. Can't change to tounrneys now to mech because electro marker designers, and owners won't stand for that.

Heh if all tournies were only mech... Smart Parts would just give up enforcing its patents because nobody makes lare numbers of electros anymore, also they would have to retool their company, WGP would go crazy over how many fockers would show up from smaller comanies and have to deal with that somehow, and lastly ULE automag parts, x-valve, and lvl 10 upgrade sales would fly though the roof. (But all this would never happen)

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by FriedRicE2
The quickest and most simple idea is just to make new mech tournies. Can't change to tounrneys now to mech because electro marker designers, and owners won't stand for that.

How about handicapping various marker types and then having open-class tournaments.

For every mech, pump, or stock class marker fielded by a team the team gets bonus points. Start out with a guess, then use game statistics to adjust the handicap.

As far as simply having mech tournaments, nothing is stopping anyone from trying. Have to start at a grass-roots level before the big tournaments take notice. Or, a mechanical only marker manufacturer has to step up as a sponsor.

[raehl]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
How about handicapping various marker types and then having open-class tournaments.

Sure, you could do that, but would anyone sign up to play?

- Chris

[FriedRicE2]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
For every mech, pump, or stock class marker fielded by a team the team gets bonus points. Start out with a guess, then use game statistics to adjust the handicap.

Thats a really neat idea, using a points system to compensate. Balacing the point system, and corrdinating an event using this is gonna be tricky though. I think it would be fun to see the tactics people use for playing with pumps vs. someone with a semi gun. :D

I would sign-up to play the first day to help balance the system. Plus i think this adds more stragety to the game. People are gonna want to play with an advantage in points so they are gonna have to come up with some pretty intereseting stratagies to conquer the faster guns.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by FriedRicE2
Thats a really neat idea, using a points system to compensate. Balacing the point system, and corrdinating an event using this is gonna be tricky though.
Well, they handle handicaps in bowling.
And you're right. I'd love to see the tactics used. It would be really interesting to see how teams adapted game to game if the statistics changed the balance of points based on what markers were used.
What would be really difficult is dealing with mixed teams. If the hanicap is well established/unmoving it would be easy. But if the handicap is dynamic it would be very difficult to come up with the right formula to attribute point averages to then calculate the handicap variation.

[nuclear zombie]

There is only one way to get the kind of "control" you want over players. The guns are not owned by the people playing , everybody gets the exact same stock marker, no modifications, no upgrades , preprogrammed and they get it a couple of minutes before the tournamnet so they can fill it with paint, much like the IROC of paintball.

You can blame electronics all you want , people will find a way to cheat with mechanical markers.

[hardr0ck68]

i wpuld play a tourny series that was mech only... and if their was such a series then i would hope they use an electro magnet or something of the sorts to completely frag up anyone tryin to hide an electro...but yeah i dont know if that will ever happed

[truss]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast


So if people wipe, and cuss, and start getting into physical fights we should just walk away if we don't like it?:rolleyes:

Get real. Lowlife scumball cheaters should be driven out of any sport/game you play. Or at least you should give it your best effort to do so before quitting.

If "how the game is being played" includes accepting jerks who are too chicken to have a fair competition and those jerks outnumber the decent players then I won't play.

Some people would like to see the game develop and remain (or perhaps become) respectable. You truss, obviously do not.

first off dont ever tell me what i obviously do and do not do.you dont know me.all i am saying is if you dont like playing against people with faster guns dont play against them.why does everybody want to limit these markers?i still dont understand.plus to get the computers on the feilds and extra people to run them would be a ton of cash.jacking tourny and paint prices at the tournies up even higher everybody is quik to complain when its something they dont like,but i bet not one of you have went to your local feild owner and talked to him about having stock gun,semi only or pump tourny?or maybe even starting your only local clubs.i enjoy playing a faster paced game.i have played many sports not just paintball and have come to one conculsion cheaters are everywhere and it sucks but its something i have learned to deal with(doesnt mean i dont bonus ball people i catch wiping,yes even people on my own team).all you can do is enjoy yourself and remember its a game.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by nuclear zombie
There is only one way to get the kind of "control" you want over players. The guns are not owned by the people playing , everybody gets the exact same stock marker, no modifications, no upgrades , preprogrammed and they get it a couple of minutes before the tournamnet so they can fill it with paint, much like the IROC of paintball.
And people thought standard chips would be expensive. :D

You can blame electronics all you want , people will find a way to cheat with mechanical markers.
Yes people can cheat with mechanical markers. But you can test mechanical markers with a large degree of certainty. Standard chronograph procedures, and knowledgable judges and refs stand a very good chance to catch mechanical cheaters.
Unfortunately a large portion of the tournamant paintball scence is controlled by inexact chronograph/test procedures, judges and refs untrained in detecting illegally modified guns, and a generalised lack of will to enforce sanctions and penalties.
What sets electronics apart from mechanical markers is that it is quite simple to make virtually impossible to detect cheats. Simple codes (say firing the gun three times immediately after power-on, or firing a certain combination of strings, of fidling with the on/off switch in a certain way, or...) can cause the gun to be full-auto, have an auto-response trigger, fire for all possible trigger bounces, adjust ball velocity, increase bps (if there was a bps limit), etc. Any other code or simple inaction could return the marker to ‘legal’ setttings.
If tournamanets were to accept FA, and there was a bps cap. The only way to enforce it would be continuous monitoring of all players or someway to measure bps and fps remotely without alerting the player being checked. (I’ve been looking on the net at 3D laser velocimeters, but don’t know how applicable anything like that could be.)

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by truss
first off dont ever tell me what i obviously do and do not do.you dont know me.all i am saying is if you dont like playing against people with faster guns dont play against them.
Perhaps you need to read the thread with a little more care then. There has been no complaint against faster guns. The limits discussed are to try and limit cheating. Not slow the game down. While limits on FA bps for safety reasons has been raised, that is a secondary issue.
Taken in light of the whole point of the thread (to limit cheating) your post saying “like it or lump it” can only be interpreted as a support for cheating. If it isn’t then I for one am glad. Too many immature twits seem to pop up in the anti-wiping threads trying to justify their loose moral code.
Considering paintball tournaments are pretty much on the level of “do anything you can get away with”, there are really only two options. Firstly to crackdown on the enforcement of the rules and increase surveillance. Or, secondly to relax the rules and open them up to a point where they are enforceable (allow FA).

PS: Please do capitalise and punctuate. You’d make much more sense if you did.

[Branchvillian]

With all of the programing knowledge around today, even if the refs checked the boards on a computer, whose to say that that programming is falseified, and doesn't show what's actually happening on the board. If people will go so far as to make these boards for the sole purpose of cheating, that should show you right there that there not going to stop if they don't have to, which they really don't.

[raehl]

Originally posted by Branchvillian
With all of the programing knowledge around today, even if the refs checked the boards on a computer, whose to say that that programming is falseified, and doesn't show what's actually happening on the board. If people will go so far as to make these boards for the sole purpose of cheating, that should show you right there that there not going to stop if they don't have to, which they really don't.

Commodity microcontrollers are cheap, but they all (well, any particular model) behave the same way. What makes it easy to cheat with a commodity microcontroller is that you can easily reprogram them - but it's just as easy to read the programming back and see if it matches approved software.

Now, could you have a chip that looks like a commodity microcontroller and runs one program but gives a different program when you try to read it?

Sure - but, that would be a special, limited run chip, which defeats the whole point of a comodity microcontroller - the special chip would be prohibitively expensive. Additionally, in order for your ruse to work, you'd have to disguise your chip as one of the real ones, which gets you into not ony tournament rules problems if caught, but also all sorts of trademark violation problems. Making something and passing it off as something made by someone else is just asking for a nice, nasty lawsuit.


Just because we may not be able to come up with a perfect solution doesn't mean we shouldn't use very good solutions. If our very good solutions can force 99% of people to play fair, it becomes that much easier to find and deal with cheaters, and players will have a much lower motivation to cheat themselves if they believe the vast majority of their competition is not cheating.

If you don't put in any controls at all, you'll just have the half of the players who are cheating, and the other half of the players who want to be able to cheat too because they don't think it's fair that their opponents are allowed to have an advantage. (And they're right, it isn't.)


- Chris

[FallNAngel]

Which is why I said each board could be flashed before each game. That would ensure the programming was correct. After the tournament, markers from the winners could be taken and examined by a 3rd party as someone else suggested.

[hitech]

Originally posted by raehl
Just because we may not be able to come up with a perfect solution doesn't mean we shouldn't use very good solutions.

I agree, but… (there is always a but, isn’t there ;) ). I had the same idea of only allowing certified markers from certified manufactures and downloading and comparing the code. However, after thinking about it for a while, I could EASILY make a cheater “board”. Basically, it would be an additional board hidden in the marker that “enhanced” operation. If I can think of it and am capable of building it myself, so are others. Now, that doesn’t mean that it still isn’t an idea that should be implemented. It should. However, it would only be PART of the solution.

I’m beginning to understand why F1 had so much trouble trying to build a system to catch “cheaters”.

[speedyejl]

Personally I think the solution I mentioned would be the most effective. (of course I think so ha)

Its:
Modular
Universal
Takes no time to tighten it on the end of barrels
Cheap to implement
Untamperable since players only have it for the duration of the game
Adds yet another specator aspect to the game


In fact I believe the NXL has wireless chronoies which transmit the speed to the scoreboard, so the technology is more than here.

[hitech]

Originally posted by speedyejl
Personally I think the solution I mentioned would be the most effective. (of course I think so ha)

Modular – Yes, this is true
Universal – Sort of, see below
Takes no time to tighten it on the end of barrels – All barrels do not have the same OD.
Cheap to implement – I guess it depends on your definition of cheap.
Untamperable since players only have it for the duration of the game – Not untamperable, just more difficult.

It wouldn’t be inexpensive. How expensive would a chrono be that can accurately determine BPS up to 30 or so? Is light enough to not make the marker front heavy? Fit well enough to not fall off varying size barrels, but also not interfere with the paintballs trajectory? Also, it can’t be a radar chrono. It’s going to have to use another method.

The biggest problem however, is what are you going to use as the criteria to define cheating? As soon as you define it the cheater software does something different. Rely on a person? Then it becomes subjective again.

It’s harder than it first appears. ;)

[speedyejl]

This is one of those things where people can argue back and forth slightly modifing what they said or thinking of new ideas.

It would have basicaly a clamp composed of two arcs with rubber padding to make sure it doesnt marr the barrel and stays on. It would easily fit every barrel on the market, unless someone decides to play with a M98 that has a silencer on it, don't think we will be seeing that in PSP or NPPL any time soon.

Look up at my first post on this, explains mostly the questions you asked. As far as the chronos operation I assume a doppler radar chrono like the handheld ones would be suffeceitnt. They are advertised at +/-6 which is good enough for someone to notice an increase in velocity high enough to be harmful.

[hitech]

Originally posted by speedyejl
It would have basically a clamp composed of two arcs with rubber padding to make sure it doesn’t mar the barrel and stays on.

It seems to me like that would be BIG. It would make to large of a target to get players to agree to. Yes, I know it’s the same for everyone, but that doesn’t mean players will agree to it. Also, if it’s big us warp users are going to cry the loudest. ;)


Originally posted by speedyejl
As far as the chronos operation I assume a doppler radar chrono like the handheld ones would be sufficient.

You couldn’t use radar. They would interfere with each other and not work. Also, as far as I know none of the handhelds will measure BPS.


Originally posted by speedyejl
They are advertised at +/-6 which is good enough for someone to notice an increase in velocity high enough to be harmful.

Is rising velocity the only thing you are trying to detect. Exceeding one shot per pull is also a big issue.

[truss]

Originally posted by hitech

You couldnt use radar. They would interfere with each other and not work. Also, as far as I know none of the handhelds will measure BPS.


you could use radar but you would have to use different freqs. on all of them, or maybe a frequency adjile radar.i think it would be wa to bulky on the front of your gun either way.

[hitech]

Originally posted by truss
You could use radar but you would have to use different freqs. on all of them...

Maybe I'm missing something, but as I understand doppler radar it detects a freq. shift. That means it needs a freq range to operate in. You also have the problem of the radar waves affecting other chrono’s waves and shifting them. Then there is the small problem of all those objects flying around the field shifting everyone waves… ;)

[truss]

Originally posted by hitech


Maybe I'm missing something, but as I understand doppler radar it detects a freq. shift. That means it needs a freq range to operate in. You also have the problem of the radar waves affecting other chronos waves and shifting them. Then there is the small problem of all those objects flying around the field shifting everyone waves;)

no it wouldnt be a problem with a freq adjile radar because they only recieve the freq they send out for a very short time.all other freq's are disregarded.this wouldnt be a dopple radar but more like a military radar.

[speedyejl]

The clamp would be as large as it needs to be to fit over most barrels which is extremely small. The instrument package would be smaller than your fist, possibly comparable to two handheld chronos lined up.

The radars wouldn't interfere with each other. They emit a very low energy wave because it only needs to travel at the most a foot or two to reach the paintball. Stray waves wouldn't be strong enough to even interfere with another device 3 feet away. (I've done exit shots simultanesously with a person next to me, no issuses)

Counting BPS? It wouldn't be hard at all to beef up the sofware just a tiny bit to calculate the equations needed. The doppler effect is an extremely simple process and it can easily be kept under 10ms which would be 100bps.

Also FPS increases are more important to look for since they actually pose a more serious danger. More than one shot per pull would be easy to detect since if the time between shots would most likely be identical and be a round number. Or if two shots were 50ms apart (20bps) something would sound fishy.

[Miscue]

/me does not understand the point of having this barrel gadget. This does not solve the ability to send false inputs to the chip's input line.

I think a lot of people are talking out of their hind quarters. :p

[truss]

it would completely bypass anything anybody would beable to do to a chip.it would give actual readings of how fast and how many bps its shooting.but i think it would be to bulky still.i was just tossing a idea out there that might work.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by truss
it would completely bypass anything anybody would beable to do to a chip.it would give actual readings of how fast and how many bps its shooting.but i think it would be to bulky still.i was just tossing a idea out there that might work.

Yes, but what does this have to do with the prevention of cheating? This does not establish a correlation between trigger pulls and bps.

[truss]

it whould give you a bps and fps reading.i think it would help with cheating in tournments.say somebody increases 20fps in a game or say they are shooting 25bps.you would know something was kinda fishy there.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by truss
it whould give you a bps and fps reading.i think it would help with cheating in tournments.say somebody increases 20fps in a game or say they are shooting 25bps.you would know something was kinda fishy there.

How do you know that they are actually shooting 20bps, but it hits 25bps? You've measured the bps that the gun is shooting, you've yet to record legitimate trigger pulls for comparison.

[speedyejl]

Obviously it doesn't since it doesn't replace the electronics. Its a deterent for players to NOT have cheating boards. Since players can do anything from using magnets in their gloves to activate the "cheat mode" the only way to test guns would to be to moinitor them during the game.

The penalties for this would be worse than getting a hot shot, their guns would be ejected from the tournament as is the case for current illegal markers and possibly them to.

With such an effective deterent as this barrel device no ones going to try to cross the line, and if they do theres a high chance if not certainty they would get caught.

Now for your last point Miscuse as I said earlier if they were shooting fast thanks to a turbo mode or bounce the time between shots would be indentical which would be pretty easy to notice on a computer.

[hitech]

Originally posted by Miscue
Yes, but what does this have to do with the prevention of cheating? This does not establish a correlation between trigger pulls and bps.

Originally posted by hitech
The biggest problem however, is what are you going to use as the criteria to define cheating?

[Miscue]

Originally posted by speedyejl
Obviously it doesn't since it doesn't replace the electronics. Its a deterent for players to NOT have cheating boards. Since players can do anything from using magnets in their gloves to activate the "cheat mode" the only way to test guns would to be to moinitor them during the game.

The penalties for this would be worse than getting a hot shot, their guns would be ejected from the tournament as is the case for current illegal markers and possibly them to.

With such an effective deterent as this barrel device no ones going to try to cross the line, and if they do theres a high chance if not certainty they would get caught.

Now for your last point Miscuse as I said earlier if they were shooting fast thanks to a turbo mode or bounce the time between shots would be indentical which would be pretty easy to notice on a computer.

???

¡Aye Caramba!

This DOESN'T work!!!

The CPU has NO way of knowing if what input it receives is legit or not, unless it has psychic abilities. The CPU will work as designed, but false inputs can be sent! Your barrel gadget... Gee, I know how fast the gun is shooting... how fast is he pulling the trigger? Barrel gadget doesn't know. None of this works.

Why would time between shots be identical?

[zaqwert6]

I got it, fool proof.....

I think every player should have an on board data acquisition system which records actual trigger pulls,shots fired and FPS and then sends them through a helmet mounted sat/com transmitter to sideline terminals monitored by a group of refs,1 for each player on the field,who can read the data in real time and determine any unlawful activity.Then if any is found he could "simply" enter a disable command back through the sat/com network shuting down the offending players marker and activate the red flashing strobe,also helmet mounted,notifying all in the proximity of the offense.

Simple.;)

Jay.

@Trademark/PatPend.

Oops, that's my bro's login. (RRFireblade)

[Miscue]

Originally posted by zaqwert6
I got it, fool proof.....

I think every player should have an on board data acquisition system which records actual trigger pulls...

HOW? The CPU has NO way of knowing if the input it receives has any correlation with a trigger being pulled one time. All it sees is that the line has gone high, or gone low. It has no idea what caused it.

[hitech]

Originally posted by speedyejl
The clamp would be as large as it needs to be to fit over most barrels which is extremely small. The instrument package would be smaller than your fist, possibly comparable to two handheld chronos lined up.

That would be HUGE. Anything that is more than three inches in diameter is NOT going to be acceptable. I’m sure there are those that wouldn’t find three inches acceptable.


Originally posted by speedyejl
The radars wouldn't interfere with each other. They emit a very low energy wave… (I've done exit shots simultaneously with a person next to me, no issues)

I’d like to see it work with two pointed roughly at each other 10 feet apart. I question whether it will work, and work reliably. But I guess it might.


Originally posted by speedyejl
Counting BPS? It wouldn't be hard at all to beef up the software just a tiny bit to calculate the equations needed.

I would think if it were that easy, the current handheld ones would. They would sell much better if they did.

Also, the cost isn’t the same as a mass-produced unit like the handheld radar chrony. These would be a VERY limited unit. The cost per unit would be MUCH greater.

[hitech]

Originally posted by Miscue
HOW?...

I don't think he was serious. ;)

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by Miscue


HOW? The CPU has NO way of knowing if the input it receives has any correlation with a trigger being pulled one time. All it sees is that the line has gone high, or gone low. It has no idea what caused it.

Obviously the Data/Acq would have it's own trigger sensor.

Are you trying to make this complicated?;)


Jay

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by hitech


I don't think he was serious. ;)


I can't believe most of these posts are "serious". ;)

[Sir_Brass]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
Well, it's been raised that at least one cheater board has surfaced. I figure that the fact it's a WAS board is only coincidence. As I've said in other threads, it's so easy to reprogram or modify a microcontroller controlled board it's rediculous. All you need is a little patience to set yourself up with the required knowledge and equipemnt and the motivation to learn.

How can paintball tournaments stop and detect cheater boards? Considering factory teams are as likely to cheat as the next guys, requiring factory only boards isn't going to help. The factory just needs to produce some special boards for the tournament.

Testing is virtually imposible as well. After all, any number of secret codes could be employed to enable and disable the cheat modes.

The way I see it there's only one way to do it. Electronic markers need to be built with removable chips that can be replaced by tournament supervisors and identified with anti-tamper devices.

Additionally, source code would need to be released to a governing body that would analyse it to ensure it was legal and didn't hide any dubious functionality.

To ensure approved software is used, the guns would have to use a limited number of microprocessors. Blank chips could then be kept and flashed for the make and model of gun before being inserted and made tamper-proof.


trust a guy who's taken a semester of microprocessors: unless you have the pro-grade software, and a chip programmer, it is NOT easy to reprogram a micro. Especially if you're using something like a 20-pin 8051. You have to use software which costs alot, is not found on the bootleg market, and is only used by professionals or educational institutions. Also, you have to have knowledge not only of how to program, but how to program that specific processor for that specific board. There's alot that goes into the programming that is dependant upon board design and construction.

If someone goes to the length to reprogram the chip, then it'll be obvious in their playing skills b/c they'll have spent so much time trying to reprogram the thing, that they will not have had time to practice.

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by Miscue


HOW? The CPU has NO way of knowing if the input it receives has any correlation with a trigger being pulled one time. All it sees is that the line has gone high, or gone low. It has no idea what caused it.

Well at least you didn't have a problem with the helmet mounted Sat/Com/Strobe system.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by RRfireblade


Obviously the Data/Acq would have it's own trigger sensor.

Are you trying to make this complicated?;)


Jay

Switch -> Data/Acq -> CPU... (or similar)

ok, how about this:

(Method of sending false inputs) -> Data/Acq -> CPU

How does the Data/Acq know that what it is counting is legit?

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass



trust a guy who's taken a semester of microprocessors: unless you have the pro-grade software, and a chip programmer, it is NOT easy to reprogram a micro. Especially if you're using something like a 20-pin 8051. You have to use software which costs alot, is not found on the bootleg market, and is only used by professionals or educational institutions. Also, you have to have knowledge not only of how to program, but how to program that specific processor for that specific board. There's alot that goes into the programming that is dependant upon board design and construction.

If someone goes to the length to reprogram the chip, then it'll be obvious in their playing skills b/c they'll have spent so much time trying to reprogram the thing, that they will not have had time to practice.

It must be pretty easy,Miscue can do it.:D

(He has no sense humour today for some reason)

Jay.

[RRfireblade]

Originally posted by Miscue


Switch -> Data/Acq -> CPU... (or similar)

ok, how about this:

(Method of sending false inputs) -> Data/Acq -> CPU

How does the Data/Acq know that what it is counting is legit?

Accelerometer mounted directly to the trigger. Ha.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass



trust a guy who's taken a semester of microprocessors: unless you have the pro-grade software, and a chip programmer, it is NOT easy to reprogram a micro. Especially if you're using something like a 20-pin 8051. You have to use software which costs alot, is not found on the bootleg market, and is only used by professionals or educational institutions. Also, you have to have knowledge not only of how to program, but how to program that specific processor for that specific board. There's alot that goes into the programming that is dependant upon board design and construction.

If someone goes to the length to reprogram the chip, then it'll be obvious in their playing skills b/c they'll have spent so much time trying to reprogram the thing, that they will not have had time to practice.

You don't NEED to reprogram anything. You can have a chip that works perfectly legit. It receives one input, it shoots once. Send two inputs... two shots. Now, what caused those inputs? The CPU doesn't know.

[Sir_Brass]

easy fix (from an EE major's standpoint). Require all boards to have a microswitch monitor and cheater circuitry. This would be required of all tourney-legal boards. yeah, a cheater could disable it, but it will act as a deterent, and the code can be built into the chip itself to help prevent tampering. This counts inputs from the trigger's switch. Compare to the number of "shoot" signals sent to the solenoid. You monitor those end lines, the places where things cannot be masked because they are our direct input and output points (trigger switch and line to the solenoid). If the two inputs do NOT match up (one trigger pull produces more than one pulse on the output line) then the board shuts down and a factory code must be entered to reactivate the gun. Mr. Cheater will have been caught.


I can draw up a diagram of the hardware design and software code (will be in C for simplicity's sake). The monitor would be passive until multiple shots per trigger pull (and board NOT on select fire) are detected. The monitoring code being in the chip itself and also making it so that unless it is recieving info that the board will NOT fire, will deter most would-be cheaters.

[hitech]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass
trust a guy who's taken a semester of microprocessors: unless you have the pro-grade software, and a chip programmer, it is NOT easy to reprogram a micro.

I could do it with only a few hundred dollars. I do write business application software for a living, but so do lots of people. It just isn't very hard.

[hitech]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass
Require all boards to have a microswitch monitor and cheater circuitry...I can draw up a diagram of the hardware design and software code (will be in C for simplicity's sake).

Sounds easy to get around to me. Maybe a simple diagram of what you are talking about would help.

[nuclear zombie]

Hey why don't we use satellites to track the trajectory of each paintball shot during the game.:rolleyes:

I assume you are calling cheaterboards , the ones that allow you to modify the denounce/offset. Most of the time changed through the trigger, to allow the debounce to be adjusted after chrono. If I recall correctly NPPL refs are allowed at any time, even during gameplay to test a players gun for trigger bounce and pull them if neccessary.

Instead of dumping all of that money into chrono's ,pay to train refs and provide them with an income so they care about enforcing those rules. If you want to get spectators more into the game buy video cameras and tvs so that people can get better views of the field.

[hitech]

Originally posted by nuclear zombie
I assume you are calling cheaterboards , the ones that allow you to modify the denounce/offset.

That would be a cheater board. However, it’s not the only type of cheater board…


Originally posted by hitech
...I could EASILY make a cheater "board". Basically, it would be an additional board hidden in the marker that "enhanced" operation.

[nuclear zombie]

but even with an additional enhanced board , what is stopping the ref from grabbing the gun from the player mid-game and shooting a couple of times to test it for cheating. I know many refs won't do this unless they are very suspicious of a person cheating as it could disturb the game.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass
easy fix (from an EE major's standpoint). Require all boards to have a microswitch monitor and cheater circuitry. This would be required of all tourney-legal boards. yeah, a cheater could disable it, but it will act as a deterent, and the code can be built into the chip itself to help prevent tampering. This counts inputs from the trigger's switch. Compare to the number of "shoot" signals sent to the solenoid. You monitor those end lines, the places where things cannot be masked because they are our direct input and output points (trigger switch and line to the solenoid). If the two inputs do NOT match up (one trigger pull produces more than one pulse on the output line) then the board shuts down and a factory code must be entered to reactivate the gun. Mr. Cheater will have been caught.


I can draw up a diagram of the hardware design and software code (will be in C for simplicity's sake). The monitor would be passive until multiple shots per trigger pull (and board NOT on select fire) are detected. The monitoring code being in the chip itself and also making it so that unless it is recieving info that the board will NOT fire, will deter most would-be cheaters.

If you supposedly have this standardized pop-in chip, it is completely pointless to compare the trigger inputs to the solenoid outputs... you already know that the code is fair and will only shoot once/trigger pull.

And... this standardized chip idea is impractical in the first place and won't ever happen. It is an expensive, time consuming approach that can be circumvented.

Code monitoring is completely pointless, because the CPU is fair to begin with. It's like a person who can only tell truths, keeps a log book of how many lies he says... pointless.

The problem is not the CPU, but what happens outside of the CPU that it cannot control. The CPU has no awareness of its outside environment beyond it's I/O lines and such.

If you have an inline oscillator between switch and CPU, a "special" switch, have another hidden microcontroller that taps into the fair CPU's input line, a method to put noise into the input line, or whatever creative thing that can be come up with... the fair CPU will be oblivious to this. Your input counts will match your outputs, and the monitoring routines will be be happily clueless.

You can circumvent this fair chip in such a way, that it would require disassembly of the gun... board needing to be dismounted... lines traced... etc. The person inspecting the gun will have no idea what to look for, and won't have the time to anyway... and this person may need to be very good with electronics, typical ref won't have a clue.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by RRfireblade


It must be pretty easy,Miscue can do it.:D

(He has no sense humour today for some reason)

Jay.

Always do! I am in the middle of working on something, and wasn't paying complete attention to what was written. :p

How hard is it... it is easy for the small population that is capable of doing it - it is merely an issue of how much time is involved. For the rest, difficult to impossible.

[argnot]

Wow. This is a great post but you missed it....... everyone is going on about limiting this and that and making this legal illegal and saftey. My thoughts on this are that you are never going to be able to standardize the industry. You could put an all out ban pn electro guns but the what is the difference between a chip mod and a trigger job....... You can make a trigger pull go from 1/4' to 1/32. You play with the enough and you will have the edge. Alot of tournament players use electro guns for thier antichop properties. I have a buddy the can rip 13bps on his cocker with a slider. Not fanning it but shooting it almost like a normal gun. Sure he chops every once in a blue moon but I am sure he would not mind having a little unblinking eye watching out for him. I know I would. So why not combine the antichop abilities of electro guns and a standard trigger pull that we can all except. I don't really see how that would be unfair or hard to do. I am not saying for all guns to be the same but for the tournament to say your tigger pull must be x. I think that limiting paint on the field is a great idea. I dont know to what but I think it should be looked into.

[raehl]

Disconnect the battery.


:)

- Chris

[Sir_Brass]

actually, upon thinking about this, it wouldn't require another chip, only two more input lines into the main chip itself, that way bypassing it is not too easy.

What you do is have code that is passive, and is encoded into an external interrupt that's activated whenever the trigger is pulled. When the switch is activated the trigger detect line goes high, and the passive code notes this. It also notes how many pulses the solenoid recieves. If the number of pulses sent to the solenoid are > 1 during that one trigger pull, then the code goes from passive (does nothing but monitor) and sets a bit high that will shut off the firing capability (firing sequence is surrounded by a statement which checks for this bit to be low). A hardware reset will be required to change this bit to low, and for the gun to be able to shoot again. Also, till this bit is reset (by way of a hardware switch inside the gripframe. you'd have to take off the grips to get to it), the LCD will be displaying only "cheater board watchdog activated." that way the guy can't just say to the ref, "sorry, ref, it just started doing this. I wasn't doing anything" and get away scott free, except a trip to the deadbox b/c he was bunkered.

Since this is embedded into the code of the main chip itself, you can't just swap out a chip.

better yet, do this in something like a PSoC chip, so that software or KNOWLEDGE of how to use the software or even program the chip is limited. B/c Cypress likes to have their micros coded in VHDL, and not many people these days are coming out of college knowing VHDL, let alone mr. John Paintball CHeater.

[SlartyBartFast]

Wow, this discussion took off. Ignoring the less than serious “suggestions”:


Originally posted by Miscue
How do you know that they are actually shooting 20bps, but it hits 25bps? You've measured the bps that the gun is shooting, you've yet to record legitimate trigger pulls for comparison.

I’d have to agree. Any on gun monitoring would have to follow the adoption of rules allowing FA.


Originally posted by nuclear zombie
but even with an additional enhanced board, what is stopping the ref from grabbing the gun from the player mid-game and shooting a couple of times to test it for cheating. I know many refs won't do this unless they are very suspicious of a person cheating as it could disturb the game.

The same thing that’s stopping them now. Any ref, allowed or not, who interferes with the game to the extent of grabbing a marker out of a player’s hands is likely to get his skull beat in.

If refs and judges are so poorly trained in performing tests on guns at the chronograph they can’t detect many of the problems and enforce rules, what makes anyone think they could rule on a marker’s legality on field?


Originally posted by Miscue
If you supposedly have this standardized pop-in chip, it is completely pointless to compare the trigger inputs to the solenoid outputs... you already know that the code is fair and will only shoot once/trigger pull.
If you have an inline oscillator between switch and CPU, a "special" switch, have another hidden microcontroller that taps into the fair CPU's input line, a method to put noise into the input line, or whatever creative thing that can be come up with... the fair CPU will be oblivious to this.

I’m in perfect agreement. Trigger monitoring or requiring any standardised circuitry as some have suggested is however pointless. One point I had made in the ‘stock chip’ suggestion has been overlooked. The boards need to be pre-approved as well. We’re not dealing with multilayer boards with intricate circuitry here. Examination of the boards after a trouney win would easily uncover many of the other strategies that have been suggested to circumvent the code.

One piece of standarised circuitry that might be useful and would be easy to implement, would be
debounce circuitry with minimum values set in the rules.

[hitech]

Originally posted by Sir_Brass
What you do is have code that is passive, and is encoded into an external interrupt that's activated whenever the trigger is pulled. When the switch is activated the trigger detect line goes high, and the passive code notes this. It also notes how many pulses the solenoid recieves. If the number of pulses sent to the solenoid are > 1 during that one trigger pull, then the code goes from passive (does nothing but monitor) and sets a bit high that will shut off the firing capability...

My separate cheater board would efeat this easily. It would be undetectable by the "passive" code.

[hitech]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
Examination of the boards after a tourney win would easily uncover many of the other strategies that have been suggested to circumvent the code.


Who is going to do it? Besides, if you think you are going to win you just remove the evidence before the last game.


If I can come up with all these ideas, just think what someone who actualy wants to cheat in a tournament can come up with. :eek:

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by hitech
My separate cheater board would efeat this easily. It would be undetectable by the "passive" code.

And would be IMMEDIATELY visible and detectable once the grips were removed and someone with a modicum of intelligence bothered to look at the board.

[hitech]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast


And would be IMMEDIATELY visible and detectable once the grips were removed and someone with a modicum of intelligence bothered to look at the board.

Nope. You're assuming that it would be located in the grip frame and in plain site.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by hitech
Who is going to do it? Besides, if you think you are going to win you just remove the evidence before the last game.
If I can come up with all these ideas, just think what someone who actualy wants to cheat in a tournament can come up with. :eek:

Already beat you to it.:D

If you read back you'll see that I advocated that the guns be inspected before the tournament and afterwards for the winners.

Open it up, verify it matches approved layout, reprogram/install chip, seal with tamperproof seal.

Counterfitting boards or chips is an expensive proposition. Paintball doesn't pay enough to justify that level of cheating.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by hitech
Nope. You're assuming that it would be located in the grip frame and in plain site.

Doesn't matter where you put it. You'd have to conceal a modified mainboard, a connector, and wiring.

Yes, it will always be possible to get past rules. If you're motivated enough, IF you can spend the time money and effort to do it, and IF the benefit outweighs the possible concequences.

Same goes for car anti-theft devices. No matter how many thousands of dollars you spend on an alarm, someone, somewhere, can get away with you car in 30 seconds. Or failing that, they can dress up as traffic control and tow it away without anyone paying attention. Does that mean we should just all leave our cars unlocked with the keys in the ignition?:rolleyes:

[SlartyBartFast]

Another thing to consider is the "swiss cheese" approach to security. No one measure will stop all events/cheaters. The idea is not to build up one solid wall of regulation and testing, but to develop an interleaved system where the holes of one layer are blocked by another.

[RRfireblade]

I give you all an A for effort,and I understand how you feel about this issue but I just have to say one last time.None of these "solutions" are going to happen,period.Paintball is still WAY to grass roots and low tech with even the biggest Tournys being made up of a high percentage of volunteer and untrained workers.You don't have the level of testing that you are suggesting in most of the highest profile sports yet.Geez, Sammy Sosa made it on the field with a corked bat!Nascar teams getting caught for all kinds of stuff(almost always way after the fact),it's just not going to happen in paintball.You'd have to coordinate EVERY MANUFACTURER IN THE WORLD to get even close to a standardized software system,these same people who still can't agree to something as simple as a BPS cap!

If your going to have ANY effect at all,you'd have to come up with some testing completely independant of the marker,would have to be manufactered so cheap as to be typically donated for use on a regular basis and so simple that any Ref could use it easily and precisely with out any training.Then you'd have to get PSP or NPPL or whoever to agree to impliment it as well as each Tourny head to agree that it's use is merited,not to mention any manufacturer that feels that such a device may be "unfair" on thier specific marker design and states so to the Tourny,because that's all that would take as well.

Until "cheater" boards are running wild and easily accessable,no one is going put any effort into this "testing" idea unless it's designed,financed,produced and distributed by a fully independant,outside source.

Sorry,but that's the fact.

Jay.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by RRfireblade
unless it's designed,financed,produced and distributed by a fully independant,outside source.

Well, it's all just waiting for the first lawsuit. As far as verifying the 'legality' of boards it should be handled to a large extent by the manufacturers. If a reprogrammed board is responsible, how much is the manufacturer going to be hit for when the tournamnet is celeared of responsibility because they can't test the gun and the manufacturer didn't take steps to avoid tampering.

Someone just needs to talk to the ASTM and the insurance industry and all of this could explode in the industry's face. We'd see rental only fields and even tournaments because insurance companies won't allow markers that can't be guarenteed to follow some strict minimum requirements.

The first injury resulting from a broken mask WILL immediately result in the manufacturers having a HUGE problem. They'll have to recall all markers sold since the ASTM decided on a limit AND come up with a way to guarentee that the limit can't be tampered with.

[raehl]

NPPL and PSP would both be amenable to spending a reasonable amount of money on a procedure to detect cheater boards, say a few thousand dollars on equipment and some staff to do spot checks.

So, maybe a better question would be:

"With $5,000 and three people per tournament, what procedures would you put in place to curb cheating?"

I'd invest in a device to read microcontollers and demand that board manufacturers submit their authorized code.


- Chris

[hitech]

Originally posted by raehl
"With $5,000 and three people per tournament, what procedures would you put in place to curb cheating?"


Compare downloaded code against manufactures certified code. You would show up ready to play with your download port available. Once certified your marker (and you) would be “held” in a “secure” area awaiting the game. You should chrono in here also. The only tools would be those supplied by a tournament official to reattach anything removed (i.e. grip panels) to gain access to the download port. It’s a good first step. And at least it would make cheating harder than reprogramming an existing board.

[cledford]

Why not tag the firmware with a checksum that is randomly created? Then not every marker even needs to be checked - but if one is pulled or random checks occur there is no way to put it back to where it was. Get caught with cheater software, get banned for life - and have the leagues ENFORCE it for real.

-Calvin

[lamby]

Hitech's therory is the only thing that I think is possible to eliminate the chip programming issue, but it still has holes.

You can run a morlock and still have the required components connected to the factory processor to get diagnastic information from it even if the chip is isolated from the circuit.

You can't use a check sum because there are viables (dwell, cops setting, max rof, debounce, intellifeed duration ect. that are user controlled.

Look at a company like Directv, they have a simple card that decodes and authorizes channels. These were easy to hack until they pulled all the old cards out of the system and released new cards that the average canadian could not hack.

What I am saying is:
1. make a chip that locked to the board via encripted serial number.
2. use chips that can only be programmed once (ePROMS)to feed a dedicated non-programmable processor like a 8088 persay.
3. Store user data and settings in a non-volital ram chip outside of the processor.
4. use a security tag to secure the chip to the socket with the manifactures code to verify it is legit.

if these are all done, you can easily verify the chip to the master reference for that software version.

the hard part is all chips would have to be programmed indepently and not in mass like current. Also blank ePROMS are more expensive than pics or atmels, and the programmers are much more expensive than a "data cable" that any monkey can wire from a 9 pin serial port n a computer. Upgrades would be much harder to achieve as only the company could do it. Programming will have to be done in the assembly mode, not in dos anymore so you will need to understand c or c++ because basic is out. (unless there is a complier for that eprom that supports basic.. I dought there are any)

The way to fix the problem is simple.. The manifactures have to WANT to fix it!! Software security is not that hard on a chip that does not need to be written to for any reason, and there is no intercompatibility issues!!

[hitech]

Originally posted by lamby
Hitech's theory is the only thing that I think is possible to eliminate the chip programming issue, but it still has holes.

Lots and lots of holes.


Originally posted by lamby
The manufactures have to WANT to fix it!!

And THAT is the reason it's not going to happen. The "manufactures" (as a whole, not singling anyone out) have to WANT to fix the problem. Tournament promoters have to WANT to fix it. PLAYERS have to WANT to fix it. Everyone has to REALLY want to fix the problem. NONE of these groups REALLY want to fix it. Hence, it's getting worse, not better.

[Spartan X]

How bought every one will have to be required to use a rental :) like a Gun provided by the field or just for the tourney. All the guns would perform the same, and only team strats would win.

[Sir_Brass]

What I am saying is:
1. make a chip that locked to the board via encripted serial number.
2. use chips that can only be programmed once (ePROMS)to feed a dedicated non-programmable processor like a 8088 persay.
3. Store user data and settings in a non-volital ram chip outside of the processor.
4. use a security tag to secure the chip to the socket with the manifactures code to verify it is legit.

An 8051 would be a cheaper alternative, simply because it's a standard in IC's, and is known by the vast majority of microprocessor programmers in the industry, so it would be better for the manufacturers to use something as solid as the 8051.

Now, I have a problem with "program only once" chips. Namely, what if software needs to be updated? Case in point: emag/xmag software. Though, maybe you're referring to chips that can only be programmed by a chip programmer, like with Atmel's chips (I have eperience working with their AT89c51 chip, which is their 8051 replica), and programming software such as SuperPro. Make it so that the tools required to reprogram are difficult if next to impossible for an ordinary guy to aquire. Make it hard for him to get the tools necessary, and the discouraging factor will rise.

If we design an anti-cheat, someone will design a better cheat if determined enough. What needs to be done is to make it hard enough so that most don't have the determination to crack the anti-cheat and it becomes easier to simply practice and get better as a player than to cheat.

[lamby]

I would use program once eproms inside a socket (I like the small PLCC sockets for this). I would use a fixed code processor to run the data from the eprom. Sorta like a write once bios for an old computer. The eprom code would have to match the circuit card code to make it work and secure though.

It dont matter much as no one will ever make them. It is just a way to fix the problem of cheater boards

[hitech]

Originally posted by lamby
It is just a way to fix the problem of cheater boards

But you still have the problem of "helper" cheater boards.

I'm beginning to understand F1's decision.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by hitech
But you still have the problem of "helper" cheater boards.

That's still a specious argument. How on Earth are you going to hide a "helper" board? :rolleyes:

[hitech]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
How on Earth are you going to hide a "helper" board? :rolleyes:

It depends on how much time I put into it. The board would be VERY small. In the eMag a simple place for it would be under the current board. It would require removing the stock board to find it. It could go in the battery housing. It could go in a warp and the controlling wires disguised as the warp intellilink. It could be in a board that looks like a cutoff switch. It could… you get the idea. And I haven’t even tried to think of a good place. That’s just off the top of my head without evening taking the eMag apart and looking. Just think what someone who really wanted to build one could come up with. ;)

[SlartyBartFast]

Sorry but the argument is still specious. While technically is sounds plausible, it’s exteemely improbable.

Originally posted by hitech
It depends on how much time I put into it.
Expensive and time consuming.

The board would be VERY small.
Expensive, time consuming, require specialised knowledge and equipment. At least far more than a downloadable programming assembler and a connection cable.

In the eMag a simple place for it would be under the current board. It would require removing the stock board to find it. It could go in the battery housing. It could go in a warp and the controlling wires disguised as the warp intellilink. It could be in a board that looks like a cutoff switch.
And if anybody with a single iota of knowledge is allowed to examine your marker and mark it with tamperproof marks before an event and if you win they impound it and have a really close look, you’ll never get away with it.
A “helper” board would require modification of a legal controller board. That modification alone would render the marker illegal. Unless the manufacturer cooperates and designs the main board to accept a “helper” board. At that point when discovered, the manufacturer’s equipemnt would be banned as none of it would be considered legal.
Sure, soemthing could be designed to simply contact some existing solder pads, but come on. A layer of conformal coating could cut that possibility out. And such an arangement would hardly be trustworthy in marker.
If you think such a “helper” board could actually be devised for a current setup, let’s hear specifics. What would it do, where in the existing circuit would it connect, and how would the connection be conceled?

[manike]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
Sorry but the argument is still specious. While technically is sounds plausible, it’s exteemely improbable.

Expensive and time consuming.

Boards are getting smaller and smaller, and thats for the complete control of a marker, let alone just a signal device to add extra inputs...

I just received a chaos board for the bushmaster, and I could hide that in many places on a gun that you would never easily find without taking the whole thing to pieces. It's around 3/4 of an inch square... I could hide that in the body of many guns if I wanted to. I could also make it very hard for you to see the wiring route, or disguise it/make a run off path from where the wiring normally goes.

The difficulty is if people want to cheat, I see no cost effective and acceptable means of being able to catch all cheats at the moment. A sad issue but very true.

[hitech]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
Sorry but the argument is still specious. While technically it sounds plausible, it’s extremely improbable.

Expensive, time consuming, require specialized knowledge and equipment. At least far more than a downloadable programming assembler and a connection cable.

No it would not. Just about everything you need to know was detailed in a warpig article on using a basic stamp to control a paintgun. For $100 you get almost everything you need.


Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
And if anybody with a single iota of knowledge is allowed to examine your marker and mark it with tamperproof marks before an event and if you win they impound it and have a really close look, you’ll never get away with it.

That is possible true. Assuming there was such a thing as a tamperproof mark/seal. However, that was not the situation I was referring to. Do you think there is ANY chance that the NPPL or PSP will somehow “seal” markers with tamper resistant marks and impound winning markers; and have electronics experts inspect them?


Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
A “helper” board would require modification of a legal controller board.

Nope.


Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
If you think such a “helper” board could actually be devised for a current setup, let’s hear specifics.

Okay, one simple example (that’s as much time as I have at the moment). This is the “hidden under the existing board” version. The helper board would be a basic stamp. It would be tapped into the trigger switch lines (I/O ports) from the bottom side of the existing board. It would detect the trigger pulls and at some preset event would do its thing. This could be as simple as adding a trigger pull for every X number it detects when the ROF is over a certain amount. X could be a table in the code so it’s pattern isn’t detectable.

Removing the grip panel, inspection from that vantage point and downloading the code from the existing board will NOT detect this.

[magman007]

Ok, no i havnt read the whole thread, and no i really dont care to. I perused the front page, where all the important points were made, and all i have to say is... WHO THE HELL REALLY CARES?

HAve you been cheated against? HAve you been cheated out of the win from a tournament? have you missed tons of prizes and cash oppertunities, because some kid with an electro, was bouncing his trigger at 18 bps with ease? Can you prove that he was?

Listen, the fact is, people can shoot 18 bps with or without bounce, dont say it is impossible, because it isnt. I could do it on my matrix, and no it wasnt bouncing... i hate bounce. it messes up my rhythem. Any body can rake at 18bps just as easily as the little kid with his was'ed out timmy can bounce his trigger. I think those who complain about Electros and cheatr boards and allt his crap need to get off their sticks, and look at the facts.

If you are getting continiously shot out by these people that are keeping a line on your bunker, and relentlessly pelting your bunker, then you need to learn how to play tighter.

If you are getting out because there is a relentless rain of paint on your bunker, and you feel you are at an unfair advantage because he has kept you in your bunker, then you need to learn how to snap shoot.

if you are getting shot out, and you can achieve the same, or close to the same ROF (face it, there isnt that much of a diference between 14(avg walking speed on an electro) and 18 bps) then the problem my friend, is in the player.

Is this person shooting at a higher velocity with his cheater board? then yea, there is a problem, a safty problem. but thats the only problem i can see with cheater boards.

if you feel some huge injustice is done do you, then maybe you need to re evaluate your playing skill, maybe the problem is with you. So you can stop havin this happen.

and you know what, if it is that big of a problem well i hate to say it... but if you cant beat em... Join em.


What im saying is that, these cheater boards arent giving that much of an advantage, it may seem like it is bit it really isnt. You should be able to play against some one with an angel, with a phantom. I know i can, and it helps on the tourny field. If you are having that much of a problem with high ROF then get outta the kitchen.

[puckmaster]

I havnt read the whole thread, but i dont see why companies dont do what WDP did with the ir3's, and put the board in a tamper evident casing?

everybody acts like it is really easy to bounce a timmy. It is when your focused on bouncing it, but in a game, you have more things going on that will break your consentration.(the other team shooting there 18 a second at you for example) The only way you can bounce, or sweetspot, is if your pretty focused on it.

[hitech]

Originally posted by magman007
…and all I have to say is... WHO THE HELL REALLY CARES?

I do. Why? Because I enjoy and intellectual debate. I enjoy debates about tournament rules. I care less about who is doing it and how much of an advantage it gives them. ;) Safety is also an issue I care about. The same techniques I outlined could be used to increase the velocity on markers that have an electronically controlled velocity.

BTW, Yes, I have had someone cheat against me and win a tournament that had a “large” cash award. But it wasn’t with an electronic marker. ;)

[magman007]

well you see puckmaster... no one cares about that tamper proof casing in the angel world. our hot new thing to do is ironically, throw out the board, and put in a WAS board, 9vt battery, and then throw on an ace system.... No one cares about voiding their warrenties any more...

[puckmaster]

i dont know how to take that. it sounds sarcastic, yet serious.

[magman007]

no that was serious... sorry for the way it was written. Im not one to use smilies, but that above statement was all serious

[billmi]

Originally posted by manike


The difficulty is if people want to cheat, I see no cost effective and acceptable means of being able to catch all cheats at the moment. A sad issue but very true.

The way to do it is not cost effective, but is conceivable.

Prior to game start a field monitor is clipped onto the barrel of the player's paintgun.

The field monitor has a pressure pad that attaches with double sided adhesive to the front surface of the trigger. The wire from the pad to the monitor is taped down the side of the receiver.

The monitor chronos *every* shot, and if it detects a hot shot, or a shot that was not initiated by an increase and decrease of pressure on the face of the trigger, it sounds an alarm that can only be reset by a ref's key.

That's not horribly practical, not inexpensive to develop, but literally the only way to catch what is possible with trick software - to monitor *every* shot taken on the field.

See you on the field,
-Bill Mills

[manike]

How do you calibrate the force the pressure pad takes to register a shot with the force the trigger switch takes to register a shot? What if there is a difference? Most pressure pads I have 'felt' seem to take more force to activate than my electro gun triggers. You would almost need a two stage switch with the first 'sensing stage' to definitely be lighter than the second 'firing stage'.

Such a device is something I have been thinking about for years, I even discussed the possibility with PGI a while back.

But then what happens if you only partly pull the first stage... how long are you allowed for the activation of the second stage? If you don't activate it, can you have that as a 'shot in the bag?' I know someone who proved how silly such a rule could be circumnavigated using a rainmaker and his own board... ;) :D But obviously there will be a time delay between activation of the pressure pad and the shot.

If you have to have a device that is fitted to every gun and calibrated to work with every gun you can bet the costs in skilled personel to fit and maintain these devices for an event would be expensive. Ultimately is the price to pay going to be worth it or footed by anyone that cares enough? Would the players accept it? I know I wouldn't want to have an extra pressure pad on the trigger of my gun and have to worry that it activates properly for every shot I fire...

[raehl]

You'd just give everyone the same marker that the league owned first - or maybe just require that everyone use the same marker or a very small number of approved markers.

- Chris

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by raehl
You'd just give everyone the same marker that the league owned first - or maybe just require that everyone use the same marker or a very small number of approved markers.

- Chris

That would be a huge investment. The tournament would have to purchase and maintain all the markers and backups required.

Something as simple as not allowing markers to be taken out of a specific area and requiring that they be worked in a specific area might be one step. That would also monitor mechanical cheats.

It's all just theorising until the manufacturers and leagues (and by extension the players) make it an issue.

[SlartyBartFast]

Originally posted by billmi
but literally the only way to catch what is possible with trick software - to monitor *every* shot taken on the field.

Have to say I agree with you on that point, but agree with Manike on the trigger sensing issue.

If you monitor fps and bps, does it matter how it's being produced?

[hitech]

Originally posted by SlartyBartFast
If you monitor fps and bps, does it matter how it's being produced?

That depends. Do you want to allow fullauto? If so, then no, it doesn't matter. If you do NOT want to allow fullauto, then sure it matters. If you are going to have a rule, it needs to be inforced.

[trains are bad]

For electros, I wish that the semi-only rule would be repealed. I'm all for a 13 bps full auto cap.

YAY! I thought I was the only one!

[845]

Limited paint would be dumb 2000 rounds a game for back players all the way.

[nicad]

go mechanical.. thats what I do.

1 pull, 1 shot.
1 shot, 1 kill. :)

[RRfireblade]

Utter useless sillyness.

(clicks "unsubscribe")

You all seem to have it figured out:rolleyes: ,I'll just read it about it when the '04-'05 moddified rules book comes out.

Enjoy,

Jay.

[billmi]

Originally posted by nicad
go mechanical.. thats what I do.

Consider...

The NXL is made up of its member teams, of those who's team owners manufacture paintguns, 100% manufacture electros.

The NPPL tournaments are run by a company that makes electronic paintguns and no mechanical models.

The of the companies that own PSP, out of those that make maintguns, 100% manufacture electros.

In every case, the team owners have in interest in promoting electronic paintguns over mechanical, and making sure they are viewed as "the best" and thus what consumers will want to buy.

See you on the field,
-Bill Mills

[fallout11]

Okay, back to the only idea that's actually do-able:

Just limit each player to a fixed amount of walk-on ammo. Period.
You can share with your teammates, but when you're out, your out.
Time to learn a little fire discipline.

If you want to fire 25bps you're going to anyway, there's obviously nothing stopping you. But you'll just be off the field that much faster.

[raehl]

Limitted paint is actually WORSE for movement than unlimitted paint.

Why?

Because people are always taking pock shots, so they never reload, so their guns are always up.

Moves happen when people are reloading. Doesn't matter how fast your opponent is shooting, they still gotta reload sometime - in fact, the faster they shoot, the more often they have to reload, and the *MORE* often you have chances to move.

The key is to move when you're NOT getting shot at. Doesn't matter how fast your opponent's guns shoot then.


- Chris

[Meph]

Well no matter what option there is for cheater boards there's still some major problems.

The people that make these markers AND the boards are the same people that back the events with sponsorship.

The people that make the paint and sell the paint are not going to want to stop selling as much as they are.


When you have both manufacturer of marker and paint backing cheater boards............... what CAN you do?

[Brophog]

You sure your not on baseball's anti-steroid committee?

[Meph]

I guess since everybody can wipe and everybody can throw their equipment on the ground that doing such isn't cheating or breaking the rules either? Since everybody can overshoot they should do that without worrying since it's not breaking any rules is it? Everybody can do is, so it's not actually a real rule. Right?

[Meph]

Funny how somebody who's incapable of explaining oneself, let alone grasp the concepts or rules and regulations, must resort to name calling and putting people down.

But what can I expect from somebody who feels that if everybody's "on the same level" then there's nothing you can do and it's 'not exactly cheating.' Or 'not the same type of cheating.'

Afterall last I checked the rule books allowed only 1 shot per trigger pull. Not 1.5 or 2 per trigger pull after exceeding 8bps.

Please show me the rule book where this regulation has been changed to allow turbo type modes of fire and I will GLADLY shut up! Otherwise.... who can't look past their own nose?

Since when is there "different forms of cheating" cheating is cheating. If there's a definite rule there is no seperate grade of breaking it. You sound like the person who breaks a lie into "big lies" and "small lies." Last I checked they're both the same thing. If the rules say 'penalize for this' then chances are that's what the penalty is. There's obviously different effects from cheating and some have a bigger effect than others. Like comparing the wearing 3 shirts instead of maximum of 2 to blatant wiping. However if it wasn't something that was a big deal, or if the committee felt that "eh, there's nothing we can do about it, let them all do it" I don't think they'd then write up a rule about it.

And I can plainly observe somebody who's using a cheater board. They sound like they are firing way too fast compared to their finger speed on the trigger. You plainly have never even seen a match where people have used cheater boards. To think one can't physically hear the difference between 13 and 18bps is sad.

[fallout11]

So we are back to "if you can get away with it, so be it"?

Flagrant violations are out (like wiping and full auto). But subtle ones are okay (like electronic cheats and 3 shirts)?

Do I have that right?

[fallout11]

Ahh, I see.
The majority of the posters here are right.
It is people with that same immature mental and emotional outlook you are espousing that are representative of and causal to the problem.
A rule is stupid because you don't agree with it?
You've got a hard life ahead of you, my friend.

As with all hecklers throughout history, your job is just to inflame and annoy, not to contribute anything constructive or useful.
Just a burden on society.

And society has places for people who will not follow its rules.