Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Share your gameplay tips, secret tactics and fabulous strategies with fellow gamers here.

Moderators: wdolson, MOD_War-in-the-Pacific-Admirals-Edition

Aurorus
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 5:08 pm

Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Aurorus »

I started a new game recently with a new opponent, who wanted a historical turn 1. I thought that this was a little odd, but I have never played with a historical turn 1, so I agreed. As I was watching the combat replay, I was amazed. It was the most incredible Pearl Harbor attack that I had ever seen in WiTP, and I have seen many of them, because I have played the AI numerous times and sandboxed opening moves for Japan many, many times. The allies scored 60 torpedo hits and 64 bomb hits on ships; sunk 7 of the 8 BBs; 6 DDs; 3 CLS; and heavily damaged all of the CAs. It was an almost impossible attack with hit rates of 85% on both bombs and torpedos, which is nigh impossible to achieve. The typical hit rate is about 50% or slightly less. I know, because I have seen the game simulate many Pearl strikes.

When I posted about this attack on the forum and how astonished I was at its success, my opponent replied that this was not as good as his previous attack on a different opponent. I know that these results are nearly impossible to achieve, so I became suspicious, when someone told me that they had achieved these results twice in a row. So, I set up a test. I saved a file as a historical first turn Japan that contained a very good Pearl Harbor result. Then I opened it several times, saved it again as 3 different allied players, and "returned" it to myself as the Japanese player. Then I ran the combat report for the three different games. What I found was this. The results were the exact same for each game. Since there was no input by the allied player, the combat result was predetermined based off the Japanese save. What this means is that a Japanese player, in a PBEM, with a "historical first turn" can start a game time and again, until he achieves results that he wants. Then send this file to any number of opponents and get the exact same first turn results in each game.

I have no "hard" evidence that my opponent cheated on this first turn. I have no doubt, however, that he did. I post this simply to advise everyone of this exploit. Below are the results of my first two tests. Remember these are two different games, both based off the same original Japanese save with a historical first turn.


Here is Test 1 of the Pearl Harbor Attack

BB Nevada, Bomb hits 6, Torpedo hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
BB Arizona, Bomb hits 7, Torpedo hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Detroit, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB Maryland, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
BB Pennsylvania, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB California, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
BB Oklahoma, Bomb hits 7, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
BB West Virginia, Bomb hits 8, Torpedo hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
SS Tautog, Bomb hits 1
BB Tennessee, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
PT-29, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
DD Helm, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AV Curtiss, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
SS Cachalot, Bomb hits 2, heavy damage
AV Tangier, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CA San Francisco, Bomb hits 2, on fire
PT-23, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
DM Preble, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Monaghan, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
DMS Perry, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Dewey, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Chew, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Raleigh, Bomb hits 2, on fire
DD Ralph Talbot, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
CL Honolulu, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
DD Cummings, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
xAP St. Mihel, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CA New Orleans, Bomb hits 3, on fire
DD Dale, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Helena, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
DD Shaw, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Aylwin, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CL Phoenix, Bomb hits 1
DM Tracy, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CL St. Louis, Torpedo hits 1
DD Farragut, Bomb hits 1, on fire
SS Dolphin, Bomb hits 1, heavy damage


Here is Test 2


BB Nevada, Bomb hits 6, Torpedo hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
BB Arizona, Bomb hits 7, Torpedo hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Detroit, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB Maryland, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 4, on fire, heavy damage
BB Pennsylvania, Bomb hits 2, Torpedo hits 3, heavy fires, heavy damage
BB California, Torpedo hits 4, and is sunk
BB Oklahoma, Bomb hits 7, Torpedo hits 5, and is sunk
BB West Virginia, Bomb hits 8, Torpedo hits 5, heavy fires, heavy damage
SS Tautog, Bomb hits 1
BB Tennessee, Bomb hits 4, Torpedo hits 4, heavy fires, heavy damage
PT-29, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
DD Helm, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
AV Curtiss, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
SS Cachalot, Bomb hits 2, heavy damage
AV Tangier, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CA San Francisco, Bomb hits 2, on fire
PT-23, Bomb hits 1, and is sunk
DM Preble, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Monaghan, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
DMS Perry, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Dewey, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
DD Chew, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Raleigh, Bomb hits 2, on fire
DD Ralph Talbot, Bomb hits 1, heavy fires
CL Honolulu, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
DD Cummings, Torpedo hits 1, heavy damage
xAP St. Mihel, Bomb hits 1, on fire
CA New Orleans, Bomb hits 3, on fire
DD Dale, Bomb hits 2, heavy fires, heavy damage
CL Helena, Bomb hits 1, Torpedo hits 1, on fire
DD Shaw, Bomb hits 1, on fire
DD Aylwin, Bomb hits 1, on fire, heavy damage
CL Phoenix, Bomb hits 1
DM Tracy, Torpedo hits 1, and is sunk
CL St. Louis, Torpedo hits 1
DD Farragut, Bomb hits 1, on fire
SS Dolphin, Bomb hits 1, heavy damage


Remember, these are from 2 completely different games, with 2 different allied "players," both based upon the same original Japanese save. The combat reports are identical in every detail. Anyone can verify my results for themselves. Simply save a game, with historical first turn "on" as Japan, and then open the file under 3 different saves as the allies. Reopen each allied file as the Japanese player and view the results. They will be identical.
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by wdolson »


If the something was changed with the set up for turn 1 that changed how combat played out, the results would be different, but the same set up will generate the same results for the same game start. If you start over from the scenario menu, the seed for the game's randoms will be different and you will get different results.

This is necessary for PBEM games to stay synced. AI games do the randoms a bit differently.

Bill

WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
Aurorus
Posts: 1314
Joined: Mon May 26, 2014 5:08 pm

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Aurorus »

ORIGINAL: wdolson


If the something was changed with the set up for turn 1 that changed how combat played out, the results would be different, but the same set up will generate the same results for the same game start. If you start over from the scenario menu, the seed for the game's randoms will be different and you will get different results.

This is necessary for PBEM games to stay synced. AI games do the randoms a bit differently.

Bill



Thank you for that confirmation. Therefore, a Japanese player can run "historical" first turns until he gets the results that he desires, indeed nearly impossible results, and then send this save to his his opponent and be guaranteed to get these results. Of course, none of this is possible without a "historical" first turn.
wdolson
Posts: 7648
Joined: Tue Jun 27, 2006 9:56 pm
Location: Near Portland, OR

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by wdolson »


I honestly don't know, but that might be true. I never looked at that part of the code.

Bill
WitP AE - Test team lead, programmer
Image
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Aurorus
I have no "hard" evidence that my opponent cheated on this first turn. I have no doubt, however, that he did.

I'm counting two BBs sunk and several others severely damaged. A 'good' outcome, no doubt, for the Japanese player. I've seen worse. Just out of curiosity, what happened to POW and Repulse? Also, what was the damage to the airfields on Hawaii? Did he send DBs against the fleet or to take out the airfield? This may explain the crushing damage there if the airfields were 'spared'.

I was not aware that the turn could be recycled in this fashion. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

I don't know that I'd resort to allegations of cheating based upon this scant evidence. I would hope that your opponent would come clean with you regarding where he got the 'start' from, whether it had been reused or not and so forth.

But your options at this point seem to be whether to disregard anything and treat everything he says with suspicion and circumspection for the next several years or drop the game like a hot rock. I think I know which way you're going to go. Would be nice to hear the other side of the tale, however.
Image
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

Historical first turn will normally kill way too many Japanese pilots for my liking

User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Encircled »

Yeah, at the very least he's lost some very good fighter pilots strafing at 100 feet.

jwolf
Posts: 2493
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:02 pm

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by jwolf »

Did he send DBs against the fleet or to take out the airfield?

With historical first turn all that is set automatically, correct?

My one PBEM experience in this game was the same set up, historical first turn, and the Japanese results were very similar to what you have. I lost 7 of the 8 BBs at Pearl and very high losses overall, but I don't recall more detail than that. I assumed at the time this was at the high end but I really don't think there was any cheating. IMHO you need really hard evidence before you can make that accusation, though I admit it is a possibility.
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Yeah, at the very least he's lost some very good fighter pilots strafing at 100 feet.


What part of the combat report were you seeing such information, Encircled? I saw no evidence of any airfield attack or strafing provided in the CR or the commentary. Am I missing something?
Image
jwolf
Posts: 2493
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:02 pm

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by jwolf »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

ORIGINAL: Encircled

Yeah, at the very least he's lost some very good fighter pilots strafing at 100 feet.


What part of the combat report were you seeing such information, Encircled? I saw no evidence of any airfield attack or strafing provided in the CR or the commentary. Am I missing something?

I would imagine this is part of the historical orders, that is, automatically set when you run a historical first turn.
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

I don't know why it is not in the combat report, but during historical 1st turn the fighter planes will strafe, that is a given in standard scenarios,
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24520
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: jwolf
Did he send DBs against the fleet or to take out the airfield?

With historical first turn all that is set automatically, correct?

My one PBEM experience in this game was the same set up, historical first turn, and the Japanese results were very similar to what you have. I lost 7 of the 8 BBs at Pearl and very high losses overall, but I don't recall more detail than that. I assumed at the time this was at the high end but I really don't think there was any cheating. IMHO you need really hard evidence before you can make that accusation, though I admit it is a possibility.

Ah. What we have here may be a misunderstanding of the meaning of 'historic turn'.

I'm thinking of scenario 1 (or 2) wherein the Japanese player acts like historically in striking at Pearl Harbor with Kido Butai. Indeed that's what the OP cites. There is no 'automatic' setting for the Japanese strike on Pearl Harbor with scenario 1. Bits and pieces can be changed, including where the DBs and fighters strike.

Perhaps you (jwolf) are thinking of a different scenario-the so-called December 8 scenario (scenario 6)? In *that* scenario, everything is pre-ordained at the start.
Image
jwolf
Posts: 2493
Joined: Tue Dec 03, 2013 4:02 pm

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by jwolf »

My understanding (?? maybe misunderstanding) is that "historical first turn" means the Dec 7 orders are pre-set and the only variation is how the dice roll. Then both sides deal with the fallout with normal orders and operations beginning Dec 8.
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

we have:

Scenario start --> December 7th or December 8th
December 7th is before PH, you have a chance to rewrite "day of infamy" history, attack Manila/ Singapore/ Los Angeles[X(], go hunt the US carriers, etc
December 8th starts afterwards, and the damage to the US fleet is as it was historically

Historical first turn --> Yes or No
Assuming a December 7th start (December 8th start will make these irrelevant)
Yes will run the 1st turn with no inputs from the Japanese player, simply whatever were the orders as defined in the scenario will play. This normally includes KB's fighters at 100 feet, thus forcing strafe attacks
No will give the Japanese player the chance to change order for the 1st turn, and rewrite history as already mentioned

December 7th surprise --> Yes or No
Assuming a December 7th start (December 8th start will make these irrelevant)
Yes will severely impair the Allied response, and increase the damage to the fleet
No will run the turn using the standard rules, and therefore the Allies will perform a lot better and probably make PH attack a costly mistake
User avatar
821Bobo
Posts: 2401
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Slovakia

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by 821Bobo »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy
ORIGINAL: Aurorus
I have no "hard" evidence that my opponent cheated on this first turn. I have no doubt, however, that he did.

I'm counting two BBs sunk and several others severely damaged. A 'good' outcome, no doubt, for the Japanese player. I've seen worse. Just out of curiosity, what happened to POW and Repulse? Also, what was the damage to the airfields on Hawaii? Did he send DBs against the fleet or to take out the airfield? This may explain the crushing damage there if the airfields were 'spared'.

I was not aware that the turn could be recycled in this fashion. Thank you for bringing this to our attention.

I don't know that I'd resort to allegations of cheating based upon this scant evidence. I would hope that your opponent would come clean with you regarding where he got the 'start' from, whether it had been reused or not and so forth.

But your options at this point seem to be whether to disregard anything and treat everything he says with suspicion and circumspection for the next several years or drop the game like a hot rock. I think I know which way you're going to go. Would be nice to hear the other side of the tale, however.

David posted in this topic only results of hist test. The PH strike from actual PBEM game is here fb.asp?m=4271957
and the result is indeed suspicious.
User avatar
Jorge_Stanbury
Posts: 4345
Joined: Wed Feb 29, 2012 12:57 pm
Location: Montreal

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Jorge_Stanbury »

A very good PH outcome, one time against the AI I managed to sink all 8 BBs... happened once

Problem is that talking about cheating or suspicious results will put the game on a downward spiral and it will be hard to recover from there... I mean this is a game that will take years to finish.

And as far as the results, they are really not a big deal, the game will be won with carriers and 4-E bombers. Battleships, especially the old BBs are not critical, sure they are nice to have and they can do an amazing job on naval bombardment, but you can live without them
User avatar
821Bobo
Posts: 2401
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 2:20 pm
Location: Slovakia

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by 821Bobo »

Yes, such an outcome is possible, but it will happen once in X games. But when someone gets such results continuously doubts will rise.
When I posted about this attack on the forum and how astonished I was at its success, my opponent replied that this was not as good as his previous attack on a different opponent.
User avatar
Encircled
Posts: 2095
Joined: Thu Dec 30, 2010 3:50 pm
Location: Northern England

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Encircled »

Ah, apologies for misunderstanding the term "historical" start.

Regarding the cheating bit, you really need a lot more info before you can accuse people of that kind of thing.



User avatar
HansBolter
Posts: 7191
Joined: Thu Jul 06, 2006 12:30 pm
Location: United States

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by HansBolter »

ORIGINAL: Jorge_Stanbury

we have:

Scenario start --> December 7th or December 8th
December 7th is before PH, you have a chance to rewrite "day of infamy" history, attack Manila/ Singapore/ Los Angeles[X(], go hunt the US carriers, etc
December 8th starts afterwards, and the damage to the US fleet is as it was historically

Historical first turn --> Yes or No
Assuming a December 7th start (December 8th start will make these irrelevant)
Yes will run the 1st turn with no inputs from the Japanese player, simply whatever were the orders as defined in the scenario will play. This normally includes KB's fighters at 100 feet, thus forcing strafe attacks
No will give the Japanese player the chance to change order for the 1st turn, and rewrite history as already mentioned

December 7th surprise --> Yes or No
Assuming a December 7th start (December 8th start will make these irrelevant)
Yes will severely impair the Allied response, and increase the damage to the fleet
No will run the turn using the standard rules, and therefore the Allies will perform a lot better and probably make PH attack a costly mistake


It's a little different in AI games.

Using First Turn Surprise in a game against the Japanese AI the Allied paler does not get to issue any orders for December 7th.
First turn surprise off allows Allied player to issue orders for December 7th.
Hans

Alpha77
Posts: 2149
Joined: Fri Sep 24, 2010 7:38 am

RE: Cheating and Historical Turn 1

Post by Alpha77 »

UM, how can one be cheat - is the historical setting not entirely played by the AI, I mean pre-planned by the scen designer and IJ can not give orders ?

Also makes no big difference if 1 or 2 more slow BBs are bit more damaged or even 1 more sunk (seldom seen)

I agree that the historic turn might kill some good IJN pilots (the Zero ones at airfield attack!), but it speeds up early turns a bit right? Escept you want to plan out in hours another evil attack scheme eg. to San Fran or Colombo etc. [:D]
Post Reply

Return to “The War Room”