sodiboo :pride_heart: on Nostr: right so, indeed, movement is a big mechanic that vanilla Minecraft is notoriously ...

right so, indeed, movement is a big mechanic that vanilla Minecraft is notoriously ill-behaved about, and as such an anti-cheat necessarily mustn't flag illegal movements right away for immediate bans, lest there be false positives. *you will encounter cheaters in Minecraft*. (and yes, in The Pit, this is kind of a huge issue because of the continuous leveling and roguelikeish aspect; you get people who just want to grief at all costs, compared to most other gamemodes with lower stakes)

but, to my understanding, it's not true that these players don't get banned for months? or at least, that they don't get *detected* for months. because, like, player reporting is a thing? for bedwars, they even have a replay inspection jury system akin to Counter-Strike's "overwatch" mode, so Hypixel broadly relies on public judgement. you *cannot* blatantly bhop in such a system without being detected, but you might be able to trick the fully automated parts into having such low confidence that you won't get instantly flagged as definitely cheating. or maybe you will, because i would imagine they probably do banwaves? that's typical of games where, as the third video you linked clearly shows, there is an arms race between cheat developers and anticheat developers. and the anticheat developers are keeping up to the point where paid cheating clients are a thing and even those are often "incompatible" with Hypixel's anticheat (adjective in quotes borrowed directly from that video).

and, as i tried to argue, this arms race is so relatively balanced because Hypixel doesn't develop the client. there is a ceiling for how effective an automated anti-cheating system can be when the range of inputs from a completely legitimate player experiencing lag overlaps significantly with blatant cheaters.

given the cards they are dealt, i think Hypixel is doing a very good job at a purely server-side anticheat that doesn't falsely ban legitimate players, despite their packets sometimes being total nonsense.

but in the context of full-stack (client+server) game development (see root post talks about battle passes and centralized infrastructure), you can do *way better than peak Minecraft anticheat*. you can make a server that accepts no bullshit, and a client that won't send bullshit. if you design the game to resist cheating from the start, you can be a lot stricter on the server, and make sure the client is well behaved. if the overlap of "blatant cheating" and "what a vanilla client is capable of" is smaller, the server side detections are inherently more effective.
Minecraft does *not* represent the anti-cheat ceiling that a competitive game developer should be striving for. It is the *lower bound* for how effective a non-invasive anti-cheat can be.