> Generally I favor "cheat detection should be serverside, don't trust the client" from a general security perspective, but... I can totally see a valid case in there, somewhere, for more rigorous clientside checks.

Yeah...

The simple fact is, it's simply not possible to have completely server-side cheat detection simply because you'll be relying purely on heuristics which could very well be wrong. It's just not going to be possible to tell the difference between a cheater and a really good player.

For any cheat detection to work, it has to be client-side.

Everything you mentioned (Aside from Brownian motion, which is certainly the wrong solution) could be implemented with A* but with an incomplete graph.

I've seen it work that way in an RTS before. Fog of war will make a unit unaware of what the terrain actually looks like and the unit will head straight in the direction of where I told it to go until it finds a cliff, then it starts trying to go around it.

I was looking for this in TFA. Sad it wasn't included, as it's one of my favorites.

Based on what I learned from this video: https://youtu.be/r7l0Rq9E8MY?t=2

> I find it hard to believe that you can get actually get good data from self-reporting in surveys.

Especially when you consider the Lizardman's Constant of 4%

https://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and...

This article was written in 2013. The Internet has become a significantly more toxic place since then, and I would imagine the constant is closer to 15-20% these days.