Unfortunately, I only started playing Quake in early 2023. I started with an office mouse, and I don't even know how many centimeters the sensitivity was. But I'd estimate it was 20-25 cm at 360.
Then I found a sensitivity calculator online and started with 50 cm at 360. My results skyrocketed. I immediately heard from a huge number of players that I was a cheater. I played like that for about six months. I played at 1600 DPI.
One of the old, good players told me that his sensitivity was incredibly low—1.2 at 800 DPI. And since he was playing better than me back then, I decided to calculate how much that was in cm. It turned out to be only 43 cm on 360. And I was already playing at 50 cm. I then thought he had simply made a mistake about the DPI, and he was playing at sensitivity 1.2 at 400 DPI, which is equal to 86 cm on 360.
Well, I converted sensitivity for my DPI to 86 cm on 360 and played like that for about a year. While I was playing, I asked almost every good player their DPI and sensitivity. Through experience I have come to the conclusion that the guys on Excessive Plus mostly play 35-45cm at 360. There were exceptions. Eventually I realized that it was actually me playing at the ultra-low sensitivity.
The only thing I missed back then was that none of the old guys even thought to tell me about cl_mouseAccel and m_yaw, m_pitch.
But as I later discovered, most of the old guard readily use mouseAccel, even though the canons of KovaaK's and other AIM coaches say that accel is evil. I knew this back then, so I didn't ask about mouseAccel. It's a shame I didn't. But anyway, I did ask a lot of people about accel again a little later.
I started practicing different mouse sensitivities.
Here is a calculator and config creator that I made - calc_sens

This is a script for switching configurations. The new configuration is activated when you press zoom.

// MOUSE-FOV
set toggleMouse "vstr Sens-FOV1"
set Sens-FOV1 "exec 5; cg_fov 125;echo2 ^65 cm sens, 125 FOV; cg_zoomfov 115; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV2"
set Sens-FOV2 "exec 10; cg_fov 120;echo2 ^610 cm sens, 120 FOV; cg_zoomfov 110; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV3"
set Sens-FOV3 "exec 15; cg_fov 115;echo2 ^615 cm sens, 115 FOV; cg_zoomfov 105; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV4"
set Sens-FOV4 "exec 20; cg_fov 110;echo2 ^620 cm sens, 110 FOV; cg_zoomfov 100; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV5"
set Sens-FOV5 "exec 25; cg_fov 105;echo2 ^625 cm sens, 105 FOV; cg_zoomfov 95; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV6"
set Sens-FOV6 "exec 30; cg_fov 100;echo2 ^630 cm sens, 100 FOV; cg_zoomfov 90; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV7"
set Sens-FOV7 "exec 35; cg_fov 95;echo2 ^635 cm sens, 95 FOV; cg_zoomfov 85; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV8"
set Sens-FOV8 "exec 40; cg_fov 90;echo2 ^640 cm sens, 90 FOV; cg_zoomfov 80; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV9"
set Sens-FOV9 "exec 45; cg_fov 85;echo2 ^645 cm sens, 85 FOV; cg_zoomfov 75; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV10"
set Sens-FOV10 "exec 50; cg_fov 80;echo2 ^650 cm sens, 80 FOV; cg_zoomfov 70; set toggleMouse vstr Sens-FOV1"
bind CAPSLOCK "vstr toggleMouse"

What's my point?
Firstly, thanks for the video analysis.
I'm not surprised by the guy's abilities at low sensitivity, but I liked the tools you used. There should be many such tools.
But honestly, I think such tools should be built into the server and analyze the stream or demo using a trained neural network.
To avoid overloading the server, there should be fine-tuning when the analyzer is turned on.

1. A player database must be compiled, even if they play under different names and IP addresses.
2. Players must fall into different categories of suspicion.
3. The most suspicious players should be subject to careful analysis.
4. It is necessary to create a public list of banned users, like on CS servers, where data on banned cheaters is published.

wrote:

for part 1 - nope, its as stupid as no electricity, no cheats. the fundamental problem is there is no pressure to compete with you on your secure dream game. people can just play whatever they want.that brings us to how to get players - remove hurdles. anticheat is a hurdle, a massive one.

1. And I categorically disagree with this. Firstly, you're making a value judgment about what is stupid and what isn't.
2. I think you've already figured out everything you could. Don't try anymore, because you're looking for reasons why not, not how yes.

If you're confident your servers are clean and have good anti-cheat tools, you can host competitions for prizes, even small ones to start with. Winning status alone will motivate you to play.

wrote:

now here are 2 things you probably missed since you got here late. regular quake3 uses the windows pipeline, so having accel in windows on causes windows accel to be on in quake.

I used to think this was a thread for newbies who never played shooters, until I spoke closely with some players who'd been playing for 20 years and didn't even know about this checkbox. I think it's for people who aren't particularly fond of thinking) So, thanks for bringing this to my attention.

wrote:

the topic of sensitivity remains a nearly unsolved problem due to aim being different in games. in the red bull click world championship the guy who won used like 95/100cm for a 360 (considering all targets are only forward in a 90 window).
here is a major problem - you need to do a 180 to check your corners. when you cant do a 180, you loose out in a lot of games. the next problem is, a regular strafejump needs a 90 curveturn, so any sensitivity below that can not do a bridge 2 rail on dm6 which makes you instantly loose in classic duel or tdm.

basically in half the scenarios, you do not have the time to lift your mouse or you loose out on speed and therefor time. quake is a huge time scramble.

I completely agree. I first felt this pain when I tried playing with rails on maps other than DM17.

1. I noticed that players with high sensitivity have an advantage on narrow maps.
2. I noticed that in Quake Live you can change the zoom sensitivity, but in Quake III Arena, the zoom is tied to the overall sensitivity. I didn't like this.
3. Unlike Quake III Arena, you can set sensitivity for each individual weapon in Quake Live. I also noticed that some advanced Quake III Arena players have a script that changes sensitivity for different weapons.

That's why I decided to make a tool that would help me quickly solve the sensitivity problem on different maps.

wrote:

i switched it up since accel makes it impossible to strafe. due to the accelerated errors in mouse movement accel basically ruins any quickmoves.if you didn't yet, I recommend you to learn some strafejumps.
giving some examples - torzelan sensitivity is ~3.3/3.4 at 400 dpi, the lowest sensitivity that still allows pointing instead of tracking for me is 2.4 at 400 dpi (which is exactly what that guy plays), but it still needs a lot more of lifting the mouse and pausing between moves. for me a sensitivity that does everything is 2.8 at 400 dpi without liftoff, yet it still is to slow sometimes.
please remember, we played a instagib with bfg jumps, you do not have the time to lift your mouse basically.

I've read a ton of information and watched a ton of videos about DPI resolution. But until I tested 1cm at 360 at 400, 800, 1600, and 3200 DPI and saw how jerky the mouse is at such high sensitivity at 400 DPI and how smooth it is at 3200 DPI, I didn't fully understand what DPI is.
While I understand that in an old game like Quake III Arena, DPI settings higher than 800 aren't particularly necessary, I still play at 3200 DPI, as I sometimes use 10cm on 360 on tight CTF maps or just when I want to move quickly. 400 and 800 DPI simply don't provide me with good detail control at such high sensitivity.

wrote:

which is what E+ does, the server itselfs checks the stream for errors which are caused by cheats. the problem is what error means what. quake defrag runs code that dumps the stream as demo so compared to a demo no info is missing. they use that info then to determine if impossible values hint at scripting.

If that's the only way it works, then it's a problem.
Simple AutoHotKey scripts that move the crosshair by following green pixels cannot be tracked internally. Quake sees them as regular mouse movements unless mathematical analysis of acceleration and various curves is applied.
I seriously doubt that this is implemented, otherwise players like this "MAESTRO" wouldn't stick their nose into the game with such cheap tools as AutoHotKey + Script. He doesn't even need to restart the game. He can turn it on and off using hotkeys. His tool only works with a hotkey. He can restart and adjust the settings while playing using hotkeys.
And your anti-cheat will never detect this.

It doesn't analyze trajectories and curves.
But I'm interested in a tool that can read these very trajectories and curves. One that would create its own database of real people's movements, so that a not-so-powerful neural network could quickly work and analyze suspicious players.

wrote:

knowing everything I know it mathes out to exactly what I said.

You do know some things about Quake III Arena better than others. But you know too little, which is why you speak so confidently.

wrote:

And I am confident in catching most cheaters, in fact I havent met a cheater in weeks/months.

1. Of course you can. Unlike other referees, you just have analytical thinking, years of experience playing Quake, and interacting with the Excessive Plus mod developers. You have the tools to analyze.
2. You need to take the time to analyze, even if you are sure you are right.
3. If you are not the server owner, you will also need to prove your point by editing a video to do so.

And how many referees at home competitions have access to this?
My friend, forgive me, even though you are older than me and more experienced in some ways, I think you are talking nonsense.
Although, even from what I've said, I think you still don't have the vaguest idea of the tool I'm trying to talk about. And I've been trying to say for a long time that even you can create such a tool if you have the desire, given your knowledge, analytical thinking, and experience.

The quotation has dragged on. We've gone into too many details that distract from the main idea.

You didn't ask me questions to understand what I needed. I don't need to explain details when there are no questions.

In technical details, I agree with you almost everywhere, and in most cases I even understand the problem you are talking about.

About the main thing:
1. I'm talking about a completely different approach. This is a separate tool that has nothing to do with the mod as a whole. This tool should be built into every running server. Again, I won't go into details.
2. You still don't understand the problem I'm pointing out - the ease of use of the tool.

Here's a real-life situation for you. I meet a long-time player who wants to run servers. He knows how to assemble hardware and is eager to do so. He also says he has a social media group of 30 people who are passionate about playing. There's also a 12-person WhatsApp group, partially made up of those 30 people. They communicate lively on WhatsApp and are even more eager to play than the 30 people who aren't as active on social media. I tell him, "Okay." I'll provide the software, and you'll provide the hardware and player organization. I make servers, create a playable distribution with a basic config and .bat files for entering the servers. The servers are up and running. First there's a burst, then a lull.
I agree with you that there's more choice these days. And people have branched out into different games. But you can always stir up interest with competitions and prizes.
So I go to these groups to talk to people. I ask people questions.
And guess what?
People with many years of experience edit the settings through the interface. One out of 12 people knew how to run various configs via exec, and no one knew what autoexec.cfg was.
No one had any idea how to record a demo or how to watch it. I had to explain what I thought were completely basic things.
And mind you, I was told that these were experienced players. And I want to point out that, judging by their CTF play, they were indeed very experienced players.

But how can I not give up when I think about how to run a competition, and when I think about who to appoint as a referee?

Just imagine how much time it would take me to explain how to use all the tools available to identify cheaters, and how else would they explain to other viewers the reasons for blocking a cheater, backed up by evidence.

And you're telling me that you can detect cheaters.

I feel like I'm standing there with a megaphone, shouting into your ear, and you're turning around and can't figure out where the sound is coming from.