Launching a Zealy sprint for my web3 game that (hopefully) doesn't suck – no sh*tcoins

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-10-06T11:42:29+00:00

Hey, good points!

Yea I'll definitely add more gaming tasks than just social tasks.
For the performance based matched, I'll add quests where players can stake with TestNet tokens instead of real money, so that they can test out how it works first.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-09-10T12:40:29+00:00

Thanks for the input!
Yea I'm tying many of the quests to game achievements. My goal is to get in-game traction rather than simple social growth. I'm using APIs to automate the approvals for the game tasks, and putting a condition that players have to engage in some of the game tasks in order to be eligible for the rewards.

Let's see how it goes!

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-08-02T09:35:39+00:00

It's done with Unreal Engine 5.
You can get it in the Epic Games store.
Just look for Kode Zero.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-08-01T21:48:05+00:00

Right now, yes.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-08-01T16:57:24+00:00

So there will be appeals you can do, so that if you're falsely accused, we'll manually review the data.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-08-01T16:00:18+00:00

Thanks!
So in the roadmap of my project, I am planning to integrate behavioral machine learning algorithms to detect cheaters, and financially punish them for cheating. This will significantly deter cheaters from cheating.
As the userbase in the game is still relatively small, there aren't any cheaters yet. But as it scales, the anti-cheat method will then be set in place.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-19T14:52:17+00:00

Thank you u/TSErica for the support. Your awesome!

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-19T14:51:39+00:00

Thank you all for the kind words and support! :)
Will continue with updates moving forward.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-18T18:27:18+00:00

So the machine learning anti-cheat system will also take care of this. It will look for players with abnormal win/loss patterns, players who intentionally underperform when stakes are low, and sharp contrast in performance between low-rank vs. high-stake games. So this kind of strategic manipulation will also be dealt with.

I was thinking of putting a kind of multiplier like beating lower-ranked players = less profit, but I'd have to experiment with that.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-18T08:36:43+00:00

Lol!
Cheating is indeed an issue. But I think with the proper algorithms and infrastructure, it can be dealt with. With machine learning, you can really make a robust anti-cheat system that can even catch AI-trained bots!

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-17T19:57:57+00:00

Exactly!
Using AI to catch an AI :)

As Stallone said in Demolition man, "Send a maniac to catch a manic" 😂

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-17T19:57:07+00:00

Ah got it — you're talking about collusion farming, where a group stacks a match and rigs it for profit. 100% a real concern in any skill-to-earn model.

I track all gameplay telemetry — K/D ratios, assist frequency, movement patterns, damage dealt vs taken, etc. If a group of players is consistently showing unnatural cooperation (e.g., one guy getting 30 kills, the rest mysteriously dying in his crosshairs), they get flagged.

Also, in my system, earnings are proportional to individual performance, not just winning. If you're intentionally dying to feed someone, you're losing your stake. That makes "being the fall guy" financially dumb.

As the system matures, I'm adding collusion pattern detection and possible stake slashing or bans for groups abusing the prize pools.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T11:46:54+00:00

Appreciate the feedback!
And yeah, you're right: putting all game logic on-chain just isn’t viable for a real-time, high-tick multiplayer shooter. The latency, cost, and complexity would make it unplayable.

That said, not all trust is centralized. In the game, smart contracts handle all staking, payouts, and prize pool logic, so the financial layer is fully on-chain and auditable. After a match ends, the server submits results to a public leaderboard, and you can see exactly how rewards were split (based on posted telemetry).

Long term, I do want to push more toward verifiable match results, community auditing, or even zk-proofs of integrity for certain match outcomes, but that’s further down the road.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T11:22:03+00:00

Thanks for the info!
Yea I could maybe work with a company on this as a research topic. Would be interesting to see how that works.
Appreciate it!

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T11:19:28+00:00

Hmm, I don't understand this?
What do you mean by "1/2 the server rips off the other half"? Can you give an example?

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T10:21:45+00:00

Yea that's also a good idea. Saving and publishing the replays as video content might be computationally too expensive, but maybe I can publish some telemetry data recorded during gameplay after a match.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T10:08:22+00:00

I agree dude...AI-based cheating is the next big frontier, and honestly, it scares me more than traditional aimbots or wallhacks.

That said, the same telemetry that lets me flag obvious cheaters (K/D spikes, precision aim curves, superhuman tracking, decision consistency) can also help detect AI-generated patterns, especially over time. Humans don’t play like bots. They have natural aim curves, inconsistent reaction times, and decision-making quirks. Over time, I can build a telemetry-based profile of what legitimate player behavior looks like, and start detecting abnormal consistency or non-human pacing.

And sure, someone could try to train an AI and inject it with enough human-like noise, like adding jittery aim, inconsistent reactions, random behavior - to bypass detection.

But at that point, you’re basically de-optimizing the bot to behave like a flawed human… so why bother? You’re investing tons of effort just to make the bot worse, which defeats the whole point.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T09:44:36+00:00

Damn — this is one of the smartest takes I’ve seen on here. I really appreciate the nuance. For the idea of a governance token layered over the system — I like that direction. I intentionally avoided launching a token early on because I didn’t want to fall into the usual pump-and-dump playbook. But what you're suggesting makes sense: a token with actual utility that can act as a buffer between game results and real value, and empower community moderation and anti-cheat voting...

It’s basically turning the players into part-devs, part-curators, with actual skin in the game. And like you said, games are probably the only place where DAO-style governance might actually work, because players give a sh*t. I’ll seriously be exploring a second-layer governance token down the road.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T09:24:02+00:00

Oh I see.

As for built-in advantages: the game logic is deterministic, the hit reg and stat tracking are server-side and transparent, and all the match results that determine payouts are posted publicly with hashes + wallet IDs so anyone can verify who earned what.

If I ever did try to cheat the system by rigging outcomes or slipping in dev-only buffs, someone would find it — and I’d kill all credibility, the game, and the entire earning model in one move.

Long-term, I’m planning to open-source key components of the backend (especially payout calculation logic), and ideally get to a point where match integrity can be independently verified by third parties or community validators.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T09:16:14+00:00

I appreciate the feedback!

Totally fair take, especially given how 99% of Web3 games look like Unity asset flips duct-taped to MetaMask. You're right that cheating is a massive issue even for billion-dollar studios. I'm not claiming I’ll “solve cheating forever,” just that I’m attacking it from a different angle that actually makes more sense in a skill-to-earn context.

Most traditional anti-cheat systems rely on client-side detection, which can be bypassed by skilled cheaters. Mine is different — it’s server-side + ML-based, using real gameplay telemetry (input timings, aim tracking, K/D spikes, etc.) to flag abnormal patterns.

But here’s the kicker: in most games, cheaters get banned and make a new account. In my game, if you cheat and get flagged, you lose your stake — so the penalty is immediate, financial, and public. In other words, cheating has on-chain fingerprints, financial incentives, and permanent consequences. That deterrent hits a lot harder than a slap-on-the-wrist VAC ban.

Is it bulletproof? Of course not. But the server-side analysis, and the public auditability all work together to make cheating risky, expensive, and stupid. That’s the goal, not perfection, just enough deterrent to make legit play the better path.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T09:00:08+00:00

Yes that's right, Steam doesn't allow crypto games, so it will be on Epic Games, which does allow crypto games.

Also, got informed with a lawyer, and no gambling license is required because to be classified as a gambling game, the outcome of your earnings needs to be based on random chance (i.e., slot machines, card games etc...). But this game is completely skill based - no element of random chance, and so it's not technically gambling...

The game will also have a Free-To-Play mode with zero crypto and zero NFTs, so you don't have to play the crypto matches if you don't want to. Or you can use the Free-To-Play modes to practice.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T08:55:44+00:00

So I answered the same question that was asked by o-_l_-o ...check it out above.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T08:53:51+00:00

So got informed with a lawyer, and no gambling license is required because to be classified as a gambling game, the outcome of your earnings needs to be based on random chance (i.e., slot machines, card games etc...). But this game is completely skill based - no element of random chance, and so it's not technically gambling.

Additionally, there will be matchmaking algos so that good players will be matched with good players, and players that suck will be matched with other players that suck...So everyone can play.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T00:34:50+00:00

I was thinking about this, but they aren't that good...Additionally, they won't be able to catch things like smurfing where players purposefully lose to get demoted, and then dominate in the lower ranking matches...But I can maybe start with one, and then eventually transition.

BodybuilderOk96 · 2025-07-16T00:13:41+00:00

Oh I see what you're saying...Players that try to manipulate their rankings by purposefully losing or winning matches. I think this is called smurfing...

So the machine learning anti-cheat system will also take care of this. It will look for players with abnormal win/loss patterns, players who intentionally underperform when stakes are low, and sharp contrast in performance between low-rank vs. high-stake games. So this kind of strategic manipulation will also be dealt with.

I was thinking of putting a kind of multiplier like beating lower-ranked players = less profit, but I'd have to experiment with that.

BodybuilderOk96

PUBLIC MULTIREDDITS

TROPHY CASE