Minecraft anticheat guide
Aimbot Step Arithmetic Checks: Grid Tests Explained
What FairPlay's aimbot step-arithmetic checks test in yaw and pitch, which legitimate sensitivity changes resemble a grid, and how staff should read alerts.
What do the step-arithmetic aimbot checks look at?
The step-arithmetic checks ask whether a player's yaw and pitch changes fit the step sizes that a physical mouse and Minecraft's sensitivity setting can produce. They look at the arithmetic of the angles, not at how fast or how cleanly the player aims. Eight checks in this family test that arithmetic from different angles.
The family covers the Cope, Divisor, Integer Steps, Small Pitch Lattice, Step Modulo, Step Quotient, Pitch Step Ratio and Yaw Step Ratio checks. One check asks whether two axes share a step size. Another asks whether pitch values keep returning to a small set of positions. Another asks how a change divides into a base step.
Which cheat behavior do these checks target?
The family is aimed at rotations that come from software rather than from a mouse. A program that sets a view angle directly can produce a value that sits on no step a real mouse could create, or it can repeat a computed step in a way that a hand on a mouse does not. Staff should read these checks as tests of where the input came from. They are not proof that the player meant to cheat.
Some checks focus on pitch alone. Small Pitch Lattice looks at small vertical moves and whether they land on a fixed set of positions. Pitch Step Ratio and Yaw Step Ratio compare each axis against a sensitivity profile that is learned for that player. When a later rotation breaks the profile in a way the profile should not allow, the check can raise an alert for that axis.
Other checks work on the arithmetic of the deltas. Step Modulo and Step Quotient look at how a delta divides into a base step and whether the remainder or quotient follows a pattern. Cope and Divisor look for a step that both axes respect. Integer Steps asks whether movement arrives in whole-degree increments, a pattern that a mouse-driven view does not usually show.
Which legitimate setups can look like a grid?
Sensitivity changes are the most common innocent cause. A player who adjusts in-game sensitivity during a session, or who uses a zoom effect that scales rotation, produces a step pattern that shifts partway through the record. The Pitch and Yaw Step Ratio checks learn a sensitivity profile from rotations taken while the player is not attacking, so a sudden switch can look like a new and unexplained step size.
Very low sensitivity is another. A player who moves the mouse slowly produces tiny steps, and tiny steps overlap with many of the grid tests. The arithmetic can then look regular even though the player is simply aiming carefully with a slow setting.
Operating-system pointer acceleration can make raw mouse movement uneven, and uneven movement breaks clean ratios. Mouse hardware differs as well. A high-resolution mouse can produce finer steps than a lower-resolution one, which changes what a normal grid looks like for that player. None of these causes is cheating, and none should be read as cheating on its own.
How should staff read a step-arithmetic alert?
Treat an alert as a question about the input, not as a finding. Start by asking whether the step pattern changed during the session. A pattern that breaks partway through usually points to a settings change. A pattern that is steady across the whole record points to something about the player's setup or about the input itself.
Use the table below to decide what to check next. Each row pairs a pattern with the question that resolves it.
| Pattern in the alert | Question to ask | Evidence that helps |
|---|---|---|
| Step pattern stops matching partway through the session | Did the player change sensitivity or zoom? | A settings change in chat, or a recording that shows the change |
| Pitch keeps returning to a small set of values | Is the player on a very low sensitivity? | The player's self-reported sensitivity and a second session with the same setup |
| Yaw fits a grid but pitch does not | Did the player switch mouse or pointer settings? | A recording of the same fight, and the player's own description of the setup |
| Alerts cluster around one target | Was this one long duel or a short burst? | Video of the fight and the other check families that fired in the same window |
What should you tune only in staging?
The step checks are sensitive to settings, so tune them only where you can replay known sessions. Make one change at a time, then run the same replay again. If the alert counts move in a direction you did not expect, undo the change before you test anything else.
Keep the learned sensitivity profile out of manual edits. It is built per player from rotations, and editing the result by hand makes the record harder to explain later. If a settings change causes a problem, let the profile relearn on staging and note the time of the change.
What can a step check never tell you?
A step check sees angles, not hardware or intent. Input that the server cannot observe, such as a modified client that changes how it produces rotation, limits what any angle test can conclude. A clean step pattern does not clear a player, and a grid pattern does not convict one.
Pair this family with the aim-geometry checks for targets and with the window-spread checks. When several families disagree, the disagreement is itself useful. It tells you which question to answer next, whether that is a settings question, a recording question, or a question about the combat context.
FAQ
Why do step checks read view angles instead of click speed?
Click speed belongs to the clicking checks. Step checks read the view angles themselves, because the grid a mouse leaves in yaw and pitch is a property of the rotation, not of how often the button is pressed.
What should I do if many players changed sensitivity in the same week?
Group the alerts by date first. A cluster that starts on the day of a settings change is more likely explained by that change than by one player's input.
Can a step alert alone justify a punishment?
Your own policy decides that. This article's position is that a step alert is one input. Gather a second kind of evidence, such as a recording or an alert from another family, and record your reasoning before any action.