It’s tellingly ironic that for you it’s totally okay to make a broad statement, then when being called out cut it back to “where relevant”.

This is you restating your dishonesty. Acting as if you found something telling when you're just reasserting the same bad faith lie isn't telling anything.

And in the same sentence you make a strawman yourself, claiming that I’m acting like you are “talking about not having a game at all”.

Hyperbole is not a strawman. You in essence imply that if I don't have the bucket, I can't have basically all other critical game features because they all share something with the bucket (being server side solely in some situations).

Given a certain observable trajectory it’s freakishly easy to get a good enough point of origin to get an unfair advantage with that information.

How can you disagree with 2 different solutions with an answer that only responds to one of them?

For the grenades, a small change in the angle of impact massively changes the angle of launch. To the player having the grenade thrown at them from out of line of sight, this means they can't use that information to snipe or prepare other than a very general direction, and its completely lost if there are any bounces or other randomizing elements in the grenades path.

To say this isn't solved is to be irrationally demanding.

As for the bullet tracers, if someone is in line of sight, and shooting at you, the use of tracers is extremely limited/could be used regardless client side. I'm not sure why you feel this is a strong argument. Maybe you can elaborate but it seems like something more likely to obstruct than help if a target is visible.

Correct. Client side anti cheat can only make it so hard. Never impossible.

If you are willing to go to that logical extreme, where the point of my comment was to say that decrying server side in place of as opposed to alongside client side system watching, is unexpected. It feels like you didn't quite receive the message there, which is that every system is imperfect, but of them, technically speaking, server side is the least able to be compromised.

And that’s not true. Wall hacks would still exist, as necessary information can be used to determine an enemies position. To a certain extend.

That to a certain extent is what I'll focus on here, because to me its "in some exceptional cases, the thing that is largely eliminated can still exist" and to that, I would say that if we are being so strict for server side, we should be so strict about client side.

If we are so strict there, then we already know that client side fails too under these overly tight considerations, and I mean client side that magically works perfectly as intended.

This is as game audio is easy to use outside of a machine, and direct memory hacking exists as mentioned earlier.

The point is, sure, but as I covered with the point about grenades, the problem is pretty much solved, with some caveats as all things have.

And yes, put to an unreasonable extreme it would eliminate wall hacks entirely. Just nobody would want to play such a game.

This is where we disagree and it goes back to conversation above.

I don't see any reason there could not be found an acceptable balance. For instance, even if you add some frames worth of prior information, giving that to everyone instead of allowing cheaters to have it is one possible solution, that even according to your feelings on what would make a game unplayable, would keep it playable. That is just 1 solution.