Top level player allegedly maphacking in CoH2

Not true, since John is our new CM, there were alot of bans. But mainly based on reports via Email.

How many of them were bans for maphacking? Some bans like racism in chat or team killing are easy. Maphacking would be much more difficult. Relic had something to detect maphacking several years ago, but my guess is that there are new exploits that Relic can't detect, and has limited resources to develop detection tools for this game.

Even for games that have VAC, it sometimes takes months for people to get banned. COH2 doesn't so I wouldn't expect Relic to act fast.

I have found your interjection into these debates to be deeply hypocritical.

You were involved in a subjective community process to accuse a player that didn't get detected by Relic Entertainment, you found evidence he (or an account linked to him) was involved on hacking forums, which was used in conjunction with the subjective clip based evidence that had been collected.

Here we had a subjective community process to accuse a player that didn't get detected by Relic Entertainment, we found evidence (he played on the pc and account of a player who everyone agrees hacked in replays), which was used in conjunction with the subjective clip/replay based evidence that had been collected.

All of your raz clips/replays could have been explained with "game sense bro" in just the same way as ours.

Do me a favour, go and watch one of the last 1v1 games Seeking played before the accusations went live. He manhandles a player that goes life and death with everyone. Don't look at my time stamps, and look at the times you go "hmm", then watch any other 1v1 game replay on the ladder and do an equal exercise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy2gxRMwuW8

Now I'm willing to accept either of the following two scenarios:

1) Seeking has an innovative gameplay style and game sense that would always have led to suspicion at some point - but you don't agree with the panel of top players, referees, and casters that analysed his play and felt yourself to be in a position of unbiased view so were able to compose a google doc declaring it was mostly chance and game sense.

2) Seeking was hacking either via Fog of War or the minimap (both currently possible) - but you don't agree with the panel of top players, referees, and casters that analysed his play, and felt yourself to be in a position of unbiased view so were able to compose a google doc declaring it was mostly chance and game sense.

Which is it?

You're always so polite to me aren't you? Careful, your bias might be showing.

Unfortunately your premise is flawed. Raz WAS detected by Relic. Dbmb WAS detected by Relic. And in both cases, permabanned for map hacking.

My entire "interjection" into this debate was to voice the opinion that the way that this was handled was not optimal/deeply flawed (which you yourself admit) and that it could potentially jeopardize other players in the future.

In the case that I brought up regarding Raz/Dbmb everything was handled privately until the tournament organizer decided to message Raz/Dbmb privately to tell him that he had been disqualified. As I stated from the outset, in my opinion the tournament organizer has the sole discretion to allow/prevent anyone from playing in their tournament for any or even no reason at all. It wouldn't make for the best tournament possible if a TO was disallowing participation on a whim, but at the end of the day, it's the TO's tournament. It's the TO's blood, sweat, tears, and hard work that make the tournament possible (shoutout to the refs that help with everything as well.) Therefore, it is the TOs decision.

Instead, you privately went to Relic (this part was the right call), but when they didn't handle the situation in a manner that you saw fitting, you decided to make a video declaring Seeking to be a map hacker. Surely you can see how this might have some negative consequences for Seeking should he be not guilty at the end of the day? Why not just PM Seeking, explain the situation, and tell him that you and others involved in running the tournament were uncomfortable with his participation? Then, if he chooses to make it public, you can present your evidence to the public. It couldn't be because you were biased against him from the start, and unhappy with the way Relic handled everything, could it?

Im not sure why manhandling PGA is a noteworthy thing

Im not sure why manhandling PGA is a noteworthy thing

Fair enough I retract that part of my statment.

I have found your interjection into these debates to be deeply hypocritical.

You were involved in a subjective community process to accuse a player that didn't get detected by Relic Entertainment, you found evidence he (or an account linked to him) was involved on hacking forums, which was used in conjunction with the subjective clip based evidence that had been collected.

Here we had a subjective community process to accuse a player that didn't get detected by Relic Entertainment, we found evidence (he played on the pc and account of a player who everyone agrees hacked in replays), which was used in conjunction with the subjective clip/replay based evidence that had been collected.

All of your raz clips/replays could have been explained with "game sense bro" in just the same way as ours.

Do me a favour, go and watch one of the last 1v1 games Seeking played before the accusations went live. He manhandles a player that goes life and death with everyone. Don't look at my time stamps, put your head in the players and count at the times you go "hmm", then watch any other 1v1 game replay on the ladder and do an equal exercise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cy2gxRMwuW8

Now I'm willing to accept either of the following two scenarios:

1) Seeking has an innovative gameplay style and incredible game sense that would always have led to suspicion at some point - but you don't agree with the panel of top players, referees, and casters that analysed his play and felt yourself to be in a position of unbiased view so were able to compose a google doc declaring it was mostly chance and game sense.

2) Seeking was hacking either via Fog of War or the minimap (both currently possible) - but you don't agree with the panel of top players, referees, and casters that analysed his play, and felt yourself to be in a position of unbiased view so were able to compose a google doc declaring it was mostly chance and game sense.

Which is it?

I've literally done this to pga 5 games in a row back in the day and I was never an A-tier player like seeking. What could arguably raise suspicion is how he absolutely rolled over noggano and to a lesser extent devm.

I've literally done this to pga 5 games in a row back in the day and I was never an A-tier player like seeking. What could arguably raise suspicion is how he absolutely rolled over noggano and to a lesser extent devm.

Fair enough, I retract that part of my statement.

How many of them were bans for maphacking? Some bans like racism in chat or team killing are easy. Maphacking would be much more difficult. Relic had something to detect maphacking several years ago, but my guess is that there are new exploits that Relic can't detect, and has limited resources to develop detection tools for this game.

Even for games that have VAC, it sometimes takes months for people to get banned. COH2 doesn't so I wouldn't expect Relic to act fast.

I don't think that i am allowed to give a comment here, i am sorry.

You're always so polite to me aren't you? Careful, your bias might be showing.

Dbmb WAS detected by Relic.

Would not say that

Not true, since John is our new CM, there were alot of bans. But mainly based on reports via Email.

I see, still doesn't change the fact that this whole procedure we're talking about here is unrelated to a potential relic ban. Is that correct?

Would not say that

?????

He was literally permabanned by Relic for map hacking. Like... I don't even know what to say lol. It's an objective fact.

You're always so polite to me aren't you? Careful, your bias might be showing.

I don't believe I've been impolite to you, I actually think you've shown a certain degree of arrogance and bias yourself. Maybe we'll just have to agree to disagree.

Unfortunately your premise is flawed. Raz WAS detected by Relic. Dbmb WAS detected by Relic. And in both cases, permabanned for map hacking.

Wasn't the whole thing with Raz that he wrote his own hacks and flew under the detection radar? Isn't this why the community had to figure things out for themselves at first?

but when they didn't handle the situation in a manner that you saw fitting,

I never declared him to be a map hacker initially, I said here are the accusations and here is the evidence, and that any evidence to the contrary would be given equal platform which it has. It wasn't ideal but I was trying to be fair even if I failed, In fact anyone involved in the process would agree that I showed a lot of cynicism at every stage before having to act.

but when they didn't handle the situation in a manner that you saw fitting

You make it sound like I threw a tantrum when things didn't go my way? The only thing I have any degree of protest over is the in my opinion 100% obvious Satup/Deadbolt replay evidence didn't result in anything official.

I have a duty to take things into my own hands if I feel the tournaments I'm looking after/ providing a system for are being exploited. I did so in the best way I could.

I see, still doesn't change the fact that this whole procedure we're talking about here is unrelated to a potential relic ban. Is that correct?

Completely unrelated.

Giving Seeking platform to explain some of the "evidence" was part of ML process. I don't think Relic would care nor take into consideration Seeking's BS had they hypothetically determined Seeking's guilt.

I don't think that i am allowed to give a comment here, i am sorry.



Would not say that

No worries, I wasn't expecting an answer. This was a complicated case.

As for your reply to the other part, I played against some of the people that were banned in the first wave of maphacking bans. I was about a 300 level 1v1 player at the time and the ones that I played against had worse mechanics than me. It's a lot easier to detect when a trash player is maphacking than a good one.

You didn't throw a tantrum?

Does any of this sound familiar...

"It's sickening that Relic didn't listen to us."

"I'm gonna punch some mother fucker."

"Cheating scum."

"My blood is boiling."

"Scum."

"It will be Seeking in my world if Relic don't play ball."

"We say [names redacted] will write to the BERLIN POLICE and explain that he's a cheat that steals money unless he hands over 650 to ML."

"Relic are fuck heads."

-Did he release his document? Your response: "who gives a fuck"

You ACTUALLY suggested filing a false police report over an accusation in a video game? Jesus fuck dude. That's fucked beyond words.

To be fair, i have not played against PGA since his comeback but i doubt his performance changed alot since the time i met him in automatch on a daily basis. He used to be the kind of player thats able to give you a hard time when you dont play at 100% but ultimately isnt a hard nut to crack when you dont fool around.
I kinda miss his s-mine spam with okw
That was fun to watch and miserable to play against

You're always so polite to me aren't you? Careful, your bias might be showing.

He was polite to you because of your former stature as a player and clan leader. I thought you were being obnoxious, deceitful, and condescending even when I agreed with part of your posts.

Private PM thread between myself, referees, and people that had reported the issue. I was being emotional upon thinking someone had hacked their way to taking publicly donated funds.

What isn't shown is the 100s of messages of me being rational and trying to find the best way forward.

Why screen shot someone speaking sense 9 times when you can capture the 1 time they let things get to them.

On the idea of a complaint to the police force, I genuinely thought that Seeking had hacked his way to 2nd place in a tournament at the time of writing (before I rationlised everything and calmed down), so in a private PM thread I said something outlandish and ridiculous. I don't think people took me seriously.

To be fair, i have not played against PGA since his comeback but i doubt his performance changed alot since the time i met him in automatch on a daily basis. He used to be the kind of player thats able to give you a hard time when you dont play at 100% but ultimately isnt a hard nut to crack when you dont fool around.
I kinda miss his s-mine spam with okw
That was fun to watch and miserable to play against

Yeah I always thought it was cool to see people play him, cus he's an island, he just plays the game develops his own strats and sometimes gives people really good games. I think Dane has probably cast him over 100 times by now XD

From how I read the messages, Relic refused to ban Seeking due to lack of evidence even before everything went public.

Yes and that's what I feel is a bit weird considering I am sure Relic would have banned other people if presented with the same evidence. This is also confirmed by seeking's document where a screenshot shows how Relic literally says that in a "high profile" case like this there needs to be more evidence than in regular cases.

For me this seems unfair as standards applied for banning people for map hacking should be the same no matter their popularity.