I have not clicked the link. I suspect its about not giving you up with a fancy beat playing in the background
There used to be sites that had no-cd cracks, back when most games came on CD's or DVD's. Most of them had viruses/keyloggers/etc. I think I'll pass on this also. I have a new job and a half-crazy soon-to-be-ex-wife so I think I have enough drama for now. |
...informative stuff....
Thank you for doing this. Giving the context on why something was suspicious or not was a significant improvement over other posts that I'd seen on this. |
Both deadboltt and Seeking are openly being rude and insulting the other party on every possible occasion both in the forum and in the attached document. Just for being rude to the organiser you deserve being kicked out.
Why is this thread still open? Or are all civilities thrown out of the window?
They appear to be, with the exception of some of the posters and Relic. Relic gave a gentle warning, in public, for people to cool down but it got largely ignored with the exception of one toxic reply. I'd bet their next response will be more direct.
I don't think the charges of racism against anyone at the ML or Relic were at all justified. Relic will have a higher standard for banning someone who has made money from tournaments because if they are banned unfairly, it opens Relic to liability. I would have done the same. |
Dear community,
I was silent through the days and analysed my clips and the replays that were given to me. It took me a while to write my appeal but now i am ready to publish it. I hope everyone understands my position and how i have been treated unfairly in this case.
Link to the my document: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CB9qxa5Awmjdd27koQ22G8jwQ3sjLmczzJgbd3MiivQ/edit?usp=sharing
Seeking
You made a good defense to the maphacking allegations. It was cheapened by including screenshots of what were intended to be private conversations, then by making personal attacks but trying to claim they're not personal attacks. I somewhat understand why you went there, as I think all of this should've been private.
As for some of the investigative tactics, they look like they were borrowed straight from the police's handbook for investigations. People can make up their own minds if it is okay or an overreach. |
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. |
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. |
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. |
100 games and 10 lucky moments are not really a statistical anomaly. It's quite normal.
Problem comes when one has 3 or more completely lucky moments in one game. I'm not talking luck like penetrating a KT with scott on max range but shooting randomly, for no reason and scoring a direct hit. Sure one time it can happen. Two times? Sure. Three times? Eh, if it's your day. But 4 or more times it's really becoming a chore. Furthermore, a player can defend themselves retroactively. They get accused, look at the suspicious replay and make up excuses for most of the situations. A cheater will not be able to completely explain every random shot they decided to take. That's why.
Trust me, you won't have 10 lucky moments in one game. Might be a case if it were 10vs10 with super duper resource generation. But in 2v2 or 3v3, not gonna happen.
If you get 10 completely lucky shots in one game. I'll give you my address and you can come and beat the shit out of me.
The two attack ground shots on the cloaked AT guns looked more than just a little too "lucky", especially considering that I didn't see any other times when he randomly fired into the FOW or any other attack ground on something that he didn't see. |
CP4 and OST P4 AI capabilities are almost identical. What the CP4 does not have is AT, that's what is being used to "pay" for the aura.
Edit:
Overall, I don't think the CP4 is that bad of a unit at the moment. It is just sometimes very odd to use. If you have 50 POP invested into infantry (which is low-normal) and invest into a CP4, you have about 38 POP to play with (usually slightly less).
I can't really speak of 1v1, but in team games you need to subtract an additional Panzerwerfer which brings you down to 26 POP at most. So you can get either a Panther and more infantry, or 2 P4s. I personally am usually not sure if I really want this unit when the only benefit is that two other units on the field survive a little better. Because you pay with quite a bit of micro and lose a lot of punch compared to a normal P4. I usually tend to play the way I am most familiar with and get a normal P4 instead (or invest 2-6 POP more into a T4 unit).
This is the problem with it for me. It doesn't add enough survivability to anything to justify not being able to bring in a second Panther. It costs every as much as a regular P4 with roughly the same AI and much worse AT. Give it recon and mark target then I'd be happy with it, at least until somebody discovers there is a second Elefant doctrine and starts asking for nerfs again.... |
Watch your wording mate. You can criticize the process and handling as much as you want, but insulting the people behind it is a no go.
That being said, you do realize that your standard is unachievable? Your putting higher hurdles on someone getting banned in a video game than people getting sent to jail in real life.
In the rarest cases you will have doubtless video and audio footage of someone committing a crime. Would you let a drug trafficker go because there is no video evidence of him handling drugs (not related to Seeking in any sense)? Just a lot of fitting phone connections, emails/notes, potentially DNA on a package but that could have gotten there in another way. Circumstantial evidence is being used every day, every where. The only question is how much evidence do you need to minimize the number of people being hit falsely.
And again, you can criticize the handling of this case as much as you want. For what it is, the discussion here has stayed very civil. Even if you disagree with making this public - and there are quite some arguments for keeping it private - "lynching" is the wrong word for it.
+1 - A good player will be nearly impossible to "convict" based on replays. I think a lot of people are assuming that he either maphacks all the time or none of the time. The truth may be more complicated. None of us really know.
If it was a robbery case and I was on the jury, I probably would've voted for conviction. If it was a more serious charge, maybe not. Part of the problem is that I'm not one of Seeking's peers when it comes to knowledge of the game, particularly sniper play. I completely understand why AE end up taking the middle ground of a time ban. |
Relic Entertainment
cblanco ★ 
보드카 중대 
VonManteuffel 
Heartless Jäger 
