587 replies to this topic

[Alik Kerensky]

So one person got banned? All this noise for one person... okay, I'll file this with who cares... not because I support cheating of any kind, but because out of thousands of player and possible hundreds of cheaters you find one.

Edited by Alik Kerensky, 12 May 2015 - 09:06 PM.

[dervishx5]

So much for moral superiority!

[IraqiWalker]

Richter Kerensky, on 12 May 2015 - 08:57 PM, said:

Criminals get a trial by a jury consisting of their peers, so the police analogy doesn't work.

They got the trial, by PGI investigation, and final conclusion. You wanting to look at the classified trial transcripts, even though you are not related to the case in any way shape or form, is what really doesn't work.

Also, the analogy works, because no one (you included) talked about what happened after the arrest. You were asking if more people were "arrested". Not if they got convicted, or not.

We're talking capture (you specifically started that one), not verdict.

Nice try there.

VompoVompatti, on 12 May 2015 - 08:59 PM, said:

Not in every country. In some countries there are actual professionals who deal with justice.

India has literal bounty hunters that hunt criminals down, and just kill them. No trial, no arrest. Find'em, and kill'em.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 12 May 2015 - 09:23 PM.

[Egomane]

Rad Hanzo, on 12 May 2015 - 12:33 PM, said:

Egomane ?

https://eu.survarium...=1219&start=220

Not every company is like PGI

More reading comprehension failure.

I asked to provide me the name of a company that posts evidence. You gave a company that provides a list of names without evidence.

It has been repeatedly demanded that PGI has to show their evidence that cheating really happened. I want to know if there is any other company that would do that and so far none could be named. I am pretty sure you will not find one.

[Whatzituyah]

Egomane, on 12 May 2015 - 09:33 PM, said:

More reading comprehension failure.

I asked to provide me the name of a company that posts evidence. You gave a company that provides a list of names without evidence.

It has been repeatedly demanded that PGI has to show their evidence that cheating really happened. I want to know if there is any other company that would do that and so far none could be named. I am pretty sure you will not find one.

I would listen to Egomane he had a lot of experience with things like this on the forums if you know what I mean. I know that doesn't make his word more meaningful but still lots of experience.

Its kinda hard for a company to give evidence that a player did something to the public if I thinking the situation correctly they can't give names and say what they did that is defamation which can be sued over see here http://injury.findla...the-basics.html I am sick so kinda loopy in the brain wish I wasn't I have finals tomarrow.

[Coordinator Toxic Kerensky]

IraqiWalker, on 12 May 2015 - 08:19 PM, said:

Here's a real world example simulating what you're asking for:

Cops hunt down a criminal on the most wanted list. They get them, and you ask: "Did they catch another one with him? Cuz I don't trust the cops, unless they make mass arrests."

I hope this shows you why, and how your request has more holes in it, than a wheel of swiss cheese on Tom & Jerry.

Problem: the police in your analogy don't actually have any training to find out that a crime was even committed, much less have anything that could provide them with hard evidence that a crime has been committed, such as a highly invasive anti-cheat. How could they have compiled a list of criminals?

[IraqiWalker]

Coordinator Aigis Kurita, on 12 May 2015 - 10:23 PM, said:

Problem: the police in your analogy don't actually have any training to find out that a crime was even committed, much less have anything that could provide them with hard evidence that a crime has been committed, such as a highly invasive anti-cheat. How could they have compiled a list of criminals?

Did you even read the example?

Is reading comprehension in such a short supply nowadays?

1- For the analogy, the criminal is on the most wanted list (this means they have committed some seriously bad crimes).

2- In terms of what happened here, the player was reported.

3- You have NO evidence to support anything you're claiming there. How do you know that PGI has no anti-cheats implemented?

How do you know that PGI doesn't know what they are doing?

How do you know that they didn't investigate the cheater?

How about you drop the B.S., and only state things that: a- make sense, and b- you can back up.

Burden of proof is on the accuser here.


PGI investigated the player, found them guilty, and punished them accordingly. According to the EULA they don't even need to tell you when they ban you.

[Elizander]

It's like some people here never experienced having other people get banned in online games before.

We used to ban like 60-80 bot accounts per day per game master and that's manually confirming botting patterns and lack of response with internal evidence to justify the action to supervisors/managers but this is never shown to players or anyone else.

For the more automated stuff, pulling up a few hundred to maybe 10,000+ accounts and banning them all in one go based on server query data is also normal for some.

This has been going on for more than a decade already since we got online games.

Reaction is the same:

1) Banned person - It's not true!
2) Friends of banned person - He/she is a good person. He/she would never cheat!
3) People in the community - Great job <company>! Teach those cheaters a lesson!
4) Company - How can we maintain this type of security without it draining all our manpower for other tasks? (community/customer support/backend people)

It's nice to know that after working over 10 years on MMOs/mobile games that some things never change.

Edit (extra):

5) GM after confirming a cheater (high level/popular) after a long investigation - I got you now. (Ban)Hammer time, *****!
6) Database person - Sorry! I didn't know the cheat query script would crash the game's database! Or that it would take 12-24 hours for the script to finish running and we can't run any other script while doing that!
7) Investors/CEO/Finance - So wait, we're paying people to get rid of our customers?

Edited by Elizander, 12 May 2015 - 11:29 PM.

[Ron Ron]

VompoVompatti, on 12 May 2015 - 08:59 PM, said:

Not in every country. In some countries there are actual professionals who deal with justice.

I have an inkling Canada isn't one of them...

[An Anime Princess]

IraqiWalker, on 12 May 2015 - 09:22 PM, said:

India has literal bounty hunters that hunt criminals down, and just kill them. No trial, no arrest. Find'em, and kill'em.

caste system, corruption, and legal vigilanteism? hell, india sounds simply epic, friend

[PhoenixFire55]

Soy, on 12 May 2015 - 09:52 AM, said:

Basically everything you just said is bull ****.

Right ... so PGI actively monitored the 'you-know-who' for an extended period of time and 'you-know-whos' ban have nothing to do with 'you-know-who' so easily winning against 'that-other-guy' in a 1v1 tourney that was so inconveniently streamed using the spectator tool. Sure, sure ...

Go sober up so you can answer for your own bull****.

[Minimum Viable Kieransky]

IraqiWalker, on 12 May 2015 - 10:31 PM, said:

Burden of proof is on the accuser here.

So no matter who the accuser is in this case, there is no proof?

[Armando]

Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, on 11 May 2015 - 07:10 PM, said:

I'm sure there's an article on wikipedia you could probably comprehend on the burden of proof, if you would like to come to understand how you are misinterpreting it.

He got it right, the burden of proof lies with the person making the accusation. In this specific case, the burden of proof would lie with the person accusing PGI of banning someone without evidence.

Not to be confused with the burden of proof that would lie with PGI for accusing a player of cheating. That evidence only needs to be (and only SHOULD BE) shared with the quote / unquote 'cheater'. All it needs to be shared is evidence...in no way is PGI obligated to share their investigation methods, and would be gigantic morons if they did.

****UPDATE*****

OMG, just realized that the people asking PGI for EXPLICIT information on HOW they caught the cheater, cheating...is the cheater in questions unit.

Before I realized this I wouldn't have thought twice to look at old 'what ever the hell it was' former unit (you know, before the Ban), but NOW...after these kind of shady, Shady, SHADY requests / demands, I will be disappointed if PGI didn't review each and every member for similar evidence.

Edited by Armando, 13 May 2015 - 01:02 AM.

[IraqiWalker]

Kieranator, on 13 May 2015 - 12:20 AM, said:

So no matter who the accuser is in this case, there is no proof?

You have no proof.

PGI has proof of the wrong doing taking effect. They just won't share it, because pleasing you isn't worth exposing their methods, and frankly, you, and literally everyone here (myself included) is not involved in the case, and have no bearing on it.

Armando, on 13 May 2015 - 12:29 AM, said:

He got it right, the burden of proof lies with the person making the accusation. In this specific case, the burden of proof would lie with the person accusing PGI of banning someone without evidence.

Not to be confused with the burden of proof that would lie with PGI for accusing a player of cheating. That proof only needs to be (and only SHOULD BE) shared with the quote / unquote 'cheater'.

Someone who speaks sense.

You sir are a rare gem, and deserve all the upvotes.

PhoenixFire55, on 13 May 2015 - 12:17 AM, said:

Right ... so PGI actively monitored the 'you-know-who' for an extended period of time and 'you-know-whos' ban have nothing to do with 'you-know-who' so easily winning against 'that-other-guy' in a 1v1 tourney that was so inconveniently streamed using the spectator tool. Sure, sure ...

Go sober up so you can answer for your own bull****.

No, they banned "you-know-who" because they won a 1v1. Tinfoil hat much?

You might want to heed your own advice, and sober up as well.

Why would PGI ban a player because they won fair and square?

PGI could have released a statement saying "Nope, player XYZ did not cheat" and that would've been it.

Instead they banned a competitive player from the game.

Occam's Razor is something you might want to look up. Because it has "You're wrong" written all over it.

[Soy]

PhoenixFire55, on 13 May 2015 - 12:17 AM, said:

Right ...

Well okay then, cool!

[KursedVixen]

So am I to assume that if a certain person in your unit were to be banned for 'hacking' the system giving themselves tons of free MC and abusing the ability to do so, should not be banned because they can't show you proof?

[Ron Ron]

Armando, on 13 May 2015 - 12:29 AM, said:

He got it right, the burden of proof lies with the person making the accusation. In this specific case, the burden of proof would lie with the person accusing PGI of banning someone without evidence.

Not to be confused with the burden of proof that would lie with PGI for accusing a player of cheating. That evidence only needs to be (and only SHOULD BE) shared with the quote / unquote 'cheater'. All it needs to be shared is evidence...in no way is PGI obligated to share their investigation methods, and would be gigantic morons if they did.

****UPDATE*****

OMG, just realized that the people asking PGI for EXPLICIT information on HOW they caught the cheater, cheating...is the cheater in questions unit.

Before I realized this I wouldn't have thought twice to look at old 'what ever the hell it was' former unit (you know, before the Ban), but NOW...after these kind of shady, Shady, SHADY requests / demands, I will be disappointed if PGI didn't review each and every member for similar evidence.

its too late now. LoAdInG h4Ck1Ng t00Ls https://youtu.be/Js02m-7qHyE?t=61

[B0oN]

Egomane ?

http://en.svfan.ru/

All the evidence to download, and actually the same replay VG uses to find the culprits, bar VG´s own telemetry and other nifty tools they use .

Uhhh,that hostility yo ... *basks in it*

You´re still a man of this shady company called PGI, deep in your heart, hm ?

[TexAce]

now tell me, how can I search for banned people in the MWO forums I'm curious who is ***** enough to cheat

[Lily from animove]

Skarlock, on 12 May 2015 - 07:38 AM, said:

Actually I looked it up in the forums under the rules and guidelines section and you're completely wrong.

http://mwomercs.com/...wo-game-client/

Taken directly from the rules as stated by the staff.

Q: My mouse/keyboard came with macro software that lets me emulate a series of clicks or helps me with some process. Is this allowed?

A: Yes, using macros as provided by 3rd party hardware vendors is allowed. Though the use of any modifications to assist with aiming, aimbots, wall hacks, or any attempt to give information or tactical assistance that other players would not have by default, is a serious violation of our Terms of Use and any account found to be using such software will likely be suspended or banned.

Taken directly from the rules. So firing macros are 100% A OK. So you're dead wrong.

as already said before, this can change very quickly, I has this happen already in many games.