Jump to content


If You Were Banned


  • Please log in to reply
489 replies to this topic

RenamedUser_1000515893 #41 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:35

    Captain

  • Players
  • 52406 battles
  • 1,809
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011

View PostThePigSheFlies, on Nov 29 2016 - 15:31, said:

 

a good start would be to have A CLEAR UNDERSTANDING of what is actually a banned mod

 

They posted an updated list of banned mod's and then a Q&A about it as well, before they did this sweep.



ThePigSheFlies #42 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:36

    Major

  • Players
  • 73038 battles
  • 17,427
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012

View Post1K1LLuDi3, on Nov 29 2016 - 10:34, said:

 

How many top 10 clan players (of which +90% use cheats) have you baned? 

 

you should watch twitch or youtube of these folks - many stream, and a HUGE NUMBER play pure vanilla.

 

 



ThePigSheFlies #43 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:37

    Major

  • Players
  • 73038 battles
  • 17,427
  • [SIMP] SIMP
  • Member since:
    10-20-2012

View PostCheekyman, on Nov 29 2016 - 10:35, said:

 

They posted an updated list of banned mod's and then a Q&A about it as well, before they did this sweep.

 

I missed it.  the link / announcement isn't all that clear (still) but all it did was mean I have narrowed my mods down to essentially still having xvm and not much else.

 

when I am triggered I will run arty now and again, and I legit want to know that I'm not targeting purple players...  



Trapster99 #44 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:39

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 42783 battles
  • 224
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    06-08-2012

View PostNyxWGA, on Nov 29 2016 - 10:17, said:

http://worldoftanks..../17/first-wave/

 

I just completed placing the bans myself, and there were 252 of them. For this first round, we deliberately were very careful. We set the detection criteria extremely strict -  meaning we would detect fewer people but the ones detected we were sure they were using illegal mods. We have less strict sets of criteria, and could have set it such that we detected far more people, but then there would have been the possibility of false positives.

 

We plan to run the detection criteria regularly, and continue updating our detection methods and algorithms. We expect to complete another ban wave before the end of the year, so people who continue to use these programs will receive consequences. We knew that we wouldn't get everyone on the first pass, but will continue to work towards fair play for everyone.

 

Detection methods and algorithms.......

Hum, there are many implications to the statements on the detection methods.  Many implications.

However, my stats are so terrible that I run the risk of being banned 'for stupid'.

Indeed, a year ago in the WGLNA 3 vs 3 Tier VI competition, there were a few 'purple' teams that seemed to always connect their shots, always ammo rack ya, always kill a crew member with each shot even while going full speed in a Cromwell.  My personal detect-o-meter went off with those teams.

This is a good first step.

I am still looking for the mod that prevents me from rushing out ahead of the pack to get focused and killed.  The mod that forces me to use terrain, concealment and detection ranges to my advantage.  The mod in which I and my team mates magically focus fire on the most exposed opponent tank.  Yes, the rumor floating around is the mod is called...Using Your Brain.  Does anyone know where I can find----My Brain?
 

LeaveIT2Beaver #45 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:39

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 37182 battles
  • 9,894
  • [J4F] J4F
  • Member since:
    07-04-2014

 

****

Content moderated by JayStark02

 

That is over the line and just plain rude


Edited by JayStark02, Nov 29 2016 - 18:17.


RenamedUser_1000515893 #46 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:41

    Captain

  • Players
  • 52406 battles
  • 1,809
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
The amusing thing about this is anyone who has been banned for other reasons like tking is now immediately a skapegoat for any person that searches through the clan memberlists. 

OLDIRTYBOMBER #47 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:41

    Captain

  • -Players-
  • 11334 battles
  • 1,615
  • [DONKY] DONKY
  • Member since:
    09-05-2016

View PostRAF_Recovery, on Nov 29 2016 - 15:31, said:

If anything that is a absurdly low number. I am sorry but the day to day play I can see cheaters in almost every battle. Granted some of the "anomalies" I see are due to server lag but the majority can only be attributed to some kind of cheating hack. 

 

Yea? are you first person specing them? How can you tell? 

Seems theres a lot of players crying "hacks" everytime they die.

 

Shot by a invistank - Hacker

Penned frontally - Hacker

Module damage - Hacker

First shot ammo racked - OMG BAN THIS MFN HACKER RIGHT NOW 

 

:trollface:



Baddy_ #48 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 19813 battles
  • 3,040
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014
It amuses me when people say they can't use AA+ anymore. I've never bothered with any assistance mods and I'm playing st a pretty decent level.

NightmareMk9 #49 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:44

    Major

  • Players
  • 34875 battles
  • 2,594
  • [ZOUTH] ZOUTH
  • Member since:
    03-11-2012

I love how the OPs main point is to prove that all the "Top Clans" are full of cheaters.  The data disproves this and now he is butthurt.

 

Block Quote

 possibility of false positives.

This is a little concerning.  I understand that you don't want to list specific mods, but I think you need to list SPECIFIC NAMES for the most common mods you consider a 'Cheat'.

If they change the name or other attributes of the mod later, just update the list.

 

ie - AutoAim+ is not allowed.  If they change the name to AimerHelper and it is the exact same mod.  You get banned.

 



Trapster99 #50 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:45

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 42783 battles
  • 224
  • [D-DAY] D-DAY
  • Member since:
    06-08-2012

View PostCombatEngineerHooah, on Nov 29 2016 - 10:42, said:

It amuses me when people say they can't use AA+ anymore. I've never bothered with any assistance mods and I'm playing st a pretty decent level.

 

Then it must be that you are using that Brain Mod that I hear people talking about.

moogleslam #51 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:45

    Major

  • Players
  • 45588 battles
  • 4,917
  • [GURUS] GURUS
  • Member since:
    12-20-2013

View PostCombatEngineerHooah, on Nov 29 2016 - 10:42, said:

It amuses me when people say they can't use AA+ anymore. I've never bothered with any assistance mods and I'm playing st a pretty decent level.

 

It amuses me that this amuses you.  I'm playing at a "pretty decent level" since removing AA+, but as has been said hundreds of times on these forums, the in-game Autoaim is atrocious, and it would be nice to have one that functions better (like the console one).

Da_Craw #52 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:47

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 27359 battles
  • 3,172
  • [DOG5] DOG5
  • Member since:
    05-30-2014
Autoaim+ on Aslains is allowed.  The author removed the "snap-to" feature that was the problem.  Of course, it doesn't do much now. 

StranaMechty #53 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:47

    Captain

  • Beta Testers
  • 36275 battles
  • 1,400
  • Member since:
    01-23-2011

View Post1K1LLuDi3, on Nov 29 2016 - 10:34, said:

 

 top 10 clan players (of which +90% use cheats) 



CavScout19D #54 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:51

    Major

  • Players
  • 24434 battles
  • 4,773
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

View PostNightmareMk9, on Nov 29 2016 - 10:44, said:

I love how the OPs main point is to prove that all the "Top Clans" are full of cheaters.  The data disproves this and now he is butthurt.

 

This is a little concerning.  I understand that you don't want to list specific mods, but I think you need to list SPECIFIC NAMES for the most common mods you consider a 'Cheat'.

If they change the name or other attributes of the mod later, just update the list.

 

ie - AutoAim+ is not allowed.  If they change the name to AimerHelper and it is the exact same mod.  You get banned.

 

 

It's a fool's errand to list mods by name. 

Baddy_ #55 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:52

    Major

  • Players
  • 19813 battles
  • 3,040
  • Member since:
    03-09-2014

View Postmoogleslam, on Nov 29 2016 - 16:45, said:

 

It amuses me that this amuses you.  I'm playing at a "pretty decent level" since removing AA+, but as has been said hundreds of times on these forums, the in-game Autoaim is atrocious, and it would be nice to have one that functions better (like the console one).

 

I rarely to never use auto aim unless I'm circling a tank. I notice taking a well-places shot by leading the tank that may be zipping around me or in the open works 10x better.

Mortig #56 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:53

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 35971 battles
  • 80
  • [SCDRL] SCDRL
  • Member since:
    07-06-2013

I would like to see WG post a list of modders/modpacks that they are working with so gamers can use a collection and know it's ok.  I personally use Aslain's and it seems clear to me that Aslain's is in contact with WG and removing mods that are banned.  If WG posted this list, everyone who wanted to be safe could use these mod packs.

 

I also like the idea that although safe shot was removed, it was re-added after a discussion with WG.  Thanks!


 

I suspect the first wave were the really bad mods - lasers and tree down mod - what I consider 'obvious' cheats - I don't think anyone could reasonably say these are ok, so the players know they are gaining an unfair advantage if they are using them.  I would also guess that as the list of banned mods become more clear, they will start banning for the other mods.


 

I'm very curious to see when accounts actually get permanently banned.  If I were king for a day, I would change it to 7-day ban, multi-month ban, then permanent, with the exception being if you are running the same mods you got banned for and you were told which mods you got banned for 7 days, the next ban for using that mod should be permanent.


 

In actuality, WG could figure out how long a ban needs to be to make a player quit the game, then enforce those bans so WG doesn't actually issue permanent bans.  Magic The Gathering does this - if you receive like a 10 year ban, they never want you back, but technically you could come back after that if you really wanted to.

- Mortig


 


 


Edited by Mortig, Nov 29 2016 - 16:54.


3RiversRegt #57 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 16:59

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 65381 battles
  • 102
  • [_QC_] _QC_
  • Member since:
    07-26-2011

You should not look at major clan to find cheater....

 

It will be like any good government.... hammer the little one who more likely doesn't even know what is doing wrong... easy targer not much complain from them and most of the time doesn't spend money in the game.  If you spend money on premium tanks... convert XP with gold ... premium account...

 

You are the one putting the money in.... more likely you will not be punish...

 

LITTLE PEOPLES will get ban....

 

Let see in the next few days when leak of who as been ban and you will see ----  average or below average players will be mostly on the list.

 

 



MajorIssuez #58 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 17:01

    Staff sergeant

  • WGLNA Gold League Player
  • 30023 battles
  • 377
  • [BULBA] BULBA
  • Member since:
    01-27-2012

Hello Wargaming,

 

I get accused of being a hacker every 2nd game. How does this "detection algorithm" work.  Every time a pubby yells cheater! do you look at my account again.



Gohibniu #59 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 17:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 77645 battles
  • 5,702
  • [T57] T57
  • Member since:
    11-17-2011
Sounds like, "If I did it"....and we all know how that fared....

lbgsloan #60 Posted Nov 29 2016 - 17:02

    Major

  • Players
  • 21116 battles
  • 3,377
  • Member since:
    04-01-2012

Eh, I know of people who used the treedown mod that didn't get banned in this first wave.  I'm assuming this was really blatant warpack level stuff then.  Going to be funny to see pubby disappointment that it's actually bad players who cheat the most, not the top clans.

 

This is still good though, I'll admit I didn't think WG had any teeth as usual (I stopped using aa+ though) but it seems I was fortunately wrong.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users