Why should we revoke your punishment?
I have 4428 hours played in TF2 with almost 2k hours played on sniper alone and have played in UGC Gold (https://www.ugcleague.com/player_page.cfm) and will be in UGC Platinum this coming season. I have prior experience with Kerknor on OzzyFurocity, another server that he and his e-girlfriend Honey ran into the ground. Kerknor and Honey are not very good at TF2, and I'm fully convinced that he banned me because I was regularly destroying her on your 2fort server, even though she might as well be an easy bot, because she moves in straight lines.
I have no faith in Kerknor's anti-cheat capabilities compared to my competitive history, and I wholeheartedly believe even he doesn't know what exactly he banned me for, as evidenced by his use of a "multi-hack" ban.
He has an issue with differentiating what a good player looks like compared to a hacker. This is just a childish ban on his part. Hopefully someone can either prove him right (which I doubt) or an admin can look at your history and realize that you're just a good player.
I've recognized your name on their hightower servers. You've been holding the number 1 spot for a while haven't you? Why do they all of a sudden decide to ban you even though you've been a regular for that long.
I've recognized your name on their hightower servers. You've been holding the number 1 spot for a while haven't you? Why do they all of a sudden decide to ban you even though you've been a regular for that long.
I play on Hightower with my girlfriend a lot and I do hold #1 on one of them. Honestly, I think Kerknor might have been confused because I had removed my UGC medal and was wearing a gibus. He should really just stick to chat bans, I don't think even he could mess that up.
Regarding the evidence, admins must submit a demo to support their suspicions, mainly through a spectator "speclisthideme" thing. Something must have set Kerknor off to take suspicion of you, even as far as to record you. This could be revealed in his demo, if he provides it of course.
(Of course, I 100% believe you. Though I am interested in expanding my knowledge on these types of things)
No need to be so rude towards Honey in the appeal.
As Phillip said, you will unfortunately have to wait for Kerknor to provide a demo when he wakes up or finishes whatever else occupies his time.
Hi. Just wanted to throw in some evidence of my own. I played with your little group (You(kona), Miyagi, and Trihard (another friend)) and I had the privilege of muting you and Trihard for a week for being very toxic. I created a video out of a demo and although the quality is absolute shit, you can still clearly hear yourself and Trihard being very disrespectful towards other players including myself.
Youtube vid. I also posted the unedited demo here:
toxic.dem
After every kill one of you would say your signature quote "later", provoking others to attack you. This is seen in the beginning where a guy named Soulless rants.. Afterwards, it was obvious no one cared and knew what you guys were trying to do so you and the other girl decided to say "later, idiot". This was very disrespectful and in our rules it clearly states not to be disrespectful towards others in a provoking manner. You were being overly toxic and salty the entire time until I ended up muting you and the other girl. (I didn't mute miyagi because he wasn't saying anything toxic, just a little salt and saying "later" without "idiot" casually.) You also called me and I quote "A bitch" and "fag" as well as idiot and other names. It's all shown in demo and video.
Actual reason of me posting here: I have evidence of you allegedly wall hacking:
Tick Marks:
Tick 1: Instantly knew where Dell was and killed her while aiming at her through wall.
Tick 4000-6100: Started aiming towards a wall where a sniper was going to come out from, but you stopped aiming because he went back to spawn. You then did it again after killing the spy.
Tick 8000: Sniper was slowly coming out and you were ready for him and killed him.
Tick 8800: Knew sniper was coming out and instantly killed him like the first tick.
Tick 16000: Knew when dell was about to come out and was ready to fire again (like first tick)
I'd decline it mainly because you guys like to troll on our servers and start fights, but it's not my appeal. As they say it in Hackersville, "later".
being rude towards admins and players is definitely a way to slow down your appeal process. also in future hope you dont meet me in server because having watched overkills video i wont be muting only for a week if you act like that again.
just watched overkills demo. you can stay banned thanks we dont like hackers. you cant pull the I HAVE LOTS OF HOURS AND A MEDAL with us. it may be true but this demo is more than enough proof you used wall hacks regardless of what kerk shows us. we will also be contacting UGC with this evidence that you're using hacks in the game. i am sure they won't be pleased.
Well it's either you enforce your rules or you don't. The ban Kerknor issued was uncalled for. The other ban is irrelevant at this point. As for Overkill, you should probably stick your fingers elsewhere, this isn't for you to take. You recorded a demo of what? A sniper looking in 4 possible locations as to where another sniper might be? Sniping on 2fort is a joke and with our friends calling out where people were peaking (yes we were in discord) it's easy. Also she's a Plat sniper/scout main.
Tick Marks:
Tick 1: Instantly knew where Dell was and killed her while aiming at her through wall.
Tick 4000-6100: Started aiming towards a wall where a sniper was going to come out from, but you stopped aiming because he went back to spawn. You then did it again after killing the spy.
Tick 8000: Sniper was slowly coming out and you were ready for him and killed him.
Tick 8800: Knew sniper was coming out and instantly killed him like the first tick.
Tick 16000: Knew when dell was about to come out and was ready to fire again (like first tick)
Tick 1: There are 2 very likely positions a sniper will come from in 2fort. Instead of risking being fragged by going lower and having the possibility to be rushed most snipers stay up top. As for aiming through a wall when you keep sight lines in a game you line it up before you fire to reduce the chance of missing. This goes for every video game with sniper sight lines. You don't just flick around for heads. You line them up before you peak.
Tick 4000-6100: What? Why wouldn't you stop aiming when someone goes behind cover. Also read Tick 1.
Tick 8000: Sight lines
Tick 8800: Sight lines, shot is already lined up and at that point all you do is click
Tick 16000: Sight lines like all the others.
Honestly Overkill it seems you're being disingenuous because we made fun of you in a video game. That has already passed and you're still on about toxicity and aimbot. 2fort is the easiest map in the game for sniper. All snipers have to do is peak a corner and at that point it's a matter of being quicker than the other and lining up your shot correctly. I've been playing this game for a very long time and have competitive experience in multiple games and I can say for certain 2fort is the bottom of the barrel in terms of skill.
I think the demo shows you preaiming people, but if it's possible we'll try to contact someone from UGC and let them decide or at least ask their opinion. I think that would be fair, if it's possible. If it isn't I think I'd keep you banned.
Honestly Overkill it seems you're being disingenuous because we made fun of you in a video game. That has already passed and you're still on about toxicity and aimbot. 2fort is the easiest map in the game for sniper. All snipers have to do is peak a corner and at that point it's a matter of being quicker than the other and lining up your shot correctly. I've been playing this game for a very long time and have competitive experience in multiple games and I can say for certain 2fort is the bottom of the barrel in terms of skill.
Well it's either you enforce your rules or you don't. The ban Kerknor issued was uncalled for. The other ban is irrelevant at this point. As for Overkill, you should probably stick your fingers elsewhere, this isn't for you to take. You recorded a demo of what? A sniper looking in 4 possible locations as to where another sniper might be? Sniping on 2fort is a joke and with our friends calling out where people were peaking (yes we were in discord) it's easy. Also she's a Plat sniper/scout main.
Honestly Overkill it seems you're being disingenuous because we made fun of you in a video game. That has already passed and you're still on about toxicity and aimbot. 2fort is the easiest map in the game for sniper. All snipers have to do is peak a corner and at that point it's a matter of being quicker than the other and lining up your shot correctly. I've been playing this game for a very long time and have competitive experience in multiple games and I can say for certain 2fort is the bottom of the barrel in terms of skill.
It's almost impossible to read the debunking part of your response when you sit here and keep insulting everyone, especially when this isn't even your appeal. Let her speak for herself and explain her own actions. Personally, I couldn't tell. It felt like she could have been, but, as you said, plat snipers can easily pick up on that kind of thing. This is probably why Overkill didn't go any further with the hacking at that time. Whether or not she is, her ban is between herself and the admins. Not me, not you, not anyone else.
His observations coincide with mine about Overkill's frankly laughable attempt at trying to frame me as a cheater. Don't try to discredit him because he has a dissenting opinion from your little circlejerking witch hunt.
no. he is not necessary as he has no affect on our opinion. and you're going the right way about me giving you some warning points which effectively ban you from the forums so you'd have to wait even LONGER to get your appeal seen to. wrap up the toxicity because we dont tolerate it here and you're in our ball park now so you WILL adhere to our rules or you can leave. in several admins opinions now you're cheating so it's not looking good for you.
Just helping out Kerknor and I'm an admin too. I have free will to say what I like as do you. If your gonna be asking me why I'm butting in, I can ask you the same thing. Let the girl defend herself playboy.
Not the case here. I simply pointed out that you all come on our servers to troll and laugh at people because you are better at them in a video game.
She literally pre-aims everyshot. When the player is coming out of spawn and slowly coming out to snipe, she stays behind the wall and when they are out, bam. Knew where they were instantly. (key word: instantly)
Plus, Kerknor is a good admin. He wouldn't ban someone over false pretenses unless he was sure. Wait for his evidence.
His observations coincide with mine about Overkill's frankly laughable attempt at trying to frame me as a cheater. Don't try to discredit him because he has a dissenting opinion from your little circlejerking witch hunt.
Don't wise-crack with us. And this "laughable attempt" at trying to frame you as a cheater isn't something to laugh about. If you think this is a joke you can stay banned for all I care.
Hi. Just wanted to throw in some evidence of my own. I played with your little group (You(kona), Miyagi, and Trihard (another friend)) and I had the privilege of muting you and Trihard for a week for being very toxic. I created a video out of a demo and although the quality is absolute shit, you can still clearly hear yourself and Trihard being very disrespectful towards other players including myself.
Youtube vid. I also posted the unedited demo here:
toxic.dem
After every kill one of you would say your signature quote "later", provoking others to attack you. This is seen in the beginning where a guy named Soulless rants.. Afterwards, it was obvious no one cared and knew what you guys were trying to do so you and the other girl decided to say "later, idiot". This was very disrespectful and in our rules it clearly states not to be disrespectful towards others in a provoking manner. You were being overly toxic and salty the entire time until I ended up muting you and the other girl. (I didn't mute miyagi because he wasn't saying anything toxic, just a little salt and saying "later" without "idiot" casually.) You also called me and I quote "A bitch" and "fag" as well as idiot and other names. It's all shown in demo and video.
Actual reason of me posting here: I have evidence of you allegedly wall hacking:
Tick Marks:
Tick 1: Instantly knew where Dell was and killed her while aiming at her through wall.
Tick 4000-6100: Started aiming towards a wall where a sniper was going to come out from, but you stopped aiming because he went back to spawn. You then did it again after killing the spy.
Tick 8000: Sniper was slowly coming out and you were ready for him and killed him.
Tick 8800: Knew sniper was coming out and instantly killed him like the first tick.
Tick 16000: Knew when dell was about to come out and was ready to fire again (like first tick)
I'd decline it mainly because you guys like to troll on our servers and start fights, but it's not my appeal. As they say it in Hackersville, "later".
For starters: Proving someone who is walling, especially skilled players (or at least, theoretically), takes a hell lot
more ticks than 5. Luck can certainly be a factor, and skilled players will know how to turn luck in their favour in certain
situations. That is why you need to prove consistent behaviour over a long period to be absolutely sure. That is, to rule out luck as a factor.
Remember you are banning a high-ranked player, this is not to be taken lightly. If you are wrong, it only serves to hurt
the reputation of your server.
For tick 1:
There's no context to this tick. Without context this point is utterly useless.
For example, let's say Dell was in that exact position before Kala went into cover. This means Kala would know where Dell would be, and attempting a prefire is not a bad strategy. However, your demo does not give the context. So we cannot know what actually happened before, and context is extremely important when proving walls.
Tick 4000-6100:
The sniper peaked out of the corner slightly. See tick 4050.
So Kala could have known the sniper was there through legitimate means. A valid possibility for this is that after killing the spy, Kala could have thought the sniper would peak him to catch him off-guard and decided to preemptively counter that. Remember you are dealing with potentially skilled players, this is the type of stuff they think about ("what is the enemy going to do?")
You should also note that Kala taunted after the kill, which could support my above theory since these two might have had some beef and thus Kala kept the sniper in the back of his head.
Tick 8000:
Did you see the soldier die to the sniper? His name is HIDE.
The shot came from somewhere to the left (sound), and from Kala's POV the soldier could not have gone very far into their base, as the soldier had just jumped onto battlements.
Therefore, the sniper is to the left of battlements relative to Kala's POV.
Especially for skilled players, this type of gamesense is basic.
Secondly, the scout (named Tryhard 7) also died. To Kala, this can easily be interpreted as one solution: There is at least one sniper to the left of battlements.
With all of this information, it is thus very clear why Kala would think a sniper is on the left side. It is very
reasonable given the above circumstance.
Regarding the shot on the sniper, I looked at the ticks and the sniper was visible for 22 ticks before being shot by Kala. Since the demo is in 66ticks, this means the sniper was visible for 333ms (serverside). Note that skilled players have small reaction times, and plus latency of a generous 70ms this is fine.
Note: 66 ticks = 1 second
I checked your demo. It is running in 66tps.
For example, I run on your server at 100ms ping and I have a reaction time of 250ms.
My reaction time has taken in account for mouse input, etc, as I timed it via my computer. Also 250ms is not unreasonable for a reaction time.
Let's say I have a ping of 7 ticks, or 107ms. Note my client is setup to use 66tps networking, so this is fine. Competitive players will generally also be running 66tps for networking.
On my client the sniper first starts to come around the corner at let's say tick 0.
Since my reaction time is roughly 250ms, or 18 ticks (272ms) I shoot the sniper at tick 18 (no flickshot accounting here as I have my crosshair already on the sniper).
However, since my ping is 7 ticks, this means I am ~4 ticks behind the server (since ping is the time to the server and back, and this is rough as each way is not exactly the same time).
For the server, the sniper peaks at tick 0, let's say. The starting point does not matter. However, the server receives my shot at 22 ticks later. This makes sense, as it took me 18 ticks to react on my side, and 4 ticks for the server to receive that (see: ping).
That means, the larger the ping the more it can mask walls (ping can spike!). But having a large ping does not mean walls. I just used myself as an example.
Thus, at 100ms latency and with a reaction time of 250ms, this shot is producible without wallhacks. Especially given the sniper was clearly top left battlements given context.
Tick 8800:
First, the sniper did not die. Are you sure you have the correct tick?
Secondly, given the crosshair movement in the demo shown by Kala, it looks like he was afk (I started viewing at tick 8500) and then alt-tabbed in (thus the weird crosshair movement before peaking). It looked like he peaked because he just got back into the game.
Tick 16000:
The scout peaks the corner, "Tryhard 7", and starts to shoot. Clearly someone is there.
This is at tick 15100
You can also hear sniper shots as time goes on from that general area.
This is a large hint that a sniper is top left again.
Note that the sniper is slightly visible before Kala re-peaks and shoots. While I agree this shot looks odd (due to the timing of the peaks), this is only one shot.
You need consistent behaviour. One or two odd-looking shots is not enough. It can be luck easily.
This is why you need to have a lot of ticks and a large amount of demos, or time played. There is not enough evidence in your demo to support a ban against this player.
This is why you need to have a lot of ticks and a large amount of demos, or time played. There is not enough evidence in your demo to support a ban against this player.
Seeing as how Kerknor was the one who banned her, not Overkill, I'm guessing there will be another demo incoming from him later. That makes at least 2 admins who have become suspicious of her at two seperate times. This will probably remain open until Kerknor responds.
For starters: Proving someone who is walling, especially skilled players (or at least, theoretically), takes a hell lot
more ticks than 5. Luck can certainly be a factor, and skilled players will know how to turn luck in their favour in certain
situations. That is why you need to prove consistent behaviour over a long period to be absolutely sure. That is, to rule out luck as a factor.
Remember you are banning a high-ranked player, this is not to be taken lightly. If you are wrong, it only serves to hurt
the reputation of your server.
For tick 1:
There's no context to this tick. Without context this point is utterly useless.
For example, let's say Dell was in that exact position before Kala went into cover. This means Kala would know where Dell would be, and attempting a prefire is not a bad strategy. However, your demo does not give the context. So we cannot know what actually happened before, and context is extremely important when proving walls.
Tick 4000-6100:
The sniper peaked out of the corner slightly. See tick 4050.
So Kala could have known the sniper was there through legitimate means. A valid possibility for this is that after killing the spy, Kala could have thought the sniper would peak him to catch him off-guard and decided to preemptively counter that. Remember you are dealing with potentially skilled players, this is the type of stuff they think about ("what is the enemy going to do?")
You should also note that Kala taunted after the kill, which could support my above theory since these two might have had some beef and thus Kala kept the sniper in the back of his head.
Tick 8000:
Did you see the soldier die to the sniper? His name is HIDE.
The shot came from somewhere to the left, and from Kala's POV the soldier could not have gone very far into their base, as the soldier had just jumped into battlements.
Therefore, the sniper is to the left of battlements relative to Kala's POV.
Especially for skilled players, this type of gamesense is basic.
Secondly, the scout (named Tryhard 7) also died. To Kala, this can easily be interpreted as one solution: There is at least one sniper to the left of battlements.
With all of this information, it is thus very clear why Kala would think a sniper is on the left side. It is very
reasonable given the above circumstance.
Regarding the shot on the sniper, I looked at the ticks and the sniper was visible for 22 ticks before being shot by Kala. Since the demo is in 66ticks, this means the sniper was visible for 333ms (serverside). Note that skilled players have small reaction times, and plus latency of a generous 70ms this is fine.
Note: 66 ticks = 1 second
I checked your demo. It is running in 66tps.
For example, I run on your server at 100ms ping and I have a reaction time of 250ms.
My reaction time has taken in account for mouse input, etc, as I timed it via my computer. Also 250ms is not unreasonable for a reaction time.
Let's say I have a ping of 7 ticks, or 107ms. Note my client is setup to use 66tps networking, so this is fine. Competitive players will generally also be running 66tps for networking.
On my client the sniper first starts to come around the corner at let's say tick 0.
Since my reaction time is roughly 250ms, or 18 ticks (272ms) I shoot the sniper at tick 18 (no flickshot accounting here as I have my crosshair already on the sniper).
However, since my ping is 7 ticks, this means I am ~4 ticks behind the server (since ping is the time to the server and back, and this is rough as each way is not exactly the same time).
For the server, the sniper peaks at tick 0, let's say. The starting point does not matter. However, the server receives my shot at 22 ticks later. This makes sense, as it took me 18 ticks to react on my side, and 4 ticks for the server to receive that (see: ping).
That means, the larger the ping the more it can mask walls (ping can spike!). But having a large ping does not mean walls. I just used myself as an example.
Thus, at 100ms latency and with a reaction time of 250ms, this shot is producible without wallhacks. Especially given the sniper was clearly top left battlements given context.
Tick 8800:
First, the sniper did not die. Are you sure you have the correct tick?
Secondly, given the crosshair movement in the demo shown by Kala, it looks like he was afk (I started viewing at tick 8500) and then alt-tabbed in (thus the weird crosshair movement before peaking). It looked like he peaked because he just got back into the game.
Tick 16000:
The scout peaks the corner, "Tryhard 7", and starts to shoot. Clearly someone is there.
This is at tick 15100
You can also hear sniper shots as time goes on from that general area.
This is a large hint that a sniper is top left again.
Note that the sniper is slightly visible before Kala re-peaks and shoots. While I agree this shot looks odd (due to the timing of the peaks), this is only one shot.
You need consistent behaviour. One or two odd-looking shots is not enough. It can be luck easily.
This is why you need to have a lot of ticks and a large amount of demos, or time played. There is not enough evidence in your demo to support a ban against this player.
they're skilled yes but pre aiming and ONLY pre aiming when a player is going to be there is suspicious enough then actually looking at the wall at 16000 and only peaking to kill when the sniper moved out is evidence enough to me as well as the other evidences in the demo that they're hacking. plus we still have kerks to come. this wont hurt our servers in the slightest because it's 1 our opinion of several admins at least twice vs one person. especially when the player is as toxic as they are.
and okay 4000 > 6100 sure the player peaked but the fact that after that kona only aims in when the sniper looks to be moving out is what is suspicious here
8000 there is NO way of knowing where dell is in relation to where hide is unless he can see precisely where hide is, dell could be near the spawn, near the stairs down to intel, near to grate etc.
8400 once again ONLY aiming in when they start to move out that is clear to me they dont aim in randomly any other times unless someone looks to be moving out
and 16000 he's literally looking at the wall and only moving out when dell looks to move out.
forgetting that (which we're not) kerk still had reason enough to ban them and we'll have more evidence from him too. anyway you're permabanned for aimbot so i'm not surprised you'd defend someone accused and banned of the same
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
we dont like hackers. you cant pull the I HAVE LOTS OF HOURS AND A MEDAL with us. it may be true but this demo is more than enough proof you used wall hacks regardless of what kerk shows us. we will also be contacting UGC with this evidence that you're using hacks in the game. i am sure they won't be pleased.
