• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 04:07
CEST 10:07
KST 17:07
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
[ASL22] Ro4 Preview: Mirror Mirror4[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: Within Reach5[ASL22] Ro8 Preview: In A Tizzy11[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Holy Diver5[ASL22] Ro16 Preview: Rough Waters10
Community News
5.0.17 Patch Notes - October 7, 20262Weekly Cups Results (Sep 28-Oct 4)0SC4ALL: II SC2 Complete Invited Player Lineup10StarCraft II 5.0.17 PTR Patch Notes (Sept 30, 2026)77Weekly Cups (Sept 21-27): herO and ByuN double2
StarCraft 2
General
5.0.17 Patch Notes - October 7, 2026 How do you feel about the mass reverts in the 5.0.17 PTR? [Old] StarCraft 3 Reportedly in Development StarCraft II 5.0.17 PTR Patch Notes (Sept 30, 2026) Weekly Cups Results (Sep 28-Oct 4)
Tourneys
ISSL (IntoTheTV x SOOP SC2 League): Premier Stellar Fest TWO the Moon (Dec 16-20) Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament 2026 GSTL Grand Finals Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond)
Strategy
[H] ZvP Mid-Late Game: Stalkers Collossi HT
Custom Maps
[M] (2) Sweltering Sands [M] (2) Frigid Storage
External Content
Mutation # 546 Catch the Train The PondCast: SC2 News & Results Mutation # 545 And Drops and Rifts Mutation # 544 Double Trouble
Brood War
General
BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ BW General Discussion Fantasy returning? Sagi.gg Launcher Released SC4ALL II Brood War Complete Invited Player Lineup
Tourneys
[ASL22] Semifinal B [ASL22] Semifinal A [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL22] Ro8 Day 4
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Cliff Jump Revisited (1 in a 1000 strategy) Replay Review Process - What do you do?
Other Games
General Games
General RTS Discussion Thread Nintendo Switch Thread Warcraft III: The Frozen Throne Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Total Annihilation Zero
Dota 2
Dota 2 Champions League Season 3 Begins April 25! Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
[TL LoL EUW IHs] Teemo shall perish
Heroes of the Storm
Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Deck construction bug
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Artificial Intelligence Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Canadian Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread
Fan Clubs
Serral Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion! Diablo Animated Series on Netflix
Sports
Football (Soccer) Thread MLB/Baseball 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
Recent Gifted Posts
Blogs
[ASL22] Ro4 Day1 Ticket Giv…
bITt.mAN
Escaping Into Video Games: G…
TrAiDoS
38 yo Retired SWE loo…
PurE)Rabbit-SF
Can Bots Beat Pros?? Starcr…
namkraft
[meme] I finally understa…
LUCKY_NOOB
Regacy Esports:Our Goa…
regacyesports
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 7077 users

disappointed at Blizzard.

Blogs > KingofHearts
Post a Reply
1 2 Next All
KingofHearts
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
Japan562 Posts
May 30 2011 02:17 GMT
#1
im disappointed at blizzard for doing a bad job at stopping maphackers. other than banning and suspending players, they didnt do anything to prevent maphacks.why dont they follow iccup's footstep? banning maphackers doesnt actually prevent maphack from being used. i misses the old days when playing rts doesnt give u the anger and fear of playing a maphacker . i played red alert 1 and warcraft 2 and have never heard of maphacks. i believe maphacks doesnt even exist during those time. nobody bothers to make them anyway.

10 years down after sc1 and the issue of maphack still exists.. this is frustrating as a player and consumer . plus i think blizzard have what it takes to implement an antihack system to their game.thats what makes it more disappointing. not stopping something bad when you have the power to.

/rant

***
moshi moshi~
Shield
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Bulgaria4824 Posts
May 30 2011 02:20 GMT
#2
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.
Dubzex
Profile Joined October 2010
United States6994 Posts
May 30 2011 02:25 GMT
#3
Are you ranting about sc:bw? I thought Blizzard stopped caring about hacks for that game years ago. I could be wrong here but I think Blizzard has more important things to worry about like D3, HOTS, WOW, and the new MMO instead of a game that they are actively trying to phase out so they can bring more people, especially Koreans, into the world of SC2.
"DONT UNDERESTIMATE MY CARRY OR YOU WILL BE CARRIED INTO THE ABYSS OF SUFFERING" - Tyler 'TC' Cook
jello_biafra
Profile Blog Joined September 2004
United Kingdom6642 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-05-30 02:27:52
May 30 2011 02:26 GMT
#4
On May 30 2011 11:25 Dubzex wrote:
Are you ranting about sc:bw? I thought Blizzard stopped caring about hacks for that game years ago. I could be wrong here but I think Blizzard has more important things to worry about like D3, HOTS, WOW, and the new MMO instead of a game that they are actively trying to phase out so they can bring more people, especially Koreans, into the world of SC2.

Pretty sure he's talking about SC2.

Someone needs to make a modern day penguin plug for SC2, that would solve the problem!
(for those who don't know penguin plug was an old plugin for BW that took advantage of a "back door" in the popular maphack of the time and made the player unally themselves after 5 minutes so their own units would destroy their base lol)
The road to hell is paved with good intentions | aka Probert[PaiN] @ iccup / godlikeparagon @ twitch | my BW stream: http://www.teamliquid.net/video/streams/jello_biafra
Dubzex
Profile Joined October 2010
United States6994 Posts
May 30 2011 02:34 GMT
#5
On May 30 2011 11:26 jello_biafra wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 30 2011 11:25 Dubzex wrote:
Are you ranting about sc:bw? I thought Blizzard stopped caring about hacks for that game years ago. I could be wrong here but I think Blizzard has more important things to worry about like D3, HOTS, WOW, and the new MMO instead of a game that they are actively trying to phase out so they can bring more people, especially Koreans, into the world of SC2.

Pretty sure he's talking about SC2.

Someone needs to make a modern day penguin plug for SC2, that would solve the problem!
(for those who don't know penguin plug was an old plugin for BW that took advantage of a "back door" in the popular maphack of the time and made the player unally themselves after 5 minutes so their own units would destroy their base lol)


I don't know, it definitely seems like he is talking about SC:BW...


On May 30 2011 11:17 KingofHearts wrote:
10 years down after sc1 and the issue of maphack still exists..


"DONT UNDERESTIMATE MY CARRY OR YOU WILL BE CARRIED INTO THE ABYSS OF SUFFERING" - Tyler 'TC' Cook
KingofHearts
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
Japan562 Posts
May 30 2011 02:36 GMT
#6
im talking about sc2 10 years since sc1 and the issue still exists!
moshi moshi~
VIB
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Brazil3567 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-05-30 02:52:05
May 30 2011 02:49 GMT
#7
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote:
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological.

Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no.

A maphackable game is more profitable.
Great people talk about ideas. Average people talk about things. Small people talk about other people.
Cube
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
Canada777 Posts
May 30 2011 03:10 GMT
#8
the players you play who you think maphack are most likely not maphacking. In my experience, the problem seems far more widespread than it actually is.
elmizzt
Profile Joined February 2010
United States3309 Posts
May 30 2011 03:13 GMT
#9
On May 30 2011 11:36 KingofHearts wrote:
im talking about sc2 10 years since sc1 and the issue still exists!

hahahahahah oh wow.
d=(^_^)z
Shield
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
Bulgaria4824 Posts
May 30 2011 03:15 GMT
#10
On May 30 2011 11:34 Dubzex wrote:
Someone needs to make a modern day penguin plug for SC2, that would solve the problem!
(for those who don't know penguin plug was an old plugin for BW that took advantage of a "back door" in the popular maphack of the time and made the player unally themselves after 5 minutes so their own units would destroy their base lol)


Isn't it against the rules to use 3rd party programs? If not, then I welcome this suggestion.
L3gendary
Profile Joined October 2010
Canada1470 Posts
May 30 2011 03:17 GMT
#11
On May 30 2011 11:49 VIB wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote:
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological.

Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no.

A maphackable game is more profitable.


Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant. Sorry to say but it's just a reality of online games. Idk any games that handle hacking very well. Most tournaments have their own anti-cheats and lan is obviously not a problem so its mostly just annoying on ladder in that u might run into a hacker every 1 in 100 games or something.
Watching Jaedong play purifies my eyes. -Coach Ju Hoon
tobi9999
Profile Joined April 2009
United States1966 Posts
May 30 2011 03:21 GMT
#12
Lol people who maphack are usually not very good players anyways so there's no huge problem with them, furthermore, every time they ban someone they have to buy another copy which is more profit for them anyways. Also, on another note, I feel like playing against map hackers is extremely fun or would be as I don't label anyone I have ever played a map hacker, they're just another challenge.
"tobi is ur iq 9999? cuz i think it might be u so smart wowowow." -Artosis
KingofHearts
Profile Blog Joined January 2009
Japan562 Posts
May 30 2011 03:26 GMT
#13
http://www.2shared.com/file/OfrLxiMf/vs_terran_master_hacker.html replays speaks for itself. its just annoying.
moshi moshi~
Cambium
Profile Blog Joined June 2004
United States16368 Posts
May 30 2011 03:34 GMT
#14
On May 30 2011 12:17 L3gendary wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 30 2011 11:49 VIB wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote:
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological.

Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no.

A maphackable game is more profitable.


Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant. Sorry to say but it's just a reality of online games. Idk any games that handle hacking very well. Most tournaments have their own anti-cheats and lan is obviously not a problem so its mostly just annoying on ladder in that u might run into a hacker every 1 in 100 games or something.


BW is definitely p2p, not sure about SC2, I would guess it's the same. I would actually like to read more about this kind of stuff, a link would be appreciated.

I don't see how making it client-server would solve the problems though, it has to do what's being transmitted, not where it's coming from, no?
When you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it.
Cube
Profile Blog Joined February 2008
Canada777 Posts
May 30 2011 03:41 GMT
#15
On May 30 2011 12:34 Cambium wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 30 2011 12:17 L3gendary wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:49 VIB wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote:
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological.

Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no.

A maphackable game is more profitable.


Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant. Sorry to say but it's just a reality of online games. Idk any games that handle hacking very well. Most tournaments have their own anti-cheats and lan is obviously not a problem so its mostly just annoying on ladder in that u might run into a hacker every 1 in 100 games or something.


BW is definitely p2p, not sure about SC2, I would guess it's the same. I would actually like to read more about this kind of stuff, a link would be appreciated.



I don't see how making it client-server would solve the problems though, it has to do what's being transmitted, not where it's coming from, no?


the idea here is that when it goes through a server, the server can check what's being transmitted and detect maphacks.
VIB
Profile Blog Joined November 2007
Brazil3567 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-05-30 04:06:14
May 30 2011 03:41 GMT
#16
On May 30 2011 12:17 L3gendary wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 30 2011 11:49 VIB wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote:
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological.

Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no.

A maphackable game is more profitable.


Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant.
You're probably misunderstanding what I said. I'm talking about the specific problem of maphacks. Not about general hacks. Maphacks specifically are only possible because the player data are shared between both clients in p2p instead of being handled by a third party server. This problem is 100% solvable with a server as referee.

On May 30 2011 12:34 Cambium wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 30 2011 12:17 L3gendary wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:49 VIB wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote:
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological.

Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no.

A maphackable game is more profitable.


Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant. Sorry to say but it's just a reality of online games. Idk any games that handle hacking very well. Most tournaments have their own anti-cheats and lan is obviously not a problem so its mostly just annoying on ladder in that u might run into a hacker every 1 in 100 games or something.
I don't see how making it client-server would solve the problems though, it has to do what's being transmitted, not where it's coming from, no?
Yes it's what's being transmitted. The problem is that if it's p2p then both clients have to tell each other what they're doing to keep synced.

If the game was client-server then the clients would only tell what they're doing to the server and would never know what the other is doing. The server would receive data from both sides, calculate what both can see, and only share with the players what's in their vision. And not what's under the fog of war.

edit: made an image:
[image loading]
Great people talk about ideas. Average people talk about things. Small people talk about other people.
sob3k
Profile Blog Joined August 2009
United States7572 Posts
May 30 2011 03:44 GMT
#17
There is no way to anti-hack effectively, someone will always find a way around it. The only methods that have been pretty effective are an extremely well implemented report system, probably with an actual human review board.
In Hungry Hungry Hippos there are no such constraints—one can constantly attempt to collect marbles with one’s hippo, limited only by one’s hippo-levering capabilities.
Backpack
Profile Blog Joined March 2010
United States1776 Posts
May 30 2011 03:44 GMT
#18
Nothing is unhackable.
"You people need to just generally care a lot less about everything." -Zatic
Cambium
Profile Blog Joined June 2004
United States16368 Posts
May 30 2011 03:48 GMT
#19
On May 30 2011 12:41 VIB wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 30 2011 12:17 L3gendary wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:49 VIB wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote:
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological.

Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no.

A maphackable game is more profitable.


Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant.
You're probably misunderstanding what I said. I'm talking about the specific problem of maphacks. Not about general hacks. Maphacks specifically are only possible because the player data are shared between both clients in p2p instead of being handled by a third party server. This problem is 100% solvable with a server as referee.

Show nested quote +
On May 30 2011 12:34 Cambium wrote:
On May 30 2011 12:17 L3gendary wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:49 VIB wrote:
On May 30 2011 11:20 darkness wrote:
As far as I know, chasing maphacks is like cats'n'mice. In other words, if you patch a maphack exploit, there will be new one. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Technologically, making the game 100% maphack free is pretty trivial. Just change the network architecture from p2p to client-server. Or at least give players that option if they so choose. The problem is economical and not technological.

Blizzard only doesn't do it because it's not worth the cost vs benefit. They would spend considerable money to implement it. And how much more money do they think they would make from a maphack free game? Very little. They don't think it's worth it. This kinds of thing would have to go through the CFO which would simply analyse the ROI (return of investiment) and say no.

A maphackable game is more profitable.


Huh? The game is not p2p it is client-server. And there are plenty of games that are client-server and hacking is rampant. Sorry to say but it's just a reality of online games. Idk any games that handle hacking very well. Most tournaments have their own anti-cheats and lan is obviously not a problem so its mostly just annoying on ladder in that u might run into a hacker every 1 in 100 games or something.
I don't see how making it client-server would solve the problems though, it has to do what's being transmitted, not where it's coming from, no?
Yes it's what's being transmitted. The problem is that if it's p2p then both clients have to tell each other what they're doing to keep synced.

If the game was client-server then the clients would only tell what they're doing to the server and would never know what the other is doing. The server would receive data from both sides, calculate what both can see, and only share with the players what's in their vision. And not what's under the fog of war.

that's an interesting idea, i'd never thought about it that way. However, wouldn't that put an enormous amount of strain on the server?

I always thought of the client-server model as the server relaying the data and does no calculations. The server would obviously keep track of the frame counter, but that's it.
When you want something, all the universe conspires in helping you to achieve it.
Geovu
Profile Blog Joined November 2010
Estonia1344 Posts
Last Edited: 2011-05-30 04:15:47
May 30 2011 04:15 GMT
#20
On May 30 2011 12:44 Backpack wrote:
Nothing is unhackable.

Three step process to creating an unhackable machine:

1) Unplug machine

2) ???

3) A result!
1 2 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 1h 53m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
OGKoka 45
EnDerr 8
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 2480
Rain 1619
FanTaSy 430
Yoon 84
Soma 81
Mong 71
Killer 58
NotJumperer 43
Bale 37
Hm[arnc] 27
[ Show more ]
ajuk12(nOOB) 23
Shinee 15
yabsab 14
Sharp 9
Noble 8
Dota 2
NeuroSwarm176
Fuzer 63
League of Legends
JimRising 510
Counter-Strike
shoxiejesuss442
Super Smash Bros
Mew2King169
Other Games
summit1g8042
olofmeister992
ceh9410
Happy393
KnowMe131
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick642
BasetradeTV158
Dota 2
PGL Dota 2 - Main Stream33
[ Show 16 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• LUISG 12
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• killerbeecast0
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• iopq 5
• BSLYoutube
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
Dota 2
• lizZardDota2223
League of Legends
• Rush1156
• Lourlo1038
• Stunt473
Other Games
• Shiphtur796
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
1h 53m
INu's Battles
2h 53m
Percival vs SHIN
Zoun vs herO
OSC
4h 53m
OSC
14h 8m
Replay Cast
14h 53m
OSC
1d 14h
Big Brain Bouts
2 days
Rex vs INexorable
GgMaChine vs HeRoMaRinE
Reynor vs herO
AI Arena Tournament
2 days
BSL: Ladder Tournament
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
[ Show More ]
Patches Events
3 days
BSL Open Qualifier
3 days
BSL Open Qualifier
3 days
WardiTV Weekly
5 days
PiGosaur Cup
5 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL 2026 AUTUMN (S22)
Blizzard Classic Cup 2026
Copium Cup

Ongoing

ASL Season 22
Super Anchor Qualifying S3
Acropolis #5
Acropolis #5 - GSB
ESL Pro League Season 24
Stake Ranked Episode 4
1win Private Club #1
Logitech G Play Connect 2026
SL StarSeries Fall 2026
FISSURE Playground #3
BLAST Open Fall 2026
Esports World Cup 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer 2026
BLAST Bounty Summer Qual

Upcoming

Acropolis #5 - GSC
BSL Season 23
SC4ALL II: Brood War
BSL 23: Non-Korean Championship
HSC XXX
Stellar Fest 2: Lunar Cup
SC4ALL II: StarCraft II
Kung Fu Cup 2026 Grand Finals
RSL Offline Finals
HCC Season 3
eXTREMESLAND 2026
PGL Major Singapore 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 6
BLAST Rivals Fall 2026
IEM Beijing 2026
Stake Ranked Episode 5
PGL Masters Bucharest 2026
1win Private Club #2
Thunderpick World Champ. '26
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2026 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.