EPTSW)Lois A New Maphacker. - Page 13
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
iNsaNe-
Finland5201 Posts
| ||
|
superpenguin
France199 Posts
On May 11 2005 13:20 samaticon wrote: If you save reps from games that have lag, or is very laggy, use bwac to find hackers, it says everyone is hacking and clicking things they dont see for like 20 more seconds. il post my evidence replays when I find a laggy game to save. That's why there is in my method the line : "- Check the replay until the end to be sure it's not corrupted, or from an old starcraft version : if you see like 5 message every second, it probably means the replay is unusable" i'm not sure if you have read it completely | ||
|
Tossim1
714 Posts
| ||
|
shizuru
Japan570 Posts
also, why would anyone attack move on a Nexus? | ||
|
As.I.Lay.Dying
United States456 Posts
On May 11 2005 13:49 Tossim1 wrote: im gonna laugh if he wins wcg usa ;p Hard to hack at LAN =*( | ||
|
Shiv
France447 Posts
(edit: to shizuru, mainly) | ||
|
superpenguin
France199 Posts
On May 11 2005 13:56 shizuru wrote: why don't the hack actions, that is scanning exactly on nexus, register as red text/suspicious action on bwchart? also, why would anyone attack move on a Nexus? 1- bwchart only consider that "select actions" can be suspicious. PenguinPlug allow to discover the profs even on target and move on 2- why would anyone attack anything ? and why not ? He clicked it by error and is busted because of that, i dont think we realy need to explain every action he do, with 300 apm there is obviously a lot of un-necessary clics. | ||
|
Veg
Canada2945 Posts
your english is as bad as your hacking skills u fag want bw + english lessons? 2 for 1 k ? i'll give you a great deal | ||
|
shizuru
Japan570 Posts
On May 11 2005 14:00 Shiv wrote: You just all you people attacking superpenguin have to understand one thing: the question is not why. It is how. (edit: to shizuru, mainly) im not attacking. im questioning to understand not why but how penguin came to his conclusion. i think the days are long gone when no one questions the voice of god. | ||
|
shizuru
Japan570 Posts
On May 11 2005 14:08 superpenguin wrote: 1- bwchart only consider that "select actions" can be suspicious. PenguinPlug allow to discover the profs even on target and move on 2- why would anyone attack anything ? and why not ? He clicked it by error and is busted because of that, i dont think we realy need to explain every action he do, with 300 apm there is obviously a lot of un-necessary clics. i was tryin it out in the game. for scanning, usually people click on minimap. when you click on minimap even when its right at the nexus, it doesnt select the nexus. you'd have to physically move your pointer to the nexus and click on it then hit scan. from all the confusion, which action did lois do? target the nexus or select it? im not exactly computer literate thats why im asking. hack accusations are pretty serious so questioning the method is just as important. | ||
|
shizuru
Japan570 Posts
On May 09 2005 21:05 superpenguin wrote: Lois, like i said on wgtour, i dont know for the game vs testie and i will probably never know, but what i can be sure is that you hacked in the game vs nookie that i explained in the following link http://www.starcraftdream.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4983 (it's not the one that is shown in this TL thread) Sure there is suspicious action in everyones games, but everytime it's possible to know if they can be done by a legit player or if it's necessary to have a cheat program to do a particular suspicious action. If you can find a flaw in my explaination, and you could verify in a test game that both penguinplug and bwchart can be wrong at the same time and in this kind of situation (attack a nexus that you didnt saw since the last 30 seconds), then you would have my appoligies, but i would suggest you instead to try to become the president of the USA or to walk on the moon because it's easier. More seriously, you should give your appologies, i'm sure theres many players that didnt deserved to play the unfair games you gave them. In addition, there were many player that deserved by thier skills the place you took by your maphack. 14:32 - scan on nexus 15:20 - move on nexus 15:26-7 - engineering bay has vision of nexus lois moves units on nexus 6-7 seconds before he has vision of it. that's cutting it close according to your five second lag rule. 1-2 seconds over what you call a borderline case. but about 4 seconds over normal lag. does penguin read differently a move under partial/fog of war and with vision? | ||
|
Elvin_vn
Vietnam2038 Posts
select object BEFORE having vision is not LAG by the way, u really think somebody is willing to play under 5 seconds lag condition in a tournament like this ? | ||
|
shizuru
Japan570 Posts
On May 10 2005 19:55 superpenguin wrote: an other proof, in the game named in the begining of this thread (it's not the same game than the first proof i gave). you can also download it from here if you want: http://ste.gnux.info/ftp/scd/3301noookie-1.rep lois comsat a nexus that he cant see, before he comsat, it's totaly the black fog of war : ![[image loading]](http://ste.gnux.info/ftp/scd/lois2-rep2.png) Then he comsat exactly on the nexus and it's shown as a target on that object that he couldnt even see before that, not even greyed. ![[image loading]](http://ste.gnux.info/ftp/scd/lois-rep2.png) You can also see the action in bwchart: ![[image loading]](http://ste.gnux.info/ftp/scd/loisbwchart-rep2.png) Some might argue with a theory that it's the purpose of the comsat to "discover the units" that you clic on. It doesnt work that way for broodwar, so i made a simple test map to help you to check this (choose "save as" ) : http://ste.gnux.info/ftp/scd/test-target.scm all the north of the map is filled with nexus, and you have enough scanner at the south to hit a few undiscovered nexus... not surprisingly, every time you scan a nexus that you dont have directly under vision, it's recorded as a "scan on the ground", PenguinPlug doesnt complain and bwchart show that the action is not associated with a particular tageted object but only the location. Please, dont say "i think you are wrong" if you are too lazy to test by yourself  Ok, i was stupid enough to give a 2nd evidence, as good as the first one. Now that theres 200% of chance that you are a cheater, do i need to proove that you are 300% of a cheater ? 400% ? when will it stop ? what will you invent next, i'm starting to get borred ? there are many actions considered suspicious by bwac where things are selected , moved on, scanned. you point out that the difference between a suspicion and proof is the lag. a second within he selects or targets it, he scans. this happens throughout on canons, gateways, units after before a scan but are not considered 100% proof so why is this one used as an example? | ||
|
superpenguin
France199 Posts
On May 11 2005 14:14 shizuru wrote: i was tryin it out in the game. for scanning, usually people click on minimap. when you click on minimap even when its right at the nexus, it doesnt select the nexus. you'd have to physically move your pointer to the nexus and click on it then hit scan. from all the confusion, which action did lois do? target the nexus or select it? On the fist proof (in the starcraft dream link), he attack the nexus, i dont know if it's attack move or right clic but anyway it's on the nexus. On the 2nd he comsat the nexus directly. To answer your question "why didnt he used the minimap to scan", it's because he dont even need comsat to see that there is a nexus, but he think he need to scan it so he can attack it or make a drop on it without looking like a cheater. When you see that there is some dark templar, and you want to reveal it for your units, what do you clic to scan them ? the minimap or the screen game ? lois was already looking the nexus when he intended to scan, for example he could need to know if it was finished or just building, so he just scanned on the global map and not on the mini map. He scanned just to make it looks like he isnt a cheater and this action is in this fact a proof that he maphacks ironical | ||
|
shizuru
Japan570 Posts
On May 11 2005 15:23 Elvin_vn wrote: user select objects AFTER losing vision <== LAGNESS select object BEFORE having vision is not LAG by the way, u really think somebody is willing to play under 5 seconds lag condition in a tournament like this ? what i think about what they feel about playing 5 seconds of lag is besides the point. maybe lag creeped up during that battle as it is known to, maybe it didnt. selecting object before vision is not lag? hmm.... | ||
|
Elvin_vn
Vietnam2038 Posts
Don't talk, find replay of progamers, test the method and prove it wrong. You are too lazy. | ||
|
shizuru
Japan570 Posts
On May 11 2005 15:29 Elvin_vn wrote: shizuru: Don't talk, find replay of progamers, test the method and prove it wrong. You are too lazy. lol i knew the condescention was coming from you. im lazy even tho im spending the past hr reading through penguins argument and then checkin the reps out on penguin? this is testing the method, albeit the very beginnings of it. so u can take a big pill of stfu | ||
|
superpenguin
France199 Posts
On May 11 2005 15:25 shizuru wrote: there are many actions considered suspicious by bwac where things are selected , moved on, scanned. you point out that the difference between a suspicion and proof is the lag. a second within he selects or targets it, he scans. this happens throughout on canons, gateways, units after before a scan but are not considered 100% proof so why is this one used as an example? I never talked about lag, i talked about lattency. Lattency is the delay between the moment you send the command and the moment the game do this action for every player at the same time including yourself. This lattency is predictable, it's a defined number of game tick (well, you can pick one of 3), and lag has to effect on it as long as you consider how the games works using the "game tick" to count the time. When you watch a replay in single player, there is no lag, but there is still the latency that it was recorded with. So in fact because of the lattency, someone can attack something when he see it, and then just half a second after, the thing disapear. When we consider comsating, it's clear that when lois comsat something, the fact that the comsat will allow him to see the nexus latter in the game will not help him to see it before that time, at the moment he send the command. | ||
|
shizuru
Japan570 Posts
why is it that in bwchart the only time the action is recorded as a comsat vs. a move or hotkey is in that incident you pointed out at 16:51? recorded as move or hotkey: scans of nexuses in fog: 7:51, 10:33, 12:30 etc. & scans of ground in fog: 11:16 two scans. | ||
|
superpenguin
France199 Posts
On May 11 2005 16:41 shizuru wrote: i see. why is it that in bwchart the only time the action is recorded as a comsat vs. a move or hotkey is in that incident you pointed out at 16:51? recorded as move or hotkey: scans of nexuses in fog: 7:51, 10:33, 12:30 etc. & scans of ground in fog: 11:16 two scans. i dont understand your question | ||
| ||
