[?] Spades hacking? - Page 118

On June 05 2012 15:03 roymarthyup wrote:



i actually am probably in the extreme minority here but i highly encourage hacking


im trying to go pro and im high masters and i actually think i would get better practice if i practiced in a real ladder scenario against really good maphackers

maphacks cannot translate into yournament play, so if i DONT maphack, but lots of people on the ladder DO maphack, then all it does is it improved my training and then essentially its like im training in the hyperbolic time chamber in dragonball z and my training is more efficient than my opponents training as long as i learn from the games knowing i was playing at a handicap

then my pure skill will increase and in a tournament setting I will perform at a much higher level


I know its strange logic but i have no problem with people cheating in a ladder scenario where theres nothing on the line other than your own quality practice and since im high masters i would only be playing against the best hackers getting in good practice.

heck i wouldnt even mind if i could play with a self-induced handicap of say 20% hp or something


actually in my ladder games i occasionally will suicide my own units and kill 20-30 of my own food before the battle just to give myself a handicap because i think it improved the quality of my training

On June 05 2012 14:59 Insane wrote:

Spades lost, but it's not like he was trying to lose the showmatch. I'm sure if he could win (without revealing his hacking ways too much) he would've, whereupon he would've gained quite a bit of fame and followers, considering the respect Lucifron gets as one of the best foreign Terrans.
If you really think it's OK to cheat in ladder or whatever then you just fundamentally have an irreconcilable viewpoint with the vast majority of the SC2 community. The fact is that it's not OK to do so, according to basically all authorities within SC2 that matter (tournament runners, and the wider community).


If someone who's actually known in the community in any sense stream cheated idra or MKP, they would get a pretty similar reaction I think. However, the people who do that are either a) anonymous assholes who do it for laughs and no one really knows who they are to punish them or b) people who are known for doing that, and are already hated/can't do anything further to (CombatEX, Deezer, etc.).
If you have evidence of some known & somewhat respected player cheating, then I'm sure you'd get a similar reception to what Spades here is getting.

On June 05 2012 15:03 roymarthyup wrote:



i actually am probably in the extreme minority here but i highly encourage hacking


im trying to go pro and im high masters and i actually think i would get better practice if i practiced in a real ladder scenario against really good maphackers

maphacks cannot translate into yournament play, so if i DONT maphack, but lots of people on the ladder DO maphack, then all it does is it improved my training and then essentially its like im training in the hyperbolic time chamber in dragonball z and my training is more efficient than my opponents training as long as i learn from the games knowing i was playing at a handicap

then my pure skill will increase and in a tournament setting I will perform at a much higher level


I know its strange logic but i have no problem with people cheating in a ladder scenario where theres nothing on the line other than your own quality practice and since im high masters i would only be playing against the best hackers getting in good practice.

heck i wouldnt even mind if i could play with a self-induced handicap of say 20% hp or something


actually in my ladder games i occasionally will suicide my own units and kill 20-30 of my own food before the battle just to give myself a handicap because i think it improved the quality of my training

On June 05 2012 15:09 CursivE wrote:


Lol, good point. Let's say he's representing himself?

On June 05 2012 15:10 SkyMightFall wrote:
I'm surprised so many people have nothing better to do with their lives.

nerdkingdom

On June 05 2012 14:13 naux wrote:
The thing is he was probably hacking for fun.
I use to hack all the time for fun in CS 1.6 and i played for cal-invite team but only time i hacked was just to pub never scrimming nor matches but also to get a better understanding of the game
Nothing was on the line and he lost anyways, the out burst of people in this community should calm down, he doesnt have the admit he hacked because we all know he did its so blunt he did, also who cares he wasnt hacking for money.

The bigger problem is that one poster talking about koreans cheating online, there's major online tournaments and qualifications just imagine how much they cheated.

On June 05 2012 15:11 Gheed wrote:


Well he's done an absolutely shit job of representing himself so far, so yeah, he'd be boned.

On June 05 2012 15:14 Blennd wrote:

The irony.

On June 05 2012 15:16 hadhubhi wrote:
Here's a good (and unbiased) test that someone can do on replays (I don't have SC2 installed here).

Find a couple replays that match the Lucifron games in maps (that are TvT). Find the first time he looks into the fog of war in each of those (probably when he sends out his first scouting SCV). Compare this to the Lucifron series. His camera should be locked during the time when he looks offscreen. If the camera consistently doesn't move (appears to be "screen locked" by the maphack) during the times he usually scouts, then this is fairly damning evidence, especially if he is very consistent in these timings (as one would expect a well-practiced professional to be) during non-"hackish" gameplay.

This could be loosely compared to what is called a "synthetic control" method in econometrics (cite Alberto Albadie). In this, you try to find an accurate comparison by combining elements from a number of similar-ish case studies. This is useful when you have really low statistical power, and you're relying on what are essentially just case studies. It still lets you bring a little bit of statistics into the discussion.

So what you would want to do:
1) Collect similar replays to study.
2) Record the times (and lengths of time) for the first time or two he looks into the fog of war.
3) Compare this to the Lucifron replays. Does his camera look suspicious at these times?

For a player with builds timed down very precisely, this has potential to pretty easily detect a false positive.

That said, it seems the evidence is already pretty strong. But this seems like a fairly elucidating comparison to make for those still seeking something more objective.

On June 05 2012 15:16 hadhubhi wrote:
Here's a good (and unbiased) test that someone can do on replays (I don't have SC2 installed here).

Find a couple replays that match the Lucifron games in maps (that are TvT). Find the first time he looks into the fog of war in each of those (probably when he sends out his first scouting SCV). Compare this to the Lucifron series. His camera should be locked during the time when he looks offscreen. If the camera consistently doesn't move (appears to be "screen locked" by the maphack) during the times he usually scouts, then this is fairly damning evidence, especially if he is very consistent in these timings (as one would expect a well-practiced professional to be) during non-"hackish" gameplay.

This could be loosely compared to what is called a "synthetic control" method in econometrics (cite Alberto Albadie). In this, you try to find an accurate comparison by combining elements from a number of similar-ish case studies. This is useful when you have really low statistical power, and you're relying on what are essentially just case studies. It still lets you bring a little bit of statistics into the discussion.

So what you would want to do:
1) Collect similar replays to study.
2) Record the times (and lengths of time) for the first time or two he looks into the fog of war.
3) Compare this to the Lucifron replays. Does his camera look suspicious at these times?

For a player with builds timed down very precisely, this has potential to pretty easily detect a false positive.

That said, it seems the evidence is already pretty strong. But this seems like a fairly elucidating comparison to make for those still seeking something more objective.

On June 05 2012 15:14 TheBlueMeaner wrote:
The op of this thread must show himself, this smurfing crap is not acceptable. If the accusations are false this guy must take a dive, and spades should take legal action.

On June 05 2012 15:07 CursivE wrote:


Please, by all means, if it's that easy, then debunk away and end all of this.

Nothing is more annoying than when people make sweeping statements like this.

I'm looking at this on the balance of probabilities and if this was a court of law, he would be convicted.

On June 05 2012 15:18 papaz wrote:
I don't mind the discussion around hacking and Spades but how the hell is it ok that the OP that now has ruined Spades career is a smurf account?

If you ruin someones career like this, regardless of what Spades have done, you better show who you are.

I am disgusted by the OP.