|
07:06 KST - method linked here has been disproved here10:54 KST - Find a full timeline of pro comments (including Spades) in the topic here.08:47 KST - Summary:Accusations of maphacking have the potential to destroy a player's career if left unaddressed. Because of the potential consequences, we should be careful about accepting unproven accusations. The principle of 'innocent until proven guilty' should be applied here. That does not mean that there has been a conclusion about this case, however, which is why this thread remains tentatively open. Please discuss with caution and use evidence to back up your claims. (also a summary post by an unnamed pro on reddit here) |
On June 06 2012 23:17 figq wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 23:15 floor exercise wrote:On June 06 2012 23:08 figq wrote:On June 06 2012 21:33 Alejandrisha wrote:
1. every time the camera locks the only actions are hotkeys. this is true throughout the entire replay. Sorry, I'm confused... it was posted earlier by people who actually know the real existing camera lock hack that in fact it doesn't record any action in the replay during camera lock, the APM in the replay should be zero during camera locks... how does he select stuff during camera lock then? This is true for the most common free hack out there. For a while now hacks have turned to subscription and pay models. I haven't heard what if anything is different in those. It would certainly be helpful to know that what he does is possible with a certain hack that is out there, since I think we can reasonably rule out Spades being some mastermind hacker who makes his own tools So... nobody even knows if such type of hack required for the accusation here actually exists? Interesting.
Well no, we know map hacks exist and we know ways of manipulating replays so that they don't record camera movement in order to hide map hacking exists. These are facts we know. The basic free hack apparently does not allow any actions while in camera lock mode, but I haven't even see any video evidence of that and I'm not about to download hacks to see for myself.
Based on what we know about the hacks out there it's perfectly reasonable to assume that a hack that does exactly what Spades is doing in these games can exist, everything I've read about the zero actions thing is a means to further hide evidence, not some limitation of hack technology.
There seems to be very limited knowledge of what these hacks do and don't do, and mostly that's the result of them being significantly more privatized than what we dealt with in the BW days (and basically any game post-wow where I feel pay-hacking truly started)
|
On June 06 2012 22:17 turdburgler wrote:
why does it seem in every case like this, where a really minor personality gets caught in some controversy, the only people defending him have <200 posts. just strikes me as odd that the only people who are asking for scientific proof when thats impossible are people who never take part in discussion unless their favorite player is involved. strikes me as odd.
I do find it odd too. Some posters have just joined since this story broke and have only posted here to defend Spades. Sounds a bit dodgy to me. Obviously the OP had some doubts cast on his credibility being a single post man/woman, but similarly it looks fishy to me that someone would join TL and only post to defend a maphacker who has been condemned now by several pro-gamers - Illusion, Catz, Drewbie, PainUser, Idra, DarkForce etc.
|
On June 06 2012 23:01 Neurosis wrote:
You aren't exactly off the mark. What you say is true, but the thing is no pro plays like that, not even Spades himself. They have shown vods from his stream where he consistently looks into the fog to give unit commands or rally/whatever. I'm not saying noone gives commands from the minimap, but no one ONLY gives commands from the minimap (at least no pro level player). Which seems to be the case in the replays that are being analyzed.
As someone that plays way too much Starcraft myself that evidence alone is enough to convince me of hacking, but when you mix it with all the other ridiculously suspicious shit such as the miraculous scan on shakuras, the "oh shit I'm about to get dropped in my main let me just unsiege all my tanks and return home even though I have no vision of it" that occured on tal darim, I mean come on this is obvious maphacking.
That's a strong argument, I'm not trying to defend Spades just seeing if there might be a way to settle this.
My idea might be too dependent on screen resolution to be definitive.
|
I liked seeing how Spades randomly chooses to scan a base without even scouting for the possible spawning locations. I can only assume he hacked to see lucifron build a quick 3rd so he scanned to make it look like he scouted it and build his own quick 3rd lol. This game was on shakuras plateau btw. Pretty self-explanatory that he hacks - once a cheater always a cheater 
|
Just a question...would it have been in bad taste to put up a poll? Hacker/No/Undecided?
|
On June 06 2012 23:33 revel8 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 22:17 turdburgler wrote:
why does it seem in every case like this, where a really minor personality gets caught in some controversy, the only people defending him have <200 posts. just strikes me as odd that the only people who are asking for scientific proof when thats impossible are people who never take part in discussion unless their favorite player is involved. strikes me as odd. I do find it odd too. Some posters have just joined since this story broke and have only posted here to defend Spades. Sounds a bit dodgy to me. Obviously the OP had some doubts cast on his credibility being a single post man/woman, but similarly it looks fishy to me that someone would join TL and only post to defend a maphacker who has been condemned now by several pro-gamers - Illusion, Catz, Drewbie, PainUser, Idra, DarkForce etc.
Yeah, the only guys "defending" him are biased fanboys, or maybe it's people pointing out that it's hard to conclusively prove that someone is hacking and that innocent until proven guilty should apply, especially since most of the evidence is based on "noone would play like that" or "I wouldn't have done that" rather than actual evidence.
His playstyle in the series vs lucifron really isn't that different from the TvT replays he posted, he rarely looks into FoW at all, uses the minimap to move his army, makes some lucky calls, makes some unlucky calls and as often as not he loses because of some horrible move. The TvP and TvZ replays in general has a different feel to them but that's likely because the three matchups are completely different to play with different openers.
Several of the top players that says he's cheating are people who's been wrong about cheaters before, coming to any sure conclusion without exhaustive (more than a few hours) analysis is not possible and jumping the gun does no good. Again I would like people like Artosis, nony, morrow and other level heads who's taken part in things like this before, and doesn't have a history of jumping the gun, to take a look at it.
|
On June 06 2012 23:50 Santiago4ever wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 23:33 revel8 wrote:On June 06 2012 22:17 turdburgler wrote:
why does it seem in every case like this, where a really minor personality gets caught in some controversy, the only people defending him have <200 posts. just strikes me as odd that the only people who are asking for scientific proof when thats impossible are people who never take part in discussion unless their favorite player is involved. strikes me as odd. I do find it odd too. Some posters have just joined since this story broke and have only posted here to defend Spades. Sounds a bit dodgy to me. Obviously the OP had some doubts cast on his credibility being a single post man/woman, but similarly it looks fishy to me that someone would join TL and only post to defend a maphacker who has been condemned now by several pro-gamers - Illusion, Catz, Drewbie, PainUser, Idra, DarkForce etc. Yeah, the only guys "defending" him are biased fanboys, or maybe it's people pointing out that it's hard to conclusively prove that someone is hacking and that innocent until proven guilty should apply, especially since most of the evidence is based on "noone would play like that" or "I wouldn't have done that" rather than actual evidence. .
I didn't say the only guys defending him are biased fanboys, did I? Respectfully re-read my post. It was about new posters joining to only defend a maphacker.
Of course there are some with lots of posts who still refuse to see the evidence and think acting aggressive in this thread will somehow refute the unexplainable gameplay behaviour exhibited by Spades.
|
On June 06 2012 23:50 Santiago4ever wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 23:33 revel8 wrote:On June 06 2012 22:17 turdburgler wrote:
why does it seem in every case like this, where a really minor personality gets caught in some controversy, the only people defending him have <200 posts. just strikes me as odd that the only people who are asking for scientific proof when thats impossible are people who never take part in discussion unless their favorite player is involved. strikes me as odd. I do find it odd too. Some posters have just joined since this story broke and have only posted here to defend Spades. Sounds a bit dodgy to me. Obviously the OP had some doubts cast on his credibility being a single post man/woman, but similarly it looks fishy to me that someone would join TL and only post to defend a maphacker who has been condemned now by several pro-gamers - Illusion, Catz, Drewbie, PainUser, Idra, DarkForce etc. Yeah, the only guys "defending" him are biased fanboys, or maybe it's people pointing out that it's hard to conclusively prove that someone is hacking and that innocent until proven guilty should apply, especially since most of the evidence is based on "noone would play like that" or "I wouldn't have done that" rather than actual evidence. His playstyle in the series vs lucifron really isn't that different from the TvT replays he posted, he rarely looks into FoW at all, uses the minimap to move his army, makes some lucky calls, makes some unlucky calls and as often as not he loses because of some horrible move. The TvP and TvZ replays in general has a different feel to them but that's likely because the three matchups are completely different to play with different openers. Several of the top players that says he's cheating are people who's been wrong about cheaters before, coming to any sure conclusion without exhaustive (more than a few hours) analysis is not possible and jumping the gun does no good. Again I would like people like Artosis, nony, morrow and other level heads who's taken part in things like this before, and doesn't have a history of jumping the gun, to take a look at it.
I would be extremely interested to hear Grubby's take on it.
|
On June 06 2012 23:50 Chunhyang wrote:
Just a question...would it have been in bad taste to put up a poll? Hacker/No/Undecided?
If the poll were to go one way, it could influence people's analysis of the replays for them self.
|
On June 06 2012 23:59 Holytornados wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 23:50 Chunhyang wrote:
Just a question...would it have been in bad taste to put up a poll? Hacker/No/Undecided? If the poll were to go one way, it could influence people's analysis of the replays for them self.
There was such a poll some pages back. Good luck finding it.
|
I's just curious. Has anyone else gotten the feeling that we don't have all the information here? That something is...off?
I know this sounds like paranoia, but was wondering if I was the only one :D.
|
On June 06 2012 23:50 Chunhyang wrote:
Just a question...would it have been in bad taste to put up a poll? Hacker/No/Undecided?
There was a pole on like page 320-330 and it was like 80% yes.
|
On June 06 2012 23:57 Shallot wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 23:50 Santiago4ever wrote:On June 06 2012 23:33 revel8 wrote:On June 06 2012 22:17 turdburgler wrote:
why does it seem in every case like this, where a really minor personality gets caught in some controversy, the only people defending him have <200 posts. just strikes me as odd that the only people who are asking for scientific proof when thats impossible are people who never take part in discussion unless their favorite player is involved. strikes me as odd. I do find it odd too. Some posters have just joined since this story broke and have only posted here to defend Spades. Sounds a bit dodgy to me. Obviously the OP had some doubts cast on his credibility being a single post man/woman, but similarly it looks fishy to me that someone would join TL and only post to defend a maphacker who has been condemned now by several pro-gamers - Illusion, Catz, Drewbie, PainUser, Idra, DarkForce etc. Yeah, the only guys "defending" him are biased fanboys, or maybe it's people pointing out that it's hard to conclusively prove that someone is hacking and that innocent until proven guilty should apply, especially since most of the evidence is based on "noone would play like that" or "I wouldn't have done that" rather than actual evidence. His playstyle in the series vs lucifron really isn't that different from the TvT replays he posted, he rarely looks into FoW at all, uses the minimap to move his army, makes some lucky calls, makes some unlucky calls and as often as not he loses because of some horrible move. The TvP and TvZ replays in general has a different feel to them but that's likely because the three matchups are completely different to play with different openers. Several of the top players that says he's cheating are people who's been wrong about cheaters before, coming to any sure conclusion without exhaustive (more than a few hours) analysis is not possible and jumping the gun does no good. Again I would like people like Artosis, nony, morrow and other level heads who's taken part in things like this before, and doesn't have a history of jumping the gun, to take a look at it. I would be extremely interested to hear Grubby's take on it.
I think he's too classy to get involved tbh. >.>
|
On June 06 2012 23:33 revel8 wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 22:17 turdburgler wrote:
why does it seem in every case like this, where a really minor personality gets caught in some controversy, the only people defending him have <200 posts. just strikes me as odd that the only people who are asking for scientific proof when thats impossible are people who never take part in discussion unless their favorite player is involved. strikes me as odd. I do find it odd too. Some posters have just joined since this story broke and have only posted here to defend Spades. Sounds a bit dodgy to me. Obviously the OP had some doubts cast on his credibility being a single post man/woman, but similarly it looks fishy to me that someone would join TL and only post to defend a maphacker who has been condemned now by several pro-gamers - Illusion, Catz, Drewbie, PainUser, Idra, DarkForce etc.
Well tbh, the one that started this whole mess has a count of 1 post and joined the day he opened this thread.
"Never trust something people aren't willing to put their name on".
|
Seeker
Where dat snitch at?37110 Posts
Poll: How well have you kept up with this thread?I've only read the pros' comments (84) 35% I've read the whole thing and I keep coming back for new posts (74) 31% I've read bits of this thread here and there (56) 24% I started reading the whole thing, realized how much I would actually have to read, and gave up (17) 7% Other (specify) (6) 3% 237 total votes Your vote: How well have you kept up with this thread? (Vote): I've read the whole thing and I keep coming back for new posts
(Vote): I've only read the pros' comments
(Vote): I've read bits of this thread here and there
(Vote): I started reading the whole thing, realized how much I would actually have to read, and gave up
(Vote): Other (specify)
|
I have an idea to help prove Spades is innocent.
He plays a 100 ladder games with a video filming himself playing.
If he is still Rank1 GM after that, then a lot of people will stop believing he hacked.
If he really maphacked his way up there, his MMR will fall waaaay down.
|
As per your poll, I kept up and read every comment on the first ~205 pages, now I just skim for updates/pro player/commentator responses. *Voted other
|
On June 07 2012 00:22 Geiko wrote:
I have an idea to help prove Spades is innocent.
He plays a 100 ladder games with a video filming himself playing.
If he is still Rank1 GM after that, then a lot of people will stop believing he hacked.
If he really maphacked his way up there, his MMR will fall waaaay down.
He already played a lot of games without maphack and released the replays. And no, he's not currently in GM.
|
On June 06 2012 15:57 canikizu wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 15:42 dvorakftw wrote:On June 06 2012 13:55 StarStrider wrote:
You make some very very good points. But the key thing I don't understand is why he suddenly resieged in the position he did in Exhibit C above the red star . He wasn't in range of the ramp by resieging there. He wasn't in range of anything. He was still in "natural sieging position", just a little bit forward. The small .5 inch movement didn't help him gain position at all: The 'eventual siege location' in Exhibit D is where he wanted to get. Exhibit F. A minute earlier when theognis' second CC is destroyed. + Show Spoiler +Notice the marines are just at the edge of the back tank's cover. theognis could attack those marines without being hit by the tanks. If someone had their entire army and every SCV ready at the ramp it is possible the marines could be killed allowing the tanks to then be destroyed my units moving inside siege range. This is not to say theognis could have done it in this exact case (though maybe) but potentially in a game situation such as this. So the marines retreat to the tanks ASAP. Now the comparison, Exhibit G. + Show Spoiler +Note at 9:50 Spades does not have a good look at the ridge and that Tank 2's position is just a little bit back and above the spot where he leaves Tank 3 sieged at 10:10 while leaping the other two forward. Here's what could happen if he leaves Tank 2 siege and moves other tanks around. Exhibit H Picture of me vs myself in a custom game with some help from MSPaint: + Show Spoiler +The tanks move in range of the ledge where we must remember he lost a tank just a few minutes earlier. Look again at 10:10 in Exhibit G. With Tank 3 now in a position a bit forward and lower than where Tank 2 was, a good view of the ledge accomplished by the 'suspicious' pan down, and the viking in place, he can unsiege the two other tanks and move them to the ramp. This WAS NOT POSSIBLE with the original tank positions. If Tank 1 and Tank 3 could be unsieged and easily moved between the rocks and Tank 2, then the half inch creep is very suspicious. Since Tank 2 isn't in ideal position already, the act of unsieging and repositioning a few hexes over actually isn't that odd. With Tank 3 replacing and improving Tank 2's original position he can then do the proper leap toward the ramp which was the original goal. Yep. I don't know if he hacked or not, but I'm not surprised if he didn't hack at this moment. People keep saying that he hacked, because what's the chance that the tank can siege up right when the marines walk in.However, people don't actually think that what is the chance that Lucifon DOESN'T have marines up that cliff, or what is the chance that Lucifon DOESN'T have marines waiting up that ramp. If you think about it that way, you'll see that there're very slim chance that Lucifon doesn't have units up that clip AND doesn't have units ready to run down the ramp. Sieging there seems to be a good, normal decision to me. It's basic and simple knowledge of positioning. So is siege tank positioning. We always see GSL players put the siege tanks in that one place over and over again. Throughout practicing, players gradually optimize about their positioning, especially tank positioning. Yes, he sieged right when the units move in, but we can't exclude the fact that his siege positioning at that time was the most optimized one at that moment (can shoot up cliff, can shoot ramp, far enough to not get hit by bio) So as I said, I don't know if he hacked or not, but I'm not surprised if he didn't hack at this moment.
All of that is actually pretty irrelevant. Spades included a viking in this push. The point of the viking for this push is to provide high ground vision, which it was just out of range to do. Technically, everything should have gone exactly as it did, IF that viking was doing its job. But he actually couldn't see the high ground, and still reacts to the approaching marines. Ideally he would have resieged closer to the base than he did. Then those marines that he couldn't see but should have the viking spotting for(but didn't) approached and he resieged. It's very fishy.
|
On June 07 2012 00:25 Fyrewolf wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 15:57 canikizu wrote:On June 06 2012 15:42 dvorakftw wrote:On June 06 2012 13:55 StarStrider wrote:
You make some very very good points. But the key thing I don't understand is why he suddenly resieged in the position he did in Exhibit C above the red star . He wasn't in range of the ramp by resieging there. He wasn't in range of anything. He was still in "natural sieging position", just a little bit forward. The small .5 inch movement didn't help him gain position at all: The 'eventual siege location' in Exhibit D is where he wanted to get. Exhibit F. A minute earlier when theognis' second CC is destroyed. + Show Spoiler +Notice the marines are just at the edge of the back tank's cover. theognis could attack those marines without being hit by the tanks. If someone had their entire army and every SCV ready at the ramp it is possible the marines could be killed allowing the tanks to then be destroyed my units moving inside siege range. This is not to say theognis could have done it in this exact case (though maybe) but potentially in a game situation such as this. So the marines retreat to the tanks ASAP. Now the comparison, Exhibit G. + Show Spoiler +Note at 9:50 Spades does not have a good look at the ridge and that Tank 2's position is just a little bit back and above the spot where he leaves Tank 3 sieged at 10:10 while leaping the other two forward. Here's what could happen if he leaves Tank 2 siege and moves other tanks around. Exhibit H Picture of me vs myself in a custom game with some help from MSPaint: + Show Spoiler +The tanks move in range of the ledge where we must remember he lost a tank just a few minutes earlier. Look again at 10:10 in Exhibit G. With Tank 3 now in a position a bit forward and lower than where Tank 2 was, a good view of the ledge accomplished by the 'suspicious' pan down, and the viking in place, he can unsiege the two other tanks and move them to the ramp. This WAS NOT POSSIBLE with the original tank positions. If Tank 1 and Tank 3 could be unsieged and easily moved between the rocks and Tank 2, then the half inch creep is very suspicious. Since Tank 2 isn't in ideal position already, the act of unsieging and repositioning a few hexes over actually isn't that odd. With Tank 3 replacing and improving Tank 2's original position he can then do the proper leap toward the ramp which was the original goal. Yep. I don't know if he hacked or not, but I'm not surprised if he didn't hack at this moment. People keep saying that he hacked, because what's the chance that the tank can siege up right when the marines walk in.However, people don't actually think that what is the chance that Lucifon DOESN'T have marines up that cliff, or what is the chance that Lucifon DOESN'T have marines waiting up that ramp. If you think about it that way, you'll see that there're very slim chance that Lucifon doesn't have units up that clip AND doesn't have units ready to run down the ramp. Sieging there seems to be a good, normal decision to me. It's basic and simple knowledge of positioning. So is siege tank positioning. We always see GSL players put the siege tanks in that one place over and over again. Throughout practicing, players gradually optimize about their positioning, especially tank positioning. Yes, he sieged right when the units move in, but we can't exclude the fact that his siege positioning at that time was the most optimized one at that moment (can shoot up cliff, can shoot ramp, far enough to not get hit by bio) So as I said, I don't know if he hacked or not, but I'm not surprised if he didn't hack at this moment. All of that is actually pretty irrelevant. Spades included a viking in this push. The entire point of the viking for this push is to provide high ground vision, which it was just out of range to do. Technically, everything should have gone exactly as it did, IF that viking was doing its job. But he actually couldn't see the high ground, and still reacts to the approaching marines. Ideally he would have resieged closer to the base than he did. Then those marines that he couldn't see but should have the viking spotting for(but didn't) approached and he resieged. It's very fishy.
I don't understand why people keep arguing about those details. He doesn't look at fog of war a single time in the series, ffs, how is that not enough of a proof for everyone in its right mind?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/815/tankcreep5.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/815/tankcreep5.jpg)
![[image loading]](http://img703.imageshack.us/img703/5752/tankcreep6.jpg)
