|
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 07 2012 09:03 psychotics wrote:
im just gona sit here and laugh at everyone when spades is proven innocent jump on the band wagon hate train more please like spades said i could go download a few replays of any pro and find suspicious looking play and claim it hack hype it up post on a forum and get hundreds of people to follow the hate train till that players career is all but gone.
http://www.reddit.com/r/starcraft/comments/uoc3a/conclusive_proof_that_spades_was_hacking/
User was warned for this post
|
For those wondering about MLG, it's not an issue. As of right now, not everyone agrees on one verdict. He won't be able to hack at MLG, so that's a non-issue. If everyone later agrees that he did indeed hack, he would not be welcome at future LAN events.
|
Already been debunked. Please read the big white box at the top of the thread.
|
On June 07 2012 07:41 StarStrider wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 07:40 phiinix wrote:I want to preface this with the follow: 1) Excuse me for not reading all 263 pages 2) I am not taking a position on whether I think he is map hacking or not. That said, if I'm correct, the consensus is that Spades never looked into the fog of war in his series against Lucifron. If this is correct, what is this? http://i.imgur.com/u0Sft.jpgIt seems unthinkable, but it looks to me like he's looking into the fog of war and his medivac does not have any vision of his screen. I know it's possible to implement a command to take off the screen lock, but is this news for anyone else or am I just an idiot? The theory on the hack is that the camera only snaps to where your eyes are looking through the fog of war if you perform a command there. And as you can see in your picture there is a move command being issued in that location. His camera only appears over no-vision fog of war after a command has been performed there. Never once do we see the camera scanning the map as it would from normal screen scrolling or a left click on the minimap.
Ah, that clears things up, thanks.
|
On June 07 2012 09:04 Shiori wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 09:03 ghrur wrote:On June 07 2012 08:50 Shiori wrote:
Okay, if that thing about the Camera Locking has been debunked, then it seems that all we really have to go on are nebulous things like his decision making. That's...honestly not very convincing. What? Where was this debunked? I thought the only thing debunked was that minimap clicking vs conclusive proof of clicking on fog of war. Doesn't Camera Lock still happen with the hack? Like, isn't Camera Lock still a real effect of the hack? On the previous page there's a rather long post detailing some problems with the Camera Lock hypothesis from, and I can't stress this enough, actual experience with the hack.
I didn't debunk it I just said that it is very unlikely to be any well known public hack, and at the same time unlikely to be a certain private hack as well from what I've gathered. I don't know anything about private hacks in general though so some random private hack is still a possibility, but you have to take into account the probability of that.
edit - And what people have said about him being friends with HRGZack. I wouldn't judge him too quickly on that although that does point to the possibility of him having a private hack, if my ongoing analysis of the HRGZack replays suggests something other than a known public hack.
But, I wouldn't just him just for having Zack on his friend's list. Some time ago between CSL seasons my roommate noticed that one of the people on our team was on the confirmed hackers thread. This was quite a surprise to us - I mean we even play with him IRL and stuff. So, we immediately removed him from our roster for the next season.
We don't hack, but we sure as hell had him on our Real ID friend's list. So, don't be too quick to judge just from this connection. Just investigate it to the ends that it would suggest.
|
On June 07 2012 09:06 EtherealDeath wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 09:04 Shiori wrote:On June 07 2012 09:03 ghrur wrote:On June 07 2012 08:50 Shiori wrote:
Okay, if that thing about the Camera Locking has been debunked, then it seems that all we really have to go on are nebulous things like his decision making. That's...honestly not very convincing. What? Where was this debunked? I thought the only thing debunked was that minimap clicking vs conclusive proof of clicking on fog of war. Doesn't Camera Lock still happen with the hack? Like, isn't Camera Lock still a real effect of the hack? On the previous page there's a rather long post detailing some problems with the Camera Lock hypothesis from, and I can't stress this enough, actual experience with the hack. I didn't debunk it I just said that it is very unlikely to be any well known public hack, and at the same time unlikely to be a certain private hack as well from what I've gathered. I don't know anything about private hacks in general though so some random private hack is still a possibility, but you have to take into account the probability of that.
I'd say that definitely weakens the hypothesis, though, because the notion of camera locking was originally supplied by the OP, who implied that Spades was using some sort of feature common to maphacks. If this isn't the case, then the OP (and in fact everyone here) was going off of an assumption about the nature of what constitutes Camera Locking that isn't actually true. This calls into question every analysis, because we were all looking for things that don't actually match up with how a real camera lock would work.
|
I can't understand why are you saying that cat'z etc are biased, they opened this thread then download the reps and watched it, catz told that spades hacked and that he was going to show it in his stream, so what were you waiting of catz guys? he watched the reps 3 or 4 times before the stream so...
|
The sheer amount of incredibly weak evidence in this thread is staggering, and reflects much more poorly on the accusers than Spades even. I really have no opinion on whether he hacks or not, but it's pretty obvious that nearly (all?) the replay analysis in this thread is still nothing but conjecture. You guys would have concluded just about any player hacks given their replays with the amount of rigor in this 'investigation.'
Maybe just try not to sound so conclusive when you aren't 100% sure. And when you think you're 100% sure, maybe take a step back and realize you shouldn't be.
|
On June 07 2012 08:59 JerKy wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 08:53 teamsolid wrote:On June 07 2012 08:45 mrtomjones wrote:On June 07 2012 08:40 oxxo wrote:
Why are people still trying to prove/disprove this? Any highish T player can tell that the type of play and responses in the OP is just unexplainable sans maphack at his level. The difference between the clean replays (with normal play) vs these replays are clear as day. Most of what the OP said was proven to be way over exagerated or in many places to be simply wrong. The OP is not really relevant. I don't know why there isn't a mod link to the CatZ & Co analysis VOD. The arguments made their are 10x as strong as the OP and extremely convincing. Yeah I find it really convincing too, but a lot of people are arguing that CatZ and co began their analysis (on stream) already under the impression that Spades hacked during those games, so their collective opinions are very biased
I guess the problem with that VOD is that lots of what they said was said thoughtlessly, and commented on anything that seemed suspicious without a thorough investigation. Perhaps they were thorough before they started to stream? Even so a lot (some say most? Some say all?) of what they said was wrong. Since people always want examples I'll give one: they mentioned the clicking so close together on the mini-map was impossible, yet they never checked that closely or they would've seen the three clicks coming from north, which would map very well with the movement of the mouse cursor you expect when moving down to the minimap.
So with that problem (a lot didn't indicate hacking), it loses validity in the public eye really fast, and all the points made that (probably? I guess I should review them all...) were valid are neglected.
|
On June 07 2012 09:08 Beakyboo wrote:
The sheer amount of incredibly weak evidence in this thread is staggering, and reflects much more poorly on the accusers than Spades even. I really have no opinion on whether he hacks or not, but it's pretty obvious that nearly (all?) the replay analysis in this thread is still nothing but conjecture. You guys would have concluded just about any player hacks given their replays with the amount of rigor in this 'investigation.'
Maybe just try not to sound so conclusive when you aren't 100% sure. And when you think you're 100% sure, maybe take a step back and realize you shouldn't be.
Did you even see the evidence?
For example, never looking in the fog of war in a bo7 when he does it in every single ladder game he streamed?
|
On June 07 2012 09:03 ghrur wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 08:50 Shiori wrote:
Okay, if that thing about the Camera Locking has been debunked, then it seems that all we really have to go on are nebulous things like his decision making. That's...honestly not very convincing. What? Where was this debunked? I thought the only thing debunked was that minimap clicking vs conclusive proof of clicking on fog of war. Doesn't Camera Lock still happen with the hack? Like, isn't Camera Lock still a real effect of the hack? Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 09:03 psychotics wrote:
im just gona sit here and laugh at everyone when spades is proven innocent jump on the band wagon hate train more please like spades said i could go download a few replays of any pro and find suspicious looking play and claim it hack hype it up post on a forum and get hundreds of people to follow the hate train till that players career is all but gone. So we've heard this claim made a lot. Go do it.
dont have the time and honestly i care to much about the community to kill someones career just to prove a point. like i said in my first post in this thread this issue was handled wrong TL and public accusations are the wrong place for this. contact the team let them deal with it professionally instead of a hate forum by someone with no credentials to back up his claims (half of which were completely proven wrong). The SC2 community needs to learn to act more professional with important matters that impact peoples careers and lives. trust me i am not in favor of map hackers but theres a right and wrong way to deal with this and the OP chose the wrong way. until there is no reasonable doubt that spades hacked i will support him and wish him well, and hope he does well at MLG this weekend
|
About the arguments (far from being any kind of solid proof, obviously) that he was falling down, playing other games, going back home and suddenly skyrocketing on ladder - raising suspicions - the story isn't really that strange. Remember how Sheth was feeling really bad at the Korean teamhouse of FXO and had to go back home, where he could feel more comfortable and since then he flourished and reached world top class heights many times.
Environment is very important factor; people have ridiculous ups and downs as streaks in esports.
Again, I still just can't know for sure if Spades hacked or not, just commenting on this type of argument, if it deserves even to be considered as a serious argument at all. Another one similar was the psychological analysis how if he was innocent he would get angry and fight back with detailed argumentation - truth is, there are all kinds of human characters, the behavior of Spades here is perfectly possible for someone completely innocent, as well.
|
On June 07 2012 09:10 Pwnographics wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 09:08 Beakyboo wrote:
The sheer amount of incredibly weak evidence in this thread is staggering, and reflects much more poorly on the accusers than Spades even. I really have no opinion on whether he hacks or not, but it's pretty obvious that nearly (all?) the replay analysis in this thread is still nothing but conjecture. You guys would have concluded just about any player hacks given their replays with the amount of rigor in this 'investigation.'
Maybe just try not to sound so conclusive when you aren't 100% sure. And when you think you're 100% sure, maybe take a step back and realize you shouldn't be. Did you even see the evidence? For example, never looking in the fog of war in a bo7 when he does it in every single ladder game he streamed?
But it turns out that he did look into the fog of war, but it was dismissed on the grounds that Camera Locking supposedly allows this if you click. But now we've learned that CLing doesn't actually do this, which means Spades's clicking in the fog of war counts as looking in the fog of war.
|
On June 07 2012 09:09 Bogeyman wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 08:59 JerKy wrote:On June 07 2012 08:53 teamsolid wrote:On June 07 2012 08:45 mrtomjones wrote:On June 07 2012 08:40 oxxo wrote:
Why are people still trying to prove/disprove this? Any highish T player can tell that the type of play and responses in the OP is just unexplainable sans maphack at his level. The difference between the clean replays (with normal play) vs these replays are clear as day. Most of what the OP said was proven to be way over exagerated or in many places to be simply wrong. The OP is not really relevant. I don't know why there isn't a mod link to the CatZ & Co analysis VOD. The arguments made their are 10x as strong as the OP and extremely convincing. Yeah I find it really convincing too, but a lot of people are arguing that CatZ and co began their analysis (on stream) already under the impression that Spades hacked during those games, so their collective opinions are very biased I guess the problem with that VOD is that lots of what they said was said thoughtlessly, and commented on anything that seemed suspicious without a thorough investigation. Perhaps they were thorough before they started to stream? Even so a lot (some say most? Some say all?) of what they said was wrong. Since people always want examples I'll give one: they mentioned the clicking so close together on the mini-map was impossible, yet they never checked that closely or they would've seen the three clicks coming from north, which would map very well with the movement of the mouse cursor you expect when moving down to the minimap. So with that problem (a lot didn't indicate hacking), it loses validity in the public eye really fast, and all the points made that (probably? I guess I should review them all...) were valid are neglected.
Hell.. I have seen convincing arguments both ways but after the stuff I have seen today debunking a lot of what i thought was good evidence, I think he is innocent.
|
On June 07 2012 09:12 figq wrote:
About the arguments (far from being any kind of solid proof, obviously) that he was falling down, playing other games, going back home and suddenly skyrocketing on ladder - raising suspicions - the story isn't really that strange. Remember how Sheth was feeling really bad at the Korean teamhouse of FXO and had to go back home, where he could feel more comfortable and since then he flourished and reached world top class heights many times.
Environment is very important factor; people have ridiculous ups and downs as streaks in esports.
Again, I still just can't know for sure if Spades hacked or not, just commenting on this type of argument, if it deserves even to be considered as a serious argument at all. Another one similar was the psychological analysis how if he was innocent he would get angry and fight back with detailed argumentation - truth is, there are all kinds of human characters, the behavior of Spades here is perfectly possible for someone completely innocent, as well.
Yes, there are are hundreds of possible reasons and factors that Spades might have ascended to the top of the ladder. Other, better players might have been busy playing tournaments, and laddering less at the time. Maybe it was the change in scenery. Maybe he just had a good streak one month.
It's not proof of anything.
|
On June 07 2012 09:13 mrtomjones wrote:Show nested quote +On June 07 2012 09:09 Bogeyman wrote:On June 07 2012 08:59 JerKy wrote:On June 07 2012 08:53 teamsolid wrote:On June 07 2012 08:45 mrtomjones wrote:On June 07 2012 08:40 oxxo wrote:
Why are people still trying to prove/disprove this? Any highish T player can tell that the type of play and responses in the OP is just unexplainable sans maphack at his level. The difference between the clean replays (with normal play) vs these replays are clear as day. Most of what the OP said was proven to be way over exagerated or in many places to be simply wrong. The OP is not really relevant. I don't know why there isn't a mod link to the CatZ & Co analysis VOD. The arguments made their are 10x as strong as the OP and extremely convincing. Yeah I find it really convincing too, but a lot of people are arguing that CatZ and co began their analysis (on stream) already under the impression that Spades hacked during those games, so their collective opinions are very biased I guess the problem with that VOD is that lots of what they said was said thoughtlessly, and commented on anything that seemed suspicious without a thorough investigation. Perhaps they were thorough before they started to stream? Even so a lot (some say most? Some say all?) of what they said was wrong. Since people always want examples I'll give one: they mentioned the clicking so close together on the mini-map was impossible, yet they never checked that closely or they would've seen the three clicks coming from north, which would map very well with the movement of the mouse cursor you expect when moving down to the minimap. So with that problem (a lot didn't indicate hacking), it loses validity in the public eye really fast, and all the points made that (probably? I guess I should review them all...) were valid are neglected. Hell.. I have seen convincing arguments both ways but after the stuff I have seen today debunking a lot of what i thought was good evidence, I think he is innocent.
Well, that makes me happy.
|
On June 07 2012 08:31 StarStrider wrote:
And I countered with: a reposition slightly to the left did nothing to help him reposition to start sieging the main, and was redundant to the position he already held
It was better. It was not redundant. It allowed the just-two-tank-leap move that was not possible in the original position because Tank 1 could not go between the rocks and the still sieged Tank 2.
If Spades had moved his marines 2 or 3 inches and then the tanks just 1 inch I would be more suspicious but still have reasonable doubt. As it stands and having had personal experience with unsieging tanks just to move them a few hexes over I don't find it questionable at all.
|
I'd like to add, in Tal'darim altar game against Lucifron, I've seen instances where Spades looks into fog of war for at least 1 second before resetting a barracks rally to that point. Now you can say, "oh that's because he issued a command." Well for one thing, the apparent prerequisite in the Hack readme was that a "Unit" was selected, not a building (Barracks).
So my question is, what gives anyone the right to attribute these features (that conveniently support the accusers) to the hack as they come up. Either you know the hack or you don't, stop saying that it can do 10000 different magical features if you don't actually have it yourself.
|
Yeah, honestly, I went from initially thinking he was hacking, to being uncertain, to thinking he was. Now, I'm pretty much convinced that he's not, or at least that none of the evidence we have is anything more than the most utter kind of circumstantial (i.e. "this doesn't seem like a logical move"). The most compelling piece of evidence was not looking into fog, but this has finally been debunked due to the fact that Spades's clicks into fog are legitimate insofar as camera locking doesn't allow them.
|
Guys.
GUYS.
Spades might not have used the hack you found with google.
Incredible, right?
Drop that argument already. Hacks are not limited to what you read on some forum or readme.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
