| Forum Index > SC2 General |
07:06 KST - method linked here has been disproved here 10:54 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) | ||
|
superstartran
United States4013 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:22 RezJ wrote: 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. There's only one undetected/working maphack to my knowledge other than private hacks. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:24 superstartran wrote: There's only one undetected/working maphack to my knowledge other than private hacks. This, and apparently the private hacks are basically just more functional clones of the public version, since Blizzard hasn't bothered to make the public version detectable. | ||
|
jacksonlee
175 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:22 RezJ wrote: 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. You're doing exactly what I said in my post. It is unreasonable to accuse someone of one thing that he did, and when that's debunked, you conveniently say, "well that's because tha hxors are so 1337 they can do anything and hide every hacking activity." At what point do we draw the line and say, "well, our theory was wrong, let's look somewhere else." I"m talking strictly about the whole FOW argument | ||
|
mindjames
Israel323 Posts
| ||
|
Santiago4ever
Sweden299 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:22 RezJ wrote: 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. Well, the camera lock can't be turned on all the time since he actually looks into the FoW once or twice in the series. But if he can turn it on and off at will why isn't he watch FoW more often or move his units into FoW and not by using mini-map? Could it because he uses mini-map to move for most situations and rarely ever watches FoW normally? Can't have it both way. Can't be both "He's not watching FoW cause that would trigger the hack!!!" and "Watching FoW doesn't mean he doesn't hack, you can't say what hack he's using or how it works!!!"... can it? | ||
|
mindjames
Israel323 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:25 jacksonlee wrote: You're doing exactly what I said in my post. It is unreasonable to accuse someone of one thing that he did, and when that's debunked, you conveniently say, "well that's because tha hxors are so 1337 they can do anything and hide every hacking activity." At what point do we draw the line and say, "well, our theory was wrong, let's look somewhere else." I"m talking strictly about the whole FOW argument Let me explain then: I'm saying he might have been able to lock his camera without being as limited as the public hacks are. | ||
|
hinnolinn
212 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:26 RezJ wrote: How would you know anything about the functionality of private hacks if they're truly private? This seems like an excellent question, why are people so sure there are hacks that do the things he's claimed of doing if the functionality is private? | ||
|
dvorakftw
681 Posts
A 2:30 minute summary of the CatZ/Illusion analysis | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:26 RezJ wrote: How would you know anything about the functionality of private hacks if they're truly private? Private just means they cost money. It doesn't mean you need to be part of the mafia to use them. They would never actually sell if people weren't made aware of their features. | ||
|
IamPryda
United States1186 Posts
| ||
|
jacksonlee
175 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:28 RezJ wrote: Let me explain then: I'm saying he might have been able to lock his camera without being as limited as the public hacks are. Then how is FOW an evidence that he's hacking, if, as you propose, the so-called hack can cover all grounds in regards to FOW. | ||
|
jacksonlee
175 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:28 IamPryda wrote: i wonder how many people are hackers just defending spades because they dont want the program they use to be pinpointed and then banned themselves or the same type of evidence to be seen has credible against them. A guy who prolly had very few fans all of a sudden has people practically swear on there first born child he's not a hacker yet several pros have put together a case in which when u add it all up seems pretty convincing. well there is no one single piece of evidence that complete proves him a hacker when all things are added up there is such a strong case not to mention he has used hacks in bw so clearly the ethics for stooping that low is not a problem for him. nice try, most of us are backseat players who haven't played ladder since season 4 | ||
|
toiletCAT
Qatar284 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:28 RezJ wrote: Let me explain then: I'm saying he might have been able to lock his camera without being as limited as the public hacks are. Maybe this, maybe that, maybe the Flux Capacitor. | ||
|
Greenwizard
48 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:28 dvorakftw wrote: Here ya go: A 2:30 minute summary of the CatZ/Illusion analysis All i have to say is : number 1 !!!  | ||
|
warshop
Canada490 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:27 Santiago4ever wrote: Well, the camera lock can't be turned on all the time since he actually looks into the FoW once or twice in the series. But if he can turn it on and off at will why isn't he watch FoW more often or move his units into FoW and not by using mini-map? Could it because he uses mini-map to move for most situations and rarely ever watches FoW normally? Can't have it both way. Can't be both "He's not watching FoW cause that would trigger the hack!!!" and "Watching FoW doesn't mean he doesn't hack, you can't say what hack he's using or how it works!!!"... can it? You can't draw the line. That's why this whole argument has been going on for 250+ pages. You'd need to have access to private hacks, which personally, I do not wish to pay for. | ||
|
Bogeyman
Sweden307 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:08 Shiori wrote: 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. Well, we now know that plenty of the popular hacks out there either weren't used by Spades or Spades just didn't utilize the screen lock because having observer tabs, minimap revealed etc is more than enough, or that he was using a different hack that allowed him to macro while looking around with screen lock active, or of course he wasn't hacking at all. But with all those possibilities available we can't conclude that he doesn't hack and disregard any strange behavior we find. It's less likely now that the "screen lock moments" weren't actually screen locks, but there's no way we can evaluate how much smaller the chances are of him using screen locks since we have no insight into the world of private hacks. So all it really means is that the new information/experience regarding hacks (provided by EtherealDeath) does not point towards Spades being a hacker. It really sucks to be in Spades position if he's innocent (well it sure sucks if he's guilty too) because it would take a lot to clear his name at this point. The main problem I think is that so many people have come forth providing personal information that puts Spades in a bad light or even states that he has streamcheated etc. Such personal information will mean people won't be convinced he hasn't hacked until we've either made a really, really thorough investigation (that puts what we've done so far to shame, with fucking diagrams and hard data of Spades behavior in clean ladder games vs suspected hack games) and still not come up with anything conclusive, or we somehow find a way to prove he is innocent, which seems nigh impossible. Until that point is reached lots of theories may come up and be debunked, but it won't clear him of any guilt for a long time. | ||
|
Shiori
3815 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:31 Bogeyman wrote: Well, we now know that plenty of the popular hacks out there either weren't used by Spades or Spades just didn't utilize the screen lock because having observer tabs, minimap revealed etc is more than enough, or that he was using a different hack that allowed him to macro while looking around with screen lock active, or of course he wasn't hacking at all. But with all those possibilities available we can't conclude that he doesn't hack and disregard any strange behavior we find. It's less likely now that the "screen lock moments" weren't actually screen locks, but there's no way we can evaluate how much smaller the chances are of him using screen locks since we have no insight into the world of private hacks. So all it really means is that the new information/experience regarding hacks (provided by EtherealDeath) does not point towards Spades being a hacker. It really sucks to be in Spades position if he's innocent (well it sure sucks if he's guilty too) because it would take a lot to clear his name at this point. The main problem I think is that so many people have come forth providing personal information that puts Spades in a bad light or even states that he has streamcheated etc. Such personal information will mean people won't be convinced he hasn't hacked until we've either made a really, really thorough investigation (that puts what we've done so far to shame, with fucking diagrams and hard data of Spades behavior in clean ladder games vs suspected hack games) and still not come up with anything conclusive, or we somehow find a way to prove he is innocent, which seems nigh impossible. Until that point is reached lots of theories may come up and be debunked, but it won't clear him of any guilt for a long time. Yeah, but we really haven't got much to go on at this point. Okay, so we have "suspicious behaviour" but that category seems to be getting weaker and weaker. A great deal of the initial observations from replays about confusing plays have been explained away, with the possible exception of maybe 1 or 2 questionable sieges. Is that really enough to actually convict someone of hacking? Honestly, I don't think so. This argument has never really been about "hmm, it doesn't make sense that he did X here" but more about things like Fog of War, magic Scans, and the like. With the latter significantly weakened (unless Spades has access to hacks that nobody anywhere has heard of--unlikely) we're left with the unverifiable former. Just bear with me: take a look through the last 100 pages. Perhaps just click randomly on 5 or 10. The argument has basically been about not ever looking in fog of war, because somehow we got this idea that camera locking would exclude the instances of clicking into fog of war. Well, that's been shown to be false in the case of the most popular (and by extension accessible) hack and its private derivatives. That's not good news for the prosecutor, so to speak. | ||
|
StarStrider
United States689 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:17 dvorakftw wrote: 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 AGREE that in order to move to where he did before he resieged he would need to move all 3 to avoid going into cliff range. BUT what I am saying is that it was redundant because he didn't gain any position on the ramp or main by doing so. All he gained was what he already had - a position to shell the cliff outcropping. If he already had this then why move? Do you see why I am calling that redundant? He moved because he was trying to get position to hit the ramp so he could begin sieging the main as you showed in Exhibit D. That is the optimal position that the 111 eventually wants to get. He was on his way there. He suddenly changed his mind and resieged at a tiny increment to the left instead when he saw the army. I understood your opinion but I don't think you clearly understood mine. Did that clear it up? I don't want you to adopt it I just want you to understand it and not say it was a redundant move when it clearly was, being as no new ground can be shelled from the new position...only what he could already hit before - the cliff outcropping. | ||
|
starcraft911
Korea (South)1263 Posts
On June 07 2012 09:28 hinnolinn wrote: This seems like an excellent question, why are people so sure there are hacks that do the things he's claimed of doing if the functionality is private? Pay to use is what is meant by private. There are many small hacking communities that provide hacks for virtually every major game, however, they come at a price. The difference between using a public hack and a private hack is similar to using TPB vs private trackers. One will get you caught much much easier and the other can get you caught, but not as likely. | ||
|
StarStrider
United States689 Posts
Ok. | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Other Games |
|
Afreeca Starleague
Snow vs Sharp
Jaedong vs Mini
Wardi Open
OSC
Sparkling Tuna Cup
Afreeca Starleague
Light vs Speed
Larva vs Soma
PiGosaur Monday
LiuLi Cup
RSL Revival
Maru vs Reynor
Cure vs TriGGeR
The PondCast
RSL Revival
Zoun vs Classic
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
