|
Second Youtunbe video, minute 5:05~
He is blinking single stalkers although he has all selected which is impossible and a 100% proof of him maphacking.
He also blinks one of his stalkers, that is a bit on the wall at the rocks, south INTO the Zerg army. That is obviously a logical misscalculation by the bot, no human would ever do such a misstake. It cannot even be a missclick, because you wouldn't ever use your mouse south during that blink micro.
Good find, I don't think he will go to WCG. People will have heard of him beeing a maphacker and flame him hard.
|
|
|
At least Protoss maphackers are caught very easily because they all enable the Blink hack...
|
KiWiKaKi used to go gate first sometimes... just sayin... I wish he came back.
Maybe he just build cannons because he's dumb. It's hard to say. Also, Protoss with Colossus unless there is some form of high tech, especially with sentries too is basically A-move. Also, I can explain moving towards the third but not the timing. Zerg tries to deny the third, you have five cannons on your base. Vibe has around 550 APM sometimes.
The only evidence towards maphacking is the ridiculously impossible timings. No explanation for the blink though.
|
Of course it is fraud. Someone needs to re-create this thread on the Blizzard forums under the multiplayer and esports section.
|
On June 06 2012 13:23 ReaperX wrote:
Wonder if he will do well without his hacks
Of course he won't do well. He A) had to cheat to even get invited and B) will be going against *actual* pros who don't fuck around or need crutches to win games. He has zero chance to do anything except shit the bed.
This is the thing, if you cheat you're fucked, not just in the community, but in actual tourney games where you will just end up looking like the wannabe you are.
|
On June 06 2012 14:39 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 14:36 Caihead wrote:On June 06 2012 14:34 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 06 2012 14:31 terran0330 wrote:
I was talking to Zack earlier today about this.
From what he tells me, Blizzard has emailed him concerning his safety from attacks at the event haha
Meaning Blizzard knows about this thread, knows about the replays, but choosing to continue on. And that is exactly what I've been talking about above! Blizzard is the one to blame here. Blizzard is utmost concerned about the SECURITY of an event, if they don't even have that basis how can they monitor competitive play. I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about they fact that they know what people think of think, meaning they have access to the information in this thread, but are still inviting him to this event.
They have between that email and when the event starts to investigate it themselves, they need to check the validity and authenticity of the claims, draft public messages, and formulate a suitable solution / punishment if need be if verified. Again, their first priority is an event they are hosting goes off with out ANY player recieving threats of or actual violence, two wrongs don't make a right.
|
They are too busy working on shared replays to look into this.
|
lol somehow they have a chance to show their real SKILLS onLAN, it'll be fun lolol
seriously, hilarious
|
Zack was talking to me for about a month before MLG Columbus as the team manager/rep for HRG High Rollers Gaming, a eSports team that according to him wanted to break into SC2 and add me to their team. Come and go MLG and about the time Zack was telling me I'd be talking to their CEO and get my tickets and everything payed for the next MLG as I joined the team, then day after day, week after week I wasn't able to contact him or the CEO and after that being the second team to lure me in with good promices then fuck me over after weeks and months of pulling me along... Sigh after that I ended up quitting SC2, a real pain in the ass, over 50% of my time practicing I was promiced to two teams that both gave me nothing, and made me turn down legitimate team offers. I really hope he gets punished or his tickets/hotel taken away, to see someone screw me over, maphack, and get rewarded for me would just be a pain in the ass...
|
On June 06 2012 14:44 Caihead wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 14:39 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 06 2012 14:36 Caihead wrote:On June 06 2012 14:34 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 06 2012 14:31 terran0330 wrote:
I was talking to Zack earlier today about this.
From what he tells me, Blizzard has emailed him concerning his safety from attacks at the event haha
Meaning Blizzard knows about this thread, knows about the replays, but choosing to continue on. And that is exactly what I've been talking about above! Blizzard is the one to blame here. Blizzard is utmost concerned about the SECURITY of an event, if they don't even have that basis how can they monitor competitive play. I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about they fact that they know what people think of think, meaning they have access to the information in this thread, but are still inviting him to this event. They have between that email and when the event starts to investigate it themselves, they need to check the validity and authenticity of the claims, draft public messages, and formulate a suitable solution / punishment if need be if varified. Again, their first priority is an event they are hosting goes off with out ANY player recieving threats of or actual violence, two wrongs don't make a right.
But why not look into the cheating claims first, then issue a statement regarding them, either banning him or allowing him based on their analysis, then worry about the security of him?
Fact is, if Blizzard knows for certain he is cheating and he isn't invited, then they don't need to worry about his security. If they know he isn't cheating, then they can state that and provide reasons (which would settle people down a lot anyway) and then worry about his security if people are still fired up.
No reason to work on getting additional security for someone who might be showing up. Put the horse before the cart.
It sounds more like Blizzard has decided he is coming and is now planning for his security.
|
On June 06 2012 14:47 BigBirdy90 wrote:
They are too busy working on shared replays to look into this.
And resizable chat windows on the x and y scale.
|
Its getting so sad with all the hackers .. >_>
|
just let him go to the lan, i doubt he will even show up in the first place
but if he does he will just expose himself
and even if blizzard is paying for his expenses is, maybe it will create better incentives to improve their anti hacking protocols
|
On June 06 2012 14:47 Lobber wrote:
Zack was talking to me for about a month before MLG Columbus as the team manager/rep for HRG High Rollers Gaming, a eSports team that according to him wanted to break into SC2 and add me to their team. Come and go MLG and about the time Zack was telling me I'd be talking to their CEO and get my tickets and everything payed for the next MLG as I joined the team, then day after day, week after week I wasn't able to contact him or the CEO and after that being the second team to lure me in with good promices then fuck me over after weeks and months of pulling me along... Sigh after that I ended up quitting SC2, a real pain in the ass, over 50% of my time practicing I was promiced to two teams that both gave me nothing, and made me turn down legitimate team offers. I really hope he gets punished or his tickets/hotel taken away, to see someone screw me over, maphack, and get rewarded for me would just be a pain in the ass...
I'm sorry to hear that, we need a Kespa of SC2 so shit like this doesn't happen or go unnoticed / unpunished.
|
On June 06 2012 14:48 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 14:44 Caihead wrote:On June 06 2012 14:39 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 06 2012 14:36 Caihead wrote:On June 06 2012 14:34 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 06 2012 14:31 terran0330 wrote:
I was talking to Zack earlier today about this.
From what he tells me, Blizzard has emailed him concerning his safety from attacks at the event haha
Meaning Blizzard knows about this thread, knows about the replays, but choosing to continue on. And that is exactly what I've been talking about above! Blizzard is the one to blame here. Blizzard is utmost concerned about the SECURITY of an event, if they don't even have that basis how can they monitor competitive play. I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about they fact that they know what people think of think, meaning they have access to the information in this thread, but are still inviting him to this event. They have between that email and when the event starts to investigate it themselves, they need to check the validity and authenticity of the claims, draft public messages, and formulate a suitable solution / punishment if need be if varified. Again, their first priority is an event they are hosting goes off with out ANY player recieving threats of or actual violence, two wrongs don't make a right. But why not look into the cheating claims first, then issue a statement regarding them, either banning him or allowing him based on their analysis, then worry about the security of him? Fact is, if Blizzard knows for certain he is cheating and he isn't invited, then they don't need to worry about his security. If they know he isn't cheating, then they can state that and provide reasons (which would settle people down a lot anyway) and then worry about his security if people are still fired up. No reason to work on getting additional security for someone who might be showing up. Put the horse before the cart. It sounds more like Blizzard has decided he is coming and is now planning for his security.
Maybe because they can send an email quickly and easily, while they're not done with the other stuff?
|
Well, this is pretty obvious. The blink action sequence is EXACTLY identical to every other blink hacker out there. The blink hack used by blink hackers has a very unique and obvious fingerprint. It generates the following sequence of actiosn:
- Deselect all units
- Blink one individual stalker
- Issue attack command to said stalker
- Re-select previous selection (without the use of hotkeys)
With this in mind, let's look at the actions in the replay:
+ Show Spoiler +10:41 HRGzack Deselect all
10:41 HRGzack Blink (Stalker); target: x=28.9,y=129.1
10:41 HRGzack Attack; target: x=22.5,y=123.3
10:41 HRGzack Select Sentry x6 (304ac,e051c,50548,2056c,10694,20868), Stalker x17 (30420,30460,90538,205c4,205cc,210608,20650,1079c,107a4,107a8,207d0,2080c,20818,20820,20858,1086c,10894), Colossus (30768), Immortal x2 (20688,1070c)
--
10:42 HRGzack Deselect all
10:42 HRGzack Blink (Stalker); target: x=29.8,y=133.3
10:42 HRGzack Attack; target: x=23.7,y=127.5
10:42 HRGzack Select Sentry x6 (304ac,e051c,50548,2056c,10694,20868), Stalker x17 (30420,30460,90538,205c4,205cc,210608,20650,1079c,107a4,107a8,207d0,2080c,20810,20818,20820,20858,1086c), Colossus (30768), Immortal x2 (20688,1070c)
--
10:43 HRGzack Deselect all
10:43 HRGzack Blink (Stalker); target: x=31.6,y=130.1
10:43 HRGzack Attack; target: x=23.7,y=127.1
10:43 HRGzack Select Sentry x6 (304ac,e051c,50548,2056c,10694,20868), Stalker x17 (30460,90538,205c4,205cc,210608,20650,1079c,107a4,107a8,207d0,2080c,20810,20818,20820,20858,1086c,10894), Colossus (30768), Immortal x2 (20688,1070c)
---
10:44 HRGzack Deselect all
10:44 HRGzack Blink (Stalker); target: x=30.5,y=126.8
10:44 HRGzack Attack; target: x=24.5,y=127.9
10:44 HRGzack Select Sentry x6 (304ac,e051c,50548,2056c,10694,20868), Stalker x17 (30420,30460,90538,205c4,205cc,210608,20650,1079c,107a4,107a8,207d0,2080c,20810,20818,20858,1086c,10894), Colossus (30768), Immortal x2 (20688,1070c)
---
And once again, as a reminder, let's look at what human code S blink stalker micro looks like:
+ Show Spoiler [squirtle] +13:59 StarTale Select Stalker x3 (10830,10834,1083c), Immortal (205ec), Deselect 2 units
13:59 StarTale Blink (Stalker); target: x=95.5,y=159.7
14:05 StarTale Select Stalker (10674), Deselect all
14:05 StarTale Blink (Stalker); target: x=97.6,y=155.2
14:06 StarTale Select Stalker x3 (306d4,206e4,10834), Deselect all
Any questions?
|
On June 06 2012 14:30 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 14:15 MrCash wrote:On June 06 2012 13:29 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 06 2012 13:26 windsupernova wrote:On June 06 2012 13:19 BronzeKnee wrote:
To be completely honest, if I didn't love SC2 so much and knew that by hacking I could get an invite to WCS, I would do it to help clean up E-sports. And I'd show up and act like the biggest troll ever and do Bitbybit SCV all-ins and Gaulzi style cannon rushes. And I'd play random, especially vs Protoss players.
Blizzard needs to deal with this crap. This isn't Zack's fault, this is Blizzards fault. Hate the game, not the player. Yeah, thing is that as long as there is a market for hacks they will exist no matter what the community and devs do(although I agree that Blizzard could be doing more about this.). Its moronic to blame the company and the game instead of the idiot that is commiting the crime itself.... Its definitively Zack's fault, he chose to hack, he chose to take up a spot from legit players, he chose to accept the spot. He is not someone trying to prove a point, he is a toolbad who decided to cheat in a videogame. Nothing more nothing else. Guess you guys have never heard this quote: The world is a dangerous place not because of people who do evil, but because of good people who look on and do nothing about it.
-- Albert EinsteinSo is it right for Bin Laden to be who he was? You are making it ok for people to be who they are even if people are doing horrible things? As off topic as my analogy may seem and how unrelated it seems im trying to show you what your saying doesnt make sense. Your logic is that of an enabler, that its ok for people to do bad things because thats just who they are. I understood completely but the fact someone could say something like that is quite astonishing to me. Evil people exist, pretending that their existence is the problem, is the problem! Instead the problem is not dealing with them correctly or not dealing with them at all. You even admit that as long as there is a market for hacks, people will use them. And thus, the problem isn't the hackers, the problem is when people don't deal with them. Blizzard can't stop people from hacking, but Blizzard can punish them for doing it. And if Blizzard doesn't punish people for it, they are just as guilty as the hackers. We can't change what the hackers will do, but we can change how Blizzard will respond. That is why this isn't Zack's fault, the man is what he is, but Blizzard needs to step up to the plate and lay down the law. That is what Einstein was getting at and it is the only way to deal with the problems in the world. That's a very narrow minded interpretation.... but neither hackers nor criminals should simply be accepted as if they are doing something reasonable. It isn't about accepting criminals as if they are doing something reasonable. It is about accepting the fact that people who do unreasonable things exist. And when you accept the fact they exist, you can deal with them. EDIT: In the lines below you can see evidence that Blizzard isn't accepting the fact that Zack as a hacker exists. Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 14:21 Flipshy wrote:
Your interpretation seems very close minded and far from what Einstein most likely intended it to mean...
You are upset that people are trying to bring justice to this matter? Not Zacks fault? shame on you, prob one of the most foolish things i have ever read. It wasn't Bin Ladens fault either for the world trade centers cause the US should have come down on other convicted terrorists harder. Jesus man i honestly cant believe someone could say such a foolish thing
You don't understand what I've written. I am not upset that people are trying to bring justice to the matter. Zack is who he is, you can't blame him for being himself and that goes back to what I said to MrCash. You have to accept the fact people like Zack exist, and they are who they are. But that doesn't mean you shouldn't act to stop Zack from being himself. And that is what Blizzard needs to do, stop the hackers.
So is it right for Bin Laden to be who he was?
You are making it ok for people to be who they are even if people are doing horrible things?
As off topic as my analogy may seem and how unrelated it seems im trying to show you what your saying doesnt make sense. Your logic is that of an enabler, that its ok for people to do bad things because thats just who they are. I understood completely but the fact someone could say something like that is quite astonishing to me.
|
On June 06 2012 14:48 BronzeKnee wrote:Show nested quote +On June 06 2012 14:44 Caihead wrote:On June 06 2012 14:39 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 06 2012 14:36 Caihead wrote:On June 06 2012 14:34 BronzeKnee wrote:On June 06 2012 14:31 terran0330 wrote:
I was talking to Zack earlier today about this.
From what he tells me, Blizzard has emailed him concerning his safety from attacks at the event haha
Meaning Blizzard knows about this thread, knows about the replays, but choosing to continue on. And that is exactly what I've been talking about above! Blizzard is the one to blame here. Blizzard is utmost concerned about the SECURITY of an event, if they don't even have that basis how can they monitor competitive play. I wasn't talking about that. I was talking about they fact that they know what people think of think, meaning they have access to the information in this thread, but are still inviting him to this event. They have between that email and when the event starts to investigate it themselves, they need to check the validity and authenticity of the claims, draft public messages, and formulate a suitable solution / punishment if need be if varified. Again, their first priority is an event they are hosting goes off with out ANY player recieving threats of or actual violence, two wrongs don't make a right. But why not look into the cheating claims first, then issue a statement regarding them, either banning him or allowing him based on their analysis, then worry about the security of him? Fact is, if Blizzard knows for certain he is cheating and he isn't invited, then they don't need to worry about his security. If they know he isn't cheating, then they can state that and provide reasons (which would settle people down a lot anyway) and then worry about his security if people are still fired up. No reason to work on getting additional security for someone who might be showing up. Put the horse before the cart. It sounds more like Blizzard has decided he is coming and is now planning for his security.
What? It has nothing to do with what it sounds like after it's been relayed through 2 different people who might be lying, it's just standard procedure when accusations and threats come out for players / representatives that the organization be first concerned about their safety, then the validity of the claims. Same thing works in law, when a person recieves allegations of a crime and threats of violence the law has to protect him first before trial and prosecution.
|
On June 06 2012 14:47 Lobber wrote:
Zack was talking to me for about a month before MLG Columbus as the team manager/rep for HRG High Rollers Gaming, a eSports team that according to him wanted to break into SC2 and add me to their team. Come and go MLG and about the time Zack was telling me I'd be talking to their CEO and get my tickets and everything payed for the next MLG as I joined the team, then day after day, week after week I wasn't able to contact him or the CEO and after that being the second team to lure me in with good promices then fuck me over after weeks and months of pulling me along... Sigh after that I ended up quitting SC2, a real pain in the ass, over 50% of my time practicing I was promiced to two teams that both gave me nothing, and made me turn down legitimate team offers. I really hope he gets punished or his tickets/hotel taken away, to see someone screw me over, maphack, and get rewarded for me would just be a pain in the ass...
Sorry to hear that, my friend mention that he played you at a past MLG and you were a good player. This whole High Rollers Gaming thing sticks like the Gus situation to me. People with a bunch of empty promises trying to cash in on SC2.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
