Useless Demos?

[ChristensenCT]

I have been taking the time to submit demos of hackers, and I keep getting the response that, "there is not enough proof". I went through all the steps: I made sure the person was caught in a very obvious act, usually, spectating for several minutes to set them up. Then, I made sure he was killed, made a kill, or threw a grenade so his name could be identified. Finally, I made sure I opened up the status command in the console. What amI missing here???

What's the point of making the demo if very, very clear evidence is ignored? It's a slap in the face.

[cpnichol]

Don't take it personally or let a few "not enough proof" replies put you off recording demos of players you think are cheating.

I didn't review your last demo submission so I can't comment on the reasons for that being turned down.

There are 3 main reasons why a demo will not result in a ban:

1. The player isn't cheating. Sometimes a player can look like they are cheating but on review suspicious things can often be explained using sound, visual or radar.

2. The demo didn't have enough information for us to be able to identify the player who was being recorded. No status or the players name not being shown in the demo account for most of these.

3. A player is cheating but the demo does not show it conclusively. If you are recording someone you think is aimbotting make sure to get several examples of them firing, 1 kill demos aren't always easy to be certain of unless it is a very obvious aimbot. If you think a player is wallhacking then a longer demo, or several demos are usually required to show conclusive use of a cheat. An experienced wallhacker who hides it well can take a long time to get enough of demo to conclusively show the player cheats.

We also get demos of players doing other things like glitching, console buying awps, spamming, teamkilling, being racist etc. Not all of those will warrant a global ban for a first offence, depending on the severity of the racism. Though submitting demos is a good way of notifying us of problem players so we can notify admins to watch out for certain players.

I understand having a demo turned down of someone you are sure is cheating is frustrating, Steambans had the cheek to turn down a few of mine, mostly for being too short. It takes a bit of practice to know what is required to prove someone is cheating, but stick with it and you'll soon get get some cheats banned. We have high standards and need to be certain that someone cheats before adding them to the ban list.

I'm happy to briefly discuss reasons for not banning someone and tips to help people record better demos, just remember I'm not going to change my mind or spend ages justifying my decision .

[ChristensenCT]

My email responses did not say anything about what was wrong, would you mind looking at my demo and pointing out what the problem is? It is only like a minute long.

[HitMan]

a minute long? here is yo problem.

your demo needs to be somewhere around 3 or 4 rounds worth of the suspect in the ct you believe to be hacking.

[cpnichol]

I think there was a bit of a misunderstanding about what the demo was suposed to be showing. The demo showed someone spawning a load of guns (more than you could buy with $16000) at the start of the round, but the player was not hacking (aimbot/walls/speedhack etc.) so got the "not enough proof" reply. I've replied to your "Raining Guns" thread about this.

It's not always how long it is Hitman, it's what you do with it. To show someone is cheating the amount of proof you need will vary depending on the cheat and how obvious they are being about it.

Speedhacks don't need very long demos, as long as the demo shows the players name i.e. when they get a kill or die.

Aimbots. It's not so much the length of the demo but the number of times the player fires at the opposition, a 30second demo of someone killing 10 is far better than a 10minute demo of someone who only fires their gun once.

Wallhacks. Often harder to prove so will need to be longer or several demos, depends on how obvious the player in the demo is being.

When I record demos I record for 1 or 2 rounds, then stop and record another. Then I watch them and pick the demos that best show the player cheating. If I'm watching some demos of someone I think wallhacks I'll type r_drawothermodels 2 in console, it lets you see all the moveable objects through walls.

[XTR3M3]

I turned one of your demos down because it did not show a hacker using hacks. Our polite way or saying this is "not enough proof". This is a standard response that Phil has explained well. If that one was hacking, he turned them off. I recommend watching them yourself before turning them in if you aren't sure. Watching in wireframe usually either will convince us of a wall hack, or make us go "No way that is a wallhack or the player would've <insert scenerio>" Slow motionhelps show aimbots better. Just because someone gets some crazy shots or gets some kills through "solid" objects doesn't automatically mean they are hacking. Good sound cards and map knowledge are mistaken for hacks all the time. The most important thing to note is we won't add people to the global ban list unlesswe are110% sure they are hacking. Keep this in mind.... if someone were to submit a demo of you having a good/unusual session, would you want us to just ban if we weren't sure?

[ChristensenCT]

I did watch the demos before I submitted them. I am tlaking about the subject right now with another admin. The players were producing dozens of guns each round. We ae trying to figure out if this is a hack or exploit.

Next time I buy 50 M4s at the start if a round,I would be happyto be addedto the global ban list.