Jump to content

Photo

Cheat Reports


  • Please log in to reply
70 replies to this topic

#1 Olaf

Olaf

    Commander

  • XWIS Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12639 posts
  • XWIS Name: XTF

Posted 06 February 2012 - 08:40 PM

Ok, you're right, handling of reports isn't ideal. What can be done to improve this?

My idea:
1. Have (new) staff do a quick review to ensure the report is sane and meets all requirements.
2. Message the reported player and ask/require him to respond and explain.
3. If he pleads guilty, mark as proven. Goto end.
4. If he doesn't, analyze as before.

Analysis takes the most time (and knowledge), so this should speed up the process a lot.
What do you think?

#2 XXxPrePxX

XXxPrePxX

    King of Yuris Revenge

  • XWIS Buddies
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7986 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 08:49 PM

I think it's a fair assessment and a good idea.

The main thing would likely be to keep things as organized as possible.

I feel that with a lot of the improvements being made to XWIS (auto-ss for instance) cheat reporting will become a lot easier in the future.

At the end of the day, I feel their just needs to be a few more helping hands, and things will be ran fine.

#3 ZiGZaG

ZiGZaG

    Commander

  • Strike Team
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4060 posts
  • Location:Scotland, Edinburgh
  • XWIS Name: ZiGZaG

Posted 06 February 2012 - 08:50 PM

i think the system is good just needs extra manpower ur first statement do u mean someone to look over the report and tell them if extra info is needed or do u mean actually get extra staff, both would be good idea but mainly just more people to analyze reports and sort them out where possible.

#4 PostNextOlaf

PostNextOlaf

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1680 posts
  • XWIS Name: yid

Posted 06 February 2012 - 09:59 PM

Why would the player say he is guilty? Unless he gets a reduced 'sentence'

I dont see any problem with the current system apart from lack of analyzers, which could be recruited.

Of course, the best solution to this would of course to make the auto ss uploader mandatory.

Edited by DubStep, 06 February 2012 - 10:02 PM.


#5 Olaf

Olaf

    Commander

  • XWIS Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12639 posts
  • XWIS Name: XTF

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:07 PM

Of course, the best solution to this would of course to make the auto ss uploader mandatory.

Would it? Majority of reports appear to be unrelated to that.

#6 PostNextOlaf

PostNextOlaf

    Captain

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1680 posts
  • XWIS Name: yid

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:15 PM

Would it? Majority of reports appear to be unrelated to that.


It wouldn't solve everything but i think it would help...

What incentive would the player have to say he was guilty?

#7 Olaf

Olaf

    Commander

  • XWIS Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12639 posts
  • XWIS Name: XTF

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:20 PM

What incentive would the player have to say he was guilty?

Honour
Or an increased ban length if he plead innocent but is found guilty.

#8 Seke

Seke

    C&C Tournament Organizer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5970 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:34 PM

Honour
Or an increased ban length if he plead innocenct but is found guilty.


I like the idea, on a side note, I quoted what prep said without adding anything because I agreed with everything he had said, by simply adding "I agree" after quoting him would be redundant. There was no reason to add to my warning level for this.

#9 Olaf

Olaf

    Commander

  • XWIS Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12639 posts
  • XWIS Name: XTF

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:41 PM

I like the idea, on a side note, I quoted what prep said without adding anything because I agreed with everything he had said, by simply adding "I agree" after quoting him would be redundant. There was no reason to add to my warning level for this.

Saying you agree is useless too. This isn't a popularity contest/vote, it's a discussion based on arguments.

At the end of the day, I feel their just needs to be a few more helping hands, and things will be ran fine.

I find it kinda strange that in most cases we don't have any feedback from the reported player.
Analyzing reports is *not* trivial. Even with more helping hands I don't see why we wouldn't try to reduce that workload.

#10 Seke

Seke

    C&C Tournament Organizer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5970 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:44 PM

Saying you agree is useless too. This isn't a popularity contest/vote, it's a discussion based on arguments.


I find it kinda strange that in most cases we don't have any feedback from the reported player.
Analyzing reports is *not* trivial. Even with more helping hands I don't see why we wouldn't try to reduce that workload.


You asked me what I thought. Prep's post summed up what I thought. You asked a question; I answered it accordingly.

#11 Olaf

Olaf

    Commander

  • XWIS Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12639 posts
  • XWIS Name: XTF

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:48 PM

You asked me what I thought. Prep's post summed up what I thought. You asked a question; I answered it accordingly.

I didn't ask you specifically. If someone else has already mentioned your points there's no need to mention them again or to quote that other person.

#12 Jev

Jev

    Lieutenant

  • Bounty Hunters
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 10:57 PM

I am probably the instigator of this so I would like to add my thoughts on the subject

Ok, you're right, handling of reports isn't ideal. What can be done to improve this?

My idea:
1. Have (new) staff do a quick review to ensure the report is sane and meets all requirements.
Good idea. Players given the ability to mark up a report as **suitable for actioning**, then the report can be placed into a sub section awaiting a moderator review it. I see that this would cut down the time spent on proving cheat reports and the cheats being dealt with expeditiously. There are "GUIDES TO MAKING A CHEAT REPORT" that are very effective and tell people what they need to include. Perhaps a little tweak to show a screeny of what a quality cheat report should look like can be added to this, again asking the reporter to post all the info which would then speed up the report being processed in full.
2. Message the reported player and ask/require him to respond and explain.
I don't think this is feasible, How long would be considered "suitable time to respond", given that it may be that someone doesnt play for a period (i.e. may be on vacation for 14 days)and would be unable to answer for their actions.
3. If he pleads guilty, mark as proven. Goto end.
Again this could be exploited by the "it was my brother on my account" Or "my brother admitted that I cheated on my ST account" claims
4. If he doesn't, analyze as before.

Analysis takes the most time (and knowledge), so this should speed up the process a lot.
Analysis would be sped up by the introduction of **first stage** checking of reports, as in 1 above
What do you think?

Olaf you have no doubt spent some considerable time developing the auto ssuploader, are you sure it is 100% reliable???? If you are, and it is undisputable, then make it a requirement of all LADDER games, inc clan, that it is compulsory to install and use it.

Edited by Jacobite, 06 February 2012 - 11:18 PM.


#13 AlliedLdr

AlliedLdr

    Corporal

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:07 PM

1. Have (new) staff do a quick review to ensure the report is sane and meets all requirements.
2. Message the reported player and ask/require him to respond and explain.
3. If he pleads guilty, mark as proven. Goto end.
4. If he doesn't, analyze as before.


Would this be a new position on strike team? Per say this postion would check all the above and if it needs to be investigated further, make sure all the pertinet information is there. Then would they pass it on to an investigator? I believe having a person to do all this would eliminate some time and make things move along faster for the investigator. Thus making the whole process faster. I also agree if the say they didn't cheat and are proven then there ban should be more severe. If they say they are guilty for instance then a simple reset and warning about not doing it again for a first offence. On the other hand if they say they are innocent and then proven guilty a reset and 32day ban be given for first offence. Something along those lines.

#14 FReQuEnZy

FReQuEnZy

    CnCFTW Team Leader

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7169 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:10 PM

My idea:
1. Have (new) staff do a quick review to ensure the report is sane and meets all requirements.
2. Message the reported player and ask/require him to respond and explain.
3. If he pleads guilty, mark as proven. Goto end.
4. If he doesn't, analyze as before.

What do you think?


1. Good, recruiting more caring non biased staff is the way to go.
2. Good luck with this one, I will enjoy the drama and the BSing. :)
3. Same as with #2, useless to ask for a player to plead anything, it's a video game.
4. Refer to answer one and return to 4 once read.

Think reasonably, if people are going to cheat they know they are doing something bad and it's doubtful they will own up.
I know I wouldn't. I'd ban dodge to the end. :) My point being is that no one is stupid enough to own up and plead guilty.

Unless it's a lot more reasonable/preferable to do so.


Honour
Or an increased ban length if he plead innocent but is found guilty.


That's what he said? Avoiding agreeing to another forum member?
Also, LOL @ honour I probably know the only few players on the game that I could consider having honor.

One of these players is Seke. Who's point you so aggressively assault with your comment.

I didn't ask you specifically. If someone else has already mentioned your points there's no need to mention them again or to quote that other person.


He is merely showing support. Should he say the same thing as prep with different phrasing?
I kinda do that at times, otherwise aggressive responses such as this ones get posted.

If you continue this hobby, don't complain about the lack of responses to your topics in the future, again.

#15 Jev

Jev

    Lieutenant

  • Bounty Hunters
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:13 PM

Would this be a new position on strike team? Per say this postion would check all the above and if it needs to be investigated further, make sure all the pertinet information is there. Then would they pass it on to an investigator? I believe having a person to do all this would eliminate some time and make things move along faster for the investigator. Thus making the whole process faster. I also agree if the say they didn't cheat and are proven then there ban should be more severe. If they say they are guilty for instance then a simple reset and warning about not doing it again for a first offence. On the other hand if they say they are innocent and then proven guilty a reset and 32day ban be given for first offence. Something along those lines.

I feel the punishments as they currently are, should remain. There are many players out there who continue to cheat even after serving bans. There are people who are on a first ban and if they continue to cheat they would be on a 64 day ban prior to perm ban. Why revert back to a "a simple reset and warning".?

#16 Seke

Seke

    C&C Tournament Organizer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5970 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:14 PM

I didn't ask you specifically. If someone else has already mentioned your points there's no need to mention them again or to quote that other person.


And you think adding to my warning level is justifiable because I simply quoted someone?

#17 Olaf

Olaf

    Commander

  • XWIS Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12639 posts
  • XWIS Name: XTF

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:21 PM

Think reasonably, if people are going to cheat they know they are doing something bad and it's doubtful they will own up.
I know I wouldn't. I'd ban dodge to the end. :) My point being is that no one is stupid enough to own up and plead guilty.

So you'd plead not guilty and thus get a 64 day ban (for example) instead of a 32 day ban, assuming the evidence is present?

He is merely showing support. Should he say the same thing as prep with different phrasing?
I kinda do that at times, otherwise aggressive responses such as this ones get posted.

There's no need to show support.

#18 Seke

Seke

    C&C Tournament Organizer

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5970 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:25 PM

So you'd plead not guilty and thus get a 64 day ban (for example) instead of a 32 day ban, assuming the evidence is present?


There's no need to show support.


In my opinion the more people that are in favor of something the more value that it has. As far as I know, it doesn't say anything about quoting people being spam or against the rules in any way. I'm sorry if you think that it was spam, and I will try to provide a more thorough analysis in a topic such as this in the future, but I still don't think I deserved a warning increase for that quote. A more appropriate response would have been for you to ask me to elaborate.

#19 FReQuEnZy

FReQuEnZy

    CnCFTW Team Leader

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7169 posts

Posted 06 February 2012 - 11:43 PM

So you'd plead not guilty and thus get a 64 day ban (for example) instead of a 32 day ban, assuming the evidence is present?

There's no need to show support.


I wouldn't plead guilty nor innocent, I'd just avoid replying at all if I knew I was guilty...

There's always a need to show support... How else will you know towards what the community has a negative or a positive outlook?
Also if some one says what you wanted to say then you will quote them.

Warnings for not breaking the rules reduces your credibility as an admin, but I'm quite sure you don't care about that at all.

#20 Edd

Edd

    I LoVe LiZa

  • Bounty Hunters
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3451 posts
  • Location:USA
  • XWIS Name: Edd

Posted 07 February 2012 - 12:36 AM

Ok, you're right, handling of reports isn't ideal. What can be done to improve this?

My idea:
1. Have (new) staff do a quick review to ensure the report is sane and meets all requirements.
2. Message the reported player and ask/require him to respond and explain.
3. If he pleads guilty, mark as proven. Goto end.
4. If he doesn't, analyze as before.

Analysis takes the most time (and knowledge), so this should speed up the process a lot.
What do you think?


1. Having new staff will not hurt anyone, i dont see a downside to it so yeah, the more the better! Staff can then split the cheat reports within each other to attend them.

2. It wouldn't hurt to ask but like everyone is saying, I doubt anyone will openly plead guilty. I don't like the idea of them receiving a higher ban if they say they're not guilty either. I'd think that most players that get banned the 1st time will probably think twice before cheating again, so the faster they're back, the better.

3. If that was the case, then yea... obviously.

4. Yes, with new staff members so everything can get handled alot quicker.


Imo, I just think that ST needs more staff...

#21 AlliedLdr

AlliedLdr

    Corporal

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 38 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 04:20 AM

Why revert back to a "a simple reset and warning".?


This is not meant for players that have already been banned. This is or the first time offense only. I don't mean everyone starts fresh.

#22 Olaf

Olaf

    Commander

  • XWIS Admin
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12639 posts
  • XWIS Name: XTF

Posted 07 February 2012 - 09:41 AM

I wouldn't plead guilty nor innocent, I'd just avoid replying at all if I knew I was guilty...

Ah, in that case I'd just lock your game account until you did reply.

There's always a need to show support... How else will you know towards what the community has a negative or a positive outlook?

You know based on the arguments that have been posted.

#23 JoKuJaK

JoKuJaK

    b00yaka

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10846 posts
  • Location:Earth
  • XWIS Name: JoKuJaK

Posted 07 February 2012 - 11:10 AM

Ok, you're right, handling of reports isn't ideal. What can be done to improve this?

My idea:
1. Have (new) staff do a quick review to ensure the report is sane and meets all requirements.
2. Message the reported player and ask/require him to respond and explain.
3. If he pleads guilty, mark as proven. Goto end.
4. If he doesn't, analyze as before.

Analysis takes the most time (and knowledge), so this should speed up the process a lot.
What do you think?

I think the old way was working, just have the proper amount of staff to handle it.. and when there is a tough hack or something, temporarily do extra checks like admin ss request for the top rankers.
Cheating can never be cleared but it surely can be taken care off

and if i had normall internet i would be playing :( (i could actually do some anti-cheating for u since i understand syncs and xgs i merely dont know like 1 or 2 tricks in the sync files)

Edited by JoKuJaK, 07 February 2012 - 11:14 AM.


#24 Jev

Jev

    Lieutenant

  • Bounty Hunters
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 802 posts

Posted 07 February 2012 - 01:07 PM

I think the old way was working, just have the proper amount of staff to handle it.. and when there is a tough hack or something, temporarily do extra checks like admin ss request for the top rankers.
Cheating can never be cleared but it surely can be taken care off
You're right there as I know of two players that have been playing with observer on and setting up second connection to act as observer. This would defeat olaf's auto ss uploader, but making auto ss compulsory is the way forward.


and if i had normall internet i would be playing :( (i could actually do some anti-cheating for u since i understand syncs and xgs i merely dont know like 1 or 2 tricks in the sync files)



#25 uncledrew

uncledrew

    Lieutenant

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 900 posts
  • XWIS Name: .

Posted 07 February 2012 - 01:10 PM

You're right there as I know of two players that have been playing with observer on and setting up second connection to act as observer. This would defeat olaf's auto ss uploader, but making auto ss compulsory is the way forward.


I don't understand this.


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users