TOPIC: TTT is broken.

CrankyBot wrote:
So instead of allowing us to ban people who are obviously hacking (like the guy in video I showed) until further review you are saying we should give them up to 168 hours to ruin the game until someone MIGHT act up...... This seems like a solid system

Is this someone hacking?


There is a difference between how things look and what is clear signs of modification the anticheats came back with no clear signs so the video was the only form of proof and was what the user was punished off. The fact that a trusted group of experienced staff members took time to look at the proof given and came to a conclusion to punish the user in accordance to the policy should make you feel better than if you were to punish them for their cheats and having no clue of the policy and the possibility of breaking it which would've lead to consequences for yourself. Punish the user for the rules they have broken and you can punish for not the rules in which they've possibly broken and with no knowledge of the proper process to follow.

LonelyDodo wrote: If there's one in-between that I can agree with that'd be that Lead Team members can request the CM team to host an emergency meeting purely to vote on one or two hackers so that not such a long time would have to pass. After all, the staff team is here to improve the users' experience, and you're right when you say that obvious hackers ruin that.

However, for a billionth time, why do you get to decide what is "obvious hacking"? One single person can easily be wrong, and the term "obvious" is hard to define. That's why it has to be voted on.

Raeker wrote:
He has resigned so stop going on at him now.

I agree with Cranky that most admins just aren't trusted enough to have that power, but I do agree with Dodo that the kick system wasn't my favorite either...

LonelyDodo wrote: You can always ban him for other rules hes broken? If hes going around just rdming ban him for RDM and have it extended to a perma in the meeting. I fail to see how someone would be able to ruin everyones experience while hacking but not break any other rules.

EMP wrote: I know a couple of users that would only use their hacks during their traitor rounds. Then again they'd always kill a traitor buddy or two during those rounds so after 3 or 4 times there'd still be a reason to ban them.

Dodo Said:From what I have experienced there is either a need for an update for the anticheat as in the past we have had people using software to cheat, taunt staff about using anti cheat to scan them and nothing comes up apparently, ( for at least two cases). But were dealt with as LT was on to check them. So the reliance on the anticheat needs to be lowered due to software camouflaging its use.
Also Raeker mentioned:Possibly then LT members need to be re-trained if unsure or struggling for usage of anticheat?

But I realised that it is best that action for hacking are voted on between the LT in meetings as some people are simply very good at aiming or using gaming knowledge to their advantage. Although it is rather troublesome that it can take a week to catch user breaking rule 1.5.

Raeker wrote:
I see no one gives a fuck about video proof I provide. It is obviously shown that this person didn't use the hacks to kill unless he was provoked to shoot back. Mind you that I had edited out 10 minutes of me steam chatting with Johnler out of respect. So in total I had well over 20 minutes of footage.

CrankyBot wrote:
Huh did not know that but makes sense. Would of cleared up things about lower staff having access to it for TTT at least.

Nigerian_Prince wrote:
The anticheat was updated a month or two ago by Tyler to detect some of the lower tier hacks automatically through console and auto-kick (he explained it to me I don't really remember how it works), there are just some hacks that simply can't be detected in that way. I never personally had a problem catching hackers with anti-cheat, but if I did it was usually when they were using citizen hack. And the "hacking policies" aren't voted on in lead team meetings at all. That is a community team thing. Although I agree the new policy does take awhile to actually take out a smarter hacker.

brenzor9137 wrote: Okay that's great, those cases then were further ago than amonth so that's cool.
I didn't mean LT voting on policies, I meant LT following policies to take action on hackers, my bad.

brenzor9137 wrote: brenzor please marry me

Raeker wrote: I had no issue with giving administrators complete banning rights and I can confidently say well over 95% of them were valid. HOWEVER, the thing about it is that, we used to have much MUCH stricter requirements for staff members so the general quality would be higher. Add that on top of the fact that we had multiple ways of checking for cheats such as checking different stats and all sorts of workarounds and admin chat alerts in case something was fishy. I'm not saying ZARP has shit admins, don't get me wrong, but here I've noticed the principle for getting mod is basically be active, don't rulebreak (example being Stoned still gathering few positive votes as far as I know after proving time and time again how big of a fuck up he is) and THEN prove yourself after you get accepted. There it was the complete opposite. You had to have at least one month of play time in order to be eligible to apply, but I'd rarely accept people even under two because we'd generally pick people who we were 150% confident they wouldn't screw up.
I kinda agree with what you and Cranky said and to be fair hackers are, as far as I've seen, not as common in G-Mod (or ZARP at least). The thing that makes me take Dodo's side in this however is that in order to have full banning rights of a hacker when one does log in, you gotta be a Super Admin - a rank that is considered as part of the lead team and is no longer awarded just by doing your job well. Multiple things are taken into account (which I find completely normal) which basically sum up your personality. Point being, it's much harder to become one. If a guy logs in and his sole purpose is to fuck the server over by mass rdming every visible model they can lock onto, that's problematic. You have a ban command that you can't use because of the policies in place.

Vakarian wrote:
If they are just "mass rdming" you can just gather your video evidence, while he is doing it, and then ban him for a max of three days for mass RDM

Vakarian wrote: Thats not what the issue here is at all as it turns out. Obviously if someone comes on and starts mass rdming they will get banned for RDM. The issue he was raising is because the cheater was being smart and trying to not break other rules. Something that is a valid complaint but is a non issue because we have policies in place that allow the lead team to ban someone without absolute evidence. The real problem with allowing people to ban "obvious" hackers until the meeting is the fact that my definition of "obvious" might just very well be different then yours. Yes in this case it was pretty damn clear, but the problem is it won't always be the case. That was the problem we had in the past and it resulted in false bans. If the hacker is not breaking other rules then the impact he is having on the server is reduced significantly and is something can be handled in the weekly meetings. If he was using his hacks to blatantly break rules then he will be banned for those rule breaks.

After reading the feedback I think admins should have ban command removed honestly. We are not trusted to make decisions based on evidence. No matter when if we falsely ban we will get shit but suddenly its too big of a risk to ban someone when its (again) obvious that they are hacking.

Like perma banning the whole server is not a risk of any admins but god if they ban someone for 168h for hacking with video proof..

EMP wrote: For some reason I was stuck in a moderator mentality, scrap the mass rdming thing and just think of it as the guy doing this in his T round. I don't know what Savage did but I was just giving an example of where exceptions would be wished to be made by the general majority. The thing that's usually the case is that people are doing a great job and acknowledge it, expect changes to be made to their rank because of it disregarding that it would affect even those who are not really shining examples in given position. I still am no big fan of the banning policies since as brendzor highlighted, if you're smart enough you can get away with it fairly easily. One flaw, for instance, is trusting admins with banning mass rdmers for LTAP and if the victim does not provide valid proof of being wrongly accused, from what I've seen, the appeal would just get denied and the ban would still hold until its expiry.

EMP wrote:
Can you tell me why are you so disgustingly lenient towards hackers? Why are you defending them and giving us obstacles to punish them?

1. We can't handle it, we have to be little babies and ask the LT to come on and handle them
2. APPARENTLY WHAT DODO SHOWED IS NOT PROOF ENOUGH
3. The policy is to KICK and then ban? Are you kidding me?

What's. The. Deal.? Do you WANT hackers? Why are there so many stupid steps and retarded ass backward policies?

If you give us a normal explanation, sure, but this dumb shit is hard to explain rationally.

You give them A TON of unneeded chances to stop hacking.

I've recently banned a person who was hacking - he used aimlock and some sort of spinbot, killed over 10 people and made 8 reports. In each report, he spammed "citizenhack", admitting to his cheats. After I ban him, I get in trouble from a TTT super admin, saying I'm breaking policies.

It was more than obvious he was cheating. He was admitting to cheats. He didn't regret them, because after his slay for "Mass RDM", He said "Fuck, I can't kill all of you anymore because of my karma".

Why do you give them SO MANY CHANCES? They are spinbotting, or aimlocking without hiding it, yet your retarded policies make it so they get loopholes and shortcuts to not being punished.

In most other communities, they would've been long gone, after which, they just move to another server they can terrorise, it doesn't matter to them.

Here, we need to:
1. See that they're hacking, as dodo did.
2. Gather enough evidence to support his claims.
3. Contact a LEAD TEAM MEMBER, which in itself, good luck with that
3.1 - That completely ruins workflow for the attending staff members
4. He has to come on, and check his anti-cheats to gather enough evidence
5. KICK him and sit there and wait until he comes back (most instances end there, after, what, only a minimum of 10 minutes of an aimlocker mass RDMer in the server? And don't try saying "You should punish him for RDM and not hacking" because we need to let him run to gather enough evidence
6. IF he comes back, only then is he banned. That's an IF. Most others just move on to another community after they see the disconnect message.

Why put your own playerbase through this torture to give opportunities to hackers?

Bumping for that reply specifically for higher ups

bump