TOPIC: Reform ZARP hacking policy

In my opinion the hacking policy really protects hackers in a sense of how proof is needed for a ban. see below.

"Clear evidence
For evidence to be considered as clear it must clearly show visual proof of the user hacking in one of the forms outlined in 2.b. The only forms of evidence considered as clear evidence are screenshots from the anti-cheat system.
The only forms of clear evidence are screenshots of ESP, cheat menus, screen blockers or other on-screen HUD cheat elements."

this requirement relies heavily on direct evidence, whilst circumstantial evidence can also be very telling. with the current policy it is near impossible to ban cheaters. If there is no repercussion, why would they not cheat to gain an unfair advantage over other players ?

There are a few players who are well known amongst players to be cheaters yet they roam free. Also, how can printing outside of map be a permanent band but hacking is rewarded with not only a second chance after a 2 month ban, a third chance after a 6 month ban. but even after having an inventory wiped you could offend 3 times.

EDIT:

MY SUGGESTION IS TO CHANGE THE REQUIRED EVIDENENCE FOR A BAN TO OCCUR. SUCH AS CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FROM ANOTHER PLAYER RECORDING THE CHEATING TAKING PLACE.

Memelouse wrote:

I mean it took them years to ban a cheat dev who blatantly made ZARP specific cheats, that's just the state of the rampant cheating issue here and we'd be very lucky to even step foot in actually improving policies and detection methods because it still doesn't do any justice with how much it can impact gameplay for legitimate players

sucks to suck

bassboosted oven wrote: I was expecting a bit more of a nuanced answer from staff but then I remembered its you, a cheater himself. off course you don't want the policy changed.

Cal wrote: Okay well there wouldn't have been a ban at all if you weren't afk for 4 hours while I waited around to speak to you hope this helps.

Clarky wrote: This is a bad take, free codabro #didn'donuffin

can we all get back to the point please and give our inputs on the hacking policy.
should the requirements for punishment be changed yes or no ?

JoshuaIsGreat wrote: i am in full support of #freecoda i just also like to use my brain

Cal wrote:
The only thing that needs changed is the progressive punishments for cheating. Needing direct evidence protects you from individual staff banning you for no reason, circumstantial evidence is voted on all the time in meetings.

a little too late for that though, theres like 10 active players and they all cheat

bro we've all tried dont bother.

Cal wrote: Ok but like give an example of what can be changed I'm glad to bring any suggestions up for discussion in the CM Team meetings, trust me I've taken in ideas from tons of people and illegal's reply kinda just tells it how it is. Not to mention the automated system as well (which albeit I don't know how it works, but hey zarp.)
illegalimmigrant wrote:

CEO of Business wrote: use faceit anticheat to queue onto zarp

i heard zarp is HVH can anyone clarify this information

bassboosted oven wrote:
You yourself have a history of being banned for cheating, of course you're replying with nonsense.

Nice suggestion just one issue.

No one cares

Indiana Jones wrote:

CEO of Business wrote: Ok but like give an example of what can be changed I'm glad to bring any suggestions up for discussion in the CM Team meetings, trust me I've taken in ideas from tons of people and illegal's reply kinda just tells it how it is. Not to mention the automated system as well (which albeit I don't know how it works, but hey zarp.)
[/quote]

Thanks for your reply, I have made and edit in the post with my suggestion.
to allow circumstantial evidence recorded by others to be used as proof to get cheaters players banned.

To your addition, here are some questions you can expect that would need to be answered:

-What do you consider circumstantial evidence?
-In the case of circumstantial evidence, what would be the limit where someone can be considered cheating and not?
-Would the ban follow the current policy guidelines? (such as ban length, voting, whether it be appealed, and probably more)
-How would we make sure there are no "false positives" so to speak?
-How would you circumvent false evidence/faked evidence if it can be submitted by anyone at any time?
-Would there be any requirements within the policy to make it not abusable (such as max length before reporting or evidence length?)