TOPIC: Reform ZARP hacking policy

zarp is vac secured it’s impossible to cheat

JoshuaIsGreat wrote:
Thank you for your substantial reply.

-What do you consider circumstantial evidence?

an example would be footage recorded by someone else of a cheater gunning down 5 people in a short span of time.
To elaborate, a while ago I was in a minigame where everyone was bouncing around and flying through the arena. Yet one person managed to kill many of them in such a short span of time it was very sus.

A second example would be, a clear recording of a cheater joining, and heading straight towards printers hidden with scanner. (not checking all places trial and error style but just going straight towards it)

-In the case of circumstantial evidence, what would be the limit where someone can be considered cheating and not?

this is highly depending on the situation. there will be situations where the line is not exactly clear and there is no evidence supporting a binary answer. Yes or no. I think its very important to examine this per case. and off course if there it is questionable there cannot be a punishment/ conclusion.

-Would the ban follow the current policy guidelines? (such as ban length, voting, whether it be appealed, and probably more)
In my opinion the bans could be more severe, IE only a second chance not a third. (if caught multiple times)

-How would we make sure there are no "false positives" so to speak?
I think part of this comes back to what would be the limit where someone can be considered cheating and not?
there will be scenarios where both could be true and both could be false. in such a case no decision should be made. in other cases it could be so obvious you can conclude there is no false positive.

-How would you circumvent false evidence/faked evidence if it can be submitted by anyone at any time?
I think evidence should be very clear, showing name, preferably video with very few or no cuts.

-Would there be any requirements within the policy to make it not abusable (such as max length before reporting or evidence length?)
could you elaborate on this a bit more please ?

Cal wrote:
Let's say in this scenario another person has found your printers earlier or has memorized the spots you often use and relayed that information to a friend who joined to raid you, he runs towards them and raids you, and you clip it.
On video, this would seem very blatant, yet because of missing context, it would be fully legit.
How would we be able to determine whether this is a cheater not?

Cal wrote:
If we look on a case-by-case basis with no other guidelines, would this not open these situations up to bias depending on whether the member is liked within the community or not?

Cal wrote:
I believe you misunderstood my question, in case we ban someone based on circumstantial evidence should it follow the current guidelines we have set for cheating punishments with actual evidence or should they be different?

Cal wrote:
I feel the need to point to my reply to the answer I gave to your response to question 2

Cal wrote:
Okay, no cuts in how long, how would context be given to a given situation, how would we know nothing is faked or edited in?

Cal wrote:
Should there be anything changed within the policy or added to the policy if this suggestion were to be accepted, that would say how long after a situation happened it could be reported, or how long videos should be to really be able to "prove" cheating? The reason I say this is because 5 minutes after something happened it could be harder to for example fake evidence than if it happened a month ago.
To add to this, is there any other guidelines to reports you can think of that could possibly stop false/fake reports?

hhhmmm tough one yes I must agree

It's never gonna change unless the anticheat is improved. They rely on their anticheat so much that they only ban the cheater if they see cheats on their screen or if the player is blatantly cheating. If someone with more gameplay knowledge records the evidence and sends it to the lead team, it has to reach 100% CM+ votes for the hacker to be banned, even if some of the CM+ isn't even playing on the server the cheater was cheating on. It's stupid, why should a CM+ staff member who doesn't even play on the server vote on whether the guy is cheating or not, the CM+ staff has less knowledge of the gameplay on that server than the guy who sent the evidence. My suggestion would be to rely more on the community and not CM+ as they have less knowledge than the community who have more hours than some of CM+ and the voters should be the community and the staff members who actually play on that server.