Ban tables need to be updated

[Exult]

Here are the current MCGamer ban tables for hacked client offences (made public 2 weeks ago):

Hacked clients have evolved since the table's engenderment, and more subtle combat hacks are far more prevalent than they once were. Hence, for me, there are some glaring omissions from this table, the most notable of which I feel are clickaimbot, triggerbot and the toggling of combat hacks. These omissions have led to many players going unpunished despite them evidently using one of these hacks. Certain staff members also seem to be under the impression that a player's head absolutely has to snap in order for them to be able to ascertain that they're hacking.

The existing descriptions of combat hacks should also be updated to include that a player using combat hacks may land their first hit from an otherwise impossible distance if they have their range set high enough. This is absolute proof of a player hacking as the first hit distance is not affected by latency in the way subsequent hits may be, as latency causes the server's positioning of the player being hit to be closer to the hacker than that of the player's client.

Thanks for reading. I hope these changes will be considered. ^_^

 

[ImtheforumGod]

or we should have a judgement day

 

[Exult]

or we should have a judgement day

that would be dank also

 

[Giggity69Goo]

The staff have been talking about this in both the past and present. But I think it would be good to get the opinion of a Sr. Mod+ on this thread.

 

[RC_4777]

Well, updating these kinds of things is never a bad idea. It would be good to reevaluate where information might be missing.

 

[Scott]

If staff come across these, they'd deal with it adequately. It's just there are way too many hacks to list and describe. The lack of them from the guide means little, considering the staff are told in training and other staff events how to deal with hacks not on that list.

 

[Tenebrous]

They should add
-Triggerbot
-rTrig
-Safe Aura
-Click Aura
-pSilent
-External Aim
-HMR Aura
-Aim Assist
-Silent Aim
-Autoclicker
-Blink
-rLimit and rSpeed ixAura
-MultiAura
-Fight Bot

 

[Tuatara]

They should add
-Triggerbot
-rTrig
-Safe Aura
-Click Aura
-pSilent
-External Aim
-HMR Aura
-Aim Assist
-Silent Aim
-Autoclicker
-Blink
-rLimit and rSpeed ixAura
-MultiAura
-Fight Bot

I don't know what half those are.

 

[Exult]

If staff come across these, they'd deal with it adequately.

Except that they don't most of the time, yourself included.

 

[Scott]

Except that they don't most of the time, yourself included.

Hilarious. Now, instead of targeting the discussion, you're going to retort with ad hominem responses.

There are 2 categories: modded clients and hacked clients. Hacked clients include, but are not limited to, aimbot, kill aura, fly, no-knockback, speed, and anything else that dramatically affects PvP. Modded clients include, but are not limited to, mini-map (that doesn't show chest/player locations), derp, damage indicators, and any other visual effect or mod/hack with little effect on PvP.

Let's think of a hack/mod not listed on the document. Pretend a moderator caught someone using this hack. This hack is "Aim Assist." A moderator would ask "Does this have a fairly large effect on PvP?" If the answer is yes, he/she would permanently ban for hacked clients. If the answer is no, he/she would go for modded clients. If he/she doesn't know, he/she can just ask a Sr. Moderator.

Now, if you understand that, you should be able to understand that it's not that hard to adequately deal with a situation in which it isn't listed. The most commonly used hacks are on the document, and other ones don't need added quite yet...

 

[Exult]

Hilarious. Now, instead of targeting the discussion, you're going to retort with ad hominem responses.

With all due respect, you clearly don't understand what an ad hominem argument is. An ad hominem argument is when you attempt to undermine the opposing argument by pointing to flaws in the person's character that bear no relevance on the argument at hand. What I said about you is relevant to my argument, as the fact that I have reported players in the past clearly using hacks I mentioned in the OP only for you and other moderators to decline the report is evidence that mods aren't adept at recognising these cheats, which could be addressed to an extent by updating the ban tables.

Let's think of a hack/mod not listed on the document. Pretend a moderator caught someone using this hack. This hack is "Aim Assist."

I don't think you understand what I'm getting at here either. The issue for me is that moderators often fail to identify players using more subtle combat hacks due to a lack of information- not that their punishment falls into the wrong category.

Modded clients include, but are not limited to, mini-map (that doesn't show chest/player locations), derp, damage indicators, and any other visual effect or mod/hack with little effect on PvP.

Just a little nitpick: as of yesterday purely topological minimaps are allowed.

 

[Scott]

With all due respect, you clearly don't understand what an ad hominem argument is. An ad hominem argument is when you attempt to undermine the opposing argument by pointing to flaws in the person's character that bear no relevance on the argument at hand. What I said about you is relevant to my argument, as the fact that I have reported players in the past clearly using hacks I mentioned in the OP only for you and other moderators to decline the report is evidence that mods aren't adept at recognising these cheats, which could be addressed to an extent by updating the ban tables.

Actually, I used ad hominem correctly. You focused on moderators and me, rather than the point of "we should add this to the ban guide." As defined by Google, an ad hominem argument is one focused on a person or group of people rather than the position they are maintaining. It doesn't necessarily have to do with anyone's character at all, rather any aspect about them. Now that I understand exactly your reasoning, I see what you're saying; however, the staff doesn't need to see it on the ban guide. They need to be trained on what they are and how to deal with them. If I may ask, what are some of the big one's that are not on there?

Just a little nitpick: as of yesterday purely topological minimaps are allowed.

Incorrect. It doesn't take place until August 6th...