2 New Rules: Hackusating and Mockery

[LoadzAF]

Well I agree with your first statement. I agree that its hard to detect if someone is making fun or just made up an excuse. However I disagree with your statement on hackusating. It is quite easy to tell if someone is hacking or not. And people dont just call it because they see people lagging. I see about 1 person a game call someone a hacker just because they died.

Yeah but not everyone is good at the game I hope you realise that

 

[LoadzAF]

Sometimes it's not "bad enough" -_-

You cant just get offended by every small thing that's said, otherwise you can always turn off ur chat fully to not get offended at all.

 

[Lilleh__]

Nice ideas, I completely agree with mocking but false hackusations should only be punishable if done excessively.

I am not agree with 1st one. Lots of people don't know how to 1.9pvp and they call hacker to every player who knows how to 1.9pvp. It would be so chaotic...

True, but let the wrong version but they don't know it noobs get warned for excessively hackusating players who kill them using the skillset that's effective in that version.

 

[Shrek Trained Me]

Im suggestion we create 2 rules on mockery (making fun of someone) and hackusating. Im saying that we make both of these against the rules. Both rules will require a warning before being able to report but hackusating will have the same punishments as spamming as they are the same thing, however mockery will follow a similar punishment to bullying.

Hackusating:
Hackusating is when you are accusing a player of hacking or another offense falsely. This could be encouraging people to report a player or simply claiming hacks when you die. This would be fine if the player is actually hacking however if they are not then it is just useless spam. This would follow the exact same rules as spamming as they are very similar. They could even incorporate it into the spamming rule.
Advantages: Less false accusations. Less spam.
Disadvantages: Staff will have to deal with far more reports.

Muting for hackusating? I get alot of hackusaters but i never get annoyed. Hackusating isn't bullying and it's fine if someone thinks someone is hacking and warn other players..

 

[LonelyNartyta]

I think they are very good ideas, I hope they can incorporate them to the server. At least it would be nice to warn them.

 

[_The13thDoctor_]

You cant just get offended by every small thing that's said, otherwise you can always turn off ur chat fully to not get offended at all.

Not the point but ok.

 

[BringMeTheHorizon ♠]

Well, you see, sometimes a hacker hacks in a game, but he can report people that hackusate him, if he got away with it. It's not impossible to get away with just one round. There's no proof the player was hacking. Instead though, I guess you could block the word hacker, haxer and all that and say "Don't accuse anyone, record and report them at reports.cubecraft.net". Because, really, you don't need a warning to get a hacker banned. Also sometimes people can't really tell the difference between a person with high ping or a person with reach. I'm neutral with the mockery part and would count it as bullying if any case, but hackusating can't be a possible rule, really. You can also take any hackusate towards you as a compliment to say that you're really good, or a hint to get better connection. xP
Edit: you can always report them in case if they were spamming. c:

 

[Lilleh__]

Muting for hackusating? I get alot of hackusaters but i never get annoyed. Hackusating isn't bullying and it's fine if someone thinks someone is hacking and warn other players..

That's why I suggested only doing it excessively without evidence should be a warning.

 

[Gainfullterror]

That's why I suggested only doing it excessively without evidence should be a warning.

Wouldn't it be spam at that point?

 

[Gainfullterror]

No he can not, there are big letters on the right side of his screen saying ''Flux, Huzuni, Jigsaw'' etc.

I highly doubt that there are clients that exist that cannot toggle the HUD elements.

edit: I don't know what happened, but the post I quoted is now gone.

 

[BringMeTheHorizon ♠]

No he can not, there are big letters on the right side of his screen saying ''Flux, Huzuni, Jigsaw'' etc.

You could just hide them. I, myself, made my own server and tested hacks on my other account so I know the difference between lag and hacks, and what type of logs console gives me. All the clients I tried had a "Hide options" button which hides every option from plain sight.

 

[Thefty]

Then why report it?
If it can't be dealt with by staff it probably isn't that severe,

Some people are way too insecure *cough* and dunno how to deal with the smallest things, imo they shouldnt even be on the internet :)

 

[Sweetenerera]

If someone says you're a hacker, but you're not. Just take it as a complement. Why would it need a mute?

And how can you proof you weren't actually hacking?

 

[OnePointEight.exe]

This will never be a thing and here's why; due to the 1.9 mechanics, the hacked clients are incredibly hard to detect if they are not using the most obvious ones, you seem to think that if the client isn't obvious then they aren't cheating. It's not a case of if their client is on or off, 100% or 0%. They CAN tone them down, change distances and toggle, some people only use reach, so its not easy Adding a rule where I have to check every single time someone calls hacks to see if they are lying is inefficient and pointless.

You also write:

Why is 'less false accusations' an advantage? they have to write the false accusation for me to deem it a false accusation, so its there either way. Also we have a rule to reduce spam, it's called 'spamming'.



So why is it required? why do you need a form of it when it's the same thing and fall under the same punishment?

Sorry I can't be bothered to waste my time deleting all but the message I want to quote you for, it went something like, with 1.9 PVP mechanics it is harder to detect hacks. How does that make any sense? What is so different about the versions that makes looking for cheats more difficult? Aimbot is identical between versions and every variant of smoothing, auto clickers, (aka the hardest hack to see) doesn't work in 1.9, reach does the exact same thing between versions, triggerbot doesn't change much aside from timing the hits, all movement cheats are identical. I am curious why 1.9 is harder to detect hacks in. I would understand that anti cheats may need to be redesigned since the game version is based on something else, but otherwise I don't see any difference.

 

[Story]

Sorry I can't be bothered to waste my time deleting all but the message I want to quote you for, it went something like, with 1.9 PVP mechanics it is harder to detect hacks. How does that make any sense? What is so different about the versions that makes looking for cheats more difficult? Aimbot is identical between versions and every variant of smoothing, auto clickers, (aka the hardest hack to see) doesn't work in 1.9, reach does the exact same thing between versions, triggerbot doesn't change much aside from timing the hits, all movement cheats are identical. I am curious why 1.9 is harder to detect hacks in. I would understand that anti cheats may need to be redesigned since the game version is based on something else, but otherwise I don't see any difference.

Because kill aura is timed, it only hits when the cooldown ends, its very natural looking. Whereas in 1.8 its a constant flux of perfect hits every millesecond, its much more obvious to the human eye. Movement cheats are identical. When you click very quickly on a player body it makes a 'hit' noise, if someone is using an autoclicker you can here this noise very very quickly and it never misses a beat because a program is doing it, it's consistently fast.

 

[OnePointEight.exe]

Because kill aura is timed, it only hits when the cooldown ends, its very natural looking. Whereas in 1.8 its a constant flux of perfect hits every millesecond, its much more obvious to the human eye. Movement cheats are identical. When you click very quickly on a player body it makes a 'hit' noise, if someone is using an autoclicker you can here this noise very very quickly and it never misses a beat because a program is doing it, it's consistently fast.

When you say kill aura I am going to assume you mean ghost aura since standard ka is 100% Noticable, they simply get hits that are outside the hit box, however aimbot glues to the player. If someone lands every hit in 1.9 it seems a little like they are cheating, however in 1.8 it is expected for at least one person to always be hitting the other. In 1.9, idk about you but I don't always have my aim glued to the player, I only make sure that every 0.625 seconds I am hovering over them, in 1.8 on the other hand, you have to constantly be hovering over the other person otherwise you take more KB and do less dps, in 1.9 most people dont have their crosshairs over their enemy all the time, usually only when their weapon is not on cooldown. Thus making it so aimbot looks a little weirder in 1.9.
Auto clickers are pointless in 1.9, and in 1.8, without an anticheat, from 3rd person perspective, no one can tell they are auto clicking unless you see 10 quadrillion particles flying off you, but a 14 cps auto clicker is almost undetectable without an anticheat.

 

[Gainfullterror]

Because kill aura is timed, it only hits when the cooldown ends, its very natural looking. Whereas in 1.8 its a constant flux of perfect hits every millesecond, its much more obvious to the human eye. Movement cheats are identical. When you click very quickly on a player body it makes a 'hit' noise, if someone is using an autoclicker you can here this noise very very quickly and it never misses a beat because a program is doing it, it's consistently fast.

I don't know about you, but I'd say it's way easier to spot them in 1.9+.
Sounds aside, sometimes you can tell it's kill aura just by how regular the hits are. Nobody that I've fought before, hits in a completely regular manner.
Everybody is bound to miss a hit or two, resulting in the interval between hits being extremely irregular. With a regular kill aura, it's almost perfect (due to connection and stuff, it'll never be perfect). Of course, this isn't enough proof sometimes, but it is quite the red flag if you're fighting someone.

 

[Joel200]

GUYS I GOT AN IDEA FOR THE FIRST ONE!

The chat filter could block the words revolving around hacks and hax and make say:

Please report cheaters here: https://reports.cubecraft.net
If you need a recording device: OBS or ScreenCast O' Matic
Thank You.

2nd One I SO AGREE.

Being toxic and rude in general deserves mutes.

I actually agree with this. Hackusating shouldn't be forbidden, but a chat filter for that is a good idea!

 

[Luzario]

Mocking is when you take something about a player or something a player did/said and make fun of it. This could be anything like name calling, or making fun of someones spelling or poor english

Lmao, #english discord in a nutshell

 

[OnePointEight.exe]

I actually agree with this. Hackusating shouldn't be forbidden, but a chat filter for that is a good idea!

God please no.