RondegoYou've had lucky plays too, I'm sure.
yeah i have lucky plays like shooting a spam rocket at a point and airshotting a random scout, but not lucky plays like deciding to move my crosshair directly onto the center mass of an invisible spy and then firing
like come on man you didnt even do a double take, you just locked on and owned him without a second thought about what you had done
[quote=Rondego]You've had lucky plays too, I'm sure.[/quote]
yeah i have lucky plays like shooting a spam rocket at a point and airshotting a random scout, but not lucky plays like deciding to move my crosshair directly onto the center mass of an invisible spy and then firing
like come on man you didnt even do a double take, you just locked on and owned him without a second thought about what you had done
[img]http://puu.sh/ii16H/fedeee63a2.jpg[/img]
-85
I am not convinced that Rondego hacks. The evidence simply isn't there. He has a high sensitivity, and good "muscle memory" and I think that's the end of it. The soldier video isn't evidence at all because you can tell that it takes him several shots to get it and the scout isn't actively dodging at all, just directly behind him. The airshot at the end can be explained by using sound and just guessing where the enemy is. It's obviously edited up, it isn't like he is hitting every single shot, and I'm pretty sure the direct hit aimbot at close range will hit every single shot on targets that aren't AADAD mashing.
The heavy videos aren't good evidence as well. They only reason why his tracking looks "crazy" is because you can tell he has a really high sensitivity, which, for most people, means you won't be able to track at all. Hence why it looks so shaky. And the invisible spy? You act like you've never headshot a completely invisible spy just by guessing where he might go before. It happens and it's silly to call someone out on it when it happens once.
Rondego's been extremely cooperative and has real explanations for all these accusations, and all of you are just shitting on him. Innocent until proven guilty.
I am not convinced that Rondego hacks. The evidence simply isn't there. He has a high sensitivity, and good "muscle memory" and I think that's the end of it. The soldier video isn't evidence at all because you can tell that it takes him several shots to get it and the scout isn't actively dodging at all, just directly behind him. The airshot at the end can be explained by using sound and just guessing where the enemy is. It's obviously edited up, it isn't like he is hitting every single shot, and I'm pretty sure the direct hit aimbot at close range will hit every single shot on targets that aren't AADAD mashing.
The heavy videos aren't good evidence as well. They only reason why his tracking looks "crazy" is because you can tell he has a really high sensitivity, which, for most people, means you won't be able to track at all. Hence why it looks so shaky. And the invisible spy? You act like you've never headshot a completely invisible spy just by guessing where he might go before. It happens and it's silly to call someone out on it when it happens once.
Rondego's been extremely cooperative and has real explanations for all these accusations, and all of you are just shitting on him. Innocent until proven guilty.
https://youtu.be/BkWPddbPCic?t=13m22s
Stroking the heavy because reasons.
Medusahttps://youtu.be/BkWPddbPCic?t=13m22s
this looks the most convincing of aim assist to me. watch it in .25 speed he's perfectly tracking the demo then in a split second tracks the heavy then it goes back to the demo. his aim assist dun goofed and locked onto the heavy instead of the demo. a legit player would've kept tracking the demo there
[quote=Medusa]https://youtu.be/BkWPddbPCic?t=13m22s[/quote]
this looks the most convincing of aim assist to me. watch it in .25 speed he's perfectly tracking the demo then in a split second tracks the heavy then it goes back to the demo. his aim assist dun goofed and locked onto the heavy instead of the demo. a legit player would've kept tracking the demo there
looks like normal shitty high sensitivity tracking to me
hitting the heavy can easily be explained by having just overcompensated for the demoman's initial movement. sticking to the demo's leg and then right side of body is definitely fishy but I don't know of any cheats that do that in particular automatically, and it's something that happens from time to time anyway.
did not follow the thread, just wanted to comment on that clip
EDIT: Just looked at last page and that spy clip is all "lol infinite accelerations and sharp angles", how does someone even decide to lock on to a cloaked spy? WTF
looks like normal shitty high sensitivity tracking to me
hitting the heavy can easily be explained by having just overcompensated for the demoman's initial movement. sticking to the demo's leg and then right side of body is definitely fishy but I don't know of any cheats that do that in particular automatically, and it's something that happens from time to time anyway.
did not follow the thread, just wanted to comment on that clip
EDIT: Just looked at last page and that spy clip is all "lol infinite accelerations and sharp angles", how does someone even decide to lock on to a cloaked spy? WTF
Would it help shed some light on the suspicious parts of the demos if they were recorded at a very high frame rate like 240 or 300 (or higher)? Because I've actually never used aim assist, and I don't know exactly how they work. I assume they perfectly track the centers of targets, which would be recorded 1-to-1 on a POV demo, right? That's why I'm wondering if showing a super slow-mo might make things clearer. Maybe in wireframe. I'm not sure what would help at this point.
Would it help shed some light on the suspicious parts of the demos if they were recorded at a very high frame rate like 240 or 300 (or higher)? Because I've actually never used aim assist, and I don't know exactly how they work. I assume they perfectly track the centers of targets, which would be recorded 1-to-1 on a POV demo, right? That's why I'm wondering if showing a super slow-mo might make things clearer. Maybe in wireframe. I'm not sure what would help at this point.
Hugh_LaurieMedusahttps://youtu.be/BkWPddbPCic?t=13m22s
this looks the most convincing of aim assist to me. watch it in .25 speed he's perfectly tracking the demo then in a split second tracks the heavy then it goes back to the demo. his aim assist dun goofed and locked onto the heavy instead of the demo. a legit player would've kept tracking the demo there
if you also look closely his crosshair isn't on the heavy at a point and it looks like he is doing damage to him. u have to watch in .25 thought to see that aswell
[quote=Hugh_Laurie][quote=Medusa]https://youtu.be/BkWPddbPCic?t=13m22s[/quote]
this looks the most convincing of aim assist to me. watch it in .25 speed he's perfectly tracking the demo then in a split second tracks the heavy then it goes back to the demo. his aim assist dun goofed and locked onto the heavy instead of the demo. a legit player would've kept tracking the demo there[/quote]
if you also look closely his crosshair isn't on the heavy at a point and it looks like he is doing damage to him. u have to watch in .25 thought to see that aswell
RondegoWould it help shed some light on the suspicious parts of the demos if they were recorded at a very high frame rate like 240 or 300 (or higher)? Because I've actually never used aim assist, and I don't know exactly how they work. I assume they perfectly track the centers of targets, which would be recorded 1-to-1 on a POV demo, right? That's why I'm wondering if showing a super slow-mo might make things clearer. Maybe in wireframe. I'm not sure what would help at this point.
Shadowplay does not record higher than 60fps
Same goes for OBS if I recall.
I'm pretty sure bandicam doesn't either.
Source: I use shadowplay to record all my videos. I used to use bandicam and OBS but they are terrible.
[quote=Rondego]Would it help shed some light on the suspicious parts of the demos if they were recorded at a very high frame rate like 240 or 300 (or higher)? Because I've actually never used aim assist, and I don't know exactly how they work. I assume they perfectly track the centers of targets, which would be recorded 1-to-1 on a POV demo, right? That's why I'm wondering if showing a super slow-mo might make things clearer. Maybe in wireframe. I'm not sure what would help at this point.[/quote]
Shadowplay does not record higher than 60fps
Same goes for OBS if I recall.
I'm pretty sure bandicam doesn't either.
Source: I use shadowplay to record all my videos. I used to use bandicam and OBS but they are terrible.
Sucks that you need a hacker to try to place. I also agree with the "hacker ego" thing. Rondego released a video of "How to Play Competitive Heavy" not too long ago. He must be really proud of himself.
Sucks that you need a hacker to try to place. I also agree with the "hacker ego" thing. Rondego released a video of "How to Play Competitive Heavy" not too long ago. He must be really proud of himself.
HAHAHAHHAH IM DUMB THIS IS THE THIRD HACKER IN A ROW IVE DEFENDED IM A FUCKING RETARD
HAHAHAHHAH IM DUMB THIS IS THE THIRD HACKER IN A ROW IVE DEFENDED IM A FUCKING RETARD
xoSucks that you need a hacker to try to place. I also agree with the "hacker ego" thing. Rondego released a video of "How to Play Competitive Heavy" not too long ago. He must be really proud of himself.
Well sure. I'm happy that I'm able to make videos for youtube and help out newer heavies, since there's not a lot of content out there and good heavies are scarce because nobody really wants to play the class. I've only played heavy in comp for the past year and a half, mostly in steel, and it was a ton of fun.
I really hate doing all this on a forum because it seems like it's making me sound like a condescending dick. Podgy, maybe, but I've never tried to come across that way. I'm just frustrated because I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place and apparently all of the POVs and reasoning I've tried to give out have only made things worse.
Obviously the problem is that I don't know how to actually prove that what I'm doing is genuine. Guess I'd just be digging myself a deeper hole if I keep trying to show evidence? Here's a slow-mo video of some of the kills that people brought up recently. I can record more if this is helpful. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7ryxiV7p5w
[quote=xo]Sucks that you need a hacker to try to place. I also agree with the "hacker ego" thing. Rondego released a video of "How to Play Competitive Heavy" not too long ago. He must be really proud of himself.[/quote]
Well sure. I'm happy that I'm able to make videos for youtube and help out newer heavies, since there's not a lot of content out there and good heavies are scarce because nobody really wants to play the class. I've only played heavy in comp for the past year and a half, mostly in steel, and it was a ton of fun.
I really hate doing all this on a forum because it seems like it's making me sound like a condescending dick. Podgy, maybe, but I've never tried to come across that way. I'm just frustrated because I'm stuck between a rock and a hard place and apparently all of the POVs and reasoning I've tried to give out have only made things worse.
Obviously the problem is that I don't know how to actually prove that what I'm doing is genuine. Guess I'd just be digging myself a deeper hole if I keep trying to show evidence? Here's a slow-mo video of some of the kills that people brought up recently. I can record more if this is helpful. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7ryxiV7p5w
Jetzoh well, if hes not hacking he wont get banned
Hacking is touchy because neither side can 100% prove their stuff, so it comes down to a game of who can convince people more. There's no "show me x and y to prove that you're not cheating," because if there was, I would have done it a long time ago. I just have to sit here spewing out what I think shows that I'm actually doing what I'm doing. Nobody's giving me anything to show, I assume because most people don't care enough to jump off the bandwagon of thinking I'm cheating and/or don't want to associate with an accused hacker because they don't want to look bad. It feels like a witch hunt. Hell, just the fact that it's me saying this and not someone else automatically removes any credibility of what I'm saying for a lot of those people.
And hey, the convenient thing for them is that if I'm hacking, they get rid of a cheater. If I'm not, they get rid of an annoying little brat who won't shut up about trying to defend himself. So why wouldn't they ban me? It's a win-win. Can't say I blame them.
DoctorMiggyRondegoWould it help shed some light on the suspicious parts of the demos if they were recorded at a very high frame rate like 240 or 300 (or higher)? Because I've actually never used aim assist, and I don't know exactly how they work. I assume they perfectly track the centers of targets, which would be recorded 1-to-1 on a POV demo, right? That's why I'm wondering if showing a super slow-mo might make things clearer. Maybe in wireframe. I'm not sure what would help at this point.
Shadowplay does not record higher than 60fps
Same goes for OBS if I recall.
I'm pretty sure bandicam doesn't either.
Source: I use shadowplay to record all my videos. I used to use bandicam and OBS but they are terrible.
I understand that. I meant show those frags from the demos in slow motion to show that the tracking isn't perfect.
[quote=Jetz]oh well, if hes not hacking he wont get banned[/quote]
Hacking is touchy because neither side can 100% prove their stuff, so it comes down to a game of who can convince people more. There's no "show me x and y to prove that you're not cheating," because if there was, I would have done it a long time ago. I just have to sit here spewing out what I think shows that I'm actually doing what I'm doing. Nobody's giving me anything to show, I assume because most people don't care enough to jump off the bandwagon of thinking I'm cheating and/or don't want to associate with an accused hacker because they don't want to look bad. It feels like a witch hunt. Hell, just the fact that it's me saying this and not someone else automatically removes any credibility of what I'm saying for a lot of those people.
And hey, the convenient thing for them is that if I'm hacking, they get rid of a cheater. If I'm not, they get rid of an annoying little brat who won't shut up about trying to defend himself. So why wouldn't they ban me? It's a win-win. Can't say I blame them.
[quote=DoctorMiggy][quote=Rondego]Would it help shed some light on the suspicious parts of the demos if they were recorded at a very high frame rate like 240 or 300 (or higher)? Because I've actually never used aim assist, and I don't know exactly how they work. I assume they perfectly track the centers of targets, which would be recorded 1-to-1 on a POV demo, right? That's why I'm wondering if showing a super slow-mo might make things clearer. Maybe in wireframe. I'm not sure what would help at this point.[/quote]
Shadowplay does not record higher than 60fps
Same goes for OBS if I recall.
I'm pretty sure bandicam doesn't either.
Source: I use shadowplay to record all my videos. I used to use bandicam and OBS but they are terrible.[/quote]
I understand that. I meant show those frags from the demos in slow motion to show that the tracking isn't perfect.
[img]https://33.media.tumblr.com/4bee4460953dd5209b268a959a9023e3/tumblr_muiqqowuL31qg8jcso8_r1_250.gif[/img]Ur cheating i don't care what essays you're typing up or what videos you're submitting
RondegoHacking is touchy because neither side can 100% prove their stuff, so it comes down to a game of who can convince people more. There's no "show me x and y to prove that you're not cheating," because if there was, I would have done it a long time ago. I just have to sit here spewing out what I think shows that I'm actually doing what I'm doing. Nobody's giving me anything to show, I assume because most people don't care enough to jump off the bandwagon of thinking I'm cheating and/or don't want to associate with an accused hacker because they don't want to look bad. It feels like a witch hunt. Hell, just the fact that it's me saying this and not someone else automatically removes any credibility of what I'm saying for a lot of those people.
And hey, the convenient thing for them is that if I'm hacking, they get rid of a cheater. If I'm not, they get rid of an annoying little brat who won't shut up about trying to defend himself. So why wouldn't they ban me? It's a win-win. Can't say I blame them.
If you are set on defending your innocence than this thread is not the place. There is a lot of very reasonable suspicion (a number of those frags look really fishy... which I do admit does not immediately mean hacks, but it raises a lot of doubt). Because of that you aren't going to win in the court of public opinion right now.
That has nothing to do with this being a win-win situation, it isn't. But it is a situation where the cost of being wrong and exonerating you when you are guilty is incredibly high (it would essentially invalidate any future investigation before it began and that is dangerous).
Anyway, if you are genuinely innocent then what you need to do is stop feeding the fire here, and go to whatever admin group is handling the actual investigation and ask them what you are trying to ask here. What do they need, if you are innocent be as cooperative as you can be, give them whatever they need, and stop worrying about opinions in this thread. We can't ban you, regardless of our personal opinions.
You are right though, catching a hacker isn't a game of absolutes. There is a chance that even if you are legit you will be banned, and you need to be ready for that, and you need to handle it gracefully. As long as you are cooperative and respectful to the admins you should be fine.
[quote=Rondego]Hacking is touchy because neither side can 100% prove their stuff, so it comes down to a game of who can convince people more. There's no "show me x and y to prove that you're not cheating," because if there was, I would have done it a long time ago. I just have to sit here spewing out what I think shows that I'm actually doing what I'm doing. Nobody's giving me anything to show, I assume because most people don't care enough to jump off the bandwagon of thinking I'm cheating and/or don't want to associate with an accused hacker because they don't want to look bad. It feels like a witch hunt. Hell, just the fact that it's me saying this and not someone else automatically removes any credibility of what I'm saying for a lot of those people.
And hey, the convenient thing for them is that if I'm hacking, they get rid of a cheater. If I'm not, they get rid of an annoying little brat who won't shut up about trying to defend himself. So why wouldn't they ban me? It's a win-win. Can't say I blame them.[/quote]
If you are set on defending your innocence than this thread is not the place. There is a lot of very reasonable suspicion (a number of those frags look really fishy... which I do admit does not immediately mean hacks, but it raises a lot of doubt). Because of that you aren't going to win in the court of public opinion right now.
That has nothing to do with this being a win-win situation, it isn't. But it is a situation where the cost of being wrong and exonerating you when you are guilty is incredibly high (it would essentially invalidate any future investigation before it began and that is dangerous).
Anyway, if you are genuinely innocent then what you need to do is stop feeding the fire here, and go to whatever admin group is handling the actual investigation and ask them what you are trying to ask here. What do they need, if you are innocent be as cooperative as you can be, give them whatever they need, and stop worrying about opinions in this thread. We can't ban you, regardless of our personal opinions.
You are right though, catching a hacker isn't a game of absolutes. There is a chance that even if you are legit you will be banned, and you need to be ready for that, and you need to handle it gracefully. As long as you are cooperative and respectful to the admins you should be fine.
_In_SanityRondegoHacking is touchy because neither side can 100% prove their stuff, so it comes down to a game of who can convince people more. There's no "show me x and y to prove that you're not cheating," because if there was, I would have done it a long time ago. I just have to sit here spewing out what I think shows that I'm actually doing what I'm doing. Nobody's giving me anything to show, I assume because most people don't care enough to jump off the bandwagon of thinking I'm cheating and/or don't want to associate with an accused hacker because they don't want to look bad. It feels like a witch hunt. Hell, just the fact that it's me saying this and not someone else automatically removes any credibility of what I'm saying for a lot of those people.
And hey, the convenient thing for them is that if I'm hacking, they get rid of a cheater. If I'm not, they get rid of an annoying little brat who won't shut up about trying to defend himself. So why wouldn't they ban me? It's a win-win. Can't say I blame them.
If you are set on defending your innocence than this thread is not the place. There is a lot of very reasonable suspicion (a number of those frags look really fishy... which I do admit does not immediately mean hacks, but it raises a lot of doubt). Because of that you aren't going to win in the court of public opinion right now.
That has nothing to do with this being a win-win situation, it isn't. But it is a situation where the cost of being wrong and exonerating you when you are guilty is incredibly high (it would essentially invalidate any future investigation before it began and that is dangerous).
Anyway, if you are genuinely innocent then what you need to do is stop feeding the fire here, and go to whatever admin group is handling the actual investigation and ask them what you are trying to ask here. What do they need, if you are innocent be as cooperative as you can be, give them whatever they need, and stop worrying about opinions in this thread. We can't ban you, regardless of our personal opinions.
You are right though, catching a hacker isn't a game of absolutes. There is a chance that even if you are legit you will be banned, and you need to be ready for that, and you need to handle it gracefully. As long as you are cooperative and respectful to the admins you should be fine.
Thank you so much for posting that. I'm actually working on a video now detailing every single suspicious moment that people have brought up here, and I'll give that to the admins when it's done in case they don't want to talk to me in person for some reason.
[quote=_In_Sanity][quote=Rondego]Hacking is touchy because neither side can 100% prove their stuff, so it comes down to a game of who can convince people more. There's no "show me x and y to prove that you're not cheating," because if there was, I would have done it a long time ago. I just have to sit here spewing out what I think shows that I'm actually doing what I'm doing. Nobody's giving me anything to show, I assume because most people don't care enough to jump off the bandwagon of thinking I'm cheating and/or don't want to associate with an accused hacker because they don't want to look bad. It feels like a witch hunt. Hell, just the fact that it's me saying this and not someone else automatically removes any credibility of what I'm saying for a lot of those people.
And hey, the convenient thing for them is that if I'm hacking, they get rid of a cheater. If I'm not, they get rid of an annoying little brat who won't shut up about trying to defend himself. So why wouldn't they ban me? It's a win-win. Can't say I blame them.[/quote]
If you are set on defending your innocence than this thread is not the place. There is a lot of very reasonable suspicion (a number of those frags look really fishy... which I do admit does not immediately mean hacks, but it raises a lot of doubt). Because of that you aren't going to win in the court of public opinion right now.
That has nothing to do with this being a win-win situation, it isn't. But it is a situation where the cost of being wrong and exonerating you when you are guilty is incredibly high (it would essentially invalidate any future investigation before it began and that is dangerous).
Anyway, if you are genuinely innocent then what you need to do is stop feeding the fire here, and go to whatever admin group is handling the actual investigation and ask them what you are trying to ask here. What do they need, if you are innocent be as cooperative as you can be, give them whatever they need, and stop worrying about opinions in this thread. We can't ban you, regardless of our personal opinions.
You are right though, catching a hacker isn't a game of absolutes. There is a chance that even if you are legit you will be banned, and you need to be ready for that, and you need to handle it gracefully. As long as you are cooperative and respectful to the admins you should be fine.[/quote]
Thank you so much for posting that. I'm actually working on a video now detailing every single suspicious moment that people have brought up here, and I'll give that to the admins when it's done in case they don't want to talk to me in person for some reason.
yall niggas gotta reevaluate life if you cant tell this shitlord heavy is cheating
yall niggas gotta reevaluate life if you cant tell this shitlord heavy is cheating
https://youtu.be/vytYPZfiaB4?t=46
unless you got eyes in the back of your head, no way this shot was legit
https://youtu.be/vytYPZfiaB4?t=46
unless you got eyes in the back of your head, no way this shot was legit
The way he moves between targets and flicks to people who were not on his screen is what looks most blatant to me.
The way he moves between targets and flicks to people who were not on his screen is what looks most blatant to me.
like from the soldier clips its not necessarily blatant, even though i've never aimed like that even when i had a .9" sens, but the invisible spy is incredibly blatant.
like from the soldier clips its not necessarily blatant, even though i've never aimed like that even when i had a .9" sens, but the invisible spy is incredibly blatant.
KarlThe way he moves between targets and flicks to people who were not on his screen is what looks most blatant to me.
Can you elaborate any on tf2 cheats a highlander heavy might be using? Considering your vac banned tf2 alt you might have some insider knowledge to share.
[quote=Karl]The way he moves between targets and flicks to people who were not on his screen is what looks most blatant to me.[/quote]
Can you elaborate any on tf2 cheats a highlander heavy might be using? Considering your vac banned tf2 alt you might have some insider knowledge to share.
JohnMilterKarlThe way he moves between targets and flicks to people who were not on his screen is what looks most blatant to me.
Can you elaborate any on tf2 cheats a highlander heavy might be using? Considering your vac banned tf2 alt you might have some insider knowledge to share.
Silent aimbot,regular aimbot, wallhack, ESP, 2D radar. Basically any cheat. Just config them right and you can play a long time without getting caught.
[quote=JohnMilter][quote=Karl]The way he moves between targets and flicks to people who were not on his screen is what looks most blatant to me.[/quote]
Can you elaborate any on tf2 cheats a highlander heavy might be using? Considering your vac banned tf2 alt you might have some insider knowledge to share.[/quote]
Silent aimbot,regular aimbot, wallhack, ESP, 2D radar. Basically any cheat. Just config them right and you can play a long time without getting caught.
http://www.ugcleague.com/players_page.cfm?player_id=76561197979358751
banned
rip
[*] RIP RONDEGO.
LIGHT A CANDLE FRIENDS
edit: {DAT} podgy713: the popular vote won over an actual case where he had proof on innocence, but ok
HAHAHAHAH LMFAO
[*] RIP RONDEGO.
LIGHT A CANDLE FRIENDS
edit: {DAT} podgy713: the popular vote won over an actual case where he had proof on innocence, but ok
HAHAHAHAH LMFAO
That entire team should be dropped, or atleast the leader. They won a match with that cheater. It shouldn't be fair that team leaders can just add hackers and get no repercussions other than a match getting overturned. This is the one of many times this has happened. If the main leader picked him up, then he should get consequences, as well.
That entire team should be dropped, or atleast the leader. They won a match with that cheater. It shouldn't be fair that team leaders can just add hackers and get no repercussions other than a match getting overturned. This is the one of many times this has happened. If the main leader picked him up, then he should get consequences, as well.
If a whole plat team + an anticheat team thinks your teammate is cheating, he's probably cheating and the "popular vote" has nothing to do with it
If a whole plat team + an anticheat team thinks your teammate is cheating, he's probably cheating and the "popular vote" has nothing to do with it
{DAT} podgy713: the popular vote won over an actual case where he had proof on innocence, but ok
HAHAHAHAH LMFAO
you're just further ruining your own reputation by continuing to vouch for a blatant cheater even after he gets banned
[quote]{DAT} podgy713: the popular vote won over an actual case where he had proof on innocence, but ok
HAHAHAHAH LMFAO[/quote]
you're just further ruining your own reputation by continuing to vouch for a blatant cheater even after he gets banned
rondego more like ron_downgo
rondego more like ron_downgo
http://puu.sh/ij4o1/1a4a8abe3e.png