Avicus Archive

You need to be more clear. :/// by Ihze June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

If ingigo played all of apollo's matches surely they should all be counted as losses??????????????????? and disqualified
thank for the help amigo

Numberz_ June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

1 players can be banned without them being disqualified. If they have two players hack, they get disqualified. That's what I know anyway.

Ihze June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

1 players can be banned without them being disqualified. If they have two players hack, they get disqualified. That's what I know anyway.
But the matches that the player plays get counted as a loss right?

Legoche June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

On the rules:
  • Autoclicker

    • First Offense → Player disqualified, Player permanent banned on ALL Avicus services, match loss

    • Second Offense → Player permanent banned on ALL Avicus services, team disqualified & blacklisted.


    The matches can't be changed according to Tazz since they have already been played.

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    On the rules:
  • Autoclicker

    • First Offense → Player disqualified, Player permanent banned on ALL Avicus services, match loss

    • Second Offense → Player permanent banned on ALL Avicus services, team disqualified & blacklisted.


    The matches can't be changed according to Tazz since they have already been played.
    The players that were banned during our games just got banned and we played on. you cant have different rules just because your team is considered "top tier". Your matches should all be counted as losses, he played most/all?

    Numberz_ June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    But the matches that the player plays get counted as a loss right?
    Ye, according to the post Robo made. 


    Legoche June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    The players that were banned during our games just got banned and we played on. you cant have different rules just because your team is considered "top tier". Your matches should all be counted as losses, he played most/all?
    I'm not defending my team whatsoever. I was surprised when I found this out too. I didn't ask for any of this, Tazz just told me it.

    JJTheGuy June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    Did the people of apollo know he was hacking? Or was it an idividual decision?

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    Did the people of apollo know he was hacking? Or was it an idividual decision?
    It's been pretty well known that hes a cheater for a while was just a ticking time bomb for him to be banned lmao

    Legoche June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    Did the people of apollo know he was hacking? Or was it an idividual decision?
    Nope, I was planning on kicking him though since he was really sketchy.

    pope_panda June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    Did the people of apollo know he was hacking? Or was it an idividual decision?
    pretty sure everyone on the server knew xd

    JJTheGuy June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    pretty sure everyone on the server knew xd
    Oh well I didn't. Oops

    Juanooo June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    Oh he finally got banned..

    JJTheGuy June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    Nope, I was planning on kicking him though since he was really sketchy.
    Little too late for that now :/ Biting you in the butt. 

    Also, does this mean there's a spot open on Apollo? ;D

    Legoche June 5, 2016 at 5:06 PM UTC

    Little too late for that now :/ Biting you in the butt. 

    Also, does this mean there's a spot open on Apollo? ;D
    gotta get through these guys first
    https://avicus.net/teams/913#membersTab

    Sevoo June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    Wait Ingigo was banned?

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    Wait Ingigo was banned?
    literal pointless question but yes

    JDKL June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    gotta get through these guys first
    https://avicus.net/teams/913#membersTab
    It says 'match loss', therefore the matches that Ingigo played means that you should have lost those matches.

    Legoche June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    It says 'match loss', therefore the matches that Ingigo played means that you should have lost those matches.
    Take it up with Tazz, his decision, not mine.

    JustBudah June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    It says 'match loss', therefore the matches that Ingigo played means that you should have lost those matches.
    Tazz banned him after the matches that's why our matches are not counted as a loss

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    It says 'match loss', therefore the matches that Ingigo played means that you should have lost those matches.
    finally somone understand sm h

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    Tazz banned him after the matches that's why our matches are not counted as a loss
    [17:47:42] Izzy: apollo may have lost if he wasnt playing
    [17:47:53] Izzy: if he wasnt cheating the result may have been different
    [17:47:56] Izzy: so you cant count it as that
    [17:52:20] Izzy: like they might not have won
    [17:52:22] Izzy: if he wasnt cheating
    [17:52:28] Izzy: so all matches he played = loss

    Spoookeh June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    [17:47:42] Izzy: apollo may have lost if he wasnt playing
    [17:47:53] Izzy: if he wasnt cheating the result may have been different
    [17:47:56] Izzy: so you cant count it as that
    [17:52:20] Izzy: like they might not have won
    [17:52:22] Izzy: if he wasnt cheating
    [17:52:28] Izzy: so all matches he played = loss
    We would have beaten Varsity, they only had 6 players.

    Numberz_ June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    A player from The Crazy Beaners was also banned so it makes sense that the matches wouldn't be counted as losses. If TCB and Apollo were both given losses for the matches those players played in it would result in them pretty much being disqualified, since they couldnt regain enough wins. Much as I agree with that it should be counts as a loss, it can't really be changed... they should both be deducted a win each tho.

    JustBudah June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    [17:47:42] Izzy: apollo may have lost if he wasnt playing
    [17:47:53] Izzy: if he wasnt cheating the result may have been different
    [17:47:56] Izzy: so you cant count it as that
    [17:52:20] Izzy: like they might not have won
    [17:52:22] Izzy: if he wasnt cheating
    [17:52:28] Izzy: so all matches he played = loss
    Is it my fault that they officials can't make up their mind? They can't change back now anyway. I agree with you of them being more clear, I do not agree with them having a rule saying that someone cheating in a team will not be dq'd, but that's not in the rule set for this tourney.

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    We would have beaten Varsity, they only had 6 players.
    You can't say that. Its not a matter of if you would/wouldn't have. If you won illegitimately then you cant count it as a win. From an observers perspective the match is always 50/50. Its probable that you would have beaten them but there is also a chance that you wouldnt. You cheated your way through that match, not your whole team, but one of your players, So you cant count it as a legitimate win.

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    Is it my fault that they officials can't make up their mind? They can't change back now anyway. I agree with you of them being more clear, I do not agree with them having a rule saying that someone cheating in a team will not be dq'd, but that's not in the rule set for this tourney.
    It's your fault for having a cheater on your team.

    JJTheGuy June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    gotta get through these guys first
    https://avicus.net/teams/913#membersTab
    Aight, lemme at them all.

    JustBudah June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    It's your fault for having a cheater on your team.
    It's their fault for not having the rules clear.

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    It's their fault for not having the rules clear.
    There shouldnt be a cheater on your team in the first place, the point is that the cheater on your team made that rule which can be easily misunderstood have to be enforced.

    JustBudah June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    There shouldnt be a cheater on your team in the first place, the point is that the cheater on your team made that rule which can be easily misunderstood have to be enforced.
    How did Ingi make that rule, lol. And yes, I agree. we shouldn't have a cheater on our team. But how could we know? I agree with all of the points that you made except for the ones that we should have lost all the matches which isn't right because the staff  didn't make the rule clear.

    Eteh June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    It's your fault for having a cheater on your team.
    How is it their fault for not knowing that Ingigo would decide to hack? That's being unreasonable...

    dev_revs June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    Tazz banned him after the matches that's why our matches are not counted as a loss
    They should. He cheated throughout the tourney therefore the matches should count as loses. who knows if he wasn't cheating that you guys would of won?

    JustBudah June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    They should. He cheated throughout the tourney therefore the matches should count as loses. who knows if he wasn't cheating that you guys would of won?
    Have you even read my previous posts? Like get a brain and read them.

    Stimulating June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    How is it their fault for not knowing that Ingigo would decide to hack? That's being unreasonable...
    I'll be 100% honest and real here, almost the entire competitive scene knew he wasn't legit, and obviously so, for over half a year. It's 100% their fault that they facilitated someone who's known as a hacker/cheater.

    awesome_apricot June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    can someone explain to me why he wasn't screenshared? Apart from having "evidence" from an autoclicker detector. Because as we know the Ingibot has been falsely banned before by such mechanisms in place.

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    Have you even read my previous posts? Like get a brain and read them.
    Theres no need to flame :)

    ImRaging June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    They should. He cheated throughout the tourney therefore the matches should count as loses. who knows if he wasn't cheating that you guys would of won?
    i doubt that if ingi wasnt autoclicking/another player was playing would've made a difference of 50 points (or in your case us winning over 100 points) lmao, one player can't make that much of a difference

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    can someone explain to me why he wasn't screenshared? Apart from having "evidence" from an autoclicker detector. Because as we know the Ingibot has been falsely banned before by such mechanisms in place.
    There was probably no need for a screenshare as he also got GCheat banned on JD7 which was the same day as this tourney, they practically had a double check by looking at that. If he has been detected by 2 autoclick detectors then its pretty obvious he is cheating.

    Stimulating June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    can someone explain to me why he wasn't screenshared? Apart from having "evidence" from an autoclicker detector. Because as we know the Ingibot has been falsely banned before by such mechanisms in place.
    Because we have a 100% method that doesn't require anticheat. It doesn't require a screenshare in the slightest.

    Jahaj June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    IMO both teams should be given one loss, as making all of them losses would be too extreme, but the teams were still cheating so they can't get away without a scar.

    Eteh June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    There was probably no need for a screenshare as he also got GCheat banned on JD7 which was the same day as this tourney, they practically had a double check by looking at that. If he has been detected by 2 autoclick detectors then its pretty obvious he is cheating.
    We simply can't use another minecraft server's ban on him as evidence.

    Numberz_ June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    IMO both teams should be given one loss, as making all of them losses would be too extreme, but the teams were still cheating so they can't get away without a scar.
    +1

    shahmi June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    There was probably no need for a screenshare as he also got GCheat banned on JD7 which was the same day as this tourney, they practically had a double check by looking at that. If he has been detected by 2 autoclick detectors then its pretty obvious he is cheating.
    Or he has a good gaming chair and gaming mouse :p

    MEMES

    ImRaging June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    I'll be 100% honest and real here, almost the entire competitive scene knew he wasn't legit, and obviously so, for over half a year. It's 100% their fault that they facilitated someone who's known as a hacker/cheater.
    I'll be 100% honest and real here:

    1) So many people client these days that it's hard af to tell who is and who isn't hacking (and dont give me any of that 'oh but its so obvious' shit). This means that so many people call a person/ a group of people out that it's hard to know if they're being serious or they're just salty. From OUR point of view it just looks like everyone is being salty that a team that shouldn't be good is quite good.

    2) Please explain to me why WE should know of anyone that he was hacking. We hardly ever see eachother pvp. Ingi plays frontlines, so only maybe 1 or 2 people see him fighting, a match. Secondly, for a case like Max (bloodoh) he plays defence, which NOBODY ever goes to see unless they're supplying them. 

    If you can come up with a reason why we should've (not couldve, shouldve) known he was hacking, i'd be glad to hear it.

    We're not denying that he was hacking, but it isn't our fault

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    IMO both teams should be given one loss, as making all of them losses would be too extreme, but the teams were still cheating so they can't get away without a scar.
    No, all of the matches that were cheated in should be given as a win to the team that were opposing the cheaters

    tomqss June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    I'll be 100% honest and real here, almost the entire competitive scene knew he wasn't legit, and obviously so, for over half a year. It's 100% their fault that they facilitated someone who's known as a hacker/cheater.
    That doesn't matter. (@eteh) It's your fault if one player in your team is hacking, either if you know or if you don't.

    awesome_apricot June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    There was probably no need for a screenshare as he also got GCheat banned on JD7 which was the same day as this tourney, they practically had a double check by looking at that. If he has been detected by 2 autoclick detectors then its pretty obvious he is cheating.
    Deleted this for reasons

    I can't be arsed with it

    Ingi can't be arsed with it. 

    tldr ingi is legit but i cannot be bothered to use my skills in englishness to defend this

    Tazz June 5, 2016 at 6:06 PM UTC

    Ok, first off, you guys do not understand the rule set. The rule set states that the match the player is banned will be made a loss, not every match he played on. However, he was banned after matches so we can not make him lose one particular match. I believe we have came to a conclusion so wait a minute so I can finalise it.

    JJTheGuy June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    Ok, first off, you guys do not understand the rule set. The rule set states that the match the player is banned will be made a loss, not every match he played on. However, he was banned after matches so we can not make him lose one particular match. I believe we have came to a conclusion so wait a minute so I can finalise it.
    Finally, some solidarity.

    awesome_apricot June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    Because we have a 100% method that doesn't require anticheat. It doesn't require a screenshare in the slightest.
    enlighten us on this method please, totally unreleated to Ingi's ban, as a member of the community

    Ingigo June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    This is making me laugh xD Please provide what proof you have on me and you cannot base it on the Badlion's Ban on me.

    hasl June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    This is making me laugh xD Please provide what proof you have on me and you cannot base it on the Badlion's Ban on me.
    The primary evidence used is multiple readings from a confidential source. PM me on my Skype (live:j420ac10k) if you'd like to know what it is.

    Tazz June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    The primary evidence used is multiple readings from a confidential source. PM me on my Skype (live:j420ac10k) if you'd like to know what it is.
    No. He can appeal and we will give him the evidence there.

    Tazz June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    This is making me laugh xD Please provide what proof you have on me and you cannot base it on the Badlion's Ban on me.
    Appeal then?

    Stimulating June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    I'll be 100% honest and real here:

    1) So many people client these days that it's hard af to tell who is and who isn't hacking (and dont give me any of that 'oh but its so obvious' shit). This means that so many people call a person/ a group of people out that it's hard to know if they're being serious or they're just salty. From OUR point of view it just looks like everyone is being salty that a team that shouldn't be good is quite good.

    2) Please explain to me why WE should know of anyone that he was hacking. We hardly ever see eachother pvp. Ingi plays frontlines, so only maybe 1 or 2 people see him fighting, a match. Secondly, for a case like Max (bloodoh) he plays defence, which NOBODY ever goes to see unless they're supplying them. 

    If you can come up with a reason why we should've (not couldve, shouldve) known he was hacking, i'd be glad to hear it.

    We're not denying that he was hacking, but it isn't our fault
    The thing is the method that was more than likely used to detect autoclicker is 100% accurate. He also got GCheated, which probably isn't a coincidence.

    Pelpelajax June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    One hacker should be enough for automatic disqualification. Just to prevent things like this.

    Ihze June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    One hacker should be enough for automatic disqualification. Just to prevent things like this.
    This is what i suggested too but they just ignored it

    DaFrozenBlaze June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    Great
    So much for a well organised, smoothly flowing tournament.
    Just great

    Legoche June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    One hacker should be enough for automatic disqualification. Just to prevent things like this.
    I agree but the rules can't be changed mid tourney

    Tazz June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    Ok. 

    The officials have come to the conclusion from the evidence of the bans that Apollo will lose their match against Varsity, and The Crazy Beaners will lose their match against Team Allah. However, on the latter, Team Allah already won the match so nothing is changing there. We came to this conclusion by timing the evidence that we have for respective players and timing that to the match they were playing at time that the evidence was created.

    Speeded June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    IMO both teams should be given one loss, as making all of them losses would be too extreme, but the teams were still cheating so they can't get away without a scar.
    +1

    ImRaging June 5, 2016 at 7:06 PM UTC

    The thing is the method that was more than likely used to detect autoclicker is 100% accurate. He also got GCheated, which probably isn't a coincidence.
    we found out 10minutes before we started playing that he was banned on JD7...

    Spoookeh June 5, 2016 at 8:06 PM UTC

    Locking this seen as the 'issue' has been sorted out and only more arguments will come from this.