mihaim Report post Posted October 4, 2005 We finished analising the macroing logs. Here is the list: 152 dlerch 048 Barnak 037 Djinn 036 Grawius 029 Bugs 020 FirEBallS 018 AbelNightroad 015 poetic_justice 015 marpessa 015 Adrijana 012 wastedoftime 012 spice1 011 shadow_soldier 008 Jipomax 007 Schizophrenic 006 mort 005 Ohohok 005 Gampa 005 Eru_Illuvatar 004 ArcantriS 003 NiTAGER 003 CharlotteS The numbers represents how many times the server macroing protection was triggered. This number has nothing to do with how many items the person macroes but insteas it's an indication on how much time the persons involved spent macroing. Triggers below 3 were removed to avoid discutions about false positives and such . P.S. Macro check has NOTHING to do with illegal clients check. It is completly independent system. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Drakos7 Report post Posted October 5, 2005 poetic_justice. that is too funny. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Entropy Report post Posted October 5, 2005 poetic_justice. that is too funny. 205448[/snapback] Oh teh irony Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LadyWolf Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Is there anyway you can provide the time or date that they were suspected of doing this? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Learner Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Is there anyway you can provide the time or date that they were suspected of doing this? 205453[/snapback] What purpose would that serve other then give people mote hints on how they were detected? That would help cheaters more then others. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LadyWolf Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Im not concerned about the method you used. Just concerned about a very good friend thats on that list. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dlerch Report post Posted October 5, 2005 I dont know what method you used but I can tell you that whatever method you did use it is flawed. Even talking to Radu he has checked on me several times and I was always there manufacturing never macroing. I dont know what method you used but I can tell you it is screwed up. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Entropy Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Of course it is flawed.... While it is true that I checked on you 3 times, it was 3 times out of 1 week or so. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dlerch Report post Posted October 5, 2005 I dont care how many times you would have checked I was always there and I sure as hell was not macroing. I dont know what in particular that I do that is detected but your method is very very flawed. I also notice people on the list that were not on the modified client list. I admitted I used the client a couple times but I did not macto 150+ times. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Entropy Report post Posted October 5, 2005 I dont care how many times you would have checked I was always there and I sure as hell was not macroing. I dont know what in particular that I do that is detected but your method is very very flawed. I also notice people on the list that were not on the modified client list. I admitted I used the client a couple times but I did not macto 150+ times. 205464[/snapback] That list has absoultely nothing to do with the modified client list. The EF is not the only modified client around. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dlerch Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Well either way the detection method obviously triggers on something in particular that people do and it obviously can be done without a modified client. Hence it is not a valid test for a macro. Atest for a macro should be a little more reliable than to be able to be produced 150 plus times or even 5 times. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
LadyWolf Report post Posted October 5, 2005 (edited) Well dlerch wasn't the friend i was referring to, but I talk to him constantly while I'm in game, either in msn or on pm..I'll pull my logs to show I never have gotten an afk message from him, always a reply. I am not being disrespectful, I hope you guys have come to know me enough to know that's not my style, but i do question the method. Edited October 5, 2005 by LadyWolf Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
scafativ Report post Posted October 5, 2005 (edited) Mihiam, I loudly commend your decision to purge from this list those individuals who's "score" was low enough to suggest false-positive! That is right and just and thoughtful. While it was originally stated in the "EF Hall of Shame" list that low scores could indicate false positives, the names of the 'martyred 16' were published and dragged through the mud, casting doubt on their honesty. Therefore, I call for a simple public apology to these individuals, since they were not afforded the same consideration as the low scoring macro-ers. Doing so may retain several who have indicated their intention of quitting the game altogether in response to an accusation that was poorly thought out. scafativ Edited October 5, 2005 by scafativ Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Mr.Mind Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Even with mihaim's explanation I do not understand the meaning of those numbers or the importance of how much they vary. I suppose it does not matter since my name is not mentioned. More of a curiousity thing. Scafativ, I think the issue have been resolved? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Arnieman Report post Posted October 5, 2005 MrMind - I think he's saying that the number means that's how many times the player did something that made the game think they were macroing. I too think Scafativ's issue has already been resolved - at the very least, since it was avoided here, this isn't the place to talk about it. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NitageR Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Triggers below 3 were removed to avoid discutions about false positives and such . 205442[/snapback] maybe <= 3 ?? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
llsardonicll Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Mihiam, I loudly commend your decision to purge from this list those individuals who's "score" was low enough to suggest false-positive! That is right and just and thoughtful. While it was originally stated in the "EF Hall of Shame" list that low scores could indicate false positives, the names of the 'martyred 16' were published and dragged through the mud, casting doubt on their honesty. Therefore, I call for a simple public apology to these individuals, since they were not afforded the same consideration as the low scoring macro-ers. Doing so may retain several who have indicated their intention of quitting the game altogether in response to an accusation that was poorly thought out. scafativ 205484[/snapback] My name was dragged through the mud? Doh! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tidus Report post Posted October 5, 2005 (edited) Yay, i'm not on the list That list has absoultely nothing to do with the modified client list. The EF is not the only modified client around. 205465[/snapback] Does this mean the others that appear on the list are getting the same punishment as others? Edit: Can you still show us the ones with 002 and 001. If you showed them on the illegal client post, why not show them here to, its only fair... Edited October 5, 2005 by Tidus Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
frak Report post Posted October 5, 2005 abel on the list but not frak. looks reasonable. but there are still ppl on that list that couldnt have used ef client unless they knew how to bypass the usercheck. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerro Report post Posted October 5, 2005 We finished analising the macroing logs. Here is the list: 152 dlerch 048 Barnak 037 Djinn 036 Grawius 029 Bugs 020 FirEBallS 018 AbelNightroad 015 poetic_justice 015 marpessa 015 Adrijana 012 wastedoftime 012 spice1 011 shadow_soldier 008 Jipomax 007 Schizophrenic 006 mort 005 Ohohok 005 Gampa 005 Eru_Illuvatar 004 ArcantriS 003 NiTAGER 003 CharlotteS The numbers represents how many times the server macroing protection was triggered. This number has nothing to do with how many items the person macroes but insteas it's an indication on how much time the persons involved spent macroing. Triggers below 3 were removed to avoid discutions about false positives and such . P.S. Macro check has NOTHING to do with illegal clients check. It is completly independent system. 205442[/snapback] wtf =/ Yes i used illegal client..Yes i had exp counter coloured #GM and zoom..but NO..i NEVER EVER macroed! nice system =S greetz, Ohohok Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Lorck Report post Posted October 5, 2005 abel on the list but not frak. looks reasonable. but there are still ppl on that list that couldnt have used ef client unless they knew how to bypass the usercheck. 205551[/snapback] Maybe the list from Rogue show all detectioon of ppl macroing not just using the "EF Pro" clients. In a related note, -EF- distributed the client to Fireballs? I thought he was in UTI and UTI was making wars against -EF-. Or did i miss something? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
sMooMs Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Yep UTi did not have acces to the client. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Jaha Report post Posted October 5, 2005 Edit: Can you still show us the ones with 002 and 001. If you showed them on the illegal client post, why not show them here to, its only fair... 205545[/snapback] This is the list of people being punished, thus they removed the false-positives. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Tidus Report post Posted October 5, 2005 This is the list of people being punished, thus they removed the false-positives. 205573[/snapback] Yes, but the ones below 003 should still be named. Yes, some of them may not have done anything, but others on that list probably have! Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marpessa_ Report post Posted October 5, 2005 better check that system again Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
