>No Yes. Google it. All the major companies do hax bans in wave patterns. Valve,...

NikolaNovak · on Jan 3, 2020

>>Not sure why you're bring it up though. I wasnt talking about user submitted anything???

Then, respectfully... what did you think you were responding to? That's pretty much entirely what the OP & thread are about :-)

Havoc · on Jan 3, 2020

>what did you think you were responding to?

The part I was quoting. OP wrote multiple paragraphs.

I mean we can argue about whether "the state of anticheat on this game is absolutely horrific" refers to automated or reports but given article I was pretty certain the section I quote was automated. Anticheat is generally not understood to mean manual reports as best as I can tell. Its the well anticheat software

Besides the Linux bans are probably not user reports Driven..

cheeze · on Jan 3, 2020

> Anticheat is generally not understood to mean manual reports as best as I can tell. Its the well anticheat software

That's the thing though. Good games (CS comes to mind) do have some sort of ability to have human intervention.

Building a hack that can't be detected isn't easy, but it's also not _that_ hard with determination.

anonymousab · on Jan 3, 2020

>I wasnt talking about user submitted anything

The OP you responded to was talking about that. That's the context of the conversation. Of the cheaters not getting banned; of those bans not happening in waves.

>The shocking part is that we've compiled a list[1][2] of 380+ cheaters with video proofs and we've transmitted this list to some DICE community managers and employees

zo1 · on Jan 3, 2020

This whole thread is like a bad case of broken telephones and one guy seems to be getting the bad end of the down vote stick.

1. Person A talks about submitting videos of hackers and being ignored.

2. Person B says that "detected hacks" are acted on in waves as part of arms race with hackers, says nothing of "user-submitted", instead generalizes about "detected hacks".

3. Person C gets uppity about companies ignoring hacks, irrespective of the potentially-valid reason as mentioned by person B.

4. Person B insists that the bans happens in waves. Says he wasn't talking about "user-submitted" stuff as he was talking in generalities.

5. Person D jumps in says "thread is absolutely about user-submitted stuff".

I paraphrased and generalized too for a bit of dramatic effect, but the thread is definitely broken and if someone stares at it for a bit, they would probably see how it went bad and that probably no one is technically wrong.

6. Person E jumps in with meta-commentary about the discussion that led to this point.

Edit: Formatting.