View Full Version : Spotted my first CHEATER today!
Kenchi_Tib
04-15-2009, 15:33
The cheater used the money hack and bought a way too expensive army for 10k ranked battles.
Army he used....
1 generals bodyguard - 530
2 household cav rank 1 - 1032 x2 2064
2 light dragoons rank 1 - 823 x2 1646
1 light dragoons rank 2 - 921
1 howitzer - 690
1 howitzer - rank 2 - 873
1 Foot art - 630
1 foot art - rank 2 - 801
1 line inf - 740
1 line inf rank 1 - 834
1 line inf rank 2 - 933
1 guard - 960
1 guard rank 1 - 1076
3 riflemen rank 1 - 658 x3 1974
1 riflemen rank 2 - 741
1 riflemen - 580
Total price is: 15 993
It's against org policy to post names, but you can post the army used and say it was a 10K game. The fact that this can be done eliminates ETW MP from consideration as a game I would play.
Welcome to the Org Kenchi Tib ~:wave:
As Puzz3D said, it's not allowed to post names of people suspected of cheating in the MP game at the Org.
Posts containing names of people suspected of cheating in the multiplayer game. This clause has been much debated; its purpose is to avoid fruitless controversy. No conclusive proof on anyone cheating in the multiplayer game can be obtained or presented. Therefore, the staff and the majority of the patrons (approximately 70% voted in favor) feel that it is for the best to avoid making accusations; even if truthful, their inconclusiveness will probably lead to "flame wars" which are inconvenient to the forum and its every patron. Keeping of private "cheater blacklists" is allowed, indeed encouraged, but The Guild does not wish to be the medium for such. (Note that in the case of "name posting", the staff will often make an exception and edit out the name rather than deleting the entire message.)
I'll delete the names you mentioned and the steam ID, but the rest of the information can stay. Thnx for sharing this with us.
:bow:
Kenchi_Tib
04-15-2009, 18:16
lol then my topic isn't useful so you can simple delete it all thx
do units gain rank in battle? not sure if that is enough to explain 5-6k in variance.. but i think ive seen my troops gain ranks in battle.
I couldn't have been your friendly neighborhood Cheater! I only cheat on single player. :clown:Seriously, I haven't gotten ETW yet, but I have some questions on regards to the cheats. Are they similar to the other Total War games with console stuff, the cheats I used the most were money, quick building/training, and giving traits (some other stuff occasionally, but these four are my most important).
Megas Methuselah
04-15-2009, 20:39
The next patch is suppose to eliminate the possibility of players adjusting unit prices for online play. :shrug:
Kenchi_Tib
04-15-2009, 21:26
do units gain rank in battle? not sure if that is enough to explain 5-6k in variance.. but i think ive seen my troops gain ranks in battle.
yes they gain rank when they kill enermies. In this battle my enermy had all ranks before the fireing started. I have proof of it on the replay but I'm not allowed to post replay url here cuz of .org policy :(
t1master
04-15-2009, 21:53
nc i'm positive i saw your troops lose rank last night... :laugh4:
btw, are ghoorkas available to prussia?
Kenchi_Sulla
04-15-2009, 21:56
Watched the replay.... it's even to obvious... I tried recreating his army and couldnt get the four arty and three light dragoons he was using...
We all know its possible at this moment, we all know there are people out there who WILL use these exploits.
Now it just needs fixing. I believe they promised next gameplay patch.
It sucks, I know but there it is.
The game is still fun Puzz3d, its good.... and it will get better. Its your loss if you let a couple of immature cheaters ruin your fun.
Kenchi_Tib
04-15-2009, 22:16
btw, are ghoorkas available to prussia?
yes, Ghoorkas are available for all factions on early period. (and you need the special forces edition)
nc i'm positive i saw your troops lose rank last night... :laugh4:
~:cheers:
after 4 years of not seeing any of your ugly faces my troops broke rank on the way to the battle and ran to the bar to catch up on old times... after a few strong drinks were had by all.. they ran to catch up.. by the time most of our armies made it to the field they were exhausted and drunk!.. some of elmos troops wernt even wearing pants! goat and i staggered back and forth.. some of our troops got lost in the woods and some couldnt even climb over a fence! we lost badly the first battle.. but i blame it on the booze... and the sight of elmos's pantless troops.. they are the reason cajuns troops kept looking back instead of watching the enemy!
I have also watched the replay although i understand the needs for policy in this case there is conclusive evidence in the form of a replay.
People who cheat ultimately ruin the game and therefore the community, many of us have been avid fans of the TW series for over 9 years now and my opinion is that if you can supply a replay the cheat should be named and shamed this will protect us all and deter people from cheating
I must stress that conclusive evidence would have to be provided for this to happen
after all a forum is for the benefit of the community and i cant think of many better ways of serving the community than exposing cheats
Regards
Subadai
The game is still fun Puzz3d, its good.... and it will get better. Its your loss if you let a couple of immature cheaters ruin your fun.
These people, whether they be cheaters or exploiters, waste your time as do game bugs and imbalances. You cannot get that time back. Giving up the fun things I do now, which do not require me to waste my time, to play ETW which will require me to waste my time would be a loss. If the game is fixed, which appears to be unlikely, I'll consider buying it. Les Grognards, which will be out soon, might be a good alternative to ETW for large scale, online, land battles.
t1master
04-16-2009, 06:41
lol you haven't played tw since the shogun mod for mtw, which very few played. it was good, but it's the same old story puzz. hang it up man. you will never be satisfied unless you make your own game, and even when you do, it's still not good enough...
you haven't played empire, and i doubt you played ntw for mtw, which empire is very close to, but yet you squat down and take a dump on the game based off one replay that nobody else(save subadia) here has seen of some retard hacking the game.
:balloon2:
edit: added the name of subadia who's seen the replay, but no replay has been posted
I completely don't understand why org is not allowing on putting cheaters name here.
Only good way on them is
1. reveal their nicks
2. boycott them
3. kick them from games.
Tib showed unquestionable evidence and I don't understand policy that do not allow us to know who is cheaterish a...e.
Its possible to gain experience during combat but its impossible to gain 5 - 6 k. And units mentioned by Tib are costing more than 10 k without any upgrades.
btw Tib - could you send me his nick and steam ID on PM?
t1master
04-16-2009, 09:43
i forgot.... :laugh4:
good game tonight nc. been a long time, but had much fun!!!!
Jochi Khan
04-16-2009, 13:29
I have also watched the replay although i understand the needs for policy in this case there is conclusive evidence in the form of a replay.
based off one replay that nobody else(save subadia) here has seen of some retard hacking the game.
edit: added the name of subadia who's seen the replay, but no replay has been posted
A replay was posted but it appears to have been deleted.
I downloaded and played the replay so have seen what Kenchi_Tib has posted about.
The downside of ETW games and replays....you don't see the name of the player just the Faction name.
On the end of battle (victory/defeat) screen you see only your own name but not the other players name.
This also applies to replays but with a twist.
If you install a replay received from someone else. When you play it the end screen shows 'you' as the main player. This cant be right surely?
To conclude.....it would make it very difficult to prove who did what unless there is a log file (Host, Attackers, Defenders, Faction, Units selected etc) somewhere like we used to have in the other TW games. Up to now I have been unable to find one.
lol you haven't played tw since the shogun mod for mtw, which very few played. it was good, but it's the same old story puzz. hang it up man. you will never be satisfied unless you make your own game, and even when you do, it's still not good enough...
Money cheat was fixed in MTW, and now it's back? LOL My standards are too high because I hold CA to the standard they set with the first TW game? You paid me a compilment, and you don't even realize it. LOL
t1master
04-16-2009, 15:22
:laugh4:
edit: i know it, the circles are easy to spot here yukki, you don't even have to go up in an aeroplane...
A replay was posted but it appears to have been deleted.
I downloaded and played the replay so have seen what Kenchi_Tib has posted about.
The downside of ETW games and replays....you don't see the name of the player just the Faction name.
On the end of battle (victory/defeat) screen you see only your own name but not the other players name.
This also applies to replays but with a twist.
If you install a replay received from someone else. When you play it the end screen shows 'you' as the main player. This cant be right surely?
To conclude.....it would make it very difficult to prove who did what unless there is a log file (Host, Attackers, Defenders, Faction, Units selected etc) somewhere like we used to have in the other TW games. Up to now I have been unable to find one.
So anybody could post a certain replay showing a player X who cheats and accuse another player Y as "the cheater"?
So far for "replays are conclusive evidence" then...
Kenchi_Sulla
04-16-2009, 19:51
So anybody could post a certain replay showing a player X who cheats and accuse another player Y as "the cheater"?
So far for "replays are conclusive evidence" then...
Andres, this could happen, yes. For me, Tibs word is enough because I have known him for a few years now. For other people, I understand the hesitation.
Taking this into consideration and the absolute 0-influence I (should) have on org policy I think naming and shaming serves a function in the community. Ofcourse, there are other places where people could take there evidence so it isn't a big problem.
Would org allow naming and shaming if the evidence IS, in fact, conclusive?
I don't know how many people here actually play multiplayer games but hear this: There will not be a succesfull mp community or tournament structure untill A: CA fixes the issues with replays and logfiles (yet again, I agree) and B: people who do cheat are reported
Still love the game though :-)
Andres, this could happen, yes. For me, Tibs word is enough because I have known him for a few years now. For other people, I understand the hesitation.
My remark was just a general observation. I have no reason to doubt the word of your clan member and if I came across as if I didn't believe Tibs, then I apologise, because that certainly wasn't my intention.
It's just that apparently, even the replays (sadly) cannot offer conclusive evidence of cheating, so the current Org policy still makes sense.
Taking this into consideration and the absolute 0-influence I (should) have on org policy I think naming and shaming serves a function in the community. Ofcourse, there are other places where people could take there evidence so it isn't a big problem.
Would org allow naming and shaming if the evidence IS, in fact, conclusive?
That's not my decision to make.
However, speaking for myself and in my own, strictly personal opinion, I do believe that cheating ruins the fun for everybody else and I, personally, even as non MP-er, have zero sympathy for cheaters.
As such, if there would be a way to prove beyond doubt (without the possibility to fabricate such evidence) that somebody cheated in ETW MP, then I would be in favour of making an exception to the .org rule of not naming cheaters (e.g. by having a list of known ETW MP cheaters stickied here in the Redoubt).
I don't know how many people here actually play multiplayer games but hear this: There will not be a succesfull mp community or tournament structure untill A: CA fixes the issues with replays and logfiles (yet again, I agree) and B: people who do cheat are reported
True on both A and B. Just keep in mind that at this moment, naming cheaters at the Org is not allowed.
But, as I said, if there would be a way to get conclusive evidence of cheating in ETW MP, then I would certainly plead very hard for making an exception on the general rule for ETW MP.
I really hate cheating; it's bad sportsmanship in its' worst form.
Kenchi_Tib
04-17-2009, 01:17
Yeah you are right Andres. I watched the replay again today and the names doesn't show, not even after the battle when you view the "battle results". I can't find any good reason for CA/SEGA to not let us see the names in replays (and not even ingame). A lot of the good "standard" things we had in past games are just taken away :thumbsdown: hard to prove it now :(
@kenchi
could you send me the cheaters name please?
only I have enough wasted games from connection loss & I think I've experienced a cheater myslef, always nice to know If I can trust an opponent.
Thanks.
We should keep a list - in private, if the org doesn't allow it.
ArmaEtLorica Mongoclint
04-17-2009, 03:33
PM me the name please Kenchi, I had a noob cheater the other day myself and got so pissed, I forgot to write the name down when I quit.
Turbosatan
04-17-2009, 08:39
Without wishing to derail the thread, may I enquire if the various individuals who employ the famed "Brit Guard spam" tactic are in fact cheating, or merely boring & taking advantage of a kink in the game mechanics/unit cost balancing?
Only asking 'cos I've played a few games online now where I set up & look across the battlefield after pressing "end deployment", & then boggle, stare at my six units of line infantry, one cannon & two units of light cavalry, back at my opponent's array of life guards, coldstreams, black watch, green jackets & various other pretty pretty troops & go "No bazzing way..." (or words to that effect).
Of course, it doesn't help that I'm utterly feeble against another human & would probably lose were I to engage a single camel with ten units of Prussian Line Infantry, but there's definitely been a couple of occasions where I set up a "medium funds" battle where my opponent's British forces seemed somewhat bolstered...
Kenchi_Sulla
04-17-2009, 17:04
Without wishing to derail the thread, may I enquire if the various individuals who employ the famed "Brit Guard spam" tactic are in fact cheating, or merely boring & taking advantage of a kink in the game mechanics/unit cost balancing?
Only asking 'cos I've played a few games online now where I set up & look across the battlefield after pressing "end deployment", & then boggle, stare at my six units of line infantry, one cannon & two units of light cavalry, back at my opponent's array of life guards, coldstreams, black watch, green jackets & various other pretty pretty troops & go "No bazzing way..." (or words to that effect).
Of course, it doesn't help that I'm utterly feeble against another human & would probably lose were I to engage a single camel with ten units of Prussian Line Infantry, but there's definitely been a couple of occasions where I set up a "medium funds" battle where my opponent's British forces seemed somewhat bolstered...
Turbosatan, if you field six line units, one cannon and two units of light cavalry in a medium cash game you:
A - didnt spend all your money
or, more likely,
B - upgraded your units way to much
I can field 3 guards, 4 coldstream guards, 4 greenjackets (one with xp) and a lifeguard unit at medium settings...
About your comment of this being a lame army, try facing austria in a large money game :laugh4:
Seriously, fielding the best combination of units that stay loyal to the game is oke I think. Still, why field a core of line infantry (when infantry is your main component, and not a cannon, cav, sharpshooter with infantry as reserve combination) when you can afford at least some guard units. They simply squash same ranked line infantry units in a firefight because of the continous fire, better aim and better reload times.....
Turbosatan
04-18-2009, 10:03
Thanks for the reply, Kenchi_Sulla.
I'm beginning to see that having as many slots full as possible is the way to go, rather than spending money on upgrades.
Apologies for my ignorance.
Kenchi_Sulla
04-18-2009, 16:33
You have nothing to apologise for mate..... if you want to have some fun online, drop me a pm in steam (Kenchi_Sulla nick)... Perhaps we could shape you up a bit.
ps
you should have seen my first ever multiplayer game in MTW:Vi.... :oops:
To sum up - when you see cheater, do as much screens as you can.
Megas Methuselah
04-22-2009, 07:24
I play with the unplayable factions online, including Wurttemberg, Khanate of Khiva, Quebec, and the Powhatan Confederacy.
Does that make me a cheater? :inquisitive:
If you are not asking if you can play with unplayable fractions - I think it makes you cheater.
Megas Methuselah
04-22-2009, 19:05
Dang. I never ask. Thanks for the tip.
Tomisama
04-23-2009, 11:52
I play with the unplayable factions online, including Wurttemberg, Khanate of Khiva, Quebec, and the Powhatan Confederacy.
Does that make me a cheater? :inquisitive:
What would be the advantages gained from playing the unplayables?
Edit: At land or at sea?
It's not so much the advantage as the ability to modify/change the game, it immediately makes people suspicious that more changes have been made(I was in a game where people accused someone of cheating for choosing non-orig. faction, even though he lost and all the units were normal)
thats why asking if its okay is a nice thing to do imo, just to reassure people
It's not so much the advantage as the ability to modify/change the game, it immediately makes people suspicious that more changes have been made
agreed.. simple solution is to unlock them through an official patch at the same time they fix version control... then everyone is happy
:juggle2:
Simple Tomisama.
You know what stats have enemy units, while enemy doesn't know your stats.
vBulletin® v3.7.1, Copyright ©2000-2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.