Jump to content


E X P O S E D


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
19 replies to this topic

Lil_Dimitry #1 Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:32 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 2318 battles
  • 202
  • Member since:
    12-07-2014

 Edited.


Edited by Asklepi0s, 14 November 2017 - 04:01 PM.
This post has been edited by the moderation team due to Naming and Shaming


cragarion #2 Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:36 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 41791 battles
  • 2,164
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

You don't get instantly banned it depends on the offence, if its your first offence, and stuff like that,

without checking i think first offence is a warning, second 6 month ban, 3 perma ban.



BravelyRanAway #3 Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:46 PM

    General

  • Beta Tester
  • 22194 battles
  • 8,096
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    12-29-2010

View PostLil_Dimitry, on 13 November 2017 - 08:32 PM, said:

 Hello fellow forumites, you might remember this thread http://forum.worldoftanks.eu/index.php?/topic/649817-edited-streming-with-tundra/#topmost   ?

 

 

 

  Well our lovely tundra user is back, not only he's not banned (even though he was reported trough support) but he somewhat managed to outwit one of our recruiters and got into s3al, he got kicked 30 minutes later when I actually saw the guy (that's what top clans do to cheaters btw).


 

https://i.imgur.com/GeMjwBK.png


 

 

  He actually changed his name not long before that and I'm guessing he wants to get into another clan for the campaign.


 

  If you want to not have a cheater in your clan, keep an eye opened for this guy.

 

Thanks for the heads up.......see you in six months when you can post again, as WG always shoot the messenger. :trollface:

japtank #4 Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:51 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 27611 battles
  • 1,046
  • Member since:
    04-20-2012

You know, if WG only improved some unpleasant features of the interface, we wouldn't have these endless discussions.

Tundra?

I don't like that mod because the landscape is ugly and takes away from the immersion. But shooting at a thin red silhouette against moving foliage? Seriously? How realistic or fun is that?

How hard would it be to make the outline more distinctive, or to lighten the foliage around the center of the reticle so we actually see where we're shooting?

We've all gotten used to it over the years, but frankly, I still think it could be improved and thus cut the grass under the ..err.. tundra, so to speak.

 

Another example: auto-aim cheat.

Well, it hasn't been a cheat for years, the mod is still listed on these very boards, but on whim someone at WG decided it would now be a bannable offense and the target is only selected once you hover your mouse over the target after having right-clicked anywhere you want.

Gimme a break!

Right-clicking on a target should never be an exercise in frustration and I'm not here to play some point-and-click game, I can't even blame the guys using auto-aims or aimbots just to get that basic thing done.

 

I would even go as far as saying WG design team is lazy.

Earning billions and coming up with so little improvements over the years gives a new meaning to 'milking the cash cow' IMHO.

 

So before blaming the players or the mods, first question why the need to mod exist and more often than not it's because the game interface is lacking.

 

*fireproof suit on*



Lil_Dimitry #5 Posted 13 November 2017 - 09:57 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 2318 battles
  • 202
  • Member since:
    12-07-2014

View Postjaptank, on 13 November 2017 - 10:51 PM, said:

You know, if WG only improved some unpleasant features of the interface, we wouldn't have these endless discussions.

Tundra?

I don't like that mod because the landscape is ugly and takes away from the immersion. But shooting at a thin red silhouette against moving foliage? Seriously? How realistic or fun is that?

How hard would it be to make the outline more distinctive, or to lighten the foliage around the center of the reticle so we actually see where we're shooting?

We've all gotten used to it over the years, but frankly, I still think it could be improved and thus cut the grass under the ..err.. tundra, so to speak.

 

Another example: auto-aim cheat.

Well, it hasn't been a cheat for years, the mod is still listed on these very boards, but on whim someone at WG decided it would now be a bannable offense and the target is only selected once you hover your mouse over the target after having right-clicked anywhere you want.

Gimme a break!

Right-clicking on a target should never be an exercise in frustration and I'm not here to play some point-and-click game, I can't even blame the guys using auto-aims or aimbots just to get that basic thing done.

 

I would even go as far as saying WG design team is lazy.

Earning billions and coming up with so little improvements over the years gives a new meaning to 'milking the cash cow' IMHO.

 

So before blaming the players or the mods, first question why the need to mod exist and more often than not it's because the game interface is lacking.

 

*fireproof suit on*

 

 

 

   Autoaim+ was always a cheat, just a legal one, just like xvm is.


 


 

  If your poor understanding of the game and the mechanics behind it requires you to "not play a point and click game" so you install a cheat mod then you should get banned, permanently. Same goes for the "need" to install a mod that removes all foliage so you can easily ignore any object that people who don't use that shitty mod will have trouble aiming trough.


 

 If YOU think it's not a cheat and if YOU enjoy using a mod that doesn't mean I or anyone else should have it, personally I think autoaim should be removed as a whole so people actually have to aim but hey, we all can't get what we want.


 


 

 Plain and simple, you cheat, you should get banned.



speedphlux #6 Posted 13 November 2017 - 10:02 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 42006 battles
  • 1,661
  • [TZAR] TZAR
  • Member since:
    01-28-2011

When I read the title of the topic, I was hoping to find some titties in here, but ... nah.

 

Huge disappointment !



Balc0ra #7 Posted 13 November 2017 - 10:10 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 62806 battles
  • 14,399
  • [WALL] WALL
  • Member since:
    07-10-2012

View Postjaptank, on 13 November 2017 - 09:51 PM, said:

I don't like that mod because the landscape is ugly and takes away from the immersion. But shooting at a thin red silhouette against moving foliage? Seriously? How realistic or fun is that?

How hard would it be to make the outline more distinctive, or to lighten the foliage around the center of the reticle so we actually see where we're shooting?

 

They have. If you get a silhouette, you are aiming at the target. If it goes away, something is blocking your shot. If you still get it and nothing happens. You hit the ground below it. It's not that complicated. If you are 30m behind a bush to get concealment, you should not see anything. If you wanted to see something, them move up. You can't have great cover around you and full awareness. You trade one for something else. As it should be IMO.



BravelyRanAway #8 Posted 13 November 2017 - 10:11 PM

    General

  • Beta Tester
  • 22194 battles
  • 8,096
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    12-29-2010

View Postspeedphlux, on 13 November 2017 - 09:02 PM, said:

When I read the title of the topic, I was hoping to find some titties in here, but ... nah.

 

Huge disappointment !

 

Look a little closer.

Junglist_ #9 Posted 13 November 2017 - 10:48 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35132 battles
  • 1,297
  • Member since:
    06-17-2013

View Postjaptank, on 13 November 2017 - 08:51 PM, said:

You know, if WG only improved some unpleasant features of the interface, we wouldn't have these endless discussions.

Tundra?

I don't like that mod because the landscape is ugly and takes away from the immersion. But shooting at a thin red silhouette against moving foliage? Seriously? How realistic or fun is that?

How hard would it be to make the outline more distinctive, or to lighten the foliage around the center of the reticle so we actually see where we're shooting?

We've all gotten used to it over the years, but frankly, I still think it could be improved and thus cut the grass under the ..err.. tundra, so to speak.

 

Another example: auto-aim cheat.

Well, it hasn't been a cheat for years, the mod is still listed on these very boards, but on whim someone at WG decided it would now be a bannable offense and the target is only selected once you hover your mouse over the target after having right-clicked anywhere you want.

Gimme a break!

Right-clicking on a target should never be an exercise in frustration and I'm not here to play some point-and-click game, I can't even blame the guys using auto-aims or aimbots just to get that basic thing done.

 

I would even go as far as saying WG design team is lazy.

Earning billions and coming up with so little improvements over the years gives a new meaning to 'milking the cash cow' IMHO.

 

So before blaming the players or the mods, first question why the need to mod exist and more often than not it's because the game interface is lacking.

 

*fireproof suit on*

 

You just want the game easier that's all it is nothing to do with lacking interface.

What game do you wanna play aiming too hard, right click autoaim too hard and even red line outlining the tanks behind bushes is still not enough either? Just do yourself a favour and go play on consoles or mobile games with aiming support if PC games are too difficult for you



cragarion #10 Posted 14 November 2017 - 12:12 AM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 41791 battles
  • 2,164
  • Member since:
    07-10-2010

View Postspeedphlux, on 13 November 2017 - 10:02 PM, said:

When I read the title of the topic, I was hoping to find some titties in here, but ... nah.

 

Huge disappointment !

 

i can see some :trollface:

Tomotorqemada #11 Posted 14 November 2017 - 03:59 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 13268 battles
  • 388
  • Member since:
    03-21-2017
Like - Really?? A personal flippin hunt gainst 1 guy out of MILLIONS which WG is banging bout on every corner? Really worth an effort to open a topic?))))))

mathwat #12 Posted 14 November 2017 - 06:21 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16494 battles
  • 465
  • Member since:
    11-03-2011

OP I think he got a 7 day ban before he changed his name, he last played on th 5th November before that.

 

Got him added on wot app to see if he got banned.


Edited by mathwat, 14 November 2017 - 06:23 AM.


Dr_ownape #13 Posted 14 November 2017 - 09:49 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 40613 battles
  • 5,143
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    03-27-2013
He posted an application to join us yesterday lunch time with another name change.

mathwat #14 Posted 14 November 2017 - 10:05 AM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 16494 battles
  • 465
  • Member since:
    11-03-2011

View PostDr_Goombah, on 14 November 2017 - 08:49 AM, said:

He posted an application to join us yesterday lunch time with another name change.

 

And he’s paid all that gold for nothing people still know who is :trollface:

Lil_Dimitry #15 Posted 14 November 2017 - 11:57 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 2318 battles
  • 202
  • Member since:
    12-07-2014

View PostDr_Goombah, on 14 November 2017 - 10:49 AM, said:

He posted an application to join us yesterday lunch time with another name change.

 

 

 

 

 

 Nice, hopefully he won't get in any decent clan for the campaign.



BravelyRanAway #16 Posted 14 November 2017 - 12:48 PM

    General

  • Beta Tester
  • 22194 battles
  • 8,096
  • [H_I_T] H_I_T
  • Member since:
    12-29-2010

View PostDr_Goombah, on 14 November 2017 - 08:49 AM, said:

He posted an application to join us yesterday lunch time with another name change.

 

So....not ideal.:P

Igor_BL #17 Posted 14 November 2017 - 12:50 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 35524 battles
  • 1,032
  • Member since:
    06-10-2015

I like the fact he wasnt banned.
and the first post on that topic was erased by mods.

 

CHEATING: allowed

NAMING AND SHAMING: forbiden

 

GREAT JOB WG



ZlatanArKung #18 Posted 14 November 2017 - 03:28 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 1529 battles
  • 5,112
  • Member since:
    12-20-2014

View PostIgor_BL, on 14 November 2017 - 12:50 PM, said:

I like the fact he wasnt banned.
and the first post on that topic was erased by mods.

 

CHEATING: allowed

NAMING AND SHAMING: forbiden

 

GREAT JOB WG

 

It is just WGs flawless automated system at work. 



jabster #19 Posted 14 November 2017 - 03:56 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 12516 battles
  • 21,687
  • [WSAT] WSAT
  • Member since:
    12-30-2010

View PostIgor_BL, on 14 November 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

I like the fact he wasnt banned.
and the first post on that topic was erased by mods.

 

CHEATING: allowed

NAMING AND SHAMING: forbiden

 

GREAT JOB WG

 

If they didn’t play for seven days that suggests they were indeed banned for a first offence. The second is permanent.

Asklepi0s #20 Posted 14 November 2017 - 04:01 PM

    Moderator

  • Moderator
  • 4976 battles
  • 802
  • [WG_M] WG_M
  • Member since:
    01-23-2017
This thread has been closed by the moderation team due Naming and Shaming.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users