Requirements to validly test a fraps of a death cam.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

#1 Sound card... audigy one or above is a must as game sounds give positions away and you must be able to hear what they may be hearing

#2 Video card... you must be able to watch it/record it with shadows on and all settings cranked or low

#3 At least 2 systems video it. Once pc may see it different then another due to settings. Have at least one with high settings and one with low. Fraps only records what you see, not actually how the players see's it so you need a mix.

#4 For matches and ladders... outside source that is impartial and not part of the ladder to review it.

#5 For your own servers at least 2 to 3 to watch it, and a PUBLIC ban list where the video can be downloaded, so even the one accused can reply and see what they are beeing accused of. Also IP address and in-game name.

Those of you that were with GR1 know i have watched a lot of replays and the above is a must

[}PW{ Postal]

The only thing i would question is the sound card. Some might say that an X-FI card should be required. That way your guaranteed to hear what the top systems are hearing and there would be no question about it. Atleast with an X-FI card you can hear minimum sounds as well as maximum but with lesser cards your not gonna be able to scale it past its limits. Just a thought.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

The only thing i would question is the sound card. Some might say that an X-FI card should be required. That way your guaranteed to hear what the top systems are hearing and there would be no question about it. Atleast with an X-FI card you can hear minimum sounds as well as maximum but with lesser cards your not gonna be able to scale it past its limits. Just a thought.

Trust me, you can hear very well with an audigy xgamer.. but i do say creative should be the standard and you should turn eax on, on the sound card (creative playcenter) when testing (eax in game is different)

Not every admin can afford an xfi but at 50$ the audigy xgamer should do you. Note i ain't saying the se version , usb, or realtech onboard sound either.

Edited July 25, 2006 by ROCOAFZ

[}PW{ Postal]

I am sure you can hear very well with an Xgamer. My only concern is can the xgamer card or comparible cards hear what an X-FI card user does? I have no means to test this but to me its a very relevent point. If the lesser cards can hear exactly what an X-FI card can then yes..i would say thats good and be on my way but i dont know and have my doughts. Its just that when it comes down to someones reputation i think the standards should be at the max for the reviewer.

I guess at this point its more a question than a statement....Can a lesser card like the xgamer hear exactly what an X-FI does?

[ROCO*AFZ*]

I am sure you can hear very well with an Xgamer. My only concern is can the xgamer card or comparible cards hear what an X-FI card user does? I have no means to test this but to me its a very relevent point. If the lesser cards can hear exactly what an X-FI card can then yes..i would say thats good and be on my way but i dont know and have my doughts. Its just that when it comes down to someones reputation i think the standards should be at the max for the reviewer.

I guess at this point its more a question than a statement....Can a lesser card like the xgamer hear exactly what an X-FI does?

I am thinking for walk and run, the sound difference would be very similar and since i know currently i can track someone with the xgamer it should be similar.

[}PW{ Postal]

Thats cool...Just want everything to be fair..well as fair as possible..lol

It is funny that you had posted this topic though...me and my clan were just discussing it last nite.

[zulater]

#4 For matches and ladders... outside source that is impartial and not part of the ladder to review it.

You're not going to get this no matter where you go. Impartial to the match yes as I would not review replays that my team participated in. However, to have reviewers that were not in the league is extremely difficult to do. up until the end of GR the people reviewing were playing on other teams.

This is to say if someone is going to give a good review they probably play or had played many many hours of the game. And all things considered people can make good sound judgements wether they know the player or not.

[ROCO*AFZ*]

#4 For matches and ladders... outside source that is impartial and not part of the ladder to review it.

You're not going to get this no matter where you go. Impartial to the match yes as I would not review replays that my team participated in. However, to have reviewers that were not in the league is extremely difficult to do. up until the end of GR the people reviewing were playing on other teams.

This is to say if someone is going to give a good review they probably play or had played many many hours of the game. And all things considered people can make good sound judgements wether they know the player or not.

Not to bring this into the mix... but do you remember the old skool vs new? do you remember our guy getting accused (the fraps video of the replay in GR1)? Did you know I had to tell him i was recording him on vent saying his judment picked our guy out because of arguments in the forum with our guy to get him to apoligize for openly accusing us in the forum at tcz. It pays to record coversations with others when dealing with delicate matters that i know are bs because i was there.

I was on the hill dead, watching the guy come up the hill and giving our guy exact directions. (Gr1 Caves)

It is better to have impartial... or enough of a mix that aren't friends / enemies with the clans judging it that it will end up being fair should be a better way to word it.

Only time we were ever accused that i know of on TCZ.

Edited July 25, 2006 by ROCOAFZ

[ToW-Angel]

Basically saying is that we need an UNBIASED appraisal of SS's, Replays, Fraps and the other items we use to combat cheaters.

1 person's say should not be the one taken, it should be a group consensus of each and every report on saying if a person is cheating or not.

Whatever it is we use, we should always evaluate each piece of evidence that is given by not being biased because this is a friend of a friend, friend, relative or otherwise.

Just because 1 person says someone is cheating, isn't enough evidence to prove one way or another.

[FI_FlimFlam]

Unless there is absolutely no other way to catch cheaters I will always vote no to accepting FRAPS as definitive evidence for a community ban list. I don't care if a server admin bans locally for someone that was FRAPS'd on their server but I am mostly against it for shared banlists.

1) In most of the fraps videos, it's very subjective as to whether it is absolutely without a doubt proof positive of a person cheating. Just look at these supposed requirements that someone must do to be able to evaluate it. Addittionally factor in the problems with the client side synching with the server and lag and you have a recepie for disaster and guaranteed arguments.

2) Evaluations of FRAPS videos almost always ends up being "evaluated" by a select few which again IMO leads to less objective input and discussion. It is also easier for one or a few people to abuse their status of evaluators. It is also easier for agendas to roll in smaller groups. The argument of having "impartial" evaluators is going to be hard whenever you limit the people who are "approved" to evaluate the video.

I feel that the potential of mistakes and potentially innocent people landing on a community ban list is much higher if fraps are approved as an accepted primary medium for cheat submissions.

I understand if it is the only tool that server admins will have if GRINs AC remains half baked. If that happens I see it as being open for review among all AC community members (qualifing as a member will have to be determined) and not limited to a handful of people. Secondly, people have to keep in mind that only ABSOLUTELY PROOF POSITIVE cases should be voted yes to. If there is even a reasonable doubt or possibility it is something else it should be voted against adding to a community ban list. The problem with this game is going to be the utter inconsitency with things from sound, to lag, to rendering, to client animation synching are going to make that extremely difficult.

I strongly caution everyone in regards to FRAPs with this game.

[zulater]

#4 For matches and ladders... outside source that is impartial and not part of the ladder to review it.

You're not going to get this no matter where you go. Impartial to the match yes as I would not review replays that my team participated in. However, to have reviewers that were not in the league is extremely difficult to do. up until the end of GR the people reviewing were playing on other teams.

This is to say if someone is going to give a good review they probably play or had played many many hours of the game. And all things considered people can make good sound judgements wether they know the player or not.

Not to bring this into the mix... but do you remember the old skool vs new? do you remember our guy getting accused (the fraps video of the replay in GR1)? Did you know I had to tell him i was recording him on vent saying his judment picked our guy out because of arguments in the forum with our guy to get him to apoligize for openly accusing us in the forum at tcz. It pays to record coversations with others when dealing with delicate matters that i know are bs because i was there.

I was on the hill dead, watching the guy come up the hill and giving our guy exact directions. (Gr1 Caves)

It is better to have impartial... or enough of a mix that aren't friends / enemies with the clans judging it that it will end up being fair should be a better way to word it.

Only time we were ever accused that i know of on TCZ.

Nice of you to leave out the fact that the guy throwing out accusations was not related to the TCZ quality assurance team (anti-cheat).

When reviewed by our QA team your guy was exhonerated because the people reviewing them WERE impartial. (some reviewers played on the opposing team so finding a hack would have benifited us)

What I'm saying is that our staff is impartial and no matter where you go the staff is (99% of the time) going to be playing the same game.

[Pulaski]

I don't think fraps will work, unless something has changed. Fraps files will be huge. I once had one that was 2gb for a match. (maybe my settings were wrong) Plus you would need to frap more then just the one player, maybe he's on comms with a few friends(one of his friends are dead and watching through the eyes of another player) The smart hackers are not going to make it easy to get busted.

Edited July 26, 2006 by Pulaski

[ROCO*AFZ*]

#4 For matches and ladders... outside source that is impartial and not part of the ladder to review it.

You're not going to get this no matter where you go. Impartial to the match yes as I would not review replays that my team participated in. However, to have reviewers that were not in the league is extremely difficult to do. up until the end of GR the people reviewing were playing on other teams.

This is to say if someone is going to give a good review they probably play or had played many many hours of the game. And all things considered people can make good sound judgements wether they know the player or not.

Not to bring this into the mix... but do you remember the old skool vs new? do you remember our guy getting accused (the fraps video of the replay in GR1)? Did you know I had to tell him i was recording him on vent saying his judment picked our guy out because of arguments in the forum with our guy to get him to apoligize for openly accusing us in the forum at tcz. It pays to record coversations with others when dealing with delicate matters that i know are bs because i was there.

I was on the hill dead, watching the guy come up the hill and giving our guy exact directions. (Gr1 Caves)

It is better to have impartial... or enough of a mix that aren't friends / enemies with the clans judging it that it will end up being fair should be a better way to word it.

Only time we were ever accused that i know of on TCZ.

Nice of you to leave out the fact that the guy throwing out accusations was not related to the TCZ quality assurance team (anti-cheat).

When reviewed by our QA team your guy was exhonerated because the people reviewing them WERE impartial. (some reviewers played on the opposing team so finding a hack would have benifited us)

What I'm saying is that our staff is impartial and no matter where you go the staff is (99% of the time) going to be playing the same game.

Truthfully i don't know who is on your team... but he talked like he was. In fact he said he is one of the reviewers. Anyway, just an example... If i remember right it was thrown out before it went to review after he posted the apology.

Other than that i have never had any issues with the way TCZ handled things.(except forum spam lol)

People develop opinions of other people or squads. It's best to have one's that have no prior issues or friendships with the squad that is being reviewed.

Edited July 26, 2006 by ROCOAFZ