1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Become a member of PRTA today, fill out the application form here.
  3. Hey Guest, It'd be great if you'd consider making a small contribution here. All support is greatly appreciated!

Denied PR:BF2 Ban Appeal - ZED=11=

Discussion in 'Ban Appeals' started by ZED=11=, May 24, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Offline
    GLORYWINGS GLORYWINGS ''GLORYWINGS''

    LandZone

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2017
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    95
    Location:
    Landzone
    Squad Name:
    Glorywings
    PR:BF2 Name:
    GLORYWINGS
    I ment by watch
    I just watch admins asking zed
    And see if is he a hacker or not
    Lets see i respect admins to make this case denied or not
    Temur kindly close thread untill you denie it or approve it
  2. Offline

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    35
    PR:BF2 Name:
    ZED=11=
    same ,u should know game just for Instant fun then u forget what happen.
  3. Offline

    9ª Compañía de Infantería

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2018
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    95
    "thread unlocked for discussion", Inspect dixit.

    are you impliying that you don't remember what went through your head, then? If so, that means what you wrote is an invention...
  4. Offline

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    35
    PR:BF2 Name:
    ZED=11=
    u are not getting the point yet , i just said how i think when i play in general. the real invention, when u call someone a hacker and he can t even run another program while he is playing a game cuz his bad frames.
  5. Offline

    9ª Compañía de Infantería

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2018
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    95
    "2- 6 enemies roped on the wall they all crossed front of us.

    MG was on my back side from the road firing at me all the time firing at me ( I didn’t t see him)

    I moved my apc after I checked my back and saw the smoke

    Clearly when I killed 5 of them I know 1 guy left (2 dead on my right-1 on top of the bridge- 1 in the open near the road – 1 behind the fence barrier where I looked most of the time) and1 left alive

    If u are medic which 1 u going to revive ?"

    That doesn't seem very general to me.
  6. Offline

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2017
    Messages:
    31
    Likes Received:
    13
    Trophy Points:
    35
    PR:BF2 Name:
    ZED=11=

    its not general because u don t play like this , just anyone think different ban him
  7. Offline
    K-Massive K-Massive The Great Khan

    Joined:
    Jan 21, 2012
    Messages:
    46
    Likes Received:
    79
    Trophy Points:
    121
    Location:
    Finland
    PR:BF2 Name:
    K-Massive
    Can we just make Zed lead admin and go on?
    Lorfah, TabZa and agus92 like this.
  8. Offline
    GLORYWINGS GLORYWINGS ''GLORYWINGS''

    LandZone

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2017
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    95
    Location:
    Landzone
    Squad Name:
    Glorywings
    PR:BF2 Name:
    GLORYWINGS
    +1
  9. Offline

    PR:BF2 Senior Administrator

    Joined:
    Apr 12, 2016
    Messages:
    229
    Likes Received:
    280
    Trophy Points:
    131
    PR:BF2 Name:
    Inspect
    Promoted.
  10. Online

    Events PR:BF2 Resident Administrator AREA 94

    Joined:
    Sep 5, 2016
    Messages:
    398
    Likes Received:
    439
    Trophy Points:
    130
    Discord:
    CAS_ual_TY#4737
    PR:BF2 Name:
    CAS_ual_TY
    Doesnt this also say something about me?

    [​IMG]

    I am even more convinced now as well
  11. Offline
    fecht_niko fecht_niko POV Leader

    Joined:
    Oct 13, 2013
    Messages:
    544
    Likes Received:
    616
    Trophy Points:
    196
    Location:
    GER
    PR:BF2 Name:
    ARC*fecht_niko
    No one promoted you... You just made kissbanglove with Wicca, sold your soul and got thrown away like an ugly bitch in the morning... hehe
  12. Offline
    GLORYWINGS GLORYWINGS ''GLORYWINGS''

    LandZone

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2017
    Messages:
    235
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    95
    Location:
    Landzone
    Squad Name:
    Glorywings
    PR:BF2 Name:
    GLORYWINGS
    Hey its a ban appeal not a nightclub wall sticker
  13. Offline
    Temur Temur usitumbe mashua - hakuna matata

    Manager Community Dept. Lead Moderator PR:BF2 Senior Administrator Foxtrot

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,316
    Likes Received:
    863
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Occupation:
    Teacher / Charity Worker
    Location:
    Tanzania
    Squad Name:
    Temur
    PR:BF2 Name:
    Temur
    Thread closed, that's enough discussion for now.

    If anyone has anything they feel a burning need to say, PM one of the Senior Admins.

    Expect the outcome by the end of the weekend.
    DogACTUAL and GLORYWINGS like this.
  14. Offline
    Temur Temur usitumbe mashua - hakuna matata

    Manager Community Dept. Lead Moderator PR:BF2 Senior Administrator Foxtrot

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,316
    Likes Received:
    863
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Occupation:
    Teacher / Charity Worker
    Location:
    Tanzania
    Squad Name:
    Temur
    PR:BF2 Name:
    Temur
    ZED=11= The PRTA PR Admin Team has deliberated your appeal and reached a conclusion.

    Your appeal has been denied and we have found you to be in violation of rule 3.1 Do not use any form of an unfair advantage (ghosting, cheating, glitching etc.).

    You have been permanently banned from our servers and your PRTA membership has been revoked. You do not have the right to appeal this decision any further.

    We do not tolerate any form of cheating, and all evidence has been shared with other PR communities.

    Investigation Report to follow.

    Temur
    Dr_Evil, Inspect, mectus11 and 2 others like this.
  15. Offline

    PR:BF2 Resident Administrator Foxtrot

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2015
    Messages:
    102
    Likes Received:
    141
    Trophy Points:
    116
    PR:BF2 Name:
    Buttermilch25
  16. Offline
    Temur Temur usitumbe mashua - hakuna matata

    Manager Community Dept. Lead Moderator PR:BF2 Senior Administrator Foxtrot

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    1,316
    Likes Received:
    863
    Trophy Points:
    270
    Occupation:
    Teacher / Charity Worker
    Location:
    Tanzania
    Squad Name:
    Temur
    PR:BF2 Name:
    Temur
    Investigation Report: ZED=11=

    Background: On May 12 2018 player "DogACTUAL" published video evidence in which, he claimed, was evidence that player "ZED=11=" was using hacks/cheats/exploits to gain an unfair advantage in PR. More specifically, "DogACTUAL" claimed that "ZED=11=" was using a form of wallhack. His evidence was entirely set within Muttrah City round 2018_05_04_10_31_46_2_gpm_cq_64 on the PRTA | EU Modern Conflict Server.

    PRTA and other communities had already been monitoring ZED=11= from as early as May 5, the date of the first suspicious round.

    On May 20 "ZED=11=" posted a ban appeal on =HOG= Forums, which "=HOG=Haley11thAC", "Super_6__5__" and other =HOG= staff members dismissed, claiming there was 'zero doubt' that the player was hacking.

    On May 24 the PRTA PR Admin Team also banned "ZED=11=" and removed his PRTA membership status. He immediately made a Ban Appeal, as is his right, and the PRTA PR Admin Team took a second, closer look.

    From May 24 to June 1 the allegations were discussed across multiple community forums, both internal and public.

    On June 1 the PRTA PR Admin Team produced further evidence, this tie from Operation Marlin round 2018_05_04_12_00_12_gpm_cq_64, also on the PRTA | EU Modern Conflict server.

    A final vote was initiated internally within the PRTA PR Admin Team. The vote was concluded on Sunday June 3, with the verdict being that "ZED=11" was in fact using cheats/hacks/exploits to gain an unfair advantage.

    A number of issues arose which limited the effectiveness of investigations:
    • It became difficult, if not impossible to look at BR files prior to recent updates. All evidence gathered right up until June 1 had been from one isolated round. In order to negate this, Inspect put a lot of time and effort into getting us more evidence, giving us another full round to analyse.
    • Due to the allegations being public, the level of drama was unusually high, clouding some of the facts and making it more difficult to get to the bottom of matters. One particular problem was the level of personal hostility between "DogACTUAL", "ZED=11=" and other members of [LZ] clan. It became apparent that "DogACTUAL" had left/been removed from [LZ] and that bad blood between accusers and accused existed. This could prejudice the evidence produced. In order to negate this, the moderator team strictly controlled the flow of the relevant public threads, locking and unlocking them as appropriate. Some members were temporarily banned in order to keep things 'clean'.
    • Language - there was a clear language barrier which prevented the accused player from being able to properly defend themselves. In order to negate this, the Senior Admin team reached out privately to both accuser and accused and spoke to them directly, both over PM and via VOIP, working through matters slowly to ensure everything was understood.
    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Evidence:


    · Video 1 10:29

    o 1A 0:37 – 2:00


    § Engagement at corner of building. Killed by enemy right around corner.​
    o 1B 2:42 – 3:15


    § Engagement from behind air con unit, through trees towards guard house​
    o 1C 3:45 – 4:00


    § Engagement left down street towards T building​
    o 1D 4:10 – 4:25


    § Engagement in front, in opening by street​
    o 1E 4:35 – 5:30


    § Scoping ‘through building’​
    o 1F 7:28 – 8:16


    § Grenade Incident​
    o 1G 8:16 – 9:50


    § Engagement in gardens, chase, death​

    · Video 2 4:47

    o 1B – 1G, with Demo Analyzer​

    · Video 3 4:17

    o 3A 0:42 – 1:05


    § APC Engagement​
    o 3B 1:16 – 1:48


    § Engagement of Infantry on Roof​
    o 3C 2:22 – 2:45


    § Engagement of AA kit behind​
    o 3D 3:05 – 3:10


    § Engagement of soldier around sharp corner​
    o 3E 3:30 – 4:06


    § Engagement of HAT kit behind dumpster​

    · Video 4 1:02

    o 1A, with Demo Analyzer​

    · Video 5 5:29

    o 5A 0:02 – 1:04


    § Engagement of TOW and warehouse infantry with APC​
    o 5B 1:40 – 2:01


    § Engagement of infantry behind fountain​

    · Video 6 11:31

    o 6A 3:05 – 5:10


    § Engagement of warehouse smoke infantry with APC​
    o 6B 5:28 – 7:44


    § Watching of CAS behind mountains, engagement of CAS​
    o 6C 8:27 – 8:40


    § Watching of CAS behind mountains​
    o 6D 9:08 – 10:38


    § Watching of APC & Infantry down road behind smoke​

    · Video 7 1:01

    o 7A 0:00 – 1:01


    § Waiting for LAT to crawl out of cover​

    · Video 8 3:20

    o 8A 0:10 – 0:30


    § Engagement of infantry inside building with APC​
    o 8B 2:10 – 2:38


    § Aiming at Heli (in mountains) through wall​

    · Video 9 0:48

    o 9A 0:00 – 0:48


    § Moving towards area with lots of enemies​

    * 1A – 1B – 1C – 1D – 1F random moments I talked about it before.
    |1E checking the corner and street with my gun.

    |1G at 9:00 I kept a distance from the guy so he doesn’t surprise me on close range then I adjusted

    My pistol when I saw his head.

    *3A – 3B random moments I talked about it before.

    |3C I saw hat tracer crossed front of my screen then I tried to suppress him when my driver

    Moved away.

    |3D I used my coax to clear the smoke at 3:06 (no enemies in the smoke or behind it)

    And that guy on the corner was clearly front of my screen while my driver turning.

    |3E I explained my part and what happen nothing I want to add in page 6.

    *5A – 5B explained in page 6 (right click on the IMG link and view)

    *6A I putted indirect hit in the smoke to clear it then my driver backed up to avoid possible tow inside

    Second smoke.

    At 4:20 I hit the smoke and nothing happen to the guy unlike what DOG trying to show us

    (if I hit him he would be dead or we could see the HE rounds landed next to him because

    DOG paused this moment and moved immediately to the AR soldier)

    About 3 HE hit the small ledge when I start firing, the rest landed inside the smoke.

    5B – 5C I explained it at page 3 (I had a narrow angel towards the mountains)

    5D first time when my driver peaked I was watching the right side from the road and the AVVP left side

    Second time we only peaked a little off curse I`m going to look at the smoke

    (Both time I could kill it if I’m aware where is he why I would leave it firing at us?)

    (At 10:53 1inf guy next to me I didn`t aim at him or look)

    *7A it’s not clear for me in the clip why I stopped in the middle of the road maybe I saw him before

    running and start looking around (I don’t remember).

    *8A I m looking at the general T-shape from east side and the guy was visible in the window, I hit the

    Next window first because I m firing while we are moving.

    8B in AA the iron site from the left not in the tube

    Heli sound led me to her direction + I m moving slowly and checking mountains ( not looking directly at the cas)

    *9A I followed enemy gun sound

    (from 0:10 to 0:30 nade sound + rifle + AR )

    (at 0:30 1 guy was visible after I crossed the corner and close to me I didn’t looked at him before through the walls).

    First off, i now think it is very likely that zed used demo analyzer as his hack. That would explain some stuff that at first didn't seem to add up.
    Now to the incidents:

    • 1A: Preaiming running enemies, second time directly preaiming at stationary enemy. Note that the enemy coming around the corner that surpises and kills zed wasn't visible on demo analyzer wallhack (64 player limit probably), which adds to my theory. Would perfectly explain why he was caught so off guard and why his 'hearing abilities' suddenly failed.
    • 1B: Suspicious but not completely impossible since technically he could have caught a glimpse.
    • 1C: Nothing special at all, could be totally legit.
    • 1D: Maybe a bit suspicious since he seems to react to the enemy before possibly seeing him, but not conclusive, could be totally legit.
    • 1E: With DA it looks like he might look at a far off enemy through walls, but it is simply not conclusive enough, could just as well be checking the corner. Check the other moment at 3:27 though, very suspect how he reacts to the guy behind the car.
    • 1F: I mantain that there is clearly more going on than simply hearing footsteps, given his reaction and later actions.
    • 1G: Same story, very shady, his explanations for these moments simply don't add up as i already lined out in my long post on hog forums.


    • 3A: Doable with intel and/or sound check, cannon fire was audible.
    • 3B: A bit suspicious but possible, upper part of the guy was visible.
    • 3C: Surprised by the HAT since he never was looking into its direction, HAT just got to that position very recently. Quite suspicious that how after the failed shot he seems to know exactly where to shoot at, tracer excuse seems like a big stretch.
    • 3D: Something i left out of the timestamps which is very telling though looking at it now. Even before coming around the corner he already starts turning his turret towards the guy in anticipation, even though given his earlier statements he should be looking the other way since he said they were going to engage the AAVP they spotted earlier when they were at the construction site.
    • 3E: Smoking gun right there, all of his excuses simply don't add up. Very likely a pure panic reaction once he noticed it was an AT guy moments before he passed by.

    • 5A: Engagement of TOW completely normal and doable with intel or without. But shooting at the warehouse is very suspicious, his shots line up very accurately with the movements of the personel behind the warehouse. That's why his excuse of wanting to splash potential hidden enemies or the guy next to the water seem like a stretch, if he wanted to splash the guy near the water he could have simly splashed the corner of the wall next to the bench or the billboard. My guess it that he saw the enemies behind the warehouse wholely painted in green and forgot that it means they are not visible and assumed they were actually in front of the warehouse. Admins if you didn't do it already, please make a local server and recreate this moment yourself, you will see it doesn't add up. Don't trust his pictures, do it yourself.
    • 5B: Very suspicious, he even tried to defend himself by stating the fact that he didn't kill them(?), which only further reenforces my point though. From his perspective with the wallhack he probably couldn't tell if they were inside or behind the fountain and probably assumed they were inside. That's why it was very likely not intel given to him since then he would have splashed the grass otherwise.

    • 6A: First timestamp is somewhat suspicious but still plausible since he might have been splashing the bodies, but it seems by doing that he might have been trying to mask that he was actually intending to splash the guy in cover. Imo the second stamp is another smoking gun, his first shots land directly on the exact spot of the concrete barrier the guy is lying behind, that simply can't be a coincidence. If his goal was to splash inside the smoke he did a piss poor job, since the only thing those shots splashed was the water. Probably same thing as with the warehouse, didn't realize enemy was actually not visible. Right after he swerves off and puts some shots all over the place into the smoke which to me seems like a masking attempt after the fact when he realized he fucked up and shot an enemy that was completely in cover.
    • 6B: Plausible with sound checks and intel, but still sketchy how he seems to keep track of the general position of the helicopter and why he is not preaiming above the peaks. Not enough to draw any conclusions though imo. It seems he never directly aims at it.
    • 6C: Same.
    • 6D: Plausible, could have received intel on that APC, not very suspicious.

    • 7A: I started the recording right there, but i can tell you no, he didn't see that LAT before while driving. Also reenforced by his behaviour, he acts like he doesn't prioritize the corner while still checking it often, waiting for the LAT to become visible. I also think he didn't know it was a LAT and assumed it was a normal guy.

    • 8A: Somewhat suspect but still plausible since one enemy was partially visible before firing.
    • 8B: Nothing special, followed the sound of the rotor blades, caught a glimpse of the helicopter and then went back in cover and started preaiming. Completely possible. Only thing that is suspect is how leading up to that he seems to be able to tell the exact direction of the CAS by sound alone at certain moments, but it is not enough to make a conclusion.

    • 9A: I published this one mainly to show off the contrast of his gameplay when the wallhack shows noone is around in the vicinity, which is also apparent in the other videos at certain moments. His proponents and he himself made him out to be some really cautious player, who when behind enemy lines is always stopping and checking corners and preaiming them and closely listening to sounds. But here it becomes apparent that his gameplay alternates given certain conditions. Him moving towards the group of enemies is suspect but wasn't the actual focus of the video. Note how he doesn't even react to the approaching AAVP until it is too late and generally is just is running around without stopping, seemingly sure that noone is around the corner, quite careless compared to when the wallhack shows enemies are just around the next corner.

    Ok, that is all. All in all there are just too many 'coincidences' with his gameplay that round, coupled with the unexplainable moments and the shift in his behaviour when enemies are not in the vicinity, to me it is clear that he was using a hack. No matter what the admins decide, i am pretty sure he is not going to cheat again after this because of all the exposure he got from this affair.

    1. Tracking LAT through hills: https://streamable.com/lfn29
    If there's a LAT behind hill, normally gunners scan the area with thermals. ZED pre-tracks the running LAT kit through terrain and aims directly at him a few times.

    2. Tracking infantry through walls: https://streamable.com/byx45
    The first part of the video is just to set the scene, it get's better by the end. It's weird how he initially shoots inf behind the hotel, but never aims back there. And when the medic comes for a revive (behind cover) he pretty much knows it. Also notable is the way he moves his APC right when there's nobody close to the corner but stops as soon as the enemy change direction.

    3. Aiming through walls: https://streamable.com/6cpr2
    Typical gunner aims to spots where enemy actually could come. Not towards walls where there happens to be enemy behind.

    4. Sixth sense for LAT kits: https://streamable.com/2djmj
    Going up the hill, the T-building isn't apparently the obvious threat for the APC. Instead the gunner decides that it's more safe to aim 45 degrees to the left from the APC, and surprisingly there happens to be a LAT kit there.

    5. Pre-aiming towards tents: https://streamable.com/inh3u
    ZED just killed people down the road, and APC is driving towards them. Instead of aiming direct front, the gunner thinks it's better to aim towards a wall next to tent village. Only to find out later that there's enemies behind.

    6. Bush HE is too OP: https://streamable.com/dcvkt
    Or maybe if you have wallhacks, you know which specific bush to splash to? Also really fast inf spot in the beginning of this clip.

    7. HAT and LAT behind cover: https://streamable.com/1ooy5
    Feels a lot like the Muttrah round, doesn't it? Also that's really good shooting through smokes, considering that VBCI has thermal smokes.

    8. A few other highlight moments:
    https://streamable.com/sthhc
    https://streamable.com/7oydb

    I really know the effort inspect did to make those vids.

    The tracker: https://eu1.prta.co/servers/prbf2/tracker/index.html?demo=https://eu1.prta.co/servers/prbf2/1/tracker/tracker_2018_05_04_12_00_12_operation_marlin_gpm_cq_64_Modern Conflict.PRdemo

    Anyone can do the same for any player, just watch demo for him then record the most unexplainable moments (he is hacking).

    No one could know what in the player mind in that moment, what he is thinking

    we are watching a demo of someone from a different angel what the gunner , driver , ….. see actually in game then we judged him, its really not fair, more u edit and record it from a good angel, more people will believe it.

    nothing personal against inspect he just record what he saw.

    1-https://imgur.com/a/mAsA7n3 - 3:28:00 on the tracker.

    the guy completely visible for the driver view, I don t remember what happen but I m sure he spotted him running when he slows down and turned before I move my gun, then I kept looking slowly from the right (where he spotted him) to the left then the tank came and killed him (tank + our apc in the same squad) also we killed the same guy before in this area.



    2- 6 enemies roped on the wall they all crossed front of us.

    MG was on my back side from the road firing at me all the time firing at me ( I didn’t t see him)

    I moved my apc after I checked my back and saw the smoke

    Clearly when I killed 5 of them I know 1 guy left (2 dead on my right-1 on top of the bridge- 1 in the open near the road – 1 behind the fence barrier where I looked most of the time) and1 left alive

    If u are medic which 1 u going to revive ?



    3- u just did same what DOG done before , I’m moving my gun all the time u just paused and zoomed when its a good sight match.



    4- 1:04 the lat 100% visible for driver and 1:07 also visible to me.

    The T-shape full of inf I didn t fire single shot until I saw the guy at 1:15 completely visible also

    Then HE the whole floor.

    1:33 u completely changed the aim direction , I killed the guy at 1:43 when u zoomed in.



    5- 3:42:50 on tracker (1 FRIENDLY died in f7) here my driver take the right side from the road

    I start looking at the tents where he died



    6- hat was to easy to see when my driver moving slow

    The guy first is visible at 1:00

    1:23 I hit most of that area with HE then I HE d bushes and more HE where the guy was at 1:00



    7-we peaked and I looked at the hotel 0:01 the lat visible 0:08

    0:30 I m splashing same bushes line without a single enemy in it !

    0:39 when u zoomed in the guy feet visible only his upper side is hidden

    3:40:00 on tracker – 1:32 in the video when we fully went at the road I dropped smoke then see multiple enemies before the smoke fully dropped coax them first then HE but I didn t kill him cuz of the smoke blocked me as u can see from the tracker that guy in the video was already dead by someone else and the lat was in the smoke when he hit us how he see us and I didn t?

    splashed the whole wall next to him and damaged him.



    8_ a) the lat visible also all the time for driver he missed us and I turned my turret to our back side then I saw him

    b) 0:43 the guy visible .



    think I know now why the game is dying , because of stuff like this .

    wondering how many people got banned or stopped playing cuz of this moments didn t know how to explain it , same what is happening to me now.
    --- Double Post Merged, Jun 1, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 1, 2018 ---
    1 more thing , watch the tracker and speed it up
    and see how many enemies we crossed and didn t kill them or look at them behind walls


    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Analysis (Muttrah):

    "DogACTUAL"'s evidence from this round was flawed at times. Some of the clips either had misleading camera angles, did not show the entire situation properly, or were cut short prematurely. The lack of Demo Analyser was particularly frustrating.

    The BR was revisited internally by the Admin Team. A number of explanations for incidents were discovered that the original evidence could not show, presenting enough "reasonable doubt" to challenge the allegation of hacking. The accused player and his friends assisted with providing, privately, screenshots and alternative evidence which offered good explanations for some of the incidents. A number of the incidents were therefore dismissed as "insufficient".

    I will now analyse each incident individually, outlining the conclusions made:

    1A: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed not unusual for a player to pre-aim around that specific corner. Obvious potential location of enemies. No clear evidence of wallhacking, and player "ZED=11=" was killed by someone that would be obvious had wallhacks been used.

    1B: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for a player to immediately aim at guard house in such a manner. Some evidence of wallhack used in aiming through tree. No good alternative explanation given - player did not aim anywhere except for precise enemy location.

    1C: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed not unusual for a player to check down that road. Normal tactical awareness. No clear evidence of wallhacking.

    1D: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed not unusual for a player to aim around corner. Enemy in obvious location. Normal tactical awareness. No clear evidence of wallhacking.

    1E: Dismissed as borderline insufficient evidence - alternative explanation offered by accused was deemed to be plausible. Explanation was that player was checking around corner for enemies coming down the road. Explanation could not be dismissed, although evidence was very suspicious.

    1F: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for a player to predict arrival of enemies so accurately. Incident was re-created as far as possible with varying sound settings, highly unlikely that "ZED=11=" was able to hear enemies other side of building.

    1G: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed nothing unusual, normal tactical awareness, no clear evidence of wallhacking.

    3A: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed unusual for a player to predict arrival of enemy APC so accurately. No good alternative explanation offered - although accepted plausible that player could be using good intel. This plausibility meant evidence insufficient.

    3B: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed not unusual for an APC to spot enemies on roof. Normal tactical awareness demonstrated, no clear evidence of wallhacking.

    3C: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - enemy rocket clearly visible flying past APC. Deemed not unusual for APC to immediately turn and engage AA kit.

    3D: Maintained as borderline suspicious incident - deemed unusual for APC to predict enemy immediately around corner there. Suspiciously fast movement and engagement. Plausible that product of accidental over-turning by driver, but evidence suggests some use of wallhack.

    3E: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for APC to know exactly where HAT kit was. Alternative explanation of shadow under dumpster deemed insufficient - although shadow is visible, not possible to spot it whilst moving at speed. Good evidence of wallhacking.

    5A: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - original evidence failed to show enemy in closer position, alternative explanation that player was aiming at this enemy was deemed viable. Deemed "too idiotic to be true" that player using wallhack would try to shoot through large, obvious warehouse building in order to kill enemies behind. Enemy smoke obviously signified enemy presence. No unusual gameplay.

    5B: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed not unusual to engage fountain in this way. Clearly visible enemy running towards fountain for cover - reasonable explanation that accused suspected enemies were hiding behind fountain. Not unusual deduction to make.

    6A: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed not unusual to engage enemies in area, had been hotbed of enemy activity throughout round. Enemy smoke obvious - clear enemy position. No evidence of wallhacking.

    6B: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed highly unusual and very suspicious for APC to know exactly where CAS was and track them in this way. Clear evidence of wallhacking.

    6C: Maintained as suspicious incident - as above. Highly unusual for APC to track CAS movements in this way, even with good intel.

    6D: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - deemed not unusual for APC to pre-aim down this road. Enemy visible, normal tactical awareness evident. No clear evidence of wallhacking.

    7A: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for player to have such tunnel vision towards one enemy. Player clearly aware of enemy presence and exact location - clear evidence of wallhacking. Some attempt made to 'cover up' hacking.

    8A: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for player to so quickly engage the correct floor and window of large building whilst moving. Defendant's explanation not good enough. Some evidence of wallhacking.

    8B: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - defendant's explanation deemed valid. AA sights to left, not inside tube. Enemy helicopter visible when correct sight line followed.

    9A: Dismissed as borderline insufficient evidence - defendant's explanation deemed valid. Player moves towards sound of enemy gunfire. Normal tactical awareness, no clear evidence of wallhacking.

    Lots of incidents that were deemed "insufficient evidence" - but a number of incidents that are clearly suspicious. Player clearly proficient in covering up hacking / misleading investigators, but makes number of mistakes.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Analysis (Marlin):

    This evidence was much better, and Inspect deserves huge kudos for managing to get it. The incidents in this evidence are consistently more suspicious - player gets lazy in trying to cover up wallhacks. Some highly problematic scenes. Defendant could, on the whole, not offer good explanations for his gameplay.

    1: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for player to spot and track enemy so accurately through buildings. Defendant's explanation that driver could see enemy was deemed insufficient - not clear that driver would be able to see enemy. Enemy clearly behind undulated terrain when driver supposedly spots him - and APC is moving at speed. Very suspicious incident.

    2: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for player to continually check same area repeatedly, when area in question is not obvious location for enemy activity. Suspicious locating and tracking of enemies through walls, some evidence of wallhacking. Defendant's explanation deemed insufficient - plausible that initial engagement from MG does prompt defendant to pay attention to that area, but later tracks enemies closely through walls when they were not visible. Cannot be explained, good evidence of wallhacking.

    3: Dismissed as insufficient evidence - defendant's explanation plausible, video evidence was accidentally misleading. Not unusual for player to aim where he did - likely locations of enemy presence. Not evidence of wallhacking.

    4: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for player to so quickly and accurately locate enemy AT through barrier. Enemy clearly not visible to driver or gunner - inexplicable how gunner could know he was there. Defendant claims that enemy was visible to driver and gunner, deemed not plausible. Good evidence of wallhacking.

    5: Dismissed as borderline insufficient evidence - defendant's explanation plausible, friendly died at location towards which he begins to aim. Not unusual to be aiming that direction, no clear evidence of tracking enemy movements through walls. No clear evidence of wallhacking. However, when combined with incident 6, 5 looks more suspicious.

    6: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for player to quickly and accurately locate enemy position both at beginning and through tents. Some unusual tracking through walls, not normal tactical awareness. Good evidence of wallhacking.

    7: Maintained as suspicious incident - deemed unusual for player to quickly and accurately locate enemy positions in all engagements. Particularly unusual to locate and engage enemy through thermal smoke - good evidence of wallhacking.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Evaluation:

    Despite the technical problems limiting evidence gathering to only two rounds, there are enough suspicious and inexplicable incidents in those two rounds alone to raise serious doubts as to the integrity of the defendant. Yes, there are a number of incidents that can be explained or that are insufficient to clearly show evidence of hacking, but we have seen time and time again that it is very easy to conceal use of hacks/cheats. Even viirus could have 50+ kills, 0 death rounds and his replays would not clearly show hacking.

    It is a very fine line between "good at the game" and "using wallhacks". In this case, we believe player "ZED=11="'s gameplay, at times, suggested wallhacking rather than just good gameplay. That is not to say he isn't also good at the game - there are many occasions which can be explain as good gameplay. But there are simply too many coincidences and too many suspicious kills.

    Incidents 3E, 6B, 6C, 7A, 1, 2 and 4 were particularly damning. They are not the only suspicious incidents, but they are the most alarming. The defendant was unable to offer up reasonable explanations for his actions in those moments.

    We have worked very hard with accuser, accused, admin team and others to ensure we arrived at the correct decision. Player "ZED=11=" was given every opportunity to clear his name, provide alternative evidence and give good explanations.

    I want to make it absolutely clear that we never want to ban players for hacking. It is always an unfortunate thing and it always creates unwanted drama. At no point did any member of the PRTA Admin Team seek to have ZED=11= banned. We do not operate in that way.

    We sought only to collect as much evidence as possible, weight it all up, discuss it, debate it and analyse it closely, then evaluate whether or not it showed evidence of hacking.

    In this case, unfortunately, the team overwhelmingly agreed that the player was hacking.

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    ZED=11= DogACTUAL If either of you have any complaints about the handling of this case please submit them to PRTA Management.

    I am confident that we can all now draw a line under this and move on. If the fallout from this reaches a point where members of the community are being harassed, bullied or unfairly attacked, the moderator team will take action.

    I also want to make it absolutely clear that [LZ] clan as a whole is not under suspicious at this time. They remain good friends of PRTA and welcome members of the community. We operate on "innocent until proven guilty", and will continue to operate in this way.

    This thread will remain open so that people can continue to discuss the case. Inciting of drama will not be tolerated.

    - Temur
    Camel, DogACTUAL, Halgesson and 3 others like this.
  17. Offline

    9ª Compañía de Infantería

    Joined:
    Jan 14, 2018
    Messages:
    133
    Likes Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    95
    "another one"?
    --- Double Post Merged, Jun 3, 2018, Original Post Date: Jun 3, 2018 ---
    I really want to congratulate the admin and management teams on the featured professionalism depicted throught this process.
    Camel, DogACTUAL and Halgesson like this.
  18. Offline
    BubblyNinja BubblyNinja 乇乂ㄒ尺卂 ㄒ卄丨匚匚

    Resident Moderator PR:BF2 Resident Administrator Media Team Foxtrot

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2015
    Messages:
    436
    Likes Received:
    527
    Trophy Points:
    161
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    PR:BF2 Name:
    BubblyNinja
    [​IMG]
    Doc, Woxbel, agus92 and 2 others like this.
  19. Offline

    PR:BF2 Resident Administrator Foxtrot

    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2017
    Messages:
    248
    Likes Received:
    216
    Trophy Points:
    120
    PR:BF2 Name:
    terrry
  20. Offline

    Joined:
    Jun 27, 2015
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    21
    Location:
    Hamburg, Germany
    PR:BF2 Name:
    Halgesson
    Outstanding investigative work, well done!


    I had no doubt Zed was hacking since the very first time I watched the evidence, it's nice to know he won't be able to play again in the biggest servers in our game.

    I personally believe the whole LZ clan needs to be watched not only for possible hacking activities but simply for being exactly what we do NOT want in this community. You can see by yourself, every single post in this thread coming from LZ is filled with insults and are extremely aggressive. Not once they tried to be civil and use logic. All of this without mention the members' attitudes in game. THEIR problems are always someone else's fault. I have never made a single good experience with LZ clan and I sincerely hope they take this incident as a hint and perhaps work on becoming something else.


    As a guest admin on another community, I always need to be impartial. But I have zero respect for this clan.


    Please note that this post is based on my personal opinions and not representing any communities :wink:
    Lorfah and DogACTUAL like this.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page