Accept livestream footage as report evidence

Referring to https://freestylersworld.com/showthr...=1#post1075489 as an example.

I only watched a bit of it but it looks like macro to me too. However though, the report doesn't get considered because only f11 replays get accepted.

To me it doesn't make sense because f11 is never more convincing than live gameplay is, in my opinion it should get considered and not just declined. Maybe it should only get accepted under certain circumstances (POV from the reported player for example).

Please vote in the poll wether you agree with me or not.

Edit: cant add the poll somehow.. Reply your thoughts about it.

the only problem is that game moderators cant spectate anyone but the player.

In certain circumstances like above where it is obviously apparent then in my opinion is yes it should be accepted as evidence.

If someone uploaded a YouTube video of them using lawmower for example showing their character name but no one ever actually reported them with a F11 recording im pretty sure we'd ban the user as it's blatently obvious they are breaking the rules.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Notorious

In certain circumstances like above where it is obviously apparent then in my opinion is yes it should be accepted as evidence.

If someone uploaded a YouTube video of them using lawmower for example showing their character name but no one ever actually reported them with a F11 recording im pretty sure we'd ban the user as it's blatently obvious they are breaking the rules.

---

Yeah like, I wonder what value would an f11 record add to the report in the above situation? That's why I find it strange..

Usually with a f11 recording we can see multiple players perspective. A youtube video or a livestream vod only shows one side. There are different variables that could void such evidences. There are times where users will experience a lot of client side bugs/quirks, for example spike or lag, maybe only you are experiencing "x player lagging" or maybe you are the one lagging. With a vod/clip it only shows your perspective, but with a f11 replay it shows the server side more than client side. Whenever we recieve ingame replay(f11), we can relay that evidence as what is actually happening in-game(server-wise) instead of what is happening in front of one person's monitor(Client-side).

As mentioned by MrMistersir above it only shows one players view point. When looking through replays we want to see both players perspective to find the best solution. Also Youtube videos and Livestreams can be altered so therefore we do not accept them as replays in reports.

Adding to mister & tony, streams and youtube videos can be altered, thus f11 is the best way to check the reports.

I didnt specify it but I'm not talking about spike reports. I'm talking about reports about stuff like macro, hitbox, aimfix etc. If you don't get enough info from the live stream thats a ok reason to decline it. But it not being considered at all seems weird to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganggbangg

I'm talking about reports about stuff like macro, hitbox, aimfix etc.

---

Which are also easier to spot from live gameplay than a replay

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ganggbangg

I didnt specify it but I'm not talking about spike reports. I'm talking about reports about stuff like macro, hitbox, aimfix etc. If you don't get enough info from the live stream thats a ok reason to decline it. But it not being considered at all seems weird to me.

---

Like I said above, I was using spike as an example, there are more variables and benefactors in client side than server side. Big one is animation cancel, in which user experiences a lot, mostly with TBF macros. Animation cancel shows to the user on the monitor but through the game file (replay) it could show different. I don't know if you find this valid enough answer but, replays are always more superior due to the fact that it is a game file.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrmistersir

Like I said above, I was using spike as an example, there are more variables and benefactors in client side than server side. Big one is animation cancel, in which user experiences a lot, mostly with TBF macros. Animation cancel shows to the user on the monitor but through the game file (replay) it could show different. I don't know if you find this valid enough answer but, replays are always more superior due to the fact that it is a game file.

---

replays always show animation cancels.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrmistersir

Like I said above, I was using spike as an example, there are more variables and benefactors in client side than server side. Big one is animation cancel, in which user experiences a lot, mostly with TBF macros. Animation cancel shows to the user on the monitor but through the game file (replay) it could show different. I don't know if you find this valid enough answer but, replays are always more superior due to the fact that it is a game file.

---

https://media1.tenor.com/images/86f3...itemid=4486363

Replays are literally one of the most bugged functions on gunz. You can't even see where a player is aiming when hes moving, the spread on a replay is different from the live gameplay spread. I could go on lol.

I'm sorry but I can't take your comment serious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mrmistersir

Like I said above, I was using spike as an example, there are more variables and benefactors in client side than server side. Big one is animation cancel, in which user experiences a lot, mostly with TBF macros. Animation cancel shows to the user on the monitor but through the game file (replay) it could show different. I don't know if you find this valid enough answer but, replays are always more superior due to the fact that it is a game file.

---

It's already been mentioned but I'm going to add to it.

Take a replay watch the shotgun spread, pay attention to the pattern and where each pellets lands, screenshot it. Now give that replay to your friend have him/her watch that replay, have them pay attention to the pattern and where each pellet lands, now have them screenshot it. Compare both screenshots, chances are they'll be different.

Jack Rifles, there was a time when used that thy would produce NO pellets spray on replays therefore highly used when aimfixing as on a F11 replay you'd find it very hard to accuse someone of aimfixing since there's was no pellets to follow. Again another F11 replay evidence flaw.

The thread was started showing a live stream of a user who was also showing which key strokes were used, looking at the video you can see he's performing actions without using the appropriate keys that he has mapped for such things as spacebar for 'jump'.


Yes protocol states only F11 replays can be used as evidence but in cases where especially with macros it's can be hard to determine if someone is macroing due to not actually knowing there 'skill set', so people get away with things like late dash & dash break macros because they are moves that can be performed without macroing, I think a live recording ESPECIALLY with keystrokes being shown can be used as evidence to take action against a user who macroing in particular.

behold, your trials for staff

https://media.giphy.com/media/YRuFix...xpmX/giphy.gif

theres a reason why frag movies get made from other ppl's replays.. its because it looks good. the only reason it looks good is because its bugged as fuk, making the movement nicer than it normally should be.

ya'll need to accept livestream evidence, as thats more natural.

It can be additional evidence and evidence for flaming, kick abuse, avoiding death.

even with f11 records hard to find macros, we need to deep look at players movements(player chase) also players perspective(player mouse view)
the most important thing is sound and slow/speed motions to identify macros.

I like to suggest: every match should have MACTH ID CODE(it will auto records the game) from CP staffs can access it
^I know this thing is hard to code if we have more than two developers or a perfect team we can do it maybe for the new generation :?

Hi Ganggbangg,

Thanks for the suggestion.

We are happy to accept livestream footage for evidence going forward, however it may or may not be legible and accepted as evidence.

Example:

The reports we will accept as evidence from livestream:

• Insulting/flaming
• Advertising
• Spamming
• Macroing
• Obvious hacks

We will still consider it for reports such as UC/OC and so on, but we may require F11 replay(s) too.

Note: We have the right to decline an evidence from a livestream if we believe it's not to our standards (720p quality etc).