Jump to content

Ban appeal


  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1
bow

bow

    Newbie

  • Registered User
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Battlelog:http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/soldier/BOW_DOWN_TO_MOI/stats/1055523832/pc/
battle report that resulted in ban http://battlelog.bat...152/1055523832/

banned by FST-Rigor, I believe it's him because he was the only admin in the server at the time of my ban

stated reason for my ban is that my stats apparently don't match the number of hours I played

admin continually asked what is my alt account. this is the only account I ever played bf4 on

having read other ban reports on this forum, I realize that you guys believe that some players are too good for the number of hours played. First of all, my stats aren't very good. Also, I have put 400 hours into bf3 on PC, another couple hundred hours into bf3 on PS3, and countless hours of BC and BC2 on PS3. I don't believe my stats are suspicious in any way.

#2
PC Gamer 753

PC Gamer 753

    "Retired"

  • Head Admin
  • 446 posts
Hello Bow, thank you for taking the time to create an account and file an appeal!

From Internal Records:
Banning Admin (Via RCON Listing): PC_Gamer_753
Date and Time Banned (Server time): 2016-08-16 04:37:28
Given Reasons: Suspicious Stats Per 24/7 Fair Play and iStats. Stats Don’t Match Hours. Appeal @ Low-key.us {753}
Date Ban Lifted(?):
Internal Forum Report Filed?: YES
----------------------------------------------------

As the banning admin on this ban, I received numerous in game player complaints about you. That led heavily into the consideration for this ban.

Next taking a look at your latest up to date stats, they show you currently have only 290 Hours in BF4, with a 3.37 K/D. This is flagged in yellow on 24/7 Fair Play.

Speaking of your BF3 stats, I actually find them equally suspicious as your BF4 stats. Listed on 24/7 Fair Play, you have 417 Hours logged. Looking at the weapon break down over roughly 90% of your weapons ever used are marked as better than normal in KPM.

Seeing SO many weapons flagged like this leads quickly to generating an overall picture that something might be up with these stats.

And finally, after looking up your name in BF4 AND BF3 i-Stats you are marked as Suspicious on BOTH of your accounts.


i-Stats BF3 Account: LINK: Marked as Suspicious
i-Stats BF4 Account: LINK: Marked as Suspicious
24/7 Fair Play: LINK


The main deciding factor for me here is that BOTH of your accounts, BF3 and BF4 statistics are flagged and marked as suspicious stats via i-Stats.

And very last, looking at bf4stats.com's reports page, here we can see that you have been doing quite remarkably for 290 hours.
For example:
Zavod 311: 100 Kills - 18 Deaths. Report

bf4stats.com -- Reports

In conclusion, as far as our ban goes unless you can get both of your battlefield stats (BF3 and BF4) unflagged as suspicious from i-stats.net, the ban will remain in place.
"Retired"
PC Gamer 753

#3
bow

bow

    Newbie

  • Registered User
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Battlelog:http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/soldier/BOW_DOWN_TO_MOI/stats/1055523832/pc/
How can you base my ban off of my 3.37 k/d? It's not THAT high of a k/d. Also, if you look at what I get kills with, you will see that I play a LOT of vehicles. I'm going to assume you are experienced with battlefield 4, so you should know that it's not that hard to post high k/d ratios with vehicles.

In terms of my bf3 stats, I don't even think my kpm is THAT high, I believe I'm averaging around 3 kpm for a lot of my weapons, If you or the stats engine believe that it's a high kpm, I can only say that I got bf3 sometime last year when origin was giving away free copies of bf3. By that time, the only servers that ran bf3 were 24/7 noshahr canals tdm servers. I don't know if you have played on these servers, but it is extremely easy to grind out a large number of kills in a short period of time. All the weapons you or the stats engine believe to be suspicious of were used during 24/7 tdm.

You used fairplay as a source against my legitimacy as a clean player. I already talked about the issues of using k/d as a tool for cheat websites. The only other statistics that are marked yellow in my player stats are score per minute and the kills per minute on the glock 18. The score per minute is relatively high because I'm pretty much using XP boosters all the time;  I think recording score per minute with the XP booster is flawed because it doesn't accurately portray my real score per minute. For the kills per minute on the g18, I pretty much made it a goal since bf3 to have a high kills per minute on this weapon just for fun. This means that I NEVER hold the g18 out unless I'm using it to kill someone. Using this method, ANYONE can increase the kills per minute on a weapon.

You said you used istats as the main deciding factor that I am a cheater on both BF3 and BF4. I have looked at istats, and my opinion on this cheating website is the same as it is on fairplay; it does not use a good job of using statistics to oust cheaters. I will start with my BF3 stats.
The 2 weapons I used that are flagged as suspicious on that website are the G18 and 870mcs. The suspicious statistic on the G18 is kpm/exp.kpm. Again, I may be getting more kills per minute than the expected number of kills per minute because I am minimizing the time I hold the G18 out. The suspicious statistic on the 870mcs is accuracy. This is a shotgun; it records accuracy in a way that the accuracy is increased if more people are hit per shot, which isn't hard to do because of the spread and number of pellets from a shotgun. The same applies to the conspicuous statistic on the Saiga12k, another shotgun. The Scar-H, M249Saw, Type88 LMG, PDW-R, A-91, M27 IAR, and M4A1 are marked as conspicuous in terms of kpm/exp.kpm. I have already talked about how easy it is to grind out kills on noshahr canals TDM, and I have used all of these weapons in that scenario. As for the conspicuous accuracies for the M40A5 and the M98B, I have nothing else to say except I have practiced sniping religiously on BF3 and I can say that I am a decent shot with a bolt-action. I suppose if you want to see "non-suspicious" accuracies for bolt-actions, you can look on my BF4 stats and see that with the L115, my most used bolt action rifle with 275 kills, I am shooting at 39% accuracy, which the site does not think is suspicious or even conspicuous.
As for BF4, the only suspicious stats I have are the kpm/expkpm on the G18 and the accuracy on the 870mcs. I have already made my arguments on those two cases, I don't want to repeat myself. The ONLY conspicuous statistic I have on weapons used is the M82A3 because I am killing enemies on 83.8% of my hits. Obviously this high of a kill/hit percentage is impossible on any other weapon, but this is the 50cal we're talking about. If not for the fact that I have hit lightly armored targets with this weapon, I would have a 100% kill/hit percentage because the M82A3 is a one-shot kill for infantry. The other conspicuous statistic I have for BF4 is score per minute, and I have already talked about XP boosters.

You finally point out my performance on BF4, saying that I have been doing "quite remarkable for 290 hours." I feel like this should be a compliment, as this implies I am doing good for how little I have played, but you view it as a cause for suspicion of hacking. In my first post, I have already talked about how experienced I am as a player; I have been playing since the first Bad Company on PS3, and I might as well mention I have countless hours on Call of Duty and other such shooters. Also, 290 hours is NOT a short amount of time. Think about it; if I have been playing this "remarkable" for this long, wouldn't I have been caught by fairfight? I won't mention PBbans because I am aware of how poor it is at catching cheaters. Of course, you referred to my statistics in sites such as fairplay and istats, and I have defended myself as a clean player. You point out that I have went 100/18 on Zavod 311. You have referred to a single battle as a source of suspicion. Let me ask you; haven't you had a round in which you performed extremely well? And what if based on that one single round that is a complete misrepresentation as what kind of player you are, someone bans you for that round. How does that make any sense? I cannot find that specific round, so I can't defend myself in this exact situation, but I'm going to tell you right now that 100/18 is not even that insane. And that 100/18 equates to a 5.56 k/d, which is much higher than my lifetime k/d of 3.37.

You end your argument by saying that I need to be labeled non-suspicious in both my BF3 and BF4 accounts. What kind of demand is that? I haven't even touched BF3
in several months, and the statistics in BF3 and BF4 were accumulated over 400 and 290 hours, respectively. Do you want me to enter games and intentionally underperform to lower my statistics?

I hope you read my response thoroughly, as I believe I have refuted your arguments in your response to my ban appeal. If you have any other reasons for believing I am a cheater, let me know. Otherwise, I will maintain that I have been wrongfully banned.

#4
PC Gamer 753

PC Gamer 753

    "Retired"

  • Head Admin
  • 446 posts

View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

The score per minute is relatively high because I'm pretty much using XP boosters all the time;  I think recording score per minute with the XP booster is flawed because it doesn't accurately portray my real score per minute.

Correct, your ban wasn't based off of SPM. That stat is easily manipulated.

View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

You said you used istats as the main deciding factor that I am a cheater on both BF3 and BF4. I have looked at istats, and my opinion on this cheating website is the same as it is on fairplay; it does not use a good job of using statistics to oust cheaters.

24/7 Fair Play and i-stats run off of the exact same global statistics provided by bf4stats.com. Each engine uses different parameters to determine what stats are higher than normal. i-stats generally catches outlying stats before 24/7 Fair Play does. In a few hundred hours of game-play or so you will more than likely be flagged as suspicious on 24/7 for your bf4 stats as well.

View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

The suspicious statistic on the 870mcs is accuracy.
Correct, your ban wasn't based off of this stat.

View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

You finally point out my performance on BF4, saying that I have been doing "quite remarkable for 290 hours." I feel like this should be a compliment, as this implies I am doing good for how little I have played, but you view it as a cause for suspicion of hacking. In my first post, I have already talked about how experienced I am as a player; I have been playing since the first Bad Company on PS3, and I might as well mention I have countless hours on Call of Duty and other such shooters. Also, 290 hours is NOT a short amount of time.

View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

I feel like this should be a compliment, as this implies I am doing good for how little I have played

View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

Also, 290 hours is NOT a short amount of time.
Okay? You just told me in the exact same paragraph, that you acknowledge how little you've played...and then say that you've been playing a long time?


View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

Think about it; if I have been playing this "remarkable" for this long, wouldn't I have been caught by fairfight? I won't mention PBbans because I am aware of how poor it is at catching cheaters.

Absolutely not, being banned by fairfight or pbbans is often a shot in the dark. We all as admins have seen cases of OBVIOUS blatant hackers and hacker stats that haven't been banned by fair-fight or PBbans


View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

I cannot find that specific round, so I can't defend myself in this exact situation, but I'm going to tell you right now that 100/18 is not even that insane. And that 100/18 equates to a 5.56 k/d, which is much higher than my lifetime k/d of 3.37.

Then what would exactly be considered insane? From every single member in this community I can think of I don't think any of them have hit 100 kills ever, with a mean playing time for each member of well over 800 hours.

View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

You end your argument by saying that I need to be labeled non-suspicious in both my BF3 and BF4 accounts. What kind of demand is that? I haven't even touched BF3
in several months, and the statistics in BF3 and BF4 were accumulated over 400 and 290 hours, respectively. Do you want me to enter games and intentionally underperform to lower my statistics?

Of course not. This would mean, getting in contact with i-stats.net and asking for a re-evaluation or explanation of why both battlefield 3 and 4 statistics are flagged as suspicious.

View Postbow, on 29 August 2016 - 03:57 AM, said:

I can only say that I got bf3 sometime last year when origin was giving away free copies of bf3. By that time, the only servers that ran bf3 were 24/7 noshahr canals tdm servers.

This is probably the biggest lie of everything you've said.
BF3 Conquest Servers LINK
As you can see, there are well over 45 Conquest Large servers in BF3.  I'm not saying you didn't exclusively play TDM, but trying to sell that there were ONLY TDM servers....no....But I digress.


My final thoughts here.

You keep talking about how experienced you are at this game, you have pointed out that you are a good shot with the sniper rifles while playing BF3 TDM ... and how you basically only played TDM in BF3... You then point out that you are very good in vehicles in BF4 and have lots of prior experience in doing so....How? by playing TDM in BF3 that runs off of an entire different game engine? Or from playing on console with entirely different controls?

None of this makes any real sense half of what you typed up contradicts what you have typed in the same posting.

You are explaining to me why your stats for specific highlighted guns are so high, when quite frankly I don't care if any of them were highlighted or not. If it says your overall stats are suspicious then that is for you to sort out with i-stats.net.

Finally, looking in-depth even more it's pretty apparent other clans and servers have had similar problems with the exact same issue with you, raising even more red flags meaning that more reputable admins have thought the exact same as I have.
One simple example being TBG Clan. Report LINK

I mean I'm not really sure what to say here....what you've said in your post raises more questions then it does answer.

And where exactly have I said I based your ban completely off K/D?

I mean...maybe if you had read everything posted you would see that the given reason for the ban is clearly labeled in the ban appeal quick reply... "Suspicious Stats Per 24/7 Fair Play and iStats"

I also stated that more than K/D the in game player complaints everyone was typing against you weighed in as a deciding factor more than K/D.

Like I've said I think 3 times now its up to you, to sort out having your account flagged as suspicious with i-stats.


If you would like to come into our teamspeak and talk to me about this I welcome it. I'm usually around from 7-9P.M. Central U.S. Time.
You can look for a user named "PC Gamer 753", or If I'm not around I welcome you to sit idle in my channel named "PC's Department" until I arrive.

In fact I would actually prefer you do come into teamspeak and talk with me, simply because of all the questions surrounding this.
"Retired"
PC Gamer 753

#5
bow

bow

    Newbie

  • Registered User
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Battlelog:http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/soldier/BOW_DOWN_TO_MOI/stats/1055523832/pc/
more than happy to speak to you on teamspeak. sorry if my response wasn't the most clear. thanks for your time.

#6
bow

bow

    Newbie

  • Registered User
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Battlelog:http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/soldier/BOW_DOWN_TO_MOI/stats/1055523832/pc/
not sure how to join your team speak... can you give me the teamspeak address?

#7
PC Gamer 753

PC Gamer 753

    "Retired"

  • Head Admin
  • 446 posts
I gave the user Teamspeak information more than a week ago after he contacted me via Battlelog Messenger:

BOW_DOWN_TO_MOI added PC_Gamer_753
BOW_DOWN_TO_MOI
2016-08-29
hey pc gamer, it's bow. i just wanted to ask if you wanted to speak on teamspeak because you want to speak with voices? otherwise, i feel like communicating through battlelog is fine
there is also the issue that both of us may not be available at the same time on teamspeak, so leaving messages on battlelog is a better alternative, at least i think so
You
2016-08-30
Hello! Here is the teamspeak information, I am currently online if you wish to join
LowKeyGaming.typefrag.com:4845
BOW_DOWN_TO_MOI
2016-08-31
I never seem to be free when you're on teamspeak... do you think you could just leave your questions here so that I can answer when I have time?
---------------------------------------------

I can understand time conflicts and things of that nature, but given so much time has passed {especially with the holiday} I am rather surprised that no effort has been made to explain the questions that have arisen in the above postings, teamspeak or not.

For final clarification the reasons you were banned in order of weighted significance (From highest to lowest) are the following:
  • Substantial in-game player complaints from reputable players - prompted admin action {looking into stats}

  • BF3 and BF4 stats flagged as yellow suspicious on i-stats.net

  • Suspicious nature of 24/7 Fair Play stats, when both Bf3 and Bf4 stats are considered together

  • Similar occurrence of being banned by other reputable servers and admins - TGB Clan

  • Small amount of hours: (290) when compared to game scores: (100-18; 99~5; 80~7)
Battlelog
BF3 i-stats: Link
BF4 i-stats: Link
24/7 Fair Play: Link
bf4stats.com: Link
TGB Clan Report: Link


Personally I am not the happiest with the ban as a whole. While there is some evidence to be had it isn't exactly rock solid. But given the amount of player complaints against this user along side with the banning and reporting by a similar clan, I can only conclude that it would be in the best interest of LKG to keep the ban in place.

Besides this ban anyway, if the user followed the same similar pattern of going 100~18; 99~5; 80~7 in our BF4 server the user would have probably been banned anyway by another admin for running the tables, and or emptying the server out -- As we are not a MLG (Major League Gaming) grade server......the people who play on our server expect a level playing field.





At this point with all the reasoning more than explained (most being explained twice or three times over at this point) I am going to go ahead and close this topic.

I feel it is appropriate to close this topic because the only response I can see to this would be arguing and bickering or fighting about it.
"Retired"
PC Gamer 753

#8
PC Gamer 753

PC Gamer 753

    "Retired"

  • Head Admin
  • 446 posts
Ban lifted, welcome back any time!

Glad we got to sort things out in teamspeak!

Have a great fall semester of college!
"Retired"
PC Gamer 753

#9
bow

bow

    Newbie

  • Registered User
  • Pip
  • 5 posts
  • Battlelog:http://battlelog.battlefield.com/bf4/soldier/BOW_DOWN_TO_MOI/stats/1055523832/pc/
thanks man, appreciate it




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users