Tabasco

Member
  • Content count

    103
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

34 Positive

About Tabasco

  • Rank
    PMC operator
  1. Scavs are Brutal on Low Gear players

    So you're not using the term aim bot the way most people use it are you? Most people equate aimbots with ai that one shot you.
  2. Scavs are Brutal on Low Gear players

    ...? What? I just gave you a way to prove your point. I have no idea what you mean by this.
  3. Scavs are Brutal on Low Gear players

    If they were aimbots, I wouldn't have hours of recorded footage in which scavs get flanked, and do not turn around. The problem with people who call the scav aimbots, is that they refer to anecdotes of times where they get one-shoted. The problem with anecdotes arethey are often embellished / incorrect / incomplete accounts of what happened. Moreover the people who complain about these "aimbots" rarely ever have accurate perspective on the ratio of times they get one-shot. They just remember the times they get one-shotted, and forget / ignore all the other times. So no, they're not aimbots. If you want to prove they're aimbots, record three games in a row, and if they 180-headshot you three times in a row, you'll have a case. It won't happen. But there's your method for which you can show us wrong.
  4. Countercheating measures

    ???
  5. Countercheating measures

    Okay, this needs to stop. I've seen people reference these reddit posts here, and on reddit, and on discord. All of these such posts are from the watermark period. That should in and of itself make you at least pause: because during that period you got insta-banned for posting anything about the game outside of the official forums. Many of these thread creators, you will see if you read through the responses, were simply not aware / dilligent with regards to the NDA policies. Some of these users clearly didn't know / fully understand the NDA rules, as evidenced by the statements within the thread itself. Here's another often-linked example: Except if you read the post, the guy states that he discussed the issue outside of the official forum "Yeah I agree that's a valid statement, I just know personally that there is no reason I could of been banned, other than what someone just recently commented about discussing the game outside of the forums." It's pretty clear that when these reddit users begin their thread with "I didn't do anything wrong", that these do not constitute evidence for an anti-cheat working in the slightest. They constitute players who, in all likelihood (and sometimes by clear admission) posted a pic, video, text, or whatever, outside of the forums. Again, if all of these posts are from the watermark period, your instant conclusion shouldn't be "oh hey, this must be evidence of anti-cheat working". The same is true for the post you just linked. A user isn't going to just come out and say "yeah I broke the NDA let me back in", and you can tell by his evasive responses that he has the same problem as the link I gave. He simply asserts he did nothing wrong: but asserting this is simply his interpretation of what he did. He, again in all likelihood, spilled the beans about the game somewhere.
  6. Countercheating measures

    The hell are you on about? First off, you wrote "Thank you for your comprehensive Counter-cheating measures report I see your independent team are diligently producing an effective countermeasure to the problem we are having in game." I responded to you asking for a reference to what you mean "comprehensive report", because this post is neither a report, nor is it comprehensive. I'm still waiting for this "comprehensive report".
  7. Countercheating measures

    Please link to me what you just read, because I know it wasn't this thread. This isn't even a report. A comprehensive one? Link PLEASE, because all I see is a statement. He made a claim that the AC is working. In other news, PR person for company X says company X is awesome. Does that surprise you?
  8. Countercheating measures

    How about we get some proof of these supposed ban waves?
  9. Escape from Tarkov at GamesCom 2017

    When EA execs take to the stage at game shows like E3, a lot of gamers sigh when they use industry buzz terms or over-inflate things. I get that PR is a thing, but this is a little much: 1) Quests, definetly the highlight of the stream, but the way you phrased it sounds like a car salesman showing me that the windows come with the car. "Quest givers"... you mean the traders? Who are already in the game? "Rewards"? You mean like what every quest has at the end of it? I cringed at reading the way you put it. 2) Cool 3) Cool 4) ??? From memory, really don't recall this, but cool if it was there. 5) Come on dude... a "view of" ? We saw placeholders. We didn't see anything showing progress on these fronts. 6) Cool, though doubtful these will actually be practical given the nature of the game.
  10. Escape from Tarkov at GamesCom 2017

    What do you mean by show a quest in action? It would literally be going into customs and killing 3 scavs. One quest had kill 15 scavs and extract from customs. That's pretty basic, there's nothing to show.
  11. Scav on scav

    I'm under the impression ai scavs won't aggro if you kill a player scav.
  12. Spawning in late

    Is it as s scav? If so that is normal. As a pmc it wouldn't be normal
  13. Details and screenshots of the Scav gameplay

    So I've been reading the back and forth on this and I just thought I should chime in on this point. I'm someone who wants a scav mode. Regarding your point here however, this strikes me as a semantic word game rather than a real point. I understand you want to trip him up with "well you wanted hardcore didn't you? So here's some more hardcore". The thing is though, hardcore =/= unfair advantage in the way scav mode allows it. Hardcore to me means things like 1 life only, risked gear, on-point shooting mechanics, emphasis on player learning/experience, etc. The problem with scav mode is the problem that everyone with eyes can see: it's the reason they had to put a cooldown on it. If you knew nothing else about what scav mode was, only that it was a 1-per-hour mode, you'd think "huh, there's something OP about that mode". For me the main argument for scav mode is what Drakaar pointed out, sometimes you just don't want the "loss" worry when you play. The way I see it, then, why not just allow scavs but WITHOUT them keeping their loot? Or, someone above said they are worried about scavs having gamma containers, why not give them gamma containers ONLY. So something like: Allow scav mode They can only keep loot that is in their container Have a scav levelling system where you start out with a 2x2 container and work your way up to 2x3, maybe 3x3 This way: New players will have a place to learn against humans and not just AI You can play without the fear of loss Players who think scavs have an unfair advantage (which they do) at least won't be able to get M4s/heavy armor-risk free, the most scavs will actually keep are salewas, attachments, helmets and pistols
  14. Preparations for the next update release

    I upgraded from a gtx 780, and seeing as how an rx480 is ~ a 1060 with higher vram, I was in the same boat as you, though I was getting about 24 fps on customs and that was with eight gigs of system ram. That's pretty disappointing though that amds latest performs that poorly.
  15. Details and screenshots of the Scav gameplay

    Thanks, I can't believe I glossed over that. About the debate of the legitimacy of scav mode, what do you say to the point about their being an imbalance of risk between non scav players and scav players? It doesn't seem fair that one has something to lose while the other stands only to gain.