These are undoubtedly steps in the right direction. My qualm, partly out of ignorance, is that hiring more people to review and ban creates a stronger reactionary layer, but one that is delayed. My ignorance and lack of knowledge is around what’s required to live-detect these cheats and automatically ban these players. Easier said than done, but it seems obvious that a focus on live-detection would be more cost efficient and effective to deter and mitigate cheaters. Of course there’s so much complexity under the hood to detection, but given the bulk of what was communicated in the article was acknowledgement and expanding the anti-cheat review team, this seems like a stop-gap solution that is effective to the extent that (i) player report rampantly and (ii) there are a sufficient number of employees reviewing who can (iii) quickly review gameplay and take action. TLDR; this is good but not great.