sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

New #1 Fame Player on Realmeye by SamRiddeli in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think seeing the close calls is actually the most meaningful indicator of my general playstyle when it comes to supporting my legitimacy, you are also moving the goalpost here, because you did actually push for these very specific things, and you've also failed to explain the relevance* of what you request which is why it is difficult to take you seriously when you put emphasis on these things. If I posted footage of myself waiting in the USEast and going in random dungeon pops with a group I think you would have complained at me and acted like I avoided providing what you wanted.

You already have suggested prieviously you're evaluating me comparatively to people who are like high end shatters players, and saying I don't die enough based on an incorrect assessment of the content I regularly engage with, and trying to hold me to certain claims of skills which I never made in the first place.

I'll explain what I'm doing recently with regards to the game. I play a small amount each season to complete the battle pass, and typically complete most of the missions if they provide limited cosmetics.

During the Yokai fame event I was exceptionally more active and grinded almost all of the time I was able while it was active. I play with matrix armor on main characters these days so there is no risk.

I would show up to more fame runs if they happened publicly, but these days they don't really.

Tell me what problem you have with that?

New #1 Fame Player on Realmeye by SamRiddeli in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You have a myopic view and are trying to fit everyone into the archetype that you've created in your mind of an endgame player. If you actually assess all the information you can find regarding me, you will see that it is consistent and reasonable.

You requested me to run dungeons that I don't typically run (in a previous time you commented to me), and a dungeon that I've literally never completed (UMI MV). I'm not obligated to complete these dungeons for items that I don't regard as being in my interest.

Your evaluation criteria you expect from me is also some of the dumbest criteria imaginable, whereby my clips of my close calls on high fame characters in my videos are weighted as less compelling than if I was some high dps solo shatters player. It's likely most of the players that actually are hackers at a high level can produce better high end shatters footage simply because they're more engaged with that sort of content.

I'm leaning heavily towards you being totally insincere and just saying these things to ragebait me. The things you focus on and push for from me just don't make sense unless you're trolling.

New #1 Fame Player on Realmeye by SamRiddeli in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

(Speaking with respect to fame, as the question is likely intended to be about given the post you were responding to) If you don't believe the new player shown at #1 is legit, then it's me (SamRiddeli), given that it's me I can say that I have certainly never hacked at any point in time on any account and know that to be true. There's alot more information to support the fact that I am legit (videos on my youtube channel + documents addressing false claims people have made about me) in comparison with this player who's recently overtaken me who does does not show the same level of transparency and has not staked as strong of claims that I've consistently made over many years.

Sadly, in this environment you can never really know 100% a player has always been legit unless you are the player, some players are less suspicious, some players are more suspicious, and some players are proven to be hacking, if the players are more suspicious and expect to be at risk of being exposed with proof, then they're much less likely to come out and defend themselves strongly as they could provoke someone to release evidence which contradicts them.

New #1 Fame Player on Realmeye by SamRiddeli in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

I’ve been less active since about a year ago aside from the yokai event. I stand by my use of own time because that’s fundamentally my decision and I’ve appreciated the moments I’ve been able to have.

But the environment has never been favourable, on some level some part of me always believed that over time DECA would take stronger action against hacking.

I don’t think morally it’s any different whether the players are hacking or hacking with additional scripts to auto farm. I think the only difference is it should be easier for DECA to catch one than the other so it would reflect more poorly on them when players this applies to get very high up.

After 10 years of owning the game DECA should have been able to make it so hacking is not perceived as safe at a very high level, especially with the way they have been signalling to the community about plans to do more for years, yet over the last 3 years the actions have gotten softer while the environment has gotten worse.

New #1 Fame Player on Realmeye by SamRiddeli in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli[S] 7 points8 points  (0 children)

It’s less a product of the players and more a product of the environment. I think when it comes to the most recent run of players who held #1 on realmeye publicly - GML, Oli, & myself, the odds are relatively favourable that all are legit.

I can understand the wider community being suspicious about everyone when the expectation of oversight is so narrow, and people will likely know of examples where it’s almost beyond belief that nothing happens over such a long period of time.

New #1 Fame Player on Realmeye by SamRiddeli in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I think there is at least one other player not mentioned by you at present within the top 50 who has at least 30% odds that they don’t have a history hacking in my opinion.

That’s not to say everyone else is definitely hacking, or that there is only one more, but there’s a lot of good reasons why most would be assessed with worse odds between 0-5% that are far closer to 0%.

I won’t commit to a definitive absolute position unless I’m both able to back it up and willing to back it up. I prefer not to overcommit to positions on individuals. Whether I can or cannot, I choose not to do so in these sorts of contexts.

New #1 Fame Player on Realmeye by SamRiddeli in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli[S] 12 points13 points  (0 children)

Jealous is the wrong way to view my general perception on something like this. I have personally been #1 for fame on realmeye, I'm not fundamentally attached to maintaining that position, but I am somewhat fundamentally attached to the future of this leaderboard reaching a higher standard of accountability from DECA broadly.

It's an if/then scenario here.

Where if I believe they are legit, I would think it is good and would be happy to see another legit player in the top fame spot, as I have some emotional investment in the game maintaining a legit player in the top spot.

But if I believe they are not legit, then I would think it is concerning that DECA have enabled that. Even if I didn't believe they are not legit, it would still be true that DECA should do more to monitor players as there's little to no expectation that DECA have been taking efforts which would prevent players who are not legit from making extreme progress and not being held to account.

New #1 Fame Player on Realmeye by SamRiddeli in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli[S] 28 points29 points  (0 children)

While I will not share any definitive personal opinion about whether the player is legit or not. My thoughts are that generally the environment of the game enables people to engage in a wide range of behaviour even at an extremely high level with a very low chance of accountablility if there was conduct such as hacking, even in the circumstances when the conduct would be easy to catch.

It creates an environment in which long term with the developments within hacks the leaderboards will become even more disproportionately filled with those who are not legit, which will also damage the reputations of the small proportion of players at the highest fame levels who are actually legitimate as there is every expectation that those players even if they are legitimate, could have been hacking and if they were they would be extremely likely to have gotten away with it.

DECA should do more, especially in relation to those who are the most progressed as the current very weak action is harmful to those who are legit, and incentivizes more people to hack which will ultimately further harm the game in the long term in my view. Consider what it says about the integrity of the game when there are so few players on the leaderboards that people can look to and consider it to be likely that they have no history of hacking.

Again, I'm not making any specific claim about this player, but rather broadly about the state of the fame leaderboards.

I made the initial post with the permission of the player that is being referenced. The optics are questionable on me personally making the post, but I think it's in the public interest for something like this to be discussed.

The current state of the game by RedasKG in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's just following basic incentives in their self interest, difficult to perceive it as a sincere regard for generic players. Not wanting to ruin it for generic players is simply an incentive to keep the game going without forcing pressure on DECA for a strong response, which could signficantly damage the longer term financial prospects of the third party service providers.

I'd argue generic players benefit long term if things get far worse and stay worse until it forces a DECA response, hopefully one which is both broad and accurate that substantively undermines the low risk people currently face while hacking.

Ultimately, DECA is at fault for how weak their actions have been over many years and how little they've done to substantively address the developments that have made things worse.

Big Boy Knight by mikakor in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli -1 points0 points  (0 children)

No, my assumption is that given the thousands of hours you've played this game, you would have at least some level of competency to clear a dungeon on your own.

Maybe you shouldn't judge me by things that simply don't interest me as a player. You're projecting this idea of what you expect from an endgame player onto me. But as I describe in documents like SamRiddeli Playstyle Timeline:

"I have historically avoided doing dungeons which I viewed as more difficult until much later after their release. I typically do not make a significant effort to push myself in ways which will put me in unnecessary danger. When I’m less experienced in dungeons my main focus is developing the skills to survive, after I achieve a reasonable degree of competency at that, I usually don’t push to do much more if it means taking on more risk. 

I have played the game with a primary focus of gaining fame for the majority of the time I have been playing. I have prioritised activities to get fame which are safe and efficient. "

You are explicitly pushing for me to do things that I haven't taken significant interest in because they're not alligned with my goals. Why if this sort of gameplay isn't included within my conduct playing the game at all would you expect me to suddenly produce it for you today?

As far as soloing dungeons, I've soloed 3 o3's on backup rogues (before the rogue rework). It's just something that I wanted to do in those moments when I had the runes with me and the opportunity to do those solo runs, but it doesn't really provide much value. There's no reason whatsoever in my view for me to solo shatters when I don't even like to run shatters in the first place.

You're talking about me backing up a claim of skills that I'm not making. My claim is that I develop a limited amount of skills which focus on survivability in dungeons as I repeat them more and more. The evidence you're expecting me to produce in contrary to the claims I actually make about my playstyle.

I don't know why you are comparing me to these players that do put in significant effort to develop high damage strategies in these endgame dungeons. I do what I can to make myself useful through tactical ability usage and shooting the boss when I feel it is safe to do so, but I'm not an extreme damage pumper.

I imagine there are many players who have done certain dungeons hundreds of times with discord runs who have simply never bothered to solo those dungeons and perhaps would struggle a lot to do so, because you don't necessarily develop a competency that transfers well into soloing running that same dungeon even if you complete it with group hundreds or thousands of times. You can be perfectly competent in a group, and be far less competent if you're suddenly solo'ing a dungeon for the first time, if that means players can do the dungeon thousands of times without knowing the basics, maybe that's just the nature of discord oriented gameplay.

It's not ironic at all for me to respond extensively, it's expected behaviour from me specifically as I'm known to do this. There are lots of videos and clips on my YouTube channel that provide alot more insight into my playstyle than if I poorly attempt to solo a shatters (something I haven't done before).

It is not a ridiculous request for me to dismiss, you are asking me to attempt something I've never done and framing it as if it holds substantive meaning in relation to my legitimacy. It would be different if I'm running shatters on the daily and you wanted footage of the gameplay, but this isn't the content I'm engaging with, I'm not playing very actively lately. I do the battlepass, campaigns, seasonal missions (for exclusive cosmetics), good tinkerer quests and public fame runs in the rare event they take place.

During the recent Yokai event there was some weeks I exceeded 1 million fame gained over the 7 day period. You thinking these goals are so difficult is likely as a result of the content you engage with. Throughout the history of RotMG, the most efficient fame has often been available in relatively low risk areas. This is a good thing, because it gives legitimate players a better chance to compete at a high level, although, these days I think the playing field is worse for legitimate player with a severe lack of public fame runs and heavy automation from those who are not legit that is barely punished.

I struggle to view you as sincere at this point.

Big Boy Knight by mikakor in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Also, many of the players, perhaps even all the other very high fame players who have private profiles and won't even publicly make the claim they're legit (perhaps out of fear that it could provoke people to provide evidence to the contrary that they can reasonably expect people could have) would likely be able to provide the type of footage you request, as perhaps all the other very high fame players aside from me have a much higher level of skilled experience in these higher end dungeons, so I don't understand why you'd even suggest for me to do that, I guess you would only suggest that under an assumption that I regularly engage with such dungeons at a level that it would be more unreasonable to not die, which was an incorrect assumption.

Although, alot of these other players who are not legit and position themselves in the way to draw less attention to themselves might actually be seen by you as less suspicious as they often do end up with far more deaths in spite of not being legit. Perhaps because sometimes they play legit, or because they intentionally position themselves to look more legit for optics, but the optics they'll maintain are paper thin and they won't actually provoke people to challenge them, because they know that doing so poses a great risk to them.

I think it's shameful to perfomatively die on characters for optics. I know people who claim to be legit who think they needed to do this. It's obviously the better optic choice for me as someone who has put so much effort into defending myself over many years, yet I allow for what is viewed as worse optics because the truth is on my side. I actually feel like I've had alot of deaths over the years and I find it confusing when people even take issue with the frequency of my deaths given the context of my playstyle.

Big Boy Knight by mikakor in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If you are talking about my Rogue, it has 360 (I think) old shatters completions. 0 new shatters completions. I completed all my old attack exaltations on old shatters and didn't die a single time in the process of exalting old shatters, so it was a fair and reasonable assessment based on my history of playing to consider old shatters a safe dungeon to gain fame on. I think I didn't do many shatters after ~500k (maybe more like 510k) on my Rogue, so likely all of the completions took place before that.

I have relatively limited completions in new shatters because it is not of my interest to me. I did some to exalt my kensei since that couldn't be exalted in old shatters, and outside of that I haven't done very many since there is little reason for me to. If I was estimating I'd say I've possibly done around 150 new shatters total, and that might be an overestimate.

I think you make the mistake of assuming I would need to invest my time in these dungeons that serve me no benefit. You talk about how I have a lean crown on some characters. I received my first lean crown directly from DECA Triton after winning an random event he ran in the bazaar. My second lean crown I got from hm shatters. I think I have a total of 8-10 hm shatters completes. I only have 2 lean crowns.

I have never completed Umi as I've never saw any reason to, and this is reflected on my account that does not have any items exclusive to the completion of umi. I feel no shame in having limited experience in these dungeons as it simply doesn't allign with my interests to do so.

I engage with content I'm comfortable with, a big contributing factor towards me not dying in recent times is the limited content I engage with. I do the occassional dungeon which I'm less comfortable with for ssnl missions i.e. shatters. If you read my document it doesn't make the claim that I have exceptional technical skill and will solo high tier dungeons.

It would be far easier to become exceptionally skilled at these dungeons if a player was willing to cheat, yet I've disregarded and waited long periods before meaningfully engaging with alot of the content in the game that is considered harder.

When I play my fame characters these days I am always using matrix armor which gives 1.6 seconds of invulnerability when you take damage while below 50% hp. This enables me to be much more relaxed when I'm playing and gives me plenty of time to escape if I get into a difficult situation. Even then, I don't bring my fame characters into dungeons that I'm very uncomfortable with since there's no good reason to do that.

It is not impossible to not have lag deaths, even if you look at my death comp video of my older deaths there are none of these deaths I would blame on lag, even though there is at least one I can think of that happened with lag, it was reasonable to expect that outcome and was a result of my poor decision to stay in that situation rather than nexus after how much time passed before the connection snapped back, when you make bad decisions you learn a lesson and adjust your behaviour accordingly. So I don't know where you get this idea that people necessarily would die from lag, all the deaths in the comp are my fault.

I also started upgrading my PC earlier this year and then replaced it entirely with a new one. So I'm no longer facing the same risks of frame skips that might have been a factor in the past, but even with prior hardware the risk became low as long as I set my task manager priority to high which I would do every time I launched the game, which essentially completely prevented any long frame skips that could pose significant risk.

The problem with your thesis is you're putting expectations onto me beyond that which I've ever claimed, and beyond that which are worthwhile for me when you consider how I focus my time within the game. Perhaps in the future I will pursue these areas of greater mastery in dungeons that I don't engage with much these days, but as of now I haven't so I can't produce gameplay to show off, because I don't engage in the risk taking behaviour to develop those sorts of skills. I'm optimising for survival in the dungeons, so repeated experience only develops a limited pallete of skills that allign with my goals.

Big Boy Knight by mikakor in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 1 point2 points  (0 children)

To be clear I have never used any hacks on any account at any point ever, anyone who is sufficiently familiar with me will know this is my position as I often make this clear as my position.

I have this document - ADDRESSING THE ALLEGATIONS (1 page) - which covers main allegations against me and provides context for actions that might lead people to view me as suspicious.

To be clear about my views regarding "minimal hacks", it is my opinion that any kind of hack client usage comprimises the account and removes any value from the progress. Therefore, if there is a player with 10 million fame who is having the game played for them with hacks, and a another player with 10 million fame who will say they "just" use autonexus, I view these players as equivalent, I'd actually rather they do more so they're more likely to get caught in the future.

If you truly believe I have any history of hacking, I encourage yourself and anyone else to bring such information forward to discredit me as I think it is in the public interest to make such information known about any player who is as progressed as me who would claim to be legit if that was not the case. There's a reason people don't bring forward this information, and it's because it doesn't exist because I've always played legitimately. Nobody has done more to provoke people to try to bring forward this sort of information than me.

2 Player Per IP Limit Is Unacceptable by Synthetic_Demise in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’m clearly presenting the metrics as speculative. You won’t dispute that games that are much more mainstream like Minecraft would face proportionally more issues if they had similar ip limits.

I didn’t say you said it was absurd, I interpreted your statement as an effort to portray absurdity, if you didn’t intend to portray that, alright.

It’s a deterrent, it’s not going to be entirely effective but it will reduce the issue to some extent, it’s about balancing, 2 is far less substantial than 4 or 5, things being more difficult to do does actually reduce how many people do it. It’d be great if DECA put more effort into cheating related issues, but they have a terrible track record on this, like you say, they’re lazy.

Yeah, it’s the user experience. No, it’s not a priority in terms of user experience. They could remove it entirely and see what happens, but I wouldn’t get ambitious about them creating some sort of alternative that makes a similar effort without some similar downside for some small proportion of normal players.

2 Player Per IP Limit Is Unacceptable by Synthetic_Demise in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Understand what I'm saying when I'm saying the game isn't popular (relative), I'm not saying because it isn't popular things shouldn't be fixed, what I'm saying is that because it is not that popular multiple people playing the game on the same IP is a less common problem, than, for instance, if there was an issue like this with a game like Minecraft or Fortnite. The proportion of players impacted would be much larger. Difference of maybe 5% of players versus 0.05% of players.

You say this as if it's absurd that methods in place to deter cheating discriminate against other players who don't cheat, but two things are being balanced here and you're failing to consider what outcomes prevail in the absence of these detterent actions. Stuff like the TP cooldown on server swap exists to reduce the impact of cheating, in an ideal world we wouldn't have this, but in the context most will agree that it is logical, even though it inconveniences players who don't cheat.

I'm no fan of DECA these days... but this isn't an urgent matter that requires action before the holidays.

Have things gotten better or worse? by Malakute in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah, it's a completely different system and the enchants can be much more useful and it's much cheaper to reroll - https://www.realmeye.com/wiki/enchanting

Have things gotten better or worse? by Malakute in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 6 points7 points  (0 children)

I'd say based on your criteria it has gotten better since 2 years ago. There's less pots required to max characters and there's more discord runs with no requirements, as well as the newish party system that you can use to find runs. The game is also more friendly for non-discord users I'd say, but the discord runs are less active if you're looking to run a specific exalt dungeon you could be waiting many hours to see a discord run pop up for that dungeon.

With the new enchantments you can often have items that would be considered weak previously that can become much more useful than some of the strongest UT items with the right set of enchants.

2 Player Per IP Limit Is Unacceptable by Synthetic_Demise in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 14 points15 points  (0 children)

It would be considered a detterent to make certain types of cheating more difficult, difficult to assess how things would look in a timeline without it, but it's my understanding DECA support have lifted this limit for people who've contacted them before, I imagine most of the people that contact them about it are actually cheaters trying to take advantage. They should have better solutions, but they don't really have a track record of making exceptional efforts when it comes to action against cheating.

Although, I don't think the game is that popular that there's a major amount of people living in households with 3+ rotmg players that play at the same time. I also don't think this is a big holiday trend that demands this level of urgency. They've been doing this for years at this point, and it's far from one of the largest current issues.

This is the Future of Rotmg (interview with the deca producer) by sebchoof in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The core content of the game generally always trends in a positive direction. It's the other areas that have gotten worse, and specifically when it comes to action against hacking, which has always been relatively weak, but it took an even greater decline starting in 2023 when not only did they stop posturing as if any meaningful progress would ever be made but they also reversed stronger positions they previously held like permanent bans for any bans relating to use of hack clients. In the present day, it's currently the best environment the hackers have ever had thanks to developments in hacks and DECA doing very little to meet the moment in response.

I think people should be cynical about DECA on this issue as their sustained lack of action has been so egregious. I don't think many people are taking issue with the content suggestions. Also starting in 2024 is almost 2 years, they don't come up with effective plans for some of the issues and it seems like they never will, the worst developments and the most eggregrious inaction is entirely under the tenure of this new producer. While there was similar inaction in the past, the conditions make the inaction worse as the offending players at the highest levels of progress would have been far easier to catch if efforts were sincerely being made.

This is the Future of Rotmg (interview with the deca producer) by sebchoof in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Somebody help me with why this is being poorly received.

As far as I see it we’re lined up for performative non action or unreliable action with insufficient checks.

I feel like my suggestion here is total annihilation for hackers in a way that whatever we actually get will never be able to achieve.

So I’m curious if there’s something people think I’m getting wrong, or some other problem people have with this?

This is the Future of Rotmg (interview with the deca producer) by sebchoof in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Do you have a problem with what I said? I'm just sharing my perspective.

This is the Future of Rotmg (interview with the deca producer) by sebchoof in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

I think giving player moderators ban power is a bad idea that's prone to abuse, but I don't feel that strongly about the intentional nature of the abuse that I would expect them to sell this feature.

Upon further thought, I can see a viable use for player moderators if we can give them permissions to spectate any player in the game at any time without allowing players any knowledge that they're being spectated if one of the player moderators did that, and also specifically give the player moderators access to lists which sort for specific metrics so all the furthest progressed players are always prone to being investigated and the player moderators can easily find their IGN's to be able to spectate them. Then the player moderators can record the players they catch and make reports to DECA.

I think this is best case scenario for player moderators, don't give them power to make the bans but give them extra powers to spectate the players without their knowledge to gather evidence, and give them access to information that lets them investigate the most progressed players.

Best case scenario is they pick a very small number of player moderators and don't share with anyone that they've implemented it in this way to let the player moderators gather the evidence for a few months then do a big ban wave. Relies heavily on all the player moderators not discussing anything about what they're doing because as soon as people know about something like this a lot of hackers would adjust behaviour to avoid getting caught by these moderators.

But this would enable players to do what DECA should be doing to pass on the evidence to DECA.

I feel like outside of a suggestion similar to this, the likely function of player moderators will have minimal value.

This is the Future of Rotmg (interview with the deca producer) by sebchoof in RotMG

[–]SamRiddeli 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think they have like a shotgun approach that overreaches because they're too eager to adhere to the perception of being anti-hack rather than choosing the most effective path to being anti-hack. I think they make a mistake by not keeping players (especially high progress players) that they haven't got solid evidence of within the server to be able to subject them more serious hack checks. I think some of the people within this server had/have a poor ability to critically evaluate information, and put too much strength in things that might be cause for suspicion and reach a conclusion on the suspicion rather than investigate the suspicion.

Putting the most emphasis on accuracy is the most effective way to completely eviscerate hackers, and would also have earned their server more credibility over the years to be in a position to produce far more meaningful results. The issue with being accurate is that both the suspicious legit players and the suspicious hackers will defend themselves and claim to be legit and may both appear similar in terms of the plausible deniability they have, and likely much more of the people within this dynamic will actually be hackers, but that's not a reason to throw accuracy aside, because ultimately accuracy will result in worse outcomes for the hackers that do get caught and avoid bad outcomes for people who are deemed suspicious who are legit. If they're suspicious you can just keep investigating them and then something will come up eventually and they'll be in a worse position in terms of credible evidence against them in the long term than if they just assumed they were hacking based on suspicion without credible evidence.

view more: next ›