(17 Oct 19 at 9:45pm)Shower Wrote: -1 Is this a joke
You can debate the hacking part all you want but unless you pull out evidence that isn't from sandbox then I'll keep myself neutral on that. Whats funny to me is the metagame part. Just the fact that metagame was put on your ban signals this wasn't a 1 time thing and you meta gamed maces to an extreme. Don't lie.

(18 Oct 19 at 7:51am)Ikea Wrote: -1 The "evidence" provided has no relevancy to the situation as well as the original proof is well beyond a reasonable doubt, many cheats have ways to hide from recording, and you could have easily toggled in sandbox. The evidence that he can flick from his perspective is not nearly enough bc it is not at the extreme as doing a 90 degree turn back and forth in 10 frames. You even look back to see who you killed, if you flick to someone and flick back why would you look at them again unless you were surprised by it or it was an accident? Almost like you didn't mean to hit your aim key.

I flicked back since I knew in my head right after I shot him I shouldn't have killed him. Also wouldnt you think I would have snapped to the stalker, not the mace? even if that was the case? ( i could be wrong I have no idea if that stalker had a hitbox or not but still )

He's right actually he should've flicked into the stalker (Unless being pilled breaks his aimbot)

Yo you guys big stupid hes not a hacker

Maybe if your "cool" montages weren't so cringy, I would +1 this, but that cringe montage is holding me back

mad cuz bad

Hi, i just reviewed the evidence again and i think i have a pretty solid theory as to what happened. also someone doesnt need to be in spectate mode to catch someone.

I cannot share the video but i will relay my comments on it. You saw the MACE with ESP, turned on your flashlight so it looks like you were only metagaming. In one frame you went from looking at the stalker to looking and firing at the MACE. So you purposefully made it look as if it was only metagame but there is clear evidence of aim assist and ESP.

That's the theory everyone has, yes.

ngl i didnt pay attention to this appeal for a while so idk the replies lmaoo plus im at school

(18 Oct 19 at 2:16pm)[DEFN] Pyro Shark Wrote: Hi, i just reviewed the evidence again and i think i have a pretty solid theory as to what happened. also someone doesnt need to be in spectate mode to catch someone.

I cannot share the video but i will relay my comments on it. You saw the MACE with ESP, turned on your flashlight so it looks like you were only metagaming. In one frame you went from looking at the stalker to looking and firing at the MACE. So you purposefully made it look as if it was only metagame but there is clear evidence of aim assist and ESP.

Flat out wrong. I had my flash light before the vid even started, if he extended the vid he would have seen me talking to the stalker thats why my mic was on, + the fact that if I had "aim assist" why would i snap to the mace? and not the stalker RIGHT INFRONT OF ME

(18 Oct 19 at 2:53pm)Swag Forza Wrote:

(18 Oct 19 at 2:16pm)[DEFN] Pyro Shark Wrote: Hi, i just reviewed the evidence again and i think i have a pretty solid theory as to what happened. also someone doesnt need to be in spectate mode to catch someone.

I cannot share the video but i will relay my comments on it. You saw the MACE with ESP, turned on your flashlight so it looks like you were only metagaming. In one frame you went from looking at the stalker to looking and firing at the MACE. So you purposefully made it look as if it was only metagame but there is clear evidence of aim assist and ESP.

Flat out wrong. I had my flash light before the vid even started, if he extended the vid he would have seen me talking to the stalker thats why my mic was on, + the fact that if I had "aim assist" why would i snap to the mace? and not the stalker RIGHT INFRONT OF ME

The Stalker was a rebelrecruit, he was on your team.