Ban Appeal - nicoraguila
-
Dear Support Team,I am writing to appeal a ban on my account (username: nicoraguila). I received a message stating that my account is banned for 13 days, but I am not aware of any violations or rule-breaking on my part.I enjoy playing on this platform and always try to follow the rules. Could you please look into my case and let me know the reason for this ban? If there was a mistake, I kindly request that you consider lifting it.Thank you for your time and assistance.Best regards,nicoraguila
-
Dear Support Team,I am writing to appeal a ban on my account (username: nicoraguila). I received a message stating that my account is banned for 13 days, but I am not aware of any violations or rule-breaking on my part.I enjoy playing on this platform and always try to follow the rules. Could you please look into my case and let me know the reason for this ban? If there was a mistake, I kindly request that you consider lifting it.Thank you for your time and assistance.Best regards,nicoraguila
nicoraguila it looks like you triggered the plutonium anticheat about 24 hours ago:
That is what gave you the first 7 days.
The second 7 days was because you logged in from a different account (that is seen as ban evasion). That will add more time each time you try different accounts.
All you can really do is wait until the ban is over and read up on the anti-cheat rules: https://plutonium.pw/docs/anticheat/
-
Thank you for explaining what happened.
I understand now that the first 7 days were issued after the anti-cheat was triggered, and that the additional 7 days were added because I logged into another account while the ban was active. I understand that this is considered ban evasion, and I won't do that again.
I would, however, like to clarify the circumstances behind the anti-cheat detection.
I was working on a personal Zombies trainer/mod project and testing it while playing solo. The earlier version of the project used external memory access to interact with the game process. I now understand that this can trigger TAC regardless of whether the game is being played online, privately, or solo.
I was not trying to cheat on a public server or gain an unfair advantage over other players. The purpose was to develop and test a personal Zombies project.
After realizing what happened, I removed the external memory manipulation approach and moved the functionality to native GSC scripting instead.
Would it be possible to review the original TAC detection and let me know what specifically triggered it? I would like to make sure I fully understand what happened and ensure that I don't accidentally trigger the anti-cheat again in the future.
I understand the punishment and will respect the remaining ban. I'm only asking if the original detection can be reviewed or explained.
Thank you.
-
Thank you for explaining what happened.
I understand now that the first 7 days were issued after the anti-cheat was triggered, and that the additional 7 days were added because I logged into another account while the ban was active. I understand that this is considered ban evasion, and I won't do that again.
I would, however, like to clarify the circumstances behind the anti-cheat detection.
I was working on a personal Zombies trainer/mod project and testing it while playing solo. The earlier version of the project used external memory access to interact with the game process. I now understand that this can trigger TAC regardless of whether the game is being played online, privately, or solo.
I was not trying to cheat on a public server or gain an unfair advantage over other players. The purpose was to develop and test a personal Zombies project.
After realizing what happened, I removed the external memory manipulation approach and moved the functionality to native GSC scripting instead.
Would it be possible to review the original TAC detection and let me know what specifically triggered it? I would like to make sure I fully understand what happened and ensure that I don't accidentally trigger the anti-cheat again in the future.
I understand the punishment and will respect the remaining ban. I'm only asking if the original detection can be reviewed or explained.
Thank you.
nicoraguila no, they won't do that.
just launch the game in LAN mode and you can do all the memory injecting you want without worrying about the anti-cheat. That's one of the things the guide says (along with the big red box that says it is still turned on in solo mode)
telling people what specific part of a cheat/memory injection triggered an anticheat is not going to happen. you can understand how if people did that, you could learn what things did and did not set it off and adjust your cheats accordingly. (not saying that you are trying to cheat... just pointing out why they won't do that)
-
Thanks for the clarification.
I understand why you can't provide the specific details of what triggered the anti-cheat detection, and I understand the reasoning behind that.
I also appreciate the information about using LAN mode for testing. I wasn't aware that the anti-cheat could still be active during solo/private testing, so that was an important clarification for me.
I'll wait for the suspension to expire and will make sure not to use another account during the suspension again. For my project, I'll also avoid using external memory manipulation while connected to Plutonium and continue moving the functionality toward native GSC instead.
Thanks again for taking the time to explain it.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login