What do you think it could be?

Gentlemen, you chose the wrong method for detecting maphack

No one was specifically catching a maphacker – I just decided to check a suspicious player, who was also a boor in communication…. And when such moments were discovered in the opponent's game, and I also learned many negative things about this person - I decided to create this topic to punish the cheater and warn everyone else …

Situations like "my hand slipped", "the blood rushed to my head", "the third eye opened", etc., are very real.

Yes, I suppose I agree that with a constantly or periodically "open third eye", the "blood can rush to the head" so much that the "hands slip" and they reveal that very "third eye" :)

So here it is - one of the correct methods for detecting maphackers is, for example, the following: you take several of a person's games and review them day by day. And you look for so-called "branching points", that is, moments when a person isn't rolling according to a thought-out plan, but makes a decision that determines the direction of further actions, a choice from several roughly equal options.

This is exactly where you can see that the key priorities were set during the game with a slight delay of turns from the game plan, but not as usual: "we build based on what we see", but also on what we "supposedly find by chance".
And examples of such "branching points" are: an unchecked! Griffin Conservatory on the native respawn (in the path of a whole herd of heroes), and the main hero's maneuver of leaving the road into the swamp, followed by leveling up on a Gnoll, and this despite the fact that the necessary chain for delivering forces was already prepared precisely so that on the next turn they could not just hand them over to the Papa, but also make a forced march with him into the darkness without Papa losing precious movement points due to the penalty of a non-native army relative to the respawn (and all this without prior scouting with a scout hero!) And there, of course, a Griffin Conservatory is found by chance, which is taken easier than the one that wasn't even checked on the native respawn, despite the fact that the chain with the army to the native Griffin Conservatory was even simpler and earlier, and Papa didn't have to run far or leave the road, but that particular Griffin Conservatory was chosen, and in advance, because after taking it, it's half a turn back into the darkness and further away from the road, but Papa is already in the Treasury, where it's already clear in what sequence to shake the ducks – raise parameters and get to a 1-3-1 Dragon Utopia, which has control (via the Air book).

Further, based on this statistics of branching points, conclusions can already be drawn. Plus - make an adjustment for the player's overall skill. That is, for top players, the percentage of "guesses" (i.e., correct decisions that do not directly follow from available facts or even contradict them) is inherently higher, that's normal, partly why they are tops.

Yes, and IMO one must also consider that assessing skill "over the internet" is not an entirely unambiguous thing; a player's behavior as a person is much more indicative, and if he is a boor or, worse, a cheater, then it is much more serious in compelling an adjustment to conclusions about the honesty of his game.

So here it is - maphackers almost never have episodes of the type "ran over there, but there was nothing there". That is, making a clearly unfavorable decision in a situation where there are other more favorable alternatives that are equivalent when the map is hidden. A maphacker at a fork in the road will "randomly" run to where something is.

This is precisely the clearest example of such a case!

I think most experienced players can recall situations where they frantically searched for control all over the map, built a lookout tower looking for Dimension Door, while a Dragon Utopia with a blue cap was tucked away in a secluded corner of the native respawn. Maphackers don't have episodes like that - some scout hero will definitely run past the Dragon Utopia, then call dad. Or daddy himself will come "to scout the territory" or "just in case there's something there!"

Yes-yes-yes … here he didn't even hesitate to go straight through with Papa …. Not even scout heroes scouted the first or second Griffin Conservatory as a cover – this could be attributed either to a very weak level of play or to maphacking … but you can see that overall the person plays decently.

That is, the general idea is this - you need to look for episodes that exonerate the player. Some actions that a maphacker would be unlikely to perform. If there are many such actions, then a person can be forgiven for individual "unclear" decisions - humanity is strong precisely because it is diverse, thinks and makes decisions differently; considering another person's consciousness as identical to one's own is not correct.

Well, it's hard to look for episodes that exonerate the player here, because in essence the "branching points" can be traced from at least the beginning of the second week, and at most from the 3rd or 4th turn of the game …

BUT !
As many have rightly noted - the main thing in this matter is the presumption of innocence + not washing dirty laundry in public. Caught a maphacker - don't play with him anymore. To hell with rating points. The integrity of the community is more important. And every scandal like this, regardless of its outcome, is a nail in the coffin.

All else being equal, the presumption is the main defense mechanism of maphackers, and a scourge for the community, since obtaining 100% factual evidence is unrealistic; even the 3 methods of catching outlined above only give a logically justified conclusion, but not one that is 100% reliable!
On the one hand, you shouldn't wash dirty laundry in public, but on the other hand, forewarned is forearmed, and I don't think the integrity of the community will suffer from you voting for one option and me for another.
Of course, one must consider that the vote is not about the "best level 7 unit" ;) .. but rather the player's reputation is at stake, but he didn't even bother to reply in this topic!!! Although I personally sent him the link both via PM and ICQ, and after that he was online – but no reply followed, neither in PM nor here!

P.S. The only vote for the "luck" option is mine. For the principled reasons stated above.

After more than a year, he remains alone (just as principled)

P.P.S. I glanced at the saves, didn't draw any conclusions.

Glanced!? … what a pity … still, the only one who voted differently from everyone else, hence big doubts arise about the correctness of that vote, as well as about the approach to everything that you initially have no interest in, but some external forces force you to participate.

P.S. no decision was ever made; they talked it over, drew conclusions whoever wanted to, and forgot about it .... now I hope AK will make a decision and announce it.