I dag modtog Morten 'coloN' Johansen et 12-måneder-langt ban fra ClanBase. Admins har kigget spillerens demo igennem fra landskampen 31. januar, hvor Danmark mødte Norge.

Og fem admins har enstemmigt fundet frem til, at coloN brugte ulovlige hjælpemidler i landskampen.

For at komme til bunds i sagen, har vi snakket med Xapso-spilleren selv og NationsCup-supervisoren Nebojša 'NICKY' Vasić.

Sidstnævnte er cup supervisor i ClanBase og har været med ombord som admin siden 2003.

On a general level: how difficult is it to give bans based upon videos? How experienced is your cheat/anticheat crew?

It is difficult I must admit. There will always be people who will agree with the decision and those who don't agree with it, but it's just how it is. People have different opinions. I said earlier, I trust my crew completely, as I know they have handled hundreds and hundreds of cheating cases, so I know they have a lot of experience.

 

Norway did file a complaint - and you have gone through the POV demo. Why have you chosen to ban coloN?

Yes, Norway did file a complaint on coloN cheating in their match, so we (CS admins on CB) had to review the demo. It took longer than expected, as not all admins are online all the time, so we had to wait for opinion from most of the CS crew admins. There are around 10 CS admins in ClanBase crew, some who are assigned in ladders, some in cups like myself, all from different countries from all over Europe.

 

How many did vote him guilty?

Actually first five out of five said he was clearly cheating. Even tho some of his plays can be explained by hearing, teammate calls or luck, some of his plays really can't be explained at all.

 

Actually I was the 6th admin to see the demo. But I didn't want my opinion to count as I am the cup supervisor - so I didnt want to influence their decision - as I'm speaking daily to all of the players. So I don't want someone to say that my decisons are biased. But it was enough that admins who handle cheating cases daily voted him guilty.

 

But you aren't complaining about their decision - so I guess you are confident about the decision?

Yes of course. Those admins handled hundreds of cheating cases. So I trust them completely. And if I was 100% that he didn't cheat, I would have said it of course.

 

You say that all 5 admins did agree that coloN was cheating. Why did it have to take 2 weeks then?

We're not professionals in CB, so people take time to check on stuff we post in our internal forums and some are busy for example with their CB tasks. Actually it took about 10 days - Norway filed complaint 2 days after the match (officially).

 

And we had a decision 2 days ago but we weren't ready to announce as we were waiting for a ban to be issued on CB by our C&A (Cheating & Anticheating) crew.

 

Can you point out some critical scenes from the POV that - in particular - proves him cheating?

There were a few scenes - I would say 3 or 4 - that really can't be explained. I was one of the first to watch the demo, so I kinda forgot all the scenes while waiting for others (it was 2 weeks ago).

 

On XplayN.com especially two incidents has been debated a lot. A situation in inner bomb site where T is making a tower. And a situation where coloN is guarding pop dog with AWP and said-to-be wrongly preaming thorugh the train. How did you see those two incidents?

1. Well, the tower thing: He did see an arm (if you look at the demo). But he was aiming there way before he showed up - like he did see they were making a tower behind the wall.

2. And ye, the yard scene is pretty obvious in my opinion: Aiming and waiting the guys behind the trains that weren't called by his teammates.

 

I (and we) did see the so called "bust" movie, but that doesn't count in our decisions at all.

 

In the debate about coloN some says that colon has a very special play style - to which extent have you taken that into count when you voted?

That's true. I've watched him play before. As said earlier, no matter how "special play style" he's got, some of his situations can't be explained by luck, or play style, and especially by hearing.

 

Some also says that it's impossible for everybody other than the team to know what has been said on voice chat - how valid is that explanation in your ears?

What teammates didn't see they can't call, right? So that can be explanations for some situations, which we did take into consideration, but as I said, some of his plays couldn't have been called by his teammates as they didn't see (or hear) the opponents in question.

 

It's always difficult to say whether a person cheats due to playstyle/skills/experience/luck/voicechat/ and so forth - i'm sure you agree.

How can you be so sure that the incident on inner bomb site - wasn't a product of high skills, experience, knowledge, luck - and that the incident with the "said-to-be-preaiming" in yard as well? 

For some actions you can say he was lucky, but you can't say he was lucky all the time hitting or aiming people he didn't hear or see trough walls. If you watch 10-20 top players' demos you will rarely see those kind of plays. You can't just explain it with "he's got special play-style".

And it's known that all of the anti-cheat tools can be bypassed, especially VAC.

 

Which consequenses will this have for Denmark in CB:NC other than norway wins the game with a WO?

CB rule says that it can be proven that team captain or some of his players knew that he was cheating, Denmark would have been removed from the cup, but as we don't have those informations, we have to believe that it was him that decided to use cheats on his own without his teammates known it, so Denmark as a team will not have any further consequenses other than match forfeit (loss) in a match against Norway?

Vi tog også fat i hovedpersonen selv. Han havde følgende at sige.

coloN1

Hej coloN. Du har fået et ban af CB - hvordan har du det med det?

Jeg har selvfølgelig siddet og ventet på deres beslutning, men jeg havde aldrig regnet med denne afgørelse. Det er pisse ærgerligt at blive stemplet som snyder, men det er ikke første gang det sker - og sandsynligvis ikke den sidste. Jeg var af den overbevisning at CB består af folk der har forstand på at afholde turneringer og ligeledes medfølger det selvfølgelig, at de dømmer fair.

 

Og ud fra hvad der forelægger af bevismateriale. Jeg kan ikke gøre så meget ved deres beslutning, og hvis det ikke har nogen yderligere konsekvenser mht. andre turneringer, at jeg er blevet dømt skyldig hos CB - så kunne jeg ikke være mere ligeglad.

 

 

Vi har snakket med clanbase cup supervisor som har været med til at kigge demoen igennem. Han siger, at der er 3-4 steder i POV demoen som ikke kan forklares med andet end cheat. Lad os snakke om to specifikke situationer fra kampen:

 

1.Situtationen i inner site, hvor T laver et tower. ClanBase-admins siger godt nok, at

du kan se armen, MEN de siger, at du aimede der før armen viste sig som om at du kunne sei gennem muren, at de laved et tower. Hvad er din reaktion på den forklaring?

Haha hvor er det dog den mest latterlige forklaring - hvor skulle jeg ellers kigge? Jeg kommer løbende op af en slidske med en scout på høj, skal jeg løbe hjerneløst frem og spotte ned i jorden? :-)

Jeg kommer med scout på CT-høj og spæner op af rampen, ser en arm og reagerer ved at steppe længere ned mod højre for at få de bedste odds. Der er ingen grund til at jeg skal forsvare hvad jeg gør i den situation, da det er den mest simple og rationelle handling jeg udfører.

 

2. Den anden scene, ClanBases admins stiller spørgsmålstegn ved, er runden i yard, hvor du dækker pop dog med AWP og - ifølge dem - buster dig selv ved at rykke dit aim med modstanderen igennem togvognen. men han vælger at klatre op på stigen i stedet. Hvad er din reaktion på den påstand?

Jeg har ikke lyst til at forklare hvordan jeg spiller og hvorfor jeg træffer mine valg.

 

Hvorfor?

Jeg kan sidde og forsvare alle de situationer så meget jeg har lyst,

og det er ligegyldigt.

 

Jeg sigter muligvis på folk igennem togene - det skal jeg ikke kunne sige. Men hvis der bliver refereret til scenen hvor jeg sidder under site-toget udenfor, så er det rimelig simpelt hvorfor jeg sigter direkte på 4'eren (det røde tog til højre for elboxen) - det skyldes min reaktionsevne, hvilken tillader mig at jeg kan flytte mit aim hurtigt, og det at jeg kan spotte alle 3 vinkler.

 

Og ud fra hvad der forelægger af bevismateriale. Jeg kan ikke gøre så meget ved deres beslutning, og hvis det ikke har nogen yderligere konsekvenser mht. andre turneringer, at jeg er blevet dømt skyldig hos CB - så kunne jeg ikke være mere ligeglad.

 

Nu er du udråbt som cheater hos ClanBase. Har du tænkt lidt over, hvad du vil gøre - hvis overhovedet noget - for for alvor at bevise, at du er ren?

(coloN beder om at få oversat et svar, han har givet til Fragbite)
Det har jeg tænkt længe over. Og det eneste, jeg kan sige, er, at jeg vil deltage ved mange LAN events i år. Hvis jeg må med mit hold, selvølgelig. Jeg vil sige en ting: jeg har spillet i 13 år. Når du ser en professionel bokser på tv med så mange år på bagen, så vil du også se, at han kan forudsige sin modstanders næste træk. Og du vil se, at hvis nogen gør noget i så mange år - og har flair for det - at den person vil blive den bedste i dén disciplin. Min disciplin, hvor bedrøvende det end lyder, er Counter-Strike.

 

Til slut vil jeg gerne sige at jeg virkelig håber på opbakning fra det danske community, ikke kun brugere og spillere, men også diverse danske turneringer og xplayn. Jeg føler at jeg bliver udstillet som snyder på et meget tyndt grundlag og der er absolut ingen grund til at jeg skulle benytte eksterne programmer - derfor ønsker jeg lidt, at der kommer en vurdering om hvorvidt jeg skal have lov til at fortsætte med at spille DEL og andre turneringer.

coloN modtager altså et ban på 12 måneder fra ClanBase, da det er stand procedure for personer, der bannes første gang.

Om coloN får lov at fortsætte i Dansk Esport Liga er endnu uvist.