Hackers are a real problem. Please make NoCheat as stringent as it is on other servers.

On Wild West server, catching a hacker requires that you go to them, or that you succeed in recording them in the first combat.

Returning to them takes time (sometimes you cannot even find the person, or catch up to them), and results in another death, and there is no guarantee that your evidence will be considered "sufficient proof" unless they are literally 5 blocks above the ground. I won't bother doing it anymore (until an Auto-Banner is there to help me), that is the gist of my argument.

Succeeding in recording them the first time? Of course I will still try to do that. But most often, the brief moment before Death by Hacker is not enough time to gather evidence. In those cases where a hacker found me and killed me before I can screenshot his hacks, I will announce in chat that there is a hacker, and then I will leave the server for a bit rather than trying to solve the issue as a player without any effective tools to do so. I recommend that everyone adopts a similar policy until flying is auto-banned (at the very least), to encourage Brawl to deal with hackers in an official capacity.

Its not my responsibility to chase after people with hacks, but that seems to be what you are advocating. Understand: I am not turning a blind eye to hackers. I am not going out of my way to catch them either.

 

I have had screenshots be sufficient proof, you are incorrect.

 

If you take screenshots away as proof, many players have NO tools to record hacking.

 

When there are no staff on, it is necessary to gather evidence. Many players cannot begin to record without lagging so much that by the time they begin the recording, combat is over (3-4 seconds maximum, against a hacker).

In this post you rather rudely told me to continue gathering evidence (you even got honored for your rudeness, as it was in defense of the server).

Now you are arguing for the sole method of evidence gathering available to me (and others) to be no longer accepted as proof.

It looks like you're being contrary on purpose.