Can someone help me get some great ones?

[carrot]

i have been doing the "Great One grind" for about 3 months now and have not even gotten a diamond from it. from what i know, im doing it right but its not working. if anyone is good at getting them and would like to help me, please add me. im getting desperate lol. this is my last resort before i give up and try to find a hacker to get one

[david.hardie]

I think the entire GO grind is a myth.
I strongly suspect a GO is randomly generated somewhere on the map you are in and if you are in the wrong region you will never see it.
What makes me think that?
Duck hunting. I have literally killed thousands of those things and rarely see a gold.
Eurasian Widgeon. Maybe shot a dozen of them out of boredom and got two diamonds.
I suggest you go back to doing what was fun and when you get a GO or Diamond just accept the luck you had and celebrate like its 1999 :).

[Findus]

Originally posted by carrot:

before i give up and try to find a hacker to get one

Now that sounds really rewarding.

I'm not good at getting them (as in interested in spending much time with pure grinding) and won't add you, but I'm interested in the topic and if you describe what you've been doing and what you know, people might be able to point out potential mistakes. Not even getting a diamond sounds like you might be doing something wrong.
From what you are saying, you are trying to get a GO for all GO species at once? That will offer a little bit more variety, but will take longer of course. And 3 month doesn't say much without knowing how many animals of each GO species you shot in that time. Did you concentrate on one reserve per species? What animals do you choose, are you culling the middle levels? Sometimes you might get a favorable level distribution from the start and can directly go with only shooting the highest levels, many times you'll have to massage the overall population first.

Originally posted by david.hardie:

I think the entire GO grind is a myth.

I think the successes and overall known numbers available speak for themselves. While it is random, there will still be a probability attached to it and there is strong evidence from multiple different angles that herd management is a thing as well.

If a GO spawns somewhere on the map and you never go there, then obviously you won't find it and if you aren't thorough, then you might miss it as it's a bit more skittish. But GOs seem to spawn into existing herds as well just fine, by the standard mechanism, so finding e.g. all need zone for drinking and plugging any "leaks" (looking for new herds) if you realize that animals must have started to spawn somewhere you haven't covered yet, should be a good way to find it.
As for having one on your map right away, that might happen (very rarely), but I don't see any evidence for it being the standard.

[Carstein83]

Which GO and which map?

[Geronimo]

Let's approach this from a different angle. Instead of just respewing the same old theories, let's actually ask some of the related questions that tend to go unasked because their topics are usually assumed to be already known. They aren't!

Much rhetoric is proclaimed under assumptions it has been confirmed. But many questions are left hanging in that fog.

Active Field of Play- there has been some discussion about the game AI calculating on two separate fronts. One is the areas of the map beyond the rendering distance, where it is speculated that the AI is only calculating data which doesn't require graphic display or instantaneous response to the player's interacting because the player is not there in those positions.

This speculation proposes that in the AI mind there are two worlds, the one in which it must calculate the environment's responses within that 450 ish yards immediately surrounding the player, and everywhere else on the map where the animals routines are being tracked and monitored in a radar blip type of scenario, which is much less of a process for the AI because it doesn't have to provide the graphic equivalents to display it.

Now the big question should this be accurate-

Are replaced animals always respawned within that immediate 450 yard field of play, OR, can they be respawned anywhere on the map?

This makes a huge difference in what we should expect to have result from our so-called grinding. Early schools of thought courted the idea that each spawning and killing of the Mythical stage would spawn the Legendary in the next nearest Activity Zone of that specie's daily schedule.

Watch the early Zaggi YouTube's where he's killing the level 8 and than running to the zone next door to find the freshly spawned level 9.

Again the question here is about actually knowing if animals respawn only within a certain proximity of the player's active 450 yard field of engagement. A question yet unanswered, and yet so crucial to deciding how we should be playing consequentially.

If animals are respawning anywhere on the map despite where the player is active, than the odds of our coming into contact with a respawn are much more reduced than if animals only respawn within 450 yards of us.

But, in spite of not knowing the answer to this question, people are grinding away because they think they can increase their odds by sheer number of kills.

Immediate Respawn- another unanswered question involves whether or not animals respawn immediately or if there is a need to advance time. Let's be clear here, YouTubers are able to edit videos so that viewers don't have to wait out time, or wait through the many game restarts necessary to create enjoyable videos. So we see an end product that is deceptively timely.

So, based on just these two unknowns alone, reason should tell us that when it comes to the spawning of high level animals, the professor is still out to lunch.

IMHO, this grinding is ridiculous simply because it's being done without any actual knowledge of whether or not it's even viable. Understand here that YouTubers are not playing the game, they're editing it. So their 'grinding' is very different than what the player will be experiencing.

And I think that the reality of the game's true spawning mechanics actually makes it even harder for players attempting to grind in a mimic of what they 'think' they're seeing on YouTube. And because of this confusion they're killing far more than is really necessary to spawn higher levels, and in that slaughtering they are causing population dispersion problems that only exaggerate the issue.

And there are other questions that bear attention like does this slaughtering cause some inadvertent problems for spawning. Are grinding players simply creating more unnecessary difficulty for themselves?

Are grinders stressing the AI to unecessary limits where the game is simply not being managed/calculated efficiently?

It's been my contention that I have been able to realize more high level spawning by only harvesting the highest available levels, while attempting to remain within a specific area of activity, and not having to kill hundreds of thousands in between high level harvests.

Many disagree and insist I am imagining my success.

Regardless, I am finding that if I only kill the highest levels, for example the mythical instead of the level 7, I rarely have to kill more than 2 Mythicals in order to get a legendary to spawn somewhere nearby.

Now, do I have to do restarts in order to accomplish this? I'm not sure because I haven't experimented with that in any certainty. I have done restarts here and there when it seems that animals have become suddenly sparse. But there remains another question in this regard.

And that is whether or not that process of killing the higher levels to gain a top level spawn is somehow interrupted and disengaged once a restart is done. If so, than the player must avoid doing restarts in order to maintain any momentum of that spawning process.

And yet another question, does this momentum require the player remaining within a specific distance from his last kill? In other words can we move too far which disables any unique spawning process we may have triggered?

Again, more unanswered questions that immediately affect our success. So, short of actual advice for the OP, it should be logical that there are a few unknowns involved that should be dictating our gameplay, and if you're asking yourself all of the pertinent questions, than maybe your determined observation can dictate your tactics, rather than placing your bets on YouTuber editing proposals.

[Findus]

@Geronimo: I would ask if we need a new explanation for this or if it isn't already covered by the "same old theories" and if we consider a new explanation (or revisit even older ones) also look for evidence against it. I think you are asking the right questions, but I also think they have been answered by now. For example, there seems to be ample evidence that new animals can spawn outside of the immediate field of play.
For one thing, I can't vouch for the great one and the latest version and like always it's not 100%, but I can confirm that new animals can spawn into areas I haven't been to in a long time and without me killing that species recently.
Also, as this was an early explanation, people would have been on the lookout for this and would have noticed if this was a constant, guaranteed thing, especially if it was the same herd. Some "grinders" more ore less monitor their whole map.
Then, animals can be replaced immediately, but sometimes it takes some time (monitored with "illegal" tools). One earlier demonstrated trigger for respawns seems to have been the killing of an animal of the opposite sex. That would raise the addional question of what counts as the "active area of play".
Lastly, and at least in the case of the GO, if there was a known precise way of predicting it including the exact herd, then the devs would have an incentive to change that aspect of the game pretty quickly.

Now, if we look at the explanation of the game trying to balance out animal levels per species and on the map (which seems like a sensible thing to do), then animals would tend to respawn into the same area or even herd, especially if not many are killed in the meantime, but would do so not necessarily. We are just dealing with probabilities again. That seems to be a sufficient explanation to me.

Originally posted by Geronimo:

But, in spite of not knowing the answer to this question, people are grinding away because they think they can increase their odds by sheer number of kills.

While you'd have to monitor less area, you wouldn't increase the odds by not moving. This is not some kind of ritual or behavior that triggers the spawning of a GO, the probabilities don't change. And if it spawned somewhere else, you'd never know.
And while it's a figure of speech, and techinally you increase "your" odds by killing many animals, you of course don't increase the general odds, you just accept and work with them. And for that, it's easier to incorporate more herds, e.g. to dissipate hunting pressure.
You do increase your odds by herd management, though.

Originally posted by Geronimo:

It's been my contention that I have been able to realize more high level spawning by only harvesting the highest available levels, while attempting to remain within a specific area of activity, and not having to kill hundreds of thousands in between high level harvests.

Many disagree and insist I am imagining my success.

Who are those "many" who are insisting you are imagining your success? I for one just (tried) to help you to properly assess and analyze what you are experiencing and tried to steer you away from rituatlistic/superstituous thinking or extrapolating from small numbers.
E.g. Luring is very unlikely to have anything to do with it while the area very well might have, especially with more solitary animals like male moose (at least that used to be the case until now) when all or most of the herd/need zone "slots" are taken.

And what's with that claim of "having" to kill "hundreds of thousands" in between high level harvests? Does that stem from the number given for the GO in the New England thread, with a specific fur no less? (And while these are related topics, you keep conflating high level, diamond potentials, diamonds and GOs.)

Originally posted by Geronimo:

Regardless, I am finding that if I only kill the highest levels, for example the mythical instead of the level 7, I rarely have to kill more than 2 Mythicals in order to get a legendary to spawn somewhere nearby.

Which would be perfectly explaibable by the "same old theories". But what does "rarerely" mean? Is this based on more than the recent run of like 10 to 20 animals?

And several Youtubers are fairly transparent about the time / number of kills it took them to get a GO. Editing doesn't change those numbers unless we outright want to accuse them of not telling the truth and using cheats.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Findus:

@Geronimo: I would ask if we need a new explanation for this or if it isn't already covered by the "same old theories" and if we consider a new explanation (or revisit even older ones) also look for evidence against it. I think you are asking the right questions, but I also think they have been answered by now. For example, there seems to be ample evidence that new animals can spawn outside of the immediate field of play.
For one thing, I can't vouch for the great one and the latest version and like always it's not 100%, but I can confirm that new animals can spawn into areas I haven't been to in a long time and without me killing that species recently.
Also, as this was an early explanation, people would have been on the lookout for this and would have noticed if this was a constant, guaranteed thing, especially if it was the same herd. Some "grinders" more ore less monitor their whole map.
Then, animals can be replaced immediately, but sometimes it takes some time (monitored with "illegal" tools). One earlier demonstrated trigger for respawns seems to have been the killing of an animal of the opposite sex. That would raise the addional question of what counts as the "active area of play".
Lastly, and at least in the case of the GO, if there was a known precise way of predicting it including the exact herd, then the devs would have an incentive to change that aspect of the game pretty quickly.

Now, if we look at the explanation of the game trying to balance out animal levels per species and on the map (which seems like a sensible thing to do), then animals would tend to respawn into the same area or even herd, especially if not many are killed in the meantime, but would do so not necessarily. We are just dealing with probabilities again. That seems to be a sufficient explanation to me.

Originally posted by Geronimo:

But, in spite of not knowing the answer to this question, people are grinding away because they think they can increase their odds by sheer number of kills.

While you'd have to monitor less area, you wouldn't increase the odds by not moving. This is not some kind of ritual or behavior that triggers the spawning of a GO, the probabilities don't change. And if it spawned somewhere else, you'd never know.
And while it's a figure of speech, and techinally you increase "your" odds by killing many animals, you of course don't increase the general odds, you just accept and work with them. And for that, it's easier to incorporate more herds, e.g. to dissipate hunting pressure.
You do increase your odds by herd management, though.

New animals do not respawn into areas you haven't been in recently simply because new animals don't respawn unless they are replacing an animal already on the map. Once you start a game, it's population is loaded and dispersed, and every single one of those individual animals will remain on your map from restart to restart until it is harvested. The only thing a restart does is initiate the repopulation and dispersion process, which may or may not calculate recent harvesting and spawning/zone activity, etc. What I am experiencing on my maps are higher level animals spawning within my active areas, not just anywhere randomly on my map. Why is my game so different? Those factors to which I speak regarding continual proximity and the fact that I am not slaughtering anywhere on my map, which could be causing its own unique problems for other players.

And to your assumption that some of my questions have been resolved with confirmation I think you're deluding yourself.

In so much as you suggest that there can be no unique process that influences spawning mechanics, you also point out that the Devs would quickly act to avoid predictability. But what we can predict is that there's a good possibility that grinding could be exactly why people are having to kill so many more animals than I, in between high level spawns.

I think the biggest difference between your game and mine, is that what you discern as probable is based on odds and numeration, while I am simply basing my speculation on whatever I'm actually experiencing as a result of my playing according to those speculations. And from what I'm hearing from you and others, is that I seem to be experiencing much more predictable success.

[Findus]

Originally posted by Geronimo:

New animals do not respawn into areas you haven't been in recently simply because new animals don't respawn unless they are replacing an animal already on the map.

What I was saying is that since I hadn't hunted a specific species recently, new (high level) animals of that species being present in an area I hadn't been in for a while very likely had to be the result of me killing that species in other areas earlier, which would be a hint that animals don't respawn just in the current radius. Like always, I wouldn't claim it's 100%, perhaps I simply didn't notice them in the past or hung around long enough, but overall it's pretty conclusive.

Originally posted by Geronimo:

What I am experiencing on my maps are higher level animals spawning within my active areas, not just anywhere randomly on my map. Why is my game so different?

It's not? For a possible explanation see my previous (edited) answer.

Originally posted by Geronimo:

In so much as you suggest that there can be no unique process that influences spawning mechanics, you also point out that the Devs would quickly act to avoid predictability.

I didn't say that there "can" be no unique process, but if one was actually identified in the past, then yes, it's a good possibility that the devs would have changed it by now. Overall distribution etc. they can't change as easily, though, as it's necessary, and grinding per se isn't an exploit. You seem to be looking for an exploit of sorts.

What I oppose is the forming of "rituals". Not finding causalities, but simply repeating/recreating everything that was done when something else happened without proper analysis and isolation of factors with a good chance to miss the actual underlying reason.

Originally posted by Geronimo:

But what we can predict is that there's a good possibility that grinding could be exactly why people are having to kill so many more animals than I, in between high level spawns.

Again, what are you talking about? What's happening to @carrot remains to be seen, but what you are experiencing is neither unexplainable nor (so far) statistically relevant or unheard of. It's possible that this will continue at least for a while and you only killing the highest level animals and staying in the same area is likely a contributing factor to that, but if you get a GO earlier that way than someone who grinds for it, that would be luck. Statistically, you won't have to kill less animals to get one. Basically, you are grinding, but at a more leasurly and more naturally feeling pace, perhaps being lucky with the initial population distribution, while someone who fully commits to the grind and decided to monitor the map normally shouldn't have to shoot more animals than you (some will have very high species specific diamond rates if they can get enough low level animals on their map).

Also does this currently hold true for all species for your?
You are stubbornly refusing to mention current numbers, but your very old, species spanning diamond rate from your xbox account was like 0.1% (7 diamonds among 8049 harvests). This will have very likely increased significantly by now, e.g. by applying some sort of herd management and because the game itself might have changed, but, and I'm repeating myself here, to me from the outside it seems like all of your attention is on your recent couple of high level moose kills because it's out of the ordinary for you. I have mentioned that earlier, but didn't get a reaction, so I tend to think it might be true.

Originally posted by Geronimo:

And from what I'm hearing from you and others, is that I seem to be experiencing much more predictable success.

Again, based on what? Your last couple of high level moose kills across several reserves? You probably won't believe me, but I'm happy for you and wish you all the success in the world. However, to date, that data is simply not enough to turn up your nose on more solidly established advice. E.g. if you got a GO tomorrow, I'd be genuinly glad for you, but if you then went on to proclaim you now have the way to get a GO quickly, I'd be genuinly mad at you.

As for me, while I'm interested in grinding from the technical side of things and do employ some techniques learned from it, I enjoy roaming the landscape far too much to do it myself as a regular style of play and especially can't see myself grinding for a GO, and I think we are similar in that regard. And while I occasionally did have a couple of diamonds of a species in short succession, I normally turn to a different species after I have a diamond of one. I have given my overall diamond rate of 0.6% in the past, but I'm well aware that others have e.g. 2% or even more, especially after doing herd management for a while or if you don't shoot many females.


Edited to incorporate edits to Geronimo's post.

[Geronimo]

@Findus,

Preciating your time.

Ill repeat that I don't grind for high levels to reach a GO. But when I'm in an area where I've taken a couple 7s and an 8, I'm probably going to hang in that area and see if the legendary pops up.

After all, I am typically hunting for racks. But I won't have a lot of diamonds compared to others because they aren't my focus with each and every hunt. And that's what you see in my Xbox account as well.

As a matter of fact I've turned down going after diamonds I've spotted because I was engaged in another animal.

But that doesn't mean that I haven't been observing what tactics seem to be successful when I do come across the top levels, and it certainly doesn't mean that last month's moose records are the only trophies I've acquired over the years. Lol

I'm pretty confident in my tactics and that I can get diamonds to spawn in any area by killing less than 50 animals.

But you'll just have to take my word for it. However if you want to start keeping track of any diamonds I get, I'll try to make sure I post the screens.

[Findus]

I wasn't implying you didn't get any trophies at all, I hope you realize that.
1 in 50 is possible, that would be a diamond rate of 2%. Sometimes the numbers between diamonds will be smaller, sometimes bigger.
But that would generally be after some herd management or a good initial level distribution. Getting a diamond consistently for any species in any area with any starting level distribution in under 50 kills seems overconfident, though. Maybe there were some changes with one of the last updates, but if I understand you correctly, you are saying you could do that at any point in the (at least recent) past.

And I'll gladly take your word for it IF you record your kills in a clean manner for yourself, e.g. including reserve, and try to eliminate bias and try to disprove your own idea as well. It's not your honesty I'm questioning, after all, I'm just more than a bit wary of your methods / the way you arrive at conclusions.
E.g. in order to disprove your idea, look for a couple of areas with mostly/only medium level animals that you have "surveyed" reasonably well to ensure no diamonds are hanging around, preferably of species that form bigger herds and that you didn't see many diamonds of recently, and see if you can get a diamond to spawn within 50 kills for each one.
And for finding random areas, close your eyes and pick one, or let someone pick who isn't familiar with the game at all and draw a species from a hat or something like that (but perhaps do a preselection of sorts to exlude absolutely empty areas).
And if you don't want to spend too much time, do like one of the "disprove" areas and two of the random ones at first. That's 150 kills that don't give you a 100% conclusive outcome, but since you made a strong claim, you'd see pretty fast if it's worth continuing down that path.

As for always staying in one area, my prediction would be that this might work for a while, simply because high level animals have a big impact and the game trying to balance out the distribution would tend to respawn it in the same area again, but as I think that's only a probability, sooner or later some high level respawns will "bleed" from the area.

[nauxous]

The fact that you haven't even got a diamond after three months makes me wonder if you are even targeting the right animal.

I've managed to bag both a whitetail and a red deer great one. Each one took way over 1000 kills, an embarrassing number of months. Probably picked up about 20+ diamonds for each.

However, if you value your time and your sanity, I'd certainly advise against embarking on a grind. Any satisfaction/achievement that you expect will be underwhelming to say the least.

If you are up for punishment then the only tip I can give you is to literally find all your drinking zones first (I ended up with around 50 for whitetail), then shoot/harvest only a couple of males from each zone before moving on. Just work your way through all the zones and rinse and repeat.

Bonus tip: if you mess up a vital shot on decent trophy animal - quit the game before the map turns red. When you reload, the animal will still be there in the same spot for another go.

[Woodyplank]

It's nice to find and harvest a GO but it's a long shot. I suggest you take a little time to investigate some of the small lakes in out of the way places. You're looking for tracks that exceed the normal max weight for that species. For example a Whitetail diamond has a max weight of 100 KG so a track with a high end of it's weight range of 102 KG has a good chance of being a GO. It's a known fact that you have to kill something to get something in this game (other than the initial spawn). There is no guarantee what level a replacement animal will be and no "sure fire" way any player can influence that. Anyone that tells you "kill x diamonds and a GO will always spawn" probably also has a sure fire system to win at craps in Vegas he/she is willing to sell you.

[sneakybass]

Originally posted by carrot:

i have been doing the "Great One grind" for about 3 months now and have not even gotten a diamond from it. from what i know, im doing it right but its not working. if anyone is good at getting them and would like to help me, please add me. im getting desperate lol. this is my last resort before i give up and try to find a hacker to get one

Well if your blasting animals at need zones like the ccs want you to do I can see why you would be where your at and attitude grinding kills I think ruins the game. , some people say you need to kill thousands of animals to get one ,very boring I would think doing that. Have fun , I just shot a Diamond Moose on new england less than 400 moose were killed maybe even 300 moose while hunting boots on the ground exploring It was amazing to see this Moose coming towards me when I was calling did not even expect it just like real hunting you just never know when your going to see a good animal thats what i love about this game. Have fun explore and hope you run Into one.

[Tigershark1968]

It's very possible those getting numbers like 600 diamonds and that have lodges filled with rares and super rares and tons of GO's are actually cheating. They could totally be making up this herd management story to cover their tracks. There are literally thousands of people saying they have been doing herd management for months and swear they are doing it to the letter without making any of the mistakes being warned about not making. If you read the comments section of Youtube, there are thousands of players saying they still can't get anything special doing the herd management. Which makes me think it is possible it's a ruse, to cover their cheating behinds and not raise suspicion.

One thing I have noticed is the graphics being shown on peoples Youtube videos of the herd grinders. No grass, barren landscape you can see clearly through for the entire sight range. I tried minimalizing my video settings to see if I could reduce vegetation and detail to the level I was seeing in the videos and I didn't even get close. In Battlefield there was a cheat that simplified a players view. It removed all the cover that could be shot through, so the cheater could see other players beyond easily. My clan was getting our lunch money taken by this guy for like 2 years of gaming. We all swore the guy had to be cheating. One day one of our top guys in our clan with superior gaming and programming knowledge joined that player as a spectator and then saw what this cheater was seeing. Screen shots and video were taking and handed over to Punkbuster and the guy finally got banned for using this new at the time hack.

Logic would dictate that when a small margin of people are seeing this level of success, while others doing the same things have no luck and outnumber those claiming it works by 20 to 1...there's a problem. It does not help that the developers do not aid one bit in dispelling any theories or ideas on the subject. They just read the forums and nerf and buff accordingly as they find issues that go against their grand vision.

Which brings another question to mind. Would developers make a game that you have to shoot 2,500 or even 4,000 of the same species on a map to get the ball rolling for that species to begin to see diamonds, GO's and super rare fur types? Think about it. How many maps are there. How many species are there to hunt. Run the numbers through your head at just how many animals you would have to shoot to see all this game has to offer for variety of fur types, antlers and such. To make it 4,000 animals of the same species before you start to see good stuff, the stuff that people bought the game to hunt and see for themselves...yet nearly totally unobtainable for the average light game play hours player. Either the Dev's are cruel in making a game this ruthless, or there is something suspicious going on with what others are claiming.

[Findus]

@Tigershark It's possible some of them are cheating, I can't imagine all of them are. And I'm not so sure about "literally thousands of people" having no success at all when grinding, not to mention we can't control what they are actually doing or understanding.
Would be nice if the OP could clear that up for this case at least.

I'd be interested in seeing screenshots of CCs you can't recreate, although that doesn't touch the spawning mechanic itself. Haven't seen that for more popular content creators, but it does sound like something people might do when the goal is more the prize than the journey.

As for the devs, no they aren't interested that we get all of the possible harvests and rares (and combinations) that are possible. Why should they be? In a way it's a gambling mechanic and it's what keeps people playing. But no, generally you don't need to kill thousands of animals to get diamonds or rares unless you want a specific rare of a specific species. And if you shoot thousands of animals of the same species without seeing a diamond, then you are either very unlucky or you are doing something wrong.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Tigershark1968:

It's very possible those getting numbers like 600 diamonds and that have lodges filled with rares and super rares and tons of GO's are actually cheating. They could totally be making up this herd management story to cover their tracks. There are literally thousands of people saying they have been doing herd management for months and swear they are doing it to the letter without making any of the mistakes being warned about not making. If you read the comments section of Youtube, there are thousands of players saying they still can't get anything special doing the herd management. Which makes me think it is possible it's a ruse, to cover their cheating behinds and not raise suspicion.

One thing I have noticed is the graphics being shown on peoples Youtube videos of the herd grinders. No grass, barren landscape you can see clearly through for the entire sight range. I tried minimalizing my video settings to see if I could reduce vegetation and detail to the level I was seeing in the videos and I didn't even get close. In Battlefield there was a cheat that simplified a players view. It removed all the cover that could be shot through, so the cheater could see other players beyond easily. My clan was getting our lunch money taken by this guy for like 2 years of gaming. We all swore the guy had to be cheating. One day one of our top guys in our clan with superior gaming and programming knowledge joined that player as a spectator and then saw what this cheater was seeing. Screen shots and video were taking and handed over to Punkbuster and the guy finally got banned for using this new at the time hack.

Logic would dictate that when a small margin of people are seeing this level of success, while others doing the same things have no luck and outnumber those claiming it works by 20 to 1...there's a problem. It does not help that the developers do not aid one bit in dispelling any theories or ideas on the subject. They just read the forums and nerf and buff accordingly as they find issues that go against their grand vision.

Which brings another question to mind. Would developers make a game that you have to shoot 2,500 or even 4,000 of the same species on a map to get the ball rolling for that species to begin to see diamonds, GO's and super rare fur types? Think about it. How many maps are there. How many species are there to hunt. Run the numbers through your head at just how many animals you would have to shoot to see all this game has to offer for variety of fur types, antlers and such. To make it 4,000 animals of the same species before you start to see good stuff, the stuff that people bought the game to hunt and see for themselves...yet nearly totally unobtainable for the average light game play hours player. Either the Dev's are cruel in making a game this ruthless, or there is something suspicious going on with what others are claiming.

Well said!

I'm not going to speak to the cheating factors, but all you've said is absolutely logical rationale.