[UNOFFICIAL] List Of Legit and Scam Providers List

Quote:

Originally Posted by !nvictus-Load This wording implies that you confirmed something with me in reality, I had to approach you to correct the record.

Quote:

Originally Posted by !nvictus-Load The customer in question violated our rules by discussing the cheat with individuals outside of our private community, which is against our most important rule. Furthermore, they spread false information. As a result, their account was banned, and we issued a full refund covering the past two months. After being banned, the customer tried to return to our service, which we have denied. Since they are no longer an active customer, the claim of "a lot of customer complaints" is simply inaccurate.

Quote:

Originally Posted by !nvictus-Load For context, our cheat stands out on your list for several reasons: Its the only one that has never been detected. It includes a spoofer. Its priced affordably at €59.95 per month. I have already provided evidence showing that the community is largely satisfied with the cheat, that all customers are fully informed about features and state of the cheat prior to purchase, and that refunds are offered to anyone who is dissatisfied. This ranking, as it stands, lacks credibility and fairness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by !nvictus-Load Despite these advantages, our cheat is listed as Tier 3, while others (facing similar feature-related challenges and being detected more frequently) remain in Tier 2 and Tier 1.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 I never said i reached out you to, i said i have confirmed the information i had gotten with you, which is true. This information was regarding to yet another customer being tired of the issues with features not being in the cheat, and weeks of waiting for compensation. This is the information i had gotten about a complain from a customer: "Just ESP and silent aim, brooo I can't take it anymore Now he says it'll take until July or something What kind of crap is this And for compensation, he’s been saying 'soon soon' for weeks"

• The customer violated clear rules by discussing private community matters externally and spreading false claims.
• They were refunded fully for the past two months despite these violations.
• After being banned, they attempted to rejoin, demonstrating that they were still interested in using our product despite their grievances.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 Just because his no longer an active customer, doesn't mean he wasn't a customer. The fact that you banned him from simply sharing his frustrations about EvilCheats, i believe prove something regarding you ways of behaving to customers, when in fact so many have left and complained in the near past.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 Just because you have a UD product with a good detection rate & history, doesn't mean it doesn't deserve to be in tier 3, there are multiple reasons for your product to be in tier 3, and i have explained these reasons plenty on times in privates before.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 You can disagree all you won't with this, but in the end of the day before your product actually improve and your customers satisfactions improves i don't see any good enough reason to move you to another tier

• Our undetected (UD) status, combined with a strong detection history, is a significant advantage over competitors in Tiers 1 and 2.
• Our cheat includes a spoofer and remains affordable, which many competitors at higher tiers do not offer.
• We’ve demonstrated our commitment to transparency, refunds, and resolving customer issues promptly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 you product EvilCheats, is literally the product on the market with most complains atm, also with most complains that i have to investigate since it's private, i have spent sooo many hours investigating you and your product to come to the conclusion i have come to. If you want me to make any kind of evaluations of your product and customer satisfaction, you have to NOT kick/ban me from the discord when we disagree on something, otherwise it's really hard to reevaluate a private product & community.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 All other cheats in both tier 1 & tier 2, have magnificent more features at their current state and not users complaining like they do with your product (EvilCheat).

• Features are irrelevant if a product is frequently detected or lacks stability.
• Our community remains loyal because of our detection history and stability, and we have proven this with positive feedback and customer retention.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 When all of this is said, i have explained and talked about this in privates with you, i have seen no reason to start a big drama on this thread as it benefits no one. Btw you are banning your customers because of what you yourself is doing right now. :confused:

In our private discussion, we talked about key points that are misrepresented here:

• As I mentioned privately, For most of the users that are banned from our community, there is usually a deliberate attempt to exaggerate negative experiences or take things out of context out of frustration.
• I highlighted how, prior to their ban, users like Astro irrefutably talked positively about the product as can be seen in his 26 thousand messages in our Discord, even noting its superior performance in limited states. This is often the case with other customers and their public negativity doesn't always align with their actual experience.
• While opinions change over time, consistency and context matter, especially when complaints come immediately after bans for rule violations. These incidents reflect individual problems, not a widespread issue within our community.

You agreed that promoting opinions in an "organized" way to harm a product is not the right approach, yet you contradict yourself and use these isolated and misleading examples without adequately investigating their context or result.

The claim that we are "banning customers because of what i am doing right now" is a outrageous distorted statement. Bans are enforced for clear violations of community rules, not for sharing frustrations constructively. We actively promote users sharing their actual frustrations regarding the product.

As we discussed privately, even you agreed that the actions of banned individuals (like organizing public stunts and spreading misinformation) are not the appropriate way to handle dissatisfaction. However, these bans are rare and come with full transparency, including refunds when warranted.

To imply that we handle such situations poorly ignores the broader satisfaction and loyalty of the majority of our community. Isolated incidents should not define a product's overall quality or the integrity of its providers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by !nvictus-Load You stated that you confirmed information with me, but I should point out that the information you brought to me was incomplete and wrong. You are referencing a single customer complaint that included exaggerated frustrations about delays and compensation. Not to mention that I brought his name and reasoning up to you, after which you confirmed that this was the reasoning. While I don't deny that this individual expressed dissatisfaction, the broader context and resolution are being omitted here. The customer violated clear rules by discussing private community matters externally and spreading false claims. They were refunded fully for the past two months despite these violations. After being banned, they attempted to rejoin, demonstrating that they were still interested in using our product despite their grievances. While this individual was a customer, their behavior and the resolution hardly represent "a lot of customer complaints" or reflect our general customer satisfaction. The quote you provided about "just ESP and silent aim" and "weeks of waiting" reflects frustrations we addressed transparently within our community. Customers are informed about features before purchase. Compensation topics are communicated clearly, and we have offered refunds to dissatisfied customers proving that we are customer-focused. While I can confirm these steps for our product I cannot say the same about other providers. Based on community feedback, competitors seem less willing to resolve issues or provide refunds even within subscription periods. Your translation of this message from German is also worth noting, as it was a copy from what Astro received. When compared to your statements to me, it shows inconsistencies in your "objective" view of the situation. This is inaccurate. The customer was not banned for "sharing frustrations." They were banned for breaching a key rule of our private community by sharing private information externally and spreading falsehoods. This behavior warranted a ban to maintain the integrity of our community. Yes, they were a customer, but their dissatisfaction and subsequent ban represent an isolated incident, not a widespread trend. Your claim that "many have left and complained" lacks substantiation, especially given the overall satisfaction and retention we see in our community. Heres where we differ: Our undetected (UD) status, combined with a strong detection history, is a significant advantage over competitors in Tiers 1 and 2. Our cheat includes a spoofer and remains affordable, which many competitors at higher tiers do not offer. We’ve demonstrated our commitment to transparency, refunds, and resolving customer issues promptly. Your evaluation criteria appear inconsistent when competitors with frequent detections and fewer resolutions are ranked higher. You state that EvilCheats has "the most complaints" and that you have spent "sooo many hours investigating" us. However, this generalization lacks verifiable evidence, especially compared to competitors with documented detection issues and dissatisfaction. It’s easy to cite volume without addressing the content of complaints or how they are resolved. Additionally, you claim we have banned you for disagreements. This is a misrepresentation. Bans are only issued for rule violations or disruptive behavior, and we expect mutual respect in professional discussions. You were removed for subscription inactivity, as is standard for all users, not for disagreement. The fact that we granted you access to investigate our private community demonstrates transparency. While features are important: Features are irrelevant if a product is frequently detected or lacks stability. Our community remains loyal because of our detection history and stability, and we have proven this with positive feedback and customer retention. Its also worth noting that any product will face complaints. Its part of being in this space. What matters is how issues are addressed, and we have demonstrated a consistent willingness to engage, resolve, and refund. Let me address this in two parts: 1. Private Conversations In our private discussion, we talked about key points that are misrepresented here: As I mentioned privately, For most of the users that are banned from our community, there is usually a deliberate attempt to exaggerate negative experiences or take things out of context out of frustration. I highlighted how, prior to their ban, users like Astro irrefutably talked positively about the product as can be seen in his 26 thousand messages in our Discord, even noting its superior performance in limited states. This is often the case with other customers and their public negativity doesn't always align with their actual experience. While opinions change over time, consistency and context matter, especially when complaints come immediately after bans for rule violations. These incidents reflect individual problems, not a widespread issue within our community. You agreed that promoting opinions in an "organized" way to harm a product is not the right approach, yet you contradict yourself and use these isolated and misleading examples without adequately investigating their context or result. 2. Customer Bans and Drama The claim that we are "banning customers because of what i am doing right now" is a outrageous distorted statement. Bans are enforced for clear violations of community rules, not for sharing frustrations constructively. We actively promote users sharing their actual frustrations regarding the product. As we discussed privately, even you agreed that the actions of banned individuals (like organizing public stunts and spreading misinformation) are not the appropriate way to handle dissatisfaction. However, these bans are rare and come with full transparency, including refunds when warranted. To imply that we handle such situations poorly ignores the broader satisfaction and loyalty of the majority of our community. Isolated incidents should not define a product's overall quality or the integrity of its providers. You mentioned avoiding drama, which I agree with. However, your evaluation of EvilCheats still feels biased and inconsistent. I respect the effort you have put into investigating, but I urge you to apply your criteria consistently across all products.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 I am not gonna continue this “drama” if you feel like I am biased or not fair, feel free to take it up with the staff team of elitepvpers, then we can take it from there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 I am not gonna continue this “drama” if you feel like I am biased or not fair, feel free to take it up with the staff team of elitepvpers, then we can take it from there.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Baron7777 The issue is that you’re stirring up drama by speaking poorly about a product based on the experiences of 3-4 legitimate customers and opinions from people who were never even customers, like the guy who posted above my post. Even if the active customer base numbers in the hundreds or thousands, no product exists without chargebacks or toxic customers. Yet, for some reason, you’ve specifically chosen EC to make it look bad.

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenivor This isn’t about creating drama, and I agree that some posts here don’t add value to the discussion. However, dismissing valid concerns by saying it’s “only 3-4 users” isn’t fair either. The issue is more about transparency and handling issues properly. Requiring NDAs for refunds and banning people who speak up about their experiences raises legitimate questions. It’s not about blowing things out of proportion but ensuring fair treatment for all customers. Have you noticed similar practices from other providers, or is this behavior unique to EC? [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenivor Thankfully, this thread is here, or no one would get the time of day when asking for a refund. Great work,for holding him accountable.

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenivor there is always some deal going buy the invite to the private version and get x benefits then you wait months and months and your invite you paid 500$ for now is useless because this is a different product

Quote:

Originally Posted by greenivor My friend fell for this in the past but gave it another try. Now he’s stuck with a half-functional cheat and a lazy developer making endless false promises and his yearly sub is ticking down. I guess if the scam works, why change it?

Quote:

Originally Posted by !nvictus-Load Totally his work. [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...] Oh how the turn tables they say.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lort1234 Here is the full view of it, it would only be fair for everyone to know the full “story” of it. [Only registered and activated users can see links. Click Here To Register...]

Quote:

Originally Posted by !nvictus-Load I don’t see how half what you posted is required for context there but okay. Thanks bae. 😘

Quote:

Originally Posted by alexpsp00 "Never been detected" :kappa:

Quote:

Originally Posted by jon5820 EvilCheats was detected for months (Would get ban waves multiple times a week, every week for months) while ACUS continued to sell it, and have the status as “undetected” on his website before he exit scammed into his newest cheat/bypass and rebranded it into…. EvilCheats. Before that, it most definitely was not detected only “1-2 times in its existence”