**WINTER OF WOE - BONUS OBJECTIVE POINT**
As previously announced, the team will be distributing an additional point toward milestones to anyone who completed the Absorbing Man fight in the first step of the Winter of Woe.
This point will be distributed at a later time as it requires the team to pull and analyze data.
The timeline has not been set, but work has started.

A possible solution to the unfairness of cheating, losing points and fighting in a lower tier.

Yes, Kabam, we all laud and extol your efforts and actions for punishing cheaters in AW. That's not the complaint. The complaint is dropping those cheaters into lower tiers, so they can steamroll legitimate alliances fighting tooth and nail in the gold and platinum brackets.

A run-in with one of these can unfairly cause hard working alliances to drop from a bracket; especially towards the end of a season.

It seems ludicrous to me there should be even more collateral damage caused by the cheaters.

I offer a solution:

Point Debt

What is point debt?
_______________________________

1) It's an active and passive solution to AW cheating.

2) When an alliance is caught cheating, instead of getting points deducted, they keep their current score (maintaining their relative bracket) and the would-be point deduction is added as debt.

3) Half their points from any AW would go to paying off the debt (again, to maintain their relative bracket). Once their debt is paid off, they can start earning all their points towards their score again.

4) Any debt not paid off at the end of a season is deducted from their final score.
«134

Comments

  • KirklinKirklin Posts: 149
    Punishment on a Payment Plan? Disagree with that one.

    Why?

    The punishment is applied regardless, but it's preventing them from being dropped down.

    Cause they get the rewards and jump over to a shell alliance and not be punished.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    Punishment on a Payment Plan? Disagree with that one.

    Why?

    The punishment is applied regardless, but it's preventing them from being dropped down.

    It's punishment. It's not meant to be negotiable. "Cheat now, pay later at your own convenience!". That's a no from me.
  • Al3xAl3x Posts: 42
    This is a good solution. Just to add on, their “tier” should be based on “current rating - debt”. Else they would be happily take the higher multiplier
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    @GroundedWisdom I think you missed the point of his idea. It isn't pay at your own convenience, it's you only earn 1/2 points toward you score until the other 1/2 from each war pays your debt. But it isn't the point deductions that drop them to the gold/plat matches, it's the loss in war rating. All you need to do is stop deducting war rating and keep or increase the score deduction. That way they still drop to gold/plat but they have to earn their way back against teams in master/plat 1 or else lose until they arrive at whatever level they belong at without piloting. There is no reason why the punishment should result in playing weaker competition.

    Whatever logic you apply it to, it equates to rationing punishment. That just incentivizes cheating more because it's a half-punishment and could easily be used at the last minute, or as a final push. I agree that mismatches as a result of reductions is an issue, but I'm certainly not in favor of negotiating punishment.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    Further to that, you could also argue that they are lowered because they progressed to where they were at illegally. Which means there's a good possibility they are exactly where they should be, and doesn't constitute an unfair Match at all. The cases that I see as an issue are really with repeat offenders that end up much, much lower than they should be. Going down a Tier or two isn't really an unfair Match.
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,636 ★★★★★
    Putting them lower unequivocally punishes the lower alliances. “You could argue” but you would be very, very wrong. More wrong than usual
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    Yes, please tell me more about how I couldn't possibly understand because I'm just a lowly Player who isn't at that level.
    If they didn't earn their place in that Tier, they don't belong there. That's why the Rating is adjusted. They didn't earn it honestly. They're being knocked down to where they belong. That's about as just as it gets. What the real issue here is, is people aren't happy about losing to Allies that have been caught cheating. No one likes to lose.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    We're talking about the system overall. Whether someone is in Master or Stone, the same action is what we're discussing. If you're trying to somehow imply that it's worse for someone to be knocked down from Master as opposed to Gold, the effect is the same. If they cheated to get to Master, they don't belong there.
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,636 ★★★★★
    Yes, please tell me more about how I couldn't possibly understand because I'm just a lowly Player who isn't at that level.
    If they didn't earn their place in that Tier, they don't belong there. That's why the Rating is adjusted. They didn't earn it honestly. They're being knocked down to where they belong. That's about as just as it gets. What the real issue here is, is people aren't happy about losing to Allies that have been caught cheating. No one likes to lose.

    Yes, they didn’t earn it and should be demoted. No one, literally not one person disputes that. Knock them down to gold. Just don’t drop the war rating so that matchmaking puts them up against gold alliances. That punishes the gold alliances unless you are so out of touch that you think it’s reasonable to argue that the punished master groups might belong there.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    You can't change one and not the other in the current system. War Rating is based on Wins.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    I would also debate the word punish. As off as the Matches are, they're still played and either won on ability, or lost on ability. Presuming the Match is played fairly.
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,636 ★★★★★
    We're talking about the system overall. Whether someone is in Master or Stone, the same action is what we're discussing. If you're trying to somehow imply that it's worse for someone to be knocked down from Master as opposed to Gold, the effect is the same. If they cheated to get to Master, they don't belong there.

    We are talking about the way in which the system is broken. If Alabama got penalized by the ncaa for paying recruits, they would become bowl ineligible but they would still play an SEC schedule. What Kabam is doing is putting them in the Sun Belt, making Sun Belt teams miss Bowl Games by losing to Alabama, and then rewarding Alabama for going undefeated lol
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,636 ★★★★★
    I would also debate the word punish. As off as the Matches are, they're still played and either won on ability, or lost on ability. Presuming the Match is played fairly.

    You can debate it if you want to add to your wrongness. Matchmaking ordinarily would never let them play each other. You don’t think it’s a punishment for a 12 million alliance to play a 25 million alliance they have no chance of beating because the 25 million group cheated? And the outcome affects the rewards? Whatever man. You are talking nonsense due to your need to be right
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    We're not talking about Sports. The same references keep coming up in terms of Seasons and they don't apply. Same comparison was made in the suggestion of defaulting Wins. We're talking about a complex interconnected system that has many moving parts.
    Every Season end, we have Season Fever. People come out of the woodworks and start speaking out about the injustices of how they aren't getting ahead. I don't disagree that there's an adverse effect from altering Rating. I've also posted several suggestions to resolve the situation. However, I'm also not for the Victim Mentality. We've had our own Matches that were, in my opinion, the result of some form reduction. We fought, we either won or lost, then we moved on. That's just how the system works. If we come up agaisnt an Ally we can't beat, we fight our best, and take what Points we earn. That in and of itself is fair. The system is another subject. It's based on performance. If we lose, we still get the Points we put up. I agree on some levels, but I'm definitely not for allowing Allies to stay in the Tier they are just to make Matches easier. They cheat to get the War Rating, they deserve to lose it.
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,636 ★★★★★
    It’s an analogy. In what way doesn’t it apply?
  • LeNoirFaineantLeNoirFaineant Posts: 8,636 ★★★★★
    edited October 2018
    You keep missing the point. I don’t think they should stay in the tier. No one does. But they should keep fighting the tier unless losses drop them down
  • Mr_PlatypusMr_Platypus Posts: 2,779 ★★★★★
    Could always just give them a 1x point multiplier but keep their war rating at whatever it is currently.
    The multiplier would ruin their season as everyone in their tier earns 5-7x more point than them, but it also won’t destroy some alliance that’s on the verge of getting the next bracket (eg plat 3, very nearly plat 2) by having them match up against an alliance much too strong for them.
  • Crazyjack719Crazyjack719 Posts: 425 ★★
    Why not just suspend the ally from matchmaking for 1-3 Wars depending on severity of infraction?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    edited October 2018
    You keep missing the point. I don’t think they should stay in the tier. No one does. But they should keep fighting the tier unless losses drop them down

    I'm not missing the point at all. You seem to be missing my point. They don't belong in that Tier to begin with because they cheated to get there. Removing Rating is the equivalent of losses. They shouldn't stay in it when their means of getting there was breaking the rules. The moment you allow them to stay in it, you're permitting it to happen. Certainly in part.
  • Clinton2111Clinton2111 Posts: 130
    Could always just give them a 1x point multiplier but keep their war rating at whatever it is currently.
    The multiplier would ruin their season as everyone in their tier earns 5-7x more point than them, but it also won’t destroy some alliance that’s on the verge of getting the next bracket (eg plat 3, very nearly plat 2) by having them match up against an alliance much too strong for them.

    This seems like a sensible solution.
    Why not just suspend the ally from matchmaking for 1-3 Wars depending on severity of infraction?

    Cause sometimes you cannot ban the entire alliance for the actions of one person especially if they don't know who the cheater is and kabam doesn't help by stating who when they deduct points

    One thing I wish Kabam would do is what steam does when they VAC ban people. Place a nice text on their profile similar to the legends badge with the number the bans on record and days since the last ban.



  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Posts: 36,126 ★★★★★
    Not when they cheated to earn that Rating. That's not a solution that encompasses all ill-gotten Rewards. It's not just a Matchmaking tool. It's a direct reflection of Wins and Losses.
  • LegendJRGLegendJRG Posts: 39
    Not when they cheated to earn that Rating. That's not a solution that encompasses all ill-gotten Rewards. It's not just a Matchmaking tool. It's a direct reflection of Wins and Losses.
    Rating doesn’t really do much though besides determine who you’re matched against. I think the easiest solution is to dock them points in some way as is done already and combine that with a multiplier punishment as well. Keep them in the same tier and rating, but punish their points. The simple fact is even without cheating these alliances will only move a division at worst and a handful of spots at best. They’re cheating to jump from rank 20 to rank 1, not gold1 to plat1 which it seems like you’re arguing it seems. A master ally that pilots will still destroy almost every other alliance in the game, just based on roster alone. It isn’t fair to make lower alliances suffer because they cheated, banning them from season rewards doesn’t work either because there are cases where one person cheats and the rest of the ally doesn’t know. For instance they don’t want to be kicked out and have been performing poorly, so they hire a merc, it happens. Not fair to punish the other 29 people’s season for that. Blatant piloting should be a season ban though. Kabam maybe needs to do a case by case basis in egregious circumstances.
  • The1_NuclearOnionThe1_NuclearOnion Posts: 907 ★★★
    You keep missing the point. I don’t think they should stay in the tier. No one does. But they should keep fighting the tier unless losses drop them down

    I'm not missing the point at all. You seem to be missing my point. They don't belong in that Tier to begin with because they cheated to get there. Removing Rating is the equivalent of losses. They shouldn't stay in it when their means of getting there was breaking the rules. The moment you allow them to stay in it, you're permitting it to happen. Certainly in part.

    It seems like your idea of cheating for most of these alliances is somehow 1 guy who pilots all accounts and therefore if they lose THAT, they're no good. In reality, the reality that @LeNoirFaineant keeps bringing up to you, many cheating infractions were alliances who piloted 1 or 2 accounts and usually due to temporary absences etc. not lack of abilities or rosters.
    Those alliances are plenty strong enough to get where they are and keep it. Dropping down is a massacre for all the alliances they are matched with until they, fairly quickly, work their way right back up the ladder quite undefeated on the way and leaving a trail of destruction for the lower tiers.

    As far as the Olympics analogy above from @Mainer123 : That analogy is good but breaks down in this game like this...
    The Olympics committee bans the American Olympics Team for cheating. When the American Team inquires for who was cheating and how, the Olympic committee says, "Sorry can't tell you", then they "Kick the MFers out of the season" as you said. That is not a fair solution either.
  • AleorAleor Posts: 3,041 ★★★★★
    why not just ban cheaters, recount points of every war where cheating happened and rearrange rewards from those wars? give fair alis what they didn't get and take away from cheated ali up to negative value if needed. don't think losing all your roster to win couple of wars will worth it. or don't take away a thing, if you're afraid of hurting many because of one cheater. even thou it didn't stop you now
Sign In or Register to comment.