**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Ban wave
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Take five hypothetical alliances, A through E.
Alliance A finishes the season in 1st place.
Alliance B in 2nd, Alliance C in 3rd, and so on.
If Alliance A is found to have a single member who cheated, that member is banned (some number of days for a first offense, that number of days time two for a second offense, and permanently for a third offense), and Alliance A forfeits all season rewards, effectively finishing in a new bracket without season rewards (simply moving them to last still yields rewards which they shouldn't receive).
Now that Alliance A has moved down, each Alliance beneath them moves up, making Alliance B the new 1st place alliance. If Alliance D, once in 4th place at the beginning of this scenario, now in 3rd, was also found to have a cheater, they move to the cheater bracket as well. Alliance E, originally in 5th place, is now in 3rd.
In this scenario, no one beneath a cheating alliance is penalized, alleviating @DNA3000 concern.
These alliances found to have cheaters should NOT have their war rating changed, as that would effectively make them steam roll all their competition in the next season.
To the concern raised by @Worknprogress regarding intentional tanking, perhaps I'm wrong, but it seems this is a bigger concern during off-season, and as others have pointed out, you can simply freeze war ratings in the off-season. It's not a perfect solution, but it's better than the current one.
I'm not saying this because we just missed Gold 1 by 21 places...
Here's a simple way to do this, that has a problem. A should be punished. We dock A's points and see where A places. Let's say that when we do that, A ends up below C and above D in terms of total points. We're lowering A, so we move everyone else up. The new order becomes B C A D E.
Now we look at E. E lost a fight against a cheater. So E is lower than it likely should be. We can never know where E should have landed, or for that matter all the secondary and tertiary ripple effects of that loss. But we can try to at least provide some remedy to E. So we give E compensatory points to partially compensate them for having faced a cheater. Those extra points would cause E to go up in rankings. Suppose that with those compensatory points E now falls between B and C. So the new order would be B E C A D.
Notice that in this scenario, D went from fourth to fifth (last) place. That's a problem. No one should get less rewards when you try to offer compensation for cheating. Remember: we aren't "correcting" the scores. We can't do that, because that is an unknowable. We are *compensating* the alliances who had to face cheaters, while penalizing the cheating alliances for being cheaters, and trying to not hurt anyone else in the process. No one should come away with less, except for the cheaters.
So how I would do this is different. The way I would do it is first, I would *eliminate* all the cheating alliances from the score board. So A B C D E becomes B C D E. Then I dock A's points by however much I want, and I look to see where A would have placed in the order. If A's points are now between C and D, then if C is in second place I give A third place rewards. Notice that I'm not changing the order, and D is still getting third place rewards. A is being removed, and A's rewards drop from first place to third place, but everyone else behaves as if A doesn't exist at all. No matter where we calculate A to be, A never displaces anyone.
Now we look at E. E was cheated against, so E should get some compensation for that. We compensate them by adding some specified amount of compensatory points to E, and then we see where that would place E. If we see that E now has between B and C's points, then we award E second place rewards. Again, we don't bump C or D. C still gets second place rewards.
Under this scenario, every alliance that cheats gets less points (and presumably less rewards) than they would otherwise have gotten, so they are punished for cheating. No alliance that plays fair (presumable) gets less than they would otherwise have gotten. And every alliance that has to face a cheater gets compensated by getting more points, and presumably more rewards as a result.
Making the new order bede
A no longer exists