Ban wave

StellarStellar Posts: 533 ★★★
Hello Kabam,
I heard there us a new ban wave concerning alliances that cheated during this war season !
Well it’s great that you keep this game safe from cheaters by banning them, but what about alliances victims of those cheaters ?
What about the leaderboard ?
We, honest alliances, are still victims of the cheaters as their alliances still keep their places in the top of the leaderboard !
Take away the points gain while cheating and apply them a malus on the leaderboard and make it be known so everyone will know the consequences of cheating !
«13

Comments

  • Patchie93Patchie93 Posts: 1,896 ★★★★
    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won
  • Patchie93Patchie93 Posts: 1,896 ★★★★

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    Okay so you say the other guys win? Hoe many points do you give them?
    Do you just add the 50k win bonus or are you suggesting they should get maximum points even if they didn't complete the map?
    Also how do you want that to affect the rest of the season multipliers they got? Compensate them there but how they would've fought different wars. Thus adjusting every war after the war they lost to cheater.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,977 ★★★★★
    Patchie93 said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    Okay so you say the other guys win? Hoe many points do you give them?
    Do you just add the 50k win bonus or are you suggesting they should get maximum points even if they didn't complete the map?
    Also how do you want that to affect the rest of the season multipliers they got? Compensate them there but how they would've fought different wars. Thus adjusting every war after the war they lost to cheater.
    Just give them the win bonus as that's the most impactful score. Can't really start going in and adjusting later wars but you can certainly correct losing out on a lot of points for losing against someone punished for cheating
  • StellarStellar Posts: 533 ★★★
    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    No, not 100%, but if they are so good, they would not have to rely on cheating 😉
  • StellarStellar Posts: 533 ★★★

    Hey there,
    The forums is not a place to discuss the matters of actions taken against players or alliances. Therefore, we will have to close this thread. If you have any further questions don't hesitate to contact support by using the in-game link.

    While i agree they don’t have to specify how they detect cheaters, or the actions taken against them, some publicity on large ban wave would have a certain impact on players that would be tempted to cheat
  • magic_pig1299magic_pig1299 Posts: 12
    edited October 2020
    I don't care about people getting rewards because somebody else did something bad as long as bans are issued its a job well done in my book
  • DNA3000DNA3000 Posts: 12,187 Guardian

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    if it was just that war, I would agree. But during seasons, handing more points to an alliance than they would have gotten doesn't just prevent them from falling in the standings, it actually causes them to rise higher than they would have otherwise. Which means every single alliance they bump downward is now a new victim of this cheating. If we could magically know what the points would have been had the cheating not taken place, awarding those points would leave every alliance where they should be. But handing an alliance more points because they were the "victim" creates new victims. It is just an unfortunate problem that alliances who fight cheaters score less than they should, but we can't just give them more points if it will cause other alliance who did nothing wrong to place lower than they would have otherwise.

    The only way to remedy this in a way that doesn't create new victims that I can think of is with a special post-season correction mechanism. What you do is calculate everyone's season rewards at the end of the season. Then freeze their brackets. Every alliance that doesn't cheat and did not face a cheater is now guaranteed to get *at least* the rewards they currently place for. Now look at every cheating alliance and penalize them. If this drops them to a lower bracket, their rewards go down. If this bumps an alliance upward into a higher bracket, their rewards go up to the new bracket, even if that means there are more alliances in that bracket than normal. Now award compensation points to every alliance that faced them and lost. If this raises them to a higher bracket their rewards go up. Everyone else remains the same, again even if these adjustments alter the cutoffs for the various brackets.

    I'd support this, because no innocent bystanders get penalized during cheating corrections. Everyone gets the rewards they would have gotten if there was no cheating or better to a first order approximation (you can't literally know how an entire season would go if cheating was eliminated, that would require a time machine). But I wouldn't hand points to cheaters without this mechanism, because it could cause other alliances to lose rewards that had nothing to do with cheating. I wouldn't trade the one for the other.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,977 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    if it was just that war, I would agree. But during seasons, handing more points to an alliance than they would have gotten doesn't just prevent them from falling in the standings, it actually causes them to rise higher than they would have otherwise. Which means every single alliance they bump downward is now a new victim of this cheating. If we could magically know what the points would have been had the cheating not taken place, awarding those points would leave every alliance where they should be. But handing an alliance more points because they were the "victim" creates new victims. It is just an unfortunate problem that alliances who fight cheaters score less than they should, but we can't just give them more points if it will cause other alliance who did nothing wrong to place lower than they would have otherwise.

    The only way to remedy this in a way that doesn't create new victims that I can think of is with a special post-season correction mechanism. What you do is calculate everyone's season rewards at the end of the season. Then freeze their brackets. Every alliance that doesn't cheat and did not face a cheater is now guaranteed to get *at least* the rewards they currently place for. Now look at every cheating alliance and penalize them. If this drops them to a lower bracket, their rewards go down. If this bumps an alliance upward into a higher bracket, their rewards go up to the new bracket, even if that means there are more alliances in that bracket than normal. Now award compensation points to every alliance that faced them and lost. If this raises them to a higher bracket their rewards go up. Everyone else remains the same, again even if these adjustments alter the cutoffs for the various brackets.

    I'd support this, because no innocent bystanders get penalized during cheating corrections. Everyone gets the rewards they would have gotten if there was no cheating or better to a first order approximation (you can't literally know how an entire season would go if cheating was eliminated, that would require a time machine). But I wouldn't hand points to cheaters without this mechanism, because it could cause other alliances to lose rewards that had nothing to do with cheating. I wouldn't trade the one for the other.
    It's not creating new victims, that's ridiculous. It basically becomes a forfeit like when alliances don't place defenses when tanking. No one is going in and removing the winners points in those wars.

  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,977 ★★★★★
    If people that get wins off tanking alliances, alliances that just don't care about war but match for loyalty, etc... get to keep their win bonuses (which no one seems to complain about), then there's absolutely zero problem with issuing a forfeit for caught cheaters and awarding win bonuses to the opponent
  • Ebony_NawEbony_Naw Posts: 1,527 ★★★★★

    DNA3000 said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    if it was just that war, I would agree. But during seasons, handing more points to an alliance than they would have gotten doesn't just prevent them from falling in the standings, it actually causes them to rise higher than they would have otherwise. Which means every single alliance they bump downward is now a new victim of this cheating. If we could magically know what the points would have been had the cheating not taken place, awarding those points would leave every alliance where they should be. But handing an alliance more points because they were the "victim" creates new victims. It is just an unfortunate problem that alliances who fight cheaters score less than they should, but we can't just give them more points if it will cause other alliance who did nothing wrong to place lower than they would have otherwise.

    The only way to remedy this in a way that doesn't create new victims that I can think of is with a special post-season correction mechanism. What you do is calculate everyone's season rewards at the end of the season. Then freeze their brackets. Every alliance that doesn't cheat and did not face a cheater is now guaranteed to get *at least* the rewards they currently place for. Now look at every cheating alliance and penalize them. If this drops them to a lower bracket, their rewards go down. If this bumps an alliance upward into a higher bracket, their rewards go up to the new bracket, even if that means there are more alliances in that bracket than normal. Now award compensation points to every alliance that faced them and lost. If this raises them to a higher bracket their rewards go up. Everyone else remains the same, again even if these adjustments alter the cutoffs for the various brackets.

    I'd support this, because no innocent bystanders get penalized during cheating corrections. Everyone gets the rewards they would have gotten if there was no cheating or better to a first order approximation (you can't literally know how an entire season would go if cheating was eliminated, that would require a time machine). But I wouldn't hand points to cheaters without this mechanism, because it could cause other alliances to lose rewards that had nothing to do with cheating. I wouldn't trade the one for the other.
    It's not creating new victims, that's ridiculous. It basically becomes a forfeit like when alliances don't place defenses when tanking. No one is going in and removing the winners points in those wars.


    But when the punishment comes at the end of the season, there ARE potential ramifications you need to consider. DNA makes a good point. Another consideration was had the other alliance won that war instead of the cheaters, their AWR would go up and they would face tougher opponents. They could win that war as well, but they are less likely to.

    And as far as alliances bumping other alliances down, we were frozen in our bracket for the last war, so we decided to rush the boss in order to save some members items for the last war. Our decision may have changed if we had a chance at a higher bracket. Alternatively, what happens if your suggestion causes us to now be in a lower bracket?

    I'm fine where we are to be clear, but that is still something to consider by not doing the changes in real time. As far as I can tell, freezing rankings first is the best solution to remedying the alliance that lost while ensuring that no other parties that played fairly are adversely affected.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,977 ★★★★★
    Ebony_Naw said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    if it was just that war, I would agree. But during seasons, handing more points to an alliance than they would have gotten doesn't just prevent them from falling in the standings, it actually causes them to rise higher than they would have otherwise. Which means every single alliance they bump downward is now a new victim of this cheating. If we could magically know what the points would have been had the cheating not taken place, awarding those points would leave every alliance where they should be. But handing an alliance more points because they were the "victim" creates new victims. It is just an unfortunate problem that alliances who fight cheaters score less than they should, but we can't just give them more points if it will cause other alliance who did nothing wrong to place lower than they would have otherwise.

    The only way to remedy this in a way that doesn't create new victims that I can think of is with a special post-season correction mechanism. What you do is calculate everyone's season rewards at the end of the season. Then freeze their brackets. Every alliance that doesn't cheat and did not face a cheater is now guaranteed to get *at least* the rewards they currently place for. Now look at every cheating alliance and penalize them. If this drops them to a lower bracket, their rewards go down. If this bumps an alliance upward into a higher bracket, their rewards go up to the new bracket, even if that means there are more alliances in that bracket than normal. Now award compensation points to every alliance that faced them and lost. If this raises them to a higher bracket their rewards go up. Everyone else remains the same, again even if these adjustments alter the cutoffs for the various brackets.

    I'd support this, because no innocent bystanders get penalized during cheating corrections. Everyone gets the rewards they would have gotten if there was no cheating or better to a first order approximation (you can't literally know how an entire season would go if cheating was eliminated, that would require a time machine). But I wouldn't hand points to cheaters without this mechanism, because it could cause other alliances to lose rewards that had nothing to do with cheating. I wouldn't trade the one for the other.
    It's not creating new victims, that's ridiculous. It basically becomes a forfeit like when alliances don't place defenses when tanking. No one is going in and removing the winners points in those wars.


    But when the punishment comes at the end of the season, there ARE potential ramifications you need to consider. DNA makes a good point. Another consideration was had the other alliance won that war instead of the cheaters, their AWR would go up and they would face tougher opponents. They could win that war as well, but they are less likely to.

    And as far as alliances bumping other alliances down, we were frozen in our bracket for the last war, so we decided to rush the boss in order to save some members items for the last war. Our decision may have changed if we had a chance at a higher bracket. Alternatively, what happens if your suggestion causes us to now be in a lower bracket?

    I'm fine where we are to be clear, but that is still something to consider by not doing the changes in real time. As far as I can tell, freezing rankings first is the best solution to remedying the alliance that lost while ensuring that no other parties that played fairly are adversely affected.
    Okay then, you need to also go through and correct every war an alliance matches against someone that doesn't place defense, boss rushes bc they don't care about war in general or that specific result, is tanking for next season, etc... bc all of those things have the same exact effect as just giving the opponents of docked alliances the win and even more in most cases.

    If that not something people think is worth doing or needs to be done, then that whole point is basically moot.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,977 ★★★★★
    DNA3000 said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    if it was just that war, I would agree. But during seasons, handing more points to an alliance than they would have gotten doesn't just prevent them from falling in the standings, it actually causes them to rise higher than they would have otherwise. Which means every single alliance they bump downward is now a new victim of this cheating. If we could magically know what the points would have been had the cheating not taken place, awarding those points would leave every alliance where they should be. But handing an alliance more points because they were the "victim" creates new victims. It is just an unfortunate problem that alliances who fight cheaters score less than they should, but we can't just give them more points if it will cause other alliance who did nothing wrong to place lower than they would have otherwise.

    The only way to remedy this in a way that doesn't create new victims that I can think of is with a special post-season correction mechanism. What you do is calculate everyone's season rewards at the end of the season. Then freeze their brackets. Every alliance that doesn't cheat and did not face a cheater is now guaranteed to get *at least* the rewards they currently place for. Now look at every cheating alliance and penalize them. If this drops them to a lower bracket, their rewards go down. If this bumps an alliance upward into a higher bracket, their rewards go up to the new bracket, even if that means there are more alliances in that bracket than normal. Now award compensation points to every alliance that faced them and lost. If this raises them to a higher bracket their rewards go up. Everyone else remains the same, again even if these adjustments alter the cutoffs for the various brackets.

    I'd support this, because no innocent bystanders get penalized during cheating corrections. Everyone gets the rewards they would have gotten if there was no cheating or better to a first order approximation (you can't literally know how an entire season would go if cheating was eliminated, that would require a time machine). But I wouldn't hand points to cheaters without this mechanism, because it could cause other alliances to lose rewards that had nothing to do with cheating. I wouldn't trade the one for the other.
    It's not creating new victims, that's ridiculous. It basically becomes a forfeit like when alliances don't place defenses when tanking. No one is going in and removing the winners points in those wars.
    I'm not sure what you think is ridiculous, because this is pretty automatic. If you award points to an alliance that didn't actually win them in a fair fight, even though that is not their fault, they will rise in the standings and other alliances will fall as a consequence. Those alliances that are dropping in rank are doing so because you decided to hand points to an alliance to compensate them for cheating, but if it changes the rewards at all, it does so because the alliance gaining points rises to a new bracket, which means at least one alliance in that bracket will drop downward as a consequence.

    If you have a way to convince such an alliance they are not a victim of your anti-cheating adjustment, be my guest and give it a shot.
    So like I said, go through and remove win bonuses from every war throughout every bracket where the opponent throws the war for whatever reason and gives a free win, or this doesn't matter.

  • -sixate--sixate- Posts: 1,453 ★★★★★
    All cheating alliances should have their season point total slashed back to zero and removed from leaderbord. Entire alliance get zero season rewards. It's the only way to stop the cheating.
  • IWCIWC Posts: 104 ★★
    edited October 2020
    Punishment aside - we know that its a ban wave.

    Do we have the details on how they actually cheat? At least we have the comfort that such issues can be addressed going forward, rather just implementing bans at the end of the season where so many people have already been affected.
  • ch4rnch4rn Posts: 260 ★★
    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    If they cheated, they dont deserve any of the points. Simple as that!
  • Destroyer123Destroyer123 Posts: 368 ★★
    ch4rn said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    If they cheated, they dont deserve any of the points. Simple as that!
    Agreed but that doesn’t mean you deserve them either. There’s simply no way to know you would win if they didn’t cheat unless you have details on how they cheated.
  • GreywardenGreywarden Posts: 797 ★★★★
    All I have to say is that we faced alliance’s that got docked in literally HALF our wars this season.....anything short of perma bans for the cheating accounts isn’t enough.

    Last season we faced 4 alliances that were just docked.....should have happened sooner data was available for months.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,977 ★★★★★
    Ebony_Naw said:

    Ebony_Naw said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    if it was just that war, I would agree. But during seasons, handing more points to an alliance than they would have gotten doesn't just prevent them from falling in the standings, it actually causes them to rise higher than they would have otherwise. Which means every single alliance they bump downward is now a new victim of this cheating. If we could magically know what the points would have been had the cheating not taken place, awarding those points would leave every alliance where they should be. But handing an alliance more points because they were the "victim" creates new victims. It is just an unfortunate problem that alliances who fight cheaters score less than they should, but we can't just give them more points if it will cause other alliance who did nothing wrong to place lower than they would have otherwise.

    The only way to remedy this in a way that doesn't create new victims that I can think of is with a special post-season correction mechanism. What you do is calculate everyone's season rewards at the end of the season. Then freeze their brackets. Every alliance that doesn't cheat and did not face a cheater is now guaranteed to get *at least* the rewards they currently place for. Now look at every cheating alliance and penalize them. If this drops them to a lower bracket, their rewards go down. If this bumps an alliance upward into a higher bracket, their rewards go up to the new bracket, even if that means there are more alliances in that bracket than normal. Now award compensation points to every alliance that faced them and lost. If this raises them to a higher bracket their rewards go up. Everyone else remains the same, again even if these adjustments alter the cutoffs for the various brackets.

    I'd support this, because no innocent bystanders get penalized during cheating corrections. Everyone gets the rewards they would have gotten if there was no cheating or better to a first order approximation (you can't literally know how an entire season would go if cheating was eliminated, that would require a time machine). But I wouldn't hand points to cheaters without this mechanism, because it could cause other alliances to lose rewards that had nothing to do with cheating. I wouldn't trade the one for the other.
    It's not creating new victims, that's ridiculous. It basically becomes a forfeit like when alliances don't place defenses when tanking. No one is going in and removing the winners points in those wars.


    But when the punishment comes at the end of the season, there ARE potential ramifications you need to consider. DNA makes a good point. Another consideration was had the other alliance won that war instead of the cheaters, their AWR would go up and they would face tougher opponents. They could win that war as well, but they are less likely to.

    And as far as alliances bumping other alliances down, we were frozen in our bracket for the last war, so we decided to rush the boss in order to save some members items for the last war. Our decision may have changed if we had a chance at a higher bracket. Alternatively, what happens if your suggestion causes us to now be in a lower bracket?

    I'm fine where we are to be clear, but that is still something to consider by not doing the changes in real time. As far as I can tell, freezing rankings first is the best solution to remedying the alliance that lost while ensuring that no other parties that played fairly are adversely affected.
    Okay then, you need to also go through and correct every war an alliance matches against someone that doesn't place defense, boss rushes bc they don't care about war in general or that specific result, is tanking for next season, etc... bc all of those things have the same exact effect as just giving the opponents of docked alliances the win and even more in most cases.

    If that not something people think is worth doing or needs to be done, then that whole point is basically moot.
    One is a group of people who broke the rules, and another is a group of people who play within the rules in a less competitive manner than others would like them to play. How on earth do you find these comparable?
    So you're okay with people getting free win bonuses from alliances that aren't cheating but think it's out of order to give them to alliances that lost to cheaters?

    How on earth does that make sense to you?
  • Destroyer123Destroyer123 Posts: 368 ★★

    Ebony_Naw said:

    Ebony_Naw said:

    DNA3000 said:

    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    It's great to see some alliances get stung again for cheating but I still don't think this should matter. I don't care if an alliance would have gotten obliterated in a straight up fight, if one of the two gets caught and punished for cheating, that should be an automatic win for the other. I'll never agree with how this is handled
    if it was just that war, I would agree. But during seasons, handing more points to an alliance than they would have gotten doesn't just prevent them from falling in the standings, it actually causes them to rise higher than they would have otherwise. Which means every single alliance they bump downward is now a new victim of this cheating. If we could magically know what the points would have been had the cheating not taken place, awarding those points would leave every alliance where they should be. But handing an alliance more points because they were the "victim" creates new victims. It is just an unfortunate problem that alliances who fight cheaters score less than they should, but we can't just give them more points if it will cause other alliance who did nothing wrong to place lower than they would have otherwise.

    The only way to remedy this in a way that doesn't create new victims that I can think of is with a special post-season correction mechanism. What you do is calculate everyone's season rewards at the end of the season. Then freeze their brackets. Every alliance that doesn't cheat and did not face a cheater is now guaranteed to get *at least* the rewards they currently place for. Now look at every cheating alliance and penalize them. If this drops them to a lower bracket, their rewards go down. If this bumps an alliance upward into a higher bracket, their rewards go up to the new bracket, even if that means there are more alliances in that bracket than normal. Now award compensation points to every alliance that faced them and lost. If this raises them to a higher bracket their rewards go up. Everyone else remains the same, again even if these adjustments alter the cutoffs for the various brackets.

    I'd support this, because no innocent bystanders get penalized during cheating corrections. Everyone gets the rewards they would have gotten if there was no cheating or better to a first order approximation (you can't literally know how an entire season would go if cheating was eliminated, that would require a time machine). But I wouldn't hand points to cheaters without this mechanism, because it could cause other alliances to lose rewards that had nothing to do with cheating. I wouldn't trade the one for the other.
    It's not creating new victims, that's ridiculous. It basically becomes a forfeit like when alliances don't place defenses when tanking. No one is going in and removing the winners points in those wars.


    But when the punishment comes at the end of the season, there ARE potential ramifications you need to consider. DNA makes a good point. Another consideration was had the other alliance won that war instead of the cheaters, their AWR would go up and they would face tougher opponents. They could win that war as well, but they are less likely to.

    And as far as alliances bumping other alliances down, we were frozen in our bracket for the last war, so we decided to rush the boss in order to save some members items for the last war. Our decision may have changed if we had a chance at a higher bracket. Alternatively, what happens if your suggestion causes us to now be in a lower bracket?

    I'm fine where we are to be clear, but that is still something to consider by not doing the changes in real time. As far as I can tell, freezing rankings first is the best solution to remedying the alliance that lost while ensuring that no other parties that played fairly are adversely affected.
    Okay then, you need to also go through and correct every war an alliance matches against someone that doesn't place defense, boss rushes bc they don't care about war in general or that specific result, is tanking for next season, etc... bc all of those things have the same exact effect as just giving the opponents of docked alliances the win and even more in most cases.

    If that not something people think is worth doing or needs to be done, then that whole point is basically moot.
    One is a group of people who broke the rules, and another is a group of people who play within the rules in a less competitive manner than others would like them to play. How on earth do you find these comparable?
    So you're okay with people getting free win bonuses from alliances that aren't cheating but think it's out of order to give them to alliances that lost to cheaters?

    How on earth does that make sense to you?
    Wow the lengths some people go to defend or protect cheaters amazes me. 1 war 1 cheater should result in the entire allaince being banned from season rewards at the least
  • ABOMBABOMB Posts: 564 ★★★
    Patchie93 said:

    Just cause they cheated and you lost that war. Doesnt mean 100% that if they didn't cheat you would've won

    Them fightin words dude..lol
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Posts: 5,977 ★★★★★
    Both of those situations are giving a win to an alliance without knowing what the outcome would have been had the war been played at an equal level. They both affect alliances around them "unfairly". Either they're both okay, or neither are okay.
This discussion has been closed.