2* wars effecting the highest levels of AW.

RiegelRiegel Posts: 1,089 ★★★★
I feel like I am making these posts more and more lately. Being so late in the season I can't believe cheating is becoming more prevalent.

Here is a picture of a top AW alliance doing a 2* war. You know how long I have been going on about this issue? It has still not been addressed. http://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/67928/2-wars-and-aw-seasons#latest Please address it. Now is a good time.

k7dtm1fo016c.jpg

As you can see this alliance has placed a 2* defense. They had 0 kills on both sides and the losing side placed low on diversity just as I have said they do over and over. In the bottom part you can see what a real war between the two alliances looks like. 21 deaths to 23 deaths. Absurd.

This kind of behavior really effects the competitive spirit of the game mode. For those of us who are using potions and boosts every war to get a top spot, seeing something like this is disgusting. No effort and same or better rewards?

We need to punish and prevent this from happening at all levels of AW. This is an important issue to me and many that play using boosts and potions and literally stress before fights. The challenge to beat an opponent with no deaths is something I love most about the game, so when others are bypassing this placing 2* defenders it makes all the work I've put in to get those boosts and potions and learn how to fight a new champion every other week all for nothing.
«13456711

Comments

  • BAZYBADBAZYBAD Posts: 3
    I think this violates Kabams forum rules. You have made numerous posts calling out other people and mentioning names. With no proof? All you have is some grainy photo my son could have made on photoshop. I'm tired of all the whining. Let Kabam do their job and stop trying to stir up drama and snitch.

    Every week it people complaining and throwing out accusations. Both sides need to chill and let kabam do they job. Send a ticket if you want but why spam the forums?

    Kabam please ban this guy. He is blatantly spamming.
  • DukeZmanDukeZman Posts: 534 ★★★
    I guess I don’t understand how this works. How do they ensure they get the opponent they want? What if they place 2* defense and they other team goes full normal and strong defense. And who decides who is going to win even if they do get a correct sync. I just don’t understand this at all (we are Tier 5 War btw)
  • danielmathdanielmath Posts: 1,622 ★★★★
    DukeZman wrote: »
    I guess I don’t understand how this works. How do they ensure they get the opponent they want? What if they place 2* defense and they other team goes full normal and strong defense. And who decides who is going to win even if they do get a correct sync. I just don’t understand this at all (we are Tier 5 War btw)

    They make the agreement after they know who they're facing. Since one of these alliances is a full pilot alliance, the other one has no chance to win so they both agree to place only 2*, and to make it not look suspicious the lower alliance agrees to die a certain number of times, and the better alliance will die a couple less.
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Posts: 2,869 ★★★★★
    DukeZman wrote: »
    I guess I don’t understand how this works. How do they ensure they get the opponent they want? What if they place 2* defense and they other team goes full normal and strong defense. And who decides who is going to win even if they do get a correct sync. I just don’t understand this at all (we are Tier 5 War btw)

    I’m not certain, but I believe you can see the war rating of the alliance you’re facing. Since in higher tiers so few alliances have those high war ratings, each alliance can contact the other, double check that the war ratings correspond and then place 2* accordingly.
  • nopenope Posts: 134
    DukeZman wrote: »
    I guess I don’t understand how this works. How do they ensure they get the opponent they want? What if they place 2* defense and they other team goes full normal and strong defense. And who decides who is going to win even if they do get a correct sync. I just don’t understand this at all (we are Tier 5 War btw)

    Don't think answering those questions would be good for the community tbh. Not saying they aren't valid questions but an answer would be a "how to cheat" manual. And the cheating is already too widespread as it is. I just hope the penalties are severe enough to cut it all out.

    Bear in mind, it's almost the end of season 2.... A season where a TON of alliances got points and tiers taken away and piloting and fixed matches are STILL extremely common because the cheaters think they won't be caught and if they do, the penalties aren't that bad. Kabam needs to make some very clear examples of a few alliances and we might get somewhere.
  • CapWW2CapWW2 Posts: 2,901 ★★★★
    So what is the problem with 2 stars for AW if both parties agree?
  • bm3eppsbm3epps Posts: 706 ★★
    danielmath wrote: »
    DukeZman wrote: »
    I guess I don’t understand how this works. How do they ensure they get the opponent they want? What if they place 2* defense and they other team goes full normal and strong defense. And who decides who is going to win even if they do get a correct sync. I just don’t understand this at all (we are Tier 5 War btw)

    They make the agreement after they know who they're facing. Since one of these alliances is a full pilot alliance, the other one has no chance to win so they both agree to place only 2*, and to make it not look suspicious the lower alliance agrees to die a certain number of times, and the better alliance will die a couple less.

    so who's to say someone or a few in one of the alliances goes rogue and actually place their regular defenders vs 2*..sounds like you are playing roulette..lol
  • danielmathdanielmath Posts: 1,622 ★★★★
    bm3epps wrote: »
    danielmath wrote: »
    DukeZman wrote: »
    I guess I don’t understand how this works. How do they ensure they get the opponent they want? What if they place 2* defense and they other team goes full normal and strong defense. And who decides who is going to win even if they do get a correct sync. I just don’t understand this at all (we are Tier 5 War btw)

    They make the agreement after they know who they're facing. Since one of these alliances is a full pilot alliance, the other one has no chance to win so they both agree to place only 2*, and to make it not look suspicious the lower alliance agrees to die a certain number of times, and the better alliance will die a couple less.

    so who's to say someone or a few in one of the alliances goes rogue and actually place their regular defenders vs 2*..sounds like you are playing roulette..lol

    sure, no doubt it's risky
  • qopqop Posts: 52
    edited June 2018
    Few things to improve on:

    1) Need to adjust or change or censor aw matching. Players have been able to predict their aw opponent through aw rating, +, and - match points. Thus, arranging 2* wars or some other type of deals which inflate both side’s season score through less deaths or inflates the winner heavily due to shady deals involving incentives($) being offered.

    2) Maybe change season score calculation by having deaths being a major determinent for win/loss, but not affecting season score. Meaning, fixed points for winning/losing(mayb multiply by tier?). This will allow skill to still be a major considerstion in an alliance, yet may lessen the likelyhood of piloting.

    3) Get better or more specific ban filtering for pilots. cross ip, device, etc checks.

    4) Do not allow same looking name changes. ex. iiiii vs lllll vs ilili (i uppercase and L lowercase mixture).

    5) introduce more challenging aw nodes and scale up aw difficulty for exploration. Recent changes have been good, but not enough imo.

  • Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 414 ★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Just hide the +/- until attack phase has started, simple solution.

    For the future, yes.

    It’s not enough to solve what’s already been done. Punishments must be handed out.

    I understand where your coming from and I don't agree that what they are doing is right but effectively aren't breaking any TOS in doing this.
  • BitterSteelBitterSteel Posts: 2,869 ★★★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Just hide the +/- until attack phase has started, simple solution.

    For the future, yes.

    It’s not enough to solve what’s already been done. Punishments must be handed out.

    I understand where your coming from and I don't agree that what they are doing is right but effectively aren't breaking any TOS in doing this.

    Yeah fair enough, there isn’t an explicit rule. But there have been similar situations in the past where kabam have deemed some act an exploit or the like even when it doesn’t break one of their rules. They have reserved the right to judge anything how they want basically.

    Look at 3* wars and 2* wars a year or two ago, that’s why matchmaking is (for the most part) anonymous now.
  • Vale84Vale84 Posts: 308 ★★★
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Just hide the +/- until attack phase has started, simple solution.

    For the future, yes.

    It’s not enough to solve what’s already been done. Punishments must be handed out.

    I understand where your coming from and I don't agree that what they are doing is right but effectively aren't breaking any TOS in doing this.

    So if Brazil agrees on a combine in the next world cup match they arent factually braking any rules of soccer. Does it make it unpunishable or wouldnt they be kicked out of world cup for it? ToS is a guideline, the spirit of the game has alwais been and will alwais be fair play. Modders or hackers are banned in games, that is the story.
  • nopenope Posts: 134
    bm3epps wrote: »
    13_Dub wrote: »
    Clear example would be to research where these current players that do this came from before this and if they were punished before for violating rules, then it only seems right to ban them all cause clearly they can’t not cheat. By not banning these cheaters is just letting them continue to infest other alliances when their ally gets caught and get people in the alliance punished for something. Just ban them for good...

    I don't think that would ever happen.. especially if they are spenders

    Whales are like bugs. Destroy one and ten more step into their place. Money should be of zero concern. Besides, most would likely just buy another acct and deal w the alliance joining cool off phase.
  • Markjv81Markjv81 Posts: 414 ★★★
    edited June 2018
    Vale84 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Just hide the +/- until attack phase has started, simple solution.

    For the future, yes.

    It’s not enough to solve what’s already been done. Punishments must be handed out.

    I understand where your coming from and I don't agree that what they are doing is right but effectively aren't breaking any TOS in doing this.

    So if Brazil agrees on a combine in the next world cup match they arent factually braking any rules of soccer. Does it make it unpunishable or wouldnt they be kicked out of world cup for it? ToS is a guideline, the spirit of the game has alwais been and will alwais be fair play. Modders or hackers are banned in games, that is the story.

    I'm not here to argue, I agree with what your saying but let's not get ridiculous and compare the World Cup to a mobile game mode.

    These collusions between alllainces have been around ever since AW inception and Kabam knows that and hasn't bothered to put a stop to it, I don't believe you can punish someone based on what has been allowed in the past. Just stop it from happening again in the future but in saying that if they do punish then good.
  • nopenope Posts: 134
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Vale84 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Markjv81 wrote: »
    Just hide the +/- until attack phase has started, simple solution.

    For the future, yes.

    It’s not enough to solve what’s already been done. Punishments must be handed out.

    I understand where your coming from and I don't agree that what they are doing is right but effectively aren't breaking any TOS in doing this.

    So if Brazil agrees on a combine in the next world cup match they arent factually braking any rules of soccer. Does it make it unpunishable or wouldnt they be kicked out of world cup for it? ToS is a guideline, the spirit of the game has alwais been and will alwais be fair play. Modders or hackers are banned in games, that is the story.

    I'm not here to argue, I agree with what your saying but let's not get ridiculous and compare the World Cup to a mobile game mode.

    These collusions between alllainces have been around ever since AW inception and Kabam knows that and hasn't bothered to put a stop to it, I don't believe you can punish someone based on what has been allowed in the past. Just stop it from happening again in the future.

    Well, they punished 2 other alliances for pretty much the same thing earlier in the week.

    Along with that, account sharing has always been against the rules but not enforced until this war season.

    I applaud the steps they've made so far and my only complaint is that they've been too lenient. Slaps on the wrist were fine in the beginning of the season in order to get peoples' attention... But it's time to move on to death penalties at this point. Ban cheaters from aw matchmaking for long enough to fully ruin a season and you've cleaned up the contest in one day, with one act.
  • Maat1985Maat1985 Posts: 1,704 ★★★
    you gotta start punishing at somepoint.
    It may not be technically cheating by definition of the rules
    But it is playing against the spirit of the game which is cheating
  • becauseicantbecauseicant Posts: 312 ★★★
    As long as alliances can choose when to matchmake there will be the potential to abuse the system by having two alliances enter matchmaking at the same time when there are few others searching for a match. Along with this is the problem of seeing information about your opponent before locking in defense. Both of these problems need to be addressed if you want fair competition. One suggestion is using matchmaking pools where alliances enter matchmaking, set their defense, and then all alliances from that pool are matched up. If you want to keep some essence of choosing a start time you could run 2 or 3 pools each matchmaking phase.
This discussion has been closed.