**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.
2* wars effecting the highest levels of AW.
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Just read that article. A DOTA 2 Statistician/Host/Analyst has an insightful comment on match fixing in that article:
"Basic economics suggests the decision to engage in match fixing should boil down to three factors: how much you can make doing it, how likely you’re caught, and how costly the penalties are if the latter occurs."
I made a comment, but it said it would have to be approved. It was too long for me to want to re post lol. Hopefully it gets approved. lol
Don't think Kabam can let this issue slide this time around. If I'm wrong enough players filing complaints with Apple or Google might get some kind of action like we did for this year's earlier unit scam fraud situation.
Agree, if this goes un punished our alliance has all agreed to file refunds for purchases through out season. We have succumbed to Kabams many offers on boosts and potions in order to propel our alliance forward, however these obvious 2* exploit deals are becoming an issue and negating any progress we can achieve.
Maybe you can you use the downtime in this thread to ask you ally about the chats they are supposedly in
How are they in matching chats if they played Top 3 alliances atleast once or
twice?
some alliances never bump into each other during season, it depends on start time. Someone who starts 4 hours after matchmaking goes live is probably not going to match an alliance that starts immidietley.
Not denying they do not exist, but alliances still need to earn their spot match room or not. So lets not deviate from the real issue here —blantant point manipulation bc of 2* deals.
You want me to ask myself about ally chats who is supposedly in?
I've already commented on those chats.
Just make defense placements based on alliance average prestige.
you can make prestige brackets where low prestige allows for 1-6* defenders and defender rarity range gets narrower the more prestige the alliance has. So a top alliance would only be allowed to place like maxed 4* or higher or even R3/45 5* or higher.
Problem solved! You're welcome and I do take likes for appreciation.
Now excuse me but there are other threads that need my super solving powers.
UP UP AND AWAY!... oops sorry wrong company lol XD
So you think people should rank up champs based on prestige to get the top tier matches? That eliminates the concept of skill if only to top prestige ally’s get the top matches....
Did i ask you to ask your self, no. Nice deflection tho. Ask your ally about the matchmaking chats they are in since you keep saying you have no knowledge but others are sure your ally is in them.
if so? when?
there are 4 wars left....and each day it jsut gets worse and worse.
Our alliance is currently borderline Plat1 / Master bracket, and we have worked hard & also invested plenty resources in potions and boosts so that we could finalize in Master.
One of the alliances that was caught doing these shady 2* deals are effecting our ability to progress efficintely because even with a Loss they are gaining significantly more amount of points than we would.
With that being said, Kabam really needs to send a strong message to these exploiters who are taking obvious loop holes for granted and punishing those who play fair and earn what they get.
The same top alliance organizing shady 2* deals in Season 1 ( with plenty of screen shots circulating ) continued to collect their rewards without any significant repercussions and now are doing the same tricks in Season 2.
Disgusting.
Like this week only 3* can
Are you in one of these dodgy allies? Cus the way you are attacking makes it seem like you are. He already said he didnt know his allies were in he chat. He also said he would talk with his leader if he found out they were doing dodgy stuff. He also said that they had faced the top allies alot.
1. It is one thing to be in the chat and work out who ur opponent is prior to war. That is just investigating. Nothing wrong with that at all.
2. It is another thing to time matchmakIng to avoid certain fights. (This kinda thing maybe ok in small doses it is the abuse if it where 1 and 2 avoid esch other constantly is the problem)
3. But it is entirely another thing actually use this info to then collude with your opponent and actually fix the eesult of the match.
It sounds like his ally is in number 1 situation.
And besides he is wanting to stop this.
Even if someone was peeviously involved in dodgyness it is a good thing when the decide to change.
If it doesn't happen, I'd expect those other two (ok one and a half) alliances from last week to (rightfully) throw a fit. And I'd hope plenty would join them. I also hope it's a significant slap down. I'm tired of these nice "hey um would you please stop doing the bad stuff" responses.
Yes, you did.
"You can use this time to ask you."
Supposedly is the right word. When you call other people out they will do whatever they can to smear you too. In this case they are just throwing accusations. Hope this helps.
Read more an you'll see i said to ask you ( meant to be your) ally about the chats THEY are in. Good deflection again tho.
This is actually a very simple and generally obvious statement about risk and reward, or even cost and benefit. How much you can make cheating is the reward or benefit, and how likely you are to be caught multiplied by the penalties involved when caught are the potential downside risk or the cost. You want to make the downside risk higher than the reward to make cheating not the optimal strategy. You want to make the downside risk dramatically higher than the reward to make cheating not even worth contemplating for rational actors.
The interesting question is what the appropriate punishment should be to make that cost prohibitive. Usually, in game theoretical terms I think in terms of time. The master level rewards for AW represent resources that would take an enormous amount of time to acquire any other way. When you consider that, risking a seven day ban for the potential of gaining rewards that would accelerate your progress months or even a year into the future might not be an unreasonable risk. It suggests that the penalty for cheating in AW might need to scale with tier for the punishments to be effective. A seven day ban is huge compared to the Silver 3 rewards. But it might be insignificant compared to the Platinum 1 rewards.
Another interesting question is what the in-season penalties actually mean. Suppose you're in Platinum 2, and you think you can make it to Master 3 by cheating. But if you are caught the penalty will drop you into Gold 1. Is the difference in rewards from Master 3 to Platinum 2 high enough that it is worth the risk of costing you the difference between Platinum 2 and Gold 1? I don't know. Maybe.
I think we are seeing the return of piloting towards the end of the season. Probably not as much in Masters, but in the lower tiers, the risk of getting caught won't drop alliances more than one level, so the risk may be worth the reward of not getting caught.
IDK you, but I'm sorry you feel that way. I've already answered this question, so if you really want to know go read it instead of just spreading lies.
Thanks.
That's an interesting point. The current way Kabam applies penalties has the implied intent of having a lasting effect since dropping in rating takes a while to "repair" with wars. But the penalty can't really last longer than the end of the season, because after that the effect of the penalty drops dramatically once season rewards go out. You have the entire off season to repair your rating if you cheat in the final couple of wars, so for the purposes of seasonal rewards the penalty can't hurt you for more wars than are remaining.
I've repeatedly stated that multiplier penalties are far better than war rating penalties, because they directly hurt the ability for the cheating alliance to earn points while not altering the composition of wars. Another potential benefit of a multiplier penalty is that you can make the penalty remain in effect for a certain number of in-season wars. So if you are hit with a six war penalty near the end of the season, the penalty would last for the final few wars of the season and then continue at the start of the next season, so the alliance would have to serve out the entire penalty. That would make the penalty at least somewhat more effective even at the end of the season.
It is kind of like suspensions in organized sports. Usually suspensions are for games, not days: you can't usually serve out a suspension during the off season. But war rating penalties are kind of like suspensions an alliance can simply work off during the off season between AW seasons.
Am not spreading lies at all. I said you should go ask your ally if it's true what others have said. Your on a crusade here so if its true it seriously undermines what your preaching
I'll never know. I can ask, they can lie.
All I can say for sure is that we have 100% never colluded to get addition defender remaining points, and we have 100% never colluded to have a 2* war and undermine the efforts of everyone else we consider as competition.
I can also tell you with 100% certainty that we have fought top 10, top 5, and top 3 alliances multiple times this season.
Well. I'm clean. No piloting or piloted. No fixed matches. No collusion of any kind. No mods. Just straight up match when it's open, play the best we can. P1 trying like hell to break into master but ok with p1 if it ends up that way (it will lol). Finger pointing doesn't really get us anywhere imo.
To top that off, the op has become a pariah in many circles of the community solely because of posts like these. Idk him, but I've read his posts and I've seen what the top allis have to say about him. Maybe he's trying to just make way for his alli, idk. But it seems to me that he wants things cleaned up and I'm good with that as it's what I want as well.
I haven't ignored it. I have answered it to the best of my abilities. If you want more ask someone who knows more than I do.
Not really....
Cus he is asking that it be stopped for all allies.
If his ally is doing this and unaware it does not chamge his character or stanse of the issue.
Even if his ally was doing this. He could still remain vocal on wanting to stop it.
Even if he remained with his ally after discovering they were dodgy whilst being vocal wouldn’t necessarily undermine what he was saying.
He could stay with his ally becuase he like the people there and has good friendships whilst at the same time trying to stop them from being dodgy.
And still you never responded to my statement before.
Just because an ally is in the chat and works out who their opponent is does not mean they are colluding and being dodgy.
All this does is give you information. It is what you then do with the information. Knowing your opponent in advance is not a problem.