Banned Alliances

I’m not normally one to ask for compensation but seeing 2 of our recent war opponents making the ban list really makes me question the justice for the fair play alliances. If you’ve been cheated then your alliance should be awarded season points and rewards retroactively for losses. Nothing is ever done to make things right for the victims and we have a lot of spenders. Paying customers deserve better.

Comments

Liss_Bliss_

EvilEmpire wrote: »

We have a lot of spenders. Paying customers deserve better.

Lost me right there. Why does it matter if someone is a paying customer or a F2P person? Everyone thinks they should be treated better jus because they’ve spent more than someone else.

There is no way of knowing if you would have won or still lost had players not been account sharing.

EvilEmpire

Why does it matter if we would or wouldn’t have won, the benefit of the doubt should always be given to the victim.

And no I don’t think it’s asking too much for higher tiers/spenders to ask for a higher level of scrutiny/integrity than the participation brackets. Nobody needs to spend any money for gold tier.

Honesty why is asking for a fair shake such a hard concept to grasp.

LeNoirFaineant

@EvilEmpire I agree. The current system punishes the alliances who lose to the cheaters, and then it punishes the weaker groups that get matched up with the demoted alliances. It needs an overhaul. The cheaters should be docked points but not war rating or disqualified from season rewards and the alliances who lost to them should get points added.

EvilEmpire

Yeah that’s another thing, feel bad for the unfortunate groups that will draw death matchups down the stretch playing groups that got dropped.

GroundedWisdom

Sorry, but I disagree on both counts. They can't award an automatic Win because the other Ally cheated. They can't assume you would have won. As for spending, that doesn't entitle any better treatment than F2P.

Liss_Bliss_

EvilEmpire wrote: »

Why does it matter if we would or wouldn’t have won, the benefit of the doubt should always be given to the victim.

It matters because you could still have lost so you are asking for something that you may not have even earned. Victim or not, you should always 100% unequivocally believe the victim, believe what facts show. Facts showed you lost, facts also show they cheated. Facts don’t show you would have won had they not cheated.

EvilEmpire wrote: »

And no I don’t think it’s asking too much for higher tiers/spenders to ask for a higher level of scrutiny/integrity than the participation brackets. Nobody needs to spend any money for gold tier.

In my line of work I have found the people who spend the most are the rudest, more demanding of things, vile, self absorbed, entitled people I have ever met. They think because they have more money they are better. But I have found those people who don’t just toss money in my face are the types of people who are better human beings. And those are the people that make the world turn, not rich POS people.

EvilEmpire wrote: »

Honesty why is asking for a fair shake such a hard concept to grasp.

A fair handshake is a good idea. But you’re not asking for a fair handshake. To me you are asking to be handed items you and your alliance didn’t earn.

For all you know they got account sharing banned from a war before you, and played legitimately in your war. So why strip rewards from your war for what happened in a prior one?

LeNoirFaineant

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Sorry, but I disagree on both counts. They can't award an automatic Win because the other Ally cheated. They can't assume you would have won. As for spending, that doesn't entitle any better treatment than F2P.

They can't assume you would've won? Says who? Pretty standard to award a victory to one team when the other cheated.

EvilEmpire

@Liss_Bliss_ your just making a bunch of garbage assumptions. And it’s pretty standard in any level of competition that a cheater is awarded a loss and the other team gets a win by default. Not a perfect system by any means but atleast the honest guys are benefiting and not the dirt bags.

Liss_Bliss_

EvilEmpire wrote: »

@Liss_Bliss_ your just making a bunch of garbage assumptions. And it’s pretty standard in any level of competition that a cheater is awarded a loss and the other team gets a win by default. Not a perfect system by any means but atleast the honest guys are benefiting and not the dirt bags.

So because I don’t agree with you I’m making garbage assumptions?

You don’t know if they cheated in your war or a prior war. Bans like this are not handed out right away. So it’s entirely possible they played legitimate. Your refusal to even consider this just shows you aren’t open to a discussion. So I will not respond back to you.

DNA3000

LeNoirFaineant wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Sorry, but I disagree on both counts. They can't award an automatic Win because the other Ally cheated. They can't assume you would have won. As for spending, that doesn't entitle any better treatment than F2P.

They can't assume you would've won? Says who? Pretty standard to award a victory to one team when the other cheated.

Sure, I'm fine with awarding the victim the win. Congratulations, you win. I would even be fine with awarding them the victory side rewards for an AW win. However, when you award them *season points* you aren't just giving them a win over a cheating alliance, you are advancing them ahead of other alliances who may not have cheated. Whether they would have earned those points or not becomes significant when awarding those points blindly actually punishes other innocent alliances.

Liss_Bliss_

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Sorry, but I disagree on both counts. They can't award an automatic Win because the other Ally cheated. They can't assume you would have won. As for spending, that doesn't entitle any better treatment than F2P.

Exactly. Well put @GroundedWisdom

EvilEmpire

Liss_Bliss_ wrote: »

EvilEmpire wrote: »

@Liss_Bliss_ your just making a bunch of garbage assumptions. And it’s pretty standard in any level of competition that a cheater is awarded a loss and the other team gets a win by default. Not a perfect system by any means but atleast the honest guys are benefiting and not the dirt bags.

So because I don’t agree with you I’m making garbage assumptions?

You don’t know if they cheated in your war or a prior war. Bans like this are not handed out right away. So it’s entirely possible they played legitimate. Your refusal to even consider this just shows you aren’t open to a discussion. So I will not respond back to you.

Good go away. **** me for asking for any form of justice. The clean alliance are getting bent over. The fact you share the opinion as GW proves your a fool anyways.

LeNoirFaineant

DNA3000 wrote: »

LeNoirFaineant wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Sorry, but I disagree on both counts. They can't award an automatic Win because the other Ally cheated. They can't assume you would have won. As for spending, that doesn't entitle any better treatment than F2P.

They can't assume you would've won? Says who? Pretty standard to award a victory to one team when the other cheated.

Sure, I'm fine with awarding the victim the win. Congratulations, you win. I would even be fine with awarding them the victory side rewards for an AW win. However, when you award them *season points* you aren't just giving them a win over a cheating alliance, you are advancing them ahead of other alliances who may not have cheated. Whether they would have earned those points or not becomes significant when awarding those points blindly actually punishes other innocent alliances.

Maybe so. We lost close to several groups who have since been demoted. Very frustrating. If they aren't going to award lost points they at least need to make the punishment more prohibitive. That One Certain Alliance that had their points manually adjusted in season one has been dinged multiple times and they will still get platinum rewards with easy wars the rest of the season.

Liss_Bliss_

DNA3000 wrote: »

LeNoirFaineant wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Sorry, but I disagree on both counts. They can't award an automatic Win because the other Ally cheated. They can't assume you would have won. As for spending, that doesn't entitle any better treatment than F2P.

They can't assume you would've won? Says who? Pretty standard to award a victory to one team when the other cheated.

Sure, I'm fine with awarding the victim the win. Congratulations, you win. I would even be fine with awarding them the victory side rewards for an AW win. However, when you award them *season points* you aren't just giving them a win over a cheating alliance, you are advancing them ahead of other alliances who may not have cheated.Whether they would have earned those points or not becomes significant when awarding those points blindly actually punishes other innocent alliances.

Bolded, underlined, and italicized for emphasis

However people aren’t complaining about a few shards. They want points and ladder placements. That’s not what should happen.

PFunk

If you’re spending to be in platinum you probably shouldn’t be there. I’m in p2 currently and haven’t spent a dime of my actual money on wars... if you spend glory wisely, and get the boosts with loyalty when they come around you really shouldn’t have to spend actual money. Maybe in master or p1, but as I’ve continued to move up, I keep hearing people talking about whale wars, and I just haven’t seen it yet...

Harbinger195

Actually in any other form.of competition if it is found out that the opposing team cheated in any way then the win is awarded to the other group by default. No reason this game should be any different.

DNA3000

Harbinger195 wrote: »

Actually in any other form.of competition if it is found out that the opposing team cheated in any way then the win is awarded to the other group by default. No reason this game should be any different.

People keep saying this even though it isn't true, and I have no idea why people feel compelled to do that. But for the record, please name all the competitions in which teams compete against each other among a larger ranked field of teams, and when one team is discovered to be cheating they are awarded a victory which is capable of placing them higher in the field among other teams who did not cheat.

I'm curious to know how many there are, because there aren't many in the first place that award victories under any circumstances. The NCAA vacates wins but doesn't award them - both teams record a loss. In the major professional sports like basketball, football, soccer, and even cricket and auto racing this also doesn't happen. In fact, this topic has come up many times before and in all of my research I couldn't find a major sport in which this was true.

DNA3000

LeNoirFaineant wrote: »

DNA3000 wrote: »

LeNoirFaineant wrote: »

GroundedWisdom wrote: »

Sorry, but I disagree on both counts. They can't award an automatic Win because the other Ally cheated. They can't assume you would have won. As for spending, that doesn't entitle any better treatment than F2P.

They can't assume you would've won? Says who? Pretty standard to award a victory to one team when the other cheated.

Sure, I'm fine with awarding the victim the win. Congratulations, you win. I would even be fine with awarding them the victory side rewards for an AW win. However, when you award them *season points* you aren't just giving them a win over a cheating alliance, you are advancing them ahead of other alliances who may not have cheated. Whether they would have earned those points or not becomes significant when awarding those points blindly actually punishes other innocent alliances.

Maybe so. We lost close to several groups who have since been demoted. Very frustrating. If they aren't going to award lost points they at least need to make the punishment more prohibitive. That One Certain Alliance that had their points manually adjusted in season one has been dinged multiple times and they will still get platinum rewards with easy wars the rest of the season.

Back in season two when I suggested multiplier penalties I also suggested a reasonably fair way to deal with this situation also. You score the entire season, and then set the ranks and rewards for every alliance. Then you go back to every war where you suspect cheating took place. If the cheating alliance won, you add the victory bonus (50k) times the multiplier in force at that time to the losing alliance. For every alliance who's score is modified in this way, if those adjustment points would have bumped them into a higher reward bracket, you award them the higher bracket. You do not change any other alliance's ranking.

In this way, no innocent alliance gets penalized for score adjustments. They end up where they end up as if no score adjustments took place at all, and get the rewards associated with their placement. Alliances that lost to cheaters get a chance to have a higher reward *if* the victory bonus associated with winning would have been enough to change anything. It isn't perfect, but there's no way to know what the "correct" score would have been. But it gives alliances a reasonable chance to play out the "what if" scenario and recoup a higher reward bracket if it was possible to obtain.

EvilEmpire

PFunk wrote: »

If you’re spending to be in platinum you probably shouldn’t be there. I’m in p2 currently and haven’t spent a dime of my actual money on wars... if you spend glory wisely, and get the boosts with loyalty when they come around you really shouldn’t have to spend actual money. Maybe in master or p1, but as I’ve continued to move up, I keep hearing people talking about whale wars, and I just haven’t seen it yet...

Guys aren’t really buying pots, but most of the motivation to buy GMCs and some of the higher priced rank up offers is certainly for war. I’m not asking for any special treatment I’m just saying that money is being spent and the competition is crooked and fair players get shafted. Maybe what I think is the best solution isn’t but the current system sucks. Being matched against proven cheaters certainly sucks when the narrative is that you can’t prove you would have won but more than likely the cheaters wouldn’t be competing in the same range if they weren’t (otherwise why pilot 🤷‍♂️). I’m just saying this sucks and would like to see it handled differently.

unknown

This content has been removed.

Supermanoj

When you compare like for like, retroactively awarded wins don't happen. If someone is caught mid game and disqualified for cheating then that's the only circumstances I've seen where the win is awarded. While it sucks to have faced a cheating alliance, you could have been defeated by a huge margin which means a win would have never happened anyway.