our alliance leader today recently started playing his war on a different device as it runs a lot smother believe it’s an ASUS or something, and because he does AQ on his old device and war on his new one he’s got a week long ban in the last week of the season and won’t get his rewards or AQ rewards. his IP address is the same as it’s a hotspot for his AW device. i think it’s shocking.
Any information being given out about who piloted makes it easier to for players to find new ways to pilot. If players are told what bans are given out for then those players know which methods of cheating don't work, which then leads to players looking for new ways to cheat. A win-win situation for Kabam and MCOC players may not be possible.
An example of this could be something like:
Leader - "Hey Officer #1, I got a message from Kabam saying Member #2 got a temporary ban for account sharing. I messaged him and he said he'd gotten away with using (insert account sharing method) for AW Season 1-4."
Officer #1 - "At least now we know (insert same account sharing method) isn't safe anymore."
our alliance leader today recently started playing his war on a different device as it runs a lot smother believe it’s an ASUS or something, and because he does AQ on his old device and war on his new one he’s got a week long ban in the last week of the season and won’t get his rewards or AQ rewards. his IP address is the same as it’s a hotspot for his AW device. i think it’s shocking.
cant be for that.
must be for another reason.
Please stop trying to create hysteria and spread fake news.
I play 2 accounts and my missus plays 2 accounts and they all have their primary device but are also played on the same devices.
I only use my iphone 8plus for AQ or AW regardless of which of my 2 acccounts i am using.
she normally uses her Ipad for both her accounts but often log in via my Iphone while we are out and about.
The amount of money and stress that goes into seasons seems to have no weight to your decision making.
I hate to put it this bluntly, but it does in fact have zero weight on this decision. My understanding from multiple discussions with Kabam is that Kabam's position is that they are legally required to not disclose. I'm quite certain they are wrong in that belief (if they are right, literally everyone else in the gaming industry is wrong), but so long as they believe this is true there's literally no way for me or anyone else to convince them otherwise, and there's no argument players can make that will change their minds, because they simply believe they have no choice.
At this point, I believe only three things could change this policy. One: the people making this decision leave the company and other people take their place and override that decision. Two: a large enough municipality passes a law that somehow makes this disclosure mandatory, forcing disclosure. Three: Apple or the Google Play store or both make it a requirement to access the app stores, as occurred with lootbox odds.
I honestly wish I could think of another avenue, but I'm currently out of ideas that wouldn't get me banned.
Treat it like arena if they cheat in aw the get banned from participating in it
I would have no problem with making it the policy of the game that whenever a player violates the game's rules in a manner which requires penalizing their entire alliance that the offending player must be at least temporarily banned. It must never be the case that the alliance is penalized but the offending player is not. But that currently does not appear to be the case.
Doing so would indirectly indicate to alliance leaders who was ultimately responsible for the penalty. I don't know if that is why Kabam doesn't do this, but if so that's completely bananas.
Yeah never really understood there whole protect the cheaters screw legit players over mentality they have other games get good press from banning cheaters
I'm also confused as I keep seeing people mention some odd privacy law as a reason kabam cant tell leaders who cheated this shocks me as I've seen other games go as far as mark people with a specific tag if they cheat so that argument goes right out of the window for them
Only thing left I can think of as to why they haven't taken any serious action against cheaters is that they think it would be to much work to do so
Yeah, this kind of thing must be change... 29 members can not be penalized bcuz of one guy, since the leader, officer and the others Have no idea that this fool is doing something that violate TOS.... Like you said... I have spent money on this War, bought all the Boosts Offer and now we are all ruined. Yeah, a refund should be fine then.
Technically speaking, they can. An Alliance is responsible as a team. It benefits from cheating as a collective, and adjustments are made because everyone receives the spoils of cheating. As for knowing who it is, that's a separate issue. However, you rise as a team and fall as a team.
1) Top alliance doesn't depend or care of a player or other, No ones tolerate, if ur cheating ur out, and another toptier player comes. No one wants the benefits from cheating, as we can play legit and get the same benefits. theses guys are spending money on this war, so no one wants cheaters on the Group as they can all have a legit player. I want to fall as a team when we are all aware what we did not when only one fool did.
Whether they tolerate it or not, the Alliance still receives War Rating and Rewards from the cheating as a collective. That has to be adjusted. I appreciate that people don't condone it, but the part about being a team is you're responsible as a group.
Okay, so I misunderstood. I thought they were docked after reporting.
I can't say I agree with awarding an automatic Win because the other Ally cheated.
why not???
an alliance cheats. potentially cost the win from the non cheating team.
they get docked and lost the points. why should the win not get awarded to the other team that didnt cheat?
You cheat you get a forced forfeit. a forced forfeit results in a win for the other team.
Alot of sports do this. and i have always disagreed with sports that dont award the win to the non cheater.
yes there is non guarantee the non cheater would have won.
but they had no chance against a cheater.
and well if the cheater loses the points then it is noted as noone won the war.
doesnt seem right.
also IF this alliance had not have been cheated against they likely would have won.
if they won they get master season rewards.
because they lost they only get platinum.
this shows clearly the cheating behavior has directly affected the result of the non cheater.
Just because the other team is found cheating doesn't mean you've earned a Win automatically. Not only could that be manipulated, you don't get to default to the top. You earn it.
I really don't know why honest alliance has to suffer too. @GroundedWisdom They’ve not earn a win automatically. They were robbed of their victory by cheaters.
you are not talking about giving someone an automatic win.
you are talking about someone getting a loss because of a cheater.
An example of a possible situation.
alliance X is about to win, Alliance Y last minute loads the cheats up to kill a boss they otherwise couldnt.
alliance X is now robbed of a win.
they now finish platinum. if alliance Y never cheated alliance X wins and finishes master.
this situation hardly seems fair or right does it.
and this system can also be manipulated in the same way.
Alliance X has a sister Alliance Alliance Y.
they put their dummy cheating accounts in Alliance Y.
they then use Alliance Y to force losses onto any alliance that may be competition for their Main Alliance X.
No matter what system is put in place there is always going to be ways to exploit it.
why do sport analagies not reflect this?
it is a competition much the same....
ever heard of E-Sports?
if MCOC was part of an E-Sports competition if Alliance X played Alliance Y and Alliance Y cheated then they would be kicked from the tournament and forced to forfeit all matches thereby giving the win to Alliance X.
The War season is exactly the same as this.
It is exacxtly the same as how games run Esports tournaments.
It's not the same. Not at all. It's a Ranked system that is based on Points earned in relation to other Alliances. You Rank what you put up. As I said, defaulting Wins could easily be taken advantage of. Besides that fact, you can't default your performance. We're not talking about Sports, where there is a Win or Loss, and the score is trivia. The score determines where you place. If you don't earn the Win, you don't earn the placement.
As for being robbed, that's not a given. We can't assume every Loss is because of cheating, which can be anything from Mods to Account Sharing. We can say they never earned it fairly, but had they not cheated, the Match still could have gone either way, depending on performance. It's equally as unfair to assume Allies would have won when that's not a certainty.
It's just as unfair for an Alliance to default its way to the top, from facing enough cheating Alliances and not because of their performance, as it is to cheat to get there.
It's not the same. Not at all. It's a Ranked system that is based on Points earned in relation to other Alliances. You Rank what you put up. As I said, defaulting Wins could easily be taken advantage of. Besides that fact, you can't default your performance. We're not talking about Sports, where there is a Win or Loss, and the score is trivia. The score determines where you place. If you don't earn the Win, you don't earn the placement.
As for being robbed, that's not a given. We can't assume every Loss is because of cheating, which can be anything from Mods to Account Sharing. We can say they never earned it fairly, but had they not cheated, the Match still could have gone either way, depending on performance. It's equally as unfair to assume Allies would have won when that's not a certainty.
there are many many assumptions to either side to say black and white one way or another.
there are many forms of cheating.
sometimes cheating has different results.
everything can be exploited.
cheating does not always give someone a win.
and i get wat you are saying about it is unfair to give someone a win because they may not have won.
yes you are correct.
but IF they would have won but were cheated against the potential loss is huge.
IF they were cheated against and only lost because of the cheating and get platinum instead of master that is a huge punishment.
It may be hard to draw the line but it is not cool when cheating costs someone rewards.
and it is exactly like Sports. It is exactly the same as an Esports tournament. Some sports use only win or Loss.
Alot of sports use win or loss with points difference as a sorting factor when wins and losses are same.
some sports use points scored as a large factor.
You cannot put everything into two buckets.
not everything fits in either a black or a white bucket.
there are many buckets when it comes to sports and cheating and there needs to be many things considered when issuing punishements/rewards as a result.
kabam can review the statistics and data from a war where someone has cheated to determine if it is a reasonable assumption that the non-cheating alliance would have won and use that to potential restore some of the wins and maybe not some of the wins.
they can certainly see where a win would have been possible if no cheating could have occoured.
yes they may not know 100%.
but beyond reasonable doubt is all that is required legally for a conviction so if they can assume beyond reasonable doubt that the non cheating ally would have won they should issue the victory.
@GroundedWisdom you keep saying that awarding the victory to the victim of cheating could be easily exploited. I don't see it. Are you suggesting that alliances would collude in order to get one side to cheat, hoping that they get caught thus awarding the victory to the other side? If you are going to do that, why not just have them lose outright? Kind of a risky exploit losing in hopes that you get awarded the victory.
It's just as unfair for an Alliance to default its way to the top, from facing enough cheating Alliances and not because of their performance, as it is to cheat to get there.
Can you provide a source to support this? Other competitive events like the Olympics see things differently.
It's just as unfair for an Alliance to default its way to the top, from facing enough cheating Alliances and not because of their performance, as it is to cheat to get there.
Can you provide a source to support this? Other competitive events like the Olympics see things differently.
What source? I'm saying it. This isn't the Olympics, and we're not talking drug screening.
@GroundedWisdom you keep saying that awarding the victory to the victim of cheating could be easily exploited. I don't see it. Are you suggesting that alliances would collude in order to get one side to cheat, hoping that they get caught thus awarding the victory to the other side? If you are going to do that, why not just have them lose outright? Kind of a risky exploit losing in hopes that you get awarded the victory.
I really don't want to get into specifics, but there are a number of ways I can think of to manipulate a system like that.
What source? I'm saying it. This isn't the Olympics, and we're not talking drug screening.
My question was meant to gauge whether there had been an official statement on that perspective. Other competitions outside of sports like cyber security competitions and speech and debate view cheating as more unfair than being awarded wins because your opponent cheated as well. I also don't think that Kabam would ban players for receiving increased rewards because their AW opponents violated terms of service.
I don't agree with cheating any more than the next person, but that doesn't mean I agree with just handing a Win because the other Ally cheated. That's not earning it.
I don't agree with cheating any more than the next person, but that doesn't mean I agree with just handing a Win because the other Ally cheated. That's not earning it.
we are not talking about someon just turning up and getting a gold medal.
we are talking about an alliance that puts in hard work scores 146,000 points in war... uses potions and boosts...
get beat because someone cheated...
that is not handing anyone a win.
they had it stolen.
As i said kabam can review the data and see if it is reasonable to assume that that the non cheating alliance would have won.
I can t speak for all sports but its the same as a system here in our NRL (rugby league) for a penalty try. A try is like a touchdown in American Football.
now If during an attempt of scoring a try a penalty occurs and causes the try not to be scored, if it is deamed that the try would have been scored if the penalty never occured a penalty try is awarded.
this is to stop penalties being deliberately done to stop tries and also stop a team from being punished due to an illegal act of the opposition.
for the penalty try to be awarded it has to be deemed beyond reasonable doubt trhat without the penalty trhe try would be scored.
if it was too questionable then there would only be penalty awarded no try.
kabam can surely investigate and do similar.
@GroundedWisdom you keep saying that awarding the victory to the victim of cheating could be easily exploited. I don't see it. Are you suggesting that alliances would collude in order to get one side to cheat, hoping that they get caught thus awarding the victory to the other side? If you are going to do that, why not just have them lose outright? Kind of a risky exploit losing in hopes that you get awarded the victory.
I really don't want to get into specifics, but there are a number of ways I can think of to manipulate a system like that.
A number of ways to manipulate a system in which you lose to cheaters and get awarded the victory? It would seem that, at a minimum, it would require you losing and having the other side cheat... Since Kabam isn't doing this there is no reason to not share the many ways of which you speak. Top alliances won't be able to benefit and the contest will be safe.
What source? I'm saying it. This isn't the Olympics, and we're not talking drug screening.
My question was meant to gauge whether there had been an official statement on that perspective. Other competitions outside of sports like cyber security competitions and speech and debate view cheating as more unfair than being awarded wins because your opponent cheated as well. I also don't think that Kabam would ban players for receiving increased rewards because their AW opponents violated terms of service.
I didn't say they viewed it as equally heinous. I said it's equally as unfair. I don't like the idea of an Ally earning Rewards not because they fought and earned them, but by default due to cheating. That's not a fair Win either in my eyes.
@GroundedWisdom you keep saying that awarding the victory to the victim of cheating could be easily exploited. I don't see it. Are you suggesting that alliances would collude in order to get one side to cheat, hoping that they get caught thus awarding the victory to the other side? If you are going to do that, why not just have them lose outright? Kind of a risky exploit losing in hopes that you get awarded the victory.
I really don't want to get into specifics, but there are a number of ways I can think of to manipulate a system like that.
A number of ways to manipulate a system in which you lose to cheaters and get awarded the victory? It would seem that, at a minimum, it would require you losing and having the other side cheat... Since Kabam isn't doing this there is no reason to not share the many ways of which you speak. Top alliances won't be able to benefit and the contest will be safe.
I'm not interested in providing ideas. Have you looked around? Lol. People will find any way they can to manipulate the system.
Just because the other team is found cheating doesn't mean you've earned a Win automatically. Not only could that be manipulated, you don't get to default to the top. You earn it.
you are not talking about giving someone an automatic win.
you are talking about someone getting a loss because of a cheater.
An example of a possible situation.
alliance X is about to win, Alliance Y last minute loads the hacks up to kill a boss they otherwise couldnt.
alliance X is now robbed of a win.
they now finish platinum. if alliance Y never cheated alliance X wins and finishes master.
this situation hardly seems fair or right does it.
and this system can also be manipulated in the same way.
Alliance X has a sister Alliance Alliance Y.
they put their dummy cheating accounts in Alliance Y.
they then use Alliance Y to force losses onto any alliance that may be competition for their Main Alliance X.
No matter what system is put in place there is always going to be ways to exploit it.
why do sport analagies not reflect this?
it is a competition much the same....
ever heard of E-Sports?
if MCOC was part of an E-Sports competition if Alliance X played Alliance Y and Alliance Y cheated then they would be kicked from the tournament and forced to forfeit all matches thereby giving the win to Alliance X.
The War season is exactly the same as this.
It is exacxtly the same as how games run Esports tournaments.
I don't agree with cheating any more than the next person, but that doesn't mean I agree with just handing a Win because the other Ally cheated. That's not earning it.
we are not talking about someon just turning up and getting a gold medal.
we are talking about an alliance that puts in hard work scores 146,000 points in war... uses potions and boosts...
get beat because someone cheated...
that is not handing anyone a win.
they had it stolen.
As i said kabam can review the data and see if it is reasonable to assume that that the non cheating alliance would have won.
I can t speak for all sports but its the same as a system here in our NRL (rugby league) for a penalty try. A try is like a touchdown in American Football.
now If during an attempt of scoring a try a penalty occurs and causes the try not to be scored, if it is deamed that the try would have been scored if the penalty never occured a penalty try is awarded.
this is to stop penalties being deliberately done to stop tries and also stop a team from being punished due to an illegal act of the opposition.
for the penalty try to be awarded it has to be deemed beyond reasonable doubt trhat without the penalty trhe try would be scored.
if it was too questionable then there would only be penalty awarded no try.
kabam can surely investigate and do similar.
@GroundedWisdom
can you please give your thoughts/debate either for/against this point
Comments
An example of this could be something like:
Leader - "Hey Officer #1, I got a message from Kabam saying Member #2 got a temporary ban for account sharing. I messaged him and he said he'd gotten away with using (insert account sharing method) for AW Season 1-4."
Officer #1 - "At least now we know (insert same account sharing method) isn't safe anymore."
cant be for that.
must be for another reason.
Please stop trying to create hysteria and spread fake news.
I play 2 accounts and my missus plays 2 accounts and they all have their primary device but are also played on the same devices.
I only use my iphone 8plus for AQ or AW regardless of which of my 2 acccounts i am using.
she normally uses her Ipad for both her accounts but often log in via my Iphone while we are out and about.
Yeah never really understood there whole protect the cheaters screw legit players over mentality they have other games get good press from banning cheaters
I'm also confused as I keep seeing people mention some odd privacy law as a reason kabam cant tell leaders who cheated this shocks me as I've seen other games go as far as mark people with a specific tag if they cheat so that argument goes right out of the window for them
Only thing left I can think of as to why they haven't taken any serious action against cheaters is that they think it would be to much work to do so
Whether they tolerate it or not, the Alliance still receives War Rating and Rewards from the cheating as a collective. That has to be adjusted. I appreciate that people don't condone it, but the part about being a team is you're responsible as a group.
why not???
an alliance cheats. potentially cost the win from the non cheating team.
they get docked and lost the points. why should the win not get awarded to the other team that didnt cheat?
You cheat you get a forced forfeit. a forced forfeit results in a win for the other team.
Alot of sports do this. and i have always disagreed with sports that dont award the win to the non cheater.
yes there is non guarantee the non cheater would have won.
but they had no chance against a cheater.
and well if the cheater loses the points then it is noted as noone won the war.
doesnt seem right.
also IF this alliance had not have been cheated against they likely would have won.
if they won they get master season rewards.
because they lost they only get platinum.
this shows clearly the cheating behavior has directly affected the result of the non cheater.
you are talking about someone getting a loss because of a cheater.
An example of a possible situation.
alliance X is about to win, Alliance Y last minute loads the cheats up to kill a boss they otherwise couldnt.
alliance X is now robbed of a win.
they now finish platinum. if alliance Y never cheated alliance X wins and finishes master.
this situation hardly seems fair or right does it.
and this system can also be manipulated in the same way.
Alliance X has a sister Alliance Alliance Y.
they put their dummy cheating accounts in Alliance Y.
they then use Alliance Y to force losses onto any alliance that may be competition for their Main Alliance X.
No matter what system is put in place there is always going to be ways to exploit it.
why do sport analagies not reflect this?
it is a competition much the same....
ever heard of E-Sports?
if MCOC was part of an E-Sports competition if Alliance X played Alliance Y and Alliance Y cheated then they would be kicked from the tournament and forced to forfeit all matches thereby giving the win to Alliance X.
The War season is exactly the same as this.
It is exacxtly the same as how games run Esports tournaments.
As for being robbed, that's not a given. We can't assume every Loss is because of cheating, which can be anything from Mods to Account Sharing. We can say they never earned it fairly, but had they not cheated, the Match still could have gone either way, depending on performance. It's equally as unfair to assume Allies would have won when that's not a certainty.
there are many many assumptions to either side to say black and white one way or another.
there are many forms of cheating.
sometimes cheating has different results.
everything can be exploited.
cheating does not always give someone a win.
and i get wat you are saying about it is unfair to give someone a win because they may not have won.
yes you are correct.
but IF they would have won but were cheated against the potential loss is huge.
IF they were cheated against and only lost because of the cheating and get platinum instead of master that is a huge punishment.
It may be hard to draw the line but it is not cool when cheating costs someone rewards.
and it is exactly like Sports. It is exactly the same as an Esports tournament. Some sports use only win or Loss.
Alot of sports use win or loss with points difference as a sorting factor when wins and losses are same.
some sports use points scored as a large factor.
You cannot put everything into two buckets.
not everything fits in either a black or a white bucket.
there are many buckets when it comes to sports and cheating and there needs to be many things considered when issuing punishements/rewards as a result.
kabam can review the statistics and data from a war where someone has cheated to determine if it is a reasonable assumption that the non-cheating alliance would have won and use that to potential restore some of the wins and maybe not some of the wins.
they can certainly see where a win would have been possible if no cheating could have occoured.
yes they may not know 100%.
but beyond reasonable doubt is all that is required legally for a conviction so if they can assume beyond reasonable doubt that the non cheating ally would have won they should issue the victory.
Can you provide a source to support this? Other competitive events like the Olympics see things differently.
in regards to kabam making reviews of each war where cheating is a factor.
either this one here or
this one
https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/108235/alliance-war-season-issues-again#latest
either this one here or
this one
https://forums.playcontestofchampions.com/en/discussion/108261/why-kabams-aw-season-punishment-is-flawed#latest
What source? I'm saying it. This isn't the Olympics, and we're not talking drug screening.
I really don't want to get into specifics, but there are a number of ways I can think of to manipulate a system like that.
My question was meant to gauge whether there had been an official statement on that perspective. Other competitions outside of sports like cyber security competitions and speech and debate view cheating as more unfair than being awarded wins because your opponent cheated as well. I also don't think that Kabam would ban players for receiving increased rewards because their AW opponents violated terms of service.
we are not talking about someon just turning up and getting a gold medal.
we are talking about an alliance that puts in hard work scores 146,000 points in war... uses potions and boosts...
get beat because someone cheated...
that is not handing anyone a win.
they had it stolen.
As i said kabam can review the data and see if it is reasonable to assume that that the non cheating alliance would have won.
I can t speak for all sports but its the same as a system here in our NRL (rugby league) for a penalty try. A try is like a touchdown in American Football.
now If during an attempt of scoring a try a penalty occurs and causes the try not to be scored, if it is deamed that the try would have been scored if the penalty never occured a penalty try is awarded.
this is to stop penalties being deliberately done to stop tries and also stop a team from being punished due to an illegal act of the opposition.
for the penalty try to be awarded it has to be deemed beyond reasonable doubt trhat without the penalty trhe try would be scored.
if it was too questionable then there would only be penalty awarded no try.
kabam can surely investigate and do similar.
A number of ways to manipulate a system in which you lose to cheaters and get awarded the victory? It would seem that, at a minimum, it would require you losing and having the other side cheat... Since Kabam isn't doing this there is no reason to not share the many ways of which you speak. Top alliances won't be able to benefit and the contest will be safe.
I didn't say they viewed it as equally heinous. I said it's equally as unfair. I don't like the idea of an Ally earning Rewards not because they fought and earned them, but by default due to cheating. That's not a fair Win either in my eyes.
I'm not interested in providing ideas. Have you looked around? Lol. People will find any way they can to manipulate the system.
No, it's not the same.
@GroundedWisdom
can you please give your thoughts/debate either for/against this point