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.
Alliance A finishes in platinum because they didn't fight any cheaters. Alliance B died less and fought better than alliance A but faced 3 pilot groups who were later demoted. Alliance B finishes in Gold. Did alliance A earn their spot or did they just benefit from the system and luck? "Earning" it should not require being able to outplay cheaters. Maybe it's unfair to award the victory automatically, but it's more fair than the alternative.
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.
Alliance A finishes in platinum because they didn't fight any cheaters. Alliance B died less and fought better than alliance A but faced 3 pilot groups who were later demoted. Alliance B finishes in Gold. Did alliance A earn their spot or did they just benefit from the system and luck? "Earning" it should not require being able to outplay cheaters. Maybe it's unfair to award the victory automatically, but it's more fair than the alternative.
It is more fair because what's not adding up in that scenario is the reduction in Points. They don't just lose War Rating. They lose Points as well. Alliance B is still earning what they put up in comparison to what everyone else put up. This idea of missing out on something because another Ally is penalized isn't really accurate. In the end, you Rank in relation to what you put up. Whether the other Ally Piloted or not, that is what you put up.
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
@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.
Yes, I have looked around. You don't want to provide ideas for manipulating a system that doesn't exist lol. I'm sure the top allies are shaking their fists right now that they won't be able to benefit from your ideas in the event that Kabam does a 180 on their policy... We are talking about overturning a loss upon Kabam determining that the other side cheated. Manipulating that system would require you to lose, to convince the other side to cheat, and to hope that Kabam does the needful. I don't think you have several ideas of how you could game that which are too dangerous to be shared lol.
No. You're talking about claiming a Win on the grounds of what COULD have been. Something the data doesn't show. Only what is. The suggestion implies a whole process of examination, prediction, and manual adjustment that is not only unfair, it's making a problem into more work. They can't assume Wins. You either win or you don't.
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.
Alliance A finishes in platinum because they didn't fight any cheaters. Alliance B died less and fought better than alliance A but faced 3 pilot groups who were later demoted. Alliance B finishes in Gold. Did alliance A earn their spot or did they just benefit from the system and luck? "Earning" it should not require being able to outplay cheaters. Maybe it's unfair to award the victory automatically, but it's more fair than the alternative.
It is more fair because what's not adding up in that scenario is the reduction in Points. They don't just lose War Rating. They lose Points as well. Alliance B is still earning what they put up in comparison to what everyone else put up. This idea of missing out on something because another Ally is penalized isn't really accurate. In the end, you Rank in relation to what you put up. Whether the other Ally Piloted or not, that is what you put up.
Nope. In the scenario I proposed alliance B earned more points than alliance A. They had a higher attack bonus and cleared node 29 every time whereas alliance A often left it. The difference between them is the points awarded for victory, which alliance B was unable to obtain due to cheating.
Further to that, Alliances are already adjusted when the cheaters lose Points. Everything shifts. What you're implying is, move us up when you take their Points away, and move us up again after 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 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.
Alliance A finishes in platinum because they didn't fight any cheaters. Alliance B died less and fought better than alliance A but faced 3 pilot groups who were later demoted. Alliance B finishes in Gold. Did alliance A earn their spot or did they just benefit from the system and luck? "Earning" it should not require being able to outplay cheaters. Maybe it's unfair to award the victory automatically, but it's more fair than the alternative.
It is more fair because what's not adding up in that scenario is the reduction in Points. They don't just lose War Rating. They lose Points as well. Alliance B is still earning what they put up in comparison to what everyone else put up. This idea of missing out on something because another Ally is penalized isn't really accurate. In the end, you Rank in relation to what you put up. Whether the other Ally Piloted or not, that is what you put up.
No, Alliance B actually scored more points in the War than Alliance A. They had a higher attack bonus, and for the sake of argument, they always 100%ed the map whereas Alliance A often left node 29. Alliance B outperformed and earned more points. The difference is the victory points which alliance A received because they didn't face cheater as opposed to alliance B who did.
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
They don't operate on assumptions that way.
LOL...
you are not them. you cannot speak for them.
i am suggesting just as they investigate everything they alos investigate the potential outcome.
there would be more than enough data to make a decsion one way or another beyond reasonable doubt
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.
Alliance A finishes in platinum because they didn't fight any cheaters. Alliance B died less and fought better than alliance A but faced 3 pilot groups who were later demoted. Alliance B finishes in Gold. Did alliance A earn their spot or did they just benefit from the system and luck? "Earning" it should not require being able to outplay cheaters. Maybe it's unfair to award the victory automatically, but it's more fair than the alternative.
It is more fair because what's not adding up in that scenario is the reduction in Points. They don't just lose War Rating. They lose Points as well. Alliance B is still earning what they put up in comparison to what everyone else put up. This idea of missing out on something because another Ally is penalized isn't really accurate. In the end, you Rank in relation to what you put up. Whether the other Ally Piloted or not, that is what you put up.
that is not true.
the alliance that lost cuis of cheaters missed out on 50k win bonus. which in T1 is a whopping 400k points.
more than the full win score would be at t12
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
They don't operate on assumptions that way.
LOL...
you are not them. you cannot speak for them.
i am suggesting just as they investigate everything they alos investigate the potential outcome.
there would be more than enough data to make a decsion one way or another beyond reasonable doubt
You want them to examine the data and award a Win based on what didn't happen, but what could have happened. I don't need to work for them to see how that isn't feasible.
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.
Alliance A finishes in platinum because they didn't fight any cheaters. Alliance B died less and fought better than alliance A but faced 3 pilot groups who were later demoted. Alliance B finishes in Gold. Did alliance A earn their spot or did they just benefit from the system and luck? "Earning" it should not require being able to outplay cheaters. Maybe it's unfair to award the victory automatically, but it's more fair than the alternative.
It is more fair because what's not adding up in that scenario is the reduction in Points. They don't just lose War Rating. They lose Points as well. Alliance B is still earning what they put up in comparison to what everyone else put up. This idea of missing out on something because another Ally is penalized isn't really accurate. In the end, you Rank in relation to what you put up. Whether the other Ally Piloted or not, that is what you put up.
No, Alliance B actually scored more points in the War than Alliance A. They had a higher attack bonus, and for the sake of argument, they always 100%ed the map whereas Alliance A often left node 29. Alliance B outperformed and earned more points. The difference is the victory points which alliance A received because they didn't face cheater as opposed to alliance B who did.
Alliance B is not awarded Wins based on how they do in comparison to Alliance A. Only how they do against their Opponents. If they lost, they lost. Regardless of what went on with the other Ally. Alliance B couldn't have put up more Season Points than Alliance A because they would have placed higher. Season Points determine the final Ranking.
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
They don't operate on assumptions that way.
LOL...
you are not them. you cannot speak for them.
i am suggesting just as they investigate everything they alos investigate the potential outcome.
there would be more than enough data to make a decsion one way or another beyond reasonable doubt
You want them to examine the data and award a Win based on what didn't happen, but what could have happened. I don't need to work for them to see how that isn't feasible.
it is entirely feasible. They have data on everything. the data for every thing is there. they can clearly see who cheated and wat benifit the cheating had.
just as the use the data to determine who cheated in what way it would be easy to determine the outcome that cheating had on the result.
take away the benifit caused by cheating. use the rest of the war data to create an average. replace the data which was skewed by cheating with the averaged data.
calculate new result.
It would be quite easy in the scheme of things to write algorithms to help with this.
but for the most part it would be easy enough for anyone with half an understanding of the game to determine wat would have happened.
here i am offering suggestions to actually help the player base.
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
They don't operate on assumptions that way.
LOL...
you are not them. you cannot speak for them.
i am suggesting just as they investigate everything they alos investigate the potential outcome.
there would be more than enough data to make a decsion one way or another beyond reasonable doubt
You want them to examine the data and award a Win based on what didn't happen, but what could have happened. I don't need to work for them to see how that isn't feasible.
it is entirely feasible. They have data on everything. the data for every thing is there. they can clearly see who cheated and wat benifit the cheating had.
just as the use the data to determine who cheated in what way it would be easy to determine the outcome that cheating had on the result.
take away the benifit caused by cheating. use the rest of the war data to create an average. replace the data which was skewed by cheating with the averaged data.
calculate new result.
It would be quite easy in the scheme of things to write algorithms to help with this.
but for the most part it would be easy enough for anyone with half an understanding of the game to determine wat would have happened.
here i am offering suggestions to actually help the player base.
How much work do you suppose that would require? How often are Alliances dinged? Do you suppose they should do that everytime? That's not feasible.
They're already about as retroactive as it can get. You think they need to go back and tally every move in the War? No. Just no.
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
They don't operate on assumptions that way.
LOL...
you are not them. you cannot speak for them.
i am suggesting just as they investigate everything they alos investigate the potential outcome.
there would be more than enough data to make a decsion one way or another beyond reasonable doubt
You want them to examine the data and award a Win based on what didn't happen, but what could have happened. I don't need to work for them to see how that isn't feasible.
it is entirely feasible. They have data on everything. the data for every thing is there. they can clearly see who cheated and wat benifit the cheating had.
just as the use the data to determine who cheated in what way it would be easy to determine the outcome that cheating had on the result.
take away the benifit caused by cheating. use the rest of the war data to create an average. replace the data which was skewed by cheating with the averaged data.
calculate new result.
It would be quite easy in the scheme of things to write algorithms to help with this.
but for the most part it would be easy enough for anyone with half an understanding of the game to determine wat would have happened.
here i am offering suggestions to actually help the player base.
How much work do you suppose that would require? How often are Alliances dinged? Do you suppose they should do that everytime? That's not feasible.
They're already about as retroactive as it can get. You think they need to go back and tally every move in the War? No. Just no.
Its called investigating.
simple as that.
proper investigating into the effects of cheating should occur.
They make plenty of money and could easily afford to do this.
we are not talking about every war.
only the ones where they have deemed cheating to happen.
I am offering suggestions as to what can be done to help people not get punished here.
and get waht they deserve.
why are you arguing against potential solutions to help the player base?
it could be done
it should be done
and kabam could surely afford it.
they make millions of dollars profit.
i am not asking a homeless person to give me a dollar here.
What you're asking is not reasonable. You want them to meticulously comb over every Point in Wars that cheating has been detected, remove the Points that are ill-gotten, and readjust the Wins and Losses based on the remainder. For every War cheating is found in. They would have to hire someone specifically for that purpose. That's not reasonable.
What you're asking is not reasonable. You want them to meticulously comb over every Point in Wars that cheating has been detected, remove the Points that are ill-gotten, and readjust the Wins and Losses based on the remainder. For every War cheating is found in. They would have to hire someone specifically for that purpose. That's not reasonable.
not exaclty like that.
but asking them to reasess the outcome of a war where cheating was involved is perfectly reasonable.
you seem to be missing the point here.
If an alliance loses a war due to cheating the win bonus they miss out on is potential 400k points.
you are accepting the fact that an alliance can be cheated against and thereby cost up to
750 6* shards, 1000 5* shards, 5625 t5b shards, .25 t2a, 1 war season crystal
that is the difference between master 2 and master 1
or more realistically,
500 6* shards, 1000 5* shards, 5875 t5b shards, 18000 t2a shards, 1 war season crystal.
thats the difference between platinum 1 and master season rewards.
and it is entirely possible that the win bonus from a top tier alliance alone could make the difference between those.
you may be prepared to accept this.
but I and many others are not, and feel something more needs to be done.
i personally am only a gold 2 ally and i feel that we will never be affected by any of this or barely affected by cheating at all. we are currently 800 gold 2 so pretty secure win or loss at gold2 and we are happy enough there.
So i am not arguing for this because it can benefit me,.
i am arguing this for what is right.
and from a totally unbiased and unaffected viewpoint.
The cheating of one ally should not have a negative impact on another ally.
the loss of a victory due to cheating does this.
it costs 50k win bonus as a minimum which is potentially as high as 400k points and potentially has huge ramifications in the rewards of aany given alliance.
we should not accept that kabam would put punishment and fairness to any extent in the TOO HARD BASKET.
@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.
Isn't that convenient, seems like the prerequisite answer when you're asked to back up something.
How exactly does this impact you in silver 3 alliance ?.
F.Y.I.
please be careful when talking bout cheating there are some words that may result in your post requiring admin approval before it is allowed. h_a_c_k will trigger the filter.
The only thing that isn't feasible here is expecting GW to concede to reasonable debate and not argue against the majority opinion. HajiSaab is exactly right, don't bother even responding because it doesn't matter what you say or how much sense you make, his entire shtick is being "that guy" who has to have the dissenting opinion on every topic no matter what and has never once been swayed in any thread on any topic, so why waste your time?
On the topic you're obviously right as evidenced by the numerous arguments throughout this thread explaining exactly why something should change to keep allys from being "punished" due to losing to a cheating ally. Not just at the top, but at any level where you're matched against a comparable level opponent overcoming cheating is difficult. If an ally is later docked for cheating and you didn't lose to them in a complete blowout is it not reasonable to assume different results had they not cheated?
exactly if they cheated and you lost by 1000 points or less it is very reasonable to assume that had they not cheated you would have won.
exactly how many point would be considered a reasonable amount would often be affected by the manner of
cheating used.
for example.
1. if piloting is used the results would probably be quite close and if you were to say lose by 5000 points i daresay it is very likely you would have lost if they cheated or not, and therefore dont necessarily deserve to be awarded the win
however,
2. if an alliance has given away 60+ deaths to your defence and the suddenly oneshots your 5/65 medusa due to using a hack it is reasonable to assume had they not cheated they would not have killed your boss and therefore 20k points would be able to be easily accounted for. so almost any loss would and should result in a win.
1) A player/alliance doesn’t need to violate the ToS in AW or even the war you lost to them in which caused them to be docked. If it is done in a specific AW you still cannot fairly quantify the impact. It is then hypothetical or an assumption to say that the dock was related to your loss. End of argument.
2) Season rankings are adjusted by teams being docked.
3) Repeated violations are likely to result in perm bans for players so in time these players will not be impacting seasons if they continue to break the rules.
First of all, please remember to keep your conversations in the forums civil. We know that disagreements will arise, but attacking each other is not the way to handle them. We're all adults here and should be able to calmly discuss and debate our points of view without resorting to attacking one another.
As for the topics at hand, we've talked about this before, but it is a tricky one. We do everything that we can to address cheating or manipulation of the Contest the best that we can, and are always working to improve both our manners of detection, but the ways in which we address and punish that behaviour. This is a priority for us.
It's not a good feeling losing against an Alliance that is later punished for this behaviour, but unfortunately, it is not possible to tell if that Alliance cheated against you, or somebody else, or what the Terms of Service violation that caused them to have their points deducted even was.
We do wish there was a better method here, and this is something we will continue to work to improve, but at this time, it is not possible for us to monitor exactly where an Alliance may have broken the rules, and how that affected the opposing Alliance.
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.
I can GUARANTEE this is NOT why he was banned. I have played this game (2 accounts)on probably 50 different devices over the last 3 years, and never been banned or suspended. It's NOT against the TOS to switch devices or have more than 1 device playing 2 accounts as long as the accounts are YOURS.
Your leader shared his account, or piloted another. That's the reality here.
First of all, please remember to keep your conversations in the forums civil. We know that disagreements will arise, but attacking each other is not the way to handle them. We're all adults here and should be able to calmly discuss and debate our points of view without resorting to attacking one another.
As for the topics at hand, we've talked about this before, but it is a tricky one. We do everything that we can to address cheating or manipulation of the Contest the best that we can, and are always working to improve both our manners of detection, but the ways in which we address and punish that behaviour. This is a priority for us.
It's not a good feeling losing against an Alliance that is later punished for this behaviour, but unfortunately, it is not possible to tell if that Alliance cheated against you, or somebody else, or what the Terms of Service violation that caused them to have their points deducted even was.
We do wish there was a better method here, and this is something we will continue to work to improve, but at this time, it is not possible for us to monitor exactly where an Alliance may have broken the rules, and how that affected the opposing Alliance.
If solving this is truly a priority, please print out @Vale84 ’s post from the first page. Tape it to the office refrigerator. Tape it to both sides of the front door. Put one above each urinal where you see those ads in the club and on the inside of each bathroom stall. Make it the screensaver for every computer. Run it on loop in the cafe’s tv. Slide 10 copies under the boss’ door every day.
You never know... a solution might present itself. I’m hopeful. Thanks for everything 🙂
First of all, please remember to keep your conversations in the forums civil. We know that disagreements will arise, but attacking each other is not the way to handle them. We're all adults here and should be able to calmly discuss and debate our points of view without resorting to attacking one another.
As for the topics at hand, we've talked about this before, but it is a tricky one. We do everything that we can to address cheating or manipulation of the Contest the best that we can, and are always working to improve both our manners of detection, but the ways in which we address and punish that behaviour. This is a priority for us.
It's not a good feeling losing against an Alliance that is later punished for this behaviour, but unfortunately, it is not possible to tell if that Alliance cheated against you, or somebody else, or what the Terms of Service violation that caused them to have their points deducted even was.
We do wish there was a better method here, and this is something we will continue to work to improve, but at this time, it is not possible for us to monitor exactly where an Alliance may have broken the rules, and how that affected the opposing Alliance.
If solving this is truly a priority, please print out Vale84’s post from the first page. Tape it to the office refrigerator. Tape it to both sides of the front door. Put one above each urinal where you see those ads in the club and on the inside of each bathroom stall. Make it the screensaver for every computer. Run it on loop in the cafe’s tv. Slide 10 copies under the boss’ door every day.
You never know... a solution might present itself. I’m hopeful. Thanks for everything 🙂
Oh I've read @Vale84's suggestions for ending Collusion, and there are quite a few good points in there! We don't have much information to share at this time, but we are working to improve the matchmaking system and counter collusion tactics, but also improve matchmaking, in the future!
Comments
Alliance A finishes in platinum because they didn't fight any cheaters. Alliance B died less and fought better than alliance A but faced 3 pilot groups who were later demoted. Alliance B finishes in Gold. Did alliance A earn their spot or did they just benefit from the system and luck? "Earning" it should not require being able to outplay cheaters. Maybe it's unfair to award the victory automatically, but it's more fair than the alternative.
It is more fair because what's not adding up in that scenario is the reduction in Points. They don't just lose War Rating. They lose Points as well. Alliance B is still earning what they put up in comparison to what everyone else put up. This idea of missing out on something because another Ally is penalized isn't really accurate. In the end, you Rank in relation to what you put up. Whether the other Ally Piloted or not, that is what you put up.
They don't operate on assumptions that way.
Yes, I have looked around. You don't want to provide ideas for manipulating a system that doesn't exist lol. I'm sure the top allies are shaking their fists right now that they won't be able to benefit from your ideas in the event that Kabam does a 180 on their policy... We are talking about overturning a loss upon Kabam determining that the other side cheated. Manipulating that system would require you to lose, to convince the other side to cheat, and to hope that Kabam does the needful. I don't think you have several ideas of how you could game that which are too dangerous to be shared lol.
Nope. In the scenario I proposed alliance B earned more points than alliance A. They had a higher attack bonus and cleared node 29 every time whereas alliance A often left it. The difference between them is the points awarded for victory, which alliance B was unable to obtain due to cheating.
No, Alliance B actually scored more points in the War than Alliance A. They had a higher attack bonus, and for the sake of argument, they always 100%ed the map whereas Alliance A often left node 29. Alliance B outperformed and earned more points. The difference is the victory points which alliance A received because they didn't face cheater as opposed to alliance B who did.
LOL...
you are not them. you cannot speak for them.
i am suggesting just as they investigate everything they alos investigate the potential outcome.
there would be more than enough data to make a decsion one way or another beyond reasonable doubt
that is not true.
the alliance that lost cuis of cheaters missed out on 50k win bonus. which in T1 is a whopping 400k points.
more than the full win score would be at t12
You want them to examine the data and award a Win based on what didn't happen, but what could have happened. I don't need to work for them to see how that isn't feasible.
Alliance B is not awarded Wins based on how they do in comparison to Alliance A. Only how they do against their Opponents. If they lost, they lost. Regardless of what went on with the other Ally. Alliance B couldn't have put up more Season Points than Alliance A because they would have placed higher. Season Points determine the final Ranking.
I have no opposition to bans.
it is entirely feasible. They have data on everything. the data for every thing is there. they can clearly see who cheated and wat benifit the cheating had.
just as the use the data to determine who cheated in what way it would be easy to determine the outcome that cheating had on the result.
take away the benifit caused by cheating. use the rest of the war data to create an average. replace the data which was skewed by cheating with the averaged data.
calculate new result.
It would be quite easy in the scheme of things to write algorithms to help with this.
but for the most part it would be easy enough for anyone with half an understanding of the game to determine wat would have happened.
here i am offering suggestions to actually help the player base.
How much work do you suppose that would require? How often are Alliances dinged? Do you suppose they should do that everytime? That's not feasible.
They're already about as retroactive as it can get. You think they need to go back and tally every move in the War? No. Just no.
Its called investigating.
simple as that.
proper investigating into the effects of cheating should occur.
They make plenty of money and could easily afford to do this.
we are not talking about every war.
only the ones where they have deemed cheating to happen.
I am offering suggestions as to what can be done to help people not get punished here.
and get waht they deserve.
why are you arguing against potential solutions to help the player base?
it could be done
it should be done
and kabam could surely afford it.
they make millions of dollars profit.
i am not asking a homeless person to give me a dollar here.
not exaclty like that.
but asking them to reasess the outcome of a war where cheating was involved is perfectly reasonable.
you seem to be missing the point here.
If an alliance loses a war due to cheating the win bonus they miss out on is potential 400k points.
you are accepting the fact that an alliance can be cheated against and thereby cost up to
750 6* shards, 1000 5* shards, 5625 t5b shards, .25 t2a, 1 war season crystal
that is the difference between master 2 and master 1
or more realistically,
500 6* shards, 1000 5* shards, 5875 t5b shards, 18000 t2a shards, 1 war season crystal.
thats the difference between platinum 1 and master season rewards.
and it is entirely possible that the win bonus from a top tier alliance alone could make the difference between those.
you may be prepared to accept this.
but I and many others are not, and feel something more needs to be done.
i personally am only a gold 2 ally and i feel that we will never be affected by any of this or barely affected by cheating at all. we are currently 800 gold 2 so pretty secure win or loss at gold2 and we are happy enough there.
So i am not arguing for this because it can benefit me,.
i am arguing this for what is right.
and from a totally unbiased and unaffected viewpoint.
The cheating of one ally should not have a negative impact on another ally.
the loss of a victory due to cheating does this.
it costs 50k win bonus as a minimum which is potentially as high as 400k points and potentially has huge ramifications in the rewards of aany given alliance.
we should not accept that kabam would put punishment and fairness to any extent in the TOO HARD BASKET.
Isn't that convenient, seems like the prerequisite answer when you're asked to back up something.
How exactly does this impact you in silver 3 alliance ?.
please be careful when talking bout cheating there are some words that may result in your post requiring admin approval before it is allowed. h_a_c_k will trigger the filter.
exactly if they cheated and you lost by 1000 points or less it is very reasonable to assume that had they not cheated you would have won.
exactly how many point would be considered a reasonable amount would often be affected by the manner of
cheating used.
for example.
1. if piloting is used the results would probably be quite close and if you were to say lose by 5000 points i daresay it is very likely you would have lost if they cheated or not, and therefore dont necessarily deserve to be awarded the win
however,
2. if an alliance has given away 60+ deaths to your defence and the suddenly oneshots your 5/65 medusa due to using a hack it is reasonable to assume had they not cheated they would not have killed your boss and therefore 20k points would be able to be easily accounted for. so almost any loss would and should result in a win.
2) Season rankings are adjusted by teams being docked.
3) Repeated violations are likely to result in perm bans for players so in time these players will not be impacting seasons if they continue to break the rules.
First of all, please remember to keep your conversations in the forums civil. We know that disagreements will arise, but attacking each other is not the way to handle them. We're all adults here and should be able to calmly discuss and debate our points of view without resorting to attacking one another.
As for the topics at hand, we've talked about this before, but it is a tricky one. We do everything that we can to address cheating or manipulation of the Contest the best that we can, and are always working to improve both our manners of detection, but the ways in which we address and punish that behaviour. This is a priority for us.
It's not a good feeling losing against an Alliance that is later punished for this behaviour, but unfortunately, it is not possible to tell if that Alliance cheated against you, or somebody else, or what the Terms of Service violation that caused them to have their points deducted even was.
We do wish there was a better method here, and this is something we will continue to work to improve, but at this time, it is not possible for us to monitor exactly where an Alliance may have broken the rules, and how that affected the opposing Alliance.
I can GUARANTEE this is NOT why he was banned. I have played this game (2 accounts)on probably 50 different devices over the last 3 years, and never been banned or suspended. It's NOT against the TOS to switch devices or have more than 1 device playing 2 accounts as long as the accounts are YOURS.
Your leader shared his account, or piloted another. That's the reality here.
If solving this is truly a priority, please print out @Vale84 ’s post from the first page. Tape it to the office refrigerator. Tape it to both sides of the front door. Put one above each urinal where you see those ads in the club and on the inside of each bathroom stall. Make it the screensaver for every computer. Run it on loop in the cafe’s tv. Slide 10 copies under the boss’ door every day.
You never know... a solution might present itself. I’m hopeful. Thanks for everything 🙂
Oh I've read @Vale84's suggestions for ending Collusion, and there are quite a few good points in there! We don't have much information to share at this time, but we are working to improve the matchmaking system and counter collusion tactics, but also improve matchmaking, in the future!