Can't award a partial Win. The record shows you lost. Albeit to a cheating Ally, but that's exactly what they're being punished for. Remove that by awarding Wins automatically, and you remove the very thing you're punishing for.
So because you think coming up against an Ally that cheats is an automatic Loss, you think an automatic Win is more fair? Not really. Honest answer. Let's say that's implemented and an Ally notices early on that the other side is cheating. So they do nothing and wait for vindication. Is that a fair system? Just default your way up? I'm sorry. No matter how you look at it, I disagree with defaults. There are already measures being taken to penalize Allies that affect the entire Leaderboard after. I'm not okay with them keeping the Rewards from Wins. With people on that one. I'm equally as not okay with just giving them by default.
This post proves you have no idea.
Even if an alliance new categorically that their opponents were cheating, they wouldn’t do nothing a just waiting for the cheating alliance to be penalised and be handed the win because season points are also based on attack bonus, exploration and boss kills. If you’re going to sit there and do nothing then you may as well not even worry about the win as you would get more points from 100% maps than the win. No one is suggesting you get full points just what you rightfully earned and win bonus.
I have no idea about the scoring? Is that what you're saying? You are aware I've been around since before the first War Beta, and have been an active voice in War discussions all along, right? That was a hypothetical. It was used to make a point. One that was apparently missed.
So because you think coming up against an Ally that cheats is an automatic Loss, you think an automatic Win is more fair? Not really. Honest answer. Let's say that's implemented and an Ally notices early on that the other side is cheating. So they do nothing and wait for vindication. Is that a fair system? Just default your way up? I'm sorry. No matter how you look at it, I disagree with defaults. There are already measures being taken to penalize Allies that affect the entire Leaderboard after. I'm not okay with them keeping the Rewards from Wins. With people on that one. I'm equally as not okay with just giving them by default.
Truthfully, doing nothing isn't an option @GroundedWisdom with what's being proposed. If they awarded the win to you, that means you get the 50k win bonus points (pre-multiplier), the war rating points for the win, and whatever else you earned along the way. If the major problem with AW in the realm of mods is now attack based (which is what I'm gathering from the majority of messages), stopping dead in your tracks is gonna hurt you. You'd still have to fight through to the end.
Did you think that people were proposing getting max points from a war like this?? That's ludicrous and would never happen. In the proposed system, the Alliance that played fair would merely get what they earned, the 50k bonus for the win, and war rating points returned. That's what giving an Alliance the win means. Not handing them 100% exploration with max attack bonus when it wasn't earned.
To prove that you tried to win, you have to fight that war like any other war. If anyone is proposing having Kabam handing them max points for running into an Alliance that's modding, they're seriously misguided. Never gonna happen. The other aforementioned method, I can see being a possibility, and a fair one too. Anything more is outlandish and asking too much.
In this case, Kabam is not determining that the honest Ally has won. They're determining that the cheating Ally has won through a violation of TOS. Big difference.
In turn, giving the win bonus to the honest Alliance after the fact. Perhaps it wasn't laid out properly before and it sounded like people just wanted a free win from running into a cheating Alliance. Perhaps they did. I'm not a mind reader afterall, lol. If they did, nah... never gonna happen like that.
If anyone wants this to fly, they'd have to prove they fought their way to a win and got cheated out of it. I don't see Kabam just handing anyone win with max points simply because they ran into another group that was cheating. Especially if they stop dead in the beginning or middle because they felt the war was a lost cause due to cheaters.
Therein lies the problem. You have 2 outcomes. Win and Loss. You either win or you lose. That all depends on the scoring. Hence my "what if" comment. You can't say "would have".
Oh I agree. You cannot say that you 'would have won' if they weren't modding. No way to prove that. None. 0. Agreed. I mean, logically speaking, they probably wouldn't have won without the use of mods. However, that's not being said definitively though with that wording. Playing straight up and getting out performed by a group that's cheating should result in the win bonuses defaulting to the Alliance that played fair once proven that the cheaters had used a mod. Nothing more, nothing less. Does that seem fair when said like that?
So because you think coming up against an Ally that cheats is an automatic Loss, you think an automatic Win is more fair? Not really. Honest answer. Let's say that's implemented and an Ally notices early on that the other side is cheating. So they do nothing and wait for vindication. Is that a fair system? Just default your way up? I'm sorry. No matter how you look at it, I disagree with defaults. There are already measures being taken to penalize Allies that affect the entire Leaderboard after. I'm not okay with them keeping the Rewards from Wins. With people on that one. I'm equally as not okay with just giving them by default.
Truthfully, doing nothing isn't an option @GroundedWisdom with what's being proposed. If they awarded the win to you, that means you get the 50k win bonus points (pre-multiplier), the war rating points for the win, and whatever else you earned along the way. If the major problem with AW in the realm of mods is now attack based (which is what I'm gathering from the majority of messages), stopping dead in your tracks is gonna hurt you. You'd still have to fight through to the end.
Did you think that people were proposing getting max points from a war like this?? That's ludicrous and would never happen. In the proposed system, the Alliance that played fair would merely get what they earned, the 50k bonus for the win, and war rating points returned. That's what giving an Alliance the win means. Not handing them 100% exploration with max attack bonus when it wasn't earned.
To prove that you tried to win, you have to fight that war like any other war. If anyone is proposing having Kabam handing them max points for running into an Alliance that's modding, they're seriously misguided. Never gonna happen. The other aforementioned method, I can see being a possibility, and a fair one too. Anything more is outlandish and asking too much.
In this case, Kabam is not determining that the honest Ally has won. They're determining that the cheating Ally has won through a violation of TOS. Big difference.
In turn, giving the win bonus to the honest Alliance after the fact. Perhaps it wasn't laid out properly before and it sounded like people just wanted a free win from running into a cheating Alliance. Perhaps they did. I'm not a mind reader afterall, lol. If they did, nah... never gonna happen like that.
If anyone wants this to fly, they'd have to prove they fought their way to a win and got cheated out of it. I don't see Kabam just handing anyone win with max points simply because they ran into another group that was cheating. Especially if they stop dead in the beginning or middle because they felt the war was a lost cause due to cheaters.
Therein lies the problem. You have 2 outcomes. Win and Loss. You either win or you lose. That all depends on the scoring. Hence my "what if" comment. You can't say "would have".
Oh I agree. You cannot say that you 'would have won' if they weren't modding. No way to prove that. None. 0. Agreed. I mean, logically speaking, they probably wouldn't have won without the use of mods. However, that's not being said definitively though with that wording. Playing straight up and getting out performed by a group that's cheating should result in the win bonuses defaulting to the Alliance that played fair once proven that the cheaters had used a mod. Nothing more, nothing less. Does that seem fair when said like that?
Not exactly. It still equates to someone progressing no matter what they do, through the wrong actions of others.
I have no idea about the scoring? Is that what you're saying? You are aware I've been around since before the first War Beta, and have been an active voice in War discussions all along, right? That was a hypothetical. It was used to make a point. One that was apparently missed.
I have no idea about the scoring? Is that what you're saying? You are aware I've been around since before the first War Beta, and have been an active voice in War discussions all along, right? That was a hypothetical. It was used to make a point. One that was apparently missed.
Only point you made was you have no idea.
My mistake. I thought this was a conversation. You just wanted to sling insults.
Not exactly. It still equates to someone progressing no matter what they do, through the wrong actions of others.
What would happen then, hypothetically speaking, if an alliance came up against modders every single war? And all the modders got caught, and every War that alliance fights gets voided? That would mean they'd lose every single win bonus. And how exactly would that be fair? Because that's what you're saying you'd be OK with.
So because you think coming up against an Ally that cheats is an automatic Loss, you think an automatic Win is more fair? Not really. Honest answer. Let's say that's implemented and an Ally notices early on that the other side is cheating. So they do nothing and wait for vindication. Is that a fair system? Just default your way up? I'm sorry. No matter how you look at it, I disagree with defaults. There are already measures being taken to penalize Allies that affect the entire Leaderboard after. I'm not okay with them keeping the Rewards from Wins. With people on that one. I'm equally as not okay with just giving them by default.
Truthfully, doing nothing isn't an option @GroundedWisdom with what's being proposed. If they awarded the win to you, that means you get the 50k win bonus points (pre-multiplier), the war rating points for the win, and whatever else you earned along the way. If the major problem with AW in the realm of mods is now attack based (which is what I'm gathering from the majority of messages), stopping dead in your tracks is gonna hurt you. You'd still have to fight through to the end.
Did you think that people were proposing getting max points from a war like this?? That's ludicrous and would never happen. In the proposed system, the Alliance that played fair would merely get what they earned, the 50k bonus for the win, and war rating points returned. That's what giving an Alliance the win means. Not handing them 100% exploration with max attack bonus when it wasn't earned.
To prove that you tried to win, you have to fight that war like any other war. If anyone is proposing having Kabam handing them max points for running into an Alliance that's modding, they're seriously misguided. Never gonna happen. The other aforementioned method, I can see being a possibility, and a fair one too. Anything more is outlandish and asking too much.
In this case, Kabam is not determining that the honest Ally has won. They're determining that the cheating Ally has won through a violation of TOS. Big difference.
In turn, giving the win bonus to the honest Alliance after the fact. Perhaps it wasn't laid out properly before and it sounded like people just wanted a free win from running into a cheating Alliance. Perhaps they did. I'm not a mind reader afterall, lol. If they did, nah... never gonna happen like that.
If anyone wants this to fly, they'd have to prove they fought their way to a win and got cheated out of it. I don't see Kabam just handing anyone win with max points simply because they ran into another group that was cheating. Especially if they stop dead in the beginning or middle because they felt the war was a lost cause due to cheaters.
Therein lies the problem. You have 2 outcomes. Win and Loss. You either win or you lose. That all depends on the scoring. Hence my "what if" comment. You can't say "would have".
Oh I agree. You cannot say that you 'would have won' if they weren't modding. No way to prove that. None. 0. Agreed. I mean, logically speaking, they probably wouldn't have won without the use of mods. However, that's not being said definitively though with that wording. Playing straight up and getting out performed by a group that's cheating should result in the win bonuses defaulting to the Alliance that played fair once proven that the cheaters had used a mod. Nothing more, nothing less. Does that seem fair when said like that?
Not exactly. It still equates to someone progressing no matter what they do, through the wrong actions of others.
Not really. It's merely a mild incentive for playing through without breaking the rules when running into those who are. 2 wrongs don't make a right, and not doing right by those who did right, is another wrong when they were already wronged. Logically speaking, if they used the mods, they used them for a reason. They don't feel like they can perform as well as others. So, they cheat. You don't cheat, and get out performed on uneven ground. So, in turn, you were robbed of a fair chance at that win. Being the Alliance in the right should come with something in this case. Points you didn't have a fair shot at. Seems pretty fair to me. You get what you get on the grid, and the win points for playing fair.
Truthfully, if they place some heavy focus on cracking down on these mods, it will become a moot point when they start to diminish in usage It's mainly an interim deal. Once they 'take out the trash' it will be a rarity that it will be needed. It's not right to lose in a situation where you weren't competing on even ground. So naturally, it should be awarded to those that try their best in seemingly a no win situation.
I can live without them doing this if they bring down the hammer hard on these rotten players. If they don't, it's kind of a necessity in my eyes. Not right to invest a bunch of boosts, health pots, and time into a no win situation. You still have to allocate as many points as possible to remain competitive in the season. Simply put, you're being robbed of the win bonus if you didn't have a fair shot at it. Have had it happen, and it blows.
Truthfully, this impacts EVERYONE in the grand scheme. If they weren't taking up a slot in ranks, each group behind would move up. If they weren't in the equation, everyone would have a fair shot at a win. Until that's the case, something should be done to help balance the equation. Getting your war rating bonked and losing out a points you never had a fair shot at is simply bogus.
If you don't feel the same way, well then enjoy running into a modding Alliance. I can say from experience it's VERY frustrating. Making it known that you'll get stripped of the win everytime and get some ban time might help put a stop to this. As you said, there's 2 outcomes. Win, and lose. If those that cheated are stripped of the win, it should default to the other. That's pretty much the case everywhere else, so why not here is my question?
So because you think coming up against an Ally that cheats is an automatic Loss, you think an automatic Win is more fair? Not really. Honest answer. Let's say that's implemented and an Ally notices early on that the other side is cheating. So they do nothing and wait for vindication. Is that a fair system? Just default your way up? I'm sorry. No matter how you look at it, I disagree with defaults. There are already measures being taken to penalize Allies that affect the entire Leaderboard after. I'm not okay with them keeping the Rewards from Wins. With people on that one. I'm equally as not okay with just giving them by default.
Truthfully, doing nothing isn't an option @GroundedWisdom with what's being proposed. If they awarded the win to you, that means you get the 50k win bonus points (pre-multiplier), the war rating points for the win, and whatever else you earned along the way. If the major problem with AW in the realm of mods is now attack based (which is what I'm gathering from the majority of messages), stopping dead in your tracks is gonna hurt you. You'd still have to fight through to the end.
Did you think that people were proposing getting max points from a war like this?? That's ludicrous and would never happen. In the proposed system, the Alliance that played fair would merely get what they earned, the 50k bonus for the win, and war rating points returned. That's what giving an Alliance the win means. Not handing them 100% exploration with max attack bonus when it wasn't earned.
To prove that you tried to win, you have to fight that war like any other war. If anyone is proposing having Kabam handing them max points for running into an Alliance that's modding, they're seriously misguided. Never gonna happen. The other aforementioned method, I can see being a possibility, and a fair one too. Anything more is outlandish and asking too much.
In this case, Kabam is not determining that the honest Ally has won. They're determining that the cheating Ally has won through a violation of TOS. Big difference.
In turn, giving the win bonus to the honest Alliance after the fact. Perhaps it wasn't laid out properly before and it sounded like people just wanted a free win from running into a cheating Alliance. Perhaps they did. I'm not a mind reader afterall, lol. If they did, nah... never gonna happen like that.
If anyone wants this to fly, they'd have to prove they fought their way to a win and got cheated out of it. I don't see Kabam just handing anyone win with max points simply because they ran into another group that was cheating. Especially if they stop dead in the beginning or middle because they felt the war was a lost cause due to cheaters.
Therein lies the problem. You have 2 outcomes. Win and Loss. You either win or you lose. That all depends on the scoring. Hence my "what if" comment. You can't say "would have".
Oh I agree. You cannot say that you 'would have won' if they weren't modding. No way to prove that. None. 0. Agreed. I mean, logically speaking, they probably wouldn't have won without the use of mods. However, that's not being said definitively though with that wording. Playing straight up and getting out performed by a group that's cheating should result in the win bonuses defaulting to the Alliance that played fair once proven that the cheaters had used a mod. Nothing more, nothing less. Does that seem fair when said like that?
Not exactly. It still equates to someone progressing no matter what they do, through the wrong actions of others.
Not really. It's merely a mild incentive for playing through without breaking the rules when running into those who are. 2 wrongs don't make a right, and not doing right by those who did right, is another wrong when they were already wronged. Logically speaking, if they used the mods, they used them for a reason. They don't feel like they can perform as well as others. So, they cheat. You don't cheat, and get out performed on uneven ground. So, in turn, you were robbed of a fair chance at that win. Being the Alliance in the right should come with something in this case. Points you didn't have a fair shot at. Seems pretty fair to me. You get what you get on the grid, and the win points for playing fair.
Truthfully, if they place some heavy focus on cracking down on these mods, it will become a moot point when they start to diminish in usage It's mainly an interim deal. Once they 'take out the trash' it will be a rarity that it will be needed. It's not right to lose in a situation where you weren't competing on even ground. So naturally, it should be awarded to those that try their best in seemingly a no win situation.
I can live without them doing this if they bring down the hammer hard on these rotten players. If they don't, it's kind of a necessity in my eyes. Not right to invest a bunch of boosts, health pots, and time into a no win situation. You still have to allocate as many points as possible to remain competitive in the season. Simply put, you're being robbed of the win bonus if you didn't have a fair shot at it. Have had it happen, and it blows.
Truthfully, this impacts EVERYONE in the grand scheme. If they weren't taking up a slot in ranks, each group behind would move up. If they weren't in the equation, everyone would have a fair shot at a win. Until that's the case, something should be done to help balance the equation. Getting your war rating bonked and losing out a points you never had a fair shot at is simply bogus.
If you don't feel the same way, well then enjoy running into a modding Alliance. I can say from experience it's VERY frustrating. Making it known that you'll get stripped of the win everytime and get some ban time might help put a stop to this. As you said, there's 2 outcomes. Win, and lose. If those that cheated are stripped of the win, it should default to the other. That's pretty much the case everywhere else, so why not here is my question?
I've come up against Allies that cheated. I didn't like it any more than anyone else would. I reported them and left it. What I didn't expect was to be given the Win. We lost. Albeit to a cheating Ally, but that's how it went. We lost and got what Points we could from the War. As I already said, the determination is not that the honest Ally "could have, should have, would have, did" win. The determination is that the cheating Ally won, and did so using means that broke the TOS. What people are proposing, no matter how you look at it, is that Kabam designates them the Winner. I do not agree with that. They lost. Regardless of whether the other side cheated or not, they lost. That's the outcome. Anything outside of that is based on hypothetical outcomes, under the assumption that the honest Ally should have won. You can't determine that based on the wrong actions of the other side. You can gauge based on what they're working with, what the probability of a Win is, and you can (with reasonable certainty) say whether you would have won or not. What you can't do is just hand Rewards based on that assumption, within a system designed to Reward based on progress made. Past tense.
If they're taking more Losses, they're going to be lower. Yes. What I'm saying is, no matter how the other Ally cheats, they can't affect the performance of the opposing Ally. They may be losing to an Ally that's cheating, but that still counts as a Loss, simply because they're not playing well enough to win. People may be somewhat triggered by that, but it's all in the scoring. Both sides have an either equal chance to win (based on potential Points), or a chance to Tie and take a Loss. Whether you come up against an Ally that cheats, or an Ally that finishes perfectly, it still counts as a Loss. As wrong and as unfair as it is to lose to an Ally cheating, there's nothing that Ally can do to affect how you perform.
You're literally and clearly trolling by now, considering all your posts which now aren't even making basic sense. I'd rather you stop doing it as it's going in unreal territory. Else I'll have to report you for trolling. Have a good day
If they're taking more Losses, they're going to be lower. Yes. What I'm saying is, no matter how the other Ally cheats, they can't affect the performance of the opposing Ally. They may be losing to an Ally that's cheating, but that still counts as a Loss, simply because they're not playing well enough to win. People may be somewhat triggered by that, but it's all in the scoring. Both sides have an either equal chance to win (based on potential Points), or a chance to Tie and take a Loss. Whether you come up against an Ally that cheats, or an Ally that finishes perfectly, it still counts as a Loss. As wrong and as unfair as it is to lose to an Ally cheating, there's nothing that Ally can do to affect how you perform.
You're literally and clearly trolling by now, considering all your posts which now aren't even making basic sense. I'd rather you stop doing it as it's going in unreal territory. Else I'll have to report you for trolling. Have a good day
The fact that you disagree with what I'm saying doesn't make me a Troll. I can assure you my view is exactly what I say it is, and it has nothing to do with trying to get reactions.
You really do have to find something To troll about in each solid discussion don’t you
Can we not report him for that? Because literally everyone here who frequents the forum is fed up with his trolling attitude, in guise of having a 'discussion'. AFAIK, Trolling and having meaningless conversations to incite others is against Kabam's TOS.
Modding is at an all time high. Whatever method is being used against modders is not working.
@shashankchrome best way to deal with trolls is to ignore them completely. Let them reply and post as much as they want. If you reply and start an argument it will never end, it’s exactly what trolls are waiting for. Don’t feed the trolls...
So because you think coming up against an Ally that cheats is an automatic Loss, you think an automatic Win is more fair? Not really. Honest answer. Let's say that's implemented and an Ally notices early on that the other side is cheating. So they do nothing and wait for vindication. Is that a fair system? Just default your way up? I'm sorry. No matter how you look at it, I disagree with defaults. There are already measures being taken to penalize Allies that affect the entire Leaderboard after. I'm not okay with them keeping the Rewards from Wins. With people on that one. I'm equally as not okay with just giving them by default.
Truthfully, doing nothing isn't an option @GroundedWisdom with what's being proposed. If they awarded the win to you, that means you get the 50k win bonus points (pre-multiplier), the war rating points for the win, and whatever else you earned along the way. If the major problem with AW in the realm of mods is now attack based (which is what I'm gathering from the majority of messages), stopping dead in your tracks is gonna hurt you. You'd still have to fight through to the end.
Did you think that people were proposing getting max points from a war like this?? That's ludicrous and would never happen. In the proposed system, the Alliance that played fair would merely get what they earned, the 50k bonus for the win, and war rating points returned. That's what giving an Alliance the win means. Not handing them 100% exploration with max attack bonus when it wasn't earned.
To prove that you tried to win, you have to fight that war like any other war. If anyone is proposing having Kabam handing them max points for running into an Alliance that's modding, they're seriously misguided. Never gonna happen. The other aforementioned method, I can see being a possibility, and a fair one too. Anything more is outlandish and asking too much.
In this case, Kabam is not determining that the honest Ally has won. They're determining that the cheating Ally has won through a violation of TOS. Big difference.
In turn, giving the win bonus to the honest Alliance after the fact. Perhaps it wasn't laid out properly before and it sounded like people just wanted a free win from running into a cheating Alliance. Perhaps they did. I'm not a mind reader afterall, lol. If they did, nah... never gonna happen like that.
If anyone wants this to fly, they'd have to prove they fought their way to a win and got cheated out of it. I don't see Kabam just handing anyone win with max points simply because they ran into another group that was cheating. Especially if they stop dead in the beginning or middle because they felt the war was a lost cause due to cheaters.
Therein lies the problem. You have 2 outcomes. Win and Loss. You either win or you lose. That all depends on the scoring. Hence my "what if" comment. You can't say "would have".
Oh I agree. You cannot say that you 'would have won' if they weren't modding. No way to prove that. None. 0. Agreed. I mean, logically speaking, they probably wouldn't have won without the use of mods. However, that's not being said definitively though with that wording. Playing straight up and getting out performed by a group that's cheating should result in the win bonuses defaulting to the Alliance that played fair once proven that the cheaters had used a mod. Nothing more, nothing less. Does that seem fair when said like that?
Not exactly. It still equates to someone progressing no matter what they do, through the wrong actions of others.
Not really. It's merely a mild incentive for playing through without breaking the rules when running into those who are. 2 wrongs don't make a right, and not doing right by those who did right, is another wrong when they were already wronged. Logically speaking, if they used the mods, they used them for a reason. They don't feel like they can perform as well as others. So, they cheat. You don't cheat, and get out performed on uneven ground. So, in turn, you were robbed of a fair chance at that win. Being the Alliance in the right should come with something in this case. Points you didn't have a fair shot at. Seems pretty fair to me. You get what you get on the grid, and the win points for playing fair.
Truthfully, if they place some heavy focus on cracking down on these mods, it will become a moot point when they start to diminish in usage It's mainly an interim deal. Once they 'take out the trash' it will be a rarity that it will be needed. It's not right to lose in a situation where you weren't competing on even ground. So naturally, it should be awarded to those that try their best in seemingly a no win situation.
I can live without them doing this if they bring down the hammer hard on these rotten players. If they don't, it's kind of a necessity in my eyes. Not right to invest a bunch of boosts, health pots, and time into a no win situation. You still have to allocate as many points as possible to remain competitive in the season. Simply put, you're being robbed of the win bonus if you didn't have a fair shot at it. Have had it happen, and it blows.
Truthfully, this impacts EVERYONE in the grand scheme. If they weren't taking up a slot in ranks, each group behind would move up. If they weren't in the equation, everyone would have a fair shot at a win. Until that's the case, something should be done to help balance the equation. Getting your war rating bonked and losing out a points you never had a fair shot at is simply bogus.
If you don't feel the same way, well then enjoy running into a modding Alliance. I can say from experience it's VERY frustrating. Making it known that you'll get stripped of the win everytime and get some ban time might help put a stop to this. As you said, there's 2 outcomes. Win, and lose. If those that cheated are stripped of the win, it should default to the other. That's pretty much the case everywhere else, so why not here is my question?
I've come up against Allies that cheated. I didn't like it any more than anyone else would. I reported them and left it. What I didn't expect was to be given the Win. We lost. Albeit to a cheating Ally, but that's how it went. We lost and got what Points we could from the War. As I already said, the determination is not that the honest Ally "could have, should have, would have, did" win. The determination is that the cheating Ally won, and did so using means that broke the TOS. What people are proposing, no matter how you look at it, is that Kabam designates them the Winner. I do not agree with that. They lost. Regardless of whether the other side cheated or not, they lost. That's the outcome. Anything outside of that is based on hypothetical outcomes, under the assumption that the honest Ally should have won. You can't determine that based on the wrong actions of the other side. You can gauge based on what they're working with, what the probability of a Win is, and you can (with reasonable certainty) say whether you would have won or not. What you can't do is just hand Rewards based on that assumption, within a system designed to Reward based on progress made. Past tense.
So, what you're saying is, both should lose then. Which makes 0 sense. Here's the thing about getting the war rating and defaulting the win after the fact. It should be done based on the premise more damage was done to the players in the right by the cheaters than just the loss. They've effectively caused them to match wrong because war rating points were lost in a no win situation. In some cases caused them to drop a tier and effectively screwed them for the next war with a lower multiplier.
The ONLY way to avoid this is if Kabam proved it, and rectified it before matchmaking started next war. Which I doubt would happen. Giving those that did right by the rules the win bonus (with the multiplier that was active during said war) would be a way of helping undo some of the damage done to their potential performance. No one is being handed anything. They're getting back something that was blatantly stolen. Clean and clear. Taking the points away from those who didn't earn them just isn't enough when there's fallout beyond it.
All that aside, the root of the problem needs to be handled with heavier penalties. Simple as that. Penalties need to be severe enough that it will act as a deterrent, and remove the need for rectifying botched results. I'll GLADLY take that happening over getting points back. Theoretically, should be both, but whatever. Putting a stop to it needs to be the prime focus. So what have you for such? Anyone else think a full season lockout for those cheating would help? Put em' in AW jail!!! On charges of thievery, and ruining the integrity of a competition.
That's just it. They're not going back and reevaluating the results. They're simply determining an Ally has violated TOS, and penalizing them. It's not really about changing the results of the War. There are other issues that I could see would be caused by that including privacy concerns and detection methods being revealed, but I'm not opening that can of worms here, so I'll move on. The best way to stop it is to disqualify Allies/Players responsible from Season Rewards. That will definitely reduce it. Potential side-effects come with that, like sabotaging Alliances or honest Players being penalized along with them, but let's be honest. That happens now.
Modding is at an all time high. Whatever method is being used against modders is not working.
"Anything outside of that is based on hypothetical outcomes, under the assumption that the honest Ally should have won. You can't determine that based on the wrong actions of the other side." @GroundedWisdom
So coming up against a cheating ally, what's gonna happen is this. A100% chance of the ally playing fairly, to loose. This one is not a hypothetical outcome. It is real and tangible. We are not assuming that. It WILL happen, no matter how fair you play. Or at most, a draw, IF 30 people in your alliance play on a superhuman level.
So, playing against a cheating ally=100% loss.
And according to you, and I agree to that, that there's no way of determining if the fair ally would have won if the other one wasn't cheating. In other words, a lower % of chance of them winning the war.
What I'm trying to tell you is, that what would be a lesser evil in case I was cheated upon by an ally? A 100% for us to loose all our potential points if we'd won? Or a less than 100% chance, in that hypothetical situation, that we MIGHT have won if both of us weren't cheating, and thus got atleast SOME points out of the war? I.E. getting the winning bonus atleast?
Since I was definitely cheated upon by that ally, AND wronged, I'd personally take option # 2. I'd take the option that I might have hypothetical won the war if none had cheated, rather than given an automatic loss(since they cheated).
Because that's the state of things currently. We are given an automatic loss when matched with someone that are cheating, as we can't win in that situation.
I don't know about you GW, but for me, being given an auto loss is far worse than being given an auto-win(winning bonus).
Anyone playing in a competition would agree to an Auto-Win. I'm not discussing that part of the conversation anymore. I've said about all I can say on my views with default Wins. You don't get what you could have won. You get what you win or lose.
Anyone playing in a competition would agree to an Auto-Win. I'm not discussing that part of the conversation anymore. I've said about all I can say on my views with default Wins. You don't get what you could have won. You get what you win or lose.
Ok! You’ve been heard and we understand where you’re coming from.
To the rest who are in the discussion, let’s get back to topic.
Kabam won’t ban them because a lot of them are spenders. And kabam do not want them to go. Hate cheaters in video games with a passion but apparently, gaming companies do not share that passion. Thats my experience with EA and others as well.
If there’s truth to this opinion, whoever is in charge or involved in consequences is missing the big picture. Allowing the few who mod to continue playing because they spend makes the many who play fair not want to spend. That equates to a loss of profit.
When Labyrinth of Legends was released, the Grandmaster vowed to permanently ban players who used cheats in LOL. Maybe he doesn’t care about AW Seasons or alliance mode game content:
Modding is at an all time high. Whatever method is being used against modders is not working.
How is it possible that anyone would be defining the cheaters? If you are caught cheating in any contest you lose and your opponent wins. It's that simple.
Modding is at an all time high. Whatever method is being used against modders is not working.
I'd love to see what a mod has to say about this. Some sort of "We're very serious about cheating and will continue to monitor" yada yada would go a long way.
How is it possible that anyone would be defining the cheaters? If you are caught cheating in any contest you lose and your opponent wins. It's that simple.
I’m seeing a lot of posts here about what should happen if someone gets caught cheating as far as who gets the win and who gets the loss.
Kabam has already made it clear that they won’t revert who wins or loses because there is no way to determine if the alliance who cheated would’ve lost without cheating. You can agree or disagree with this point of view but it is what it is (I personally disagree).
The issue of who gets the win or loss when an alliance is caught cheating is really small compared to the real issue we are facing now- how kabam is going to STOP modding in AW once and for all and make it sustainable.
@Greywarden Don't want to quote that Thread. It's a bit miffed. Nowhere did I say cheating doesn't affect the score. I said it doesn't alter it in a way that manipulates the amount you can earn. Meaning the cheating side doesn't prevent you from earning Points. You earn Points and gain Wins based on what you do, not what they do. Do I think it's fair to lose to a cheating Ally? No. Not a bit. What I said is you have to award based on how Wars play out. Not what "could" have played out. I'm sorry, but I don't agree with giving Rewards by default. I agree with giving them based on earning them. That means either side.
"For those Alliances, we will be offering a “Bye”. They will be awarded the points, and the rewards for that match. There is a limit to how often an Alliance can be given a Bye, so it cannot be abused."
Hmmm. It's almost like they have addressed previous issues in the game, where groups (up to 3 a week since season 8 changes) get full win rewards for doing nothing, for something out of their control. Weird.
So how is that ok, in your opinion, but trying to address the cheating system and discussing rewards if you face a modding group any different in logic or execution?
"Is that a fair system? Just default your way up? I'm sorry. No matter how you look at it, I disagree with defaults."
AW Season 11 rankings are up. This season’s motto should be “if you’re not cheating, you’re not trying”.
Sad state of affairs. Where's a hammer when you need one? Thor? Can we, the worthy that play fair, borrow Mjolnir for a bit? Need to smash some unworthy foes clean out the contest, lol.
I noticed that someone mentioned the possibility that the cheaters are high spenders and thus are protected by such. If you ask me, that's so backwards. Why spend if you're cheating? Then again, stranger things have happened so... eh...
Agreed, let's move beyond the win defaulting hypothetical to the root of the problem. The cheaters. Increased penalties are in dire need now. I reallt hope they consider this. The win defaulting would be a moot point if the root of the problem was dealt with a bit more swiftly. Just my repeated 2 cents now.
Comments
Even if an alliance new categorically that their opponents were cheating, they wouldn’t do nothing a just waiting for the cheating alliance to be penalised and be handed the win because season points are also based on attack bonus, exploration and boss kills. If you’re going to sit there and do nothing then you may as well not even worry about the win as you would get more points from 100% maps than the win. No one is suggesting you get full points just what you rightfully earned and win bonus.
That was a hypothetical. It was used to make a point. One that was apparently missed.
That would mean they'd lose every single win bonus. And how exactly would that be fair? Because that's what you're saying you'd be OK with.
Truthfully, if they place some heavy focus on cracking down on these mods, it will become a moot point when they start to diminish in usage
It's mainly an interim deal. Once they 'take out the trash' it will be a rarity that it will be needed. It's not right to lose in a situation where you weren't competing on even ground. So naturally, it should be awarded to those that try their best in seemingly a no win situation.
I can live without them doing this if they bring down the hammer hard on these rotten players. If they don't, it's kind of a necessity in my eyes. Not right to invest a bunch of boosts, health pots, and time into a no win situation. You still have to allocate as many points as possible to remain competitive in the season. Simply put, you're being robbed of the win bonus if you didn't have a fair shot at it. Have had it happen, and it blows.
Truthfully, this impacts EVERYONE in the grand scheme. If they weren't taking up a slot in ranks, each group behind would move up. If they weren't in the equation, everyone would have a fair shot at a win. Until that's the case, something should be done to help balance the equation. Getting your war rating bonked and losing out a points you never had a fair shot at is simply bogus.
If you don't feel the same way, well then enjoy running into a modding Alliance. I can say from experience it's VERY frustrating. Making it known that you'll get stripped of the win everytime and get some ban time might help put a stop to this. As you said, there's 2 outcomes. Win, and lose. If those that cheated are stripped of the win, it should default to the other. That's pretty much the case everywhere else, so why not here is my question?
As I already said, the determination is not that the honest Ally "could have, should have, would have, did" win. The determination is that the cheating Ally won, and did so using means that broke the TOS. What people are proposing, no matter how you look at it, is that Kabam designates them the Winner. I do not agree with that. They lost. Regardless of whether the other side cheated or not, they lost. That's the outcome. Anything outside of that is based on hypothetical outcomes, under the assumption that the honest Ally should have won. You can't determine that based on the wrong actions of the other side. You can gauge based on what they're working with, what the probability of a Win is, and you can (with reasonable certainty) say whether you would have won or not. What you can't do is just hand Rewards based on that assumption, within a system designed to Reward based on progress made. Past tense.
I'd rather you stop doing it as it's going in unreal territory.
Else I'll have to report you for trolling.
Have a good day
Can we not report him for that?
Because literally everyone here who frequents the forum is fed up with his trolling attitude, in guise of having a 'discussion'.
AFAIK, Trolling and having meaningless conversations to incite others is against Kabam's TOS.
The ONLY way to avoid this is if Kabam proved it, and rectified it before matchmaking started next war. Which I doubt would happen. Giving those that did right by the rules the win bonus (with the multiplier that was active during said war) would be a way of helping undo some of the damage done to their potential performance. No one is being handed anything. They're getting back something that was blatantly stolen. Clean and clear. Taking the points away from those who didn't earn them just isn't enough when there's fallout beyond it.
All that aside, the root of the problem needs to be handled with heavier penalties. Simple as that. Penalties need to be severe enough that it will act as a deterrent, and remove the need for rectifying botched results. I'll GLADLY take that happening over getting points back. Theoretically, should be both, but whatever. Putting a stop to it needs to be the prime focus. So what have you for such? Anyone else think a full season lockout for those cheating would help? Put em' in AW jail!!! On charges of thievery, and ruining the integrity of a competition.
The best way to stop it is to disqualify Allies/Players responsible from Season Rewards. That will definitely reduce it. Potential side-effects come with that, like sabotaging Alliances or honest Players being penalized along with them, but let's be honest. That happens now.
"Anything outside of that is based on hypothetical outcomes, under the assumption that the honest Ally should have won. You can't determine that based on the wrong actions of the other side."
@GroundedWisdom
So coming up against a cheating ally, what's gonna happen is this.
A100% chance of the ally playing fairly, to loose.
This one is not a hypothetical outcome. It is real and tangible. We are not assuming that. It WILL happen, no matter how fair you play. Or at most, a draw, IF 30 people in your alliance play on a superhuman level.
So, playing against a cheating ally=100% loss.
And according to you, and I agree to that, that there's no way of determining if the fair ally would have won if the other one wasn't cheating. In other words, a lower % of chance of them winning the war.
What I'm trying to tell you is, that what would be a lesser evil in case I was cheated upon by an ally? A 100% for us to loose all our potential points if we'd won? Or a less than 100% chance, in that hypothetical situation, that we MIGHT have won if both of us weren't cheating, and thus got atleast SOME points out of the war? I.E. getting the winning bonus atleast?
Since I was definitely cheated upon by that ally, AND wronged, I'd personally take option # 2. I'd take the option that I might have hypothetical won the war if none had cheated, rather than given an automatic loss(since they cheated).
Because that's the state of things currently. We are given an automatic loss when matched with someone that are cheating, as we can't win in that situation.
I don't know about you GW, but for me, being given an auto loss is far worse than being given an auto-win(winning bonus).
To the rest who are in the discussion, let’s get back to topic.
When Labyrinth of Legends was released, the Grandmaster vowed to permanently ban players who used cheats in LOL. Maybe he doesn’t care about AW Seasons or alliance mode game content:
Kabam has already made it clear that they won’t revert who wins or loses because there is no way to determine if the alliance who cheated would’ve lost without cheating. You can agree or disagree with this point of view but it is what it is (I personally disagree).
The issue of who gets the win or loss when an alliance is caught cheating is really small compared to the real issue we are facing now- how kabam is going to STOP modding in AW once and for all and make it sustainable.
"For those Alliances, we will be offering a “Bye”. They will be awarded the points, and the rewards for that match. There is a limit to how often an Alliance can be given a Bye, so it cannot be abused."
Hmmm. It's almost like they have addressed previous issues in the game, where groups (up to 3 a week since season 8 changes) get full win rewards for doing nothing, for something out of their control. Weird.
So how is that ok, in your opinion, but trying to address the cheating system and discussing rewards if you face a modding group any different in logic or execution?
"Is that a fair system? Just default your way up? I'm sorry. No matter how you look at it, I disagree with defaults."
The Bye system is literally a default.
I noticed that someone mentioned the possibility that the cheaters are high spenders and thus are protected by such. If you ask me, that's so backwards. Why spend if you're cheating? Then again, stranger things have happened so... eh...
Agreed, let's move beyond the win defaulting hypothetical to the root of the problem. The cheaters. Increased penalties are in dire need now. I reallt hope they consider this. The win defaulting would be a moot point if the root of the problem was dealt with a bit more swiftly. Just my repeated 2 cents now.