**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.
What's the reasoning behind certain degrees of punishments?
peasant
Posts: 240 ★
So on the forum, we've seen arguments for harsher punishments against people who cheat in alliance war, and go against Kabam's terms of service.
What's the reasoning behind Kabam's current stance of the level of degree they give out punishments?
Conspiracy theory says they just want the cheaters to keep spending.
I want to approach it from a different perspective..
What are other possible reasons why cheaters should still collect awards?
Or if a moderator wants to shed better light on this issue, such as, why the developer team believes taking off some points from alliance war is enough punishment.
What's the reasoning behind Kabam's current stance of the level of degree they give out punishments?
Conspiracy theory says they just want the cheaters to keep spending.
I want to approach it from a different perspective..
What are other possible reasons why cheaters should still collect awards?
Or if a moderator wants to shed better light on this issue, such as, why the developer team believes taking off some points from alliance war is enough punishment.
1
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Past that, it's 2 strike- out. Reinstating a practice of cheating in every form after getting caught and penalized before should be dealt with 0 tolerance.
Spenders doesn't equal cheaters.
No need to punish spenders.
And if cheaters are spenders, shouldn't make them immune to the dev's/community's scrutiny.
I'm trying to figure out of there are other reasonable reasons for taking a much lighter stance when it comes to punishments.
Also,
On the flip side,
If <Alliance A> really is piloting, but kabam has no way to see that on their end, then it's clear <Alliance A> won't get docked.
On the other hand, if <Alliance A> plays fairly, then what can be done to help remedy how players view this alliance and their members?
I know it sucks to hear that, but I think it makes sense
I'm not saying all spenders are cheaters. I'm saying the people who have been caught cheating in this case are heavy spenders. If Kabam punishes them, the heavy spending will stop. That's all
Yep, the trouble is; the amount kabam would lose in future from banning or punishing the spenders who are cheating is very likely to be vastly greater than the amount the average player would stop spending due to this situation. From a monetary point of view it would be a silly idea to punish the cheaters. Which is sad, but perhaps the reason we won’t see much done about it.
Some of those cheaters spend over 50k a year. It will take a life time for an average spender to spend a fraction of that
It's understandable that you might have questions about the severity of punishment that we hand out in The Contest. It relies on a number of factors including the severity of the infraction, or if someone has broken the rules before. In The Contest, we like to approach it from the perspective of giving everyone the chance to be rehabilitated. It's rare that we will issue a permanent ban right away, but it can happen.
Spend level does not play a factor in our decision to issue a punishment, in fact Summoners that have been around our forums for a long time will probably recall the occasional post from someone complaining about being banned because they feel spending in The Contest should exclude them from punishment. We don't agree with this stance. It also does not matter if someone reaches out to us or is in contact with us - if we find in-game evidence of cheating, we will act on it. Some investigations into cheating reports may take longer than others, if the cheating is more nuanced and less immediately apparent.
It's important to remember that our forum rules do not allow for conspiracy theories, but we wanted to clearly address this.