Forums Tyrant

[Boycott] Force Devs to take action against cheating page 5

115 posts

Flag Post
Originally posted by darkfang77:
Originally posted by Milenko111:

This could be a while.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Sighaknight:
Originally posted by Sabroso84:

How does any of this garbage about multiple leaders have anything to do with the discussion at hand? Regardless of if it is an advantage or not, WB can do nothing about the fact, and the issue is and has been in the hands of the DEVs. If you want to QQ about unfair advantages, prove it and message the DEVs, otherwise you look childish and jealous.

Quotes from yourself from another thread:
“I couldn’t agree more. Cheaters need to be called out, and what better forum than here. "
“The DEVs would prefer we swept it under the rug, so it doesn’t make them look bad. In the future, we should not make a stink, and trust the DEVs to do the right thing…?”
http://www.kongregate.com/forums/65-tyrant/topics/333802-retardis-turn-back-time-so-we-can-all-cheat-fairly?page=1#posts-6995749

If you want to counter my arguments, I would welcome that, although I am uncertain of the challenge you could present. Do all cheaters have to be called out, or only the ones that aren’t on your side? And why would I message the devs, you imply they cannot be trusted.

-I have already stated what WB members can do themselves
-You say it has been in the hands of the devs. Right there lies the problem: you cannot enforce ToS if you do it willy nilly, using arguments such as ’it’s not that big of an advantage’ or ‘I find it funny’. Very unprofessional, if you ask me.

Apples and oranges. The post of mine that you quoted referred to a clear violation of the ToS by Nooblingz where they knowingly abused an exploit in the game. They knew about the glitch and purposefully exploited it, trying to cover up their use of the exploits in the process. There was evidence to support the claim. They were not punished for such behavior.
-
Your example is of a faction who did break the ToS, and were punished for it. We can all admit that. WB has no control of how many leaders they have nor is having more than one leader an advantage in any way. This decision is and has been in the hands of the DEVs. If the DEVs would like to remove the leaders down to only one I’d assume WB would have no objection to doing so, as I do not speak for WB you would have to ask them. However, they were punished for such behavior, although there is no proof that anyone other than the person banned had anything to do with the use of exploits.
-

Originally posted by </forums/65-tyrant/topics/333799-to-devs-ban-cheaters-or-change-tos?page=2>:

Zaraki: If you want to report exploiters then do it in private to the developers. Please don’t start witchhunts and shame topics on these forums.


The inconsistencies in how the ToS is applied is problematic to say the least. Zaraki has said earlier that any instances of cheating should be directed directly to the DEVs, I am simply relaying the message. Your assumption that my implication is that the DEVs can’t be trusted are your words, not mine..
-

Furthermore, I cannot say I care for your tone. I (EDIT)HAD been nothing but polite and logical. In the words of one of the great philosophers of the ’90s, it would behoove you to check yourself before you wreck yourself.

My previous post was directed at no one specifically, you chose to take it personally. In your post taking my statement to the community as a whole, you took offense to me saying that QQing about unfair advantages without proof makes you look childish and jealous, so thanks for fessing up to that.
-
And seriously… Ice Cube was one of the great philosophers of the ‘90s? And you didn’t even quote it correctly.. #delusional

 
Flag Post

The irony in this thread is overwhelmingly funny. Something many of us have been voicing for so long and now your group of all people are taking our side.

Please continue this two faced sided argument.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Supercharged44:

The irony in this thread is overwhelmingly funny. Something many of us have been voicing for so long and now your group of all people are taking our side.

Please continue this two faced sided argument.

+1

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Supercharged44:

The irony in this thread is overwhelmingly funny. Something many of us have been voicing for so long and now your group of all people are taking our side.

Please continue this two faced sided argument.

Posts like this are very helpful to the discussion, please tell us more about how one faction is evil and all the rest are saints.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Sabroso84:

WB has no control of how many leaders they have

Wrong. Every player of WB can decide if they want 3 leaders or not. As for the faction itself, I do hope they can control who their 3 leaders are, it would be horrible if people were stuck there.

Originally posted by Sabroso84:

nor is having more than one leader an advantage in any way

Wrong, and irrelevant to this topic regarding strict implementation of ToS

Originally posted by Sabroso84:

If the DEVs would like to remove the leaders down to only one I’d assume WB would have no objection to doing so, as I do not speak for WB you would have to ask them.

Wrong, according to inorix.

Originally posted by Sabroso84:

However, they were punished for such behavior

Wrong, as far as I know.

Originally posted by Sabroso84:

Zaraki has said earlier that any instances of cheating should be directed directly to the DEVs, I am simply relaying the message.

I’m glad she found an errand boy. Another bravo for missing the point completely though and only reading what you want to read.

Originally posted by Sabroso84:

Your assumption that my implication is that the DEVs can’t be trusted are your words, not mine..

Grow a pair.

Originally posted by Sabroso84:

so thanks for fessing up to that

You should reread that and think about how that sounds.

Originally posted by Sabroso84:

And seriously… Ice Cube was one of the great philosophers of the ‘90s? And you didn’t even quote it correctly.. #delusional

You didn’t check yourself :(.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Sighaknight:
Originally posted by Sabroso84:

However, they were punished for such behavior

Wrong, as far as I know.

Indeed, they are banned but for unrelated offenses.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Supercharged44:

The irony in this thread is overwhelmingly funny. Something many of us have been voicing for so long and now your group of all people are taking our side.

Please continue this two faced sided argument.

Dear hillbilly,

you don’t even know what irony means (not to mention “two faced sided argument”).

regards

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by Sighaknight:
Originally posted by Sabroso84:

WB has no control of how many leaders they have

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Wrong.

Rofl u mad bro? QQ much? I forgot that ur always right, and everyone else is wrong. I’ve got an extra pillow if u get tired of licking up ur tears

 
Flag Post

Legalising difficult-to-police cheating

If I may offer a different perspective,

I’m in a faction where the leader absolutely refuses to “cheat” by some means to get ahead. There are countless many times where I’ve seen other factions get way ahead because they seem to account share or bot or join superalliances (which is legal, btw.) and to tell you the truth, I find myself wishing our faction we did the same to get the same advantages. But leader simply refuses to go against TOS so we go about our mediocre lives mostly picking our fights with other fair-play factions.

Since this has been a prevalent issue for a long time and is notoriously difficult to police (virtually every cheat-related thread consistently degenerates into a “you did” vs “we did not” battle full of name-calling and passive-aggressivisms and meme spams and e-peen waving,) would it make sense to take those elements out of the TOS and legalise them? Then introduce game mechanisms to reduce their impact?

Keep in mind that these suggestions are not meant to be refined, super well-thought-out ideas about how to reduce the impact, but just illustrations on how game mechanisms can be introduced to make it such that cheating is less desirable.

e.g. Account Sharing and Botting

A shared faction stamina bar, where players can choose how much stam they want to contribute on a sliding scale, possibly minutes I want to contribute. For example,
I’m going on vacation so I set mine at 1:1, 1 stam contributed / minute, meaning everything goes into the shared bar.
If I’m lazy but still want to play I set mine at 1:4, giving away 1 stam every 4 I get, so people can use my stam and I can still play but less hardcore.
If I’m fully active and log on every 6 hours I have no need for this so I set at 1:Infinity, keeping all my stamina.
This is modifiable at any time, so people can slide until they find the right balance they want.
Shared bar must cap at 300*faction members (or some other number?) to prevent excessive stockpiling and dumping.

e.g. Alliances

I know this isn’t against TOS at all but really makes for some static everyone’s-scared-to-offend-someone else CQ.
What about forced alliances, where after every reset (can make these more regular and automated?) you’re chucked into a mix of factions with different levels and have to work together. Token rewards are based on alliance performance and not just your own, and you cannot attack allied squares. So strategy and communication and variation, the fun parts of alliances, yes. Ganking unfairly, the less fun part, no.
You might need seeding, you might need randomisation, I’m really not so sure. Mechanics are complicated I suppose.

Thoughts please. Or improved suggestions.

 
Flag Post

strangely, your 1st proposal might be on to something (not sure about the second yet)…

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by shyguyfan1:
Originally posted by darkfang77:
Originally posted by Milenko111:

This could be a while.

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by JuzzieJT:

Legalising difficult-to-police cheating

If I may offer a different perspective,

I’m in a faction where the leader absolutely refuses to “cheat” by some means to get ahead. There are countless many times where I’ve seen other factions get way ahead because they seem to account share or bot or join superalliances (which is legal, btw.) and to tell you the truth, I find myself wishing our faction we did the same to get the same advantages. But leader simply refuses to go against TOS so we go about our mediocre lives mostly picking our fights with other fair-play factions.

Since this has been a prevalent issue for a long time and is notoriously difficult to police (virtually every cheat-related thread consistently degenerates into a “you did” vs “we did not” battle full of name-calling and passive-aggressivisms and meme spams and e-peen waving,) would it make sense to take those elements out of the TOS and legalise them? Then introduce game mechanisms to reduce their impact?

Keep in mind that these suggestions are not meant to be refined, super well-thought-out ideas about how to reduce the impact, but just illustrations on how game mechanisms can be introduced to make it such that cheating is less desirable.

e.g. Account Sharing and Botting

A shared faction stamina bar, where players can choose how much stam they want to contribute on a sliding scale, possibly minutes I want to contribute. For example,
I’m going on vacation so I set mine at 1:1, 1 stam contributed / minute, meaning everything goes into the shared bar.
If I’m lazy but still want to play I set mine at 1:4, giving away 1 stam every 4 I get, so people can use my stam and I can still play but less hardcore.
If I’m fully active and log on every 6 hours I have no need for this so I set at 1:Infinity, keeping all my stamina.
This is modifiable at any time, so people can slide until they find the right balance they want.
Shared bar must cap at 300*faction members (or some other number?) to prevent excessive stockpiling and dumping.

e.g. Alliances

I know this isn’t against TOS at all but really makes for some static everyone’s-scared-to-offend-someone else CQ.
What about forced alliances, where after every reset (can make these more regular and automated?) you’re chucked into a mix of factions with different levels and have to work together. Token rewards are based on alliance performance and not just your own, and you cannot attack allied squares. So strategy and communication and variation, the fun parts of alliances, yes. Ganking unfairly, the less fun part, no.
You might need seeding, you might need randomisation, I’m really not so sure. Mechanics are complicated I suppose.

Thoughts please. Or improved suggestions.

This is one of the worst ideas I have already seen. Sharing Stamina is already been declined because players could just dump stamina to their best player and have him/her win all the fights. Your basically supporting cheating with this whole statement. This whole thread is about fair play and you just gave 2 points against it.

Fair play is playing without hacking the game, nor forming alliances and sharing accounts (or their energy/stamina) to make the game an equal field. We all have our list of people and factions who we know did this, but they’re too much of clever smartasses to give it away in a way we could exploit. I say just use an activity log and any player who manages to sync his/her actions within a certain period of the refill in a constant manner should be banned instantly, for that’s botting 101 (note that this requires consistent data and will not be publicly announced when begun, that way we can avoid hitting active players and get shared accounts and bot players surprised).

 
Flag Post
Originally posted by beerjar22:
Originally posted by JuzzieJT:

Legalising difficult-to-police cheating

If I may offer a different perspective,

I’m in a faction where the leader absolutely refuses to “cheat” by some means to get ahead. There are countless many times where I’ve seen other factions get way ahead because they seem to account share or bot or join superalliances (which is legal, btw.) and to tell you the truth, I find myself wishing our faction we did the same to get the same advantages. But leader simply refuses to go against TOS so we go about our mediocre lives mostly picking our fights with other fair-play factions.

Since this has been a prevalent issue for a long time and is notoriously difficult to police (virtually every cheat-related thread consistently degenerates into a “you did” vs “we did not” battle full of name-calling and passive-aggressivisms and meme spams and e-peen waving,) would it make sense to take those elements out of the TOS and legalise them? Then introduce game mechanisms to reduce their impact?

Keep in mind that these suggestions are not meant to be refined, super well-thought-out ideas about how to reduce the impact, but just illustrations on how game mechanisms can be introduced to make it such that cheating is less desirable.

e.g. Account Sharing and Botting

A shared faction stamina bar, where players can choose how much stam they want to contribute on a sliding scale, possibly minutes I want to contribute. For example,
I’m going on vacation so I set mine at 1:1, 1 stam contributed / minute, meaning everything goes into the shared bar.
If I’m lazy but still want to play I set mine at 1:4, giving away 1 stam every 4 I get, so people can use my stam and I can still play but less hardcore.
If I’m fully active and log on every 6 hours I have no need for this so I set at 1:Infinity, keeping all my stamina.
This is modifiable at any time, so people can slide until they find the right balance they want.
Shared bar must cap at 300*faction members (or some other number?) to prevent excessive stockpiling and dumping.

e.g. Alliances

I know this isn’t against TOS at all but really makes for some static everyone’s-scared-to-offend-someone else CQ.
What about forced alliances, where after every reset (can make these more regular and automated?) you’re chucked into a mix of factions with different levels and have to work together. Token rewards are based on alliance performance and not just your own, and you cannot attack allied squares. So strategy and communication and variation, the fun parts of alliances, yes. Ganking unfairly, the less fun part, no.
You might need seeding, you might need randomisation, I’m really not so sure. Mechanics are complicated I suppose.

Thoughts please. Or improved suggestions.

This is one of the worst ideas I have already seen. Sharing Stamina is already been declined because players could just dump stamina to their best player and have him/her win all the fights. Your basically supporting cheating with this whole statement. This whole thread is about fair play and you just gave 2 points against it.

Fair play is playing without hacking the game, nor forming alliances and sharing accounts (or their energy/stamina) to make the game an equal field. We all have our list of people and factions who we know did this, but they’re too much of clever smartasses to give it away in a way we could exploit. I say just use an activity log and any player who manages to sync his/her actions within a certain period of the refill in a constant manner should be banned instantly, for that’s botting 101 (note that this requires consistent data and will not be publicly announced when begun, that way we can avoid hitting active players and get shared accounts and bot players surprised).

We can’t do that, we’d lose Better World in a single day!

 
Flag Post

I hear that someone will consider their rival as bots, once losing to them.
I also hear that there is a faction full of alts of another faction.
Guess who.