|
Proof. It's about proof. It's about responsible players gathering that proof and submitting it to us. It's about us investigating those reports and, if they are established to be factual, taking the appropriate action. The punishment being meted out is entirely fair and consistent. Prove otherwise and we will take all other actions that are appropriate. BTW, smurfing is another issue altogether, and because of the inability of proving a smurf, or of establishing that every player in the game has just a single account, smurfing may be unethical and unsportsmanlike, but is not technically prohibitable in the rules. Please stop and think about this before you (over)react negatively to that statement. We can punish Fred for playing on his known account, but cannot even tell that Mary is playing on a second account. Therefore, we cannot take action on smurfing because to do so would mean acting in an inconsistent and unfair manner. The fact that we cannot take action is regrettable, but it's true. Our ability to eliminate smurfing (we have already seen a reduction) is something we continue to try to improve. |
|
Originally Posted by Energizer Deth Buni
Now I am wondering if this is not a top guild that has represented the game and has been a big boost for Guild Wars advertisement. Kind of a group who we dont want their image tarnished cause it would be bad for business...
|
|
Originally Posted by Vanquisher
I think this is being blown way out of proportion, to be honest.
Firstly, the reward is small - a silver trim. None of the Guilds being punished really care about it. They're all good enough to gain it back, and will do so, pretty easily. Secondly, the reasons the Guilds are being punished are so trivial, bearing in mind what's happened in the past, and the current stance ArenaNet has on a lot of aspects that break its ladder. In the past there was a time when EvIL controlled 4 of the top 5 Guilds due to smurfs, or when ZPZG ran around with their 5 smurf Guilds, or when Negative Zero used the same Build with the same players in order to tank people on their smurf, and the same for iQ with Magic School Bus and whatever the name of their other smurf was. Not to mention the 12 vs. 8 GvG that went unpunished, and the gate-bugging at Victory or Death that was a known bug. Exploits of these were never acted upon. Now we get to resigning, and we can go back to season 2 of the GWFC. iGi would've been tanked out of the top 16, and not participated in the tournament, had the rank 251 Guild at the time not resigned out after iGi requested it. Again, nothing was done by ArenaNet. Throughout all this smurfing has remained destructive to the ladder, and since Champion Points were introduced possibly moreso, who knows. Now these three Guilds have been victimised for the following reasons: I can confirm that One Hitter Quitters [QQ] will not be recieving prizes due to the request of another Guild to resign out in the closing hour of the Ladder. Though this was not initially reported, and instead several instances wherein Guilds resigned out to this Guild were screenshotted and reported on, there was no proof to show that this Guild had asked those teams to resign out in any way. This comes after emails between Michael Gills and myself, an officer and starting player of said Guild. Though there are other things being investigated at this time, this is the only issue that has anything substantial to back it up (the admittance of all of our Guild). For the record, the Guild we asked to resign was Black Rose Gaming, who hit us for -25 with Ranger Spike on Isle of the Jade about 30 minutes before the ladder lock. In the match we had a Monk error7, though by that point it was already fair to say the match was lost. What is most trivial and annoying about this issue to me, is not the loss of the reward, but the fact it is not consistent. Throughout my emails to Mike, I mentioned that this was not the only case of resign requests, but that several other top 10 Guilds had made similar requests at some time during the season. However, he asked me for proof, of which I have none, because I would never have thought such a question would ever be deemed ladder manipulation. The other two Guilds have been found guilty of resigning out of matches premature to the end. One was most definately going to win the match, and the other coordinated a match with the Guild finishing rank 1 and resigned out immediately, feeding them 11 points. What suprises me on this matter, is that initially QQ was to be stripped due to the first Guild mentioned resigning out, as per a request - or so it was thought, though there was no evidence to back this up. However, QQ were going to get in trouble for this, while RenO, who ended rank 1 and got fed these points, were and are not recieving any punishment whatsoever. Now, another thing on this matter which makes the notion of stripping rewards completely ridiculous is that it's never been done before. During a fun season, with no clear indication of what the rules state because they are, and always have been dubious at best, does not give the Guilds in question a chance. So the motto of this; Asking teams to resign out of a match is ladder manipulation, apparently. Resigning out to a team is ladder manipulation, regardless of the status of the match, apparently. Doing any of the above results in Guilds getting stripped of any rewards they may have gained. As for proof ArenaNet have on QQ manipulating the ladder, this is something that was posted in IRC that I find quite funny, and probably quite accurate, considering from where I'm standing, we didn't do anything wrong except for asking a Guild to resign, who did not, and that was the end of the issue. |
|
Originally Posted by dgb
It would appear that the same can be said for you, when it comes to high end GVG.
And he's right you know, play to win. Everyone engaged in it, you'd be a scrub not to. What's ridiculous is A-Net's selective crackdown. If you want confidence in your ladder system you've got to apply it across the board. Punishments for everyone with a rank better than 100 if they've been found to engage in aything. Not going to happen though because that might take effort. Far easier to crackdown on three guilds while ignoring the rest. |
|
Originally Posted by Chris Blackstar
The way this game is played, and the way some players act while playing, I am not surprised by what has happened, but given if the the guild who broke the rules is a favorate of Anets, like the korean guilds, then no punishment will be issued (Slap on the wrist, shame on you). But if the guild that broke the rules (Any Other) is not favored by Anet, then they are thrown to the wolves, and are considered guilty as charged.
|
|
Originally Posted by Alfrond
Well, I suppose the fairest way to fix this problem is for Anet to actually write out the rules on what is and what is not ladder manipulation. This would fix the problem for future times would it not?
|
