Tournament Ruling

I just wonder what happens when a guild without gold trim manipulates a ladder? This seems like a poor standard for punishment in that it can't be universally enforced. And it sits poorly with me that the punishment only lasts one month. I'd fully agree if they were permanently prevented from getting gold.

At least force them to make the "Dishonorable" icon their permanent guild emblem or something...

my feedback...

complete fail.

And what remnants of respect were left are now gone. For ANet and the Guilds.

Spineless decison making and a disregard for their own rules and regulations. So weak its a farce.

There's a difference between guilds playing to a tie and guilds discussing and making a mutual agreement to tie a match. Playing a match to a tie is fine. Colluding and making an agreement to determine the outcome of a match is definitely against the rules. There is no gray area.

Some people consider the punishment to be too lenient. There is a lot of information that the greater community does not have access to, which we used to come to this decision. There were so many factors we weighed in coming to the final decision. We looked at the individual situation. We looked at what happened in the past. We looked at the documentation and records of what occurred. We discussed the situation with players. And we looked at the big picture. We looked at the technical aspects of what happened. We looked to see if the rules were vague or unclear on this issue. We had to look at the decision within the wider context of the PvP community and the community at large. In the end, we came to a decision that we believe the guilds would take seriously while tempering it with the broader contextual issues.

And I wonder why if first place gets DQ'ed, which I'm assuming stripping the trims symbolizes, why 2nd place doesn't get first place by default. I understand you can't find the correct winner without redoing the MaT with rawr and zero not involved, which is undoable, but like the Olympics, medal that are stripped are moved the person below them.

Pardon my ignorance but....what benefit does Gold Trim have besides bragging rights? If there are no benefits how is this a punishment?

what about 1v1?

Quoted for emphasis.

It's easy for people who only ever see one side of the story to feel as though something horribly unjust happened to them or their peers. While I think aNet has made mistakes, I don't think they are done on a whim, and I don't believe they're intended just to make people angry. There's a lot to consider in a lot of their actions (which is why they can take so long to happen ), so I think we should just relax a bit.

Roflmao!
Epic failure at understanding of how the Swiss system works.
Intentional Draws are an important part of it and aren't any kind of abuse. Should be simply allowed.

Honestly, the punishment suits the crime……
Think about this for a min or two.

Rawr is one of ANET’s cash cows, this guild that places very high almost every monthly
tournament.

With a superior GVG, the people who buy numerous copies of Guild Wars
Picking teams like rawr get lots of Zkeys.

Banning Rawr = less sales

Anet makes money off of the players who do these tournaments. And what do you get in return digital gold/silver and titles……


Offer real world prizes it’s better then nothing.

It intrigues me that there's no comment from anybody actually in rawr or zero in this thread, even though I recognize a bunch of names lurking at the bottom.

I'm curious to hear what any of them have to say on the matter now that the ruling is official, though I'm afraid the first one to say anything will be insta-flamed.

I am wondering what regulations anet used to say they have broken rules.

Don't try to hide your failure of not renewing the rules.

If they broke the rules, then punish them for it. That's the only information you should need to know. Taking away gold trim for a month is nothing. I guarantee [rawr] and [zero] are laughing at this so called "punishment" given by anet.

http://www.guildwars.com/competitive...amentrules.php

[rawr] has done too much (well at least more that most of us) for the pvp community to deserve anything worse...

lol, no cape, that's it? Oh well..

Is there a term for all these false equivalencies and exaggerated comparisons? Building homes and robbing banks don't remotely relate to a conga line draw in the meaningless final round of swiss play. I'm just tired of the fake outrage and tenuous parallels to felonies.

I'm far more concerned about bots, gold sellers that steal accounts and items, RA sync, people that sync bought guilds for champ points, etc. Anet recognized the problem, made efforts to discourage further infractions, and hopefully pledged to work on the faulty tiebreaker system in place.

Anet made a wise decision imo and a lot of factors had to be taken into account. The improvement of the system should be the prime focus, not the punishment itself.

Some of you are not objective, you're too involved in the pvp scene.

Fail punishment is fail.

taken from other rules post:

I really don't see the fuss here. Agreed Stalemates are an important part in most games that use Swiss Round-style tournaments. There is no rule that explicitly states "no Agreed Stalemates", only "throwing a match" and "ladder manipulation", which more directly implies bribery or coercion for one team to lose and another to win.

If they didn't want ties to happen, it could be programed by some extra rule, like "red team wins", or "higher ranking wins", or making a loss worth more than a tie. Note it's virtually impossible to draw in GvG unless you plan it.

This whole situation doesn't effect me at all, and I don't understand why so many people are up in arms about a an agreed tie. I think the 'punishment' reflects that. It also doesn't effect me. It's appropriate in its 'so what?'-itude

1. The two guilds agreed to the rules when they entered the tournament. They knew what they were doing was against the rules, even though it wasn't specifically spelled out.

2. Instead of playing to a tie (which would not have been that hard for experienced guild), they thumbed their nose at ArenaNet rules by doing a conga line.

3. What they did had no effect on the final standings.

So, therefore, ArenaNet has punished them publicly by removing the evidence of their winning status. "A slap on the wrist" it may seem, but the whole community will see the lack of trim and be reminded of the punishment. Along with the jeers and complaints of a lot of GW players, I think this is sufficient for the "crime."

Edit: This was a "childish action" and received a punishment fit for a child. Ridicule is the worst punishment.

http://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/User_...matches_in_mAT

Who care about trims?? Next month everything is back to normal! People get banned for spamming or swearing, and "knowingly" breaking rules gets a slap on the wrist??

So 2 guilds can find themselves in a situation when they would both qualify in a normal Swiss system tournament thanks to intentional draw but here one of them has to lose, what a pile of nonsense.

Anet should better address serious issues like the real exploit and ladder manipulation used for champion title farming by sync'ing traded guilds and conceding. Do they even know about the issue?

Seems fair.

A simple idea for a mechanic to fix this. Remove draws completely from tournaments. When a draw situation occurs, the server automatically rolls 100 for each team, and the high number wins, low number loses. Problem solved.

Read the rules again, please.

For the sake of the argument one point needs to be made ABUNDANTLY clear.
[rawr] and [zero] INTENTIONALLY DREW THE GAME. THIS WS NOT A WELL PLAYED MATCH. THEY RAN CONGA LINES AND DANCED FOR 28 MINUTES.

I'd like to point out how this isn't the first time A-net used double weights.
QQ lost a silver (? or gold?) back then when other guilds were farming the ladder/altering it daily.
Armbrace dupers were mass banned (and they didn't even violate the EULA since they didn't use 3rd party programs they just used a bug as much as people used signet of ghostly might in nf preview event to farm GvG)
Hff bots were given a soft slap as well
EULA and rules are from a legal standpoint relevant as toilet paper and A-net itself doesn't respect them.
They say they are not responsable for hacking and loss of items but they restored rawr's trim in this case I agree but why restore rawr's cape while giving the finger to the myriad of people who got hacked? Do they have A++ accounts and B grade ones?
They gave themselves rules about ingame policy/guild membership/general behaviour only to break them occasionally.
I got nothing against ladder manipulation , but if there are rules they must be enforced, if you don't want to be strict then delete these rules and give at least a perception of fairness. Honestly rawr, zero and most of GvGers care nothing about their cape, this is a non punishment, and I feel bullshitted when A-net (in this case Regina) tries to feed us the idea that "this" is an appropriate punishment, they simply did the most convenient thing to do I would have done the same in their position.
I'll be clear, with GW2 far from its release, banning people would just backfire, with the limited amount of people playing top GvG, they would kill an already comatose game, this especially when you're talking about highly active guilds (pointing out how Rawr organized many events), but this applies everywhere, in pve as well for example (Hfff bots treatment etc)
Also I hate the sound of some of Regina speechs, it makes us sound like mindless morons while they are the ones taking decisions for the greater good (wich is true by the way but don't forget that "we" [the communirty] are the ones supposed to buy GW2 eh) , the simple fact such things are solved in private (another similar thing is the balance forum requesting an invitation) makes GW look shady and not that transparent and far from the masses appealing game it was(not that it's really an issue seeing as it is a game but surely can sound annoying especially seeing how much the community could benefit the game at this stage).
Again, it's not rawr or zero's fault, they broke rules but the flawed system allowed them to do so, the problem is A-net not being able to address such issues.
My two cents

Well, they can still play. I can still watch them on obs. I can still watch them in the next mAT (if they play). I'm happy about that, I do confess

I would be thinking along the same lines.

Bold #1: So this has happened often?
Bold #2: I'm curious who was special enough to get asked...
Bold #3: Never assume anything.

QQ - http://www.teamquitter.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=11108
Trim - Anet never restored rawr's trim, it was simply recreated same name/tag and system automatically links it to trim. If someone else, not from rawr, formed the guild - he would've had the gold trim.
Armbrace dupers - good riddance

In reality, GW is Anet's game and they do what they want. I would certainly like them just to fix the draw system (not that I see any problem in intentional draw, it's pretty accepted in many popular games), but it's their decision to take.

Trim - Wasn't the trim given two days after the new guild was created thus nullifying your point (If not I apologize), if there is any rawr member here that might confirm
Armbrace dupers - exactly, but again I'd expect from a serious management to apply rules in every situation or fashion, so if armbrace dupers got banned a serious company would have used a fitting punishment for every similar situation (and by similiar I mean rule breaking/bug abusing/every other crap)

In reality, GW is Anet's game and they do what they want. I would certainly like them just to fix the draw system (not that I see any problem in intentional draw, it's pretty accepted in many popular games), but it's their decision to take.

Here you're wrong, Anet owns the intellectual proprerty but doesn't allow them to do anything they might want. If Anet decided to close Mr X account for no reason he would have a fair margin of victory, why? For the same reason a bartender can't spit in your drink. But on top of that the best way to deal with a company is the market, a badly polished game/bad community management (not talking about Regina or Gaile, I'm speaking hypotetically) are a garantuee of failure. And the fact such behaviour (ladder manipulation) is allowed on other games doesn't make it a right, Gw has it's rules.

Rules or not... you're gonna sue them for banning your account? Any game reserves rights to ban you for any reason. Actually, you should read most EULA's, you're just signing: "you can screw me and I'm fine with it".
Read this carefully: "ArenaNet reserve the right to suspend or revoke a player's account without prior notice for any reason deemed necessary."

Besides, how do you know [zero] or [rawr] doesn't care if their trim gets removed for one month/not awarded? I don't see you in either of the guilds.

Rules or not... you're gonna sue them for banning your account? Any game reserves rights to ban you for any reason. Actually, you should read most EULA's, you're just signing: "you can screw me and I'm fine with it".
Read this carefully: "ArenaNet reserve the right to suspend or revoke a player's account without prior notice for any reason deemed necessary."

Many European courts tend to disagree, EULA is unilateral and surpassing about the aleatory condition of click "yes" contracts, some discussion are actually moving towards "refunding" the customer in case of such unilater unmotivated solution like unreasoned ban would be. And guild wars can't avoid respecting local laws. Check the debate about the liceity of Apple native Operating system EULA for example.

Besides, how do you know [zero] or [rawr] doesn't care if their trim gets removed for one month/not awarded? I don't see you in either of the guilds.

Oh this is simple, a cape is supposed to be a merely cosmetic addiction, by removing or adding it you add or remove nothing in pratical terms, no matter how loved the cape is by the people you're punishing.
In this case this was a non solution. A punishment is supposed to give an example and be proportional to the rule broken, in this case it wasn't, there was no proportion, it was a light slap on the cheek. If justice were to be administrated by using personal parameters it wouldn't be justice, so in this case even if zero members were to be suicidal about their lost trim it would still be a non proportional solution. Again it's not these people fault, it's Anet for designing stupid rules, not fixing well known flawed mechanic and in the end failing to enforce their own rules.

Going to sleep, feel free to PM any other smart thought you might have, good night ^^

Seriously, stay on topic.

Please do not insult our intelligence what more is there to see? What background information? The two guilds conga lined to a tie and made top 16 I dont get what more info your fellers at anet could possibly have. I call bullshit.

Because Anet thinks spending days of having meetings to decide the punishment is more important than getting to the root of the problem: Anet themselves making a bad tiebreaker.

It's funny how hypocritical Anet is for letting people in HB do this, and then they come out and punish teams in GvG because it's "unsportsmanlike." When the government punishes one group for committing a crime and lets the other groups go, you get public outcry of racism. But when Anet does it, it's fine?

If they want to create punishment for ties, do it so everyone who has tied in HB gets punished as well.

My thoughts exactly. In my estimation both guilds STILL didn't do anything wrong. This "it is clear they broke the rules" talk is nonsense to me, and I pointed out exactly why in the other thread.

Actually it is worth quite a bit. That is 1 month of time that they can't sell invites for huge amounts of gold until they have more money than God.

The trim matters more to them? And you know this how? You asked them? If so, they said that because they would hope thats all you would take away. No one cares about the trim, there's plenty of other gold-trimmed guilds that aren't nearly as famous as [rawr]. People don't look at someone from [rawr] and say "Oh they have a gold-trimmed cape, they must be good." They see in observe at the top of the MAT standings, or on the guild ladder #1 - Rebel Rising [rawr]. And even so, you take away their trim for one month, so it's back next month and everything is the same. Even if their trim was taken away permanently, people would see them win MAT's all the time and see them atop the guild ladder, and not care that they don't have trim. Being the #1 guild in the game means a heck of a lot more than a measly trim does.

You knew you wouldn't please everyone with this decision, so who did you think you WOULD please? And who were you being fair to? [rawr] [zero] and yourselves? They broke the rules, isn't that grounds for a real punishment?

You continue to say you have more information about it than everyone else. What's more information can you have? [rawr] and [zero] agreed to refuse to play to ensure them both a spot in the top 16 and instead did a conga line until 28 minutes to force the draw, what else is there to it? Clear this up for us, so we can make a reasonable decision based on what we think about the situation, instead of treating us as if we're uninformed and judging this on one bit of information.

I'm still not understanding the fact that you've stated "They broke the rules, there's no gray area." but don't give them a punishment suited to breaking the rules. To them it's a mere "Oh darn, our cape doesn't look as cool for one month."

the funny thing about this whole thing is that the entire situation could have been avoided if both guilds fought each other for 28 minutes without touching the other person's guild lord to still force a draw. These people are the premiere pvp players and strategists of the game. their mastery of GvG has succeded that of many others. and yet they made this fatal mistake so they could do conga lines. =) i guess ANYONE could make a mistake eh?