[DOTA] loner asia.battle.net lickmad1ck useast.battle.net

[sunchoi522]

Your Warcraft III username: qsc522
Violator's Warcraft III username: comfortablynub back2dota lickmad1ck loner
Game name or map name: [ENT] DotA apem us/ca #73
Stats page link: https://entgaming.net/findstats.php?id=3784809
Rule player violated: Feeding (mort) and not kicking feeder
Time of incidents (Note in-game timer or replay timer): [replay timers]

Mort dies at 6 mins 7 min 13 secs 10 min 3 secs 12 min 42 secs 15 min 42 secs
16min 5 secs 21min 26 secs 22min 5 secs 28min 7 secs 30min 16 secs 35min 8 secs
44min 43 secs

Failed votekick attempt 1 on mort at 15min 52 secs: Back2Dota (sniper), LickMaD1ck (rhasta), Loner (bristleback) didn’t vote

Attempt 2 on mort at 17 mins 4 secs: LickMaD1ck and Loner didn’t vote

Attempt 3 on mort at 32mins: picante (clockwork), chileplease (silencer), Back2Dota, LickMaD1ck, Loner


Any further thoughts: ban sniper rhasta and BB for not votekicking a feeder. Also ban mort for feeding.

[banhammer22222]

Response to OP's request: Mort went 0-12. Obviously a bad score, though not outrageous for a ~50 minute game. In any case, the question is whether he was making a serious effort, or intentionally dying. He was clearly doing the former, not the latter. Mort is a 459 ELO player. His record showed OP how poorly he would play, and OP took that risk.

My request: Mods - I realize that, ordinarily, if I want to post a ban request on OP, I need to make a separate thread. However, my request here is for votekick abuse based on the same facts as OP's post, so I thought it more efficient for you if I post here. OP started and/or participated in three separate attempts to votekick mort with no justification. The times are 15:50, 16:54, and 31:58. In addition, he tried on two occasions to votekick blue (26:26 and 30:46), supposedly because blue maphacked. As the rules make clear, you cannot votekick someone for suspected maphack, since it can't be confirmed during the game.

I realize that you ordinarily do not ban for votekick abuse unless the attempt is successful. However, five attempts is serious spam.

In addition, OP admitted during the game to using a fogclick detector. He claimed that various sent players were fogclicking. I'm reasonably sure he was lying in an effort to persuade the sent players to kick Mort, but when asked, he admitted to having the detector. (Curiously, for a guy who found fogclicks, he didn't bother reporting any.) Here's the pertinent chat:

(35:55 / All) TicTacGO: oj nice fog click
...
(36:03 / All) TicTacGO: 32 48
...
(36:06 / All) TicTacGO: fog click oj
...
(36:08 / All) Loner: yo
(36:09 / All) Loner: LOL
(36:11 / All) TicTacGO: wtf u gonna say bout that
...
(36:14 / All) Loner: first of all, i don't hack, so nothing
(36:15 / All) Loner: but
(36:18 / All) TicTacGO: LOL
...
(36:20 / All) TicTacGO: deny that shit
(36:21 / All) Loner: you hav ea fogclick detector? 5 day ban
(36:23 / All) Loner: LOL
...
(36:28 / All) TicTacGO: dont worry bot me oj
(36:29 / All) TicTacGO: i can appeal
...
(36:29 / All) TicTacGO: for the hate of hax
(36:31 / All) LickMaD1ck: slark are you admitting that u have a fog click detector?
(36:31 / All) TicTacGO: i will be able to appeal
(36:32 / All) TicTacGO: you
(36:33 / All) TicTacGO: no
...
(36:44 / All) TicTacGO: keep fog clicking scrubs

Thanks for your time.

[13oomheadshot]

@banhammer22222

I realize that you ordinarily do not ban for votekick abuse unless the attempt is successful

that pretty much answers your plea for votekick abuse.

As far as the spamming of the votekick, "It is possible for a player to ruin the game by both being new and refusing to learn. In this case votekick may be used but it is up to the players in the game to decide."
i think 0-12 justifies the votekick attempts.

I'm pretty sure he was lying about the fog click detector. However, i would say don't claim to have something that you are unwilling to take the consequences for.

[banhammer22222]

He was 0-12 only at the very end of a 50 minute game. He wasn't 0-12 at the time most votekicks were initiated.

I also don't think this situation falls even close to the exception for a new player ruining by refusing to learn. This mortred got entirely sensible items, attempted both to gank and to avoid deaths, and simply got destroyed at every turn. His map awareness could definitely have been better, but this was nowhere close to game ruining.

[13oomheadshot]

0 kills 12 deaths and 4 assists in a 50min game is in my opinion game ruining.

The stats show he helped in 13% of the teams total kills and contributed 33% of the total teams deaths. those kind of numbers justify vk to me.

[banhammer22222]

Those stats show "ruining" in some sense, but not in the relevant sense. Any noob who doesn't do well "ruins" the game, but the question is whether it's being done intentionally.

I pulled this summary from a recent post by Nabo:

-Votekick is to kick game ruiners, not noobs.
-If someone game ruins, you are obligated to kick him/her.
-You will only agree to kick when you are sure someone is game ruining.
-You are free to refuse to kick a player if you are not sure of someone game ruining.

As you point out, it is permissible to votekick someone who, while not intentionally trying to lose, per say, ruins a game by "refusing to learn." Again, we're talking about intentional behavior. Someone's final score in a game cannot, except in extreme circumstances, demonstrate this kind of behavior. The OP doesn't point to a single instance of obstinance, feeding, or even repetitively bad play by this mortred. He had more deaths (and fewer kills) than his teammates because we saw at the start that (1) he was 459 ELO and (2) picked a squishy hero. We focused him hard for easy kills. That's basic strategy: focus on the team's weak points, including lack of map awareness.

[aRt)Y]

Please take discussions (or questions) of rule interpretations to the general discussion section. Additionally, if you quote moderators, it would be nice to include the source rather than wanting us to believe your paraphrasing.

Edit: Request denied. Mort did try to play properly. Player is terrible tho but tries to buy the needed items, help the team (in most cases), etc.
Looking through the player's game history, you can also see the bad performance all over the place.

Game ruining as defined in the rules and interpreted by the moderators does not apply here.