[LTD] retroward@europe

[Uryn]

Replay Link: https://entgaming.net/customstats/legio ... e/9574698/
Game Name: [ENT] Legion TD Mega #14
Your Warcraft III Username: oniy_troii
Violator's Warcraft III Username: retroward
Violated Rule(s): antistuck on sends of 2nd wave in cross
Time of Violation (in-game or replay): level 18

[retroward]

The ban requester himself flamed a lot and abused antistuck NON STOP.

[Hutzu]

The ban requester himself flamed a lot and abused antistuck NON STOP.

I watched the replay and they were not abusing antistuck at all. What you consider as antistuck-abuse may differ from what ENT considers as it.

http://wiki.entgaming.net/index.php?tit ... g:LTDRules

Antistuck

Must be used on your stuck units.
Cannot be used on opponent team.
Cannot be used to kill-steal your teammate. (Using anti-stuck on units in the middle is allowed.)
Cannot be used to delay or prevent units from teleporting to king with the intention to hide units or to aggro units away from king.
Cannot be used on creeps and sends that are attacking the king.
Cannot be used in an attempt to make sends go directly to the king by avoiding towers in a cross.

What you did on round 18 (around 41:30 onward) was abuse, breaking the antistuck rule (last one on the list). They antistucked for reasons as catching leaks which is ok. And if you want anyone to be banned for flaming, then you have to create your own ban-request. But as far as I can tell, you flamed first and clearly more than anyone else.

[retroward]

Excuse me, my main target was to slow down creep max. Not to make it go to mid directly, but rather to gather time by that 0,x seconds that u get when they get antistucked. It is not fair, yes, but I saw it in a game with premade enemy team doing like 20-30 times a level and was pretty angry on that team, cause they called me a noob etc.

[Hutzu]

A mod will have to decide the impact and whether it was a form of abuse or not. By delaying them several times, your towers managed to intercept the demon before it went mid. For the same reason, antistucking towers that are attacking king (2nd to last line in the antistuck-rules) is forbidden, because it somewhat stuns the creeps for no other purpose than slowing them down.
By intercepting the demon & Co. your towers went mid instead of not, and you killed off more towers that went to king. It had a clear impact. Let's say you miss the demon, you don't teleport mid, king gets way more damage etc.

Personally I think it is a form of abuse, but let's wait for a mod's decision.

[retroward]

I just watched replay, my intention was to make second line go to mid, I failed at my actual plans though by forgetting to sell mid delay. That thing wtih killing demon in mid was not planned at all, too unsecure. Wanted to catch line together with other valuer in mid. Also notice how often pink (URYN) abused antistuck and called me a ``retard``, not very nice. Now he makes a ban req. typical german hypocrisy

[Uryn]

Thats exactly whats not allowed. You cant antistuck all sends of the 2nd wave to go mid and kill it there. No one else used antistuck in this banable way.

[retroward]

Thats exactly whats not allowed. You cant antistuck all sends of the 2nd wave to go mid and kill it there. No one else used antistuck in this banable way.

For going mid i sold the slow downs, the antistuck was to slow down by stun. Still it was not sportmansship from me, I agree.

[bezdak]

User retroward banned for AS abuse 12 hours as a warning on top of his current autoban, which makes it 1 day in total.
@retroward

Processing.