[LTD] apm47@europe.battle.net TK
Posted: Sat Nov 11, 2017 5:48 pm
Replay Link: http://storage.entgaming.net/replay/vie ... 011688.w3g
Game Name: [ENT] Legion TD Mega 1200+ #22
Your Warcraft III Username: Pele
Violator's Warcraft III Username: apm47
Violated Rule(s): Do not ruin the game on purpose
Time of Violation (in-game or replay): Level 1 / Level 10
Any further thoughts:
At level 1 apm47 can clearly see the team already have 2 holders for level 7 (Ygg & Harlots). He decides to go bear and 1 dwarven engineer, when clearly the right choice would of been to go hard yolo with dwarven engineer. I advised him on this and he replies with
He goes on to leaking levels 3 (no send), level 4 and level 5, in which he stayed low push to try and hold it after leaking the last 2 levels.
At level 10, we leak 30+ to king with nobody at mid. We are all upgrading our king to preserve heals, after inspection, I can see that red has held onto 600wood and did not upgrade a single aspect on king causing us to lose a heal unnessecary. His response to this was
apm47 should deserve a ban as he purposely didn't upgrade the king when we needed it, simply because "he is not a holder". This doesn't make logical sense in our situation since the enemy were already down 3 heals, and we didnt concede a heal before 10.
Game Name: [ENT] Legion TD Mega 1200+ #22
Your Warcraft III Username: Pele
Violator's Warcraft III Username: apm47
Violated Rule(s): Do not ruin the game on purpose
Time of Violation (in-game or replay): Level 1 / Level 10
Any further thoughts:
At level 1 apm47 can clearly see the team already have 2 holders for level 7 (Ygg & Harlots). He decides to go bear and 1 dwarven engineer, when clearly the right choice would of been to go hard yolo with dwarven engineer. I advised him on this and he replies with
Code: Select all
(01:04 / Allied) apm47: its fine
(01:04 / Allied) ratedlol: ill yolo
(01:05 / Allied) ratedlol: pink
(01:05 / Allied) apm47: ill yoloHe goes on to leaking levels 3 (no send), level 4 and level 5, in which he stayed low push to try and hold it after leaking the last 2 levels.
At level 10, we leak 30+ to king with nobody at mid. We are all upgrading our king to preserve heals, after inspection, I can see that red has held onto 600wood and did not upgrade a single aspect on king causing us to lose a heal unnessecary. His response to this was
Code: Select all
(26:39 / Allied) apm47: of course i saved i am not holderapm47 should deserve a ban as he purposely didn't upgrade the king when we needed it, simply because "he is not a holder". This doesn't make logical sense in our situation since the enemy were already down 3 heals, and we didnt concede a heal before 10.