ENT Gaming

Replay Link: https://entgaming.net/openstats/game/8162178/
Game Name: [ENT] DotA apem us/ca #4
Your Warcraft III Username: Veneteaou
Violator's Warcraft III Username: kokillo @USEast, thorhammer @USWest, han @Europe
Violated Rule(s): feeding, refusing to votekick, possibly fixing match
Time of Violation (in-game or replay): 25 minutes for first votekick, 27 for second, 28:29 for third
Any further thoughts:

Sniper appeared to suck, which is not enough to boot him. But scourge claimed he was neutral farming, ignoring teammates and fights, not participating, and most importantly not speaking. Pink even offered to not votekick if he would simply respond with anything at all in chat (he didn't). After the 2nd vote started, I warned everyone that not voting was a rule violation and that I would have to report. After third vote, the only two people that had not voted were thorhammer (purple) and han (yellow). They stopped talking in chat, until I pointed out (31:56) that they had suddenly gotten just as quiet in chat as sniper had been. Purple eventually responded:


(32:15 / All) ThorHammer: it is pointless to argue with tyrants
(32:26 / All) ThorHammer: everyone has a vote but you want to be a commie
(32:37 / All) Veneteaou: no purple, the rules are set by ENT
(32:38 / All) ThorHammer: "agree with me or die"
(32:40 / All) ThorHammer: sure
(32:52 / All) Veneteaou: you vote to help make those rules stick, because they are designed to make sure everyone has fun
(33:22 / All) ThorHammer: here is when you think I can;t have my own belief
(34:21 / All) ThorHammer: yes sure, more baseless claims, th
(34:23 / All) ThorHammer: thx
(34:47 / All) ThorHammer: being a tyant, sure
(34:55 / All) ThorHammer: tyrant*
(36:18 / All) ThorHammer: a tyrant likes to lie also

What is interesting is that, after pointing out that the whole thing played like sniper was throwing for them, yellow randomly left the game (@34:11, 3.5 minutes before the game ended). He never said a single word in defense of sniper, or his decision to not vote him. Scourge could weigh in or the replay watched, but we were also told that Sniper fountain AFKed for some time in the 2nd half of the game.

I'm not sure the process for necessarily proving that someone is fixing games, but it certainly felt like yellow and purple were expecting it to go down like that.

Sniper is obviously a new player.
Minute 22:35 is the 1st votekick. Up to this point, sniper had many deaths, yes. But none intentional. He was also in almost everyfight. He just didn't contributy much, because as stated above, he is new. This votekick, with reasons such as "kick to help us" or "he is like neutral" is a clear abuse.

I understand it can be frustrating when one of your teammates doesn't understand. And more importantly, never even says a word. But as far as i know, not talking is not against the rules.

Minute 24:32 starts the 2nd votekick. Again, for the same reasons, it's abusive.
Again, up until this point, sniper is always trying to help his team. He defends, uses his spells, sticks with team.

Minute 28 mortred is afk/griefing behind fountain. Sniper is defending mid alone. Mortred stayed at fountain for more than 2 minutes.

ThorHammer was right all along.
Please pay more attention next time. Don't just listen to people without looking at it yourself.
I don't think any of the accused players should be banned.

I can't look at it in the game any more than talking to everyone involved. If the whole Scourge team says he is doing something, and he isn't going to defend himself, I can't simply ignore that. Team communication is a part of this game, and I've seen people get lectured on these boards for ignoring teammates, so the area is definitely gray. And when it's gray, we fall back on the spirit of the rules: making the experience fun. If booting one person who won't defend themselves makes the game enjoyable for four others, I'm okay with that when I lack the evidence to make an absolute call in-game.

I don't think that's unreasonable.

@Veneteaou
As i said before, it is understandable. I've been there myself multiple times, and it's frustrating. But the truth is, sniper never missed a fight on purpose, and he never died intentionally.

"And when it's gray, we fall back on the spirit of the rules: making the experience fun. If booting one person who won't defend themselves makes the game enjoyable for four others, I'm okay with that when I lack the evidence to make an absolute call in-game."
Making the experience fun is not the only reason for rules, spirit or otherwise.
Making a call without "absolute evidence" will often not be acceptable, and may put you at risk. Please rethink this. Yes there is grey, and sometimes this allows debate and reasoning, but in this case, I dont think a ban is appropriate. Having said that, not communicating with allies makes team play more dificult, as this obviously is a team oriented game that depends on communication and cooperation. This can even be game ruining at times. For this reason, kokillo will be issued a warning regarding communicating and cooperating with his team. No bans will be issued for failure to votekick, as the votekicks were not appropriate for reasons explained above.
@veneteaou
@FalenGa thanks for the review.