The completion of the ban request against Alahdin

[dweiler]

I'm not sure whether this should be a complaint or suggestion.

Last night I got teamkilled by the nr1 legion, beep (see viewtopic.php?f=24&t=7339 and viewtopic.php?f=25&t=7345). He did this because he was afraid he would lose his nr1 position to Donaldtheduckie and sniped his ELO in this game. To be clear, he admitted he teamkilled us.

The measure taken was a 2 or 3 day ban (not sure), however within 35 minutes this ban was removed again. The result is that because Beep consciously and knowingly did something against the rules, we got a loss and got sniped of our elo, while Beep effectively only got 'a warning'. This ELO sniping was for the number 1 ranking, so there was 'a lot' at stake.

I hope you can imagine that it does not feel justice is done. It feels like the fair players got punished and the violator got a get-out-of-jail-free card. Like I said before, I hope the cheaters are not smarter than the legion community, but at this point they are, because they effectively claim the number 1 position by cheating against honest players.

Is it possible that either our ELO gets re-installed or Beep gets punished for this? In other words, can measures be taken against this kind of behaviour?

[supersexyy]

Well this ELO boosting/sniping is a load of crap and its your kind of players who make ELO meaningless.

I do agree that his 'punishment' was quite lenient and that it should be a minimum of 24 hours before an appeal can be processed, however if he does reoffend his punishment will be severe.

[bit]

i agree, it's not an autoban or something that can be removed like that, really one of the worst forms of game ruining. i'd support ban reduce after appeal, but not fast unban like that. a guy should pay atleast 1 evening. do u think anyone can learn something, if he got straight unbanned and continues to play with friends? on the other side OP feels like shit. is this fair?

[iightfyre]

I would like to add a couple points to this argument.

1. In this game, the East side had a leaver at start of wave 3. East asked for a !draw but West refused. If DonaldTheDuckie and HACK really advocate fair competition then why would they continue a game playing 4v3 vs myself with 2150 elo? This seems to me that the West team had every intention of playing unfairly and should not be allowed to complain about fair play. If they wanted to "protect" their ELO - they should have !draw when they had the opportunity. They had every chance to get out of this game.

2. Teal's play was not the cause of the loss. Lets count the leaks on Red, Blue and Purple and Teal. Teal leaks 21 creeps + 3 sends. Purp leaks 4 creeps + 1 send. Red and Blue leaked 35 creeps + 3 sends. Lets do the math here. Red and Blue leaked 38 / 65 total leaks; the result is that Red and Blue players were 58% of the total damage heading towards their king. On the other hand, Teal was responsible for only 35% of the total damage heading to king. Red and Blue also failed to heal. In my opinion, the game was lost regardless of Teal's play. Even if Teal holds, West is looking at 42 leaks to king with auras and wyvern. Their king has shockwave. This is GG no matter how you slice it.

There should be no ELO rewarded to West team. They lost this game REGARDLESS of Teal. If anything, the only thing Teal COULD have done is carry the bad play of Red and Blue. In my opinion, a TK is defined as one player single handedly causing a loss. The true TKers in this game are Hack and DonaldTheDuckie. End of story.

[BeepBoopBeep]

Hi,

let's clear up some of the things you said, but before like i said i admit what i did was wrong.

How this became about the #1 rank shouldn't be relative as your buddy donald still has a long way climb to catch me, this is just a play of the sympathy card.

As for you saying the fair players got banned? Yet you make a new account everytime you play with your pal donald and you call yourself an honest player? iight even offered to draw the game and you laughed at him very honest on your part, i can see that you are a fair player right?

As for me being punished, measures were taken against this king of behaviour , i was banned and what do people do when they get banned they appeal i was man enough to admit i made a mistake and was redeemed.

Thanks for making this complaint now i can speak my mind.

[dweiler]

@ iightfyre and beepboopbeep

This does not really matter for my complaint, but let me elucidate why we did not draw:

You entered the game with a player with 1-6 stats. The chance of him leaving or playing poorly was very great. ELO makes up for this this: if you win you get more ELO because you had a worse player. For us this is a greater risk too, of course: if the player plays well, we lose more ELO. If we would draw every game in which this happens, the risk of playing when you can lose more ELO is not worth it anymore.

Secondly, to the 2nd point of iightfyre: You confuse the outcome with intention. I am talking about the intention of teal to play unfairly and teamkill us. All of the others had fair intentions.

If you want to debate about the outcome: a merc can make up for a lot of leaks, if he switched it is not certain we would have lost. Besides, if you watch our games back, we often leak at level 7, it is (a weak) part of our tactic.

I would however like to stress again that the fair players get punished and the cheating players get rewarded (they sniped Donaldtheduckie of their ELO). In my opinion, the ent community has to protect the fair players and distance themselves from cheaters.

It makes me feel sad that offenders get the sympathy of the admin, just because there is an insincere 'Sorry!'. For example, a sincere apology would not have been made after the ban started, and should not include an immediate BUT (BUT I wanna play again, so forget everything I said before). Another example of a sincere apology would have been that he whispered us to apologize, or invited us to play a game with 3 of his friends to get our ELO re-installed. He did none of this, which makes it seem that he is the only winner by saying 'sorry!'.

I hope you understand better now why I say the cheater is the winner and the fair player is the loser in this case now. In my opinion, this should always be the other way around.

[iightfyre]

Nothing about how you two play is fair. I have saved Donald's ELO twice by offering a !draw when his team had a leaver. In this instance, the same courtesy was not given back to me. Donald's ELO is still HIGHER today because of my fair play, due to me giving him !draw on 2 separate occasions when he would have lost. Stop crying about fair play and look at the history of the situation. Nothing you do is fair, at no point did you guys ever offer to play fair or show me any courtesy. You cannot play both sides. You guys both play unfair and could care less about the rest of the players. And such you should be left alone with no sympathy in return.

Should we dig up the game where I CLEARLY stated "Donald, I will pick -hpgmcb if you agree to no merc". His response was "I wont merc" and yet you both play the clear TEAM-MERC strategy, building opposite each other and you Merc me. Just because it wasn't Donald that switched merc doesn't mean that your TEAM wasn't clearly being dishonest and chose to merc right from the get go.

I'll say it again. Let me make it big so that you can see it. NOTHING ABOUT THE WAY YOU GUYS PLAY IS FAIR SO STOP YOUR CRYING AND MOVE ON WITH YOUR LIVES

[BeepBoopBeep]

@mickey

It makes me sad that you fail to acknowledge that you make a new account everytime to play with donald, and that iight has drawed for donald twice no matter what outcome yet you want to say you are a honest and fair player? Yes i was not honest and fair this 1 game.

Anyway your trying extremely hard to prove that you are a honest and fair player, stop kidding yourself.

I admitted i was at fault, but you of all people are not an angel.

[iightfyre]

PS - I did NOT post a ban request for your team BLATANT lie about a merc agreement. This is a bannable offense, you know, to break a verbal agreement. I showed you mercy too many times.

PPS - I looked this up for you. The last favor I will do for you:

Karma [kahr-muh] :
-noun
1. Bringing upon oneself inevitable results, good or bad, either in this life or in a reincarnation.

Hope this helps.

[BrotherMols]

As a completely unbiased observer, I was very surprised the ban got overturned so quickly.

Popular players seems to be getting preferential treatment when it comes to how they behave and the consequences.

If a random 20 games played player made that ban appeal - just saying sorry - it would have been denied on the spot. But because it is a guy near the top of the ELO ranking and with loads of friends, he got unbanned straight away.

I would like to see a specific list of offences and ban times, that cannot be changed upon appeal UNLESS, the original ban was made in error. No concession should be made to people who just apologise.

[iightfyre]

One more point for MickieTheMousie about ELO -

When an 800 elo player leaves mid game, the ELO is re balanced. Therefor, in this particular game, Pink leaving resulted in a re balance of ELO which swayed the ELO even HIGHER in your teams favor. This is why the !draw system is in place. Furthermore, the fact that you create a new account every time that you reach 1100 ELO is commonly known as "smurfing" and DonaldTheDuckie and you are very much guilty of this. You skew the ELO in every game that you play.

Please. Do not try to make a point if it is incorrect and invalid. In this case, your pitiful attempt at pointing out the 1-6 player that left our game was in anyway favorable for my team is not only incorrect but shows even more of your ignorance about game play.

Secondly, you have zero right complaining about the ELO "risk and reward" system since you fail to ever take a risk. Man up to your own side of the street for once and have a fantastic day

[DonaldtheDuckie]

Finally I got access to the forums. I am sure that the given complaint is of great interest to the entire clan ENT community, as it regards Clan ENT's adherence to its own rules and thereby living up to its selfproclaimed purpose of ensuring its players the right to an equal treatment under its rules.

First things first. Both MickeytheMousie and myself are both esteemed members of clan Enterprise on northrend (europe), and are proud to represent this clan promoting itself for its fairplay and adherence to its rules, thereby seeking to judge all players equally.

On the matter of equality of treatment
1. question which arises here, is what procedures does clan ENT take to ensure the equality of treatment of its lifeblood, its players?

I do not know which procedures clan ENT has taken to facilitate this critical condition of ensuring a fair treatment of its players, but there should in my opinion be some rules governing admins which have a beyond neutral connection to certain players, to ensure that they are not treated "preferentially", as BrotherMols so eloquently put it. Beepboopbeep is a shaman in the clan xpsxx on the realm USeast, a clan which is headed by the admin Cyberpunk. I believe that the fact of these 2 players knowing each other so well, and both being in the leadership of the same clan, shows that they are so well aquianted with each other to a degree where Cyberpunkt will not treat Beepboopbeep as he would a complete stranger.

Would it not be preferential that players are judged by admins not so befriended with the player they are about to judge, so as to ensure equal treatment? There are rules to ensure that legal disputes in all developed legal systems in the world are not judged by a person with too strong connections to the persons about to be judged, does Clan ENT not adhere to the same principles?


On the issue of the case
For those of you who are not aquianted with the case, allow me to present a brief summary for you to be able to pass judgement on the case on an as enlightened basis as possible.

BeepBoopBeep, myself and some other legion td mega players have for a long time been contending for the rank 1 ELO position in the game legion td mega.

In the given case, Beepboopbeep, played on my team on a smurf account, whilst playing with his 2 friends, iightfyre and Ilovecapehorn.
The chatlog of some of Beepboopbeeps games shows that iightfyre and Beepboopbeep has an agreement not to take each others elo which then brings forward the obvious question of:

Why then play on opposite teams if you do not intend to win?
This is a good question indeed, and please give it some thought. If you have an agreement not to take each others elo on their main account, can you play to win or are you abusing an utility of the game to play with friends which are on both teams, trying to get ur friends on ur same team to smurf to maximize your elo gain, then getting ur smurf friends on the other team to purposefully lose on purpose, thus sniping the elo of the competition?
If you win, you make the other lose elo, then violating the agreement with your friend. The reason I'm writing this out in full, is to make sure that you understand that the purpose of BeepBoopBeep to play on my team under a different name, so that I would not know it was him, was to deliberately make sure I would lose the game, thus losing elo(and therefore comparably increasing his lead in the Elo system on his main account) and try to aid his friend iightfyre by giving him free elo. In other words, I believe it fair to say, that Beepboopbeep intended gameruin and also to abuse a utility to elevate his own position in the clan ENT community, by purposefully trying to make me lose, allready prior to the start of the game.

A ban request was made about this game by my good friend, MickeytheMousie. This was then judged by the admin Cyberpunk, who judged the given game to give reason to a temporary ban of 3 days, which was then immediately appealed by BeepBoopBeep, then immediately subsequently revoked by the same admin Cyberpunk. I've allready stated their connection above.

What the admin Cyberpunk, who in my opinion was unfit to pass ruling on Beep, as they are good friends, forgot to adress, was the abusing of

"The use of any utility that gives you an unfair advantage over other players will result in a permanent ban", which is copypasted from clan enterprises general rules.

Lets give ourselves a moment to dissect and understand this rule. Is it not
1.) an unfair advantage to rig a game, by having friends on both the enemy team, and your own team, play on smurf accs to appear noobs, then have the friend on the other team purposefully gameruin to not just elevate your own elo, but also to increase his own comparable standing? I would definately answer this question as a clear yes, which then leads on to the suggested result, banning the offender permanently.

Regarding: Why was the teamkiller Beepboopbeep not banned permanently?

Is it because he received "preferential" treatment, as the neutral bystander BrotherMols put it? As I've shown above, there is a great deal to indicate that this is indeed so.

And why was it only Beepboopbeep that was penalized? Did not his friends iightfyre and Ilovecapehorn equally partake in abusing a game utility to give themselves an unfair advantage over their competitors? The answer to this question seems also obvious to me as a big and fat yes, which would then lead to the question of why was not Iightfyre and ilovecapehorn banned permanently as well? Is this also because the given offenders, were given "preferential" treatment? In my opinion, the answer to this question is also self evident.

Under the light of the above stated, I highly suggest, that Clant Enterprise takes the appropriate actions as to ensure that it lives up to its own self proclaimed goals of ensuring its players fairplay and an equal treatment under its rules. For what use are rules, they are not meant to be followed?

Another well known top 10 elo player in legion td mega dungeonseeker, was banned for a year for maphacking. Maphacking is a cheat that gives full view of the entire map, but not making it 100 % sure that you win.
Is rigging games so that you get friends to smurf and throw the game not a more serious offense than having a 3rd party utility as this gives you mh of the other team(through the other player) and making the other player play so bad that he is practically on your team, making it practically 5v3 + mh? I believe this to be the case and hope you judge the offenders iightfyre, ilovecapehorn and beepboopbeep in this light.

[iightfyre]

DonaldTheDuckie,

QUOTE: ""The chatlog of some of Beepboopbeeps games shows that iightfyre and Beepboopbeep has an agreement not to take each others elo which then brings forward the obvious question of:""
- You are uneducated in your assumption. You can not base your argument on what you "think" is the case. You are not present in all of our games, you are not in chat rooms with us. Since you want to make this into a courtroom decision, please present evidence that BeepBoopBeep and I have never played against each other. You will quickly find that you cannot. Actually, if a full game history was possible to retrieve, I can find you games in which BeepBeepBeep and iightfyre are on separate teams and the game was played to the end. We have in fact given and taken elo from eachother. Your argument here is 100% based on assumptions on your end, have no solid backing and are false.

QUOTE: ""The use of any utility that gives you an unfair advantage over other players will result in a permanent ban""
- Maphack is a utility. Not building a tower on one level is not a utility; it is an action. "Utility" is a noun. A noun is an object, place or thing. There was no "utility" used in the game in question. Unless you consider the actual player to be a "utility" in which case every player with skill should be banned because they are the "utility" that makes every game unfair. How exactly do you connect Dungeonseekers Maphack program with a player not building a tower on one level? These are VERY different things.

* If however, you look at the penalty for pausing the game during a king heal, selling all your towers to TK or purposefully not healing the king; the penalty is always a ban of 1-3 days for first time offenders. This is the same "realm" of violation that BeepBoopBeep is guilty of. Let's please stay realistic here. He got the appropriate ban time from Cyberpunk and used the appeal system to have it lifted. THIS IS FAIR AND EQUAL TREATMENT to violators of the same actions. I can list names of violators that still have their accounts. Let's site an example: ZTX)Fiji@europe paused the game during a king heal. I reported him. He got the same ban treatment as did BeepBoopBeep and is now still playing LTD on that same account - he has not been permanently banned, nor has his elo been reset. He was a Game Ruiner with evidence that proved it. THIS IS A COMPARISON OF EQUAL MERIT - IF YOU WANT TO STATE PRECEDENT PLEASE STAY IN THE SAME BALLPARK


"Did not his friends iightfyre and Ilovecapehorn equally partake in abusing a game utility to give themselves an unfair advantage over their competitors?"
- No. What utility? What exactly did either of us do that would result in any sort of disciplinary action. I joined a game in which I was the last one to enter the lobby. I played such game. My ally quit and I offered to draw they game. Your team refused draw. I recalled my vote to draw and sent furbolgs, blood orcs and wyverns on lvl 7. Where is there being a rule broken by me? I have no control or knowledge of anything that is going on outside of my towers, my teammates and my actions. There was absolutely nothing done by myself or CapeHorn that could result is disciplinary actions. And where again is this "utility"???

"Lets give ourselves a moment to dissect and understand this rule. Is it not
1.) an unfair advantage to rig a game,"
- If this is your argument then you should put yourself on the "banned for life" list. Did you or did you not enter a game with a smurf friend on your team in which I held the Red position. When I asked "Donald, I will chose mode -hpgmcb if you agree to no merc" and you said "I will not merc". Then, you agreed to build opposite your own lane with your "smurf friend" and your friend switched to merc. Wouldn't this be an "unfair advantage to rig a game"? Let's be honest, Donald. That merc switch IS indeed an unfair advantage to rig a game. And since you guys LOVE the word "INTENT" - did you not INTEND on deceiving me to get the game mode chosen that would give you an unfair advantage? Indeed you did.

We can talk about "intent" and "stacking" and "unfair" all day long. The bottom line is that your prior offenses in the manner of "intent for fair play" are just as equally punishable as the "intent for fair play" that BeepBoopBeep demonstrated. There were two separate occasions in which there was deceit in order to win a game. You are guilty of one and BeepBoopBeep is guilty of one. As far as I see it - it's even. You both violated rules on a one time basis and this whole matter should be dropped. The ONLY difference is that BeepBoopBeep had the integrity to man up to his, while you still dodge any allegations towards your own unfair play. We all know how you play games to stack the elo system, stop lying to yourself and playing the victim. Let's drop the whole matter and stop bugging the ENT admins. If you want to pursue this further I would be happy to start opening new topics that point out your own indiscretions. Lets just go our separate ways, shall we?

[eyeheartyou]

Okay to respond to this, Since i have been brought up in this forum complaint. Duckie comparing Legal justice and fairness systems throughout the world, and comparing it to a Gaming community is such a wrong metaphor to use. I understand you feel as if the actions taken on Beep wasn't justice.. But to go as far as trying to get him permanently banned is not of the right action. I've seen people such as wtc) aunttan not get permanently banned on multiple game ruining times. 1 week each and his first ban, was appealed and the admins let him play and gave him a fair warning to not do it again or punishment will be severe well he did it again and punishment is severe, beep went through the same process and im sure he regrets his actions and knowingly will never do such a shameful act, But it was his first offence in the ent community am i right? im sure more severe actions would be taken on if he ever would do so again, so im sure the admins judge fairly. Now as for now trying to get myself and iightfyre banned is another action i see wronged. You are trying to get the opposite team that wasnt sure of the intention of your team player all we did is play, we lost a player we asked for a draw for a fairness and kindness only to be laughed at and treated like a piece of turd. Okay, we did not know what you were building, we did not know what was your weakness, we did not know when you were sending so comparing this game to the map hacking game that dungeon did is by far outrageous, Lastly i want to point out you could had played on but Duckie did not heal and missed the very first heal, So trying to take action upon a game that only lasted 7 waves at partially being your fault as well is kind of overboard . I feel the actions that were taken were just and trying to bring up a already processed topic is Blasphemy.

[dweiler]

iight, about the fact whether this was a utility or not:

Beep was just a real life utility: he was maphack + more. That is: a utility to make us lose 100%. Just because dungeonseeker maphacked on his own with a programme, and you maphacked + 'killhacked' us in a 'natural' way does not make the offense any less.

About your comparison with pause. Pause is a feature in the game, and some may be unaware that this is forbidden. Besides, it does not guarantee your loss. Finally, it does not kill your own team. A comparison with pausing is not in appropiate in this case.

Just stating the facts : real life maphack + 100% loss hack.

PS I think the reactions by beepboopbeep and iightfyre show the 'genuinity' of their remorse.

PPS The fair players are still the losers now and the cheaters the winners. Where are the admins?

PPPS we suspect that they teamkilled us more often. This is probably not an incident.