Jump to content
You need to play a total of 5 battles to post in this section.
Ducky_shot

Fair play principles, what is it?

15 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

1,644
[BIAS]
Members
3,138 posts
9,201 battles

So Rule section #4 contains all the fair play principles. These are all seemingly centered on a single game's actions. It seems to be missing anything on clan battles in general. Should there be specific rules pertaining to clan battles and other competitive clan modes? If so, what should they be?

 

4. Inappropriate conduct in game / Fair play principles

The following actions are prohibited in game:

4.01. Intentionally damaging vehicles belonging to a player on the same team (team damage).

4.02. Intentionally destroying vehicles belonging to a player on the same team (team kill).

4.03. Intentionally blocking (blocking from front and rear) vehicles belonging to a player on the same team.

4.04. Intentionally propping (blocking on one side, where the other side of a user's vehicle touches a fixed indestructible obstacle, preventing free movement.) vehicles belonging to a player on the same team.

4.05. Intentionally informing participants of the opposing team through battle, or voice chat, the location of vehicles belonging to players of the same team.

4.06. Intentionally exploiting the physics system to damage an allied tank, plane, ship or similar actions. This includes, but is not limited to, pushing an allied tank into line of fire, pushing allied tanks off of cliffs, bridges, into water, etc.

4.07. Using bots, clickers, macros, keyboard and mouse recorders, or any other similar methods to accumulate credits and experience without the participation or with passive participation of the player within the battle. (Excessive and repetitive passive play)

 

I think this is a glaring omission from the game rules and it should be beefed up before the next season of clan battles. It seems to me that there were several ways a clan could game the system to some extent and if it was exploitable in any manner, then that would not be fair play.

Thoughts?

  • Cool 2
  • Funny 1
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,449
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,771 posts
6,976 battles

What glaring omission could that possibly be? The glaring omission of WG's rules for clan wars that is working as intended, that facilitates very unfairplay? Oh my, I think you will have to ask nice Mr Pigeon O' War for his opinion on this topic.

  • Funny 2
  • Boring 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
132
[BLUE_]
Members
399 posts
14,312 battles

The issue is that there aren't proper punishment actions for the violation of those rules in a way it avoids players to do it over and over again. Heck, i know one guy that is playing this game for quite a while that he TKed. every. single. day. (Now he behaves most of the time and "only" TK once in a month). He's playing the game nowadays like nothing happened.

He had issues with the credit card once that blocked his game account, it wasn't his fault, (the money no longer was in his account, but didnt reach WG, the details i don't remember, since it was in Febraury or March). So after this. He uses another credit card now to buy stuff from WoWs to avoid headaches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,644
[BIAS]
Members
3,138 posts
9,201 battles

So, can we agree that if a clan was trying to game the system by using their sub clans to rig it for a different sub clan that that would not be fair play?? Or is that fair play to try to rig it however far-fetched WG says that is? However far-fetched WG might think that is, why not just publish that along with the rules??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,644
[BIAS]
Members
3,138 posts
9,201 battles
Just now, RipNuN2 said:

In before the lock.

Why lock?? this is a sane and civil discussion and criticisms back and forth with no shaming, no accusations, nothing of the sort...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,449
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,771 posts
6,976 battles
7 minutes ago, Ducky_shot said:

Why lock?? this is a sane and civil discussion and criticisms back and forth with no shaming, no accusations, nothing of the sort...

Because a lot of people (and leaders of several clans) do not want this discussion to happen, (why?) and will spam report the topic in hope of getting it locked down.

Part of the issue is that there is a grey area (black hole possibly) in the absence of rules covering hyper clans (clans that have several sub clans, such as [EXPLOIT1] [EXPLOITI] [EXPLOIT2] and [EXPLOIT3]  for example), in which all sorts of practices occur, many with good intentions, some with bad, but all which deform/manipulate the outcome of clan wars events, possibly/definetly to the detriment of other clans, including those which abide by, not only competition rules, but further, by the spirit of fairplay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,644
[BIAS]
Members
3,138 posts
9,201 battles
5 minutes ago, nuttybiscuit said:

Because a lot of people (and leaders of several clans) do not want this discussion to happen, (why?) and will spam report the topic in hope of getting it locked down.

Part of the issue is that there is a grey area (black hole possibly) in the absence of rules covering hyper clans (clans that have several sub clans, such as [EXPLOIT1] [EXPLOITI] [EXPLOIT2] and [EXPLOIT3]  for example), in which all sorts of practices occur, many with good intentions, some with bad, but all which deform/manipulate the outcome of clan wars events, possibly/definetly to the detriment of other clans, including those which abide by, not only competition rules, but further, by the spirit of fairplay.

Well, then WG can edit those individual posts. There is no reason to lock an entire thread when the thread itself is doing nothing wrong. Do I think that will happen? Not a chance... WG seems to be very apprehensive about this topic.

Edited by Ducky_shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19
[SKI]
Members
135 posts
5,260 battles

The real solution to this problem is, once you play a clan battle with a clan ( or sub Clan) you get locked into that clan (or sub clan) until clan battles is over, people can still join that clan, but once they play a clan battle they can't leave until clan battles is over. (you cant be kicked out either) And, YES IMO this is an unfair practice.

Edited by nightrider760
additional statement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
63
[TDM]
Members
152 posts
5,602 battles

I agree there should be some added rules to clan battles after this season.  And WG should provide some type of information as to how they came to their conclusion.  Right or wrong, lots of players are furious because they feel their efforts in clan battles is going unaddressed by WG and locking these threads only makes it worse.  

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
725
[0456]
[0456]
Members
2,809 posts
7,992 battles
11 hours ago, Ducky_shot said:

I think this is a glaring omission from the game rules and it should be beefed up before the next season of clan battles. It seems to me that there were several ways a clan could game the system to some extent and if it was exploitable in any manner, then that would not be fair play.

Thoughts?

I think this is the wrong section to beef up since these are all "In Game" or what appears to be "In Battle." I think there was 2 words changed from this overall entry between tanks, planes and ships- and they are "planes" and "ships." I doubt it's been modified in 5 years other than that. 

I do think the pilot season of CB was a good way to "flush the game." To see what people were willing to do to stretch / twist the rules to gain questionable benefit so that new rules / guidelines could be established. I can imagine the conversation going something like:

"How will we regulate CB in WoWS?"

"Let's see what kind of nonsense the player base comes up with and go from there." And now they have something to work with. 

Question is... Will they work with it? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,644
[BIAS]
Members
3,138 posts
9,201 battles
48 minutes ago, ENO75 said:

Question is... Will they work with it? 

They don't seem to want to think that it can be done or that anyone tried to do it. But the fact of the matter is, there are screenshots out there that show a lesser sub clan with all the main players from the main sub clan matched up against one of the top ranked typhoon teams. And it wasn't the only time either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,644
[BIAS]
Members
3,138 posts
9,201 battles

So currently, there is 2 ways the clan battles system can try to be rigged, that I know of... perhaps there are more.

WG says that it can't be gamed, despite screenshots out there showing that it happened, intentionally or not. They are not my screenshots, they are not for me to post. But top typhoon clans were playing against another top clans sub clan with all their best players moved to it. I have seen some math done elsewhere on the games some of the top clans played against them, showing that the top order would have been different had the top Typhoon clans not played against that subclan.

WG says its not a valid problem. Ok, what are the possible ramifications?? Well, this would be a green light to the top clans to make sub clans, get them high enough up in the standings (which, lets face it, for super unicum teams takes about 2 nights) and try to snipe other top level clans when they see a bunch of them drop into battle. WG says you cannot sync snipe; sure, it's not a guarantee, but you can sure give yourself the best opportunity to drop against a top clan. Also, sync dropping against 2 subclans of the same clan to try for easy points.... That's blatant rigging, but how do you prove it? There were many instances of subclans playing against each other unintentionally, so how hard is it to do intentionally??

So, "IF" this is happening what are we left with and what might happen??

1. We have skewed top clan standings and "IF" it was done intentionally, then that is "rigging" or "fixing"

2. We have super unicum players making their way through the lower clan leagues multiple times wrecking sub par clans left and right and robbing them of what could have been rightful wins if they had been matched up against a legitimate clan in their league

3. We have those lower level clans possibly getting frustrated by playing against super unicums and quit clan battles entirely.

4. You have top clans trying to play ethically and deciding that there is no way for them to win if other clans are trying to game the system and they quit playing.

5. You have more top clans abandoning the ethical way and reverting to trying to "rig" it and, honestly, its not rigging if WG says its OK, so is it unethical.

6.If there is nothing wrong with this, what other unethical practices will we see creep into the game?

7. If no one wants to play clan battles because there is allegedly "fixing" or even the appearance of "fixing" then clan battles will just die from alck of participation.

 

It's possibly a very slippery slope if something isn't done about it. I get that there is legitimate player movement during clan battles, but most of what I saw were players moving around very full sub clans fielding multiple teams on all their sub clans, not a virtually empty sub clan getting all the top players from the main sub clan and only that subclan playing battles. This reeks! And whether or not it was intentional or not, it needs to be fixed so that it can't happen intentionally or unintentionally. The perception of cheating is very bad for any PC game.

Edited by Ducky_shot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×