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

Ethical Gaming Behavior

25 comments in this topic

Recommended Posts

431
[CUTER]
Members
699 posts
18,993 battles

Recently, I have been witness to an uptick in threads blatantly calling out Wargaming, Clans, and Individual players as cheaters.  We have all seen it here on the forums, in the game chat and it has been a clear distraction.  Last night I was playing ranked and a player was being bombarded with insults of "cheating" during clan battles/wars.  It was painful to watch becuase the player is good...but clearly not in that clan's senior leadership.  Other times you will catch a ship sailing broadside, use a spotter to catch a cruiser behind an island or RNG will bless you with a lucky salvo.  In any event...you land several citadels and the target is devastatingly struck and sent back to port.  The next thing you see in chat is impossible, hacker, cheater, and I am reporting you!

This leads me to my base argument that I want to debate.  I think the term "cheater" is used a little too liberally in this game by players.  You get killed and lash out.  For me....when I die in such a fashion, I send kudos to the other player.  

There is a huge difference between ethical and unethical and blatant cheating.  Ethical behavior is easy to define...playing the game in its purest form with no modifications.  However, when do mods begin to creep into the area of unethical?  Is it enhancing the music?  Enlarging the minimap beyond what it should be?  Enabling the training room that novice players don't even know about to get an edge up on ship lines?  Using complete mod packs to change the fundamental way the game is portrayed?  And then when do these bleed over from unethical to cheating?  Last known position markers?  Aim bots?  Hacks beyond wasd?  Something a bit lesser, using the chat to offer dubloons for killing other players?  What about premium ships (pay to win)?  What about antagonizing another player in chat to make him/her upset?

Then beyond the individual tree (i.e. player) we need to look at clans.  When does their behavior become unethical?  Playibg low tier ships to seal club?  Diving up to improve win rate?  Sync dropping multiple teams at the same time for in clan battle royal?  Sync dropping same clan players during ranked battles? Or when in a ranked battle with friends and on the same team using voice comms?  How about throwing a match?...or letting a clan mate farm you to save his star at the end during a loss? 

Then there is clan battles/wars.  Modpacks, moving players around to intentionally undermine other clans, moving players around to help weaker players learn competitive play?  There is a lot to be said on this topic and has been posted adnasium in previous threads...many of which are now closed. 

To be fair, WG never said moving players was against the rules...although it may be against the spirit of clan battles and individual clan performance and merit.  Our clan moved people, but we did not do it maliciously.  It was done to help groom new players for a second Supremacy League team and to get more peeps involved in the play.  I lost out on my Stalin flag...so that was my punishment for having fun.

Then, there is Wargaming's piece in all of this.  They have to decide if they are ok with cheating and or unethical behavior.  To me, it seems very clear that they punish cheating when they find it with appropriate bans.  Their role in regard to unethical (but legal) play seems more suspect.  However...where do they lay down the law? 

I am hoping this thread will be a sounding board for those with ideas on how to improve the gaming environment.  For me I think a "cheating" guide needs to be posted outlining what exactly that all entails.

For me, I will continue to play this game for the fun I get from it.  I have and always will use the base game package.  No mods...not even to music....call me a purist.  

Looking for tasteful and constructive conversation here folks...would like to see this thread stay open for at least a few hours.  Please avoid calling out individual players and or clans.

 

  • Cool 12
  • Boring 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,645
[BIAS]
Members
3,138 posts
9,228 battles

Moving people around to get a team going among a clans sub clans is nothing more than trying to get everyone the wins they needed. Trying to sync drop against one of the top rated typhoon clans to inflict larger point losses against them than if they had played them wit their main sub clan is not fair or ethical play.

There was a forum contest a while back for the most damage inflicted in a certain ship. Some players were trying to rig it. They apparently sync dropped divs against each other and farmed each other for damage. They were dq'ed from the contest after some detective work from some other members. They weren't necessarily rigging the match, but they were dq'ed from the contest anyways because of fair play rules.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,695
Members
18,198 posts
5,196 battles

It's kind of the same idea as a clan's reputation being trashed because of one jerk.

If one clan is found guilty of "unethical behaviour", all clans will be looked at askance, and people will be looking for an excuse to cry "cheater".

As far as what is and isn't ethical, IMO, if you have to justify your actions by saying, "but the game allows it", they're probably unethical.

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,827
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
9,282 posts

Once you open a sentence with "To be fair" you are stating, knowingly or not, there is a need to clarify what you are about to say is questionable "about" being fair. You do know perception is reality, right? If people perceive actions taken as some sleight of hand effort to gain advantage, even if said actions are within the rules because there is no rule against the action, you lose. 

Is there a rule that says NFL players can't take a baseball bat on the field? See? It's not directly prevented by the rules but using one would surely be perceived as unfair. I know it's a silly, absurd example, but it's meant to point out why folks are saying what they be saying. Just like world-class athletes continual search for performance enhancing drugs that skirt the rule book. 

Perception was/is something fishy happened. Good luck trying to change that perception. 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
431
[CUTER]
Members
699 posts
18,993 battles
2 minutes ago, Herr_Reitz said:

Once you open a sentence with "To be fair" you are stating, knowingly or not, there is a need to clarify what you are about to say is questionable "about" being fair. You do know perception is reality, right? If people perceive actions taken as some sleight of hand effort to gain advantage, even if said actions are within the rules because there is no rule against the action, you lose. 

Is there a rule that says NFL players can't take a baseball bat on the field? See? It's not directly prevented by the rules but using one would surely be perceived as unfair. I know it's a silly, absurd example, but it's meant to point out why folks are saying what they be saying. Just like world-class athletes continual search for performance enhancing drugs that skirt the rule book. 

Perception was/is something fishy happened. Good luck trying to change that perception. 

I am not denying that fishy activities have occurred.  I am trying to get a conversation going about how far in the gray area people should be playing in.

Think of it as Black White and Gray.  Black being blatant game violations, White being the purist who plays every game as purely as possible and Gray being everything else in between.  That is why I posed my questions.  Are all matters in the Gray assumed as Black?  

If so, what is your recommendation to fix the issue(s) as noted above? 

What in my post anywhere suggests that I am denying or covering for any fishy activities?  That is not my intent at all...my intent is to spark conversation of where you feel the line should be drawn on these issues.

Thanks for posting!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
555
[CVA16]
Members
2,751 posts
6,390 battles
12 minutes ago, Herr_Reitz said:

Once you open a sentence with "To be fair" you are stating, knowingly or not, there is a need to clarify what you are about to say is questionable "about" being fair. You do know perception is reality, right? If people perceive actions taken as some sleight of hand effort to gain advantage, even if said actions are within the rules because there is no rule against the action, you lose. 

Is there a rule that says NFL players can't take a baseball bat on the field? See? It's not directly prevented by the rules but using one would surely be perceived as unfair. I know it's a silly, absurd example, but it's meant to point out why folks are saying what they be saying. Just like world-class athletes continual search for performance enhancing drugs that skirt the rule book. 

Perception was/is something fishy happened. Good luck trying to change that perception. 

Well said Reitz. Always like your posts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
230
[SYN]
Members
345 posts
6,161 battles

The problem is the incongruity between WG and their customers.  A behavior doesn’t need to be against a published set of rules for it to be wrong.  WG should have the confidence to end the behavior, but they don’t.

As with most of life, doing the right thing is actually really easy.  No decent person becomes truly upset when the right thing is done.  By not doing the simple, right thing, WG has exasperated the situation and created a player base that is engaging in abusive self-help.  It’s an unfortunate and unnecessary situation.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
431
[CUTER]
Members
699 posts
18,993 battles
2 minutes ago, MikeLWX said:

  By not doing the simple, right thing, WG has exasperated the situation and created a player base that is engaging in abusive self-help. 

Agreed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,787
[SALVO]
Members
17,043 posts
17,674 battles
53 minutes ago, Herr_Reitz said:

Once you open a sentence with "To be fair" you are stating, knowingly or not, there is a need to clarify what you are about to say is questionable "about" being fair. You do know perception is reality, right? If people perceive actions taken as some sleight of hand effort to gain advantage, even if said actions are within the rules because there is no rule against the action, you lose. 

HR, I disagree with your opening statement about opening with "to be fair".  When I say "to be fair", what I'm doing usually is addressing some point that a poster with whom I perhaps disagree has made, and saying that his argument isn't entirely wrong.  Most of it might be wrong in my opinion, but there may be things being said where I think that he's right, and THAT is why I feel that it's necessary to say "to be fair".  I want "to be fair" by pointing out where I think said person is right even when I think that much of the rest of what he's said is wrong.

Edited by Crucis
  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4,787
[SALVO]
Members
17,043 posts
17,674 battles
17 minutes ago, MikeLWX said:

The problem is the incongruity between WG and their customers.  A behavior doesn’t need to be against a published set of rules for it to be wrong.  WG should have the confidence to end the behavior, but they don’t.

As with most of life, doing the right thing is actually really easy.  No decent person becomes truly upset when the right thing is done.  By not doing the simple, right thing, WG has exasperated the situation and created a player base that is engaging in abusive self-help.  It’s an unfortunate and unnecessary situation.

Just an FYI.

Exacerbated.   Not exasperated.  Two entirely different words.

 

As for the rest, I agree.  But there's something else you overlook.  In the law, there's the concepts of the letter of the law and the spirit of the law.  Personally, due to my strong leanings towards literalism, I tend to put far more emphasis on the letter of the law, and tend to say that if you can't say way what you mean, how can you ever mean what you say.  Or put another way, if the spirit of the law doesn't match the letter of the law, that's the fault of the people  writing the law.  Or that people have no obligation to obey the spirit of the law, only the letter of the law.

Furthermore, there's a difference between something being against the rules and being wrong. (I guess this is where one might say the spirit of the law or the rules comes in.) In the case of certain clan behaviors, I'd probably come down on the side that if they didn't violate the letter of the rules, then they're in the clear.  But if WG decides that the behavior violated the spirit of the rules and of fair play for all involved, then it's up to WG to change the rules so that they ban the offending behavior. 

For what it's worth, when you said above "By not doing the simple, right thing, WG has exacerbated the situation..." you are so right.  And that's why it's necessary for WG to take a stand, one way or another, on the questionable behavior, deciding whether it's against the rules or not, and have it say so in clear terms in the rules.

 

  • Cool 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
173
[NEMO]
[NEMO]
Members
756 posts
6,963 battles

Funny that so many posts like this appear at about the same time as WG officially states people using illegal mods will be banned....

Coincidence?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Members
1,866 posts

I'm not sure what the point of this is. Cheaters are subject to being banned. If you don't understand what spotter planes can let me do, that's on you. I just started a new line and "explained" to some players (with my torpedoes) why you don't sail in straight lines. I don't get to start new lines at tier 6. Lack of game knowledge is part of any new game experience. It's not unethical to use now what I've learned.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,547
[PSP]
Members
6,240 posts
8,874 battles

You bring up some good points.

Primarily, I would consider any mod to be ethical if it only affects the game's aesthetics or makes it easier for a disabled player to enjoy the game without enhancing a player's ability to win a match.

Example:

worked.jpg.0b5a5507822fc87ccd535a13b8084a9a.jpg

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,452
[-Y-]
Alpha Tester
4,791 posts
7,006 battles
4 hours ago, KongoPride said:

To be fair, WG never said moving players was against the rules...although it may be against the spirit of clan battles and individual clan performance and merit.

all true, and may also be detrimental to the progression of teams from other clans. In theory, a person moved from clan a1 to clan a2 might fight a team from clan b1 twice in the same session, which places an unfair strain on clan b1 (without even discussing the effects of point sniping.)

An honest OP would recognise this.

4 hours ago, KongoPride said:

Their role in regard to unethical (but legal) play seems more suspect.

Well said, when they deliberately leave grey areas (black holes) in their rules, are they helping or hindering cheating/unfairplay?

4 hours ago, KongoPride said:

Last night I was playing ranked and a player was being bombarded with insults of "cheating" during clan battles/wars.

Which is ironic, because such behaviour in chat is also bad sportsmanship, and revelatory of the shallow understanding/appreciation of this topic by both players and Wargaming staff.

1 hour ago, Crucis said:

Or put another way, if the spirit of the law doesn't match the letter of the law, that's the fault of the people  writing the law. 

See the title of my locked thread from yesterday. Who made the rules? WG did. Who is to blame for abuses during CW? Who, by their failure to draft appropriate and sensible rules, supports "cheating" (as in unfairplay)?


others may note I am still online in the forums after yesterdays little outing, surprising hey? Maybe they are listening.

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,695
Members
18,198 posts
5,196 battles
2 hours ago, Herr_Reitz said:

Once you open a sentence with "To be fair" you are stating, knowingly or not, there is a need to clarify what you are about to say is questionable "about" being fair. 

I dunno, the reason I use it is to counter an argument that I believe isn't taking both sides into consideration, even though I may agree with the point presented.

Because your argument seems one-sided, even though I personally may agree with you, I'll provide another side to the argument, "to be fair".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,904
[CNO]
[CNO]
Members
3,838 posts
13,051 battles
4 hours ago, KongoPride said:

For me, I will continue to play this game for the fun I get from it.  I have and always will use the base game package.  No mods...not even to music....call me a purist.  

 

Here here...from another purist.

There are always going to be grey areas when it comes to mods.  Well, WG has defined the red line, so there is a definite threshold with their checks.  And they supposedly have a list of "approved" (or, perhaps a better statement would be not not approved) mods.  And there will always be a grey area when it comes to chat and what not.  

Personally, be they mods or chat, I always give the benefit of the doubt to the one being accused.  Because we all know the hyperbole of accusations tend to far outweigh the reality at the expense of those accused.  As for illegal mods, I believe WG has a handle on that.  As for the Clan issues, I believe WG will have a handle on those by the next Clan season.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
434
[-GPS-]
Members
2,536 posts
25,006 battles

Sync dropping into Ranked with friends on TeamSpeak is unethical. WG chose not to allow divisions in Ranked, and this is a “workaround”.

it is clear that at least one clan deliberately and systematically abused the ability to move players between sub-clans during Clan Battles. Shame on them.

There are times when I continue being shot at with accuracy despite being undetected and changing direction. Cheats?  Not sure. Recently there seems to have been a remarkable increase in accuracy firing into smoke for a select few players. Spotter plane plus skill or cheat?  Definitely skill most of the time but two 18 km salvos from a Kii?

TRUE CHARACTER IS DEMONSTRATED BY WHAT YOU DO WHEN NO ONE IS LOOKING. 

  • Cool 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2,547
[PSP]
Members
6,240 posts
8,874 battles
20 minutes ago, Landing_Skipper said:

There are times when I continue being shot at with accuracy despite being undetected and changing direction. Cheats?  Not sure. Recently there seems to have been a remarkable increase in accuracy firing into smoke for a select few players.

I seem to be able to continue to hit undetected ships with my Cleveland despite them moving back and forth and changing direction. How can I do this? Well, it's because of the experience I've gleaned from playing 5,000 plus games.

I simply keep track of where ships fall out of detection and think, "now what would I be doing right about now if I were them?" I also look at where there is cover and assume that if there is somebody around then they will probably be utilizing said cover.

As far as smoke goes, if I can see you firing your guns then I'm going to aim right at them. If there are no guns firing, and I see a smoke screen extending, then I can be pretty sure that there is a ship extending it so I know which end of the smoke to fire at. If I see a smoke screen without any evidence that it contains a ship, other than the fact that it's there, I'll just fire random shots into it to see if I can hit something, just like I would in the Battleship(tm) board game. Once I hit something I then bracket it and fire for effect. It's just common sense (well, and perhaps a bit of military training too), not hacking.

Edited by Snargfargle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
434
[-GPS-]
Members
2,536 posts
25,006 battles
2 hours ago, Snargfargle said:

I seem to be able to continue to hit undetected ships with my Cleveland despite them moving back and forth and changing direction. How can I do this? Well, it's because of the experience I've gleaned from playing 5,000 plus games.

I simply keep track of where ships fall out of detection and think, "now what would I be doing right about now if I were them?" I also look at where there is cover and assume that if there is somebody around then they will probably be utilizing said cover.

As far as smoke goes, if I can see you firing your guns then I'm going to aim right at them. If there are no guns firing, and I see a smoke screen extending, then I can be pretty sure that there is a ship extending it so I know which end of the smoke to fire at. If I see a smoke screen without any evidence that it contains a ship, other than the fact that it's there, I'll just fire random shots into it to see if I can hit something, just like I would in the Battleship(tm) board game. Once I hit something I then bracket it and fire for effect. It's just common sense (well, and perhaps a bit of military training too), not hacking.

I understand all of that and practice it myself. However, there are rare times when a player seems just a bit too good at firing into smoke or after detection drops off. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1,827
[V_KNG]
Beta Testers
9,282 posts
5 hours ago, Crucis said:

HR, I disagree with your opening statement about opening with "to be fair".  When I say "to be fair", what I'm doing usually is addressing some point that a poster with whom I perhaps disagree has made, and saying that his argument isn't entirely wrong.  Most of it might be wrong in my opinion, but there may be things being said where I think that he's right, and THAT is why I feel that it's necessary to say "to be fair".  I want "to be fair" by pointing out where I think said person is right even when I think that much of the rest of what he's said is wrong.

It's perfectly fine to disagree with me. I'm not right at least ten percent of the time. :cap_like: For the more skeptical folks in the crowd though, it is "presumed" an individual is "being fair". 

Quote

To be fair, WG never said moving players was against the rules...

If he'd just written "WG never said moving players was against the rules..." well okay, that's a statement of fact. But adding "to be fair" to the statement indicates - to me - the author's position is not in the middle at all, but leaning away from a neutral, "fair" stance. Semantics I suppose. 

I do like the earlier comments about spirit of the law versus letter of the law. One must also consider the facts unknown by those of us opining about the scenario/situation. We don't know the absolute facts; we have not been informed of them. But... 

We (or so I believe most of us) really do want the companies we spend our money with to be "perceived" as honest, above-board and fair to all players. Especially when it comes to contests. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17
[WB]
Members
117 posts
8,910 battles
8 hours ago, KongoPride said:

Recently, I have been witness to an uptick in threads blatantly calling out Wargaming, Clans, and Individual players as cheaters.  We have all seen it here on the forums, in the game chat and it has been a clear distraction.  Last night I was playing ranked and a player was being bombarded with insults of "cheating" during clan battles/wars.  It was painful to watch becuase the player is good...but clearly not in that clan's senior leadership.  Other times you will catch a ship sailing broadside, use a spotter to catch a cruiser behind an island or RNG will bless you with a lucky salvo.  In any event...you land several citadels and the target is devastatingly struck and sent back to port.  The next thing you see in chat is impossible, hacker, cheater, and I am reporting you!

This leads me to my base argument that I want to debate.  I think the term "cheater" is used a little too liberally in this game by players.  You get killed and lash out.  For me....when I die in such a fashion, I send kudos to the other player.  

There is a huge difference between ethical and unethical and blatant cheating.  Ethical behavior is easy to define...playing the game in its purest form with no modifications.  However, when do mods begin to creep into the area of unethical?  Is it enhancing the music?  Enlarging the minimap beyond what it should be?  Enabling the training room that novice players don't even know about to get an edge up on ship lines?  Using complete mod packs to change the fundamental way the game is portrayed?  And then when do these bleed over from unethical to cheating?  Last known position markers?  Aim bots?  Hacks beyond wasd?  Something a bit lesser, using the chat to offer dubloons for killing other players?  What about premium ships (pay to win)?  What about antagonizing another player in chat to make him/her upset?

Then beyond the individual tree (i.e. player) we need to look at clans.  When does their behavior become unethical?  Playibg low tier ships to seal club?  Diving up to improve win rate?  Sync dropping multiple teams at the same time for in clan battle royal?  Sync dropping same clan players during ranked battles? Or when in a ranked battle with friends and on the same team using voice comms?  How about throwing a match?...or letting a clan mate farm you to save his star at the end during a loss? 

Then there is clan battles/wars.  Modpacks, moving players around to intentionally undermine other clans, moving players around to help weaker players learn competitive play?  There is a lot to be said on this topic and has been posted adnasium in previous threads...many of which are now closed. 

To be fair, WG never said moving players was against the rules...although it may be against the spirit of clan battles and individual clan performance and merit.  Our clan moved people, but we did not do it maliciously.  It was done to help groom new players for a second Supremacy League team and to get more peeps involved in the play.  I lost out on my Stalin flag...so that was my punishment for having fun.

Then, there is Wargaming's piece in all of this.  They have to decide if they are ok with cheating and or unethical behavior.  To me, it seems very clear that they punish cheating when they find it with appropriate bans.  Their role in regard to unethical (but legal) play seems more suspect.  However...where do they lay down the law? 

I am hoping this thread will be a sounding board for those with ideas on how to improve the gaming environment.  For me I think a "cheating" guide needs to be posted outlining what exactly that all entails.

For me, I will continue to play this game for the fun I get from it.  I have and always will use the base game package.  No mods...not even to music....call me a purist.  

Looking for tasteful and constructive conversation here folks...would like to see this thread stay open for at least a few hours.  Please avoid calling out individual players and or clans.

 

Ya im a purist as well...need mods = cant play the game imo.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
204
[-K-]
Members
575 posts
9,344 battles
11 hours ago, KongoPride said:

...

I tried to clear up how to spot iffy behavior:

 

2ci9xys.png

 

;)

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
354
[5D]
Members
1,244 posts
7,213 battles
10 hours ago, Ducky_shot said:

Moving people around to get a team going among a clans sub clans is nothing more than trying to get everyone the wins they needed. Trying to sync drop against one of the top rated typhoon clans to inflict larger point losses against them than if they had played them wit their main sub clan is not fair or ethical play.

There was a forum contest a while back for the most damage inflicted in a certain ship. Some players were trying to rig it. They apparently sync dropped divs against each other and farmed each other for damage. They were dq'ed from the contest after some detective work from some other members. They weren't necessarily rigging the match, but they were dq'ed from the contest anyways because of fair play rules.

 

Do unto others.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
431
[CUTER]
Members
699 posts
18,993 battles
3 hours ago, wadavid said:

I tried to clear up how to spot iffy behavior:

 

2ci9xys.png

 

;)

Why does it have to be this way?

  • Funny 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×