Jump to content


Fair Play Policy Q&A

fair Play Mods

  • Please log in to reply
395 replies to this topic

TheReturned #321 Posted Jan 06 2017 - 09:26

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 17061 battles
  • 321
  • [YOUJO] YOUJO
  • Member since:
    09-27-2013

I may have missed this, but is there a way to appeal if you feel you've been falsely suspended? What would we need to support this?

I haven't been suspended for mods but for some odd reason if do get falsely suspended what would I need as proof that I wasn't using illegal mods?



GS_G3K #322 Posted Jan 06 2017 - 12:01

    Major

  • Players
  • 19586 battles
  • 2,638
  • [RELSH] RELSH
  • Member since:
    01-10-2013

View PostTheReturned, on Jan 06 2017 - 02:26, said:

I may have missed this, but is there a way to appeal if you feel you've been falsely suspended? What would we need to support this?

I haven't been suspended for mods but for some odd reason if do get falsely suspended what would I need as proof that I wasn't using illegal mods?

 

There is no appeal so far according to the posts I have seen, if you got banned it means you were using illegal mods.

 

Maybe you should just avoid all illegal mods?

 

I hope they keep it this way like Steam's VAC system, cheaters should not be given so many chances.



TheReturned #323 Posted Jan 06 2017 - 13:35

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 17061 battles
  • 321
  • [YOUJO] YOUJO
  • Member since:
    09-27-2013

View PostGS_G3K, on Jan 06 2017 - 23:01, said:

 

There is no appeal so far according to the posts I have seen, if you got banned it means you were using illegal mods.

 

Maybe you should just avoid all illegal mods?

 

I hope they keep it this way like Steam's VAC system, cheaters should not be given so many chances.

 

I understand that and like I previously stated I'm not suspended for mods.

The only mod I use is zoom out which has been confirmed legal.

If you think about it two strikes and you're out is really only one warning then it's permanent. I'm not saying I wish for it to be changed, I agree with how strict they're currently being.

What I'm trying to say is in the future if I or anyone I know did get falsely suspended could they support evidence that they weren't using an illegal mod, and if so what files would we need to support it.



QWERTYEel89 #324 Posted Jan 06 2017 - 17:01

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22103 battles
  • 616
  • [GOONZ] GOONZ
  • Member since:
    02-05-2011

As I stated in another thread I'm fine with them cracking down on mods but they have to be on point with their [edited]. Right now it feels more of a which hunt than a set of rules, regulations and enforcement. They give you a very short list of dos and don'ts that gets vague as you scroll. You pretty much have to either hear through the grape vine for some of the more particular mods or, like me either come into this thread and wait days or weeks for an answer or simply know better from years of encountering discussing or being lucky enough to be in the midst of a player who knows a guy, who knows a guy.

 

The "play vanilla" argument is [edited]because a lot of these guys still use mods however small, for starters, and it turn out some mods specifically are not illegal, however, as with many mods come with dual functionality or exist in the context that implies their legality. Such as Webium's Modpack which has been around for ever, using a page on the forums to link to his modpack in which some of the stuff from what I heard apparently is illegal (or slightly illegal). Such as the enemy indicators.  Apparently (I use this word in reference to what I heard in passing) you can use them so long as it isn't set to designate which vehicles have a line-of-sight on you. Of course you can just switch it off so that feature isn't specifically present while playing. That would be fine and dandy If only this information were visible, clear, specific, and legible. Some of it is, the more classic cheats (foliage remover, laser barrel, etc.). Others require you to "find out" as you go, often you find this out by overhearing other players. And don't get me started on stuff that was fine in one patch and no longer fine now. Cobble that with the context of having trustworthy mod sources such as webium advertising their product on the WG forum you would at least get the impression there isn't anything too bad in it. That is until you start asking questions which take days to answer apparently.



XxDaNgErOuSxX #325 Posted Jan 06 2017 - 21:43

    Sergeant

  • Players
  • 19538 battles
  • 150
  • [SOAPS] SOAPS
  • Member since:
    08-30-2013
this game is pretty well corrupted with mods, why not make them all legal and give everyone an opportunity to use them, except for tournies or anything involving a gold or cash award.

CanOfTomatoes #326 Posted Jan 07 2017 - 01:20

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 19674 battles
  • 3,915
  • Member since:
    03-02-2015

View PostXxDaNgErOuSxX, on Jan 06 2017 - 14:43, said:

this game is pretty well corrupted with mods, why not make them all legal and give everyone an opportunity to use them, except for tournies or anything involving a gold or cash award.

 

really Really REALLY...WOW ???????????????

skagalak #327 Posted Jan 07 2017 - 17:13

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 37973 battles
  • 13
  • Member since:
    05-31-2011

Telling a user that using "Mod X" or "feature Z of Modx" is illegal does not in any way reveal the details of the detection system but would definitely give every single player in the community the heads up that the mod or feature in a modpack is illegal and would prevent possibly innocent people from being falsely or unfairly banned. 

 

The current implementation of the fair play policy is blatantly unfair. 



Black_Hawk70 #328 Posted Jan 07 2017 - 23:35

    Captain

  • Players
  • 21659 battles
  • 1,317
  • Member since:
    09-16-2012

View Poststinkybean60, on Nov 15 2016 - 15:13, said:

Question: What is the rationale behind not removing xvm/making it illegal? It doesn't really help you make good decisions, it just tells you (1) who to focus (which isn't a good thing for obv reasons) and (2) who to pick on for being bad (which sometimes is deserved, but seeing as chat was removed partially for that reason...)

 

Question: Why is the white paint mod for dead tanks illegal across some servers? I don't see how it gives an advantage. I've never used it, just find it odd.

 

Sounds like someone doesn't like getting XVM focused.

QWERTYEel89 #329 Posted Jan 08 2017 - 02:17

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 22103 battles
  • 616
  • [GOONZ] GOONZ
  • Member since:
    02-05-2011

View Poststinkybean60, on Nov 15 2016 - 15:13, said:

Question: Why is the white paint mod for dead tanks illegal across some servers? I don't see how it gives an advantage. I've never used it, just find it odd.

 

If you are looking at two similarly skinned tanks (one being dead) from a far or at the very least in max magnification it is a possibility, taking into a account personal component such as being nervous, frustrated, or generally rushing your shot, you may in fact aim for the wrong tank. Having a pasty white model parked in front of something like the new T34 B helps your brain process as minimal information as possible. So, instead of doubting your shot long enough to lose some later-needed hitpoints, you can blast away and call it a day. I have a keyboard that has illuminated keys there fore I don't have to worry about miscalculating prompts as much as if they were simply some drab grey prints. But there is also a setting that turns the brightness up so high I can have to squint blink or even look away. This isn't made any better in the dark or a lowly lit room.

 

TL:DR color contrast makes it easier to differentiate with confidence rather than doubt or screw up altogether.



Arclight58 #330 Posted Jan 08 2017 - 18:45

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 40721 battles
  • 740
  • [_F_] _F_
  • Member since:
    07-29-2011

Since WOT don't have a back up log in authentication like I found some other games networks use like Origin that sends a code to your phone or email each time you log in would a good safeguard for your account.     



MechAttack #331 Posted Jan 09 2017 - 08:38

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 41787 battles
  • 43
  • Member since:
    08-13-2012
I understand the various desire and interest in mods (customization, better tailored info, gain battlefield advantage, etc...).  However, when playing in public format, anything that gives an unfair battle advantage should be banned, period.  Aimbots obviously; mod packs that reveals enemy position not intended by game software should be banned also.  I do agree that WoT needs to be as clear as possible on what are considered illegal, cheats and what's allowed

Wtornado #332 Posted Jan 10 2017 - 13:33

    Captain

  • Players
  • 29837 battles
  • 1,241
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

This is to the Administrator Mr Ghost Prime:

 

Seeing that I have no mods and that WOT has accepted the XVM 

 

Could you please put up the legal version of the XVM link here for

us so that players like me that use no mods can ALL take advantage

of it too.

 

Kind regards,

wtornado

                                                                                                       

 



Wtornado #333 Posted Jan 10 2017 - 14:01

    Captain

  • Players
  • 29837 battles
  • 1,241
  • Member since:
    04-24-2011

To Administrator Mr Ghost Prime.

 

Is this the legal version of the XVM we are suppose to download?

 

v9.17.0.1 #22 (09-01-2017) mod friendly.

 

Usually the games I play when they allow 3rd party mods they put up the approved links

of the mods they deem ­legal  and virus free.

 

 

I am just asking if you endorse a mod can please post it officially on this site on this

so we can stay legal and abide by the game rules?

 

Kind regards,

wtornado



Winterpeger #334 Posted Jan 11 2017 - 06:52

    Captain

  • Players
  • 49311 battles
  • 1,697
  • [DD-S] DD-S
  • Member since:
    10-25-2011

View PostWtornado, on Jan 10 2017 - 07:01, said:

Is this the legal version of the XVM we are suppose to download?

 

v9.17.0.1 #22 (09-01-2017) mod friendly.

 

Based on the "v9.17.0.1 # 22", that looks like Aslain's modpack.  Its not just xvm.



Fbomb #335 Posted Jan 11 2017 - 20:10

    Captain

  • Players
  • 22066 battles
  • 1,635
  • [T_K_O] T_K_O
  • Member since:
    05-10-2011
I believe, out of a modpack like Aslain's, you can select the bare-minimum (which would just be stats?)

Oddball_64 #336 Posted Jan 13 2017 - 10:53

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 14939 battles
  • 12
  • [DIG-A] DIG-A
  • Member since:
    01-07-2013

well you may be looking at it, but why don't you come on at night and start monitoring your game!!!! there are so many illegal mods being run it's not even funny. Aim bot + galore, beefed up armor, shooting through hills, rocks, buildings.  pretty much ruining this game. start getting monitors to watch games and if you already have that then you need a lot more. and there is no reason a person should loose 15-20 matches in a row, the probability of that happening is crazy but it happens all the time at night when the cheaters are on line.  going from 48% to 46 % in a few hour period is not fun., Maybe if mm was fixed then the games wouldn't seem so rigged. Sorry to vent but I'm tired of getting hit from across the map by some cheat that couldn't hit a building right in front of them without their illegal mods.



Apache1990 #337 Posted Jan 13 2017 - 21:35

    Major

  • Players
  • 32238 battles
  • 6,206
  • [ATKRE] ATKRE
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011

View PostOddball_64, on Jan 13 2017 - 04:53, said:

Aim bot + galore, beefed up armor, shooting through hills, rocks, buildings.  pretty much ruining this game.

 

You just listed basically all the things that are completely impossible to do with mods, because tank statistics, fire control, and terrain objects are modeled server side.

Oddball_64 #338 Posted Jan 14 2017 - 05:33

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 14939 battles
  • 12
  • [DIG-A] DIG-A
  • Member since:
    01-07-2013

View PostApache1990, on Jan 13 2017 - 13:35, said:

 

You just listed basically all the things that are completely impossible to do with mods, because tank statistics, fire control, and terrain objects are modeled server side.

 

​Sir you are mistaken, WG has said that mods can and do change things in the game including aim bot + ,read back through the forums and the posts. I love the game just tired of people exploiting it. Matter of fact go look up some of the mods that are out there. WG just needs to get a better handle on it, I know they are trying.

Apache1990 #339 Posted Jan 14 2017 - 05:41

    Major

  • Players
  • 32238 battles
  • 6,206
  • [ATKRE] ATKRE
  • Member since:
    06-16-2011

View PostOddball_64, on Jan 13 2017 - 23:33, said:

​Sir you are mistaken, WG has said that mods can and do change things in the game including aim bot + ,read back through the forums and the posts. I love the game just tired of people exploiting it. Matter of fact go look up some of the mods that are out there. WG just needs to get a better handle on it, I know they are trying.

 

I bolded the things that are impossible, and there is no question that they can't be done by any mod.

 

Everyone knows aimbots are possible, and that there are some being used, but you can't shoot through terrain/objects, change armor, penetration, or anything like that.



mrholsy #340 Posted Jan 14 2017 - 22:33

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 20057 battles
  • 74
  • [DHO-X] DHO-X
  • Member since:
    01-26-2014

What is the status on the "autoaim indication" mod? I saw it show up in the OMC modpack today, but assumed that it was an illegal one.







Also tagged with fair Play, Mods

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users