Jump to content


Fair Play Policy Update: Summer 2018


  • Please log in to reply
158 replies to this topic

iDestroya #141 Posted Jul 19 2018 - 10:31

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 52237 battles
  • 999
  • [LMAO] LMAO
  • Member since:
    06-06-2011
Did any of you who got banned while using the most popular modpacks - did you install the auto aim mods that are in those modpacks? Maybe they contain AIMBOTS in there and THAT'S why you got BANNED.

XoXSciFiGuy #142 Posted Jul 19 2018 - 10:42

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 28916 battles
  • 23
  • Member since:
    05-27-2013

This is my opinion on the whole 'mods' thing:

 

Illegal cheat files have been created by 'third party providers' since the 1990's, and have ruined many online games since that time. 

 

The ONLY solution to this problem is to allow WOT to provide you ALL the files in your game folder, otherwise one way or another, the game isn't fair. 

 

I fully support the idea of banning EVERYONE and ANYONE who adds a single outside file to the files provided by World of Tanks to the game folders on your computer. This is the ONLY way to ensure a level playing field for everyone. Anything else is baloney. 

 

If you are running a single file not provided by WOT, and you are reading this now, you should reinstall the game with ONLY the files provided by WOT. I have personally seen aimbot and other files completely ruin the game experience time after time. These folks often come online late at night in the USA. I end up just closing the game and waiting for later, sometimes. And personally, I am tired of it. 



Springfield_Fats #143 Posted Jul 19 2018 - 13:48

    Sergeant

  • -Players-
  • 10300 battles
  • 232
  • Member since:
    11-04-2014
Where are the people that say it's impossible to cheat in this game because of how it's designed? Funnily enough they seem to not come to these threads.

Coffee_ #144 Posted Jul 19 2018 - 16:18

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 43236 battles
  • 432
  • [AO] AO
  • Member since:
    06-17-2011

View Postkebab6597, on Jul 05 2018 - 11:47, said:

Thanks for the update nice to see there are still players getting banned for being cheating scum sucking cretins

 

Such a pity its WG,s policy to keep the names of the cheats a secret it would be nice to have the cheats names streamed across the server in the same way punk busted used to do it was always kind of reassuring when cheats names where streamed live in some of the older FPS games

 

Yes.. DO IT.. Post the cheaters on the wall of shame!

_Tsavo_ #145 Posted Jul 19 2018 - 16:24

    Major

  • Players
  • 40615 battles
  • 16,546
  • [PBKAC] PBKAC
  • Member since:
    02-16-2011

View PostSpringfield_Fats, on Jul 19 2018 - 07:48, said:

Where are the people that say it's impossible to cheat in this game because of how it's designed? Funnily enough they seem to not come to these threads.

 

I don't think there's many saying its impossible to cheat.

Corpral_punishment #146 Posted Jul 19 2018 - 20:05

    Private

  • Players
  • 10604 battles
  • 7
  • [-A1D] -A1D
  • Member since:
    11-02-2011

I truly do not know why Wargaming is a company that works so hard at trying to destroy itself. I have been a member of my current Clan since November 2011. I had played the game for at least a year before that.

 

I admit that I have been using the Aslains Modpack for at least 3 years now. The funny thing is I just logged into the premium shop to purchase one of the deals that would give me gold, silver and premium time for a year.

 

I have two sons and two cousins that play the game. For years I have spent who knows how much money on the game. Christmas gift cards, birthday cards, plain old Awards for good grades, and God knows what other reasons. I happen to read the news before making the purchase. I am glad that I did. Now to find out that's some of the mods in the Aslains Modpack may get you banned. This would be after spending another $100.00 to purchase an annual plan. I don't even know if I am going lose my account because there may be some unacceptable modifications in the mod pack. That makes me very hesitant to drop such a large sum of money when I may lose my account. As usual they really need to get their act together.

 

This is just one more example of Wargaming shooting themselves in the foot. Here I am ready to spend money and now I'm hesitant to do so.



Taggeth #147 Posted Jul 19 2018 - 20:55

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 11249 battles
  • 550
  • [FRAY] FRAY
  • Member since:
    06-23-2012

View PostSarcon7, on Jul 18 2018 - 18:17, said:

 

Well, to release any name it will imply there is evidence to prove they were actually cheating in the first place.  Not even the banned people was given the evidence regarding why they were banned.  Saying they were cheating without providing it with evidence, means crap and it is a violation of the player's HUMAN RIGHTS.  Posting names of banned accounts for doing CHEATING will be even worse as this will put those players in the mouth of others who already played the role of judge, jury and executioner in their minds without even knowing there is no hard evidence to prove it. If you were in the banned people's position where they were only told the following line:

 

Before punishing a player, our team will review the case to ensure it's warrantedWe’re asking you to trust their decisions. Our Team is under no obligation to provide evidence or explain which type of mod/bot the player was found to be using, and will not do so even if requested.

 

How will you react if you truly believe it is NOT TRUE? will you really trust WG? FK No of course. Let's review what the Universal Declaration of Human Rights says and how it may apply to this game.

 

According to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, article 11, it states: "Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.".  In the WoT virtual world, partial and permanent banning is the highest punishment a player can get hence it compares to a penal sanction in the real world.  Presumption of Innocence principle should be a legal right of the accused player who WG says he or she has "CHEATED"The burden of proof is thus on the prosecution (WG), which must collect and present compelling evidence to the trier of fact.  Providing the evidence to the accused is the least WG should do. 

 

Now, for those who have used the famous Appeal process for such bannings, you may have experience how crappy this process is as WG only replies and close tickets immediately without caring for what you said.  If we agree WG should acknowledge the Human Rights of the players, then this Appeal process should include the evidence for the accused to present a defense.  Human Rights ask for a trial of some sort and in normal law, a trial is where the parties should present information (in the form of evidence)  to someone with authority to adjudicate claims or disputes. There is no such process in WG and they are committing a HUMAN RIGHTS VIOLATION by not giving the accused the evidence supporting their actions and not providing a forum for them to defend themselves.

 

This Fair Play Policy is a complete joke and its application is in clear violation of the PLAYERS HUMAN RIGHTS

 

 

What planet are you from?  Players Human Rights?

 

When you installed the game you gave your consent to their EULA and TOS.  If anything, you violated your own rights.  You had a very specific opportunity to refuse to let them treat you this way by refusing those 2 contracts and uninstalling the game. 

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not condoning their Fair Play Policy actions.  I've spent a lot of money over the past 4-5 years and would be seriously upset to get my account locked and not be told why.  But facts are facts.  You agreed to play their game under their terms, not yours.  Don't scream human rights violations when you don't have a rats a$$ idea what you're talking about.



netraveler68 #148 Posted Jul 20 2018 - 04:20

    Private

  • -Players-
  • 12029 battles
  • 2
  • [TAP] TAP
  • Member since:
    04-12-2011

View PostKarma_Chameleon, on Jul 06 2018 - 08:37, said:

Fair Play... What fair play?  People are cheating because they can't compete with experienced players dominating the lineup... Higher tier players seal-clubbing the new players, or less experienced players.  People also cheat because wargaming does nothing about the bullying and in-game victimization.  However I believe the biggest reason players cheat is because of the two tier difference in the battle lineups.  It is hard for players to compete with a one tier differential, but to have a two tier difference, well watch the bullies come out to play, watch the arrogant seal-clubbers whinge, and watch all the lower tier players suicide or hide.  Fair Play you say... there is no fair play when it comes to battles, so I can understand why people take the risks they do, after all this can all be resolved by not allowing any mods at all, and by making sure there is only a one tier difference in battles.  As far as I can see it is only wargaming winning here, WG wins by generating income from players trying to buy gold or premium tanks to succeed in battles with two tier differences, when that doesn't work, players resort to cheating to have some kind of balance in their favor....  I am not a modder by the way, but can see why people do, this game is frustrating at the best of times, but worse when you play really well and still get harassed for individual efforts, yet still lose battles because players are intimidated, or don't have the tank balance to compete against the enemy lineup.   

 

SO TRUE!!

malfrat77 #149 Posted Jul 20 2018 - 07:49

    Corporal

  • -Players-
  • 45291 battles
  • 73
  • [JMSQC] JMSQC
  • Member since:
    04-09-2015

WG fighting cheaters using illegal mods ? what a fkn joke, first put protected file signature on each file from your game, there's like 17 methods to do this stuff to prevent game starting with unwanted file modifications, Wg you love mods ? ok so do your job and ask mod devs to send you thoses mods to approve em with the file signature before they can be loaded in the game , even an incompetent game dev know this stuff like fkn seriously... even some software devs selling a crappy 10$ software having better protection on their softwaer integrity, This problem is well known for many years, so lazy and so stupid that you prefer taking the money from cheaters and run,

 

i don't belive you and have no hope in you anymore wg, die in hell


Edited by malfrat77, Jul 20 2018 - 08:17.


Sarcon7 #150 Posted Jul 20 2018 - 14:02

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 33021 battles
  • 73
  • Member since:
    01-29-2011

View Postblack_colt, on Jul 19 2018 - 01:51, said:

 

Please cite case law where this is a penal offense [punishment for breaking the law] under the Universal Declaration of Human Rights for Wargaming to suspend an account under the EULA that the account owner agreed to be bound to by clicking through the dialog box [click-through license] on/after 15 June 2018.

 

Just so it is clear what I am asking - case law is a set of past rulings that are considered precedent.  Precedent is a rule established in a previous legal case that is binding on or persuasive for a court when deciding subsequent case with similar issues or facts.

 

 

black_colt, thanks for your reply.  

 

In my comment yesterday, I used an analogy to illustrate a point by comparing 1) HOW WG applies punishment under the Fair Play Policy in the virtual world versus 2) the way a penal punishment is applied in the real world.  In both scenarios, virtual and real world, these are the extreme punishments applied under the respective laws (EULA for virtual and normal Laws for real world).  Everytime I read this topic I see other players judging and asking for names and such.  I guess they want to harass those players somehow but the truth is, WG made this decision under the cover of an EULA without providing evidence to the affected parties and impacting their virtual lives.  To me, that is against the players' Human Rights as no proof nor opportunity to a real appeal was given.  Now these players are marked as CHEATERS by the community and in some cases, they don't even know why? (just read all prior post if you don't know what I am talking about)

 

Let's review the Human Rights Principles common definition so they can be applied under this context:

 

Human rights are moral principles or norms that describe certain standards of human behaviour and are regularly protected as natural and legal rights in municipal and international law.  They are commonly understood as inalienablefundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being" and which are "inherent in all human beings", regardless of their nation, location, language, religion, ethnic origin or any other status. They are applicable everywhere and at every time in the sense of being universal, and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for everyone. They are regarded as requiring empathy and the rule of law and imposing an obligation on persons to respect the human rights of others, and it is generally considered that they should not be taken away except as a result of due process based on specific circumstances.

 

I truly believe the application of the FAIR PLAY POLICY is against the inalienable human rights, not the policy itself.  Regardless of the fact the EULA may state that WG can do whatever they want without notifying the player, this doesn't exempt them to consider the Human Rights of the affected players.


Edited by Sarcon7, Jul 20 2018 - 14:16.


black_colt #151 Posted Jul 20 2018 - 16:11

    Major

  • -Players-
  • 3641 battles
  • 2,601
  • Member since:
    01-11-2015

View PostSarcon7, on Jul 20 2018 - 05:02, said:

 

black_colt, thanks for your reply.  

 

In my comment yesterday, I used an analogy to illustrate a point by comparing 1) HOW WG applies punishment under the Fair Play Policy in the virtual world versus 2) the way a penal punishment is applied in the real world.  In both scenarios, virtual and real world, these are the extreme punishments applied under the respective laws (EULA for virtual and normal Laws for real world).  Everytime I read this topic I see other players judging and asking for names and such.  I guess they want to harass those players somehow but the truth is, WG made this decision under the cover of an EULA without providing evidence to the affected parties and impacting their virtual lives.  To me, that is against the players' Human Rights as no proof nor opportunity to a real appeal was given.  Now these players are marked as CHEATERS by the community and in some cases, they don't even know why? (just read all prior post if you don't know what I am talking about)

 

Let's review the Human Rights Principles common definition so they can be applied under this context:

 

Human rights are moral principles or norms that describe certain standards of human behaviour and are regularly protected as natural and legal rights in municipal and international law.  They are commonly understood as inalienablefundamental rights "to which a person is inherently entitled simply because she or he is a human being" and which are "inherent in all human beings", regardless of their nation, location, language, religion, ethnic origin or any other status. They are applicable everywhere and at every time in the sense of being universal, and they are egalitarian in the sense of being the same for everyone. They are regarded as requiring empathy and the rule of law and imposing an obligation on persons to respect the human rights of others, and it is generally considered that they should not be taken away except as a result of due process based on specific circumstances.

 

I truly believe the application of the FAIR PLAY POLICY is against the inalienable human rights, not the policy itself.  Regardless of the fact the EULA may state that WG can do whatever they want without notifying the player, this doesn't exempt them to consider the Human Rights of the affected players.

 

You are entitled to that belief.  I do not share that belief that The Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UN General Assembly Resolution 217A] applies to any of the last paragraph of your reply.

 

Why?

 

After carefully reading The Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UN General Assembly Resolution 217A] ["Resolution"] - http://www.un.org/en...n-human-rights/IMHO the only part of the Resolution that you could apply to this situation [context] is Article 17 [2] - No one should be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

 

For this you must have ownership of property. As property is not defined in the Resolution you would need to prove that virtual goods meet that definition.

 

This is further complicated by this section of the EULA that users agreed to bound by:

 

5.4 Ownership of Your Account. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY HEREIN, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU SHALL HAVE NO OWNERSHIP OR OTHER PROPERTY INTEREST IN YOUR ACCOUNT, AND THAT ALL RIGHTS IN AND TO YOUR ACCOUNT ARE AND SHALL FOREVER BE OWNED BY AND INURE TO THE BENEFIT OF WARGAMING. YOU FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO CLAIM, RIGHT, TITLE, OWNERSHIP, OR OTHER PROPRIETARY INTEREST IN THE ADDITIONAL FEATURES (AS DEFINED BELOW) THAT YOU UNLOCK OR ACCUMULATE, REGARDLESS OF ANY CONSIDERATION OFFERED OR PAID IN EXCHANGE FOR SUCH ADDITIONAL FEATURES. FURTHERMORE, WARGAMING SHALL NOT BE LIABLE IN ANY MANNER FOR THE DESTRUCTION, DELETION, MODIFICATION, IMPAIRMENT, HACKING, OR ANY OTHER DAMAGE OR LOSS OF ANY KIND CAUSED TO THE GAME CONTENT OR ADDITIONAL FEATURES, INCLUDING THE DELETION OF GAME CONTENT OR ADDITIONAL FEATURES UPON THE TERMINATION OR EXPIRATION OF YOUR ACCOUNT.

 

As this section clearly states that you have agreed to have no ownership or property interest and as such IMHO Article 17 [2] cannot be applied/used.

 

Also note the word [arbitrarily] in Article 17 [2] - that generally means [on the basis of random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system].  This is potentially fatal to any argument as you would have to prove that Wargaming revoked the user account on random choice or personal whim versus this is a prohibited mod and we have applied the same sanction to all users of this prohibited mod.

 

Applying Article 30 to this context may work but you would have to show how Wargaming [... perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights...] as you would need to show that the [click-through license] you agreed to be bound to is invalid.

 

I would recommend another venue - disputing directly with Wargaming and not through the Forum.

 

How do you do this?

 

If you have a dispute with the EULA and an action by Wargaming under the EULA then there are two clauses in the EULA for this:

 

24. Governing Law and Jurisdiction and 25. Dispute Resolution and Arbitration

 

 


Edited by black_colt, Jul 20 2018 - 16:17.


Sarcon7 #152 Posted Jul 20 2018 - 19:39

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 33021 battles
  • 73
  • Member since:
    01-29-2011

View Postblack_colt, on Jul 20 2018 - 15:11, said:

 

You are entitled to that belief.  I do not share that belief that The Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UN General Assembly Resolution 217A] applies to any of the last paragraph of your reply.

 

Why?

 

After carefully reading The Universal Declaration of Human Rights [UN General Assembly Resolution 217A] ["Resolution"] - http://www.un.org/en...n-human-rights/IMHO the only part of the Resolution that you could apply to this situation [context] is Article 17 [2] - No one should be arbitrarily deprived of his property.

 

For this you must have ownership of property. As property is not defined in the Resolution you would need to prove that virtual goods meet that definition.

 

This is further complicated by this section of the EULA that users agreed to bound by:

 

5.4 Ownership of Your Account. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY HEREIN, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU SHALL HAVE NO OWNERSHIP OR OTHER PROPERTY INTEREST IN YOUR ACCOUNT, AND THAT ALL RIGHTS IN AND TO YOUR ACCOUNT ARE AND SHALL FOREVER BE OWNED BY AND INURE TO THE BENEFIT OF WARGAMING. YOU FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO CLAIM, RIGHT, TITLE, OWNERSHIP, OR OTHER PROPRIETARY INTEREST IN THE ADDITIONAL FEATURES (AS DEFINED BELOW) THAT YOU UNLOCK OR ACCUMULATE, REGARDLESS OF ANY CONSIDERATION OFFERED OR PAID IN EXCHANGE FOR SUCH ADDITIONAL FEATURES. FURTHERMORE, WARGAMING SHALL NOT BE LIABLE IN ANY MANNER FOR THE DESTRUCTION, DELETION, MODIFICATION, IMPAIRMENT, HACKING, OR ANY OTHER DAMAGE OR LOSS OF ANY KIND CAUSED TO THE GAME CONTENT OR ADDITIONAL FEATURES, INCLUDING THE DELETION OF GAME CONTENT OR ADDITIONAL FEATURES UPON THE TERMINATION OR EXPIRATION OF YOUR ACCOUNT.

 

As this section clearly states that you have agreed to have no ownership or property interest and as such IMHO Article 17 [2] cannot be applied/used.

 

Also note the word [arbitrarily] in Article 17 [2] - that generally means [on the basis of random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system].  This is potentially fatal to any argument as you would have to prove that Wargaming revoked the user account on random choice or personal whim versus this is a prohibited mod and we have applied the same sanction to all users of this prohibited mod.

 

Applying Article 30 to this context may work but you would have to show how Wargaming [... perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights...] as you would need to show that the [click-through license] you agreed to be bound to is invalid.

 

I would recommend another venue - disputing directly with Wargaming and not through the Forum.

 

How do you do this?

 

If you have a dispute with the EULA and an action by Wargaming under the EULA then there are two clauses in the EULA for this:

 

24. Governing Law and Jurisdiction and 25. Dispute Resolution and Arbitration

 

 

Sadly black_colt, as I stated before, I have tried the venues through support or appeal process which were a joke.  All that is left is sharing my experience and expressing my oppinion about it in the forums.  I personally know WG doesn't give a crap and I don't expect anything at this time.  The threat is active for a perma ban and WG will enforce it using any excuse they want.  As of now, I am not playing any more as I don't want to risk losing all the tanks I have researched and the premium tanks I have bought (they are a lot).  Your post shares a great point regarding how, even on paid items, we players don't have property on them.  Makes you wonder why to waste money in the first place.

 

We will see what the future holds...



Lexers615 #153 Posted Yesterday, 04:43 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15308 battles
  • 360
  • [ZOMB] ZOMB
  • Member since:
    11-01-2013
Guys, relax... The  only cheaters WG bans are the ones using Warpack, and that's solely done based on copyright laws infringement, as Warpack studios always refused to pay WG a liscence while they used to rent their cheats. I'd be curious to ask all the cheaters in this thread that complain about being sanctionned where their cheats came from. Any remotely tied to Warpack studios, or whateva name they go by now? Still, when then WoT underground comunity benchmarked all the available botting mods, Warpack studios bots boasted a 49-50% winrate, sometimes peaking at 52% depending on the time of the day. When asked, they said it was thanks to they keyboard emulation drivers that their mods could remain undetected. The other real bans are the scambots in general, hangar scambots in particuliar. Other than that, WG fully condone trolling, modding and cheating, as modders, cheaters and trolls are hardcore wallet warriors. Scroll up for this example:

View PostCorpral_punishment, on Jul 19 2018 - 14:05, said:

I truly do not know why Wargaming is a company that works so hard at trying to destroy itself. I have been a member of my current Clan since November 2011. I had played the game for at least a year before that.

 

I admit that I have been using the Aslains Modpack for at least 3 years now. The funny thing is I just logged into the premium shop to purchase one of the deals that would give me gold, silver and premium time for a year.

 

I have two sons and two cousins that play the game. For years I have spent who knows how much money on the game. Christmas gift cards, birthday cards, plain old Awards for good grades, and God knows what other reasons. I happen to read the news before making the purchase. I am glad that I did. Now to find out that's some of the mods in the Aslains Modpack may get you banned. This would be after spending another $100.00 to purchase an annual plan. I don't even know if I am going lose my account because there may be some unacceptable modifications in the mod pack. That makes me very hesitant to drop such a large sum of money when I may lose my account. As usual they really need to get their act together.

 

This is just one more example of Wargaming shooting themselves in the foot. Here I am ready to spend money and now I'm hesitant to do so.

The guy admits having been cheating for years, admits spend hundreds of dollars yearly on the game, and then say cheaters shouldn't be banned. I'm pretty sure if we looked at that guy post history, we'll find that he denies modding, he says that modders are a minority of the active players, etc...

 

I personally have also been penalized. I've had two forum warnings, a forum strike, and a 24h chat ban. At some point, in another thread, I referred to WG costumer support staff as "criminal grade". Got me a forum strike subsequently reduced to a forum warning... (Meanwhile, I've seen a lot worse ingame in the team chat; but I'm the one who got the warning.). In another thread, a mod appologist asked me to provide quotes regarding cheating in soccer mode. I did. He then reported me for "providing a link to illicit/illegal content" and that got me a forum strike. (Meanwhile, I've seen a lot worse ingame in the team chat; but I'm the one who got the warning.). I also tend to be hot tempered and I usually reply to battle chat trolls. That got me a 24h chat ban in WoWs. When it happens, WG doesn't penalize all involved parties, but only the ones that spent the less ingame reports on the others... A similar situation got me a forum warning in WoWp forum.

 

Most streamers openly use botting and aimbotting mods and troll their vanilla client victims LIVE and WG does nothing. At some point, a streamer I was watching went AFK to get a beer can and his Challenger just kept fighting, undisturbed. I reported some such streamers. Last I checked they still openly botted and aimbotted. Guys, WG doesn't care at all about cheating. Want me to spam it 5 times? WG doesn't care at all about cheating. WG doesn't care at all about cheating. WG doesn't care at all about cheating. WG doesn't care at all about cheating. WG doesn't care at all about cheating.

 

How many scambots do you think there are/were around? Last spring, I maxed out my blacklist and had to purge it. Took me quite a while: I had several hundreds of those. Last update, the PM message bar in hangar was three screen wide (when using the arrows to scroll) all scambots either offerring me gold at a discount or stat padding services to boost my winrate, unlock marks of excellence grind tanks, etc.... As I'm far from being the sole player being targetted by scambots, and since scambots accounts apparently have a 24h life expectancy, I'll venture the guess that, at last update, WG must have penalized/banned 400 to 600 scambot accounts (7 days ban on a "temporary"/never to be used again account?). I could be wrong, but I don't think I'm that far off. I'm fairly confident that well over 90% of the so-called "Fairplay policy" victims are scambots...

 

Trolling? In some other thread, a guy was trolling on "thin-skinned players" saying that it was soooooo unfair that he had to go throught his tenth warnings/strikes for chat abuse/hangar trolling. 10th warning/strike out of a so-called 3 strikes system.

 

The reason WG doesn't ban cheaters: Wallet warrioring. They ban Warpackers, scambots, and make up numbers to make it look like they are addressing the issue while they don't give a crap.

 

Unaddressed cheating and trolling is the major cause of attrition. On average, WoT loses 50% of it's active player base every 2 years. 4 years ago, at peak hours, there used to be nearly 40k players on NAEast, and 30-35k players on NAWest. At some point, I read that the combined total of NAEast and NAWest was 90k years ago during the holidays. Could be true. Lastly, I've never seen more than 25k players online at peak hours, and the kids are out of school for the Summer. At the same time, RU severs boast having well over 1M players online at peak hours. China servers are said to have maybe 300-400k players at peak hours but I've never seen anything official about it. I've also read inconsistent info on EU server, sometimes saying 50k, sometimes 200k. I don't know and I don't care. I neither know nor care about other servers (Pac, SEA). What matters is that, in NACentral, kids found better games that are not pay-to-wins. Most players (nearly 75%) found better games. I found other games, yet for some BDSM reason I didn't fully quit playing though I should have had. Maybe I missed some recent exceptionnal peak hours. Let's say I did. Let's say that the numbers I previously quoted are rubbish. Still, WoT servers got merged for a good reason as occupancy dropped substantially (both in WoT, WoWs and WoWp) and no longer justified having two different servers running. All that, thanks to unaddressed cheating and trolling. Who do you think stops playing first? The vanilla players who are pissed, or the aimbotters that troll on them?

 

In order to smokescreen the issue, the cheaters "consortium" started ranting against arties. So, instead of addressing the cheating issues, WG started working on nerfing the arties. They nerfed the arties. Did it help attrition? Then, WG started making numbers up in order to fake addressing the issue, and named the process "Fairplay policy". Doesn't work. So WG now started selling the rare vehicles they said they'd never be selling ever ever again. We now see Pz.B2, T7, GroBTraktor, Type 64 for example in the Premium SHop. You've all seen the offers somewhere. (Maybe even I'll finaly be able to get a Sexton I? I should have bought it when it was $6,99! I digress...). Will it help attrition? I'm pretty sure it won't.

 

Bottom line: this game started dying 4 years ago when WG decided not to address the already rampant cheating issue... And, of course, WG felonious grade "customer support" is no stranger to the attrition as well... (As I said, referring to them as "criminal grade" once got me a forum warning... Meanwhile, I've seen a lot worse ingame in the team chat; but I'm the one who got the warning.). So far that I'm concerned, I'd be quite happy if WG would reimburse me the $400ish I spent over the years to then go out of business. Quite a few people would be happy that way. Won't happen.



Lexers615 #154 Posted Yesterday, 06:54 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15308 battles
  • 360
  • [ZOMB] ZOMB
  • Member since:
    11-01-2013

View Postblack_colt, on Jul 20 2018 - 10:11, said:

For this you must have ownership of property. As property is not defined in the Resolution you would need to prove that virtual goods meet that definition.

 

This is further complicated by this section of the EULA that users agreed to bound by:

 

5.4 Ownership of Your Account. NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY HEREIN, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU SHALL HAVE NO OWNERSHIP OR OTHER PROPERTY INTEREST IN YOUR ACCOUNT, AND THAT ALL RIGHTS IN AND TO YOUR ACCOUNT ARE AND SHALL FOREVER BE OWNED BY AND INURE TO THE BENEFIT OF WARGAMING. YOU FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO CLAIM, RIGHT, TITLE, OWNERSHIP, OR OTHER PROPRIETARY INTEREST IN THE ADDITIONAL FEATURES (AS DEFINED BELOW) THAT YOU UNLOCK OR ACCUMULATE, REGARDLESS OF ANY CONSIDERATION OFFERED OR PAID IN EXCHANGE FOR SUCH ADDITIONAL FEATURES. FURTHERMORE, WARGAMING SHALL NOT BE LIABLE IN ANY MANNER FOR THE DESTRUCTION, DELETION, MODIFICATION, IMPAIRMENT, HACKING, OR ANY OTHER DAMAGE OR LOSS OF ANY KIND CAUSED TO THE GAME CONTENT OR ADDITIONAL FEATURES, INCLUDING THE DELETION OF GAME CONTENT OR ADDITIONAL FEATURES UPON THE TERMINATION OR EXPIRATION OF YOUR ACCOUNT.

 

As this section clearly states that you have agreed to have no ownership or property interest and as such IMHO Article 17 [2] cannot be applied/used.

 

Also note the word [arbitrarily] in Article 17 [2] - that generally means [on the basis of random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system].  This is potentially fatal to any argument as you would have to prove that Wargaming revoked the user account on random choice or personal whim versus this is a prohibited mod and we have applied the same sanction to all users of this prohibited mod.

 

Applying Article 30 to this context may work but you would have to show how Wargaming [... perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights...] as you would need to show that the [click-through license] you agreed to be bound to is invalid.

 

I would recommend another venue - disputing directly with Wargaming and not through the Forum.

 

How do you do this?

 

If you have a dispute with the EULA and an action by Wargaming under the EULA then there are two clauses in the EULA for this:

 

24. Governing Law and Jurisdiction and 25. Dispute Resolution and Arbitration

 

 

Okay, let's drop the peuso lawyerism and forum wiki-lawyers... First of all, contracts never have the same strength as actual laws. Many jurisdictions have laws precluding jurisdiction transfers like this one, and most have laws forbidding a contract to includes clauses that result in unreasonable rights deprivations. In such cases, such clauses are void, no matter if you click, sign, swear, etc... In other word, if your state/province says that contacts can't include such a clause, WG has the leisure to decline doing business with the residents of said jurisdiction. That would mean not doing business with more than half of the people living in the US, and arguably 40% of the Canadian people. However, if they do business with them, then the local laws apply, and the usual contract is more or less void and meaningless, either in parts or in the whole, no matter how much BS they put in the TOS and EULA.

 

Second, what the guy intially said was more about presumption of innocence and the burden of proving guilt. Even when it comes to administrative justice, one has the right to be presumed innocent until proven guilty, though administrative justice burden is a lot less than criminal justice (in other words, "far beyond any and all reasonable doubt" does not apply here). In other words, if the HR head calls you to their office because they want to fire you based on claims that you underperformed, they have to presume you're innocent and they have to prove you're guilty in order to fire you. Otherwise, you can sue them.

 

Now, should people accused of cheating have a fair chance to plead that they didn't cheat in any way? I think so ... at a cost. If a guy using Warpack get caught and is getting a 7 days ban wants to appeal saying he didn't use Warpack, he should be entitled to. If he wins, he should be entitled to some compensation for having been unfairly accused etc... However, at that point, I think that if it's proven he cheated, the 7 days ban should be a 60 days ban instead. Just like when you get a fine, challenge it, and lose in court.



Lexers615 #155 Posted Yesterday, 07:06 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15308 battles
  • 360
  • [ZOMB] ZOMB
  • Member since:
    11-01-2013

View PostXoXSciFiGuy, on Jul 19 2018 - 04:42, said:

This is my opinion on the whole 'mods' thing:

 

Illegal cheat files have been created by 'third party providers' since the 1990's, and have ruined many online games since that time. 

 

The ONLY solution to this problem is to allow WOT to provide you ALL the files in your game folder, otherwise one way or another, the game isn't fair. 

 

I fully support the idea of banning EVERYONE and ANYONE who adds a single outside file to the files provided by World of Tanks to the game folders on your computer. This is the ONLY way to ensure a level playing field for everyone. Anything else is baloney. 

 

If you are running a single file not provided by WOT, and you are reading this now, you should reinstall the game with ONLY the files provided by WOT. I have personally seen aimbot and other files completely ruin the game experience time after time. These folks often come online late at night in the USA. I end up just closing the game and waiting for later, sometimes. And personally, I am tired of it. 

I remember a few years ago playing Team Fortress on a special server. To join the server, you had to consent to be hash scanned when joining a battle and then to be subject to random hash scan. Failing one resulted in a more scrutinious scan and failing it got you kicked/banned. It was very easy in the 90s. Today, it would be even easier, as HDD are a lot faster and there aren't that many relevant files/processes to scan. Imagine those unicoms being constantly kicked from battles, ruining their so precious stats... However, cheaters are usually also wallet warriors (you know, the guys that claim never having spent a dime on the game but are always premium when posting battle report screenshots and owns nearly all off the tiers VIII premium tanks?), and WG doesn't want to lose money...



Sarcon7 #156 Posted Yesterday, 07:32 AM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 33021 battles
  • 73
  • Member since:
    01-29-2011

View PostLexers615, on Jul 21 2018 - 05:54, said:

Now, should people accused of cheating have a fair chance to plead that they didn't cheat in any way? I think so ... at a cost. If a guy using Warpack get caught and is getting a 7 days ban wants to appeal saying he didn't use Warpack, he should be entitled to. If he wins, he should be entitled to some compensation for having been unfairly accused etc... However, at that point, I think that if it's proven he cheated, the 7 days ban should be a 60 days ban instead. Just like when you get a fine, challenge it, and lose in court.

Exactly my point Lexers.  That is what a real appeal system should look like in this game but, it is not like that.  You submit a ticket to find out what happened and WG closed it, replying back basically saying "because you cheat, and we won't tell you why we think you cheat as we don't have to...so eat it"



Sarcon7 #157 Posted Yesterday, 07:44 AM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 33021 battles
  • 73
  • Member since:
    01-29-2011

View PostLexers615, on Jul 21 2018 - 03:43, said:

Bottom line: this game started dying 4 years ago when WG decided not to address the already rampant cheating issue... And, of course, WG felonious grade "customer support" is no stranger to the attrition as well... (As I said, referring to them as "criminal grade" once got me a forum warning... Meanwhile, I've seen a lot worse ingame in the team chat; but I'm the one who got the warning.). So far that I'm concerned, I'd be quite happy if WG would reimburse me the $400ish I spent over the years to then go out of business. Quite a few people would be happy that way. Won't happen.

Well, in my case it would much more than $400.  I just returned to the game back on April 2018 to participate in the Frontline and just since then, I have WASTED $600+ in more premiums (I used to collect them now I feel I am a total moron of course), boosters and gold to exchange to Free XP.  I have no clue what a warpack is as you mention in your other post but I do use the mods from the WG Mod Hub (those called authorized).  With the way WG is treating my nowadays, I don't even want to do the math on how much money I have WASTED into this game since 2011.



lauchlin #158 Posted Yesterday, 10:51 PM

    Corporal

  • Players
  • 49759 battles
  • 69
  • [RNSTR] RNSTR
  • Member since:
    05-04-2012

this is fake news for anyone that's not a tomato



Lexers615 #159 Posted Today, 05:01 AM

    Staff sergeant

  • Players
  • 15308 battles
  • 360
  • [ZOMB] ZOMB
  • Member since:
    11-01-2013

View PostSarcon7, on Jul 21 2018 - 01:44, said:

Well, in my case it would much more than $400.  I just returned to the game back on April 2018 to participate in the Frontline and just since then, I have WASTED $600+ in more premiums (I used to collect them now I feel I am a total moron of course), boosters and gold to exchange to Free XP.  I have no clue what a warpack is as you mention in your other post but I do use the mods from the WG Mod Hub (those called authorized).  With the way WG is treating my nowadays, I don't even want to do the math on how much money I have WASTED into this game since 2011.

Warpack was a bundle of cheats, said to be the best cheats available. However, unlike other cheats, it required a subscription, and Warpack studios refused to pay a liscence to WG, so WG started banning the players using it because it was in violation with the various copyright laws. It had nothing to do with WG caring about fairplay, it was solely done in a capitalistic perspective.

 

View PostSarcon7, on Jul 21 2018 - 01:32, said:

You submit a ticket to find out what happened and WG closed it, replying back basically saying "because you cheat, and we won't tell you why we think you cheat as we don't have to...so eat it"

I  had the exact same issue when I received the 24h chatban. I received all the crap, like: the system works as intended, and sending the relevant replays or screenshots showing that I wasn't the only one at fault had no impact.

 

View Postlauchlin, on Jul 21 2018 - 16:51, said:

this is fake news for anyone that's not a tomato

The only fake news is WG pretending to care about fairplay. Rampant cheating is a real issue, just as trolling and name calling...






7 user(s) are reading this topic

1 members, 6 guests, 0 anonymous users


    Cyant