if someone was hesitating before - now they got an answer that this wont really be punished and is legal for now
this quote seems to say that IF they decide its needed they will re-programm the gw the way that cheat will not be possible.
not a word about punishing anybody
kinda sounds like its legal then (until it becomes impossible), im upset
1 Like
btw i have no moral dilemma
if in a game a cheat is legal - then i treat it like a normal in-game rule
i play by the rules that are official and equal to everybody,
if someone decides to not use one of game rules its not my problem
so yes please make this officially illegal, before ill have to upset my guild that there are special rules that some guilds follow and if we drop reward-tier we will have to consider it
1 Like
My 5 cents (for what it is worth, 5 cents?). In Contract Bridge, a match is worth 100%, divided between the two pairs. Average is 50%. After an evening of many matches played against all, or many of, the other pairs, the total winner maybe have an average score of 60-70%, while the loser pair have an average score of 30-40%.
Let’s say a daily GW war between two guilds is worth 100k ranking points. They first get score the way they get today. Let’s say the daily result is that you lose the daily war 28k-31k (a normal result around bracket 56). The percentage is then 47.5%-52.5%, which means 47,458 ranking points to your guild, and 52,542 ranking points to the opponent.
Q: So a sister guild can still decide to play no matches against their main, to give the main 100k points that day to secure the unproportional high 1. rank reward?
A: Except from being a blatantly cheat easily recognized, there could be a max cap on for instance 75%, (0 ranking points to the sister guild, 75k to the main, making their total average less than an normal 100k match). Also the sister guild now risk having so low score at end of week, that they risk falling several brackets.
Q: So two guilds can play no matches at all, and still recieve 50k ranking points each?
A: Avoided by implementing a system that for instance 2/3 of all matches must be played in order to recieve the full share of the ranking points (that is 100 of the 150 possibe matches if the guild is full). In this case both of the guilds would get 0 ranking points each.
Q: This system doesn’t work because of this and that, why didn’t you think of that?
A: Because my morning shower only last so long.
2 Likes
I think that the Devs gave as a clear answer of what is legit and what is not.
So every guild can decide to use every “tools” that as been declard as not a cheat.
Some guilds will use this, some not, based on what they personally consider fair.
if it happens, how are you going to prove people are cheating, not just a witch hunt?
I’ve said that this is, now, not a cheat, so nobody is going to cheat.
But I think that some guilds will like to not use these type of “agreement” and prefer to play alone
As i have no problems admiting doing something that was said no where as something ilegal - I’ll come fort.
I suggested Black Dragon the 1 troop defense. I offered 2 options
-only us setting 1 troop defenses
-both guild setting one troop defenses.
I offered it because i consider Eika a friend and wanted to help them reach rank 1. The other option however was to give my guildies 1 free day where they don’t have to fight defenses that includ kerb x2, x4 apocalypse, x1 deathknight.
They refused the offer.
That’s the whole story.
5 Likes
Because @Eika is a friend? You offered a friend a low-down, unethical deal and you expected him to go along with it? Is this how Mean Machine did so well the first week?
None of your excuses are believable in the slightest. As far as I am concerned, everything you do in the future will be suspect. The fact that you think this is okay because it wasn’t specifically ruled out is appalling.
I have been in a lot of guilds over the last two years. I am most grateful that I left yours.
17 Likes
What kind of c##p answer is this?
I don’t even know where to start.[quote=“RiverSong, post:76, topic:23674”]
Is this how Mean Machine did so well the first week?
[/quote]
Sorry to hurt your ego (that’s larger then mine) but no, we just did good. The offer to Eika was the first and only offer.[quote=“RiverSong, post:76, topic:23674”]
None of your excuses are believable in the slightest.
[/quote]
Because? Just because you don’t like me i guess xD
I had no need to come out, but i did, because i wanted to be clear about everything.[quote=“RiverSong, post:76, topic:23674”]
As far as I am concerned, everything you do in the future will be suspect.
[/quote]
Well IDGAF. I don’t know what else to say. If you knew me, you wouldn’t say stuff like this. But you can doubt, i have nothing to fear, my actions are not suspicious.[quote=“RiverSong, post:76, topic:23674”]
I have been in a lot of guilds over the last two years. I am most grateful that I left yours.
[/quote]
We are most grateful too. Happy? Since you are out attacking me in public, you’ll get the same behaviour you are sending towards me.
1 Like
Royal Fire is still around and doing just fine with it’s original members 
2 Likes
Before I say anything else, I am very sorry to hear that Asha and Eika have quit the game. You are both valued members of this community and will be missed. If you read this then I wish you all the best.
Onto the topic at hand…
Firstly, it’s good to talk. Thanks @Saltypatra for clarifying that the Devs may take action if guilds cooperate for the purposes of maximising guild wars points.
Secondly, the moral outrage expressed on this thread is, in my opinion, an overreaction. I don’t understand why the hive mind has decided that Guild Wars is a sacrosanct bona fide competition when it is the conventional wisdom that PvP is anything but.
#No-one gave a fig when forum members openly suggested and admitted to setting one troop defence teams for PvP.
No doubt someone is going to argue that the two things aren’t equivalent. But they are.
- Setting a one troop defence team makes it easier for other players to get trophies.
- Setting a one troop defence team makes it easier for the player to get trophies.
- This mutually benefits those players and their guilds to rise higher in the rankings.
- Before guild wars, PvP points and guild rankings were the measure of how ‘good’ a player and their guild were.
So now that guild wars is out, it’s suddenly not ok to introduce the possibility of a similar tactic? Give me a break!
With that said I repeat that I am glad that SP has clarified the Devs stance on this. I will however add that I am slightly bemused that they never did the same with PvP and straight up disallow one troop defence teams in the first place.
11 Likes
Coming to this thread late, and whoa it’s contentious.
To address @Whiskeyjack on this one point: the single troop defence was mostly to benefit the player that did it, with easier but primarily more varied invade battles. PvP opponents are too random for it to be classed as giving a sustainable benefit to any individual other player. GW is a different matter, where the opponents are planned from a v restricted pool.
It has a way more defined and pronounced effect in GW, and does unfairly benefit the two ‘colluding’ guilds at the expense of all other participants. Also it is affecting scores on a leaderboard where the impact on rewards is far greater: unless you are a bot or sharer or super-committed, you ain’t getting far enough up the PvP leaderboard to care if others are benefitting, or gain much from collusion over single troop pair-ups - whereas in GW, both ‘colluding’ guilds may benefit with better prizes.
+1 to this, that’s what my like was for 
Edit: and @Saltypatra I am puzzled by the stance you have set out on this. It must be easy enough to run a list of the defences put up and look for correlation of which guilds play each other… and come down hard accordingly Even if the team don’t have time to look at this, the public stance should be ‘we are checking this, and collusion will be punished’: like forfeiting all prizes this week and being demoted several brackets.
12 Likes
I strongly disagree with your view. Setting up a one troop defense in PVP does benefit all (trophy-wise), since you don’t have influence who is attacking you. However, this Guild War approach involves only two guilds. It’s a pure form of unsportsmanlike conduct towards other non-involved guilds.
15 Likes
Wow, I rarely open a thread, and from the mess that this has brought, I think that it’s better if I continue by not opening threads in the future 
1 Like
its due to gw rewards,
pvp ranking rewards are not as important and as high on the top as the gw ranking rewards
therefore any cheating has much heavier benefits and so ppl want heavier consequences
yes please, id hate to use that cheat method 
2 Likes
Maybe choose less contentious topics in the future? Like, say, politics, global warming, or boxers/briefs? (I wouldn’t worry too much about it. Yours was obviously a question that needed an answer, so I am glad to be having the discussion now instead of after four weeks of collusion.)
4 Likes
Wow, didn’t think someone would stoop so low as to attempt to fix a guild wars battle…
People betting on this game now too?
5 Likes
This is a perfectly logical thing to do, though we don’t do it, to be clear. However, as the rules don’t prohibit it, two guilds could benefit greatly from such a pact, as they would both score near or at 100% wins and thus both be elevated, and more likely to gain greater weekly rewards. From an objective game-theory point of view, it’s the most logical thing to do.
Stopping it would be pretty easy - they’d have to just incorporate loss stats into the overall guild score, so that “throwing the game” and getting 100% losses due to crappy defenses would cost a guild so much in points that it would outweigh the gain from making that kind of deal.
7 Likes
Wow, this is a new low. It’s not against the current rules, but… wow.
Hopefully the devs can add a rule that prevents this, and punish the guilds that does this. Let’s say… temporary GW ban the first time, longer GW ban the second time, and permanent GW ban the third time. It shouldn’t be that hard to find patterns.
Edit- the suggestion above is also good. It’s probably more realistic and less cost on dev resources, and way more easier to detect and punish.
4 Likes
People complained-rightfully- to have something more challenging and not as grindlike. Then some go on and do something like this …
A serious thumbs down from me.
2 Likes