Curse

Missing HB · Apr 15, 2010, 08:19 AM // 08:19

I noticed that some people are doing massive syncing since few weeks in gvg. They just make an alliance of 7-8 guilds of champ range guilds with their sec accs and sync easily , since not many guilds are playing anymore.

They can make that way 15 points per day , by keeping changing guilds in order that the score remains the same. But , those people found the trick to stay at 1200+ rating , but still below rank 100 in order than they are not seen and caught syncing on GW TV .They can aswell farm the gvg zaishen quest easily that way.

To crown it all , they even are making people pay ( usually 5-6e , a price which is for many a lot ) in order that they can grind their title.

Actually , this situation should not exist , as i remember syncing in RA was fixed a bit , and form of easy farming and ladder manipulation resulted in popular arena deleted .I consider champion title quite hard to get , and requiring a certain level to be earned ( ok , there are " easy builds " , but so do every other place ) .

That's why i suggest that champion points should be earned only if you are 1 week+ in the guild . I believe serious gvgers keep staying in the same guilds , and most of those i know do not care much of the title. And , people i mentionned before would not be able to make such fast farming as the yactually do ( although they would still be able to do some pts /Week)

Agar · Apr 15, 2010, 09:19 AM // 09:19

I doubt they will change it but realy they should not give HoM rewards for titles that get exploited like this. The PvP titles are only ment to show how experienced you are at PvP. Even if they get rank 12 like that they would still suck...

RhanoctJocosa · Apr 15, 2010, 10:10 AM // 10:10

champ title is beyond saving... who cares

*lemming* · Apr 15, 2010, 10:29 AM // 10:29

That's an absolutely stupid way of fixing the problem.

IronSheik · Apr 15, 2010, 11:06 AM // 11:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

That's an absolutely stupid way of fixing the problem.

And your suggestion is a much greater one.

I see it as a short term fix.

*lemming* · Apr 15, 2010, 11:51 AM // 11:51

Make matches where a team doesn't load in count for rating.

Shayne Hawke · Apr 15, 2010, 12:25 PM // 12:25

It sorta stops players from just joining a guild like this whenever they like for earning title points, but all of the people that usually spend time in those guilds aren't going to be affected.

I'm more in favor of the rating loss. While that has potential to be used against innocent people that just fail to load due to server problems or whatever, it would force the syncers to actually fight every match that isn't against their own group.

sthpaw · Apr 15, 2010, 01:01 PM // 13:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke

It sorta stops players from just joining a guild like this whenever they like for earning title points, but all of the people that usually spend time in those guilds aren't going to be affected.

I'm more in favor of the rating loss. While that has potential to be used against innocent people that just fail to load due to server problems or whatever, it would force the syncers to actually fight every match that isn't against their own group.

that is so true, and since i mostly play at aussie times.....well i think we might be afffected the most and is so annoying.

Jarge · Apr 15, 2010, 01:20 PM // 13:20

Champ Title has long since lost any worth.
Realistically, this will ruin inter-guild relations, as barely anyone will guest for other guilds, knowing they won't get champ points for playing the match.

Stoppre12 · Apr 15, 2010, 04:10 PM // 16:10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

They can make that way 15 points per day

To be more accurate if they know what they are doing, they can make 50+ points a day easily. Which just further shows how the gvg system is still being taken advantage of, even after they announced it was against the eula to sync/ ladder manipulate. Mind you many of the people are not doing just for the title but to turn extreme profit by exploiting those who want the title but have no chance of getting it. Which is even yet another reason to not only ban those involved but to change the system to prevent it. As well as changing the system, they aught to change the point system as well, as it is a well known fact NO ONE will ever max champion, at least not in the next several years.

Shayne Hawke · Apr 15, 2010, 08:35 PM // 20:35

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stoppre12

To be more accurate if they know what they are doing, they can make 50+ points a day easily.

...as it is a well known fact NO ONE will ever max champion, at least not in the next several years.

50 points a day, and you max the title in less than seven months of playing (200 days). If the title progression is really that fast, maxing the title is not something that should be unheard of after long.

*lemming* · Apr 16, 2010, 01:24 AM // 01:24

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shayne Hawke

50 points a day, and you max the title in less than seven months of playing (200 days). If the title progression is really that fast, maxing the title is not something that should be unheard of after long.

It's plausible, but unfeasible - that's three hours every day for months, assuming no interruptions. Plus, at the going rate of 20k per point, that's a lot of money.

Stoppre12 · Apr 16, 2010, 01:35 AM // 01:35

50 pts a day is easy, and by day I mean playing during the off hours when not many guilds are on. I know this as i use to do it over a year ago, i quit doing it when they officially made the announcment making it against the eula, i think that was last may, not sure. Anyway i know individuals doing it still and honestly I hope they get caught. i quit doing it cuz its not worth risking a ban. and while max would be possible doing it, if someone were to they would probably result in a ban as anet smart enough to realize no one will max it, when the highest legit title in the game is rank 9 champ, and theres few people with it.

The Mountain · Apr 16, 2010, 01:52 AM // 01:52

In response to the OP's idea, making the req for members to be in the guild for 1 week prior to earning points (and needing to be members for points...not guests) would seriously change the farming potential. These farmers need to change guilds after only a few matches in champ range before entering the top 100, so it would limit the number of points to 4.

At that point the guild winning the matches would need to lose enough rating to begin, or the members would need to wait a week. Naturally, if they have enough guilds to sync, tanking the rating would be no problem, but it would seriously cause problems for the process, since those guilds likely wouldn't have member in them who were also paying for points (hard to have that many customers in several guilds online at one time).

So, for the time being, if Anet actually wants to take care of champ farming, they can take this step....or they could put all Champ Range matches in obs mode and let the community point out the syncers.

Missing HB · Apr 16, 2010, 08:55 AM // 08:55

Well , actually putting all champ range fights on B ,in my opinion ,won't make things change much ( i.e just use random name pve char, then when u re done leave farming guild and that's it )

I meant an average of 10 points because the people who have 8 allys need to make all guilds have same rating after the syncings . But , that is of course if they don' find people buying points. If they do , they will get for sure less champ pts , but will get a very high gold/Ecto profit.

The thing is that 1 week requirement isn't much the problem since serious guilds do play gvg only for AT and MAT , thus they are usually all in the guild for some time .

Actually , it's hard to find a solution relying on the fight : for example , if you make like , earn the point after you killed the lord , then people would just afk , waiting their lord to be killed .
Aswell , making champion earned at any rank and change the title would lead to a situation similar than in Hero Battles, where everyone plays at low rank.

So , imo , the 1 week req for champ pts might have some problems ( guesting for example ) , but it's the least unfair .

*lemming* · Apr 16, 2010, 09:31 AM // 09:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Missing HB

Well , actually putting all champ range fights on B ,in my opinion ,won't make things change much ( i.e just use random name pve char, then when u re done leave farming guild and that's it )

It's still a bannable offense. If anyone bothers putting you on flist to report you the next day, you could be in trouble.

With that being said, making no-loads count as rated matches is still by far the fairest way of dealing with it - why should member guests on ladder be penalized by not being able to earn champ points? That only serves to disincentivize pugging.

Missing HB · Apr 16, 2010, 11:17 AM // 11:17

Yes i agree but that is the problem. If you just create a character for the gvg you paid for , then after you re done , delete the character and change the guild , it will be hard for people to recognize you .

You're right about the no loads count as real fights , but actually , there are not many guilds playing on some hours , time where people do go for sync. So , almost 9/10 times , they do fight the right opponent. I also believe this can be hard to implement since many people did do it on Hero Battles , and it was never fixed .

Death Syndrome · Apr 17, 2010, 01:04 PM // 13:04

Read OP, this is what I would suggest...

Change the title to a new title, the new titles points are only earned from doing AT's rating doesn't apply whether you earn the new points or not.

Synching gone, bye games/forfeits do not count towards new title track.

AT's possibly would see more play.

Quote:

Originally Posted by lemming

It's still a bannable offense. If anyone bothers putting you on flist to report you the next day, you could be in trouble.

With that being said, making no-loads count as rated matches is still by far the fairest way of dealing with it - why should member guests on ladder be penalized by not being able to earn champ points? That only serves to disincentivize pugging.

No it is not a bannable offence. You can show the guildwars staff a screenshot of two guilds playing eachother with both teams consisting of the same guild tags in both teams. They will pass it off like there was no proof.

I'm guessing their logic is more people would quit if banned, when in reality people want what they can't have.

The Mountain · Apr 17, 2010, 02:28 PM // 14:28

It's bannable, Death, trust me. First time is 3-day, second is perma. All they need to take action is the syncing in obs mode.

What you might not understand is that these guilds aren't playing a match (one side just resigns). Then no problem would exist, afaik. People from the same guilds face each other often as the join their friends to play.

Death Syndrome · Apr 17, 2010, 02:56 PM // 14:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Mountain

It's bannable, Death, trust me. First time is 3-day, second is perma. All they need to take action is the syncing in obs mode.

What you might not understand is that these guilds aren't playing a match (one side just resigns). Then no problem would exist, afaik. People from the same guilds face each other often as the join their friends to play.

Yea well, when you have been in a guild and you know what the smurfs are.

And you have team 1 being the original team lets say the tag is [band]

So you have 8 [band]

Playing vs 2 [smurf] (which are [band] members that went to [smurf] for the manipulation) 2[band] 1[random] 3 henchmens.

A clear screenshot and video of this is no proof to anet, and not bannable.

When it is clear to anyone with a brain that works halfassly what is going on.

Bots are not bannable either, evidentally this wasn't proof either.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ne-Fne4O2-U

http://img716.imageshack.us/img716/9584/gw020u.jpg
http://img268.imageshack.us/img268/4094/gw019v.jpg
http://img339.imageshack.us/img339/5451/gw018.jpg

This is not coincidence when it happens every single ranger interrupt in the game.