Curse

smilingscar · Feb 06, 2009, 09:37 PM // 21:37

I just wonder what happens when a guild without gold trim manipulates a ladder? This seems like a poor standard for punishment in that it can't be universally enforced. And it sits poorly with me that the punishment only lasts one month. I'd fully agree if they were permanently prevented from getting gold.

At least force them to make the "Dishonorable" icon their permanent guild emblem or something...

Cuthroat Dibbler · Feb 06, 2009, 09:38 PM // 21:38

my feedback...

complete fail.

And what remnants of respect were left are now gone. For ANet and the Guilds.

Spineless decison making and a disregard for their own rules and regulations. So weak its a farce.

Regina Buenaobra · Feb 06, 2009, 09:42 PM // 21:42

There's a difference between guilds playing to a tie and guilds discussing and making a mutual agreement to tie a match. Playing a match to a tie is fine. Colluding and making an agreement to determine the outcome of a match is definitely against the rules. There is no gray area.

Some people consider the punishment to be too lenient. There is a lot of information that the greater community does not have access to, which we used to come to this decision. There were so many factors we weighed in coming to the final decision. We looked at the individual situation. We looked at what happened in the past. We looked at the documentation and records of what occurred. We discussed the situation with players. And we looked at the big picture. We looked at the technical aspects of what happened. We looked to see if the rules were vague or unclear on this issue. We had to look at the decision within the wider context of the PvP community and the community at large. In the end, we came to a decision that we believe the guilds would take seriously while tempering it with the broader contextual issues.

Shadowmoon · Feb 06, 2009, 09:44 PM // 21:44

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dmitri3

Really funny how people still propose to give GeAr gold, only makes it clearer that they have no idea about what's happening in GvG scene.

And I wonder why if first place gets DQ'ed, which I'm assuming stripping the trims symbolizes, why 2nd place doesn't get first place by default. I understand you can't find the correct winner without redoing the MaT with rawr and zero not involved, which is undoable, but like the Olympics, medal that are stripped are moved the person below them.

byteme! · Feb 06, 2009, 09:45 PM // 21:45

Pardon my ignorance but....what benefit does Gold Trim have besides bragging rights? If there are no benefits how is this a punishment?

Misa · Feb 06, 2009, 09:47 PM // 21:47

what about 1v1?

Jenn · Feb 06, 2009, 09:51 PM // 21:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billiard

I am sure ArenaNet spent considerable time and effort to collect a lot of relevant information for this decision, and did not make it lightly. Before anyone blasts them for this I would hope they would do an equal amount of research themselves.

In this instance what was earned in the most recent tournament was taken away as punishment, and in addition rawr loses the use of their eight previously won permanent capes for a month. Were rawr a guild that had never won a gold cape, this would have been an even much more severe punishment since they are for most guilds not easy to win.

In any event, please don't troll or flame in this thread as you make your comments and discussion.

Quoted for emphasis.

It's easy for people who only ever see one side of the story to feel as though something horribly unjust happened to them or their peers. While I think aNet has made mistakes, I don't think they are done on a whim, and I don't believe they're intended just to make people angry. There's a lot to consider in a lot of their actions (which is why they can take so long to happen

), so I think we should just relax a bit.

Yawgmoth · Feb 06, 2009, 09:51 PM // 21:51

Roflmao!
Epic failure at understanding of how the Swiss system works.
Intentional Draws are an important part of it and aren't any kind of abuse. Should be simply allowed.

Encriptic Spear · Feb 06, 2009, 09:52 PM // 21:52

Honestly, the punishment suits the crime……
Think about this for a min or two.

Rawr is one of ANET’s cash cows, this guild that places very high almost every monthly
tournament.

With a superior GVG, the people who buy numerous copies of Guild Wars
Picking teams like rawr get lots of Zkeys.

Banning Rawr = less sales

Anet makes money off of the players who do these tournaments. And what do you get in return digital gold/silver and titles……

Offer real world prizes it’s better then nothing.

zelgadissan · Feb 06, 2009, 09:53 PM // 21:53

It intrigues me that there's no comment from anybody actually in rawr or zero in this thread, even though I recognize a bunch of names lurking at the bottom.

I'm curious to hear what any of them have to say on the matter now that the ruling is official, though I'm afraid the first one to say anything will be insta-flamed.

bitchbar player · Feb 06, 2009, 09:55 PM // 21:55

I am wondering what regulations anet used to say they have broken rules.

Don't try to hide your failure of not renewing the rules.

Sword of the Kings · Feb 06, 2009, 09:56 PM // 21:56

Quote:

Originally Posted by Regina Buenaobra

There's a difference between guilds playing to a tie and guilds discussing and making a mutual agreement to tie a match. Playing a match to a tie is fine. Colluding and making an agreement to determine the outcome of a match is definitely against the rules. There is no gray area.

Some people consider the punishment to be too lenient. There is a lot of information that the greater community does not have access to, which we used to come to this decision. There were so many factors we weighed in coming to the final decision. We looked at the individual situation. We looked at what happened in the past. We looked at the documentation and records of what occurred. We discussed the situation with players. And we looked at the big picture. We looked at the technical aspects of what happened. We looked to see if the rules were vague or unclear on this issue. We had to look at the decision within the wider context of the PvP community and the community at large. In the end, we came to a decision that we believe the guilds would take seriously while tempering it with the broader contextual issues.

If they broke the rules, then punish them for it. That's the only information you should need to know. Taking away gold trim for a month is nothing. I guarantee [rawr] and [zero] are laughing at this so called "punishment" given by anet.

Regina Buenaobra · Feb 06, 2009, 09:57 PM // 21:57

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crom Bocca

I am wondering what regulations anet used to say they have broken rules.

Don't try to hide your failure of not renewing the rules.

http://www.guildwars.com/competitive...amentrules.php

Quote:

Player/Guild Responsibilities
Players (and guilds) must follow the rules interpretations and guidelines for play set forth by ArenaNet, the head judge, and other tournament officials.

Players/guilds are expected to behave in a respectful and sporting manner at all times.

Players/guilds are expected to not participate in any form of ladder manipulation. Ladder Manipulation is defined as any actions taken to alter the rankings or ratings of the tournament ladder that deviate from guilds actually playing and completing battles. Throwing matches or getting your opponent’s to throw them to you are examples of ladder manipulation because ratings and rankings are changed without actual game play taking place.

Players/guilds that do not fulfill their responsibilities as described above may be subject to review by the ArenaNet. Such a review may result in loss of event prizes up to account suspension or revocation.

ArenaNet reserve the right to suspend or revoke a player's account without prior notice for any reason deemed necessary.

pigdestroyer · Feb 06, 2009, 10:00 PM // 22:00

[rawr] has done too much (well at least more that most of us) for the pvp community to deserve anything worse...

Icy The Mage · Feb 06, 2009, 10:21 PM // 22:21

lol, no cape, that's it? Oh well..

SurareVaera · Feb 06, 2009, 10:26 PM // 22:26

Is there a term for all these false equivalencies and exaggerated comparisons? Building homes and robbing banks don't remotely relate to a conga line draw in the meaningless final round of swiss play. I'm just tired of the fake outrage and tenuous parallels to felonies.

I'm far more concerned about bots, gold sellers that steal accounts and items, RA sync, people that sync bought guilds for champ points, etc. Anet recognized the problem, made efforts to discourage further infractions, and hopefully pledged to work on the faulty tiebreaker system in place.

Gun Pierson · Feb 06, 2009, 10:28 PM // 22:28

Anet made a wise decision imo and a lot of factors had to be taken into account. The improvement of the system should be the prime focus, not the punishment itself.

Some of you are not objective, you're too involved in the pvp scene.

Bowstring Badass · Feb 06, 2009, 10:36 PM // 22:36

Fail punishment is fail.

Antares Ascending · Feb 06, 2009, 11:12 PM // 23:12

taken from other rules post:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Antares Ascending

.

I guess the rules are the rules...but..
This could also be considered the peak of sportsmanlike behavior. The best team honoring a worthy opponent.

I played muds ( multi user dungeons..all text) and there were contests called Global quests where all players in a level range competed to complete a series of tasks. I had won my share and more than a few times let a newer player win thier first GQ..waiting at the last quest and bowing..its all yours..grats on your first global. There were more than a few times where after beating a (nice) player (who won some already)several times I would also wait. It felt good, and I thought very sportsmanlike, to show this respect.

Two worthy opponents lowered thier swords rather than destroy each other...good stuff in a movie....and irl imo

So, yep, I guess rules are rules but I can't believe this did any serious damage..flame away

Skye Marin · Feb 06, 2009, 11:13 PM // 23:13

I really don't see the fuss here. Agreed Stalemates are an important part in most games that use Swiss Round-style tournaments. There is no rule that explicitly states "no Agreed Stalemates", only "throwing a match" and "ladder manipulation", which more directly implies bribery or coercion for one team to lose and another to win.

If they didn't want ties to happen, it could be programed by some extra rule, like "red team wins", or "higher ranking wins", or making a loss worth more than a tie. Note it's virtually impossible to draw in GvG unless you plan it.

This whole situation doesn't effect me at all, and I don't understand why so many people are up in arms about a an agreed tie. I think the 'punishment' reflects that. It also doesn't effect me. It's appropriate in its 'so what?'-itude