Shard Chats = cheating

Replies

  • Graives
    49 posts Member
    top players earned their spots, and if they are over a year or 2 are holding #1 ranks, there's a reason for it, and its not the shard chats. they dont "need" the help, they can do jsut fine without it, but it will cost them bit more crystals - and the others will pay much more crystals.
    soo @Graives can we stop with this lie ? you dont even believe yourself. you wanna try snipe them ? good luck. i wouldn't recommend.

    Lol. This guy tells me why top players don't even need the help. Then proceeds to tell me why top players DO need the help. Thanks for defeating your own argument.

    Either they do, or they don't. If your argument is that they would have to spend more crystals to maintain the top spots... well, hate to tell ya, bud. So would anyone else (not in a shard chat). And if you truly believe the #1 spot of every shard has the best team in the game that cannot be beaten by anyone... I don't know what to tell you. Now maybe they have more $$$ than everyone to burn through crystals and keep #1, but the days of a single defensive team able to beat every other team is gone.

    And thanks for wishing me luck if I try to snipe them. Hm, but I wonder why I would need the luck? Could it be because I would be swarmed by a cabal of their buddies and bumped down in the 50s? Seems fair.
  • SithTrio_PO
    263 posts Member
    edited June 2018
    Graives wrote: »
    top players earned their spots, and if they are over a year or 2 are holding #1 ranks, there's a reason for it, and its not the shard chats. they dont "need" the help, they can do jsut fine without it, but it will cost them bit more crystals - and the others will pay much more crystals.
    soo @Graives can we stop with this lie ? you dont even believe yourself. you wanna try snipe them ? good luck. i wouldn't recommend.

    Lol. This guy tells me why top players don't even need the help. Then proceeds to tell me why top players DO need the help. Thanks for defeating your own argument.

    Either they do, or they don't. If your argument is that they would have to spend more crystals to maintain the top spots... well, hate to tell ya, bud. So would anyone else (not in a shard chat). And if you truly believe the #1 spot of every shard has the best team in the game that cannot be beaten by anyone... I don't know what to tell you. Now maybe they have more $$$ than everyone to burn through crystals and keep #1, but the days of a single defensive team able to beat every other team is gone.

    And thanks for wishing me luck if I try to snipe them. Hm, but I wonder why I would need the luck? Could it be because I would be swarmed by a cabal of their buddies and bumped down in the 50s? Seems fair.

    you miss the point completely. what will cost then 50, will cost others 150.
    it sounds like you have personal problem with the shard chats since you were left out. but you think that if there's no shard chat, your way to #1 would be easier ? not so sure.probably much harder. without shard chats, there's lot of chaos and people attacking outside their payout times. and if everyone is doing 10 fights instead of 5, trust me, you gonna get hurt from it also. right now, people are attacking when they should do, therefore do minimum fights. more fights to others=more fights to you, if you cant see the logic in that, i understand why you are outside your chat.
    Mods are the kings of arena, whales have best mods usually.. so no, they dont need the help. but the shard chat make their way swifter (and for the others).
    also, i dont remember any days of single defensive team, and i playing since Nov 15...
    imo, its pretty simple - there are competitive players, and less competitive players. and the competitive kind were the top of arena for long time. if you not in the chat, you are probably less competitive that think he deserve a top spot because he found some team capable of doing something. meh. if you were in my shard, i wouldnt invite you... (https://swgoh.gg/u/graives/) you are obviously not the competitive type, and giving you same rewards as people who care a lot about arena and work hard for it, seems unfair. especially not putting you in some kind of rotation. guys like you, its easier to just kick and ignore for the rest of the day. you get top rewards if you deserve it, your swgoh.gg surely prove you dont, and you just want easy crystals without really fighting for it.
    thats the harsh truth, accept it or not, your problem. now try to put the personal issues with your shard chat aside in this discussion, thanks.
  • oh, and about the "single team that cant be beaten by anyone". ofc people can beat, but not all. dont presume to be the one that can do 100% winrate on offense, because im sure you are not. also, meanwhile, i removing mods from my team for 2 weeks in order for others (from the chat) to climb, and i still dont drop outside top20. so dont act like defense dont matter. people can do amazing defense, dont act like you can beat everyone.
  • Graives
    49 posts Member
    and you just want easy crystals without really fighting for it.
    thats the harsh truth, accept it or not

    "Okay, Dan, you can be #1 at six o'clock. Bob, you can be #1 at seven o'clock. Susy, you're gonna have to sit at #2 because you share the same payout as Bob, and he was here first."

    You're right. Those are some really hard crystals. Look at all the competitiveness!
    imo, its pretty simple - there are competitive players, and less competitive players.

    You're right. But there are also players who feel entitled to max crystal payout everyday and will actively collude with others to exploit the system and avoid true competition.

    You can personally attack me and put words in my mouth all you like, but it doesn't alter the reality of what you guys do. It's not competition. It's collusion.

  • so bitter. and im sure its because you cant conquer the #1 spot.
  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    Amusing.

    Collusion in arenas exist because most players are pragmatic and have determined that it is the best means to co-exist with your otherwise rivals. The fact that payouts occur anytime between 5PM and 7PM for most players is ridiculous and most people have serious commitments during those times.

    If not for shard chats, SWGOH life would be a lot more stressful. Imagine worrying about getting sniped while you're participating in work meetings, driving home, playing a game of sport or having dinner with your family.


    If you build a strong team, you can achieve a good tank without having to worry...... Just curious, when you are "playing a game of sport", do you or your team take turns with the others so you can arrange the standings and match outcomes?

    When I play my sport, I give up 4-5 hours of my Saturday arvo - occasionally on Sundays also - so I play to win given the time investment required. But then again, I play sport at amateur level and I'm not playing for sheep stations.

    Professional sport with wagering outcomes is littered with examples of teams that have tanked in order to engineer certain outcomes. The Philadelphia 76'ers is one such example. They played poorly for several consecutive seasons in order to engineer obtaining high draft picks. The strategy executed is now bearing fruit as they have an arsenal of excellent, young talent which is helping them to finally realise success on the court.

    Football (soccer) world cups also have had numerous examples where teams sabotage group games so to engineer a more favourable match-up in subsequent knock-out phases. Hypothetically, let's say you've played two group games which has made elimination from the group impossible and advancement to the next phase a certainty. If you win your final game, you'll be paired with Brazil. If you draw or lose, you'll be paired with say... Sweden. Would you play to your best and certainly meet Brazil next; or rest a few of your best players and potentially draw/lose so you could meet Sweden, a lower ranked opponent?

    Bringing this back to SWGOH, the time investment required is significant if you want to perform at a strong to elite level. Part of that requires good performance in arenas. If a group of similarly minded, similarly time poor individuals, are able to co-operate together to optimise outcomes and limit the otherwise time investment each person is required to make, what is the harm in that? Do I make myself crystal clear?

    Completely different scenarios.....

    The 76'rs playiing poorly for years and slowly planning and grinding out a good team is the equivalent of starting this game from scratch and grinding out the tunes needed to get RJT as your first priority.... You will stink for a long time, but when you achieve your goal, you become awesome overnight...... Not cheating at all.....

    Your Brazil analogy doesn't work either...... You can bench your best players and lose so you don't draw a strong team for a match, but eventually you will have to face a Brazil if you want to win the cup....

    This shard chat business, where people conspire to "take out" anyone who comes close.to the top is more akin to flattening the tires on the other team's bus so they can't make the game and forfeit their match..... It's cheating.....
  • BubbaFett wrote: »
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    Amusing.

    Collusion in arenas exist because most players are pragmatic and have determined that it is the best means to co-exist with your otherwise rivals. The fact that payouts occur anytime between 5PM and 7PM for most players is ridiculous and most people have serious commitments during those times.

    If not for shard chats, SWGOH life would be a lot more stressful. Imagine worrying about getting sniped while you're participating in work meetings, driving home, playing a game of sport or having dinner with your family.


    If you build a strong team, you can achieve a good tank without having to worry...... Just curious, when you are "playing a game of sport", do you or your team take turns with the others so you can arrange the standings and match outcomes?

    When I play my sport, I give up 4-5 hours of my Saturday arvo - occasionally on Sundays also - so I play to win given the time investment required. But then again, I play sport at amateur level and I'm not playing for sheep stations.

    Professional sport with wagering outcomes is littered with examples of teams that have tanked in order to engineer certain outcomes. The Philadelphia 76'ers is one such example. They played poorly for several consecutive seasons in order to engineer obtaining high draft picks. The strategy executed is now bearing fruit as they have an arsenal of excellent, young talent which is helping them to finally realise success on the court.

    Football (soccer) world cups also have had numerous examples where teams sabotage group games so to engineer a more favourable match-up in subsequent knock-out phases. Hypothetically, let's say you've played two group games which has made elimination from the group impossible and advancement to the next phase a certainty. If you win your final game, you'll be paired with Brazil. If you draw or lose, you'll be paired with say... Sweden. Would you play to your best and certainly meet Brazil next; or rest a few of your best players and potentially draw/lose so you could meet Sweden, a lower ranked opponent?

    Bringing this back to SWGOH, the time investment required is significant if you want to perform at a strong to elite level. Part of that requires good performance in arenas. If a group of similarly minded, similarly time poor individuals, are able to co-operate together to optimise outcomes and limit the otherwise time investment each person is required to make, what is the harm in that? Do I make myself crystal clear?

    Completely different scenarios.....

    The 76'rs playiing poorly for years and slowly planning and grinding out a good team is the equivalent of starting this game from scratch and grinding out the tunes needed to get RJT as your first priority.... You will stink for a long time, but when you achieve your goal, you become awesome overnight...... Not cheating at all.....

    Your Brazil analogy doesn't work either...... You can bench your best players and lose so you don't draw a strong team for a match, but eventually you will have to face a Brazil if you want to win the cup....

    This shard chat business, where people conspire to "take out" anyone who comes close.to the top is more akin to flattening the tires on the other team's bus so they can't make the game and forfeit their match..... It's cheating.....

    So if it’s cheating, what ToS are being breached? I want you to be specific here. I want you to go through section 6. Rules of Conduct and identify which rule/s if any are being broken by players engaging in shard chats.
  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    Amusing.

    Collusion in arenas exist because most players are pragmatic and have determined that it is the best means to co-exist with your otherwise rivals. The fact that payouts occur anytime between 5PM and 7PM for most players is ridiculous and most people have serious commitments during those times.

    If not for shard chats, SWGOH life would be a lot more stressful. Imagine worrying about getting sniped while you're participating in work meetings, driving home, playing a game of sport or having dinner with your family.


    If you build a strong team, you can achieve a good tank without having to worry...... Just curious, when you are "playing a game of sport", do you or your team take turns with the others so you can arrange the standings and match outcomes?

    When I play my sport, I give up 4-5 hours of my Saturday arvo - occasionally on Sundays also - so I play to win given the time investment required. But then again, I play sport at amateur level and I'm not playing for sheep stations.

    Professional sport with wagering outcomes is littered with examples of teams that have tanked in order to engineer certain outcomes. The Philadelphia 76'ers is one such example. They played poorly for several consecutive seasons in order to engineer obtaining high draft picks. The strategy executed is now bearing fruit as they have an arsenal of excellent, young talent which is helping them to finally realise success on the court.

    Football (soccer) world cups also have had numerous examples where teams sabotage group games so to engineer a more favourable match-up in subsequent knock-out phases. Hypothetically, let's say you've played two group games which has made elimination from the group impossible and advancement to the next phase a certainty. If you win your final game, you'll be paired with Brazil. If you draw or lose, you'll be paired with say... Sweden. Would you play to your best and certainly meet Brazil next; or rest a few of your best players and potentially draw/lose so you could meet Sweden, a lower ranked opponent?

    Bringing this back to SWGOH, the time investment required is significant if you want to perform at a strong to elite level. Part of that requires good performance in arenas. If a group of similarly minded, similarly time poor individuals, are able to co-operate together to optimise outcomes and limit the otherwise time investment each person is required to make, what is the harm in that? Do I make myself crystal clear?

    Completely different scenarios.....

    The 76'rs playiing poorly for years and slowly planning and grinding out a good team is the equivalent of starting this game from scratch and grinding out the tunes needed to get RJT as your first priority.... You will stink for a long time, but when you achieve your goal, you become awesome overnight...... Not cheating at all.....

    Your Brazil analogy doesn't work either...... You can bench your best players and lose so you don't draw a strong team for a match, but eventually you will have to face a Brazil if you want to win the cup....

    This shard chat business, where people conspire to "take out" anyone who comes close.to the top is more akin to flattening the tires on the other team's bus so they can't make the game and forfeit their match..... It's cheating.....

    So if it’s cheating, what ToS are being breached? I want you to be specific here. I want you to go through section 6. Rules of Conduct and identify which rule/s if any are being broken by players engaging in shard chats.

    It's called the spirit of.competition...... I don't need some.document written by a stuffed suit at EA to tell me the difference between right and wrong and what is or is not cheating......

    it's not illegal to spit on the sidewalk or.slam a door in someones face.... But I know enough not to do it, I was brought up.better.....

    Anyways, enjoy the extra ill gotten few crystals you get through collusion and manipulation...... I sure hope.that sport you enjoy isn't golf, I would pity the rest of your foursome....
  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    And, btw..... I just read section 6...... Shard chats violate it in several places.....
  • BubbaFett wrote: »
    And, btw..... I just read section 6...... Shard chats violate it in several places.....

    Go on. Make your case then. Convince me.
  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    And, btw..... I just read section 6...... Shard chats violate it in several places.....

    Go on. Make your case then. Convince me.

    Contribute UGC or organize or participate in any activity, group or guild that is inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.

    I would say the fact that you are organizing and participating in an activity that colludes to make the playing field less than level is objectionable......

    Engage in any other activity that significantly disturbs the peaceful, fair and respectful gaming environment of an EA Service

    I would say that your shard chat groups significantly make it unfair for those that are not in it, and would also say they are disrespectful to other gamers not included in your little chat group.....

  • Graives
    49 posts Member
    "Sell, buy, trade or otherwise transfer or offer to transfer your EA Account, any personal access to EA Services, or any EA Content associated with your EA Account, including EA Virtual Currency and other Entitlements, either within an EA Service or on a third party website, or in connection with any out-of-game transaction, unless expressly authorized by EA."

    Virtual currency/entitlements = crystals. Third party website = Discord.

    Win-trading is against the terms of service on pretty much any game that has a PVP mode, and I believe this is the line item that covers it for EA. The issue with this game is proving it. How does an EA person take someone's word that a screenshot of a Discord chat is not doctored, or a copy/paste of Discord chat is not doctored? Most games would want their own records to research accusations of win-trading. But in this game, the Arena rankings probably look too "normal" to a casual eye, as shard-chatters routinely rotate people in and out of ranks.

    It would take a lot of time/effort for EA to investigate. And the people they would be investigating and banning are likely the people that also spend $100s to $1000s on this game, which is more incentive for the game-makers to turn a blind eye.

    But other than the technicalities, it's just an unfair practice in this game. When I get in debates on this topic, the shard-chatters usually throw the "but it would make the game harder for you!" at me... as if that would bother me. I don't care how hard the climb is. I would just like for every climber to climb only on their own individual merits.





  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    ^^^^^^ this...... And I know he is coming back with some **** justification...... Whatever....
  • Graives wrote: »
    "Sell, buy, trade or otherwise transfer or offer to transfer your EA Account, any personal access to EA Services, or any EA Content associated with your EA Account, including EA Virtual Currency and other Entitlements, either within an EA Service or on a third party website, or in connection with any out-of-game transaction, unless expressly authorized by EA."

    Virtual currency/entitlements = crystals. Third party website = Discord.

    Win-trading is against the terms of service on pretty much any game that has a PVP mode, and I believe this is the line item that covers it for EA. The issue with this game is proving it. How does an EA person take someone's word that a screenshot of a Discord chat is not doctored, or a copy/paste of Discord chat is not doctored? Most games would want their own records to research accusations of win-trading. But in this game, the Arena rankings probably look too "normal" to a casual eye, as shard-chatters routinely rotate people in and out of ranks.

    It would take a lot of time/effort for EA to investigate. And the people they would be investigating and banning are likely the people that also spend $100s to $1000s on this game, which is more incentive for the game-makers to turn a blind eye.

    But other than the technicalities, it's just an unfair practice in this game. When I get in debates on this topic, the shard-chatters usually throw the "but it would make the game harder for you!" at me... as if that would bother me. I don't care how hard the climb is. I would just like for every climber to climb only on their own individual merits.





    (slow clap)
  • Bigbearxba
    250 posts Member
    edited June 2018
    Graives wrote: »
    "Sell, buy, trade or otherwise transfer or offer to transfer your EA Account, any personal access to EA Services, or any EA Content associated with your EA Account, including EA Virtual Currency and other Entitlements, either within an EA Service or on a third party website, or in connection with any out-of-game transaction, unless expressly authorized by EA."

    Virtual currency/entitlements = crystals. Third party website = Discord.

    Win-trading is against the terms of service on pretty much any game that has a PVP mode, and I believe this is the line item that covers it for EA. The issue with this game is proving it. How does an EA person take someone's word that a screenshot of a Discord chat is not doctored, or a copy/paste of Discord chat is not doctored? Most games would want their own records to research accusations of win-trading. But in this game, the Arena rankings probably look too "normal" to a casual eye, as shard-chatters routinely rotate people in and out of ranks.

    It would take a lot of time/effort for EA to investigate. And the people they would be investigating and banning are likely the people that also spend $100s to $1000s on this game, which is more incentive for the game-makers to turn a blind eye.

    But other than the technicalities, it's just an unfair practice in this game. When I get in debates on this topic, the shard-chatters usually throw the "but it would make the game harder for you!" at me... as if that would bother me. I don't care how hard the climb is. I would just like for every climber to climb only on their own individual merits.





    In spirit, I’d love for you to be correct. But legally you are incorrect. To violate the “sell, buy or trade” clause there has to actually be transfer of the “Virtual Currency or Entitlements” between those involved. Player A isn’t transfering the crystals to player B. He is just helping player B “earn” those crystals more easily. Also, Discord in this example would not qualify as a “third party website” in terms of precedent in enforcing this kind of clause in contract. The website has to actually be transfering the “Virtual Currency...” to the players for it to fall under this clause. (As an example, websites that sell gear to players for MMOs like World of Warcraft)
  • Bigbearxba wrote: »
    Graives wrote: »
    "Sell, buy, trade or otherwise transfer or offer to transfer your EA Account, any personal access to EA Services, or any EA Content associated with your EA Account, including EA Virtual Currency and other Entitlements, either within an EA Service or on a third party website, or in connection with any out-of-game transaction, unless expressly authorized by EA."

    Virtual currency/entitlements = crystals. Third party website = Discord.

    Win-trading is against the terms of service on pretty much any game that has a PVP mode, and I believe this is the line item that covers it for EA. The issue with this game is proving it. How does an EA person take someone's word that a screenshot of a Discord chat is not doctored, or a copy/paste of Discord chat is not doctored? Most games would want their own records to research accusations of win-trading. But in this game, the Arena rankings probably look too "normal" to a casual eye, as shard-chatters routinely rotate people in and out of ranks.

    It would take a lot of time/effort for EA to investigate. And the people they would be investigating and banning are likely the people that also spend $100s to $1000s on this game, which is more incentive for the game-makers to turn a blind eye.

    But other than the technicalities, it's just an unfair practice in this game. When I get in debates on this topic, the shard-chatters usually throw the "but it would make the game harder for you!" at me... as if that would bother me. I don't care how hard the climb is. I would just like for every climber to climb only on their own individual merits.





    In spirit, I’d love for you to be correct. But legally you are incorrect. To violate the “sell, buy or trade” clause there has to actually be transfer of the “Virtual Currency or Entitlements” between those involved. Player A isn’t transfering the crystals to player B. He is just helping player B “earn” those crystals more easily. Also, Discord in this example would not qualify as a “third party website” in terms of precedent in enforcing this kind of clause in contract. The website has to actually be transfering the “Virtual Currency...” to the players for it to fall under this clause. (As an example, websites that sell gear to players for MMOs like World of Warcraft)

    Oh, that legal stuff. Such a complexity.
  • All things equal if someone can't reach top 5 because the top 5 gang up on them then it's obviously unfair.

    This garbage has been going on forever and they don't care.
  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    Jedi_of_Oz wrote: »
    Bigbearxba wrote: »
    Graives wrote: »
    "Sell, buy, trade or otherwise transfer or offer to transfer your EA Account, any personal access to EA Services, or any EA Content associated with your EA Account, including EA Virtual Currency and other Entitlements, either within an EA Service or on a third party website, or in connection with any out-of-game transaction, unless expressly authorized by EA."

    Virtual currency/entitlements = crystals. Third party website = Discord.

    Win-trading is against the terms of service on pretty much any game that has a PVP mode, and I believe this is the line item that covers it for EA. The issue with this game is proving it. How does an EA person take someone's word that a screenshot of a Discord chat is not doctored, or a copy/paste of Discord chat is not doctored? Most games would want their own records to research accusations of win-trading. But in this game, the Arena rankings probably look too "normal" to a casual eye, as shard-chatters routinely rotate people in and out of ranks.

    It would take a lot of time/effort for EA to investigate. And the people they would be investigating and banning are likely the people that also spend $100s to $1000s on this game, which is more incentive for the game-makers to turn a blind eye.

    But other than the technicalities, it's just an unfair practice in this game. When I get in debates on this topic, the shard-chatters usually throw the "but it would make the game harder for you!" at me... as if that would bother me. I don't care how hard the climb is. I would just like for every climber to climb only on their own individual merits.





    In spirit, I’d love for you to be correct. But legally you are incorrect. To violate the “sell, buy or trade” clause there has to actually be transfer of the “Virtual Currency or Entitlements” between those involved. Player A isn’t transfering the crystals to player B. He is just helping player B “earn” those crystals more easily. Also, Discord in this example would not qualify as a “third party website” in terms of precedent in enforcing this kind of clause in contract. The website has to actually be transfering the “Virtual Currency...” to the players for it to fall under this clause. (As an example, websites that sell gear to players for MMOs like World of Warcraft)

    Oh, that legal stuff. Such a complexity.

    You still haven't addressed those of us that proved you wrong... So weak....
  • these guys have no idea what shard chats are obviously.
    "trade" wins ? huh ? i attack people after their payouts, thats all. all they give me is knowledge about their payout, so i can avoid them. then, i do less attacks, and they do less attacks, thats all.
    against ToS, yea right. bunch of bitter people outside shard chat try to explain how it goes in the chats. you are outside you have no idea.
    no one is giving free crystals, we still need to fight, we just fight SMARTER instead of harder. and you should too, but you rather whine on forum and request shard shuffle or something (which i have no problem with, i'll adjust and go #1 straight away, starting the new shard chat)
    just bitterness of losers.
  • BubbaFett
    3311 posts Member
    these guys have no idea what shard chats are obviously.
    "trade" wins ? huh ? i attack people after their payouts, thats all. all they give me is knowledge about their payout, so i can avoid them. then, i do less attacks, and they do less attacks, thats all.
    against ToS, yea right. bunch of bitter people outside shard chat try to explain how it goes in the chats. you are outside you have no idea.
    no one is giving free crystals, we still need to fight, we just fight SMARTER instead of harder. and you should too, but you rather whine on forum and request shard shuffle or something (which i have no problem with, i'll adjust and go #1 straight away, starting the new shard chat)
    just bitterness of losers.

    You are being hypocritical..... You are part of one shard chat and presume to known how all shard chats work?..... Then you go on to start calling people losers?

    The chat is so.bad in my shard that they have actually formed a guild.... And they don't just preserve payout times..... If you aren't part of their little click, you better not have any ideas about being top 20..... Working around each other's payout is one thing..... Ganging up to actively exclude other players is another....
  • BubbaFett wrote: »
    these guys have no idea what shard chats are obviously.
    "trade" wins ? huh ? i attack people after their payouts, thats all. all they give me is knowledge about their payout, so i can avoid them. then, i do less attacks, and they do less attacks, thats all.
    against ToS, yea right. bunch of bitter people outside shard chat try to explain how it goes in the chats. you are outside you have no idea.
    no one is giving free crystals, we still need to fight, we just fight SMARTER instead of harder. and you should too, but you rather whine on forum and request shard shuffle or something (which i have no problem with, i'll adjust and go #1 straight away, starting the new shard chat)
    just bitterness of losers.

    You are being hypocritical..... You are part of one shard chat and presume to known how all shard chats work?..... Then you go on to start calling people losers?

    The chat is so.bad in my shard that they have actually formed a guild.... And they don't just preserve payout times..... If you aren't part of their little click, you better not have any ideas about being top 20..... Working around each other's payout is one thing..... Ganging up to actively exclude other players is another....

    I have to agree with Bubba on this one.
    You may be part of a nice shard, i may be part of a nice shard, but i know shards who instantly and indiscriminately attack anyone who tries to go beyond 30, whether they have an incoming payout or not.
    No one is allowed into top30. FINAL

    For us we dnt hit people if we dnt have payouts coming, and even then its not our thing to just bust people out of top20 for "convenience" sake

    if anyone wanna climb hes welcome to, but if its my payout or close to it, imma hit back
  • Cheaters gonna cheat. To be fair though they're just exploiting one of the few graces you get in the game.

    Whatever system CG put in place the saltiest of "winners" like that *less than complimentary language exempted* up there would find a new way of exploiting it, as he pretty much states.

    PvP is generally terrible in everything and this game is no different.
    Hey, it's still better than MSF
  • Graives
    49 posts Member
    Bigbearxba wrote: »
    In spirit, I’d love for you to be correct. But legally you are incorrect. To violate the “sell, buy or trade” clause there has to actually be transfer of the “Virtual Currency or Entitlements” between those involved. Player A isn’t transfering the crystals to player B. He is just helping player B “earn” those crystals more easily. Also, Discord in this example would not qualify as a “third party website” in terms of precedent in enforcing this kind of clause in contract. The website has to actually be transfering the “Virtual Currency...” to the players for it to fall under this clause. (As an example, websites that sell gear to players for MMOs like World of Warcraft)

    I don't know. I think the language is left somewhat ambiguous for a reason. Lawyer-speak to cover as much ground as possible. Gives them room to take action or not take action, depending on different circumstances.
    Every MMO with PVP that I've ever played will ban win-traders, and they have similar language in their TOS. For example, in WoW Arena, people would wait until slow hours and then team into each other in Arena, taking turns to win and lose. This let them gain rank and rewards more easily and quickly ... and they would absolutely get banned.

    Battle Royale games also ban people for teaming -- i.e. people NOT on the same team actively ganging up on others.

    I don't think the transfer of rewards/currencies/entitlements has to be an actual transfer from player to player... as the rewards in these games often aren't even able to be transferred from player to player. The rewards can only be earned individually or in a team.

    As I said... with this game, the problem would be proving it. Those other games have extensive gameplay logs and replays that devs can investigate.

    The ambiguity also serves in line items like this: "Engage in any other activity that significantly disturbs the peaceful, fair and respectful gaming environment of an EA Service." (Keyword here being "significant" -- how significant does EA consider shard chatting? Probably not very significant, considering most of their biggest spenders do it.)

    And also this one:

    "Use exploits, cheats, undocumented features, design errors or problems in an EA Service."

    Or this one:

    "Interfere with or disrupt another player's use of an EA Service. This includes disrupting the normal flow of game play, chat or dialogue within an EA Service by, for example, using vulgar or harassing language, being abusive, excessive shouting (all caps), spamming, flooding or hitting the return key repeatedly."

    A EA rep could easily fit shard chats into any of those if they cared enough to crack down.

  • Bigbearxba
    250 posts Member
    edited June 2018
    Graives wrote: »
    Bigbearxba wrote: »
    In spirit, I’d love for you to be correct. But legally you are incorrect. To violate the “sell, buy or trade” clause there has to actually be transfer of the “Virtual Currency or Entitlements” between those involved. Player A isn’t transfering the crystals to player B. He is just helping player B “earn” those crystals more easily. Also, Discord in this example would not qualify as a “third party website” in terms of precedent in enforcing this kind of clause in contract. The website has to actually be transfering the “Virtual Currency...” to the players for it to fall under this clause. (As an example, websites that sell gear to players for MMOs like World of Warcraft)

    I don't know. I think the language is left somewhat ambiguous for a reason. Lawyer-speak to cover as much ground as possible. Gives them room to take action or not take action, depending on different circumstances.
    Every MMO with PVP that I've ever played will ban win-traders, and they have similar language in their TOS. For example, in WoW Arena, people would wait until slow hours and then team into each other in Arena, taking turns to win and lose. This let them gain rank and rewards more easily and quickly ... and they would absolutely get banned.

    Battle Royale games also ban people for teaming -- i.e. people NOT on the same team actively ganging up on others.

    I don't think the transfer of rewards/currencies/entitlements has to be an actual transfer from player to player... as the rewards in these games often aren't even able to be transferred from player to player. The rewards can only be earned individually or in a team.

    As I said... with this game, the problem would be proving it. Those other games have extensive gameplay logs and replays that devs can investigate.

    The ambiguity also serves in line items like this: "Engage in any other activity that significantly disturbs the peaceful, fair and respectful gaming environment of an EA Service." (Keyword here being "significant" -- how significant does EA consider shard chatting? Probably not very significant, considering most of their biggest spenders do it.)

    And also this one:

    "Use exploits, cheats, undocumented features, design errors or problems in an EA Service."

    Or this one:

    "Interfere with or disrupt another player's use of an EA Service. This includes disrupting the normal flow of game play, chat or dialogue within an EA Service by, for example, using vulgar or harassing language, being abusive, excessive shouting (all caps), spamming, flooding or hitting the return key repeatedly."

    A EA rep could easily fit shard chats into any of those if they cared enough to crack down.

    Sadly, I do know. I won’t go into detail how. Most of what you are saying won’t hold up in litigation. A dirty secret that all developers/publishers love to keep is that ToS agreements aren’t all that strong. They rarely stand up in court when properly challenged. And when they do, they receive extraordinarily narrow interpretation. Cases like these often end up in appellate court or higher and judges there tend to be pedantically literal in their interpretations of contract and contract law. Especially in situations where the contract does not have an “affirmative action” by the user. Which many games do not have (I can’t remember if this game did but a simple “I agree” button before use usually counts)
    Post edited by Bigbearxba on
  • I'm not talking about court litigation. I'm talking about being banned from a game, which has been going on since the beginning of multiplayer online games -- without any litigation that I've ever heard of.

    "EA may terminate your access and use of any EA Services or your EA Account if EA determines that you have violated this Agreement"

    Pretty sure none of us have the "right" to play a mobile game if we breach said game's terms of service, and I doubt anyone would try to take that to court. And these terms of service are written as expansively (and as ambiguously) as possible to give the game entity all the leeway they want to get rid of problematic players or even to overlook breaches in terms of service. (For example, you might see game devs conspicuously overlook a video of a popular YouTube streamer cheating in some way because that streamer is providing lots of free ad space for the game ... whereas a no-name player gets banned immediately for doing the same thing.)

    I mean... I've seen in other online games where someone would get suspended or banned for mouthing off to a developer on a public forum. Or standing in front of a doorway in-game. Or saying something rude in a General chat. It honestly doesn't take much. But if they decide you are costing them $$ by doing something disruptive, then you're going to get banned very quickly.

    But in the case of this game, the players causing the controversy are also the biggest spenders. So unless people start leaving the game in droves expressly due to Arena exploit, I doubt EA will publicly rock the boat. I wish they would, but realistically... I have to assume they've done the math. If they re-worked Arena to make shard-chatting completely non-viable (i.e. every single player had to camp and protect their own payout every day if they wanted max rewards), a lot of entitled whales would cry-baby all over the forums and take their $1000s to another game. Muh crystals. Muh rank. Boohoo. That sort of thing.

  • But that would only leave the whales, krakens, dolphins, and other spenders, thus most of their money being made and if 10000 people who rarely spend quit the game, it doesnt hurt their sales.
  • BubbaFett wrote: »
    Contribute UGC or organize or participate in any activity, group or guild that is inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.

    An aggrieved party would need to prove that the content of a 'shard chat' is “inappropriate, abusive, harassing, profane, threatening, hateful, offensive, vulgar, obscene, sexually explicit, defamatory, infringing, invades another's privacy, or is otherwise reasonably objectionable.” These actions potentially infringe on criminal and/or civil rights grounds. To heap in gentlemen's agreements between certain parties are not the same context. Additionally, your definition of objectionable may not meet another person's definition of objectionable - or more importantly, the legal definition of it.

    Mr. Legal Eagle has drawn up this condition as a catchall; but Mr. Finance Manager knows that if players were banned en masse and went back to Google Play and/or iTunes claiming refunds, this game would die within weeks.
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    I would say the fact that you are organizing and participating in an activity that colludes to make the playing field less than level is objectionable......

    “Engage in any other activity that significantly disturbs the peaceful, fair and respectful gaming environment of an EA Service”

    If a third party carriage service were used that was not governed by or enforceable by EA, they have no ability to act. On the other hand, were using this very forum and/or in-game chat as the carriage service to conduct any 'objectionable' actions, you might have a case. Otherwise, the accused could just as easily say that their attacks are driven by the horoscope they read in the newspaper that day or that some deity to spoke them in a vision directing them to act in a certain way.

    My interpretation of 'Fair and respectful gaming' refers to the use of hacks, cheat codes, intercepting and adjusting communications from the device to the server to unfairly gain an advantage in the game.
    BubbaFett wrote: »
    I would say that your shard chat groups significantly make it unfair for those that are not in it, and would also say they are disrespectful to other gamers not included in your little chat group.....

    Speaking about the chats I participate in, there is every attempt made to include players, not exclude them. This involves attempting to make direct communications with players either in game, or using third-party platforms where necessary. When direct communications are not possible, I/we attempt to make contact through their guildmates or other associates. It's not easy with players that don't speak English or have in games names using non-English alphabet characters, but we've made it happen. Google Translator is used on occasion to establish understanding where there are language barriers. I've had so many positive comments from these new players thanking us that we've made the effort to involve them in the chat. These chats are generally supportive environments where players share social and family experiences and where players provide assistance to each other regarding the make-up of rosters or provide advice regarding gameplay.

    I'm sorry that your experience has not been so positive. Humans are generally social creatures that experience positive outcomes from sharing companionship. This extends to gaming. I've experienced this myself in the shard chats that you decry.

    It is also unfortunate that not all people are wired this way and narcissism and ego drive negative behaviours towards those around them.
This discussion has been closed.