Wat/Hoda/3PO GAC issue?
Has this been brought up on the forums and/or commented upon by the devs? I can't find any mention of it.
Details can be found on Reddit, but upshot is that it seems some people are getting falsely flagged for cheating and having their GAC and even TB ruined as result.
Details can be found on Reddit, but upshot is that it seems some people are getting falsely flagged for cheating and having their GAC and even TB ruined as result.
1
This discussion has been closed.
- 60.8K General Discussion
- 9 Developer Q&A Archive
- 2.6K New Players
- 30.5K Arena and Character Strategy
- 4K Individual Events
- 4.6K Guild Events
- 4.6K PVP and Rivalry
- 50.1K Guild Recruitment
- 731 Art and Media
- 4.1K Off Topic
Howdy, Stranger!
Replies
why?
The hyoda 3po wat team just retreats even if it's all relic 7 so you can use a g1 lvl 1 Cup to enter battle and win with full points.
The CG cheat identifying bot sees the huge difference between the power of the defensive team and the team used to win and the bot bans the player who sent a lvl 1 character to win vs 3 non attacking retreating characters.
This is the problem CG bot auto detecting cheaters. they cant even program text in a text box without messing that up so everyone should be careful what we ask for ... maybe playing with a bunch of cheaters is better than CG randomly banning people because CG cheat detector bot doesn't understand the game mechanics. Up for debate...
Not sure what we're supposed to do if we see an opponent sets that team on D. Give up a potential win? Report them for cheating???
When u cant make kyber just set this team and report your opponent when they attack it seems to be gaining popularity.
Because it gets other people banned? And setting something that get people banned IS quite a **** move...
Care to weigh in
Been waiting for him to answer the TB question since the last QnA. Would be shocked if he answered here.
Looks like that is just a non issue.
It is entirely possible that whoever set the team just wanted to see what would happen. I don't think we've had a situation like this before were a team auto-retreats and someone gets banned.
How so? What does the person setting the team get out of this? If you asked me to set this team why would I?
There's this cool mode called galactic war for testing like that. It is hard to say this was not a malicious move by the guy who placed them on D.
So there's an in-game message that tells everyone who plays that if a team auto-retreats on defense in GAC, the attacking player gets insta-banned? Or there's a well publicized thread or reddit post about someone being insta-banned for the same thing? Please, point me to them. Otherwise, how would anyone know what would happen? Prove malicious intent.
How would anyone know? I literally told you, galactic war. Take a step back and logically look at it. Why would you place 3 toons on defense that you know immediately retreat without testing it out? See what happens? Well GW would give you an instant answer, so its not curiosity. Collusion? Unlikely, since the detailed post on reddit about this made it clear the attacker was surprised by the placement. Just to mess with the opponent? Seems most likely, especially since people seem to think auto-D or purposely setting one team is funny and somehow hurts CG and not the opponent. Prove anything but malicious intent
Better than placing no teams and costing points.
Hilarious that the attacker, or anyone for that matter is getting banned for this lol.
Reasonable doubt for "anything but malicious intent":
The player who set the team on defense didn't test it because they assumed it would not auto-retreat, thinking it would require his opponent to waste a team on a trio that would struggle to win, but would apply enough dots to steal some banners.
there you go, that is just one situation where the player who posted the team is not trying to be malicious. There is also the situation where the player posting the def wanted their opponent to just go in thinking everyone wouldn't run away, thus wasting more than 1 character on a free win. Point is, sometimes GAC comes down to a few banners here and there, so any little thing you can do to steal a few banners is smart.
So you ignore the actual point of my question, which is about being insta-banned for beating that team in GAC, and instead just rehash what you've already said. And then you somehow bring it back to being malicious, even though there can't be anything malicious involved without knowing an insta-ban is a definite outcome. OK.
I could reasonably see people taken by surprise with this team and then trying to throw in a powerful team not knowing any better.
Kinda how you ignored what I said about GW being a tester? Ya that's annoying. Again, some of the above scenarios are possible, but that requires some thought. You would think something as well thought out as your proposed scenario would include a battle attempt somewhere. Simmed galactic war already? Good thing these plenty of nodes to test this since opponent quality is irrelevant.
I didn't ignore your "GW scenario"; it's just irrelevant to being "malicious". You still haven't answered how setting that team on D is malicious since we've never had a report of someone being auto banned for winning a battle in suspicious fashion.
But keep pretending like you have a defensible opinion on it if it helps you sleep at night. Or should we just agree that you're maliciously trolling since you know you're wrong?
As if your name wasn't enough..... It is relevant. Someone who was curious what would happen has all the opportunity to find out.
Not being curious =/= Being malicious
that is the point you are missing here. There is no proof at this time that the opponent set a team with malicious intent.
The deciding factor would be how the bot works, seems unlikely they just pick up on these things I would guess the person would have to be reported first which would show clear malicious intent from the person who set the defense then again could esasily be the other way round in which it would be impossible to tell and you are having a pointless debate.
@CG_SBCrumb care to end the debate please? Assuming you know how the bot works.
not sure how the bot has anything to do with the debate over the defense-setter being malicious. CG has never told us how the bot works, therefore how would its workings matter for what a player intended with their defense?