bannable stuff

[CARLOS]

sorry, i wasnt sure where to post this so it is at 2 locations now. pls i hope you hear what i am saying:

wow. this is gay. honestly? fana + crucade is allowed? multiple heroes? how can these be allowable? they are GLITCHES. ffs ban the cheaters. i cant believe these arent bannable. get rid of all of the gay cheaters who kill games. if these are allowed, once peple see others using them and realize they wont be banned, they will begin to cheat too. not banning shit like that makes more people want to cheat b/c it is easier to win and they cant be banned... PLEASE FFS BAN FOR FANA + CRUCADE ATLEAST!

[10010 1111 10]

Actually it's kind of a moot point given the nature of direct connect and current circumstances. However, as to our reasoning behind why we chose not to make multiple heroes and phanata-crusaders bannable, well; phanata-crusaders is a horrible horrible strat and if you loose to phanata-crusaders you deserve to loose lol. As for multiple heroes, we decided that the cost / benefit ratio was acceptable for fair game play. But like I said, it's all kinda moot anyway.

[CARLOS]

but... as people see that it is not bannable, they will start doing it too. and fana crucader is not as easy to beat as you make it sound. either way they are glitches and should be banned.

[10010 1111 10]

I guess you missed the whole part about it being moot anyway?

[CARLOS]

srry. i dont understand this "moot" word. and, do you see that more and more people will begin to cheat since it is not bannable? just ban it. whether it is "moot" or not. idc if you think that it is a horrible strategy or that for heroes it is "moot" to waste money to get 2nd hero. the point is that whether the civ points used for fana + crusade leave nothing much left, IT STILL IS A CHEAT, and you should not make it not bannable since it is so "easy to beat"

[10010 1111 10]

Moot: An irrelevant question, a matter of little or no importance.
I've been trying to skirt the issue but since you don't seem to get it I'll spell it out for ya; we cant prove who cheated in a direct connect game, therefore what is and what is not ban-able in a game is irrelevant or "moot". Sorry, but that's just the way it is. So arguing over weather or not it should be ban-able is pointless until/unless we can devise a way to mach game players with lobby names.

[CARLOS]

well, how did you manage to ban skylar with an eco glitch? can you be sure it was him? hmm if you could be sure it was him, is it not possible for me to check ip of a cheater?

[10010 1111 10]

At the time we DID have a method of detection that, under certain circumstances, was quite reliable. Currently we do not.

[CARLOS]

woops srry bout re-peat, but there is ip detection shit that the host can run....... if it is a matter or reliability. if there was sufficceint proof to ban a person of cheating (fana + crucade, hero, etc) you are saying it would be bannalbe? would about sufficient people confirming? that along with ss + save game is not enough?

[10010 1111 10]

If... and that's a big IF, it can be "proven", or the staff can be convinced of, who a cheater was then yes we can and probably will ban said cheater. That having been said, phanata-crusaders and multiple heroes are not ban-able. The staff spent considerable time discussing those two issues and has made the decision not to ban for them. See my initial post for the reasons why. Perhaps in the future we may change that position, but I don't think it likely.



Also, not for nothin carlos, but it seems, from a conversation you had the other day in the lobby, that you can't even tell when a mod is being ghosted in games, so how will you determine the identity of anyone else?

«{Co}» Wardog psy cloned Bin today
«{Co}» Wardog btw
«{Co}» Wardog and spammed racial slurs
[RoK]_Carlos_ no he didnt
[RoK]_Carlos_ he didnt
[RoK]_Carlos_ i was in the game
[RoK]_Carlos_ bin was in the game and skylar was in it too
[RoK]_Carlos_ he made fun of bin and called him an asshole
[RoK]_Carlos_ then left
[RoK]_Carlos_ then bin say racial things

[CARLOS]

that is bs. and in reference to the previous conversation, ik you were ghosted. all i was trying to say was the skylar was in the game too and that it was not him doing the ghosting.

[10010 1111 10]

in reference to the previous conversation, ik you were ghosted. all i was trying to say was the skylar was in the game too and that it was not him doing the ghosting.

Fair enough then.

that is bs.

Sorry that you feel that way. Like I said, perhaps in the future we may change our stances on these two issues.

[Omega]

IT STILL IS A CHEAT

What is a cheat is not set in stone. It is defined. You may define something to be a cheat, but that doesn't make it so collectively. Some people consider attacking with an ally cheating, but that doesn't make it actual cheating, because only a small minority define it as such.

Infinite Fanaticism and the Multiple Hero Glitch were not bannable originally. They were made bannable late into when banning started.

Originally, the VU moderators, namely Fatmother, had defended completely the Multiple Hero Glitch in particular, saying that anyone who thought it was a glitch was a complete idiot, and that it was clearly and obviously an Easter egg (an intentional special feature for players to discover, added by the developers). I never heard an official opinion on the Infinite Fanaticism glitch until it was made illegal, although obviously they did not think it a pressing enough issue to originally define it as a cheat.

When the Multiple Hero Glitch was legal, you never basically saw it being used in serious, competitive games. This is a clue right there as to how good it is. In fact, you rarely ever saw it being used at all, and it wasn't because people didn't know how to do it; 99% of the time you saw it being used, it was in games where one person/team had clearly and obviously won, and was just flaunting it to their opposition. This isn't a full analysis of whether or not the glitch should be banned obviously, but the facts do strongly suggest that it wasn't ever really an issue (especially because, as Lusitan essentially put it privately, it was only made bannable because noobs were crying about it). If you want to read a fairly decent analysis of it, you can go to this website that was being spammed a good while ago on the original EE servers: http://eecheaters.proboards.com/index.c ... &thread=16

As for Infinite Fanaticism, I've only seen it win games against noobs, and win games where for some reason a player failed to kill the player using it quickly, and they were left alone to boom for 2 hours. Using this strategy in a serious game is pretty much equivalent to massing Long Bows--I may even actually rate massing Long Bows above Fanaticism+Crusader Swords. It just plainly fails if your opponents know how to beat it. Compared to a standard EEC Sword strategy, it creates too few swords, has too poor of an economy, and is too slow on rush. The extra attack that the swords get doesn't even come close to making up for these deficiencies if you say, pit an EEC sword strategy against it; the only result in this case is that the EEC sword strategy wins in 5-12 f11, assuming the players are of roughly equal skill and the EEC Sword strategy player doesn't get a map with only 2 trees and 1 stone mine, with 7 hard-mode tigers to attack his citizens right at the start.)

If you can make a convincing, well-reasoned argument as to why they are unfair, and should be considered cheating, we'll certainly listen and be willing to re-consider our opinions on them.

[Silence]

IT STILL IS A CHEAT

What is a cheat is not set in stone. It is defined. You may define something to be a cheat, but that doesn't make it so collectively. Some people consider attacking with an ally cheating, but that doesn't make it actual cheating, because only a small minority define it as such.

Infinite Fanaticism and the Multiple Hero Glitch were not bannable originally. They were made bannable late into when banning started.

Originally, the VU moderators, namely Fatmother, had defended completely the Multiple Hero Glitch in particular, saying that anyone who thought it was a glitch was a complete idiot, and that it was clearly and obviously an Easter egg (an intentional special feature for players to discover, added by the developers). I never heard an official opinion on the Infinite Fanaticism glitch until it was made illegal, although obviously they did not think it a pressing enough issue to originally define it as a cheat.

When the Multiple Hero Glitch was legal, you never basically saw it being used in serious, competitive games. This is a clue right there as to how good it is. In fact, you rarely ever saw it being used at all, and it wasn't because people didn't know how to do it; 99% of the time you saw it being used, it was in games where one person/team had clearly and obviously won, and was just flaunting it to their opposition. This isn't a full analysis of whether or not the glitch should be banned obviously, but the facts do strongly suggest that it wasn't ever really an issue (especially because, as Lusitan essentially put it privately, it was only made bannable because noobs were crying about it). If you want to read a fairly decent analysis of it, you can go to this website that was being spammed a good while ago on the original EE servers: http://eecheaters.proboards.com/index.c ... &thread=16

As for Infinite Fanaticism, I've only seen it win games against noobs, and win games where for some reason a player failed to kill the player using it quickly, and they were left alone to boom for 2 hours. Using this strategy in a serious game is pretty much equivalent to massing Long Bows--I may even actually rate massing Long Bows above Fanaticism+Crusader Swords. It just plainly fails if your opponents know how to beat it. Compared to a standard EEC Sword strategy, it creates too few swords, has too poor of an economy, and is too slow on rush. The extra attack that the swords get doesn't even come close to making up for these deficiencies if you say, pit an EEC sword strategy against it; the only result in this case is that the EEC sword strategy wins in 5-12 f11, assuming the players are of roughly equal skill and the EEC Sword strategy player doesn't get a map with only 2 trees and 1 stone mine, with 7 hard-mode tigers to attack his citizens right at the start.)

If you can make a convincing, well-reasoned argument as to why they are unfair, and should be considered cheating, we'll certainly listen and be willing to re-consider our opinions on them.

Originally, the VU moderators, namely Fatmother, had defended completely the Multiple Hero Glitch in particular, saying that anyone who thought it was a glitch was a complete idiot, and that it was clearly and obviously an Easter egg (an intentional special feature for players to discover, added by the developers) and how do you find this easter egg? xD

grz Silence

[CARLOS]

assuming the players are of roughly equal skill and the EEC Sword strategy player doesn't get a map with only 2 trees and 1 stone mine, with 7 hard-mode tigers to attack his citizens right at the start.)

the area that it was used in for me was a 3v3, i was pock with non-exp ca. both wings were rushed and their pock helped the wing with infinite fana. that gives a huge advanteage. even in a 1v1 ca vs fana swords, ca would loose b/c all they can do is run. 2 hits will kill a ca and while a person is running they cannot mannage eco and the other guy can send in a group of swrords to eco economy while other army is distracting the cavs.