Jump to content


Fair Play Policy


  • Please log in to reply
1799 replies to this topic

Mrduckhead #201 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:31 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 60456 battles
  • 20
  • Member since:
    03-29-2015

View PostViktor_95, on 08 November 2016 - 05:49 PM, said:

I WAS BANNED FOR NO REASON!!!  JUST CAUSE I DON'T READ NEWS AND I HAD GHOST TANKS ENABLED GJ WG :(:facepalm:

 

Very Good!!!!

All illegal mod users should bann for 30 years!! :) 

Enjoy it now moron cheater. :)

 



Kandly #202 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:33 PM

    Player

  • Player
  • 1020 battles
  • 808
  • Member since:
    08-23-2016

*
POPULAR

Guys,

 

I know that you have many questions, but it is unlikely we will be able to answer every single one. One of the main reasons we're doing this, besides letting everyone enjoy a fair and clean game, is the fact that we want to avoid people using that information to abuse or bypass the system. For now, the most important thing to take from this is: if a mod changes the functionality of certain in-game features to provide a player with an unfair advantage, it is forbidden. If you have any doubts about a specific mod falling into the forbidden category, our advice is to not take the risk and decide to not install the mod. Installing a mod is up to the player. If the mod looks like it could create problems, it probably will.

 

We are also in the process of reviewing mods currently being advertised on the forum. Please note that mods aren't allowed just because they have a topic on the forum. We will examine and remove topics containing illegal mods, however that is an ongoing task and it will most likely take some time.

 

Be assured that no one will be banned just because another player says so.

 

As for autoaim, our "forbidden" list includes mods that allow players to enable built-in auto-aim/target lock without having the enemy tank highlighted by the crosshair.



Typhu5 #203 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:33 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 24055 battles
  • 43
  • Member since:
    06-14-2011

Block Quote

Before punishing a player, our team will review the case to ensure the discipline is merited. We’re asking you to trust in their decisions. They are under no obligation to provide the player evidence or explain which mod type the player was found to be using, and will not do so even if requested.

 

Spoiler

Like a few others already said. This one sentence is a huge problem. Wargaming, i know it's your game and you can make rules, but seriously, imagine the police comes and arrest you and put you in jail and nobody is under the obligation to provide evidence. That is something that would happen in a totalitarian society/nation. As i see it, i can now get banned even if i don't use mods and i can't fight that ban because your answer would be "We review every case and found you guilty. Thank you for writing the Wargaming support and have fun with the game."

 

PLZ, change that sentence and provide evidence when asked.


Edited by Typhu5, 08 November 2016 - 06:45 PM.


FilipM_eu #204 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:34 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 36511 battles
  • 7
  • [COSBY] COSBY
  • Member since:
    09-29-2012

View PostRevener, on 08 November 2016 - 03:41 PM, said:

 

Only thing that needs to be done with arty is to remove the chance to penetrate tanks, I'm fine with as long as I don't have to worry about those retarded 1 shot dumb luck kills.

 

 

I really don't mind those because they happen so rarely to me. What bothers me is arty who keeps shooting me over and over again because reasons or breaks my ammo rack twice.



Docedoc #205 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:34 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 16122 battles
  • 4
  • Member since:
    08-18-2012

First step. Thanx Wargaming!


 

Now... FINISH THEM! --> Remove res_mods completely.


 



gdgrim #206 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:39 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 33304 battles
  • 89
  • Member since:
    10-07-2012

View Postrustysprite, on 08 November 2016 - 05:42 PM, said:

 

A lot of this is a good idea, but what I like most is having all mod's approved by WG

Not sure how it can be done, but a bit like an APPROVED stamp that allows you to use it and if you use a mod without this "stamp"... banned

Could it be possible?

 

Yes they can also just approve mods. They could write s simple validation system, where all Approved mods would have some hash (sort of password) that would be then automatically approved on wot's server. They employ hundreds of IT people, I'm sure they can come up with system in less than a week if they want.

dotns #207 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:39 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 59956 battles
  • 167
  • [SAM] SAM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2012

View PostMrduckhead, on 08 November 2016 - 06:31 PM, said:

 

Very Good!!!!

All illegal mod users should bann for 30 years!! :) 

Enjoy it now moron cheater. :)

 

 

GJ

Gremlin182 #208 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:39 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 63554 battles
  • 10,428
  • Member since:
    04-18-2012

Its always going to be a constant battle to get rid of illegal mods and to think otherwise is just deluding yourself.

 

So someone writes an aimbiot program and you think its a really simple thing to remove it.

rubbish.

Should wargaming manage to block the mod it will be rewritten to get around the block and so on.

In the Q&A it was admitted they wanted to move against the illegal mods without giving away when and how then work to keep them out.

 

What they will be able to do is keep it under control so only a few players use them.

That said we have zero idea as to how many are currently using such mods.



_Only_Schiller_ #209 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:40 PM

    Corporal

  • Player
  • 5634 battles
  • 143
  • [COS-X] COS-X
  • Member since:
    08-31-2016
another fake news for no brain peoples

sniperwolf66 #210 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:40 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 48188 battles
  • 238
  • [ORA] ORA
  • Member since:
    11-23-2011


douglarse #211 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:41 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 64892 battles
  • 1,038
  • Member since:
    11-22-2011
"We’re asking you to trust in their decisions. They are under no obligation to provide the player evidence or explain which mod type the player was found to be using, and will not do so even if requested."
 
While its great that WG are actually doing something about cheats, the above phrase does concern me a little.
 
I think there might be a good few players get banned for nothing apart from the reason the person they shot/killed got butthurt about it.


Procrastinator7 #212 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:42 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 5181 battles
  • 429
  • Member since:
    02-20-2014

Very good but I'm missing the actual list that is stated in the announcement.

 

Announcement

We’ve outlined a clear list of illegal mods that we will share with you here and now 

 

The list given in the announcement is a guideline, which is good, but not a "clear list of illegal mods".



gdgrim #213 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:42 PM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 33304 battles
  • 89
  • Member since:
    10-07-2012
Also, WG has currently NO WAY of knowing if you are running illegal mods. Unless you are botting which is detectable... but other than that, empty words.

Laponac #214 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:43 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Community Contributor
  • 42803 battles
  • 1,518
  • [TAKE] TAKE
  • Member since:
    02-06-2014

Finally some good news, although i would like to know how will you find forbidden mod users? 

 

Is only way to catch a cheater to have some evidence of them using a mod? Like their own replay or their own screenshot? If that is the case, looks like only cheaters stupid enough to share their replays and screenshots will get banned, which is not really comforting.



_Epic__ #215 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:44 PM

    Sergeant

  • Beta Tester
  • 44277 battles
  • 235
  • [WHO] WHO
  • Member since:
    11-24-2010

View PostKandly, on 08 November 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

As for autoaim, our "forbidden" list includes mods that allow players to enable built-in auto-aim/target lock without having the enemy tank highlighted by the crosshair.

Now was that so hard? So autoaim+ is not allowed. The same logic can be applied to mods like battle assistant and zoom oud mods, but I guess you arent going to be consistent in your decision making.



SharpyBonfire #216 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:45 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 39597 battles
  • 1,961
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

Another widely used, now banned mod must be safeshot?

 

 



Ronnie_Soak #217 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:47 PM

    Private

  • Player
  • 19674 battles
  • 29
  • [D-GOD] D-GOD
  • Member since:
    03-14-2015

View PostKandly, on 08 November 2016 - 06:33 PM, said:

Guys,

 

..........

 

As for autoaim, our "forbidden" list includes mods that allow players to enable built-in auto-aim/target lock without having the enemy tank highlighted by the crosshair.

 

Thanks Kandly. 

 

There it is!  100% clear!  Autoaim+ is illegal.

 

I think this will make a big difference if it can actually be detected and stopped.



VuLKeN_Retired #218 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:47 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46916 battles
  • 532
  • Member since:
    07-08-2011

View PostKandly, on 08 November 2016 - 05:33 PM, said:

Guys,

 

I know that you have many questions, but it is unlikely we will be able to answer every single one. One of the main reasons we're doing this, besides letting everyone enjoy a fair and clean game, is the fact that we want to avoid people using that information to abuse or bypass the system. For now, the most important thing to take from this is: if a mod changes the functionality of certain in-game features to provide a player with an unfair advantage, it is forbidden. If you have any doubts about a specific mod falling into the forbidden category, our advice is to not take the risk and decide to not install the mod. Installing a mod is up to the player. If the mod looks like it could create problems, it probably will.

 

We are also in the process of reviewing mods currently being advertised on the forum. Please note that mods aren't allowed just because they have a topic on the forum. We will examine and remove topics containing illegal mods, however that is an ongoing task and it will most likely take some time.

 

Be assured that no one will be banned just because another player says so.

 

As for autoaim, our "forbidden" list includes mods that allow players to enable built-in auto-aim/target lock without having the enemy tank highlighted by the crosshair.

 

You know in case WG haven't already figure it out; we aren't in North Korea here.. you are taking thousands and thousands of £/€ from this region and you tell us without any explanation you can simply delete us from the damn game. Have you people lost your mind? It might be in the ToS and rules etc etc but in reality you need to show some humility here, If you find someone guilty of something you provide the evidence and show due process.. perhaps Stalin didn't pass the memo but it's pretty straight forward. You find evidence, you present the player with the evidence and explain to them why they are banned. The last part is even a bit nazi-ish but it is your game and we can't really have a jury so whatever. 

 

Not aiming this personally at you Kandly but since you're representing WG it's aimed through you. 



Cobra6 #219 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:48 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Beta Tester
  • 16624 battles
  • 18,493
  • [RGT] RGT
  • Member since:
    09-17-2010

View PostDomstadtkerl, on 08 November 2016 - 02:10 PM, said:

Now remove arta and you might actually have a decent game after 5 years.

 

+1

 

And WG: How about banning the f'ers that have been cheating the past 5 years instead of starting just now?

 

Cobra 6



Voen_Sveta #220 Posted 08 November 2016 - 06:49 PM

    Staff Sergeant

  • Player
  • 48614 battles
  • 465
  • Member since:
    11-06-2015

View Postkikox, on 08 November 2016 - 05:52 PM, said:

And why are Battle Assistant and XVM still legal despite of your rules?

 

WG already implemented their own version of Battle Assistant (almost exact copy) in sandbox vanilla client, so with some update we will get it in standard client






3 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 3 guests, 0 anonymous users