Skip to content

Banning players ingame.

2»

Comments

  • Hutch_DmitriHutch_Dmitri Posts: 361 admin
    HeissRod said:
    I'm also interested in why the person who filed the complaint was not punished as well.  While they were the target of a player who pushed them out of the top 10, regardless of your claim that spending your tickets on one person did not result in the ban, that submitting player is still one who participated in the group collusion in the event.  If you are going to punish some, then they all should have been punished.  At this point, it seems as though the person who submitted the claim is justified in snitching and was rewarded for doing so, even though they were guilty as well.
    While certainly there were further guilty parties than the two we identified, but it was only those two about whom we had sufficient evidence to act.
  • AslanVAslanV Posts: 1,123 ✭✭✭
    I hope that a) is ok, as you are just playing you stronger hand.

    For the second use case, I always have been surprised by people willing to spend money on a game for others...

    About the b), there is ONE distinction. Do you loose by misplacing you cars (or playing a weaker hand) and doing the race OR by just quitting before the race even happens ?

    Misplacing your car does expose you to others... 

    Full disclosure, never experienced this first hand...
  • milewski1015milewski1015 Posts: 2,253 ✭✭✭✭✭
    AslanV said:
    I hope that a) is ok, as you are just playing you stronger hand.

    For the second use case, I always have been surprised by people willing to spend money on a game for others...

    About the b), there is ONE distinction. Do you loose by misplacing you cars (or playing a weaker hand) and doing the race OR by just quitting before the race even happens ?

    Misplacing your car does expose you to others... 

    Full disclosure, never experienced this first hand...
    Quitting the race places your hand randomly. The distinction with quitting would be if you’re selecting your opponent beforehand and therefore feeding points directly or just dropping points yourself
  • O__VERO__VER Posts: 2,239 ✭✭✭✭✭
    AslanV said:
    I hope that a) is ok, as you are just playing you stronger hand.

    For the second use case, I always have been surprised by people willing to spend money on a game for others...

    About the b), there is ONE distinction. Do you loose by misplacing you cars (or playing a weaker hand) and doing the race OR by just quitting before the race even happens ?

    Misplacing your car does expose you to others... 

    Full disclosure, never experienced this first hand...
    Quitting the race places your hand randomly. The distinction with quitting would be if you’re selecting your opponent beforehand and therefore feeding points directly or just dropping points yourself
    I wouldn't say 'randomly'. Quitting places the cars in the order they are in your hand before you place them. So if like me you order your cars from highest RQ on the left to lowest RQ on the right (since that's the default sort order), your cars will be placed that way. Since it's not random, it is possible to order your hand in a way that is most likely to work for the tracksets and less likely to leave a bad 'ghost'.

    This is beside the point of this thread, but thought I'd point it out as many people don't know this (I'm sure you do though).
  • milewski1015milewski1015 Posts: 2,253 ✭✭✭✭✭
    O__VER said:
    AslanV said:
    I hope that a) is ok, as you are just playing you stronger hand.

    For the second use case, I always have been surprised by people willing to spend money on a game for others...

    About the b), there is ONE distinction. Do you loose by misplacing you cars (or playing a weaker hand) and doing the race OR by just quitting before the race even happens ?

    Misplacing your car does expose you to others... 

    Full disclosure, never experienced this first hand...
    Quitting the race places your hand randomly. The distinction with quitting would be if you’re selecting your opponent beforehand and therefore feeding points directly or just dropping points yourself
    I wouldn't say 'randomly'. Quitting places the cars in the order they are in your hand before you place them. So if like me you order your cars from highest RQ on the left to lowest RQ on the right (since that's the default sort order), your cars will be placed that way. Since it's not random, it is possible to order your hand in a way that is most likely to work for the tracksets and less likely to leave a bad 'ghost'.

    This is beside the point of this thread, but thought I'd point it out as many people don't know this (I'm sure you do though).
    Yeah, I meant randomly such that your hand isn’t tailored to the track set - unless specifically pre-ordering your hand to make it as viable as possible on all sets. It’s likely that your cars are placed in less than ideal positions. Thanks for elaborating though for those who might not have known. I can see how my word choice was poor - a result of squeezing a response in at work
  • HeissRodHeissRod Posts: 8,027 ✭✭✭✭✭
    O__VER said:
    AslanV said:
    I hope that a) is ok, as you are just playing you stronger hand.

    For the second use case, I always have been surprised by people willing to spend money on a game for others...

    About the b), there is ONE distinction. Do you loose by misplacing you cars (or playing a weaker hand) and doing the race OR by just quitting before the race even happens ?

    Misplacing your car does expose you to others... 

    Full disclosure, never experienced this first hand...
    Quitting the race places your hand randomly. The distinction with quitting would be if you’re selecting your opponent beforehand and therefore feeding points directly or just dropping points yourself
    So if like me you order your cars from highest RQ on the left to lowest RQ on the right (since that's the default sort order)
    You mean I'm not the only one that does that?  :D
  • markgames1970markgames1970 Posts: 3
    edited February 3
    We really need a good rewrite of the rules so that people will understand them and what will be classed as collusion and what is a safe racing practice in the game.

    I know that I was in 1st place in a recient price event and ended Tier2 (not a problem as I still got the prize car), I was in tier 1 until about the last few hours, but I was racing against the three below me to make a gap so I had a chance to get the prize car, I lost about 400 points in a few hours (the people who finished above me had better hands than mine at the end. I am fine with that, I don't go on messenger to say I want you banned I don't report them to hutch as I think they won fair and square, If they did collude I have no proof, and I congratulate them for playing how they did as if they wanted to or even just felt like it they could of pushed me out of the top 10 


    People have said that new rules have been added to TOPDRIVES yet I am still to see anything about these
  • Hutch_DmitriHutch_Dmitri Posts: 361 admin
    @Hutch_Dmitri can you clarify something, please? Let's consider this hypothetical situation:

    I'm in first place in a bracket that awards T1 prize to the Top 2 players. I have a friend who is in 3rd place. Based on the rules you outlined above:
    a) Am I allowed to buy multiple sets of tickets and race the "enemy" currently in 2nd place, basically knocking them out down to 4th or 5th? My friend who was in 3rd is now in 2nd place.
    b) Am I allowed to deliberately lose to my friend in 3rd place to give them a chance to elevate to 2nd place?

    The effect of both a and b is practically the same, and the game design allows for both scenarios. It seems an issue of semantics where you are drawing the line, and I believe a game update that implements these rules as part of what the game allows you to do is necessary in order to clarify and justify this difference in policy.

    But if you want to tell me that a) is also not allowed, that will not be okay with the player base or the spirit of the game. If I have a vendetta against a particular player with a weaker hand and want to play 100 tickets against them and drop them down the leader board, there is nothing in the rules that says I can't do that.

    And I have to say, even though option b) may seem unethical, it is part of racing and happens in real racing all the time - one driver blocking and slowing down another behind, giving a chance for his team mate to catch up and overtake. Or two cars drafting (the infamous "shake'n'bake"). It's racing. And it's beautiful.


    Both options here qualify as collusion, with option b) certainly being the most obvious example, although with option a) this depends on your intention - are you attacking someone because you don't like them, or because you want to boost your friend? 

    Regardless, on a smaller scale, such examples are inevitable. Please understand that our goal here is not to punish ANY form of collusion, which is normal for this game, as we all have friends and we cannot stop you from talking to each other. If anything, it is simply impossible for us to investigate all cases, as quite often such behaviour can be indistinguishable from normal player behaviour. 

    The bottom line is, creating a wall to block the top tier, or obviously boosting someone who can't achieve the reward on their own merit, is what we would consider a form of collusion worth investigating. Even then, we will make sure we have all the necessary evidence before taking action.
  • greddygreddy Posts: 1,944 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited February 3
    If option A is offense and can result in ban than something is really wrong with your view on game and soon you will be without players to play that game as most will be banned.

    I think you should start hiring additional support staff. 
  • lemmings99olemmings99o Posts: 1,876 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Saying that targeting a specific player can be classed as collusion opens up a massive grey area tho for people to complain to support about, I hope they're prepared for the influx of cases where people complain that this person kept beating me all the time.
  • LittleEnosBurdetteLittleEnosBurdette Posts: 3,192 ✭✭✭✭✭
    The more communication we get the more confusing it gets. I’ve hit the same guy the last 30 odd tickets in the CF event, not because he’s an enemy, it’s just what’s necessary, I’ll buy tickets at the end to continue to do so if needed also. 

    What am I meant to do, just leave him alone and take tier2 instead? 

    Bizarre. 
  • Hutch_DmitriHutch_Dmitri Posts: 361 admin
    The more communication we get the more confusing it gets. I’ve hit the same guy the last 30 odd tickets in the CF event, not because he’s an enemy, it’s just what’s necessary, I’ll buy tickets at the end to continue to do so if needed also. 

    What am I meant to do, just leave him alone and take tier2 instead? 

    Bizarre. 

    There isn’t a definitive list of the exact things you can do to collude, because as soon as you set a line, bad actors are going to find the next strategy that is technically legal according to the rules as written, but clearly go against the spirit of the rules. Realistically, in a mobile game these rules should be enforced by the game design, but for now we have to outline our view.

    I appreciate this is a debatable topic, and you are confused, so I will summarise:

    1) Strategising with other players where you create a wall at the top of a bracket, thus blocking other players from reaching the prize positions, is a behaviour that we want to discourage.
    2) Strategising with other players where you are deciding that player x should be given position y on the leaderboard, or feeding other players lots of wins, or elevating players that don’t have a hand far beyond what they could do on their own are all behaviours that we want to discourage.
    3) Support may take action if sufficient evidence is available, and it is clear that collusion is taking place which makes the game unfair.

    I'm going to lock this thread as otherwise we can go round all day long. Please get in touch via PM if you have more questions. 
This discussion has been closed.