Is this a policy? No matter how one trolls or ruins the game, moderators never refund it? Its this some god damn conspiracy or something? Why when someone trolls, gets a gt vio, and is suspended there is no Refund? Why no one ever gives refunds, if someone in the game gets a vio??????????
I mean literally, You are giving points to a winning side, that won only because of the troll/gt user :/ And you encorage such gameplay.
Why not for instance... Remove the player with violation Off the Round, and refund the game!
P.S. If someone gets a Violation through a round, i think its just fair, he to be removed from the round. I don't like players that get a GT vio for 24 hours come back after those 24 hours just to throw again.
BUMB. Cos its happening again 20 days later, and nothing changed.
deleteddeletedover 11 years agoedited
@Connor
Yeah I know but I think it's easier for us (especially newer mods) to have something to reference. It doesn't mean we would be looking at each case the same way. We would obviously need to look at each scenario differently, as they are all different
10
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
2014 has been a wild year to follow the mod team.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
What is there to discuss? Trolling and not playing seriously in a game tips the game over into something unacceptable. Refund for trolling. Common sense. Come on now.
I can confirm that there were not 700 reports per week of ISP in training.
The refunds is what really tightened them up.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
it's not at all like the other rules implemented had any affect at all
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
you mean the rule that was shipped with 4 other rules including the removal of ISP in training?
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
i don't think anyone is making it set in stone if that's how it has to be so i think as long as the context is used as a sort of reference instead of final say it should be fine
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
applying rigid formula to rule applications that are always always contextual is the wrong way to do things
1
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Not true. Hence why reports went down so much after refunds got tightened up. There used to be 1500 reports per week at the start of this year.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
i think that's a good precedent
i like the idea of contextualizing it in specific violations and offenses
10
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
who cares. people reported stuff and asked for a refund to go along with it. if they didnt ask for a refund they were going to report it anyway
if you're a good player you should be able to read around the isper and still win
10
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
it's still an issue, if the apeescaper incident is anything to go by.
11
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
I got a lot of refunds for ISP which really shouldn't have been refunded, too.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
That's basically the same thing, Retti, just that my idea we can build more clear-cut and visible precedents that should determine if there needs to be a refund. I am not saying that it should be an "auto-vio" every time it happens since each scenario will be different, but at least it's something easy to look at. Slow had a good idea for ISP in mod chat. "Only refunded if it made it far enough into MYLO or LYLO". I agree with this because that's too far into the game to just sit and pretend nothing is happened. Usually ISP is easy to work around in the early stages of the game; ISP'ers are even ignored at that time.
"i think considering advantages at all in refunds is the wrong way to do it, just imo."
I agree
deleteddeletedover 11 years agoedited
I remember helping to refund a game for ISP in which Connor was afk for maybe a total of 5 minutes. The ISP got admin ot'd quite rightfully so by Laexio. So unjustified refunding did used to be a huge problem and that's why we have become so conservative about them over the past few years. Perhaps too conservative, I will admit.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
i think considering advantages at all in refunds is the wrong way to do it, just imo.
I still think people should be removed from the round if they do something majour, rather than giving them second chance.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
I do what I want.
2
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
the game gira mentioned should have been refunded regardless of the circumstance, there was a clear chance to win and his partner practically gave up
it doesn't matter if two or three scum were already dead
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
The easier solution is to refund if the offense was a big enough impact to alter the outcome of the game or give the team that the violation occurred an unfair advantage
I have. Most of them were totally normal, with a few rounds that were bizarre due to mid-round resets, which seemed to happen every other round for a while. issue was always significantly exaggerated.
