← Back to Epicmafia

Never Refund?

xxeroxover 11 years ago

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.

The current bad guidelines that need to be improved : https://epicmafia.com/topic/61726

BUMB. Cos its happening again 20 days later, and nothing changed.

Dataover 11 years ago
wow that great
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
well i just made a stellar post in mod forums about refunds. none of you can see it, but rest assured it was a good 'ne.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Breaking news: Vancy punished for spanking ;)
12
deleteddeletedover 11 years agoedited
I'm all for re-evaluating how we give out refunds, so please keep this discussion going - just keep in mind that as this would involve very major changes it will probably take at least a round or two to thoroughly discuss and begin implementing changes (if any)

And since the mod "spanking" was referenced here, I should address it. I did tell Rutab to delete that post and it was wrong of me to do so. I have been harsh on forum posting and took the wrong approach towards addressing it.
10
xxeroxover 11 years ago
The user was Dingbat
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
instead of trying to define at what exact point it kickflips into throwing just add a timer
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
The violation may not have been wrong depending on how new the user is
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
animegayboy69
the current policy sucks
Still massively better than the days of whoever scrounged the most won the round.
Stevenover 11 years agoedited
xxerox
I just looked an old similar report to my report. Sheriff hipfires d1 shooting a blue. He gets a Note. Mafia wins.
That's a problem (or is possibly a problem, rather) with the violation and not the refund xxerox, you got it wrong. You never refund notes
Stevenover 11 years ago
Retti
if mods don't say 'refund considered' people will instantly assume refund and cause a ruckus if it doesn't happen

i've hipfired without claims before based on a read
It should always happen unless the person wasn't actually hipfiring though, and just had a quick read/gut feeling due to the opening lines or D1 in A/D or whatnot. But in that case mods shouldn't even be giving vios in the first place which is the problem
xxeroxover 11 years agoedited
I just looked an old simmilar report that was made by me. Sheriff hipfires d1 shooting a blue. He gets a Note. Mafia wins.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Retti
if mods don't say 'refund considered' people will instantly assume refund and cause a ruckus if it doesn't happen

i've hipfired without claims before based on a read
based on a read isn't hip firing
1
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Steven
Retti
i agree with riot in some sentiment as i feel if mods were more lenient on refunds then people would try to scrounge harder and reports would double because in reality the report system is sadly only used to get refunds and give violations to the people you don't like
Yeah the problem is that mods already give too many bad violations so if given a chance will also increase the number of bad refunds. Hypothetically speaking though, assuming mods could make good judgements on the matter (which is the assumption I think should be made in rules, rather than the opposite) I think the current way things work is inferior
That's why we're gonna buckle down and make sure we get things right
animegayboy69over 11 years ago
the current policy sucks
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Retti
i agree with riot in some sentiment as i feel if mods were more lenient on refunds then people would try to scrounge harder and reports would double because in reality the report system is sadly only used to get refunds and give violations to the people you don't like
That's why they were tightened up in the first place.

And people get 20 red hearts per day. There's literally no need for refunds there.
Stevenover 11 years ago
Retti
i agree with riot in some sentiment as i feel if mods were more lenient on refunds then people would try to scrounge harder and reports would double because in reality the report system is sadly only used to get refunds and give violations to the people you don't like
Yeah the problem is that mods already give too many bad violations so if given a chance will also increase the number of bad refunds. Hypothetically speaking though, assuming mods could make good judgements on the matter (which is the assumption I think should be made in rules, rather than the opposite) I think the current way things work is inferior
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
if mods don't say 'refund considered' people will instantly assume refund and cause a ruckus if it doesn't happen

i've hipfired without claims before based on a read
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Also I stand by the current precedent of no refunds for red hearts; I am strictly speaking of gold heart games.
Stevenover 11 years ago
Retti
Steven
Whats the current precedent for hipfiring, I'm confused.
Trolling/GT always, refund considered if the user's actions impacted the game largely enough or implied grudge/disregard for someone's role completely
That's dumb if you have to say "refund considered" for a hipfire, when hipfire will always change the game drastically, just IMO
10
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
i agree with riot in some sentiment as i feel if mods were more lenient on refunds then people would try to scrounge harder and reports would double because in reality the report system is sadly only used to get refunds and give violations to the people you don't like
1
Stevenover 11 years ago
Sims
Steven
Whats the current precedent for hipfiring, I'm confused.
depends on the context. most likely gting in gold hearts but mods should be more lenient in red hearts
Well what's the definition of hipfiring would be a better question to ask, actually.

Cuz to me hipfiring is shooting someone without regard or care for their role (clearly GT), rather than shooting fast or without claims like other people use it as.
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Steven
Whats the current precedent for hipfiring, I'm confused.
Trolling/GT always, refund considered if the user's actions impacted the game largely enough or implied grudge/disregard for someone's role completely
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Games used to be refunded way too often and I'd rather the almost-never policy is enforced than the former way that let you scrounge a refund over just about anything.
Simsover 11 years ago
Steven
Whats the current precedent for hipfiring, I'm confused.
depends on the context. most likely gting in gold hearts but mods should be more lenient in red hearts
deleteddeletedover 11 years ago
Steven
Basically the question that mods are currently asking when they refund games is "was the affected team on the better position when the game was affected" when they should be asking "did the rule breaker put the team in a worse position"
xxerox
Lets say, Sheriff Hipfires D1, and shoots hooker. Town wins easily after that. People report the one who hipfire, but his excuse is that he shot mafia so he did not gt. At the end there is no refund, because He was going to shoot the same user the next day no matter what.