#0 - July 16, 2008, 7:30 p.m.
Random Wintrading Accusations and Bans Issued
#13 - July 16, 2008, 7:44 p.m.
Q u o t e:
So we queued 3v3, we never "set up games" and obviously we never participated in illegal win trading, but I try to log into one of my characters today and my account is suspended for 72 hours. I am honestly flummoxed as to how you can mindless issue suspensions like this. I honestly preferred it when you would let random people win trade to #1 rather than suspending because someone probably reported someone else because they didn't like them. I don't know what kind of system you use to identify win-traders, but it is severely flawed and I would suggest that you stop sporadically issuing mass suspensions to people that just wanted to play 3v3.
While the information that has been provided thus far is correct, I'd be happy to look into this further, if at all possible.
Can you provide the name and realm of a character on that account that was affected?
Q u o t e:
that wasn't the case at all. We lost to a team 6 times because we got hard countered and looked for a solution. Why dosn't blizzard just remove arena? we didn't break 1950, we got nothing out of playing arenas for fun that day. They should honestly consider just removing the entire arena system because you can't safely arena without worrying "did i play too many games?" "can we queue? is this going to look like win trading?" great system you have, im glad you investigate these issues so thoroughly.
Let's avoid the profanity, yeah? I'd rather have a dialogue than issue suspensions. Your post lost no integrity when I removed it as well, and it makes your point more effectively.
Removing the arenas because some players are potentially exploiting the system isn't a viable solution though.
#22 - July 16, 2008, 7:49 p.m.
Q u o t e:
my problem isn't that they ban win traders. it's that theoretically anyone could get reported for going up in rating. it's just a stupid system, and I shouldn't have to contest anything when I did absolutely nothing wrong. after they started "cracking down on win traders" they have done nothing but dissuade the participation in arenas overall. The situation right now is basically you cannot "farm" a team, therefore you cannot significantly increase your rating. They should just publicly announce that you can't play against another team for more than X games because this will look suspicious and subsequently you will be suspended for win trading. The blizzard queue system was designed so that you would get queued against teams near your rating. If bans are issued for splitting games, and for farming a team down, then I don't understand how it is safe to participate in arenas at all.
Simply winning repeatedly against a particular team isn't enough, by itself, to set off alarms. I'm not able to provide much more information than that, but these situations are investigated carefully.
If an error was made in this case though, we'd certainly like to know of it. Please do send an email to [email protected] if you feel that the action was levied in error.
I'd also like to examine the matter personally, so I'd also appreciate it if you would provide the name and realm of a character on that account.
#82 - July 16, 2008, 9:17 p.m.
This season, it looks like you guys have 119 total games played, but a full 54 of those are vs. Mal'ganis teams.
More than half of every game your team has ever played has been against Mal'ganis teams. Any way you slice it, that's unusual. While personally I'm not prepared to levy a judgment of any sort on this case, surely you can appreciate why some alarms may have been set off regarding your activities?
#117 - July 16, 2008, 9:51 p.m.
I can appreciate how much this kind of situation raises passions. However, if certain posters are going to leap about in a panic insulting Blizzard and shouting about how I have no experience with the arena system, I'm going to very simply start deleting posts. I do happen to have experience with the arena system, I have a much broader perspective on it than you have the means to acquire, and I'm not interested in elitist nonsense. My interest here is in providing clarity to those affected by this situation, if I'm able to.
1) If you approach this situation with that attitude, you are not helping. Your personal experiences at high rating in the arena are not valuable to me for purposes of this discussion. I'm looking at numbers, and comparing those numbers to other numbers to create data. The plural of anecdote is not data.
2) I am trying to help, and to provide clarity in this situation. I am not interested in levying accusations. If you don't think you can follow this discussion without spouting wild hyperbole and accusations, then I suggest you stop reading the thread. If you can remain civil, and post rationally, then by all means, continue spectating and commenting.
Now then - most of the other teams, including some of the other teams faced at high rating from Mal'ganis, do not show similar ratios. When I said 'unusual', I meant it.
I'm currently seeking out more information that may shed some light on this situation, but I ask that those who are involved be patient. It may take some time for me to provide more information, and ultimately, I may not have much to add.
However, if I can provide some clarity, I'll do so as soon as is feasible.
#176 - July 16, 2008, 10:29 p.m.
Q u o t e:
Some of us are genuinely worried, I hope the random posts don't make you turn back on the investigation.
They won't.
#221 - July 16, 2008, 11:10 p.m.
Q u o t e:
I wish he would pay attention to my posts as opposed to these random trolls...
:(
Don't worry, I haven't missed any posts.
I am not personally attempting to 'prove' anything at the moment. There's a concern I'm attempting to address regarding whether this action was merited. As a result, I have related some limited facts associated with this situation: that one set of teams has unusual fighting patterns, potentially related to arranged 'series' or win-trading. A longstanding pattern inconsistent with some of the other top rated teams on the same battlegroup. Regardless of how that is justified, it is going to look out of place when it comes time to investigate =/. That is all I was attempting to express.
The conflict that I see here is that, historically at least, privately arranging games in an effort to guarantee that a particular opposing team would be fought is not okay. Regardless of how much sense it may or may not make once a team is fighting at the top of the ladder.
I am currently seeking clarification on this matter though, and I'll provide more information when and if I am able to. In the meantime, I strongly suggest that if you genuinely feel that this action was taken in error, that you send an email to [email protected] explaining your position in detail.
#256 - July 17, 2008, 1:41 a.m.
Q u o t e:
What is the point of queing over and over for 7 min cues, get 3 points per win, and then on the 5th game get a d/c and lose 30 points?
Now you've gained in 5 games in 1 hour 12 points and lost 30. So for a record of 4-1 you lost 18 points because you got d/ced. See what we mean by risk?
Yeah, I do understand =(. We're aware of that and we are examining arena dynamics at the highest levels.
Keep in mind that there are still policies to abide by, and that frustration or heightened risk in queuing is not license to violate those policies.
For now, assume that if you are privately arranging games (particularly among friends and guild mates on the same realm) to face a specific team then you are putting your team at risk.
If you are seeking opponents of an equivalent rating, it would be acceptable to announce publicly via our battlegroup forums that you intend to queue for a particular bracket during a particular time frame as an open call to opponents of high rating. Please keep in mind that if it appears that foul play is afoot then these activities could still be subject to investigation.
#258 - July 17, 2008, 1:44 a.m.
Q u o t e:
Blue, are you still looking into this? Some of my friends are saying they emailed AA again today and got a "no actions taken will be reversed" email.
I am, however, these determinations are up to our Account Administration staff, and they alone. Those players may feel free to continue their dialog with our AA department via email, but I'm not in a position to intervene directly myself.
#265 - July 17, 2008, 2:20 a.m.
Q u o t e:
We do this all the time via a public IRC channel. Is that win trading?
It could be, potentially. If you are arranging matches and fixing the queue to face specific teams, then that's almost certainly a violation. Wherever you do that, privately or publicly, it would be considered win-trading. It’s as simple as that. On the other hand, as long as you’re not fixing the queue, you should be in the clear.
If you want to come to the Battlegroup Forums and announce what time you’ll be queuing, ready to face anyone and without making specific arrangements, then that should be fine.
It would be best to use your Battlegroup Forum as any account in good standing has access to it, and it ensures that your call is going out via an official channel, and, perhaps most importantly, it's in a place that we can see. Even those that have lost their forum privileges should have relatively ready access to that information via word of mouth.
#277 - July 17, 2008, 2:48 a.m.
Q u o t e:
I just did. I now know the best level 19 twink items for every class. That's about it though.
It should be very easy to spread the word, no?
#280 - July 17, 2008, 2:53 a.m.
Q u o t e:
Okay so if we were to go to the BG forums and make a post every time we want to play, we'll never get banned randomly because we happen to play someone on our server 10 times? SWEET!
Quoted from my earlier post:
- If you are seeking opponents of an equivalent rating, it would be acceptable to announce publicly via our battlegroup forums that you intend to queue for a particular bracket during a particular time frame as an open call to opponents of high rating. Please keep in mind that if it appears that foul play is afoot then these activities could still be subject to investigation.
#285 - July 17, 2008, 3:04 a.m.
Q u o t e:
Right. What I'm trying to say is that this has been going on for over a year now. Why is Blizzard just now starting to ban for it?
Actually, win-trading has been punishable (and actioned) since the conclusion of Season 1. We are expanding our efforts to ensure that exploitation of the system is extinguished.