|
This is like selling gold or account leveling in WoW. You can ignore it, since it's minor, but it also meant you had a lot of bots running around and it negatively influenced the economy by driving up prices and everyone had to spend more money on the auction house. And in general, people worked for their arena rank, money, achievements. What is the point to a game if all your achievements have a chance to be the result of hacking or other shady actions? I think it's pathetic in general, no pro player should enable these idiots that want to buy their achievements.
Also, there are some other similar things in SC2 like account sharing to be able to play cross server, smurfing to get multiple GM accounts, letting your little brother play on your account or whatever, but those are all flaws of the ladder system and I don't mind people circumventing them. Blizzard is adding a practice ladder with no rank and cross server play in HotS.
|
On July 16 2012 22:02 Wroshe wrote:
I actually see a big difference between these leveled accounts and actual cheating. This to me only appears to be against the EULA but does not actually do any damage.
You claim it hurts exposure of up and coming semi-pro's. In reality though while it hurts them it is a spot that would otherwise have been taken by a smurf of said pro gamer, the only difference is that this smurf has another owner who uses it in team games.
The coincidence that people that pay to hvae their accounts leveled hack is not an argument on whether the leveling should be legal. It is the same as claiming that the sale of firearms should be illegal because you claim that the people buying them have a tendency to drive over the speed limit. (For the record: I am against selling firearms but that is because of the useage of the gun itself).
How does it not do any damage? Playing against someone who's true MMR is 1500 above yours is just as bad as playing against a maphacker. Your chance of winning are probably less. It delegitimatizes the ladder. It's not fair to those who play without having someone level up their account. It steals a spot on the GM ladder. It's against the rules, etc.
It even delegitmatizes the game. Who wants to play a game where cheaters and hackers run rampant, while the developers are oblivious or apathetic to doing anything about it? Would it make you more likely to recommend such a game to your friend?
|
On July 16 2012 21:58 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 21:54 Daniel C wrote:On July 16 2012 21:43 rd wrote:On July 16 2012 20:51 Daniel C wrote:On July 16 2012 20:40 rd wrote:On July 16 2012 20:28 Daniel C wrote:
It seems to me that one of the main reasons that people who are defending this practice offer is that "it's just ladder". Sadly, the integrity of ladder continues to suffer precisely because of this attitude. If ladder truly meant nothing, then yeah, who cares. But for aspiring semi-pros, GM may make the difference between getting noticed or not, or tournament qualification.
In an ideal world, smurf accounts would not be allowed either. Then ladder ranking could actually be used for something meaniz,ngful. Let's use a chess analogy: let's say that an amateur player paid a chess grandmaster to obtain a grandmaster title for him. In the process, several aspiring players in the same tournament were unable to achieve their final GM "norm" (points counting towards GM qualification) because they were playing against an elite player. Surely, bot the actual grandmaster and the paying "customer" would be severely punished for such a fraud.
Would you guys be OK with paying someone to take your exams for you? Just because we support pro players and their livelihoods does not mean we have to support their actions.
Two wrongs do not make a right, and the ends do not justify the means, etc. etc. No, I defend it because I don't think anyone should really care what people want to spend their money on. Also, when the number one argument is how leveling accounts degrades the integrity of GM what the fuck else do you expect to hear in response? GM IS very abusable, REGARDLESS of leveling accounts. It's an issue with GM, and the value everyone is placing in it. Comparison isn't relevant. Also, in general everyone needs to stop mentioning pro players, they aren't all pro players offering it. I don't think you understand my point. My point is that I feel that ladder should and could mean something. Just like in the chess world, your FIDE point ranking is rather important. The difficulty is making sure that the person playing behind the account is the person they claim to be. In theory, would it be possible to make GM meaningful, just like a chess grandmaster rating is meaningful? Re: the bolded part. It does matter if it's against the rules and hurts others. It'd obviously be cool for it to be meaningful, but it currently isn't, and it has nothing to do with leveling accounts. If GM was functioning properly account levelers couldn't affect the top ranking players. lol @ your re. It's against the rules because you have to share your account, and Blizzard does not want you playing SC2 unless you bought the game. It has never hurt anyone other than those who go out of their way on TL to be hurt by it. Doesn't affect me. I'm referring to aspiring semipros. and before you go "gm smurfs are plenty" or 'if he's good it doesn't matter', please answer this: what other mainstream sport would tolerate this kind of impersonation? What reality allows you to do such impersonations in a mainstream sport in a way the internet can? The two can't be compared.
So you're saying that its ok to cheat the system because its difficult to get caught? i know they can't be directly compared, doesn't mean we should not try to uphold the integrity of the game.
|
On July 16 2012 22:07 Grumbels wrote:
This is like selling gold or account leveling in WoW. You can ignore it, since it's minor, but it also meant you had a lot of bots running around and it negatively influenced the economy by driving up prices and everyone had to spend more money on the auction house. And in general, people worked for their arena rank, money, achievements. What is the point to a game if all your achievements have a chance to be the result of hacking or other shady actions? I think it's pathetic in general, no pro player should enable these idiots that want to buy their achievements.
There are also players in WoW that are just really, really good at making millions of gold on the AH and players who are really, really fast at power leveling characters. Not everyone is a bot/hacker, and you don't have to accept bots/hackers to accept selling gold in WoW.
|
I don't see a problem with this.
They're not stealing spots from anyone. They have to earn it themselves by doing the boosting.
Someone playing legit also has to earn the spot. Both sides have equal opportunities.
|
On July 16 2012 22:13 rd wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 22:07 Grumbels wrote:
This is like selling gold or account leveling in WoW. You can ignore it, since it's minor, but it also meant you had a lot of bots running around and it negatively influenced the economy by driving up prices and everyone had to spend more money on the auction house. And in general, people worked for their arena rank, money, achievements. What is the point to a game if all your achievements have a chance to be the result of hacking or other shady actions? I think it's pathetic in general, no pro player should enable these idiots that want to buy their achievements. There are also players in WoW that are just really, really good at making millions of gold on the AH and players who are really, really fast at power leveling characters. Not everyone is a bot/hacker, and you don't have to accept bots/hackers to accept selling gold in WoW.
Making gold off of the AH isn't cheating, just as how being good at SC2 isn't cheating.
Is it OK to let people cheat simply because they're bad?
|
On July 16 2012 22:05 Daniel C wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 21:55 Technique wrote:On July 16 2012 21:54 Daniel C wrote:On July 16 2012 21:43 rd wrote:On July 16 2012 20:51 Daniel C wrote:On July 16 2012 20:40 rd wrote:On July 16 2012 20:28 Daniel C wrote:
It seems to me that one of the main reasons that people who are defending this practice offer is that "it's just ladder". Sadly, the integrity of ladder continues to suffer precisely because of this attitude. If ladder truly meant nothing, then yeah, who cares. But for aspiring semi-pros, GM may make the difference between getting noticed or not, or tournament qualification.
In an ideal world, smurf accounts would not be allowed either. Then ladder ranking could actually be used for something meaniz,ngful. Let's use a chess analogy: let's say that an amateur player paid a chess grandmaster to obtain a grandmaster title for him. In the process, several aspiring players in the same tournament were unable to achieve their final GM "norm" (points counting towards GM qualification) because they were playing against an elite player. Surely, bot the actual grandmaster and the paying "customer" would be severely punished for such a fraud.
Would you guys be OK with paying someone to take your exams for you? Just because we support pro players and their livelihoods does not mean we have to support their actions.
Two wrongs do not make a right, and the ends do not justify the means, etc. etc. No, I defend it because I don't think anyone should really care what people want to spend their money on. Also, when the number one argument is how leveling accounts degrades the integrity of GM what the fuck else do you expect to hear in response? GM IS very abusable, REGARDLESS of leveling accounts. It's an issue with GM, and the value everyone is placing in it. Comparison isn't relevant. Also, in general everyone needs to stop mentioning pro players, they aren't all pro players offering it. I don't think you understand my point. My point is that I feel that ladder should and could mean something. Just like in the chess world, your FIDE point ranking is rather important. The difficulty is making sure that the person playing behind the account is the person they claim to be. In theory, would it be possible to make GM meaningful, just like a chess grandmaster rating is meaningful? Re: the bolded part. It does matter if it's against the rules and hurts others. It'd obviously be cool for it to be meaningful, but it currently isn't, and it has nothing to do with leveling accounts. If GM was functioning properly account levelers couldn't affect the top ranking players. lol @ your re. It's against the rules because you have to share your account, and Blizzard does not want you playing SC2 unless you bought the game. It has never hurt anyone other than those who go out of their way on TL to be hurt by it. Doesn't affect me. I'm referring to aspiring semipros. and before you go "gm smurfs are plenty" or 'if he's good it doesn't matter', please answer this: what other mainstream sport would tolerate this kind of impersonation? Ladder means nothing so your comparison doesn't make sense. If you start with that presumption then you will never feel the need to change anything. That's fine. Some people feel differently though.
That's right. Whether or not it means something is irrelevant. The whole point of this discussion is that most of us want it to mean something in the future.
|
On July 16 2012 22:11 Daniel C wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 21:58 rd wrote:On July 16 2012 21:54 Daniel C wrote:On July 16 2012 21:43 rd wrote:On July 16 2012 20:51 Daniel C wrote:On July 16 2012 20:40 rd wrote:On July 16 2012 20:28 Daniel C wrote:
It seems to me that one of the main reasons that people who are defending this practice offer is that "it's just ladder". Sadly, the integrity of ladder continues to suffer precisely because of this attitude. If ladder truly meant nothing, then yeah, who cares. But for aspiring semi-pros, GM may make the difference between getting noticed or not, or tournament qualification.
In an ideal world, smurf accounts would not be allowed either. Then ladder ranking could actually be used for something meaniz,ngful. Let's use a chess analogy: let's say that an amateur player paid a chess grandmaster to obtain a grandmaster title for him. In the process, several aspiring players in the same tournament were unable to achieve their final GM "norm" (points counting towards GM qualification) because they were playing against an elite player. Surely, bot the actual grandmaster and the paying "customer" would be severely punished for such a fraud.
Would you guys be OK with paying someone to take your exams for you? Just because we support pro players and their livelihoods does not mean we have to support their actions.
Two wrongs do not make a right, and the ends do not justify the means, etc. etc. No, I defend it because I don't think anyone should really care what people want to spend their money on. Also, when the number one argument is how leveling accounts degrades the integrity of GM what the fuck else do you expect to hear in response? GM IS very abusable, REGARDLESS of leveling accounts. It's an issue with GM, and the value everyone is placing in it. Comparison isn't relevant. Also, in general everyone needs to stop mentioning pro players, they aren't all pro players offering it. I don't think you understand my point. My point is that I feel that ladder should and could mean something. Just like in the chess world, your FIDE point ranking is rather important. The difficulty is making sure that the person playing behind the account is the person they claim to be. In theory, would it be possible to make GM meaningful, just like a chess grandmaster rating is meaningful? Re: the bolded part. It does matter if it's against the rules and hurts others. It'd obviously be cool for it to be meaningful, but it currently isn't, and it has nothing to do with leveling accounts. If GM was functioning properly account levelers couldn't affect the top ranking players. lol @ your re. It's against the rules because you have to share your account, and Blizzard does not want you playing SC2 unless you bought the game. It has never hurt anyone other than those who go out of their way on TL to be hurt by it. Doesn't affect me. I'm referring to aspiring semipros. and before you go "gm smurfs are plenty" or 'if he's good it doesn't matter', please answer this: what other mainstream sport would tolerate this kind of impersonation? What reality allows you to do such impersonations in a mainstream sport in a way the internet can? The two can't be compared. So you're saying that its ok to cheat the system because its difficult to get caught? i know they can't be directly compared, doesn't mean we should not try to uphold the integrity of the game.
I don't consider it cheating the system, and I don't consider it "getting caught" when account sharing isn't really that bad despite being against a EULA Blizzard will not and cannot realistically enforce. You're trying to place value on the integrity of a ladder created by a company trying to make a profit, who will never permanently ban a hacker. Just his account so they can make a tiny bit of money off the repurchase who will then come back and muck GM again.
|
On July 16 2012 22:15 paralleluniverse wrote:Show nested quote +On July 16 2012 22:13 rd wrote:On July 16 2012 22:07 Grumbels wrote:
This is like selling gold or account leveling in WoW. You can ignore it, since it's minor, but it also meant you had a lot of bots running around and it negatively influenced the economy by driving up prices and everyone had to spend more money on the auction house. And in general, people worked for their arena rank, money, achievements. What is the point to a game if all your achievements have a chance to be the result of hacking or other shady actions? I think it's pathetic in general, no pro player should enable these idiots that want to buy their achievements. There are also players in WoW that are just really, really good at making millions of gold on the AH and players who are really, really fast at power leveling characters. Not everyone is a bot/hacker, and you don't have to accept bots/hackers to accept selling gold in WoW. Making gold off of the AH isn't cheating, just as how being good at SC2 isn't cheating. Is it OK to let people cheat simply because they're bad?
Lol, you took that way out of context and completely misunderstood.
|
I don't really care about that, it feels like they just waste their money that's all. They don't actually gain anything and if you do want to play professionally the ladder rank means nothing, tournament and clan war results do.
|
On one hand I can see why this is a pretty big deal, but at the same time, a lot of progamers to make miserably little money because they're unable to win big events etc. I don't have any strong feelings either way really, I guess as long as it doesn't become commonplace--it definitely could get a bit ridiculous if tons of people were just leveled.
|
On July 16 2012 21:55 aTnClouD wrote:
Honestly the only problem I see in this is GM ladder being an awful system.
Are you saying the system is to blame? With any kind of ranking system this could still happen.
I definitely don't think it's the end of the world but it's messing with ladder rankings and is a dishonest practice. People may be dumb for paying for such a service but the fact that it's being fulfilled by pro players doesn't sit right with me. It's cheating. You can say that ladder doesn't mean anything, people shouldn't pay for it to begin with, players need more money, or anything else. But the fact is still that it's an unethical practice that is against the rules which negatively impacts innocent players.
|
its cheating ? are you seriously going to put this next to map hacking on tournament? this is just nothing and if you mind ur spot in gm taken by some random account .. well too bad nobody cares about if ur gm or not. all that matters is skill you have not rating ur at. this is just pointless thread and discussion. aprat from that gm is retarded system indeed.
|
Not a big deal. GM doesn't really bring recognition, tournament results do.
|
To prove that this is indeed happening, I'm going to provide my evidence for an NA account that I believe is leveled. Rank 169 (at the time of posting) IMMvp is being leveled by EU Terran (Wiki2)Naama. I also believe the owner of the account hacks in his team games and plays with other hackers, which leads to another problem with these leveling services. But I'll get back to that later.
Here's why I think this account is leveled by Naama:
- The owner of the account denies that it's leveled, and claims he simply uses different hotkeys for 1v1 and team games (see here; the "skrillex123" account is his as he admits earlier in that thread)
- Given that the 1v1 player is irrefutably Naama
Is it????
You make a blanket statement, and throw Naama's name out without any ACTUAL evidence or proof, other than some Russel Crowe " A beautiful mind" type shit. Matters like this, should be treated like a legal situation. And if so, you have 0 proof other than some shit you THINK adds up. I'm sure any pro terran playing standard would have similar if not identical hotkey graphs. So that really proves almost nothing.
You go from " I think" to, "it's irrefutable". Without asking Naama himself, or posting a comment from himself, or any additional, or even SLIGHTLY confirmed info. This thread needs to be taken down, as it's nothing more than a glorified witch hunt. Except their is 0 actual proof, not even a confirm or denial from Naama. And the graph isn't nearly enough proof.
SO much for innocent until proven guilty.
|
The system is to blame. Its a retarded system that doesnt prove much. If i want to pay someone to level up MY account then thats up to me. But i should be punished by it by gettjng my ass kciked in higher leagues. The gm system prevents this. This wouldnt even be an issue if it wasnt for it. Btw im a high masters trying to crack gm. But im not whinning. If gm is actually filled with only pros, better for me when i get there :D
|
Yeah, and what the hell do you have against Naama. How could you possibly just tell it's Naama?
All I read,"Someones blocking my GM spot. It's Naama. I have no proof, but I'm pretty sure"
|
On July 16 2012 16:47 DYEAlabaster wrote:
Idiots supplementing pro gamer's meagre income? Sounds like a good thing to me...
Sidenote- why could players lose their jobs? Someone mentioned forGG streamed it... while he was teamless?
1 - Its against EULA
2 - Progamers knew what kind of money they would be making when they got into it. Dont like being poor? Go get a real job or play poker. Theres no sympathy from me.
|
There's not much difference between GM and High Master. If you are GM, it doesn't mean you will play against GM exclusively. The only thing it does is to look pretty (arguably) for one season. If that dude starts to play, he will lose every single time. But with 200 GM, I doubt someone can name 200 people in GM every single seasons. Players pop up and drop out all the time, and no one is gonna remember them. Nowaday, having name in GM for 1,2 seasons means nothing. You have to constantly stay in GM in order to be recognize.
Overall, this is something to be frown upon, but not worth to spend resource to pursue it. Technically it's illegal and if you want to squeeze it, you can succeed, but it's not worth it. It's like when you buy 50 lbs of shrimp in a box, it means 47,48 lbs of shrimp and 2,3 lbs of ice/package; or peeing in public,,v,v,.. Trivial crime is trivial.
|
While I don't support those that purchase leveling services, they are ultimately hurting themselves. If they cannot progress pass gold level of play, They will fail competing at the masters level. Unless they just want to wag their "hey I'm a masters level 1v1" e-peen in custom games, I see marginal benefit for the one buying the leveling services.
Also, just because it's illegal doesn't mean people aren't going to do it. If there's money to be gained, then someone WILL try to capitalize on it. It's probably a fun way to make money too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
